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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Ashbel Smith Elem

Harris County · Region 04: Houston · 679 students

Current score
59/1002025-26
Change
−26 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−18.4 ptsvs 77.4 average · 2,385 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
2,190 of 2,385tied with 62 others
F59

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 85 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 77.4 average for 2,385 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Current strength

Chronically absent lower than the similar-context average

18.5% −3.9 pts vs 22.4%

  • 18.5% is 3.9 percentage points lower than the 22.4% average among 2,269 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Current strength

Attendance above the similar-context average

94.1% +1.1 pts vs 93%

  • 94.1% is 1.1 percentage points above the 93% average among 2,277 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

Ashbel Smith Elem is rated F by TEA, scoring 59 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 77.4 average for 2,385 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 26 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 2,190th of 2,385 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 62 others).

3 consecutive years rated unacceptable. At three or more years, Texas law provides for state intervention.

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 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

Additional Targeted Support

Official support label: ATS

Identification reason: Hispanic, White, Economically Disadvantaged, Continuously Enrolled

TEA track year 1 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
34.8%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,385 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
8.8%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,385 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
9080706050 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageAshbel Smith Elem 8553596859 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 B with 85 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
2025-26F5977.4 2,385 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25D6877.1 2,373 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24F5973.9 2,355 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23F5374.0 2,344 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22B8581.7 2,315 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 Achievement56 F−14.7 vs similar economic context · 2,221 reporting
  • School Progress58 F−20.6 vs similar economic context · 2,215 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps60 D−14.6 vs similar economic context · 2,201 reporting
  • Academic Growth58 F−14.5 vs similar economic context · 2,175 reporting
  • Relative Performance57 F−19.7 vs similar economic context · 2,215 reporting
  • Ashbel Smith Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,385 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement56F4
School Progress58F2
Closing the Gaps60D10
Academic Growth58F2
Relative Performance57F3

Closest to moving up: School Progress, 2 points below D 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 (58), so Student Achievement (56) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 58.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level53%−14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,221 reporting
  • Meets grade level28%−13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,221 reporting
  • Masters grade level9%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,221 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level53%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,220 reporting
  • Meets grade level27%−18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,220 reporting
  • Masters grade level9%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,220 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level56%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,211 reporting
  • Meets grade level31%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,211 reporting
  • Masters grade level10%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,211 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level47%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,072 reporting
  • Meets grade level18%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,072 reporting
  • Masters grade level9%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,072 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,385 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
679
Economically disadvantaged
87.2%−0.5 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
40.3%+3.4 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
19.0%+0.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.1%+1.1 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
18.5%−3.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Ashbel Smith Elem

African American: 10.3%Hispanic: 80.7%White: 6.5%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 0.1%Two or More Races: 2.1%
  • African American 10.3%
  • Hispanic 80.7%
  • White 6.5%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 2.1%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,385 reporting for every category shown · 2,385 in full cohort

African American: 14.2%Hispanic: 74.2%White: 7.9%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.4%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 1.9%
  • African American 14.2%
  • Hispanic 74.2%
  • White 7.9%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.4%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 1.9%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
678
Economically disadvantaged students
591
Emergent bilingual students
273
Special education students
129

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
81
Students in TEA mobility denominator
496
TEA-published mobility rate
16.3%

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 679 students in 2025–26, an increase of 131 (23.9%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
679

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+131

Increase · +23.9%

Change since 2021–22
+77

Increase · +12.8%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
679
Selected comparison
592.4

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,357 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Ashbel Smith Elem
School yearStudents enrolledAshbel Smith ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 602 First available year 632.5
2022–23 582 Decrease of 20 (3.3%) 628.7
2023–24 554 Decrease of 28 (4.8%) 619.4
2024–25 548 Decrease of 6 (1.1%) 614.1
2025–26 679 Increase of 131 (23.9%) 592.4

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
53

9.4% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
84

14.84 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
566

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
9.4%
Selected comparison
13.3%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,574 rated schools reporting

−3.9 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
14.84
Selected comparison
31.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,695 rated schools reporting

−17.1 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Ashbel Smith Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 667 39 5.8% 55 8.25 7.6% 14.7
2021–22 661 58 8.8% 133 20.12 12.7% 30.4
2022–23 629 33 5.3% 57 9.06 13.7% 33.6
2023–24 584 60 10.3% 117 20.03 13.8% 33.8
2024–25 566 53 9.4% 84 14.84 13.3% 31.9
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Ashbel Smith Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 53 9.4% 84 14.84 13.3% 31.9
In-school suspensions 51 9.0% 76 13.43 11.7% 22.9
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
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.

$6k$13k$21k20182020202220242025
  • Ashbel Smith Elem
  • Parent district: Goose Creek CISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$8,425
Selected comparison
$12,968

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,371 rated schools reporting

−$4,543 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $8,425 per student for this campus, $16,348 per student for its parent district, Goose Creek CISD, $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
YearAshbel Smith ElemParent district: Goose Creek CISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$6,495$13,739$13,054$8,278 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,247 rated schools reporting
2019$7,110$13,443$13,108$8,335 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,279 rated schools reporting
2020$7,561$16,384$14,058$8,849 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,289 rated schools reporting
2021$7,966$19,838$14,797$9,577 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,295 rated schools reporting
2022$8,140$18,829$15,708$11,094 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,315 rated schools reporting
2023$6,840$16,754$16,792$11,623 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,342 rated schools reporting
2024$8,226$16,470$18,125$12,428 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,356 rated schools reporting
2025$8,425$16,348$18,972$12,968 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,371 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
$68,995+$1,181 vs similar economic context
Teachers
46+4.6 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14.7+0.3 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Ashbel Smith Elem

Beginning: 21.7%1 to 5 years: 32.6%6 to 10 years: 15.2%11 to 20 years: 17.4%21 to 30 years: 10.9%Over 30 years: 2.2%
  • Beginning 21.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 32.6%
  • 6 to 10 years 15.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 17.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 10.9%
  • Over 30 years 2.2%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,385 reporting for every category shown · 2,385 in full cohort

Beginning: 7.2%1 to 5 years: 27.4%6 to 10 years: 19%11 to 20 years: 27.1%21 to 30 years: 15.1%Over 30 years: 3.5%
  • Beginning 7.2%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.4%
  • 6 to 10 years 19%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.1%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.1%
  • Over 30 years 3.5%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Ashbel Smith Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classAshbel Smith Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten22.818.1
Grade 115.318.4
Grade 216.318.3
Grade 31918.7
Grade 415.418.7
Grade 514.619.6

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 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 101911113.