−20.5 ptsvs 78.5 average · 289 rated districts serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
285 of 289among reporting districts
Score vs region
−22.7 ptsvs 80.7 average · 37 rated districts in Region 03: Victoria
Region 03: Victoria placement
37 of 37among reporting districts
Score vs county
−20.2 ptsvs 78.2 average · 5 rated districts in Wharton County
Score vs similar-size group
−22.2 ptsvs 80.2 average · 214 similarly sized rated districts
Similar size placement
214 of 214among reporting districts
Score vs state
−23.7 ptsvs 81.7 average · 1,019 rated Texas districts
Texas placement
1,014 of 1,019among reporting districts
F58
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is flat; under the rules in force back then it scored 57 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 78.5 average for 289 rated districts serving a similar economic context.The current score is below the 80.7 average for 37 rated districts in Region 03: Victoria.The current score is below the 78.2 average for 5 rated districts in Wharton County.The current score is below the 80.2 average for 214 similarly sized rated districts.The current score is below the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
Current strength
Four-Year Graduation Rate above the similar-context average
98%+2.7 pts vs 95.3%
98% is 2.7 percentage points above
the 95.3% average among 273 districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure (standard accountability only).
A precomputed strengths set is not available for this pinned entity. The page’s direct numeric comparisons still update to that pin.
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
Wharton ISD is rated F by TEA, scoring 58 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 78.5 average for 289 rated districts serving a similar economic context. It is unchanged since 2021-22.
Ranks 285th of 289 rated districts serving a similar economic context.
Wharton ISD is rated F by TEA, scoring 58 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 80.7 average for 37 rated districts in Region 03: Victoria. It is unchanged since 2021-22.
Wharton ISD is rated F by TEA, scoring 58 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 78.2 average for 5 rated districts in Wharton County. It is unchanged since 2021-22.
Wharton ISD is rated F by TEA, scoring 58 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 80.2 average for 214 similarly sized rated districts. It is unchanged since 2021-22.
Ranks 214th of 214 similarly sized rated districts.
Wharton ISD is rated F by TEA, scoring 58 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.7 average for 1,019 rated Texas districts. It is unchanged since 2021-22.
Dated TEA notices for campuses in this district. They are shown separately from the district rating because they describe specific campuses, support programs and transfer eligibility.
Campuses identified for federal improvement support
2
2026 TEA list
Campuses on the final PEG transfer list
0
2026–27 school year
Share of campuses identified for improvement
This district
50.0%
Selected comparison
28.8%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
+21.2 pts vs similar economic context
Share of campuses on the PEG list
This district
0.0%
Selected comparison
6.0%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
−6.0 pts vs similar economic context
See the campuses and official reasons
Official improvement and Public Education Grant notices for campuses in Wharton ISD
Comprehensive Support and Improvement · CSI Low Performance
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.
Follow the solid line to see how this district has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.
Compare against
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 Not Rated with 57 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.
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 Achievement62 D−14.5 vs similar economic context · 289 reporting
School Progress62 D−17.5 vs similar economic context · 289 reporting
Closing the Gaps49 F−26.3 vs similar economic context · 288 reporting
Academic Growth61 D−9.1 vs similar economic context · 289 reporting
Relative Performance62 D−17.1 vs similar economic context · 289 reporting
Wharton ISD
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (289 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
62
D
8
School Progress
62
D
8
Closing the Gaps
49
F
11
Academic Growth
61
D
9
Relative Performance
62
D
8
Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 8 points below C 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%.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level56%−14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Meets grade level27%−15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Masters grade level7%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level59%−13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Meets grade level32%−15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Masters grade level7%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level48%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Meets grade level20%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Masters grade level7%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level55%−19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 287 reporting
Meets grade level25%−19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 287 reporting
Masters grade level7%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 287 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
Approaches grade level70%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 283 reporting
Meets grade level35%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 283 reporting
Masters grade level9%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 283 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (289 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
98.0%+2.7 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
Five-Year
89.3%−6.5 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 272 rated districts reporting
Six-Year
95.7%+0.3 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
Dropout Rate
0.5%−0.2 pts vs similar economic contextaverage fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 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
67.0%−20.3 pts vs similar economic context
CCMR criteria
Criterion
This district% of graduates
Averagesimilar economic context
Differencepercentage points
Reportingselected comparison
Total credit for CCMR criteria
67.0%
87.3%
−20.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 273 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA, or earned credit for a college prep course
24.3%
56.0%
−31.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Scored at or above the college ready standard on SAT, ACT, TSIA
9.2%
22.3%
−13.1
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Met criterion score on AP/IB exam(s)
0.7%
6.0%
−5.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
30.9%
30.8%
+0.1
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Earned an industry-based certification
36.8%
43.4%
−6.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Earned a level I or level II certificate
0.7%
2.5%
−1.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Earned an associate degree
9.9%
4.6%
+5.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Completed an OnRamps course and qualified for college credit
0.0%
2.7%
−2.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness
6.6%
3.9%
+2.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Graduated under an advanced diploma plan and identified as a current special education student
5.3%
9.9%
−4.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 rated districts reporting
Enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces
0.0%
3.3%
−3.3
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 276 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 fordistricts 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
143
Class of 2023–24
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
52
36.4% of graduates
Not found in Texas public higher-ed records
86
60.1% of graduates
Not trackable
5
Fall 2024
Graduates in the report
This district
143
Selected comparison
556.9
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 rated districts reporting
Enrolled in Texas public higher education
This district
52
Selected comparison
241.4
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 rated districts reporting
Texas-public enrollment rate
This district
36.4%
Selected comparison
42.8%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 rated districts reporting
−6.4 pts vs similar economic context
Not-found rate
This district
60.1%
Selected comparison
53.4%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 rated districts reporting
+6.7 pts vs similar economic context
Not-trackable rate
This district
3.5%
Selected comparison
3.8%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 219 rated districts reporting
−0.3 pts vs similar economic context
Most common named Texas public destinations
WHARTON COUNTY JUNIOR COLLEGE (003668)25
BLINN COLLEGE DISTRICT (003549)5
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
1,709
Economically disadvantaged
75.7%+1.2 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
16.8%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
16.4%−2.0 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
93.9%+0.1 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
19.0%+0.2 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Wharton ISD
African American 24.7%
Hispanic 62.7%
White 9.8%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 0.5%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 2.1%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting for every category shown · 289 in full cohort
African American 8.7%
Hispanic 57.8%
White 29.6%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.8%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.8%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 37 reporting for every category shown · 37 in full cohort
African American 5.1%
Hispanic 50.9%
White 41%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 0.6%
Two or More Races 2.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Wharton County · 5 reporting for every category shown · 5 in full cohort
African American 9.8%
Hispanic 55.8%
White 32.1%
American Indian 0.1%
Asian 0.4%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 1.7%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 214 reporting for every category shown · 214 in full cohort
African American 6.4%
Hispanic 42.6%
White 46.1%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.8%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 3.7%
Statewide average1,019 reporting for every category shown · 1,019 Texas districts in full cohort
African American 6.3%
Hispanic 43.1%
White 45.4%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 1.4%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.3%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
1,707
Economically disadvantaged students
1,292
Emergent bilingual students
286
Special education students
280
Early college pathways
Early College High School
101
TEA-published share: 5.9%
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 1,709 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 58 (3.3%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
1,709
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−58
Decrease · −3.3%
Change since 2021–22
−257
Decrease · −13.1%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This district
1,709
Selected comparison
5,966.5
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Wharton ISD
School year
Students enrolledWharton ISD
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
1,966
First available year
6,206.6
2022–23
1,844
Decrease of 122 (6.2%)
6,239.4
2023–24
1,823
Decrease of 21 (1.1%)
6,174.8
2024–25
1,767
Decrease of 56 (3.1%)
6,138.4
2025–26
1,709
Decrease of 58 (3.3%)
5,966.5
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.
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
60
Live in another district; attend here · 2025–26
Transfers out
406
Live here; attend in another public district or charter · 2025–26
Transfers in minus transfers out
−346
Arithmetic context only
Transfers in · 2025–26
This district
60
Selected comparison
378.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 265 rated districts reporting
Transfers out · 2025–26
This district
406
Selected comparison
1,207.4
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 281 rated districts reporting
Transfers in minus out · 2025–26
This district
−346
Selected comparison
−932
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 259 rated districts reporting
Official transfer totals by school year for Wharton ISD
School year
Transfers inWharton ISD
Transfers outWharton ISD
In minus outWharton ISD
Transfers inselected comparison average
Transfers outselected comparison average
In minus outselected comparison average
2021–22
79
318
−239
252
1,027
−874
2022–23
62
344
−282
290.5
1,076.6
−885
2023–24
51
373
−322
317
1,136.7
−906
2024–25
66
410
−344
362.7
1,186.4
−911
2025–26
60
406
−346
378.6
1,207.4
−932
Largest reported origins for transfers in
Boling ISD 24190138
El Campo ISD 24190318
Top reported flows only. TEA published 2 of 4 counterpart counts and masked 2.
Largest reported destinations for transfers out
Boling ISD 241901266
El Campo ISD 24190357
East Bernard ISD 24190216
Needville ISD 07990615
Roscoe Collegiate ISD 17790110
Top reported flows only. TEA published 5 of 20 counterpart counts and masked 15.
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
304
15.8% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
761
39.61 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
1,921
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This district
15.8%
Selected comparison
12.2%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 266 rated districts reporting
+3.6 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This district
39.61
Selected comparison
28.7
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 272 rated districts reporting
+10.9 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Wharton ISD
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
2,030
379
18.7%
1,180
58.13
8.4%
17.2
2021–22
2,087
548
26.3%
1,902
91.14
12.6%
29
2022–23
2,035
418
20.5%
1,152
56.61
13.1%
31.3
2023–24
1,993
381
19.1%
1,034
51.88
12.7%
30.7
2024–25
1,921
304
15.8%
761
39.61
12.2%
28.7
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Wharton ISD in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
304
15.8%
761
39.61
12.2%
28.7
In-school suspensions
170
8.8%
305
15.88
10.3%
19.9
Out-of-school suspensions
216
11.2%
394
20.51
4.6%
7.5
DAEP placements
57
3.0%
61
3.18
3.1%
3.7
Mandatory DAEP placements
32
1.7%
34
1.77
1.8%
2.1
Discretionary DAEP placements
26
1.4%
27
1.41
1.7%
2
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
12,911
2024 Census estimate
Children ages 5–17
2,111
Living inside the boundary
Children ages 5–17 in families in poverty
453
21.5%
School-age child poverty rate
21.5%
453 of 2,111
Boundary population
This district
12,911
Selected comparison
40,054.8
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 288 rated districts reporting
School-age population
This district
2,111
Selected comparison
7,149.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 288 rated districts reporting
School-age population in poverty
This district
453
Selected comparison
1,560.6
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 288 rated districts reporting
School-age child poverty rate
This district
21.5%
Selected comparison
21.6%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 288 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
10.2
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 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
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.
Wharton ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This district
$21,670
Selected comparison
$23,212
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
−$1,542 vs similar economic context
This district spends $2,180 more per student than TEA's peer group, and $2,698 more per student than the state average.
View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
Year
Wharton ISD
TEA peer group
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$14,144
$12,629
$13,054
$14,022
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
2019
$15,161
$12,702
$13,108
$14,339
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
2020
$14,150
$13,696
$14,058
$15,591
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
2021
$13,550
$14,225
$14,797
$16,820
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
2022
$15,332
$15,710
$15,708
$18,046
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
2023
$25,817
$16,917
$16,792
$20,141
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
2024
$25,969
$18,225
$18,125
$21,330
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
2025
$21,670
$19,490
$18,972
$23,212
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 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
$61,355−$2,666 vs similar economic context
Teachers
123−278.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.9+0.4 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Wharton ISD
Beginning 15.3%
1 to 5 years 44.2%
6 to 10 years 11.4%
11 to 20 years 15.4%
21 to 30 years 8.9%
Over 30 years 4.9%
Selected comparison averageFor districts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 reporting for every category shown · 289 in full cohort
Beginning 7.5%
1 to 5 years 26.9%
6 to 10 years 17.7%
11 to 20 years 26%
21 to 30 years 16.7%
Over 30 years 5.2%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 37 reporting for every category shown · 37 in full cohort
Beginning 7.4%
1 to 5 years 22.8%
6 to 10 years 14.7%
11 to 20 years 30.3%
21 to 30 years 18.1%
Over 30 years 6.7%
Selected comparison averageFor Wharton County · 5 reporting for every category shown · 5 in full cohort
Beginning 6.8%
1 to 5 years 26%
6 to 10 years 16.7%
11 to 20 years 28.8%
21 to 30 years 17.4%
Over 30 years 4.4%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized districts · 214 reporting for every category shown · 214 in full cohort
Beginning 5.5%
1 to 5 years 24.3%
6 to 10 years 17.6%
11 to 20 years 29.2%
21 to 30 years 18.2%
Over 30 years 5.3%
Statewide average1,019 reporting for every category shown · 1,019 Texas districts in full cohort
Beginning 6.4%
1 to 5 years 23.9%
6 to 10 years 17.7%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 17.7%
Over 30 years 5.5%
Teacher turnover over time
TEA reported a 25.9% teacher turnover rate in 2024–25.
Teacher turnover rate · 2024–25
This district
25.9%
Selected comparison
23.1%
average fordistricts with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 289 rated districts reporting
+2.8 pts vs similar economic context
District teacher turnover rate by school year for Wharton ISD
School year
Teacher turnover rateWharton ISD
Average turnover rateselected comparison
2020–21
26.6%
18.4%
2021–22
42.8%
21.9%
2022–23
56.8%
26.0%
2023–24
33.0%
23.2%
2024–25
25.9%
23.1%
TEA defines this district rate as the share of teacher full-time equivalents from the prior fall who are not employed as teachers in the district in the current fall. That can include leaving the district or remaining in a different role; it is not a campus-level measure. The comparison average changes with the selected group; this district's reported rate does not.
Out of 160 rankings computed across every published metric and every available comparison group, these are all the measures that meet this site’s distinctive-placement threshold. The list does not change when you change Compare against. Each measure appears once, using its strongest placement. Press Copy for a citable sentence.
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
2 measures
2of 31
Earned a level I or level II certificate
Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 that report this measure
2of 31
Earned an associate degree
Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
2 measures
4of 31
Graduated with completed individualized education program (IEP) and workforce readiness
Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 that report this measure
8of 31
Earned college credit for a dual credit course
Region 03: Victoria · of the 31 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.