Districts, charter school systems & campuses · Source: Texas Education Agency
Hudson ElemA98vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Traditional public school campus
Hudson Elem
Gregg County · Region 07: Kilgore · 430 students
Current score
98/1002025-26
Change
+1 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+16.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 1,795 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
5 of 1,795tied with 9 others
Score vs region
+18.0 ptsvs 80 average · 352 rated schools in Region 07: Kilgore
Region 07: Kilgore placement
2 of 352tied with 1 other
Score vs county
+14.2 ptsvs 83.8 average · 41 rated schools in Gregg County
Gregg County placement
1 of 41among reporting schools
Score vs similar-size group
+17.9 ptsvs 80.1 average · 4,292 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
27 of 4,292tied with 25 others
Score vs state
+16.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
35 of 7,646tied with 46 others
A98
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 97 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 81.3 average for 1,795 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 83.8 average for 41 rated schools in Gregg County.The current score is above the 80.1 average for 4,292 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
Current strength
Student Achievement above the similar-context average
98+17.4 pts vs 80.6
98 is 17.4 points above
the 80.6 average among 1,727 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
Tied for 2nd of 1,727 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure; 6 schools share that value.
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
Hudson Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 98 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 1,795 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 5th of 1,795 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 9 others).
Hudson Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 98 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80 average for 352 rated schools in Region 07: Kilgore. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 2nd of 352 rated schools in Region 07: Kilgore (tied with 1 other).
Hudson Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 98 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 83.8 average for 41 rated schools in Gregg County. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 1st of 41 rated schools in Gregg County.
Hudson Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 98 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.1 average for 4,292 similarly sized rated schools. It is up 1 point since 2021-22.
Ranks 27th of 4,292 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 25 others).
Hudson Elem is rated A by TEA, scoring 98 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is up 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 A with 97 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 Achievement98 A+17.4 vs similar economic context · 1,727 reporting
School Progress97 A+15.7 vs similar economic context · 1,720 reporting
Closing the Gaps97 A+18.6 vs similar economic context · 1,705 reporting
Academic Growth94 A+19.0 vs similar economic context · 1,679 reporting
Relative Performance97 A+17.7 vs similar economic context · 1,720 reporting
Hudson Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,795 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
98
A
—
School Progress
97
A
—
Closing the Gaps
97
A
—
Academic Growth
94
A
—
Relative Performance
97
A
—
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 (98), so
School Progress (97) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 98.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level100%+24 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,727 reporting
Meets grade level96%+45 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,727 reporting
Masters grade level73%+51 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,727 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level100%+22 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,725 reporting
Meets grade level98%+42 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,725 reporting
Masters grade level79%+56 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,725 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level100%+26 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,716 reporting
Meets grade level95%+50 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,716 reporting
Masters grade level66%+48 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,716 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level100%+22 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,587 reporting
Meets grade level93%+43 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,587 reporting
Masters grade level78%+55 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,587 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,795 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
430
Economically disadvantaged
54.4%−0.3 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
12.3%−1.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
4.0%−14.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
97.1%+2.7 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
2.6%−12.4 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Hudson Elem
African American 14%
Hispanic 34%
White 41.6%
American Indian 0.5%
Asian 4.9%
Two or More Races 5.1%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting for every category shown · 1,795 in full cohort
African American 9.9%
Hispanic 43.7%
White 39.2%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 2.6%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 4.1%
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 Gregg County · 41 reporting for every category shown · 41 in full cohort
African American 19.8%
Hispanic 32.3%
White 40.7%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 5.8%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,292 reporting for every category shown · 4,292 in full cohort
African American 11.8%
Hispanic 55%
White 25.9%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 3.5%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.4%
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
430
Economically disadvantaged students
234
Emergent bilingual students
53
Special education students
17
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
13
Students in TEA mobility denominator
460
TEA-published mobility rate
2.8%
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 430 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 22 (4.9%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
430
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−22
Decrease · −4.9%
Change since 2021–22
−148
Decrease · −25.6%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
430
Selected comparison
634.7
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,755 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Hudson Elem
School year
Students enrolledHudson Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
578
First available year
636.5
2022–23
559
Decrease of 19 (3.3%)
642.4
2023–24
504
Decrease of 55 (9.8%)
642.5
2024–25
452
Decrease of 52 (10.3%)
639.4
2025–26
430
Decrease of 22 (4.9%)
634.7
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.
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
11
2.42 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
455
2024–25
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This school
2.42
Selected comparison
27.9
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,493 rated schools reporting
−25.5 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Hudson 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
566
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
2021–22
587
13
2.2%
18
3.07
12.4%
27.9
2022–23
552
25
4.5%
35
6.34
12.9%
29.6
2023–24
503
Suppressed
—
11
2.19
—
29.7
2024–25
455
Suppressed
—
11
2.42
—
27.9
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Hudson Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
Suppressed
—
11
2.42
—
27.9
In-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
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.
Hudson Elem
Parent district: Longview ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$10,129
Selected comparison
$12,211
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,768 rated schools reporting
−$2,082 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $10,129 per student for this campus, $23,597 per student for its parent district, Longview 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
Hudson Elem
Parent district: Longview ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$4,525
$11,258
$13,054
$7,886
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,633 rated schools reporting
2019
$4,565
$12,245
$13,108
$8,065
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,649 rated schools reporting
2020
$6,108
$13,308
$14,058
$8,635
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,664 rated schools reporting
2021
$8,520
$15,792
$14,797
$9,013
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,681 rated schools reporting
2022
$8,263
$17,809
$15,708
$10,360
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,695 rated schools reporting
2023
$7,853
$17,283
$16,792
$10,894
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,718 rated schools reporting
2024
$9,041
$19,461
$18,125
$11,751
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,742 rated schools reporting
2025
$10,129
$23,597
$18,972
$12,211
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,768 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
$64,196−$2,365 vs similar economic context
Teachers
30−11.5 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14.2−5.3 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Hudson Elem
Beginning 16.5%
1 to 5 years 19.8%
6 to 10 years 10.6%
11 to 20 years 26.4%
21 to 30 years 13.2%
Over 30 years 13.5%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting for every category shown · 1,795 in full cohort
Beginning 5.8%
1 to 5 years 24.8%
6 to 10 years 19.2%
11 to 20 years 28.9%
21 to 30 years 16.4%
Over 30 years 4.4%
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 Gregg County · 41 reporting for every category shown · 41 in full cohort
Beginning 5%
1 to 5 years 27.6%
6 to 10 years 16.4%
11 to 20 years 30.1%
21 to 30 years 15.2%
Over 30 years 5.8%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 4,292 reporting for every category shown · 4,292 in full cohort
Beginning 6.1%
1 to 5 years 25.8%
6 to 10 years 19.2%
11 to 20 years 29%
21 to 30 years 16.3%
Over 30 years 3.4%
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 Hudson Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classHudson Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 1
14.6
18.3
Grade 2
17.4
18.5
Grade 3
21
18.8
Grade 4
19.8
19
Grade 5
14.7
19.8
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 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.
#1 rankings
First-place results
19 measures
1of 7,260
All Subjects — Approaches
Texas average · of the 7,260 that report this measure · tied with 24
1of 7,254
Reading — Approaches
Texas average · of the 7,254 that report this measure · tied with 32
1of 7,227
Math — Approaches
Texas average · of the 7,227 that report this measure · tied with 37
1of 3,664
Science — Approaches
Similar size · of the 3,664 that report this measure · tied with 67
1of 1,727
All Subjects — Masters
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,727 that report this measure
1of 1,725
Reading — Masters
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,725 that report this measure
1of 1,716
Math — Masters
Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,716 that report this measure
1of 316
Student Achievement
Region 07: Kilgore · of the 316 that report this measure · tied with 1
1of 316
All Subjects — Meets
Region 07: Kilgore · of the 316 that report this measure
1of 315
Reading — Meets
Region 07: Kilgore · of the 315 that report this measure
1of 314
Math — Meets
Region 07: Kilgore · of the 314 that report this measure
1of 281
Science — Masters
Region 07: Kilgore · of the 281 that report this measure
1of 41
Overall score
Gregg County · of the 41 that report this measure
1of 38
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Gregg County · of the 38 that report this measure
1of 35
School Progress
Gregg County · of the 35 that report this measure
1of 35
Relative Performance
Gregg County · of the 35 that report this measure
1of 34
Closing the Gaps
Gregg County · of the 34 that report this measure · tied with 1
1of 33
Academic Growth
Gregg County · of the 33 that report this measure
1of 30
Science — Meets
Gregg County · of the 30 that report this measure
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
1 measure
3of 40
Attendance
Gregg County · of the 40 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 092903117.