Webster Parish Schools can point to evidence that students are improving academically, particularly in mathematics, and that progress deserves to be acknowledged. However, improvement does not erase the much larger problem revealed by state and national data: Webster Parish students remain substantially behind Louisiana averages and, according to nationally standardized research from Stanford University’s Educational Opportunity Project, considerably behind the national academic benchmark.
At the same time, the Webster Parish School Board is making significant decisions involving buildings, renovations, campus reorganization and other capital expenditures. One of the most important current examples is J.L. Jones Elementary School, where the Board has removed the traditional second- and third-grade configuration, reassigned those students to other schools and approved repurposing the campus as a district-level multipurpose facility. The Board approved that repurposing effective August 2026, with second-grade students moving to J.A. Phillips Elementary and third-grade students moving to E.S. Richardson Elementary.
The question facing taxpayers is therefore larger than whether J.L. Jones needed new paint or whether its floors required work. The question is whether Webster Parish is placing the same urgency on improving academic achievement that it places on maintaining, reorganizing and improving its physical facilities.
Webster Parish Is Nearly Two Grade Levels Behind the National Benchmark
One of the strongest pieces of evidence concerning Webster Parish’s academic condition comes from Stanford University’s Educational Opportunity Project. Its April 28, 2026 report, Trends in Academic Performance in Webster Parish, Louisiana, uses Stanford Education Data Archive information covering 2009 through 2025 and places test results from different states onto a nationally comparable scale.
For the 2022 through 2025 period, Stanford reported that Webster Parish students in grades three through eight averaged 1.93 grade levels below the 2019 national average when mathematics and reading results were combined. Louisiana as a whole was approximately 0.70 grade levels below that national benchmark, while the group of Louisiana districts Stanford identified as most similar to Webster Parish averaged approximately 0.86 grade levels below the national benchmark.
Those similar districts were not randomly selected. Stanford explains that they were selected within Louisiana based on socioeconomic status, demographics and district size. For Webster Parish, those comparison districts include Franklin Parish, Winn Parish, Iberia Parish, St. Mary Parish and Avoyelles Parish.
That comparison is particularly important because poverty and demographics are frequently used to explain poor academic achievement. Economic hardship unquestionably affects educational opportunities, and it would be unfair to pretend otherwise. However, Stanford’s comparison shows that Webster Parish’s average combined achievement was still more than a full grade level farther behind the national benchmark than the average of Louisiana districts selected specifically because they resemble Webster Parish socioeconomically and demographically.
This does not prove that district leadership alone caused Webster’s academic deficits, nor does it mean every Webster Parish school, teacher or student performs at the same level. What it does establish is that Webster Parish’s academic challenge cannot be dismissed simply by saying the parish is poor or that Louisiana traditionally struggles educationally. The district’s nationally standardized achievement level is substantially lower than both the Louisiana average and the average of comparable Louisiana school systems.
Louisiana’s 2026 LEAP Results Tell the Same Story
The Louisiana Department of Education released its 2026 LEAP results in July, and Louisiana reported the highest overall grades three through twelve Mastery-or-Advanced rate on record. Statewide, 36 percent of tested results in grades three through twelve reached Mastery or Advanced, while almost nine out of ten Louisiana school systems either improved or maintained their overall Mastery+ rate. Seventy-five percent of Louisiana school systems improved from 2025 to 2026.
The state’s underlying 2026 data files show a much different picture for Webster Parish. Across English language arts, mathematics, science and social studies in grades three through eight, 25 percent of Webster Parish test results reached Mastery or Advanced, compared with 35 percent statewide. Webster had improved from 24 percent in 2025, but it remained 10 percentage points behind Louisiana. The Louisiana Department of Education publishes the district and school files used to make these comparisons through its official Elementary and Middle School Performance data library.
The subject-by-subject results show that this is not a weakness confined to one area. Webster Parish reached Mastery or Advanced on approximately 32 percent of grades three through eight English language arts results, compared with 43 percent statewide. Mathematics was approximately 24 percent in Webster compared with 34 percent statewide, science was approximately 19 percent compared with 31 percent statewide, and social studies was approximately 23 percent compared with 33 percent statewide. The state publishes separate 2026 Mastery summaries for each of those subjects as part of its official assessment database.
Science deserves particular attention because Webster Parish moved in the wrong direction while Louisiana improved. Webster’s grades three through eight science Mastery+ rate decreased from approximately 20 percent in 2025 to 19 percent in 2026, while Louisiana increased from 29 percent to 31 percent. Statewide math also improved, social studies and science improved, and English language arts held steady as Louisiana reported record overall LEAP performance.
These percentages should be described carefully. They represent the percentage of tests or assessment results reaching Mastery or Advanced, not necessarily the percentage of individual children who are proficient in every subject. Students take multiple examinations, so it would be misleading to simply say that three out of four Webster Parish children are failing. What can accurately be said is that approximately three-fourths of the district’s grades three through eight tested results did not reach Louisiana’s Mastery-or-Advanced benchmark in the combined four-subject measure.
Webster Parish Is Improving — And That Makes the Remaining Gap More Important
The Stanford data contain an important piece of good news that should not be hidden from readers. Webster Parish’s recent academic trajectory is considerably better than its absolute achievement level. The district has experienced substantial growth, particularly in mathematics, which means educators and students are making measurable progress from where they started.
That distinction between growth and achievement is critical. A student can gain more than an expected year’s worth of learning during a school year while still remaining academically behind because that student began the year well below grade level. A district can therefore demonstrate excellent growth and still produce disappointing overall proficiency numbers.
That appears to be part of the Webster Parish story. The district deserves credit for accelerating student learning, but families and taxpayers also have every right to ask why students began so far behind and how long it will take for the district to close the remaining gap with Louisiana and the country.
Recognizing improvement should not become an excuse for accepting low achievement. In fact, evidence that students can make significant gains should increase expectations. If the district has demonstrated that rapid progress is possible, then the next public question should be what resources, interventions and policies are necessary to accelerate that progress even further.
J.L. Jones Shows the Difference Between Growth and Achievement
J.L. Jones Elementary School provides a striking example of the difference between improving students and having students who have already reached expected achievement levels. During an April 2026 public meeting concerning the school’s future, district officials discussed J.L. Jones’ 2025 school performance results. The school received an overall D, an F for its assessment component, and an A for student growth.
Those grades tell two very different stories about the same school. The F assessment component indicates very weak absolute academic performance, while the A growth component indicates that students were making substantial progress. District officials also explained that under Louisiana’s changing accountability system, the school’s unusual grade configuration would affect how growth points were calculated and could expose the campus to an overall F under the new system.
The School Board ultimately approved repurposing J.L. Jones as a district-level multipurpose facility beginning in August 2026. Former Jones second-graders were reassigned to J.A. Phillips, while third-graders were reassigned to E.S. Richardson.
That decision may ultimately prove educationally or financially beneficial, but the public should be given enough information to determine whether it actually does. Repurposing a school should not be evaluated solely by what happens to the building. It should also be evaluated by what happens to the children who were moved, how the receiving schools perform, what the transition costs, what operating expenses are saved and whether academic outcomes improve.
The First Major Repurposing Expense: $119,580
In July 2026, Webster Parish School Board financial activity included a $119,580 payment to prime and paint interior walls and resurface floors at J.L. Jones Elementary. That expenditure came from the District 6 One-half Cent Sales Tax Fund. The same reported fund activity totaled more than $423,000 and included several other projects throughout the district.
The $119,580 amount is therefore not an estimate created by Heart of Webster and should not be presented as such. It is a publicly reported expenditure associated with work at the J.L. Jones campus after the Board approved its repurposing.
However, the $119,580 should also not automatically be described as the complete cost of repurposing J.L. Jones. Heart of Webster has not located a publicly released comprehensive project budget showing every expected renovation, relocation, staffing, transportation or operating expense associated with the transition. Painting and floor resurfacing may ultimately represent only one portion of the total cost.
That distinction is important because criticism should be based on documented facts rather than assumptions. If additional work is planned for Jones, taxpayers should know the estimated total. If the district expects the repurposing to save substantial money over several years, taxpayers should also be told those projected savings.
A responsible accounting should include both sides of the ledger.
Other Spending at the Schools Receiving Jones Students Raises Questions
The same July financial reporting also identified several expenditures involving the campuses receiving former J.L. Jones students. Among them were $20,250 for additional parking spaces with bumpers at Phillips Elementary, $19,950 for site adaptation for modular classroom buildings at J.A. Phillips, and $75,739.60 involving the removal and replacement of ramps, awnings and concrete work at four T-buildings at Richardson Elementary. Richardson also had a reported $37,828 expenditure for seven Promethean ActivPanels and $23,500 for additional parking spaces.
It would be improper to automatically add those expenditures to the $119,580 and announce that they represent the cost of closing or repurposing J.L. Jones. The available public reporting does not establish that all of those projects were caused by the student transfers.
However, their timing and their locations make them legitimate subjects for further inquiry. Phillips is receiving the former Jones second-grade students, while Richardson is receiving the former Jones third-grade students. Taxpayers deserve to know whether any of the modular-building work, parking expansion or other improvements became necessary because of the reorganization or whether those projects had already been planned independently.
That answer matters because the actual cost of the J.L. Jones decision cannot be determined by looking only at work performed inside the Jones building. If moving students created additional expenses at receiving campuses, those costs belong in a complete financial analysis. If they were unrelated projects, the district should make that clear as well.
The Funding Source Matters
There is another important limitation that should be understood before comparing the $119,580 with classroom spending. The money used for the J.L. Jones painting and floor work came from the District 6 One-half Cent Sales Tax Fund.
Dedicated school tax revenues can be subject to restrictions on how the money is spent. A dollar available for a building project is not necessarily a dollar that school officials are legally permitted to convert into teacher salaries, tutoring or another instructional expense.
For that reason, it would be misleading to tell readers that Webster Parish simply could have taken the entire $119,580 and hired teachers with it without first reviewing the legal dedication of that particular tax revenue.
The larger public-policy question remains legitimate, however. Taxpayers elect School Board members, voters approve taxes and district leadership helps determine long-term priorities. When a district is nearly two grade levels below a national benchmark in combined reading and mathematics, the public is entitled to ask whether its overall financial strategy places enough emphasis on directly improving student achievement.
The question is therefore not simply whether one restricted account could legally pay for tutoring. The question is whether the district’s total spending, tax proposals, budgeting decisions and long-term planning demonstrate the same urgency toward academic achievement that residents see when construction and facility projects are proposed.
What Does $119,580 Represent?
Even when funds cannot legally be transferred between accounts, putting the amount into perspective helps taxpayers understand its scale. A six-figure expenditure represents a significant public investment, and Webster Parish should be able to show residents what educational or operational return it expects to receive from that investment.
The appropriate comparison is not to claim that $119,580 would magically solve Webster Parish’s academic problems. It would not. A district-wide achievement gap this large developed over many years and will require sustained intervention, better attendance, strong instruction, effective leadership and continued investment.
The legitimate question is whether comparable levels of financial commitment are being directed toward the children who are furthest behind. How much is Webster Parish budgeting for intensive mathematics intervention? How much is dedicated to reading intervention? How many intervention teachers are available? How much tutoring is provided outside regular classroom instruction? How are students who enter kindergarten behind being identified and supported before those early deficits grow larger?
Those are measurable questions, and taxpayers should be able to obtain measurable answers.
Chronic Absenteeism Makes the Problem Even More Difficult
Academic intervention also cannot work effectively if children are frequently absent. The Stanford Webster Parish report shows chronic absenteeism as another significant problem facing the district. Chronic absenteeism is defined in that report as missing at least 10 percent of the school year.
Webster Parish averaged 28.4 percent chronic absenteeism from 2022 through 2025, compared with approximately 21.8 percent statewide and 25.6 percent among Stanford’s similar Louisiana districts. Before the pandemic, Webster’s 2017 through 2019 average was approximately 23 percent, meaning the district’s chronic absenteeism problem became worse rather than returning to its earlier level.
That means more than one out of every four Webster Parish students, on average during the period measured, was chronically absent. Students who miss that much classroom time are substantially more difficult to catch up, regardless of how talented their teachers may be.
This is another reason the district’s academic challenge cannot be solved through one program or one expenditure. Webster Parish needs a comprehensive strategy that addresses both instruction and the barriers preventing children from consistently receiving that instruction.
Buildings Matter, But They Are Supposed to Serve Education
Nothing in these numbers means Webster Parish should stop maintaining its buildings. Students deserve schools that are safe, clean, secure and functional. Teachers deserve working facilities, and taxpayers should expect public property to be maintained rather than allowed to deteriorate.
The concern arises when facilities become easier to measure than education. It is simple for the public to see that walls were painted, floors were resurfaced, parking was expanded or a new facility was built. Measuring whether a struggling third-grader becomes a proficient reader takes considerably longer and requires far more sustained effort.
That difference cannot allow academic achievement to become secondary.
When Webster Parish students are averaging 1.93 grade levels below the national benchmark used in Stanford’s analysis, academic performance should be among the first considerations attached to every major district decision.
A building project may be necessary, but the district should be able to explain how it fits within a broader educational strategy. A school consolidation may save money, but officials should show taxpayers the projected savings. A campus repurposing may create valuable programs, but the district should establish measurable goals for those programs and report whether they are producing results.
Taxpayers Need the Full J.L. Jones Accounting
The $119,580 expenditure gives the public one confirmed number, but it does not yet provide the complete cost of the J.L. Jones transition.
The Webster Parish School Board should provide residents with a consolidated accounting identifying all expenditures connected with repurposing J.L. Jones, all work planned for the building, any expenses created at Phillips and Richardson because of student transfers, transportation changes, staff relocations, technology and furniture movement, and the projected annual operating expenses for the repurposed campus.
The district should also disclose the savings side of the equation. If removing second and third grades from Jones eliminates duplicated administrative expenses, reduces staffing needs or decreases other annual operating costs, those savings deserve to be included. A fair investigation should not hide information that supports the Board’s decision any more than it should hide information that raises questions about it.
Once those numbers are available, taxpayers can make an informed judgment about whether the reorganization represents responsible financial planning.
There Is Another Question That Cannot Be Ignored
The debate over Webster Parish education should not become a contest over who can produce the harshest description of the schools. The numbers are serious enough without exaggeration.
Students are demonstrating meaningful academic growth, and teachers producing that improvement deserve recognition. At the same time, Webster Parish’s actual academic achievement remains far below where parents should want it to be. Stanford’s nationally standardized research places the district nearly two grade levels below the national benchmark in combined grades three through eight reading and mathematics, while Louisiana’s own 2026 LEAP data show Webster trailing the state by roughly 10 percentage points in the overall four-subject grades three through eight Mastery+ measure.
Those realities can exist at the same time.
Webster Parish can be improving while still performing poorly.
Teachers can be producing meaningful student growth while students remain below grade level.
The School Board can make legally permissible facility expenditures while taxpayers still question whether the district’s overall financial priorities are aligned closely enough with the academic crisis.
The important issue is what Webster Parish does next.
Parents and Taxpayers Should Be Asking for Measurable Answers
Residents should ask the district to provide the total projected cost and anticipated savings of the J.L. Jones reorganization, but that should only be the beginning. They should also ask what percentage of Webster Parish students are currently below grade level in reading and mathematics, what specific intervention each school provides, how many students receive intensive tutoring, what academic targets the district has established for 2027 and 2028, and how much of the district’s annual budget is specifically devoted to closing achievement gaps.
The district should also explain its plan for reducing chronic absenteeism from the 28.4 percent average documented for 2022 through 2025. If nearly three out of every ten students are chronically absent, Webster Parish needs measurable attendance goals alongside measurable academic goals.
The public should then be able to return one year later and determine whether those goals were met.
Accountability should not consist solely of presenting a letter grade or celebrating that one percentage increased. It should involve telling taxpayers where students are today, where they need to be tomorrow, how much the district intends to spend getting them there and whether the strategy actually worked.
The Documents Are Available for Readers to Check
Heart of Webster does not have to ask readers to accept these academic numbers on faith. Louisiana’s Department of Education publicly maintains the 2026 LEAP district and school files, including achievement-level and Mastery summaries for individual subjects. The state also publicly maintains Louisiana’s school-performance and accountability information.
Stanford University’s Educational Opportunity Project publicly provides its Webster Parish report showing the district’s national academic comparison, socioeconomic peer districts, academic trends and chronic absenteeism. The report was generated April 28, 2026 and uses Stanford Education Data Archive information through 2025.
The May School Board action repurposing J.L. Jones and moving students to Phillips and Richardson was publicly reported, as was the July financial activity identifying the $119,580 J.L. Jones painting and flooring expenditure and the other District 6 projects discussed in this article.
Heart of Webster encourages readers to examine those records for themselves rather than relying solely on anyone’s interpretation of them, including ours. The purpose of publishing the supporting documents is to allow parents, teachers, taxpayers and School Board members to start from the same factual record and debate what should happen next based on evidence rather than rumor.
The Final Measure Must Be the Students
There is nothing inherently wrong with painting school walls, resurfacing floors, expanding parking, improving athletic facilities or repurposing an existing building. Those decisions may be necessary, and some may ultimately save taxpayers money.
The concern is that none of those accomplishments can substitute for academic results.
Webster Parish has evidence that its students can grow academically, which should give the community reason to believe improvement is possible. But those same students remain substantially behind Louisiana and the national benchmark, and the district’s chronic absenteeism remains considerably higher than the statewide rate.
The question parents and taxpayers should now ask is whether Webster Parish School officials are willing to attack that academic gap with the same energy, planning, funding and accountability that accompany major building projects.
The future of Webster Parish Schools will not ultimately be determined by how much money is spent on a building or how freshly its walls are painted. It will be determined by whether the children who pass through those buildings can read, write, calculate, reason and compete academically when they leave them, and whether the district can prove through measurable results that today’s students are receiving a stronger education than the students who came before them.
Source Documents — Check the Numbers Yourself.
- Louisiana Department of Education — 2026 LEAP Data Library.
https://doe.louisiana.gov/data-and-reports/elementary-and-middle-school-performance - Louisiana Department of Education — July 6, 2026 LEAP announcement.
https://doe.louisiana.gov/about/news-releases/release/2026/07/06/louisiana-students-achieve-record-high-performance-on-leap - Stanford Educational Opportunity Project — Webster Parish report.
https://edopportunity.org/reports/trends/2025/LA/report_LA_2201890_webster-parish.pdf - Louisiana Department of Education — School and District Performance Scores.
https://doe.louisiana.gov/data-and-reports/performance-scores - Minden Press-Herald — April 15, 2026 J.L. Jones meeting.
https://press-herald.com/meeting-outlines-proposed-closure-of-j-l-jones-elementary/ - Minden Press-Herald — May 4, 2026 Board action.
https://press-herald.com/school-board-awards-griffith-park-bid-approves-j-l-jones-repurposing-plan/ - Webster Parish Journal — July 9, 2026 financial report.
https://websterparishjournal.com/2026/07/09/school-board-will-try-again-to-rededicate-millage-funds/ - Official Webster Parish School Board website.
https://www.websterpsb.org/
