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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Ponder ISD

Denton County · Region 11: Fort Worth · 1,740 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
84/1002025-26
Change
+3 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−1.1 ptsvs 85.1 average · 222 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
125 of 222tied with 11 others
B84

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 89 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 85.1 average for 222 rated districts serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent domain gain

Academic Growth rose 13 points

69 to 82 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 82 is 6.4 points above the 75.6 average among 222 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

STAAR result

Social Studies above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
59%vs 54.1% avg · +4.9 pts
Masters
27%vs 25% avg · +2 pts

Among 217 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

Ponder ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 84 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 85.1 average for 222 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is up 3 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 125th of 222 rated districts serving a similar economic context (tied with 11 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 district ranks best
  17. 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
1

2026 TEA list

Campuses on the final PEG transfer list
0

2026–27 school year

Share of campuses identified for improvement

This district
25.0%
Selected comparison
13.2%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

+11.8 pts vs similar economic context

Share of campuses on the PEG list

This district
0.0%
Selected comparison
0.8%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

−0.8 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Ponder ISD
CampusNoticeOfficial status or reason
Ponder ElemTSITargeted Support and Improvement · English Learners

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 averagePonder ISD 8173777884 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 89 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
2025-26B8485.1 222 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25C7883.8 222 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24C7782.3 222 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23C7382.6 222 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22B8183.3 222 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 Achievement83 B−2.9 vs similar economic context · 222 reporting
  • School Progress82 B+0.6 vs similar economic context · 222 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps87 B+4.1 vs similar economic context · 222 reporting
  • Academic Growth82 B+6.4 vs similar economic context · 222 reporting
  • Relative Performance76 C−4.4 vs similar economic context · 222 reporting
  • Ponder ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (222 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement83B7
School Progress82B8
Closing the Gaps87B3
Academic Growth82B8
Relative Performance76C4

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 3 points below A in that domain — the nearest of the measures that count toward the overall rating.

TEA does not add the domains up. The overall score is the better of Student Achievement and School Progress at 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. For this district that better measure is Student Achievement (83), so School Progress (82) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 83.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level77%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
  • Meets grade level52%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
  • Masters grade level19%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level77%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
  • Meets grade level52%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
  • Masters grade level18%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level75%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
  • Meets grade level47%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
  • Masters grade level16%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level82%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 reporting
  • Meets grade level57%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 reporting
  • Masters grade level26%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 221 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level82%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 217 reporting
  • Meets grade level59%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 217 reporting
  • Masters grade level27%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 217 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (222 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
99.2%+2.0 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
100.0%+2.5 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
96.3%−1.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.2 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 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 · 212 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course69.2%60.4%+8.8 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA34.2%34.8%−0.6 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)5.0%9.4%−4.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course22.5%39.9%−17.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification57.5%41.6%+15.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate2.5%1.2%+1.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree0.0%2.5%−2.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit15.8%4.6%+11.2 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness3.3%2.8%+0.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student15.0%8.0%+7.0 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces5.8%3.3%+2.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 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
135

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
53

39.3% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
72

53.3% of graduates

Not trackable
10

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
135
Selected comparison
433.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 164 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
53
Selected comparison
194.3

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 164 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
39.3%
Selected comparison
49.5%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 164 rated districts reporting

−10.2 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
53.3%
Selected comparison
46.8%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 164 rated districts reporting

+6.5 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
7.4%
Selected comparison
3.7%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 164 rated districts reporting

+3.7 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS (003594)14
  2. NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COLLEGE (003558)11
  3. TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY (003644)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
1,740
Economically disadvantaged
38.3%−1.5 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
17.8%+10.9 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
18.9%+1.6 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.1%−0.2 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
10.5%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Ponder ISD

African American: 1.2%Hispanic: 38.4%White: 55.8%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 0.5%Two or More Races: 3.9%
  • African American 1.2%
  • Hispanic 38.4%
  • White 55.8%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 0.5%
  • Two or More Races 3.9%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting for every category shown · 222 in full cohort

African American: 3.9%Hispanic: 29.8%White: 61%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.4%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.5%
  • African American 3.9%
  • Hispanic 29.8%
  • White 61%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.4%
  • 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
1,737
Economically disadvantaged students
665
Emergent bilingual students
309
Special education students
328

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 1,740 students in 2025–26, an increase of 21 (1.2%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
1,740

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+21

Increase · +1.2%

Change since 2021–22
+158

Increase · +10.0%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
1,740
Selected comparison
4,457.8

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Ponder ISD
School yearStudents enrolledPonder ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 1,582 First available year 4,297.6
2022–23 1,640 Increase of 58 (3.7%) 4,404.1
2023–24 1,677 Increase of 37 (2.3%) 4,449.5
2024–25 1,719 Increase of 42 (2.5%) 4,474.5
2025–26 1,740 Increase of 21 (1.2%) 4,457.8

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
176

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
100

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

Transfers in minus transfers out
+76

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
176
Selected comparison
187.6

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 216 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
100
Selected comparison
374.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 212 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
+76
Selected comparison
−194

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 207 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Ponder ISD
School yearTransfers inPonder ISDTransfers outPonder ISDIn minus outPonder ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 100 71 +29 167.2 278.7 −118
2022–23 99 60 +39 165.4 305.3 −145
2023–24 109 84 +25 170.1 324.2 −159
2024–25 138 94 +44 179.7 355.4 −184
2025–26 176 100 +76 187.6 374.1 −194

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Northwest ISD 06191160
  2. Krum ISD 06190544
  3. Argyle ISD 06191029
  4. Denton ISD 06190122
  5. Decatur ISD 24990510

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

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Argyle ISD 06191014
  2. Texas College Preparatory Academies 22180114
  3. Northwest ISD 06191113
  4. Krum ISD 06190510
  5. North Texas Collegiate Academy 06180210

Top reported flows only. TEA published 5 of 22 counterpart counts and masked 17.

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
226

12.4% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
561

30.76 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
1,824

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
12.4%
Selected comparison
8.8%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 191 rated districts reporting

+3.6 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
30.76
Selected comparison
18.2

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 199 rated districts reporting

+12.6 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Ponder ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 1,650 79 4.8% 114 6.91 7.1% 13.7
2021–22 1,689 106 6.3% 193 11.43 8.9% 18.7
2022–23 1,723 192 11.1% 339 19.67 9.3% 19.4
2023–24 1,760 173 9.8% 329 18.69 9.1% 19.7
2024–25 1,824 226 12.4% 561 30.76 8.8% 18.2
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Ponder ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 226 12.4% 561 30.76 8.8% 18.2
In-school suspensions 207 11.3% 422 23.14 7.8% 13.9
Out-of-school suspensions 68 3.7% 99 5.43 2.6% 3.7
DAEP placements 37 2.0% 40 2.19 2.0% 2.4
Mandatory DAEP placements 17 0.9% 17 0.93 1.3% 1.5
Discretionary DAEP placements 21 1.1% 23 1.26 1.0% 1.1
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
8,636

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
1,741

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
121

7.0%

School-age child poverty rate
7.0%

121 of 1,741

Boundary population

This district
8,636
Selected comparison
26,583.2

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

School-age population

This district
1,741
Selected comparison
4,892.5

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

School-age population in poverty

This district
121
Selected comparison
445.9

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

School-age child poverty rate

This district
7.0%
Selected comparison
11.9%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

−4.9 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
6.7

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 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.

High School
2
Elementary
1
Middle / Jr. High
1
Browse all 4 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
Schools in this district
SchoolTypeRatingScoreStudents
Ponder HSHigh SchoolA95560
Ponder JHMiddle / Jr. HighB82432
Ponder ElemElementaryB82747
Denton Co JJAEPHigh SchoolNot Rated—1

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$25k$41k20182020202220242025
  • Ponder ISD
  • TEA peer group
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$21,803
Selected comparison
$23,400

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

−$1,597 vs similar economic context

This district spends $2,313 more per student than TEA's peer group, and $2,831 more per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearPonder ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$12,292$13,246$13,054$14,076 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting
2019$11,263$12,865$13,108$14,493 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting
2020$12,173$13,729$14,058$15,236 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting
2021$12,931$14,629$14,797$16,143 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting
2022$38,640$15,859$15,708$17,660 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting
2023$32,862$16,917$16,792$19,075 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting
2024$23,214$18,225$18,125$21,898 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting
2025$21,803$19,490$18,972$23,400 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 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
$70,188+$4,849 vs similar economic context
Teachers
123−183.9 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
14.1+1.6 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Ponder ISD

Beginning: 2.3%1 to 5 years: 24.5%6 to 10 years: 23.5%11 to 20 years: 28.7%21 to 30 years: 17.5%Over 30 years: 3.4%
  • Beginning 2.3%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.5%
  • 6 to 10 years 23.5%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.7%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.5%
  • Over 30 years 3.4%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 reporting for every category shown · 222 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.1%1 to 5 years: 21%6 to 10 years: 18%11 to 20 years: 32.1%21 to 30 years: 18.7%Over 30 years: 5.1%
  • Beginning 5.1%
  • 1 to 5 years 21%
  • 6 to 10 years 18%
  • 11 to 20 years 32.1%
  • 21 to 30 years 18.7%
  • Over 30 years 5.1%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 33.0% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
33.0%
Selected comparison
18.2%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 222 rated districts reporting

+14.8 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Ponder ISD
School yearTeacher turnover ratePonder ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–214.6%14.3%
2021–2221.7%17.9%
2022–2336.2%19.1%
2023–2429.4%18.8%
2024–2533.0%18.2%

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 200 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

5 measures

  • 1of 11

    Five-Year Graduation Rate

    Denton County (standard accountability only) · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 1of 11

    Dropout Rate (lowest is best)

    Denton County (standard accountability only) · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 1of 11

    College, career or military ready

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 1of 11

    Earned a level I or level II certificate

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 1of 11

    Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

11 measures

  • 2of 11

    Overall score

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · full ranking

  • 2of 11

    School Progress

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 2of 11

    Closing the Gaps

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 2of 11

    Academic Growth

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 2of 11

    Social Studies — Approaches

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 2of 11

    Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 3of 11

    Math — Approaches

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 3of 11

    Four-Year Graduation Rate

    Denton County (standard accountability only) · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 3of 11

    Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 3of 11

    Earned an industry-based certification

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 3of 11

    Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

19 measures

  • 4of 11

    Math — Meets

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 4of 11

    Math — Masters

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 4of 11

    Science — Approaches

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 4of 11

    Science — Masters

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 4of 11

    Social Studies — Meets

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 4of 11

    Attendance

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 4of 11

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 5of 11

    All Subjects — Approaches

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 5of 11

    All Subjects — Meets

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 5of 11

    Science — Meets

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 5of 11

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

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 5of 11

    Earned college credit for a dual credit course

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 7of 11

    Reading — Approaches

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 11

    Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 8of 11

    Social Studies — Masters

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 9of 11

    All Subjects — Masters

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 9of 11

    Per-student spending

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure

  • 10of 11

    Reading — Meets

    Denton County · of the 11 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 10of 11

    Six-Year Graduation Rate

    Denton County (standard accountability only) · of the 11 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