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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus · Alternative Education Accountability

Allison L Steele E L C

Guadalupe County · Region 20: San Antonio · 75 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
88/1002025-26
Change
+11 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+2.8 ptsvs 85.2 average · 1,260 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
516 of 1,260tied with 36 others
B88

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 69 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 85.2 average for 1,260 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent movement

Overall score rose 7 points

81 to 88 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 88 is 2.8 points above the 85.2 average among 1,260 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Current strength

Student Achievement above the similar-context average

88 +2.2 pts vs 85.8

  • 88 is 2.2 points above the 85.8 average among 1,226 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

Allison L Steele E L C is rated B by TEA, scoring 88 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 85.2 average for 1,260 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 11 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 516th of 1,260 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 36 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. 5 years of ratings
  3. Where the score comes from
  4. Student outcomes
  5. After high school: the following fall
  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
  12. Where this school ranks best
  13. Where this comes from

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
908070 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageAllison L Steele E L C 7776868188 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 69 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
2025-26B8885.2 1,260 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25B8185.3 1,234 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24B8683.7 1,217 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23C7684.2 1,203 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22C7786.0 1,187 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 Achievement88 B+2.2 vs similar economic context · 1,226 reporting
  • School Progress81 B−2.1 vs similar economic context · 1,222 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps—Not reported · similar economic context 82.6 · 1,212 reporting
  • Academic Growth—Not reported · similar economic context 78.7 · 1,200 reporting
  • Relative Performance81 B+1.3 vs similar economic context · 1,222 reporting
  • Allison L Steele E L C
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,260 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement88B2
School Progress81B9
Closing the Gaps—Not rated—
Academic Growth—Not rated—
Relative Performance81B9

Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 2 points below A 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 Student Achievement (88), so School Progress (81) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 88.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level74%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,226 reporting
  • Meets grade level42%−18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,226 reporting
  • Masters grade level17%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,226 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level60%−23 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,225 reporting
  • Meets grade level37%−28 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,225 reporting
  • Masters grade level3%−27 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,225 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level40%−40 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,221 reporting
  • Meets grade level20%−34 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,221 reporting
  • Masters grade level20%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,221 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level100%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,123 reporting
  • Meets grade level0%−59 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,123 reporting
  • Masters grade level0%−31 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,123 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level84%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 645 reporting
  • Meets grade level52%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 645 reporting
  • Masters grade level26%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 645 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,260 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.

Completion

Four-Year
97.4%+10.3 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 15 rated schools reporting
Five-Year
96.1%+8.4 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 15 rated schools reporting
Six-Year
98.0%+10.1 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 15 rated schools reporting
Dropout Rate
0.5%−1.4 pts vs similar economic context average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 15 rated schools reporting

These measures use TEA's alternative-education accountability population. Each comparison average includes only schools in that population that report that specific measure; its reporting count is shown beside the average. It is an unweighted average of those reported school rates, not a pooled rate across every student in the group.

College, career and military readiness

Total credit for CCMR criteria
28.0%−60.8 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis school% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria28.0%88.8%−60.8 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course9.7%62.4%−52.7 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA6.5%37.2%−30.7 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)5.9%15.6%−9.7 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course2.2%36.7%−34.5 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Earned an industry-based certification3.8%36.1%−32.3 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate0.0%1.0%−1.0 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%4.3%−4.3 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit1.6%5.9%−4.3 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness1.1%2.8%−1.7 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student10.2%7.2%+3.0 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces7.0%3.2%+3.8 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 355 rated schools reporting

Every row is a share of this school's graduates, and every row is a way of meeting CCMR — so on every row, a bigger share is better. Difference is this school minus the average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate, counted in percentage points: +5.0 would mean five more graduates in every hundred met that criterion here. The selected comparison is an unweighted average of the reported school percentages, not a pooled rate across all graduates in the group. Graduates may meet several criteria, so the rows do not add up to the total.

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.

After high school: the following fall

Where school graduates appeared in Texas public higher-education records the fall after graduation. This is a limited next-step measure, not an eventual college-going or completion rate.

Graduates in the report
214

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
21

9.8% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
182

85.0% of graduates

Not trackable
11

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This school
214
Selected comparison
253.7

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 307 rated schools reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This school
21
Selected comparison
119.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 307 rated schools reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This school
9.8%
Selected comparison
48.2%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 307 rated schools reporting

−38.4 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This school
85.0%
Selected comparison
46.6%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 307 rated schools reporting

+38.4 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This school
5.1%
Selected comparison
5.1%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 307 rated schools reporting

+0.0 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. ALAMO CCD NE LAKEVIEW COLLEGE (000309)15

Selected comparison counts are neutral cohort scale context. The percentages put differently sized graduating classes on the same basis, but still cover only the limited Texas-public system observed by this report.

Source: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, high-school graduates enrolled in higher education, fetched 24 August 2026. The report covers graduates who enrolled in a Texas public college or university the following fall and includes only districts or campuses with more than 25 graduates.

“Not found” does not mean a graduate did not continue their education. It can include private or out-of-state college, work, military service, enrollment after the fall term, or another path the Texas public system does not observe.

“Not trackable” is not an outcome. THECB uses it for graduates with a non-standard identifier that could not be matched to higher-education records.

Who this school serves

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

Students
75
Economically disadvantaged
37.3%−0.8 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
9.3%−1.6 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
24.0%+6.0 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
75.0%−20.0 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
70.4%+58.3 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Allison L Steele E L C

African American: 6.7%Hispanic: 52%White: 30.7%Pacific Islander: 1.3%Two or More Races: 9.3%
  • African American 6.7%
  • Hispanic 52%
  • White 30.7%
  • Pacific Islander 1.3%
  • Two or More Races 9.3%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,260 reporting for every category shown · 1,260 in full cohort

African American: 9.2%Hispanic: 33.7%White: 46.8%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 5.3%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 4.6%
  • African American 9.2%
  • Hispanic 33.7%
  • White 46.8%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 5.3%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 4.6%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
75
Economically disadvantaged students
28
Emergent bilingual students
7
Special education students
18

TEA context labels

  • Alternative education campus under AEA procedures
  • Alternative education type: dropout recovery school
  • Rated under AEA procedures

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
213
Students in TEA mobility denominator
224
TEA-published mobility rate
95.1%

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 did not publish an enrollment count for 2025–26 in this PEIMS report, so no current year-over-year change is calculated. The latest available PEIMS count is 87 students in 2024–25.

Latest available PEIMS enrollment
87

2024–25

Change since 2021–22
−30

Decrease · −25.6%

Enrollment in 2024–25

This school
87
Selected comparison
737.3

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,211 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Allison L Steele E L C
School yearStudents enrolledAllison L Steele E L CChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 117 First available year 739.1
2022–23 121 Increase of 4 (3.4%) 740.7
2023–24 155 Increase of 34 (28.1%) 741.3
2024–25 87 Decrease of 68 (43.9%) 737.3
2025–26 Not reported Not available —

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
16

7.2% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
33

14.93 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
221

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
7.2%
Selected comparison
10.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 976 rated schools reporting

−3.2 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
14.93
Selected comparison
22.3

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,057 rated schools reporting

−7.4 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Allison L Steele E L C
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 205 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2021–22 295 29 9.8% 51 17.29 10.5% 22.3
2022–23 277 34 12.3% 64 23.10 11.0% 23.5
2023–24 271 25 9.2% 44 16.24 10.7% 23.7
2024–25 221 16 7.2% 33 14.93 10.4% 22.3
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Allison L Steele E L C in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 16 7.2% 33 14.93 10.4% 22.3
In-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Out-of-school suspensions 13 5.9% 18 8.14 5.1% 7
DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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$13k$20k20182020202220242025
  • Allison L Steele E L C
  • Parent district: Schertz-Cibolo-U City ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$16,508
Selected comparison
$11,884

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,234 rated schools reporting

+$4,624 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $16,508 per student for this campus, $14,903 per student for its parent district, Schertz-Cibolo-U City 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
YearAllison L Steele E L CParent district: Schertz-Cibolo-U City ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$14,877$14,541$13,054$7,709 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,127 rated schools reporting
2019$12,797$11,635$13,108$7,846 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,144 rated schools reporting
2020$12,374$11,221$14,058$8,181 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,150 rated schools reporting
2021$14,023$10,865$14,797$8,659 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,168 rated schools reporting
2022$10,806$11,204$15,708$9,829 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,186 rated schools reporting
2023$10,928$13,026$16,792$10,361 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,203 rated schools reporting
2024$9,133$14,644$18,125$11,599 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,217 rated schools reporting
2025$16,508$14,903$18,972$11,884 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,234 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

Average salary
$72,792+$5,165 vs similar economic context
Teachers
11−37.2 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
6.8−7.4 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Allison L Steele E L C

11 to 20 years: 45.5%21 to 30 years: 45.5%Over 30 years: 9.1%
  • 11 to 20 years 45.5%
  • 21 to 30 years 45.5%
  • Over 30 years 9.1%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,260 reporting for every category shown · 1,260 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.2%1 to 5 years: 23%6 to 10 years: 19.5%11 to 20 years: 31.3%21 to 30 years: 17.1%Over 30 years: 3.6%
  • Beginning 5.2%
  • 1 to 5 years 23%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.5%
  • 11 to 20 years 31.3%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.1%
  • Over 30 years 3.6%

Where this school ranks best

Out of 174 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 590

    Science — Approaches

    Region 20: San Antonio · of the 590 that report this measure · tied with 10

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

3 measures

  • 2of 14

    Dropout Rate (lowest is best)

    Region 20: San Antonio (alternative-education accountability only) · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 3of 14

    Five-Year Completion Rate

    Region 20: San Antonio (alternative-education accountability only) · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 3of 14

    Six-Year Completion Rate

    Region 20: San Antonio (alternative-education accountability only) · of the 14 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

12 measures

  • 4of 36

    Overall score

    Guadalupe County · of the 36 that report this measure

  • 4of 36

    Per-student spending

    Guadalupe County · of the 36 that report this measure

  • 4of 33

    Student Achievement

    Guadalupe County · of the 33 that report this measure

  • 4of 14

    Four-Year Completion Rate

    Region 20: San Antonio (alternative-education accountability only) · of the 14 that report this measure

  • 4of 13

    Social Studies — Masters

    Guadalupe County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 6of 123

    Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit

    Similar size · of the 123 that report this measure

  • 6of 33

    Relative Performance

    Guadalupe County · of the 33 that report this measure

  • 6of 13

    Social Studies — Meets

    Guadalupe County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 7of 13

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Guadalupe County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 9of 123

    Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)

    Similar size · of the 123 that report this measure

  • 10of 33

    School Progress

    Guadalupe County · of the 33 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 10of 33

    Math — Masters

    Guadalupe County · of the 33 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 094902002.