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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Pleasant Grove ISD

Bowie County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 2,349 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
91/1002025-26
Change
−1 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+5.2 ptsvs 85.8 average · 186 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
35 of 186tied with 10 others
A91

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 94 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 85.8 average for 186 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent movement

Overall score rose 3 points

88 to 91 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 91 is 5.2 points above the 85.8 average among 186 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Recent domain gain

Academic Growth rose 7 points

77 to 84 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 84 is 7.5 points above the 76.5 average among 186 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

STAAR result

All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
69%vs 58.8% avg · +10.2 pts
Masters
33%vs 25.5% avg · +7.5 pts

Among 186 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

Pleasant Grove ISD is rated A by TEA, scoring 91 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 85.8 average for 186 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.

Ranks 35th of 186 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 10 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 averagePleasant Grove ISD 9291888891 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 94 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
2025-26A9185.8 186 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25B8884.6 186 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24B8883.3 186 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23A9183.5 186 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22A9284.2 186 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 Achievement92 A+5.3 vs similar economic context · 186 reporting
  • School Progress89 B+7.5 vs similar economic context · 186 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps90 A+6.4 vs similar economic context · 186 reporting
  • Academic Growth84 B+7.5 vs similar economic context · 186 reporting
  • Relative Performance89 B+8.6 vs similar economic context · 186 reporting
  • Pleasant Grove ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (186 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement92A—
School Progress89B1
Closing the Gaps90A—
Academic Growth84B6
Relative Performance89B1

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 (92), so School Progress (89) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 92.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level88%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
  • Meets grade level69%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
  • Masters grade level33%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level89%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
  • Meets grade level74%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
  • Masters grade level37%+10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level86%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
  • Meets grade level59%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
  • Masters grade level22%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level93%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 185 reporting
  • Meets grade level79%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 185 reporting
  • Masters grade level48%+17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 185 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level89%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 182 reporting
  • Meets grade level69%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 182 reporting
  • Masters grade level35%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 182 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (186 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
98.8%+1.0 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
98.8%+0.9 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 177 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
99.0%+1.1 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 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
98.0%+7.3 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria98.0%90.7%+7.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course54.7%60.4%−5.7 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA31.2%36.4%−5.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)12.4%10.8%+1.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course80.0%40.8%+39.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification19.4%40.5%−21.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate5.9%1.2%+4.7 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%2.1%−2.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%5.5%−5.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness1.8%2.7%−0.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student8.8%7.9%+0.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces0.6%3.3%−2.7 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 178 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
166

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
56

33.7% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
109

65.7% of graduates

Not trackable
1

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
166
Selected comparison
484.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 137 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
56
Selected comparison
216.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 137 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
33.7%
Selected comparison
50.0%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 137 rated districts reporting

−16.3 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
65.7%
Selected comparison
46.1%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 137 rated districts reporting

+19.6 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
0.6%
Selected comparison
3.8%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 137 rated districts reporting

−3.2 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY-TEXARKANA (029269)19
  2. TEXARKANA COLLEGE (003628)11

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
2,349
Economically disadvantaged
35.3%−1.7 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
5.4%−1.1 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
10.1%−6.8 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.6%+0.3 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
10.2%−0.3 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Pleasant Grove ISD

African American: 16.4%Hispanic: 9.3%White: 62.6%American Indian: 0.2%Asian: 4.1%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 7.3%
  • African American 16.4%
  • Hispanic 9.3%
  • White 62.6%
  • American Indian 0.2%
  • Asian 4.1%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 7.3%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting for every category shown · 186 in full cohort

African American: 4%Hispanic: 27.7%White: 62.4%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.7%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.6%
  • African American 4%
  • Hispanic 27.7%
  • White 62.4%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.7%
  • 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
2,348
Economically disadvantaged students
828
Emergent bilingual students
126
Special education students
237

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 2,349 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 17 (0.7%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
2,349

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−17

Decrease · −0.7%

Change since 2021–22
+28

Increase · +1.2%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
2,349
Selected comparison
5,003.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Pleasant Grove ISD
School yearStudents enrolledPleasant Grove ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 2,321 First available year 4,805.3
2022–23 2,310 Decrease of 11 (0.5%) 4,924.3
2023–24 2,274 Decrease of 36 (1.6%) 4,978.2
2024–25 2,366 Increase of 92 (4.0%) 5,020.5
2025–26 2,349 Decrease of 17 (0.7%) 5,003.9

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
529

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
534

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

Transfers in minus transfers out
−5

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
529
Selected comparison
202.6

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 182 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
534
Selected comparison
393.5

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

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
−5
Selected comparison
−197

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 174 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Pleasant Grove ISD
School yearTransfers inPleasant Grove ISDTransfers outPleasant Grove ISDIn minus outPleasant Grove ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 507 568 −61 177.6 299.4 −128
2022–23 495 592 −97 174.7 324 −153
2023–24 518 529 −11 178.4 341.5 −168
2024–25 567 520 +47 191.8 375.1 −191
2025–26 529 534 −5 202.6 393.5 −197

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Texarkana ISD 019907270
  2. Red Lick ISD 019911128
  3. Liberty-Eylau ISD 01990853
  4. Redwater ISD 01990635
  5. Hooks ISD 01990217

Top reported flows only. TEA published 6 of 14 counterpart counts and masked 8.

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Texarkana ISD 019907386
  2. Red Lick ISD 01991165
  3. Redwater ISD 01990623
  4. Premier High Schools 07280117
  5. Hooks ISD 01990210

Top reported flows only. TEA published 5 of 15 counterpart counts and masked 10.

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
136

5.4% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
242

9.65 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
2,507

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
5.4%
Selected comparison
8.3%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 160 rated districts reporting

−2.9 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
9.65
Selected comparison
17.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 167 rated districts reporting

−7.5 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Pleasant Grove ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 2,379 130 5.5% 230 9.67 6.6% 12.5
2021–22 2,450 183 7.5% 373 15.22 8.4% 17.3
2022–23 2,441 156 6.4% 267 10.94 8.9% 18.3
2023–24 2,429 148 6.1% 235 9.67 8.7% 18.4
2024–25 2,507 136 5.4% 242 9.65 8.3% 17.1
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Pleasant Grove ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 136 5.4% 242 9.65 8.3% 17.1
In-school suspensions 115 4.6% 185 7.38 7.4% 13.1
Out-of-school suspensions 24 1.0% 32 1.28 2.5% 3.6
DAEP placements 21 0.8% 25 1.00 1.8% 2.2
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements 21 0.8% 25 1.00 0.8% 0.9
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
11,861

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
2,221

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
245

11.0%

School-age child poverty rate
11.0%

245 of 2,221

Boundary population

This district
11,861
Selected comparison
29,566.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
2,221
Selected comparison
5,428.2

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
245
Selected comparison
444.6

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
11.0%
Selected comparison
10.9%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting

+0.1 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
7.3

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 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
Pleasant Grove HSHigh SchoolA95821
Pleasant Grove MSMiddle / Jr. HighA91552
Margaret Fischer Davis ElemElementaryA91465
Pleasant Grove IntElementaryB88511

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.

$10k$17k$25k20182020202220242025
  • Pleasant Grove ISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$17,634
Selected comparison
$23,829

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting

−$6,195 vs similar economic context

This district spends $1,856 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $1,338 less per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearPleasant Grove ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$10,653$12,629$13,054$14,479 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting
2019$11,667$12,702$13,108$14,656 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting
2020$16,567$13,696$14,058$15,538 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting
2021$13,348$14,225$14,797$16,138 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting
2022$13,820$15,710$15,708$17,741 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting
2023$13,887$16,917$16,792$18,732 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting
2024$22,553$18,225$18,125$21,719 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting
2025$17,634$19,490$18,972$23,829 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 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
$61,955−$3,633 vs similar economic context
Teachers
184−159.5 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
12.8+0.2 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Pleasant Grove ISD

Beginning: 1.1%1 to 5 years: 17.2%6 to 10 years: 23.4%11 to 20 years: 32%21 to 30 years: 21.4%Over 30 years: 4.9%
  • Beginning 1.1%
  • 1 to 5 years 17.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 23.4%
  • 11 to 20 years 32%
  • 21 to 30 years 21.4%
  • Over 30 years 4.9%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 reporting for every category shown · 186 in full cohort

Beginning: 4.7%1 to 5 years: 20.7%6 to 10 years: 18.2%11 to 20 years: 32.5%21 to 30 years: 18.9%Over 30 years: 5%
  • Beginning 4.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 20.7%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 32.5%
  • 21 to 30 years 18.9%
  • Over 30 years 5%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 16.0% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
16.0%
Selected comparison
17.9%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 186 rated districts reporting

−1.9 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Pleasant Grove ISD
School yearTeacher turnover ratePleasant Grove ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2115.5%13.6%
2021–2218.3%17.6%
2022–2325.4%18.7%
2023–2426.7%18.6%
2024–2516.0%17.9%

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 184 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

7 measures

  • 1of 187

    Earned college credit for a dual credit course

    Similar size · of the 187 that report this measure

  • 1of 46

    Science — Meets

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

  • 1of 46

    Science — Masters

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

  • 1of 13

    Overall score

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure · full ranking

  • 1of 13

    Student Achievement

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 1of 13

    Relative Performance

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 1of 11

    Social Studies — Meets

    Bowie County · of the 11 that report this measure

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

15 measures

  • 2of 187

    Science — Approaches

    Similar size · of the 187 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 2of 46

    All Subjects — Masters

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

  • 2of 42

    Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)

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

  • 2of 13

    School Progress

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 2of 13

    Closing the Gaps

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 2of 13

    Academic Growth

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 2of 13

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 2of 13

    All Subjects — Meets

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 2of 13

    Reading — Meets

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 2of 13

    Math — Approaches

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 2of 13

    Math — Meets

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 2of 11

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Bowie County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 2of 11

    Social Studies — Masters

    Bowie County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 3of 46

    Reading — Masters

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

  • 3of 13

    Math — Masters

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

6 measures

  • 4of 13

    Reading — Approaches

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 5of 13

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 6of 42

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

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

  • 6of 13

    Attendance

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 6of 13

    Per-student spending

    Bowie County · of the 13 that report this measure

  • 8of 42

    Earned a level I or level II certificate

    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