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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Geographic public school district

Riesel ISD

McLennan County · Region 12: Waco · 683 students

Official district websiteEnrollment, registration and eligibility

Current score
89/1002025-26
Change
−1 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
+5.0 ptsvs 84 average · 280 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
61 of 280tied 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 93 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 84 average for 280 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
64%vs 55.1% avg · +8.9 pts
Masters
26%vs 22.9% avg · +3.1 pts

Among 280 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
57%vs 48.3% avg · +8.7 pts
Masters
22%vs 18.8% avg · +3.2 pts

Among 280 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.

See the full measure

STAAR result

Science above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
76%vs 58% avg · +18 pts
Masters
42%vs 28.1% avg · +13.9 pts

Among 279 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

Riesel ISD is rated B by TEA, scoring 89 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 84 average for 280 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is down 1 point since 2021-22.

Ranks 61st of 280 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. 2 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 averageRiesel ISD 9089909089 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 93 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
2025-26B8984.0 280 reporting81.7 1,019 reporting
2024-25A9083.0 280 reporting80.3 1,019 reporting
2023-24A9081.3 280 reporting78.7 1,017 reporting
2022-23B8982.0 280 reporting79.2 1,018 reporting
2021-22A9082.6 280 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 Achievement90 A+5.3 vs similar economic context · 280 reporting
  • School Progress86 B+4.5 vs similar economic context · 280 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps88 B+6.1 vs similar economic context · 280 reporting
  • Academic Growth70 C−4.8 vs similar economic context · 280 reporting
  • Relative Performance86 B+5.3 vs similar economic context · 280 reporting
  • Riesel ISD
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (280 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement90A—
School Progress86B4
Closing the Gaps88B2
Academic Growth70C10
Relative Performance86B4

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 2 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 (90), so School Progress (86) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 90.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level85%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
  • Meets grade level64%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
  • Masters grade level26%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level85%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
  • Meets grade level67%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
  • Masters grade level25%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level83%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
  • Meets grade level57%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
  • Masters grade level22%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level91%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 279 reporting
  • Meets grade level76%+18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 279 reporting
  • Masters grade level42%+14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 279 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level78%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 reporting
  • Meets grade level57%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 reporting
  • Masters grade level21%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (280 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
98.1%+1.6 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 269 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
100.0%+3.0 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
97.9%+1.0 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 267 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.0%−0.3 pts vs similar economic context average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 269 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
92.0%+2.5 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
CriterionThis district% of graduatesAveragesimilar economic contextDifferencepercentage pointsReportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria92.0%89.5%+2.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course80.8%58.0%+22.8 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA44.2%32.1%+12.1 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)0.0%8.7%−8.7 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course38.5%38.1%+0.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification3.8%41.7%−37.9 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate0.0%1.4%−1.4 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree1.9%2.2%−0.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit0.0%4.5%−4.5 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness1.9%2.9%−1.0 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student15.4%7.7%+7.7 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces0.0%3.3%−3.3 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 268 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
38

Class of 2023–24

Enrolled in Texas public higher education
20

52.6% of graduates

Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
18

47.4% of graduates

Not trackable
0

Fall 2024

Graduates in the report

This district
38
Selected comparison
492

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 rated districts reporting

Enrolled in Texas public higher education

This district
20
Selected comparison
218.3

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 rated districts reporting

Texas-public enrollment rate

This district
52.6%
Selected comparison
48.9%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 rated districts reporting

+3.7 pts vs similar economic context

Not-found rate

This district
47.4%
Selected comparison
47.6%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 rated districts reporting

−0.2 pts vs similar economic context

Not-trackable rate

This district
0.0%
Selected comparison
3.5%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 213 rated districts reporting

−3.5 pts vs similar economic context

Most common named Texas public destinations

  1. MCLENNAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE (003590)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
683
Economically disadvantaged
43.0%−1.7 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
2.8%−5.1 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
16.1%−1.6 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.9%+0.8 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
10.0%−1.8 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Riesel ISD

African American: 2%Hispanic: 26.1%White: 67.3%Asian: 0.3%Two or More Races: 4.2%
  • African American 2%
  • Hispanic 26.1%
  • White 67.3%
  • Asian 0.3%
  • Two or More Races 4.2%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting for every category shown · 280 in full cohort

African American: 4.4%Hispanic: 31.9%White: 58.2%American Indian: 0.4%Asian: 1.4%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 3.6%
  • African American 4.4%
  • Hispanic 31.9%
  • White 58.2%
  • American Indian 0.4%
  • Asian 1.4%
  • 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
683
Economically disadvantaged students
294
Emergent bilingual students
19
Special education students
110

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 683 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 6 (0.9%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
683

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−6

Decrease · −0.9%

Change since 2021–22
+60

Increase · +9.6%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This district
683
Selected comparison
5,169.4

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

Student enrollment by school year for Riesel ISD
School yearStudents enrolledRiesel ISDChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 623 First available year 5,038.8
2022–23 656 Increase of 33 (5.3%) 5,137.6
2023–24 652 Decrease of 4 (0.6%) 5,170.7
2024–25 689 Increase of 37 (5.7%) 5,201.9
2025–26 683 Decrease of 6 (0.9%) 5,169.4

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
250

Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26

Transfers out
32

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

Transfers in minus transfers out
+218

Arithmetic context only

Transfers in · 2025–26

This district
250
Selected comparison
281.1

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 272 rated districts reporting

Transfers out · 2025–26

This district
32
Selected comparison
566.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 261 rated districts reporting

Transfers in minus out · 2025–26

This district
+218
Selected comparison
−287

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 256 rated districts reporting

Official transfer totals by school year for Riesel ISD
School yearTransfers inRiesel ISDTransfers outRiesel ISDIn minus outRiesel ISDTransfers inselected comparison averageTransfers outselected comparison averageIn minus outselected comparison average
2021–22 182 56 +126 230.9 434.2 −212
2022–23 189 49 +140 232.9 475.7 −249
2023–24 211 52 +159 243.2 479.6 −243
2024–25 218 51 +167 262.8 547.2 −288
2025–26 250 32 +218 281.1 566.4 −287

Largest reported origins for transfers in

  1. Marlin ISD 073903106
  2. Hallsburg ISD 16192469
  3. Mart ISD 16190832
  4. Waco ISD 16191410

Top reported flows only. TEA published 4 of 15 counterpart counts and masked 11.

Largest reported destinations for transfers out

  1. Mart ISD 16190811

Top reported flows only. TEA published 1 of 11 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
70

9.7% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
134

18.53 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
723

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This district
9.7%
Selected comparison
9.2%

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 245 rated districts reporting

+0.5 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This district
18.53
Selected comparison
19.4

average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 252 rated districts reporting

−0.9 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Riesel ISD
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 689 80 11.6% 208 30.19 7.5% 14.5
2021–22 671 114 17.0% 272 40.54 9.4% 20
2022–23 708 73 10.3% 118 16.67 10.0% 21
2023–24 691 84 12.2% 142 20.55 9.8% 21.3
2024–25 723 70 9.7% 134 18.53 9.2% 19.4
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Riesel ISD in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 70 9.7% 134 18.53 9.2% 19.4
In-school suspensions 51 7.0% 74 10.24 8.2% 14.7
Out-of-school suspensions 24 3.3% 31 4.29 2.8% 4
DAEP placements 23 3.2% 28 3.87 2.1% 2.6
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
2,349

2024 Census estimate

Children ages 5–17
453

Living inside the boundary

Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
55

12.1%

School-age child poverty rate
12.1%

55 of 453

Boundary population

This district
2,349
Selected comparison
32,283.1

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

School-age population

This district
453
Selected comparison
5,691.4

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

School-age population in poverty

This district
55
Selected comparison
612.3

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

School-age child poverty rate

This district
12.1%
Selected comparison
13.4%

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

−1.3 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.

2 schools in this district

Number of schools in the district

This district
2
Selected comparison
7.7

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

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

Elementary
1
High School
1
Browse all 2 schoolsName, type, rating, score and enrollment
Schools in this district
SchoolTypeRatingScoreStudents
Riesel SchoolHigh SchoolA91325
Foster ElemElementaryB87358

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

Spending per student · 2025

This district
$15,753
Selected comparison
$23,074

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

−$7,321 vs similar economic context

This district spends $5,722 less per student than TEA's peer group, and $3,219 less per student than the state average.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearRiesel ISDTEA peer groupTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$14,455$13,378$13,054$13,747 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting
2019$11,558$14,225$13,108$14,294 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting
2020$12,224$15,250$14,058$15,397 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting
2021$13,048$15,636$14,797$16,254 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting
2022$13,928$16,982$15,708$17,599 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting
2023$14,824$18,148$16,792$19,230 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting
2024$19,529$19,654$18,125$21,508 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 rated districts reporting
2025$15,753$21,475$18,972$23,074 average for districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 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
$61,670−$3,481 vs similar economic context
Teachers
57−298.1 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
12−0.7 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Riesel ISD

Beginning: 1.8%1 to 5 years: 18.3%6 to 10 years: 26.2%11 to 20 years: 44%21 to 30 years: 3.5%Over 30 years: 6.2%
  • Beginning 1.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 18.3%
  • 6 to 10 years 26.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 44%
  • 21 to 30 years 3.5%
  • Over 30 years 6.2%

Selected comparison average For districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 280 reporting for every category shown · 280 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.4%1 to 5 years: 21.9%6 to 10 years: 17.9%11 to 20 years: 30.9%21 to 30 years: 18.8%Over 30 years: 5.3%
  • Beginning 5.4%
  • 1 to 5 years 21.9%
  • 6 to 10 years 17.9%
  • 11 to 20 years 30.9%
  • 21 to 30 years 18.8%
  • Over 30 years 5.3%

Teacher turnover over time

TEA reported a 17.6% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.

Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25

This district
17.6%
Selected comparison
18.6%

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

−1.0 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Riesel ISD
School yearTeacher turnover rateRiesel ISDAverage turnover rateselected comparison
2020–2128.8%14.6%
2021–2221.8%17.9%
2022–2320.1%20.1%
2023–249.8%19.4%
2024–2517.6%18.6%

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

2 measures

  • 1of 18

    Science — Approaches

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 1of 18

    Science — Meets

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

#2–3 rankings

Second- and third-place results

2 measures

  • 2of 18

    Closing the Gaps

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 3of 17

    Earned an associate degree

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

22 measures

  • 4of 18

    Overall score

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 2 · full ranking

  • 4of 18

    All Subjects — Meets

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 4of 18

    Math — Approaches

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 4of 18

    Science — Masters

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 4of 17

    Social Studies — Meets

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 2

  • 5of 18

    Student Achievement

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 5of 18

    All Subjects — Approaches

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 5of 18

    Attendance

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 5of 17

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

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure

  • 5of 17

    Earned college credit for a dual credit course

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure

  • 5of 17

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

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure

  • 6of 18

    Reading — Meets

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 6of 18

    Math — Meets

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 6of 18

    Math — Masters

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 6of 17

    Social Studies — Approaches

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure

  • 6of 17

    Social Studies — Masters

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure · tied with 1

  • 7of 18

    All Subjects — Masters

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 7of 18

    Reading — Masters

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 8of 17

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

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure

  • 9of 18

    Reading — Approaches

    McLennan County · of the 18 that report this measure

  • 9of 17

    College, career or military ready

    McLennan County · of the 17 that report this measure

  • 10of 18

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    McLennan County · of the 18 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