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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Burns Elem

Cameron County · Region 01: Edinburg · 622 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
93/1002025-26
Change
−5 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+15.4 ptsvs 77.6 average · 2,028 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
49 of 2,028tied with 17 others
A93

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 96 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 77.6 average for 2,028 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent movement

Overall score rose 4 points

89 to 93 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 93 is 15.4 points above the 77.6 average among 2,028 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Recent domain gain

Closing the Gaps rose 11 points

83 to 94 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 94 is 19.1 points above the 74.9 average among 1,866 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

STAAR result

All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
69%vs 40.5% avg · +28.5 pts
Masters
33%vs 16.1% avg · +16.9 pts

Among 1,880 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

Burns Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 93 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 77.6 average for 2,028 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 49th of 2,028 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 17 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. Who this school serves
  6. Student counts behind the percentages
  7. Enrollment over time
  8. Discipline and removal from class
  9. Spending per student
  10. Teachers and actual class size
  11. Where this school ranks best
  12. 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
90807060 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageBurns Elem 9890918993 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 A with 96 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
2025-26A9377.6 2,028 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25B8977.3 2,010 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24A9173.8 1,992 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23A9073.3 1,986 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22A9881.9 1,961 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 Achievement91 A+20.8 vs similar economic context · 1,880 reporting
  • School Progress92 A+13.3 vs similar economic context · 1,877 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps94 A+19.1 vs similar economic context · 1,866 reporting
  • Academic Growth91 A+17.9 vs similar economic context · 1,850 reporting
  • Relative Performance92 A+15.3 vs similar economic context · 1,876 reporting
  • Burns Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,028 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement91A—
School Progress92A—
Closing the Gaps94A—
Academic Growth91A—
Relative Performance92A—

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 (92), so Student Achievement (91) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 92.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level89%+23 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,880 reporting
  • Meets grade level69%+29 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,880 reporting
  • Masters grade level33%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,880 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level85%+16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,879 reporting
  • Meets grade level64%+20 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,879 reporting
  • Masters grade level22%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,879 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level92%+26 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,875 reporting
  • Meets grade level76%+37 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,875 reporting
  • Masters grade level43%+28 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,875 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level88%+25 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,770 reporting
  • Meets grade level63%+29 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,770 reporting
  • Masters grade level35%+21 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,770 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,028 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
622
Economically disadvantaged
93.1%+1.8 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
41.2%+0.2 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
20.4%+2.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.2%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
12.2%−10.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Burns Elem

Hispanic: 97.9%White: 2.1%
  • Hispanic 97.9%
  • White 2.1%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,028 reporting for every category shown · 2,028 in full cohort

African American: 15%Hispanic: 76.5%White: 5.4%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.2%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 1.6%
  • African American 15%
  • Hispanic 76.5%
  • White 5.4%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 1.6%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
622
Economically disadvantaged students
579
Emergent bilingual students
256
Special education students
127

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
51
Students in TEA mobility denominator
434
TEA-published mobility rate
11.8%

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 622 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 29 (4.5%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
622

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−29

Decrease · −4.5%

Change since 2021–22
+24

Increase · +4.0%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
622
Selected comparison
568.7

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,007 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Burns Elem
School yearStudents enrolledBurns ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 598 First available year 614.5
2022–23 604 Increase of 6 (1.0%) 610.6
2023–24 641 Increase of 37 (6.1%) 600.8
2024–25 651 Increase of 10 (1.6%) 594.1
2025–26 622 Decrease of 29 (4.5%) 568.7

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
Suppressed

Rate not available

Cumulative year-end enrollment
691

2024–25

TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Burns Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 687 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2021–22 657 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2022–23 672 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2023–24 680 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2024–25 691 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Burns Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
In-school suspensions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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$13k$20k20182020202220242025
  • Burns Elem
  • Parent district: Brownsville ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$11,902
Selected comparison
$13,188

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,008 rated schools reporting

−$1,286 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $11,902 per student for this campus, $16,535 per student for its parent district, Brownsville 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
YearBurns ElemParent district: Brownsville ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$8,314$11,135$13,054$8,328 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,913 rated schools reporting
2019$8,767$11,998$13,108$8,347 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,938 rated schools reporting
2020$9,709$13,029$14,058$8,846 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,942 rated schools reporting
2021$10,590$13,534$14,797$9,662 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,944 rated schools reporting
2022$11,461$15,729$15,708$11,250 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,961 rated schools reporting
2023$12,979$16,177$16,792$11,782 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,985 rated schools reporting
2024$13,674$16,871$18,125$12,656 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,995 rated schools reporting
2025$11,902$16,535$18,972$13,188 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,008 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
$68,415+$71 vs similar economic context
Teachers
40+0.3 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.5+0.8 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Burns Elem

1 to 5 years: 17.4%6 to 10 years: 10%11 to 20 years: 35.1%21 to 30 years: 35.1%Over 30 years: 2.5%
  • 1 to 5 years 17.4%
  • 6 to 10 years 10%
  • 11 to 20 years 35.1%
  • 21 to 30 years 35.1%
  • Over 30 years 2.5%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,028 reporting for every category shown · 2,028 in full cohort

Beginning: 7.5%1 to 5 years: 27.1%6 to 10 years: 18.8%11 to 20 years: 27.2%21 to 30 years: 14.8%Over 30 years: 3.4%
  • Beginning 7.5%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.1%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.8%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 14.8%
  • Over 30 years 3.4%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Burns Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classBurns Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten15.818
Grade 11518.3
Grade 29.618.3
Grade 314.118.5
Grade 417.818.4
Grade 514.919.2

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 105 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.

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

2 measures

  • 2of 125

    Math — Meets

    Cameron County · of the 125 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 3of 125

    Academic Growth

    Cameron County · of the 125 that report this measure · tied with 1

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

2 measures

  • 5of 125

    Math — Masters

    Cameron County · of the 125 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 125

    Math — Approaches

    Cameron County · of the 125 that report this measure · tied with 2

Other top-5% rankings

High placements in larger reporting groups

10 measures

  • 26of 1,866

    Closing the Gaps

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,866 that report this measure · tied with 6

  • 33of 1,880

    All Subjects — Meets

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,880 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 34of 1,880

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,880 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 44of 1,880

    Student Achievement

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,880 that report this measure · tied with 18

  • 49of 2,028

    Overall score

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 2,028 that report this measure · tied with 17

  • 53of 1,880

    All Subjects — Masters

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,880 that report this measure · tied with 9

  • 56of 1,876

    Relative Performance

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,876 that report this measure · tied with 33

  • 65of 1,770

    Science — Masters

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,770 that report this measure · tied with 7

  • 67of 1,879

    Reading — Approaches

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,879 that report this measure · tied with 19

  • 71of 1,879

    Reading — Meets

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,879 that report this measure · tied with 11

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 031901128.