+6.6 ptsvs 78.4 average · 2,083 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
532 of 2,083tied with 75 others
Score vs region
+5.0 ptsvs 80 average · 352 rated schools in Region 07: Kilgore
Region 07: Kilgore placement
124 of 352tied with 13 others
Score vs county
+2.6 ptsvs 82.4 average · 23 rated schools in Upshur County
Upshur County placement
8 of 23tied with 2 others
Score vs similar-size group
+3.0 ptsvs 82 average · 2,390 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
1,016 of 2,390tied with 70 others
Score vs state
+3.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
3,064 of 7,646tied with 260 others
B85
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 83 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 78.4 average for 2,083 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 80 average for 352 rated schools in Region 07: Kilgore.The current score is above the 82.4 average for 23 rated schools in Upshur County.The current score is above the 82 average for 2,390 similarly sized rated schools.The current score is above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
STAAR result
All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
Meets
58%vs 44.1% avg · +13.9 pts
Masters
27%vs 17.4% avg · +9.6 pts
Among 1,934 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
A precomputed strengths set is not available for this pinned entity. The page’s direct numeric comparisons still update to that pin.
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
Gilmer Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 85 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 78.4 average for 2,083 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 532nd of 2,083 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 75 others).
Gilmer Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 85 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80 average for 352 rated schools in Region 07: Kilgore. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 124th of 352 rated schools in Region 07: Kilgore (tied with 13 others).
Gilmer Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 85 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 82.4 average for 23 rated schools in Upshur County. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 8th of 23 rated schools in Upshur County (tied with 2 others).
Gilmer Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 85 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 82 average for 2,390 similarly sized rated schools. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 1,016th of 2,390 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 70 others).
Gilmer Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 85 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.
Follow the solid line to see how this school has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.
Compare against
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 83 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.
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 Achievement82 B+7.8 vs similar economic context · 1,934 reporting
School Progress88 B+8.4 vs similar economic context · 1,928 reporting
Closing the Gaps77 C+1.3 vs similar economic context · 1,913 reporting
Academic Growth73 C+0.4 vs similar economic context · 1,871 reporting
Relative Performance88 B+10.1 vs similar economic context · 1,928 reporting
Gilmer Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,083 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
82
B
8
School Progress
88
B
2
Closing the Gaps
77
C
3
Academic Growth
73
C
7
Relative Performance
88
B
2
Closest to moving up: School Progress, 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 School Progress (88), so
Student Achievement (82) 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 level76%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,934 reporting
Meets grade level58%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,934 reporting
Masters grade level27%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,934 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level81%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,931 reporting
Meets grade level63%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,931 reporting
Masters grade level26%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,931 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level72%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,923 reporting
Meets grade level53%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,923 reporting
Masters grade level28%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,923 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,083 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
1,044
Economically disadvantaged
75.1%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
9.6%−14.6 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
16.0%−2.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
93.8%+0.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
17.2%−1.8 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Gilmer Elem
African American 8.9%
Hispanic 21.7%
White 57.4%
American Indian 0.4%
Asian 1.8%
Pacific Islander 0.3%
Two or More Races 9.5%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,083 reporting for every category shown · 2,083 in full cohort
African American 13.2%
Hispanic 62%
White 19.3%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.9%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 3.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 07: Kilgore · 352 reporting for every category shown · 352 in full cohort
African American 13.6%
Hispanic 28.4%
White 52.2%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.8%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 4.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Upshur County · 23 reporting for every category shown · 23 in full cohort
African American 5.9%
Hispanic 19.5%
White 67.7%
American Indian 0.4%
Asian 0.6%
Two or More Races 5.8%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 2,390 reporting for every category shown · 2,390 in full cohort
African American 12.6%
Hispanic 51.5%
White 24.7%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 7%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 3.8%
Statewide average7,646 reporting for every category shown · 7,646 Texas schools in full cohort
African American 11.5%
Hispanic 52.6%
White 27.8%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 4.2%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.4%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
1,044
Economically disadvantaged students
784
Emergent bilingual students
100
Special education students
167
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
100
Students in TEA mobility denominator
924
TEA-published mobility rate
10.8%
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 1,044 students in 2025–26, an increase of 2 (0.2%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
1,044
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
+2
Increase · +0.2%
Change since 2021–22
−72
Decrease · −6.5%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
1,044
Selected comparison
637.9
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,053 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Gilmer Elem
School year
Students enrolledGilmer Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
1,116
First available year
656.2
2022–23
1,179
Increase of 63 (5.6%)
660
2023–24
1,224
Increase of 45 (3.8%)
657.2
2024–25
1,042
Decrease of 182 (14.9%)
654.5
2025–26
1,044
Increase of 2 (0.2%)
637.9
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.
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
58
5.2% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
83
7.43 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
1,117
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This school
5.2%
Selected comparison
13.2%
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,568 rated schools reporting
−8.0 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This school
7.43
Selected comparison
31.8
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,672 rated schools reporting
−24.4 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Gilmer Elem
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
1,178
126
10.7%
268
22.75
9.1%
18
2021–22
1,238
147
11.9%
324
26.17
12.9%
30.9
2022–23
1,280
107
8.4%
194
15.16
13.6%
33.4
2023–24
1,336
76
5.7%
131
9.81
13.5%
33.1
2024–25
1,117
58
5.2%
83
7.43
13.2%
31.8
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Gilmer Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
58
5.2%
83
7.43
13.2%
31.8
In-school suspensions
58
5.2%
80
7.16
11.7%
23.5
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.
Gilmer Elem
Parent district: Gilmer ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$9,469
Selected comparison
$13,097
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,066 rated schools reporting
−$3,628 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $9,469 per student for this campus, $15,516 per student for its parent district, Gilmer 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
Year
Gilmer Elem
Parent district: Gilmer ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$6,781
$10,149
$13,054
$8,046
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,946 rated schools reporting
2019
$6,916
$12,157
$13,108
$8,179
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,963 rated schools reporting
2020
$7,349
$22,065
$14,058
$8,732
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,984 rated schools reporting
2021
$7,775
$15,790
$14,797
$9,296
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,996 rated schools reporting
2022
$7,609
$14,535
$15,708
$10,600
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,015 rated schools reporting
2023
$8,225
$14,770
$16,792
$11,168
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,031 rated schools reporting
2024
$15,818
$17,679
$18,125
$12,305
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,053 rated schools reporting
2025
$9,469
$15,516
$18,972
$13,097
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,066 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
$57,964−$8,715 vs similar economic context
Teachers
66+23.1 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.7+1.6 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Gilmer Elem
Beginning 3%
1 to 5 years 33.3%
6 to 10 years 25.5%
11 to 20 years 20.3%
21 to 30 years 15.1%
Over 30 years 3%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,083 reporting for every category shown · 2,083 in full cohort
Beginning 6.7%
1 to 5 years 27.5%
6 to 10 years 19.1%
11 to 20 years 27.2%
21 to 30 years 15.2%
Over 30 years 3.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 07: Kilgore · 352 reporting for every category shown · 352 in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 24.6%
6 to 10 years 17.7%
11 to 20 years 28%
21 to 30 years 17.3%
Over 30 years 6%
Selected comparison averageFor Upshur County · 23 reporting for every category shown · 23 in full cohort
Beginning 4.8%
1 to 5 years 23.2%
6 to 10 years 18%
11 to 20 years 27.5%
21 to 30 years 19.8%
Over 30 years 6.6%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 2,390 reporting for every category shown · 2,390 in full cohort
Beginning 6.4%
1 to 5 years 27%
6 to 10 years 20.5%
11 to 20 years 28.8%
21 to 30 years 14.4%
Over 30 years 2.7%
Statewide average7,646 reporting for every category shown · 7,646 Texas schools in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 25.6%
6 to 10 years 19.2%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 15.9%
Over 30 years 3.7%
Average students in a class
TEA average class size by grade or subject for Gilmer Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classGilmer Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten
16.5
17.9
Grade 1
21.9
18.2
Grade 2
20.1
18.3
Grade 3
21.3
18.7
Grade 4
21
18.9
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.
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.
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
1 measure
3of 22
Math — Masters
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
8 measures
4of 22
All Subjects — Masters
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure · tied with 1
5of 22
Math — Meets
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure · tied with 2
6of 22
School Progress
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure · tied with 1
6of 22
Relative Performance
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure · tied with 1
7of 22
All Subjects — Meets
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure · tied with 2
8of 23
Overall score
Upshur County · of the 23 that report this measure · tied with 2
8of 22
Reading — Meets
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure
9of 22
Reading — Masters
Upshur County · of the 22 that report this measure
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.
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 230902102.