Independent Texas school research. TEA data, clearly explained. Not affiliated with the state agencyTEA.

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Aaron Parker Elem

Lamar County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 244 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
80/1002025-26
Change
+12 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+0.7 ptsvs 79.3 average · 2,025 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
982 of 2,025tied with 96 others
B80

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 67 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 79.3 average for 2,025 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent domain gain

Academic Growth rose 25 points

56 to 81 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 81 is 7.6 points above the 73.4 average among 1,839 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

STAAR result

Math above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
49%vs 41% avg · +8 pts
Masters
27%vs 15.6% avg · +11.4 pts

Among 1,897 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

Selected positive signals, not a summary of performance. The same rules choose them on every page: only the latest one-year gain, results meaningfully better than the currently selected comparison with broad reporting, and distinctive top-three placements. Demographics, staffing and spending cannot become academic “wins.” The overall rating and the full results below remain the complete picture for this school.

Read the full rating context and placement

Aaron Parker Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 80 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 79.3 average for 2,025 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 12 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 982nd of 2,025 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 96 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. Official improvement and transfer notices
  3. 5 years of ratings
  4. Where the score comes from
  5. Student outcomes
  6. Who this school serves
  7. Student counts behind the percentages
  8. Enrollment over time
  9. Discipline and removal from class
  10. Spending per student
  11. Teachers and actual class size
  12. Where this school ranks best
  13. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

Official state and federal designations can carry support, reporting requirements or a family transfer option that a single A–F rating does not explain.

2026 federal improvement status

Comprehensive Support and Improvement

Official support label: Comprehensive Progress

Identification reason: CSI Low Performance

TEA track year 2 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
29.2%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,025 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
3.7%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,025 rated schools reporting

Selected comparison percentages are the share of reporting schools in that group found on each dated list. They are neutral prevalence context; changing the comparison never changes this school's official status.

These are dated TEA statuses, fetched 24 August 2026; they are not added to or subtracted from this site's rating.

5 years of ratings

Follow the solid line to see how this school has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.

Compare against
90807060 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageAaron Parker Elem 6878816480 2021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26

2021-22 is shown under the refreshed methodology TEA adopted in 2023, so it is comparable with later years. Under the original scoring it was rated Not Rated with 67 that year.

Comparison lines follow the current rated cohort backward through time. The table gives the number in that fixed cohort that reported a score each year; it can be smaller than cohort membership.

View the yearly scores and comparisons
Rating history with comparisons
YearRatingScoreSelected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rateStateTexas average
2025-26B8079.3 2,025 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25D6479.0 2,005 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24B8176.9 1,989 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23C7877.4 1,960 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22D6882.0 1,940 reporting83.7 7,283 reporting

Where the score comes from

Texas builds the overall rating from the better of Student Achievement and School Progress, weighted 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. School Progress is itself the better of Academic Growth and Relative Performance. The 60, 70, 80 and 90 rules mark the letter-grade thresholds.

  • Student Achievement75 C−1.4 vs similar economic context · 1,907 reporting
  • School Progress81 B+0.7 vs similar economic context · 1,900 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps77 C+0.5 vs similar economic context · 1,887 reporting
  • Academic Growth81 B+7.6 vs similar economic context · 1,839 reporting
  • Relative Performance80 B+1.3 vs similar economic context · 1,900 reporting
  • Aaron Parker Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,025 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement75C5
School Progress81B9
Closing the Gaps77C3
Academic Growth81B9
Relative Performance80B10

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 3 points below B in that domain — the nearest of the measures that count toward the overall rating.

TEA does not add the domains up. The overall score is the better of Student Achievement and School Progress at 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. For this school that better measure is School Progress (81), so Student Achievement (75) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 81.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level72%−0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,907 reporting
  • Meets grade level47%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,907 reporting
  • Masters grade level23%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,907 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level76%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,905 reporting
  • Meets grade level46%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,905 reporting
  • Masters grade level19%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,905 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level68%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,897 reporting
  • Meets grade level49%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,897 reporting
  • Masters grade level27%+11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,897 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,025 in cohort)

Percentage of tests at or above each level. Masters is a subset of Meets, which is a subset of Approaches. The selected-comparison tick on each bar marks the average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate — a comparison TEA does not publish.

Counts in the comparison controls describe full cohort membership, not the denominator of every average. Each average uses only schools for which TEA reported that measure; metric-specific reporting counts are shown on the STAAR, graduation and CCMR rows and may vary.

Who this school serves

Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.

Students
244
Economically disadvantaged
69.0%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
2.1%−18.0 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
22.7%+3.9 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.2%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
5.0%−12.5 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Aaron Parker Elem

African American: 1.7%Hispanic: 9.9%White: 68.6%American Indian: 2.5%Asian: 0.4%Two or More Races: 16.9%
  • African American 1.7%
  • Hispanic 9.9%
  • White 68.6%
  • American Indian 2.5%
  • Asian 0.4%
  • Two or More Races 16.9%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,025 reporting for every category shown · 2,025 in full cohort

African American: 12.1%Hispanic: 56%White: 25.9%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.1%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 3.5%
  • African American 12.1%
  • Hispanic 56%
  • White 25.9%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.1%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 3.5%

Student counts behind the percentages

Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.

Students in this TEA accountability summary
242
Economically disadvantaged students
167
Emergent bilingual students
5
Special education students
55

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
26
Students in TEA mobility denominator
179
TEA-published mobility rate
14.5%

The mobility count and rate use TEA’s separate 2024–25 campus denominator shown above, not current enrollment. This site does not recalculate a missing rate.

The first figure is TEA’s student count for this accountability summary. It is a separate publication from the fall PEIMS enrollment shown above and can differ; this site does not substitute one for the other. Counts come from TEA’s 2025-26 accountability summary, fetched 29 August 2026. A reported zero is shown as 0. Small-number and complementary masks, unavailable values, and blank not-reported fields stay separate and are never estimated. TEA masking definitions.

Enrollment over time

TEA-reported student enrollment for each available school year. Enrollment growth or decline is not a measure of school quality.

TEA reported 244 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 2 (0.8%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
244

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−2

Decrease · −0.8%

Change since 2021–22
+7

Increase · +3.0%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
244
Selected comparison
640.4

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,987 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Aaron Parker Elem
School yearStudents enrolledAaron Parker ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 237 First available year 654.1
2022–23 265 Increase of 28 (11.8%) 661
2023–24 270 Increase of 5 (1.9%) 659.2
2024–25 246 Decrease of 24 (8.9%) 656.9
2025–26 244 Decrease of 2 (0.8%) 640.4

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting schools in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this school's own counts do not.

Source: TEA PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. TEA reports these counts from its fall student snapshot; changes compare adjacent reported school years.

These counts show how enrollment changed, not why. Attendance-zone changes, school openings or closures, grade reconfigurations, transfers and population shifts can affect the total.

Discipline and removal from class

TEA’s annual student and action counts, kept separate and divided only by the matching full-year enrollment. These figures describe removals from instruction, not a simple safe-or-unsafe score.

Students in TEA’s all-discipline count
Suppressed

Rate not available

Disciplinary actions
18

6.59 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
273

2024–25

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
6.59
Selected comparison
30.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,657 rated schools reporting

−24.3 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Aaron Parker Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 254 Suppressed — 12 4.72 — 19.5
2021–22 268 14 5.2% 37 13.81 12.9% 30.5
2022–23 284 14 4.9% 17 5.99 13.5% 32.5
2023–24 283 20 7.1% 38 13.43 13.4% 32.5
2024–25 273 Suppressed — 18 6.59 — 30.9
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Aaron Parker Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline Suppressed — 18 6.59 — 30.9
In-school suspensions Suppressed — 18 6.59 — 23.5
Out-of-school suspensions Not reported — Not reported — — —
DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —

Selected comparisons use rates, not raw counts, so differently sized schools can be read on the same basis. Each average uses only group members for which TEA reported that rate; this school's own counts and rates remain fixed.

Students, actions and incidents are different units. One student can receive multiple actions. The categories overlap, so they must not be added together. Rates use TEA's matching cumulative year-end enrollment, not the October enrollment shown elsewhere on this page.

Source: TEA Discipline Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. Suppressed values stay unavailable rather than being estimated. Use 2020–21 cautiously because remote instruction during the pandemic changed students' exposure to in-person discipline. TEA consolidated its separate action-group reports into this product in 2024–25; this trend uses only the stable “All discipline” heading.

Spending per student

The campus and its parent district stay fixed while the selected same-sector txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference remain visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.

$7k$16k$24k20182020202220242025
  • Aaron Parker Elem
  • Parent district: North Lamar ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$10,043
Selected comparison
$13,159

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,004 rated schools reporting

−$3,116 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $10,043 per student for this campus, $16,950 per student for its parent district, North Lamar ISD, $18,972 per student for the Texas average.

Not reported in this TEA campus finance record: TEA peer group.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearAaron Parker ElemParent district: North Lamar ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$8,335$11,131$13,054$8,011 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,866 rated schools reporting
2019$8,143$10,748$13,108$8,171 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,883 rated schools reporting
2020$7,788$10,514$14,058$8,719 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,904 rated schools reporting
2021$8,546$11,731$14,797$9,214 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,918 rated schools reporting
2022$8,204$15,183$15,708$10,456 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,941 rated schools reporting
2023$9,597$23,301$16,792$11,116 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,962 rated schools reporting
2024$9,915$22,901$18,125$12,355 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,988 rated schools reporting
2025$10,043$16,950$18,972$13,159 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,004 rated schools reporting

The selected-comparison reporting count is year-specific and can vary across the table. Dollar amounts are shown as TEA published them and are not adjusted for inflation.

Teachers and actual class size

Average salary
$59,427−$7,005 vs similar economic context
Teachers
19−24.2 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
12.7−1.3 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Aaron Parker Elem

Beginning: 4.7%1 to 5 years: 41.9%11 to 20 years: 48.7%21 to 30 years: 4.7%
  • Beginning 4.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 41.9%
  • 11 to 20 years 48.7%
  • 21 to 30 years 4.7%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,025 reporting for every category shown · 2,025 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.4%1 to 5 years: 26.8%6 to 10 years: 19%11 to 20 years: 27.6%21 to 30 years: 15.5%Over 30 years: 3.9%
  • Beginning 6.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 26.8%
  • 6 to 10 years 19%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.6%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.5%
  • Over 30 years 3.9%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Aaron Parker Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classAaron Parker Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten23.518
Grade 120.318.2
Grade 223.418.4
Grade 323.718.6
Grade 42018.9
Secondary English24.315.2

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 6 of 12 categories for this campus; the categories are not combined into a made-up campus-wide average. Each selected comparison average uses only schools reporting that same grade or subject.

Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.

Where this school ranks best

Out of 90 rankings computed across every published metric and every available comparison group, these are all the measures that meet this site’s distinctive-placement threshold. The list does not change when you change Compare against. Each measure appears once, using its strongest placement. Press Copy for a citable sentence.

#1 rankings

First-place results

1 measure

  • 1of 18

    Attendance

    Lamar County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 1

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

2 measures

  • 2of 18

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Lamar County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 2of 16

    Math — Masters

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

9 measures

  • 5of 17

    All Subjects — Masters

    Lamar County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 17

    Reading — Masters

    Lamar County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 16

    Academic Growth

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure

  • 7of 16

    Relative Performance

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 16

    Math — Meets

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure

  • 8of 20

    Per-student spending

    Lamar County · of the 20 that report this measure

  • 10of 17

    Reading — Approaches

    Lamar County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 10of 16

    School Progress

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure

  • 10of 16

    Closing the Gaps

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1

These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above this section is the full picture, including where this school ranks poorly. Each measure appears once here, using its strongest qualifying placement across all available comparison groups. Very large ties are left out because they do not distinguish this school; any tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones no school would put in a press release.

Where this comes from

The Texas Education Agency publishes the underlying accountability reports and data downloads. Ratings, outcomes, demographics, staffing and finance on this page come from TEA data available through txschools.gov, fetched 15 August 2026. TEA’s Reports and Data Portal links the official bulk files. Enrollment history comes from TEA's PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations reports, fetched 24 August 2026. The student-count context comes from TEA’s bulk accountability summary, fetched 29 August 2026; TEA’s masking definitions explain withheld values. The dated notice, staffing, discipline, transfer, community and postsecondary sections cite their separate TEA, Census or THECB publication in place. Every archived source carries checksums so each number stays traceable to the bytes the public agency served.

Download the full dataset · this campus's district

Single-file records are pre-built for district-level records only, so there is no per-campus CSV to link here. Producing both formats for every entity would consume most of the 20,000-asset deployment limit before pages and shared data are counted. This campus is a row in the bulk files on the download page, keyed by its TEA id 139911102.