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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Groesbeck ISD

Limestone County · Region 12: Waco · 1,461 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
76/1002025-26
Change
−5 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−4.3 ptsvs 80.3 average · 387 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
271 of 387tied with 16 others
C76

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 84 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 80.3 average for 387 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Current strength

Academic Growth above the similar-context average

75 +3.9 pts vs 71.1

  • 75 is 3.9 points above the 71.1 average among 387 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

Groesbeck ISD is rated C by TEA, scoring 76 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 80.3 average for 387 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 271st of 387 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 16 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. Official improvement and transfer notices
  3. 5 years of ratings
  4. Where the score comes from
  5. Student outcomes
  6. After high school: the following fall
  7. Who this district serves
  8. Student counts behind the percentages
  9. Enrollment over time
  10. Students crossing district lines
  11. Discipline and removal from class
  12. Community around the district
  13. 4 schools in this district
  14. Spending per student
  15. Teachers
  16. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

Dated TEA notices for campuses in this district. They are shown separately from the district rating because they describe specific campuses, support programs and transfer eligibility.

Campuses identified for federal improvement support
2

2026 TEA list

Campuses on the final PEG transfer list
0

2026–27 school year

Share of campuses identified for improvement

This district
50.0%
Selected comparison
24.4%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

+25.6 pts vs similar economic context

Share of campuses on the PEG list

This district
0.0%
Selected comparison
3.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

−3.7 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Groesbeck ISD
CampusNoticeOfficial status or reason
Enge-Washington IntATSAdditional Targeted Support · African American
H O Whitehurst ElemTSITargeted Support and Improvement · Hispanic

Selected comparison percentages describe how common each dated campus notice is across reporting districts in that group. They are neutral prevalence context; changing the comparison never changes a campus's official status.

Sources: TEA's 2026 Schools Identified for Improvement and Public Education Grant program, fetched 24 August 2026. A PEG listing makes a student assigned to that campus eligible to request a transfer; it does not guarantee acceptance, available space or transportation.

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
90807060 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageGroesbeck ISD 8176717376 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 84 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
2025-26C7680.3 387 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25C7379.0 387 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24C7177.3 387 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23C7677.9 387 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22B8179.0 386 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 Achievement74 C−5.9 vs similar economic context · 387 reporting
  • School Progress75 C−5.8 vs similar economic context · 387 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps77 C−0.5 vs similar economic context · 386 reporting
  • Academic Growth75 C+3.9 vs similar economic context · 387 reporting
  • Relative Performance74 C−6.3 vs similar economic context · 387 reporting
  • Groesbeck ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (387 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement74C6
School Progress75C5
Closing the Gaps77C3
Academic Growth75C5
Relative Performance74C6

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 3 points below B 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 School Progress (75), so Student Achievement (74) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 75.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level71%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
  • Meets grade level44%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
  • Masters grade level15%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level72%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
  • Meets grade level46%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
  • Masters grade level15%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level69%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
  • Meets grade level40%−0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
  • Masters grade level14%±0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level73%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 384 reporting
  • Meets grade level48%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 384 reporting
  • Masters grade level20%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 384 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level67%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 381 reporting
  • Meets grade level40%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 381 reporting
  • Masters grade level9%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 381 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (387 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
97.0%+0.7 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 373 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
95.8%−0.6 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 370 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
96.7%+0.3 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 370 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.6%+0.1 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 375 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
78.0%−11.0 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria78.0%89.0%−11.0 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 372 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course36.4%56.8%−20.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA19.2%25.1%−5.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)0.0%5.2%−5.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course27.3%33.4%−6.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification53.5%43.1%+10.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate0.0%1.7%−1.7 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%3.4%−3.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%2.4%−2.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness2.0%3.5%−1.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student11.1%9.0%+2.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces2.0%3.8%−1.8 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 374 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
113

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
46

40.7% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
64

56.6% of graduates

Not trackable
3

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
113
Selected comparison
353.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 281 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
46
Selected comparison
150.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 281 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
40.7%
Selected comparison
43.6%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 281 rated districts reporting

−2.9 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
56.6%
Selected comparison
53.0%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 281 rated districts reporting

+3.6 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
2.7%
Selected comparison
3.4%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 281 rated districts reporting

−0.7 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. MCLENNAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE (003590)12
  2. TEXAS STATE T. C. in WACO (003634)10
  3. NAVARRO COLLEGE (003593)6

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
1,461
Economically disadvantaged
64.2%+0.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
7.4%−5.0 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
20.5%+1.9 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.7%+0.3 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
14.5%−1.3 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Groesbeck ISD

African American: 7.9%Hispanic: 29.6%White: 55.2%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.2%Pacific Islander: 0.3%Two or More Races: 5.5%
  • African American 7.9%
  • Hispanic 29.6%
  • White 55.2%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.3%
  • Two or More Races 5.5%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting for every category shown · 387 in full cohort

African American: 6%Hispanic: 43.6%White: 45.6%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 0.8%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.5%
  • African American 6%
  • Hispanic 43.6%
  • White 45.6%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 0.8%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 3.5%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
1,457
Economically disadvantaged students
935
Emergent bilingual students
108
Special education students
299

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 1,461 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 34 (2.3%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
1,461

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−34

Decrease · −2.3%

Change since 2021–22
−85

Decrease · −5.5%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
1,461
Selected comparison
3,667.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Groesbeck ISD
School yearStudents enrolledGroesbeck ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 1,546 First available year 3,706.7
2022–23 1,573 Increase of 27 (1.7%) 3,744.8
2023–24 1,543 Decrease of 30 (1.9%) 3,735.3
2024–25 1,495 Decrease of 48 (3.1%) 3,739.1
2025–26 1,461 Decrease of 34 (2.3%) 3,667.7

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
170

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
71

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

Transfers in minus transfers out
+99

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
170
Selected comparison
210.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 366 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
71
Selected comparison
490.2

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 372 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
+99
Selected comparison
−298

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 353 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Groesbeck ISD
School yearTransfers inGroesbeck ISDTransfers outGroesbeck ISDIn minus outGroesbeck ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 179 67 +112 158 399.3 −257
2022–23 174 79 +95 175.7 418 −260
2023–24 157 68 +89 185.9 447.9 −275
2024–25 155 76 +79 207 473.3 −278
2025–26 170 71 +99 210.7 490.2 −298

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Mexia ISD 147903108
  2. Marlin ISD 07390332

Top reported flows only. TEA published 2 of 13 counterpart counts and masked 11.

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Bremond ISD 19890118
  2. Mexia ISD 14790313

Top reported flows only. TEA published 2 of 18 counterpart counts and masked 16.

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
157

9.9% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
384

24.20 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
1,587

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
9.9%
Selected comparison
11.3%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 345 rated districts reporting

−1.4 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
24.2
Selected comparison
25.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 356 rated districts reporting

−0.9 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Groesbeck ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 1,653 181 10.9% 436 26.38 8.5% 17.4
2021–22 1,697 210 12.4% 511 30.11 11.4% 25.2
2022–23 1,680 164 9.8% 316 18.81 11.9% 27.3
2023–24 1,666 177 10.6% 453 27.19 11.6% 26.4
2024–25 1,587 157 9.9% 384 24.20 11.3% 25.1
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Groesbeck ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 157 9.9% 384 24.20 11.3% 25.1
In-school suspensions 146 9.2% 323 20.35 9.8% 18.6
Out-of-school suspensions 31 1.9% 44 2.77 3.7% 5.6
DAEP placements 15 0.9% 17 1.07 2.7% 3.3
Mandatory DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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
9,380

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
1,413

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
299

21.2%

School-age child poverty rate
21.2%

299 of 1,413

Boundary population

This district
9,380
Selected comparison
22,729.3

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
1,413
Selected comparison
4,112.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
299
Selected comparison
715.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
21.2%
Selected comparison
18.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

+2.5 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.

4 schools in this district

Number of schools in the district

This district
4
Selected comparison
6.3

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 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
2
High School
1
Middle / Jr. High
1
Browse all 4 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
Schools in this district
SchoolTypeRatingScoreStudents
Groesbeck MSMiddle / Jr. HighB86235
Groesbeck HSHigh SchoolB82465
Enge-Washington IntElementaryD68294
H O Whitehurst ElemElementaryD64467

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.

$11k$19k$26k20182020202220242025
  • Groesbeck ISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$14,214
Selected comparison
$23,159

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

−$8,945 vs similar economic context

This district spends $5,547 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $4,758 less per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearGroesbeck ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$12,229$12,629$13,054$14,237 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting
2019$12,794$12,702$13,108$14,313 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting
2020$14,881$13,696$14,058$15,209 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting
2021$14,353$14,629$14,797$16,233 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting
2022$16,467$15,859$15,708$17,841 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting
2023$16,747$17,414$16,792$19,580 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting
2024$15,329$19,844$18,125$21,325 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting
2025$14,214$19,761$18,972$23,159 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 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
$59,014−$5,046 vs similar economic context
Teachers
110−139.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.2+1.0 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Groesbeck ISD

Beginning: 5.4%1 to 5 years: 25.1%6 to 10 years: 16.3%11 to 20 years: 27.2%21 to 30 years: 19.1%Over 30 years: 6.8%
  • Beginning 5.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 25.1%
  • 6 to 10 years 16.3%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 19.1%
  • Over 30 years 6.8%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 reporting for every category shown · 387 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.9%1 to 5 years: 25%6 to 10 years: 17.6%11 to 20 years: 27.4%21 to 30 years: 17.3%Over 30 years: 5.8%
  • Beginning 6.9%
  • 1 to 5 years 25%
  • 6 to 10 years 17.6%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.3%
  • Over 30 years 5.8%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 26.0% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
26.0%
Selected comparison
22.3%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 387 rated districts reporting

+3.7 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Groesbeck ISD
School yearTeacher turnover rateGroesbeck ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2117.3%17.3%
2021–2213.0%21.3%
2022–2320.1%24.8%
2023–2425.2%22.1%
2024–2526.0%22.3%

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 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