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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Industrial ISD

Jackson County · Region 03: Victoria · 1,160 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
89/1002025-26
Change
−3 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+3.0 ptsvs 86 average · 181 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
61 of 181tied with 17 others
B89

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 96 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 86 average for 181 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
70%vs 59.3% avg · +10.7 pts
Masters
34%vs 25.8% avg · +8.2 pts

Among 181 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

STAAR result

Math above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
66%vs 53% avg · +13 pts
Masters
30%vs 21.5% avg · +8.5 pts

Among 181 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
73%vs 64.2% avg · +8.8 pts
Masters
32%vs 27.1% avg · +4.9 pts

Among 181 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

Industrial ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 89 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 86 average for 181 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 3 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 61st of 181 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. 4 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 averageIndustrial ISD 9291888989 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 96 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
2025-26B8986.0 181 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25B8984.6 181 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24B8883.3 181 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23A9183.7 181 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22A9284.3 181 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 Achievement89 B+2.2 vs similar economic context · 181 reporting
  • School Progress84 B+2.5 vs similar economic context · 181 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps88 B+4.3 vs similar economic context · 181 reporting
  • Academic Growth80 B+3.4 vs similar economic context · 181 reporting
  • Relative Performance84 B+3.7 vs similar economic context · 181 reporting
  • Industrial ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (181 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement89B1
School Progress84B6
Closing the Gaps88B2
Academic Growth80B10
Relative Performance84B6

Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 1 point 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 (89), so School Progress (84) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 89.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level89%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
  • Meets grade level70%+11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
  • Masters grade level34%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level92%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
  • Meets grade level73%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
  • Masters grade level32%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level87%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
  • Meets grade level66%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
  • Masters grade level30%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level84%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 reporting
  • Meets grade level69%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 reporting
  • Masters grade level40%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level92%+11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 177 reporting
  • Meets grade level75%+19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 177 reporting
  • Masters grade level46%+20 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 177 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (181 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%+1.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
96.5%−1.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 172 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
98.9%+1.1 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.3 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 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
84.0%−6.6 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria84.0%90.6%−6.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course45.6%60.6%−15.0 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA45.6%37.0%+8.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)12.7%11.4%+1.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course59.5%40.4%+19.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification41.8%39.9%+1.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate0.0%0.9%−0.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%2.2%−2.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%5.6%−5.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness0.0%2.6%−2.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student2.5%7.8%−5.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces7.6%3.3%+4.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 173 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
84

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
62

73.8% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
22

26.2% of graduates

Not trackable
0

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
84
Selected comparison
500

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 134 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
62
Selected comparison
223.5

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 134 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
73.8%
Selected comparison
49.9%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 134 rated districts reporting

+23.9 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
26.2%
Selected comparison
46.0%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 134 rated districts reporting

−19.8 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
0.0%
Selected comparison
4.1%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 134 rated districts reporting

−4.1 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. VICTORIA COLLEGE (003662)22
  2. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY (003632)8

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
1,160
Economically disadvantaged
34.6%−1.6 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
2.3%−4.0 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
13.4%−3.4 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.1%+0.7 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
6.7%−3.6 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Industrial ISD

African American: 0.8%Hispanic: 32.6%White: 64.6%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 0.1%Two or More Races: 1.6%
  • African American 0.8%
  • Hispanic 32.6%
  • White 64.6%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 1.6%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting for every category shown · 181 in full cohort

African American: 4.1%Hispanic: 27.1%White: 62.9%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.8%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.7%
  • African American 4.1%
  • Hispanic 27.1%
  • White 62.9%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.8%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 3.7%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
1,153
Economically disadvantaged students
399
Emergent bilingual students
27
Special education students
155

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 1,160 students in 2025–26, an increase of 4 (0.3%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
1,160

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+4

Increase · +0.3%

Change since 2021–22
+2

Increase · +0.2%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
1,160
Selected comparison
5,160

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Industrial ISD
School yearStudents enrolledIndustrial ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 1,158 First available year 4,957.6
2022–23 1,188 Increase of 30 (2.6%) 5,078.5
2023–24 1,170 Decrease of 18 (1.5%) 5,132.3
2024–25 1,156 Decrease of 14 (1.2%) 5,177.5
2025–26 1,160 Increase of 4 (0.3%) 5,160

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
160

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
53

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

Transfers in minus transfers out
+107

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
160
Selected comparison
221.5

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
53
Selected comparison
398.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 172 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
+107
Selected comparison
−186

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 169 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Industrial ISD
School yearTransfers inIndustrial ISDTransfers outIndustrial ISDIn minus outIndustrial ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 196 40 +156 190.7 302.2 −119
2022–23 190 43 +147 189.4 327.4 −145
2023–24 170 48 +122 193.2 344.5 −159
2024–25 140 58 +82 208.6 380.5 −182
2025–26 160 53 +107 221.5 398.4 −186

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Victoria ISD 23590299
  2. Edna ISD 12090135
  3. Bloomington ISD 23590115

Top reported flows only. TEA published 3 of 7 counterpart counts and masked 4.

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Edna ISD 12090118
  2. Victoria ISD 23590210

Top reported flows only. TEA published 2 of 10 counterpart counts and masked 8.

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
73

6.0% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
129

10.69 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
1,207

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
6.0%
Selected comparison
8.3%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 156 rated districts reporting

−2.3 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
10.69
Selected comparison
17.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 163 rated districts reporting

−6.4 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Industrial ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 1,252 105 8.4% 165 13.18 6.5% 12.5
2021–22 1,202 100 8.3% 179 14.89 8.4% 17.3
2022–23 1,260 88 7.0% 271 21.51 8.8% 18.3
2023–24 1,212 88 7.3% 260 21.45 8.6% 18.3
2024–25 1,207 73 6.0% 129 10.69 8.3% 17.1
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Industrial ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 73 6.0% 129 10.69 8.3% 17.1
In-school suspensions 66 5.5% 104 8.62 7.4% 12.9
Out-of-school suspensions 10 0.8% 10 0.83 2.5% 3.6
DAEP placements 13 1.1% 14 1.16 1.8% 2.2
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
4,635

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
994

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
89

9.0%

School-age child poverty rate
9.0%

89 of 994

Boundary population

This district
4,635
Selected comparison
30,632.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
994
Selected comparison
5,624.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
89
Selected comparison
457.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
9.0%
Selected comparison
10.6%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting

−1.6 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
7.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 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
Industrial HSHigh SchoolA92343
Industrial JHMiddle / Jr. HighA92260
Industrial Elem WestElementaryB82287
Industrial Elem EastElementaryB80270

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.

$12k$18k$25k20182020202220242025
  • Industrial ISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$14,022
Selected comparison
$23,746

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 rated districts reporting

−$9,724 vs similar economic context

This district spends $5,739 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $4,950 less per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearIndustrial ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$19,559$13,246$13,054$14,650 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting
2019$21,250$12,865$13,108$14,731 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting
2020$16,914$13,729$14,058$15,531 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting
2021$14,702$14,629$14,797$16,192 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 180 rated districts reporting
2022$15,249$15,859$15,708$17,696 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 rated districts reporting
2023$15,576$17,414$16,792$18,720 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 rated districts reporting
2024$15,335$19,844$18,125$21,741 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 rated districts reporting
2025$14,022$19,761$18,972$23,746 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 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
$63,373−$2,380 vs similar economic context
Teachers
82−271.0 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14+1.0 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Industrial ISD

Beginning: 7.1%1 to 5 years: 15.2%6 to 10 years: 19.1%11 to 20 years: 32.4%21 to 30 years: 17.7%Over 30 years: 8.6%
  • Beginning 7.1%
  • 1 to 5 years 15.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.1%
  • 11 to 20 years 32.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.7%
  • Over 30 years 8.6%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 reporting for every category shown · 181 in full cohort

Beginning: 4.6%1 to 5 years: 20.4%6 to 10 years: 18.4%11 to 20 years: 32.7%21 to 30 years: 19%Over 30 years: 4.9%
  • Beginning 4.6%
  • 1 to 5 years 20.4%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.4%
  • 11 to 20 years 32.7%
  • 21 to 30 years 19%
  • Over 30 years 4.9%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 23.1% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
23.1%
Selected comparison
18.1%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 181 rated districts reporting

+5.0 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Industrial ISD
School yearTeacher turnover rateIndustrial ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2112.3%13.4%
2021–2215.8%17.1%
2022–2313.3%18.7%
2023–2414.0%18.4%
2024–2523.1%18.1%

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.

#1 rankings

First-place results

1 measure

  • 1of 31

    Earned college credit for a dual credit course

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 that report this measure

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

8 measures

  • 2of 37

    Reading — Approaches

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 2of 35

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 35 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 2of 35

    Social Studies — Masters

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 3of 37

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 3of 37

    All Subjects — Meets

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 3of 37

    Reading — Meets

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 3of 35

    Social Studies — Meets

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 35 that report this measure

  • 3of 31

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

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

14 measures

  • 4of 37

    All Subjects — Masters

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 4of 37

    Math — Meets

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 4of 37

    Math — Masters

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 4of 31

    Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 that report this measure

  • 5of 37

    Science — Masters

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 5of 31

    Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 that report this measure

  • 6of 37

    Student Achievement

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 6of 37

    Closing the Gaps

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 6of 37

    Reading — Masters

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 6of 37

    Science — Meets

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 6of 37

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 8of 37

    Attendance

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure

  • 10of 37

    Academic Growth

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 10of 37

    Science — Approaches

    Region 03: Victoria · of the 37 that report this measure · tied with 1

Other top-5% rankings

High placements in larger reporting groups

1 measure

  • 13of 261

    Math — Approaches

    Similar size · of the 261 that report this measure · tied with 4

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