Sheridan Report Card 2026

Campus results

Every school, 2025 to 2026

Select a campus to load its indicator detail below.

Arkansas grades P–2 campuses on the tested grades of their paired 3–5 school, so East End Elementary and East End Intermediate carry one identical score, as do Sheridan Elementary and Sheridan Intermediate. The district has five scored units, not seven.

Read this first

The statewide tide lifted every boat

Arkansas proficiency rose roughly 5 points in all three subjects between 2025 and 2026, and the share of schools graded F fell from 10.2% to 7.0%. A raw gain of 5 points is standing still. Percentile rank against every comparable Arkansas school is the honest lens — it is the one this dashboard defaults to.

State average proficiency, all Arkansas schools

Gray is 2025, navy is 2026. Sheridan's own marks sit as gold ticks. Where the gold tick sits above the navy bar, the district beat the state; where the gap widened, Sheridan outpaced the tide.

Statewide letter grades

1,047 schools graded in 2026 (1,059 in 2025). 291 schools rose a letter, 468 held, 205 fell.

Arkansas River co-op districts

District	2025	2026

Indicator explorer

Sheridan School District

By grade and course

Percent proficient and percent meeting growth targets, 2025 → 2026, for the grades this campus tests.

Student groups

Proficiency and growth by group. Cells are suppressed by the state when a group is too small.

Performance levels

Levels 1–2 are below grade level; 3–4 count as proficient. Watching Level 1 shrink is the clearest sign intervention is reaching the students furthest behind.

Same students, one year later

Cohort tracking

Grade-level averages compare two different sets of children. These rows follow the same cohort as it moves up a grade — 2025's fifth graders become 2026's sixth graders. With the state up about 5 points, a cohort gain under 5 is treading water.

Interpretation

What moved, and the most likely reason

Arkansas publishes outcomes, not practices. The claims below are ranked by how directly the data supports them: the numbers are fact, the attributions are inference an administrator can confirm or kill in a morning with local schedules, rosters and intervention logs.

Before you cite this

Data notes and known traps

Comparability

The state moved. Proficiency rose about 5 points statewide in all three subjects; F schools fell from 108 to 73. Raw year-over-year gains overstate local improvement.
Paired campuses share a score. P–2 buildings are graded on their 3–5 partner's tested grades. Sheridan Elementary's D and East End Elementary's C are not measurements of P–2 instruction.
Hold-harmless is gone. 50 schools statewide were held harmless in 2025; none in 2026, which reshapes the statewide distribution independent of teaching.
Growth is relative. Meeting a growth target depends on the state's expectation for that student, so a school can raise proficiency and still lose growth points.

Reporting changes

Low-income share jumped 9.8 points district-wide in one year (42.1% → 51.9%), and 18.3 points at East End Middle. A shift that large in a single year is far more likely an eligibility or direct-certification reporting change than a change in who lives in Grant County — verify before using it in any equity narrative.
Program fields were standardized. 2025 listed named programs by campus (Lexia Core5, Sonday, Take Flight, 95 Percent Group, RISE, Illustrative Mathematics, Benchmark Workshop, IXL, Jacket Time). 2026 replaced these with generic labels, so the state file can no longer tell you which intervention ran where.
Directory vs. accountability names differ. At East End Middle and East End Intermediate the listed principal differs from the administrator of record, consistent with a leadership move between those two buildings. Confirm locally before drawing conclusions.
Suppression. Groups below the state's minimum n are withheld, which is why Black and English learner cells appear and vanish between years.

A B that hides five very different stories