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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Chapel Hill ISD

Titus County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 947 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
84/1002025-26
Change
−4 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+0.5 ptsvs 83.5 average · 302 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
134 of 302tied with 17 others
B84

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 92 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 83.5 average for 302 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent domain gain

School Progress rose 6 points

79 to 85 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 85 is 3.5 points above the 81.5 average among 302 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

STAAR result

Reading above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
66%vs 59.3% avg · +6.7 pts
Masters
28%vs 23.4% avg · +4.6 pts

Among 302 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

STAAR result

Social Studies above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
59%vs 51.9% avg · +7.1 pts
Masters
27%vs 24% avg · +3 pts

Among 293 districts 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 district.

Read the full rating context and placement

Chapel Hill ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 84 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 83.5 average for 302 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 4 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 134th of 302 rated districts 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. After high school: the following fall
  6. Who this district serves
  7. Student counts behind the percentages
  8. Enrollment over time
  9. Students crossing district lines
  10. Discipline and removal from class
  11. Community around the district
  12. 3 schools in this district
  13. Spending per student
  14. Teachers
  15. Where this district ranks best
  16. Where this comes from

5 years of ratings

Follow the solid line to see how this district has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.

Compare against
908070 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageChapel Hill ISD 8883868384 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 92 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
2025-26B8483.5 302 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25B8382.7 302 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24B8680.9 302 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23B8381.5 302 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22B8882.3 302 reporting80.6 1,017 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 Achievement86 B+1.9 vs similar economic context · 302 reporting
  • School Progress85 B+3.5 vs similar economic context · 302 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps80 B−1.3 vs similar economic context · 301 reporting
  • Academic Growth73 C−1.3 vs similar economic context · 302 reporting
  • Relative Performance85 B+4.4 vs similar economic context · 302 reporting
  • Chapel Hill ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (302 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement86B4
School Progress85B5
Closing the Gaps80B10
Academic Growth73C7
Relative Performance85B5

Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 4 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 district that better measure is Student Achievement (86), so School Progress (85) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 86.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level81%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
  • Meets grade level57%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
  • Masters grade level23%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level85%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
  • Meets grade level66%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
  • Masters grade level28%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level76%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
  • Meets grade level44%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
  • Masters grade level13%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level82%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 301 reporting
  • Meets grade level59%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 301 reporting
  • Masters grade level29%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 301 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level83%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 293 reporting
  • Meets grade level59%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 293 reporting
  • Masters grade level27%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 293 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (302 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 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate — a comparison TEA does not publish.

Graduation

Four-Year
98.7%+2.6 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
100.0%+3.4 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 288 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
94.4%−2.1 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 287 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.3 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 290 rated districts reporting

These measures use TEA's standard-accountability population. Each comparison average includes only districts in that population that report that specific measure; its reporting count is shown beside the average. It is an unweighted average of those reported district rates, not a pooled rate across every student in the group.

College, career and military readiness

Total credit for CCMR criteria
100.0%+10.6 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria100.0%89.4%+10.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 288 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course66.7%58.4%+8.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA30.7%30.8%−0.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)2.7%8.3%−5.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course56.0%37.9%+18.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification82.7%41.5%+41.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate2.7%1.5%+1.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree2.7%2.6%+0.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%4.6%−4.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness1.3%2.9%−1.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student9.3%7.8%+1.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces2.7%3.3%−0.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting

Every row is a share of this district's graduates, and every row is a way of meeting CCMR — so on every row, a bigger share is better. Difference is this district minus the average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate, counted in percentage points: +5.0 would mean five more graduates in every hundred met that criterion here. The selected comparison is an unweighted average of the reported district percentages, not a pooled rate across all graduates in the group. Graduates may meet several criteria, so the rows do not add up to the total.

Counts in the comparison controls describe full cohort membership, not the denominator of every average. Each average uses only districts for which TEA reported that measure; metric-specific reporting counts are shown on the STAAR, graduation and CCMR rows and may vary.

After high school: the following fall

Where district graduates appeared in Texas public higher-education records the fall after graduation. This is a limited next-step measure, not an eventual college-going or completion rate.

Graduates in the report
72

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
41

56.9% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
28

38.9% of graduates

Not trackable
3

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
72
Selected comparison
455.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 231 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
41
Selected comparison
202

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 231 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
56.9%
Selected comparison
48.5%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 231 rated districts reporting

+8.4 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
38.9%
Selected comparison
48.2%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 231 rated districts reporting

−9.3 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
4.2%
Selected comparison
3.3%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 231 rated districts reporting

+0.9 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. NORTHEAST TEXAS COMM COLLEGE (023154)16
  2. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY (003632)5

Selected comparison counts are neutral cohort scale context. The percentages put differently sized graduating classes on the same basis, but still cover only the limited Texas-public system observed by this report.

Source: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, high-school graduates enrolled in higher education, fetched 24 August 2026. The report covers graduates who enrolled in a Texas public college or university the following fall and includes only districts or campuses with more than 25 graduates.

“Not found” does not mean a graduate did not continue their education. It can include private or out-of-state college, work, military service, enrollment after the fall term, or another path the Texas public system does not observe.

“Not trackable” is not an outcome. THECB uses it for graduates with a non-standard identifier that could not be matched to higher-education records.

Who this district serves

Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.

Students
947
Economically disadvantaged
45.2%−1.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
13.6%+5.6 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
17.8%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.1%+0.1 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
12.0%−0.3 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Chapel Hill ISD

African American: 2%Hispanic: 41.6%White: 52.8%American Indian: 0.5%Asian: 0.6%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 2.2%
  • African American 2%
  • Hispanic 41.6%
  • White 52.8%
  • American Indian 0.5%
  • Asian 0.6%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 2.2%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting for every category shown · 302 in full cohort

African American: 4.3%Hispanic: 33.2%White: 57.2%American Indian: 0.4%Asian: 1.3%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.6%
  • African American 4.3%
  • Hispanic 33.2%
  • White 57.2%
  • American Indian 0.4%
  • Asian 1.3%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 3.6%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
943
Economically disadvantaged students
426
Emergent bilingual students
128
Special education students
168

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 947 students in 2025–26, an increase of 19 (2.0%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
947

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+19

Increase · +2.0%

Change since 2021–22
−99

Decrease · −9.5%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
947
Selected comparison
4,888.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Chapel Hill ISD
School yearStudents enrolledChapel Hill ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 1,046 First available year 4,759
2022–23 1,061 Increase of 15 (1.4%) 4,855.2
2023–24 978 Decrease of 83 (7.8%) 4,888.6
2024–25 928 Decrease of 50 (5.1%) 4,923
2025–26 947 Increase of 19 (2.0%) 4,888.1

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting districts in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this district'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.

Students crossing district lines

How many students live in one public-school district and attend in another. These are movement counts, not a measure of family satisfaction or school quality.

Transfers in
352

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
135

Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26

Transfers in minus transfers out
+217

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
352
Selected comparison
267

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 292 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
135
Selected comparison
568.2

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
+217
Selected comparison
−306

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Chapel Hill ISD
School yearTransfers inChapel Hill ISDTransfers outChapel Hill ISDIn minus outChapel Hill ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 406 103 +303 219 430.6 −219
2022–23 404 122 +282 221.5 474.6 −258
2023–24 367 142 +225 231.3 485.7 −263
2024–25 327 138 +189 250.3 547.5 −303
2025–26 352 135 +217 267 568.2 −306

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Mount Pleasant ISD 225902185
  2. Pittsburg ISD 03290265
  3. Daingerfield-Lone Star ISD 17290232
  4. Harts Bluff ISD 22590723
  5. Pewitt CISD 17290520

Top reported flows only. TEA published 6 of 10 counterpart counts and masked 4.

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Mount Pleasant ISD 225902108

Top reported flows only. TEA published 1 of 10 counterpart counts and masked 9.

Selected comparison figures are average reported counts, not rates; group size and district enrollment affect them. They provide scale context and are not a performance judgment. This district's official totals do not change when the comparison does.

Source: TEA Student Transfer Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. The totals are TEA's official district rows; this site does not add masked detail cells. A transfer records a mismatch between district of residence and public district or charter of attendance. It does not say why a family transferred, whether the move was optional, or whether either school is better.

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
20

2.1% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
34

3.51 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
969

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
2.1%
Selected comparison
9.4%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 264 rated districts reporting

−7.3 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
3.51
Selected comparison
19.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 270 rated districts reporting

−16.4 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Chapel Hill ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 1,049 57 5.4% 102 9.72 7.6% 14.4
2021–22 1,115 96 8.6% 172 15.43 9.5% 19.9
2022–23 1,111 104 9.4% 158 14.22 10.1% 21.2
2023–24 1,013 53 5.2% 79 7.80 9.8% 21.3
2024–25 969 20 2.1% 34 3.51 9.4% 19.9
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Chapel Hill ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 20 2.1% 34 3.51 9.4% 19.9
In-school suspensions 19 2.0% 30 3.10 8.3% 15.1
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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 districts can be read on the same basis. Each average uses only group members for which TEA reported that rate; this district'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.

Community around the district

A district serves a place as well as a roster. These Census estimates describe the resident community without treating its circumstances as an explanation or a verdict on students.

People living inside the district boundary
2,951

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
613

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
76

12.4%

School-age child poverty rate
12.4%

76 of 613

Boundary population

This district
2,951
Selected comparison
30,551.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
613
Selected comparison
5,378

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
76
Selected comparison
613.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
12.4%
Selected comparison
13.8%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

−1.4 pts vs similar economic context

Population averages provide neutral scale context and can differ sharply across a region, county or the state. The poverty-rate comparison is the like-for-like percentage; none of these Census measures is treated as school performance.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2024 Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, fetched 24 August 2026. These are modeled estimates for residents inside the geographic district, not the students enrolled by the district. A family's poverty status is context, never a school-quality measure.

3 schools in this district

Number of schools in the district

This district
3
Selected comparison
7.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

The selected comparison is a neutral average district size. This district's school count and school-type mix remain its own facts.

Elementary
1
High School
1
Middle / Jr. High
1
Browse all 3 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
Schools in this district
SchoolTypeRatingScoreStudents
Chapel Hill HSHigh SchoolA94283
Chapel Hill JHMiddle / Jr. HighC79217
Chapel Hill ElemElementaryC77447

Spending per student

The selected txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference stay visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.

$9k$17k$25k20182020202220242025
  • Chapel Hill ISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$20,933
Selected comparison
$23,059

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

−$2,126 vs similar economic context

This district spends $542 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $1,961 more per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearChapel Hill ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$10,849$13,246$13,054$13,990 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting
2019$11,314$12,865$13,108$14,119 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting
2020$12,158$13,729$14,058$15,321 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting
2021$12,759$15,636$14,797$16,224 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting
2022$13,858$15,859$15,708$17,805 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting
2023$15,416$17,414$16,792$19,557 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting
2024$15,589$19,654$18,125$22,091 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting
2025$20,933$21,475$18,972$23,059 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts 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
$61,176−$4,065 vs similar economic context
Teachers
78−255.7 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
12.1−0.6 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Chapel Hill ISD

Beginning: 2.6%1 to 5 years: 28.4%6 to 10 years: 21.7%11 to 20 years: 25.6%21 to 30 years: 17.9%Over 30 years: 3.8%
  • Beginning 2.6%
  • 1 to 5 years 28.4%
  • 6 to 10 years 21.7%
  • 11 to 20 years 25.6%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.9%
  • Over 30 years 3.8%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 reporting for every category shown · 302 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.3%1 to 5 years: 22.2%6 to 10 years: 17.6%11 to 20 years: 30.6%21 to 30 years: 18.9%Over 30 years: 5.4%
  • Beginning 5.3%
  • 1 to 5 years 22.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 17.6%
  • 11 to 20 years 30.6%
  • 21 to 30 years 18.9%
  • Over 30 years 5.4%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 19.8% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
19.8%
Selected comparison
18.8%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 302 rated districts reporting

+1.0 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Chapel Hill ISD
School yearTeacher turnover rateChapel Hill ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2114.5%15.0%
2021–2215.3%18.1%
2022–2321.0%20.8%
2023–2419.1%19.7%
2024–2519.8%18.8%

TEA defines this district rate as the share of teacher full-time equivalents from the prior fall who are not employed as teachers in the district in the current fall. That can include leaving the district or remaining in a different role; it is not a campus-level measure. The comparison average changes with the selected group; this district's reported rate does not.

Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.

Where this district ranks best

Out of 160 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

  • 2of 42

    Earned an industry-based certification

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 42 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

11 measures

  • 5of 46

    Reading — Masters

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 46 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 44

    Social Studies — Meets

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 44 that report this measure

  • 7of 44

    Social Studies — Masters

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 44 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 42

    Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 42 that report this measure

  • 8of 46

    Reading — Meets

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 46 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 9of 46

    Science — Masters

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 46 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 9of 44

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 44 that report this measure

  • 9of 42

    Earned college credit for a dual credit course

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 42 that report this measure

  • 9of 42

    Earned an associate degree

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 42 that report this measure

  • 10of 46

    All Subjects — Meets

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 46 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 10of 42

    Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 42 that report this measure

These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above this section is the full picture, including where this district 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 district; any tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones no district 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 this district as CSV · JSON · the whole dataset