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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Aikin Elem

Lamar County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 844 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
75/1002025-26
Change
−5 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−4.6 ptsvs 79.6 average · 2,021 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,371 of 2,021tied with 59 others
C75

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 77 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 79.6 average for 2,021 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Current strength

Academic Growth above the similar-context average

76 +2.4 pts vs 73.6

  • 76 is 2.4 points above the 73.6 average among 1,839 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Current strength

Chronically absent lower than the similar-context average

13.4% −3.9 pts vs 17.3%

  • 13.4% is 3.9 percentage points lower than the 17.3% average among 1,955 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

Aikin Elem is rated C by TEA, scoring 75 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 79.6 average for 2,021 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,371st of 2,021 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 59 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

Targeted Support and Improvement

Official support label: TSI

Identification reason: African American, Two or More Races, Economically Disadvantaged, Continuously Enrolled

TEA track year 0 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
28.9%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,021 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
3.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,021 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 averageAikin Elem 8069687575 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 C with 77 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
2025-26C7579.6 2,021 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25C7579.3 1,998 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24D6877.3 1,984 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23D6977.8 1,952 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22B8082.1 1,931 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 Achievement70 C−6.9 vs similar economic context · 1,907 reporting
  • School Progress76 C−4.6 vs similar economic context · 1,900 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps71 C−5.8 vs similar economic context · 1,883 reporting
  • Academic Growth76 C+2.4 vs similar economic context · 1,839 reporting
  • Relative Performance70 C−9.0 vs similar economic context · 1,900 reporting
  • Aikin Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,021 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement70C10
School Progress76C4
Closing the Gaps71C9
Academic Growth76C4
Relative Performance70C10

Closest to moving up: School Progress, 4 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 (76), so Student Achievement (70) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 76.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level66%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,907 reporting
  • Meets grade level41%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,907 reporting
  • Masters grade level16%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,907 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level70%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,904 reporting
  • Meets grade level42%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,904 reporting
  • Masters grade level16%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,904 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level62%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,896 reporting
  • Meets grade level39%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,896 reporting
  • Masters grade level15%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,896 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,021 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
844
Economically disadvantaged
67.7%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
6.8%−12.6 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
20.5%+1.7 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.0%+1.0 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
13.4%−3.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Aikin Elem

African American: 23.7%Hispanic: 18.5%White: 40.3%American Indian: 0.9%Asian: 0.7%Two or More Races: 15.9%
  • African American 23.7%
  • Hispanic 18.5%
  • White 40.3%
  • American Indian 0.9%
  • Asian 0.7%
  • Two or More Races 15.9%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,021 reporting for every category shown · 2,021 in full cohort

African American: 12%Hispanic: 54.5%White: 27.3%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.2%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 3.6%
  • African American 12%
  • Hispanic 54.5%
  • White 27.3%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 3.6%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
844
Economically disadvantaged students
571
Emergent bilingual students
57
Special education students
173

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
98
Students in TEA mobility denominator
787
TEA-published mobility rate
12.5%

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 844 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 22 (2.5%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
844

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−22

Decrease · −2.5%

Change since 2021–22
−80

Decrease · −8.7%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
844
Selected comparison
635.4

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,986 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Aikin Elem
School yearStudents enrolledAikin ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 924 First available year 647.5
2022–23 937 Increase of 13 (1.4%) 654.8
2023–24 924 Decrease of 13 (1.4%) 654.7
2024–25 866 Decrease of 58 (6.3%) 651.6
2025–26 844 Decrease of 22 (2.5%) 635.4

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
116

12.3% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
343

36.53 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
939

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
12.3%
Selected comparison
12.8%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,549 rated schools reporting

−0.5 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
36.53
Selected comparison
30.3

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,654 rated schools reporting

+6.2 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Aikin Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 1,023 95 9.3% 214 20.92 9.7% 19.3
2021–22 996 120 12.1% 312 31.33 12.8% 30
2022–23 1,001 129 12.9% 262 26.17 13.3% 32
2023–24 1,009 93 9.2% 231 22.89 13.2% 31.8
2024–25 939 116 12.3% 343 36.53 12.8% 30.3
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Aikin Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 116 12.3% 343 36.53 12.8% 30.3
In-school suspensions 116 12.3% 331 35.25 11.5% 22.9
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements Suppressed — 10 1.06 — 6.1
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Suppressed — 10 1.06 — 3.4
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.

$6k$13k$20k20182020202220242025
  • Aikin Elem
  • Parent district: Paris ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$8,647
Selected comparison
$13,205

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,997 rated schools reporting

−$4,558 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $8,647 per student for this campus, $14,332 per student for its parent district, Paris 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
YearAikin ElemParent district: Paris ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$6,112$12,292$13,054$7,990 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,859 rated schools reporting
2019$6,492$11,999$13,108$8,152 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,875 rated schools reporting
2020$6,710$13,438$14,058$8,711 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,895 rated schools reporting
2021$7,248$13,533$14,797$9,202 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,908 rated schools reporting
2022$7,021$13,287$15,708$10,484 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,931 rated schools reporting
2023$7,099$14,835$16,792$11,207 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,954 rated schools reporting
2024$7,650$16,212$18,125$12,347 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,982 rated schools reporting
2025$8,647$14,332$18,972$13,205 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,997 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
$64,288−$2,233 vs similar economic context
Teachers
60+16.6 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14.2+0.3 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Aikin Elem

Beginning: 3.4%1 to 5 years: 22.7%6 to 10 years: 28.7%11 to 20 years: 18.3%21 to 30 years: 18.2%Over 30 years: 8.9%
  • Beginning 3.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 22.7%
  • 6 to 10 years 28.7%
  • 11 to 20 years 18.3%
  • 21 to 30 years 18.2%
  • Over 30 years 8.9%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,021 reporting for every category shown · 2,021 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.4%1 to 5 years: 26.6%6 to 10 years: 19.1%11 to 20 years: 27.8%21 to 30 years: 15.6%Over 30 years: 3.9%
  • Beginning 6.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 26.6%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.1%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.8%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.6%
  • Over 30 years 3.9%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Aikin Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classAikin Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten1818
Grade 121.218.2
Grade 22318.4
Grade 322.718.7
Grade 422.219

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 5 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.

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

2 measures

  • 9of 16

    Academic Growth

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure

  • 10of 16

    Math — Masters

    Lamar County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 2

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 139909109.