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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Pittsburg Elem

Camp County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 468 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
80/1002025-26
Change
−9 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+2.1 ptsvs 77.9 average · 2,110 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
914 of 2,110tied with 99 others
B80

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 86 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 77.9 average for 2,110 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

Math above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
51%vs 38.6% avg · +12.4 pts
Masters
18%vs 14.5% avg · +3.5 pts

Among 1,942 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

Current strength

Overall score above the similar-context average

80 +2.1 pts vs 77.9

  • 80 is 2.1 points above the 77.9 average among 2,110 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Current strength

School Progress above the similar-context average

85 +5.9 pts vs 79.1

  • 85 is 5.9 points above the 79.1 average among 1,947 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

Pittsburg Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 80 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 77.9 average for 2,110 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 9 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 914th of 2,110 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 99 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
  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 averagePittsburg Elem 8966858880 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 86 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
2025-26B8077.9 2,110 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25B8877.5 2,099 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24B8575.1 2,085 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23D6675.6 2,066 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22B8981.6 2,048 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 Achievement77 C+4.0 vs similar economic context · 1,952 reporting
  • School Progress85 B+5.9 vs similar economic context · 1,947 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps69 D−6.1 vs similar economic context · 1,933 reporting
  • Academic Growth57 F−15.4 vs similar economic context · 1,899 reporting
  • Relative Performance85 B+7.5 vs similar economic context · 1,947 reporting
  • Pittsburg Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,110 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement77C3
School Progress85B5
Closing the Gaps69D1
Academic Growth57F3
Relative Performance85B5

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 1 point below C 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 (85), so Student Achievement (77) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 85.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level82%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,952 reporting
  • Meets grade level51%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,952 reporting
  • Masters grade level17%+0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,952 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level86%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,950 reporting
  • Meets grade level51%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,950 reporting
  • Masters grade level15%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,950 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level79%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,942 reporting
  • Meets grade level51%+12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,942 reporting
  • Masters grade level18%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,942 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,110 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
468
Economically disadvantaged
78.0%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
22.4%−4.5 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
22.9%+4.2 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.0%+2.5 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
6.5%−13.5 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Pittsburg Elem

African American: 11.8%Hispanic: 45.7%White: 34%Asian: 1.5%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 6.8%
  • African American 11.8%
  • Hispanic 45.7%
  • White 34%
  • Asian 1.5%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 6.8%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,110 reporting for every category shown · 2,110 in full cohort

African American: 13.9%Hispanic: 65.3%White: 15.8%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.8%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 2.8%
  • African American 13.9%
  • Hispanic 65.3%
  • White 15.8%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.8%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 2.8%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
468
Economically disadvantaged students
365
Emergent bilingual students
105
Special education students
107

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
48
Students in TEA mobility denominator
511
TEA-published mobility rate
9.4%

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 468 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 12 (2.5%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
468

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−12

Decrease · −2.5%

Change since 2021–22
−48

Decrease · −9.3%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
468
Selected comparison
636.5

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,083 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Pittsburg Elem
School yearStudents enrolledPittsburg ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 516 First available year 658.2
2022–23 545 Increase of 29 (5.6%) 662.2
2023–24 503 Decrease of 42 (7.7%) 657.4
2024–25 480 Decrease of 23 (4.6%) 655.1
2025–26 468 Decrease of 12 (2.5%) 636.5

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
39

7.6% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
71

13.89 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
511

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
7.6%
Selected comparison
13.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,585 rated schools reporting

−5.8 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
13.89
Selected comparison
32.4

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,686 rated schools reporting

−18.5 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Pittsburg Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 511 34 6.7% 55 10.76 8.7% 17.2
2021–22 557 53 9.5% 110 19.75 13.0% 31.2
2022–23 570 52 9.1% 111 19.47 13.7% 34.1
2023–24 531 38 7.2% 62 11.68 13.7% 33.9
2024–25 511 39 7.6% 71 13.89 13.4% 32.4
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Pittsburg Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 39 7.6% 71 13.89 13.4% 32.4
In-school suspensions 39 7.6% 70 13.70 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.

$6k$16k$26k20182020202220242025
  • Pittsburg Elem
  • Parent district: Pittsburg ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$8,132
Selected comparison
$13,041

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,098 rated schools reporting

−$4,909 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $8,132 per student for this campus, $24,752 per student for its parent district, Pittsburg 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
YearPittsburg ElemParent district: Pittsburg ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$6,769$12,352$13,054$8,076 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,982 rated schools reporting
2019$6,913$11,902$13,108$8,225 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,002 rated schools reporting
2020$7,424$10,972$14,058$8,734 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,019 rated schools reporting
2021$7,752$12,092$14,797$9,352 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,031 rated schools reporting
2022$7,998$14,046$15,708$10,728 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,049 rated schools reporting
2023$7,296$13,989$16,792$11,267 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,066 rated schools reporting
2024$7,728$14,678$18,125$12,288 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,085 rated schools reporting
2025$8,132$24,752$18,972$13,041 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,098 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
$55,586−$11,222 vs similar economic context
Teachers
33−10.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14.3+0.3 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Pittsburg Elem

Beginning: 12.2%1 to 5 years: 29.7%6 to 10 years: 15.3%11 to 20 years: 26.3%21 to 30 years: 12.2%Over 30 years: 4.3%
  • Beginning 12.2%
  • 1 to 5 years 29.7%
  • 6 to 10 years 15.3%
  • 11 to 20 years 26.3%
  • 21 to 30 years 12.2%
  • Over 30 years 4.3%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,110 reporting for every category shown · 2,110 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.9%1 to 5 years: 27.6%6 to 10 years: 18.9%11 to 20 years: 27.1%21 to 30 years: 15.1%Over 30 years: 3.7%
  • Beginning 6.9%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.6%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.9%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.1%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.1%
  • Over 30 years 3.7%

Where this school ranks best

Out of 72 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.

Other top-5% rankings

High placements in larger reporting groups

3 measures

  • 73of 2,029

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 2,029 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 90of 2,031

    Attendance

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 2,031 that report this measure · tied with 13

  • 106of 1,950

    Reading — Approaches

    Similar economic-disadvantage rate · of the 1,950 that report this measure · tied with 18

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 032902103.