2025–26 peer & position analysisAll 255 graded Arkansas districts · independent analysis of public ADE data, not an official district publication
Sheridan's B ranks 58th of 255 Arkansas districts — genuinely good. But Sheridan also enrolls fewer low-income students than 90% of districts in the state, and the ten districts that most resemble it demographically scored a median 29 points higher. Both facts are true, and which one you lead with depends on why you're asking.
Every number below is calculated from the same official file. The spread between them is not a contradiction — it is what happens when you change the comparison group, and it is the single most important thing to understand before quoting any of it.
Sheridan's 502.8 points sit well above the district median of 464.9. Its one-year gain of +28.2 beat 70% of districts, where the median gain was +11.2. This is the honest headline for a public audience.
Only Benton (544.8) is clearly ahead. Bryant edges Sheridan by 0.35 points — a statistical tie. Sheridan outscores White Hall, Bauxite, Malvern, Glen Rose, Poyen and Harmony Grove, and sits far above Pine Bluff and Watson Chapel.
Sheridan scores 11.4 points above what a district with 51.9% low-income enrollment is predicted to score — a positive result, but an unremarkable one. Half the state does better relative to its students.
Each dot is an Arkansas district. Switch the view to change what the axes mean, and highlight a peer group to see it against the whole state. Click any dot to pull its numbers.
Compare each campus not to the state as a whole but to schools of the same type serving a similar share of low-income students — within six points of its own rate. The district's B splits cleanly in half: the middle schools and high school beat their poverty-matched peers by 17 to 88 points, and both elementary pairs fall below them, one by 116.
Every Arkansas school of this type, plotted by low-income enrollment and total score. Sheridan campuses are labeled. The shaded band marks schools within six points of that campus's poverty rate — its fairest comparison group.
Three defensible peer definitions, because no single one is right. Nearby is geography — the districts families actually choose between. Similar size shares Sheridan's operational scale. Twins are the closest statistical matches on low-income share, enrollment and special education rate, which is the fairest comparison of all and the least flattering.
How far up the statewide distribution each measure sits. Green is top third, amber bottom third. The pattern is unusually consistent: Sheridan's students arrive testing well and graduate well, and the district's weakest numbers are all about how much students gain in a year — especially in math, and especially for the students who started furthest behind.
Percentile among the 255 graded districts. For chronic absence and low-income share, a higher percentile means fewer students — Sheridan's 90th percentile on low-income share means only 24 districts in Arkansas enroll a smaller share of low-income students.
District letter grades come from eleven indicator ratings on a 1–4 scale, not from the total score, which is why A and B point ranges overlap. Comparing Sheridan's rating profile to the median A district shows exactly where the gap is — and where it is not.
The same data set answers three different questions depending on who is asking. Pick your seat.
This assistant looks up published figures — it does not guess or generate. If it cannot find something, it says so.