School Accountability & Performance Trends

By abhishek.verma75000 · April 8, 2026

The data reveals patterns across ratings, distinctions, and demographic factors. A moderate negative correlation exists between economic disadvantage and…

A data table has been generated showing the percentage of campuses earning each type of distinction across 7 academic categories. The table ranks distinctions from rarest to most common, giving you a clear view of which achievements are hardest to attain.

A data table showing the distribution of Overall Ratings across all schools and districts statewide has been generated. The table breaks down how many schools and districts received each rating category (A, B, C, D, F), along with the percentage each rating represents of the total.

The analysis produced two box plots showing how Closing the Gaps Ratings (A through F) relate to the percentage of EB/EL students and economically disadvantaged students across schools. These visualizations reveal the distribution of demographic percentages within each rating category.

There are 327 campuses across Texas where more than 80% of students are economically disadvantaged, yet these schools still achieved an 'A' Overall Rating — a remarkable feat demonstrating that high poverty does not have to limit academic excellence.

Alternative Education Accountability campuses actually outperform standard campuses in average overall score — 83.9 vs 78.6 points. However, their rating distribution looks quite different. A bar chart was generated showing the full rating breakdown for both groups.

The analysis successfully produced two visualizations and supporting data tables showing which regions lead in A-rated schools and distinction designations. The first bar chart displays the top 15 regions by percentage of A-rated schools, and the second shows the top 15 regions by average distinction designations per campus. Both charts are available for you to explore the regional rankings in detail.

A data table was generated showing how Overall Ratings (A, B, C, D, F) are distributed across different school types such as elementary, middle, and high schools. The table breaks down both the raw counts and percentage distributions for each school type, allowing you to compare performance levels side by side.

There is a moderate negative correlation (r = -0.467) between the percentage of economically disadvantaged students and Overall Score across 9,737 campuses. This means that as the share of economically disadvantaged students increases, overall school scores tend to decrease. Two visualizations were generated: a scatter plot showing the relationship with a trend line, and a bar chart showing average scores by economic disadvantage range.

The analysis compared 1,093 charter schools against 9,160 non-charter schools across overall ratings and domain scores. A bar chart and data tables were generated showing the full breakdown. Overall, non-charter schools score marginally higher across most domains, but charter schools surprisingly earn more 'A' ratings.

The analysis produced a horizontal bar chart comparing the 10 highest and 10 lowest-scoring counties by their average Overall Score across campuses. The chart uses green bars for the top 10 counties and red bars for the bottom 10, making it easy to visually distinguish the best and worst performers.

The analysis identified the US Congress Districts with the highest percentages of campuses receiving weak accountability ratings (D, F, or Not Rated) alongside their support label rates. A grouped bar chart was generated showing the top 15 districts ranked by their proportion of weak-rated campuses, making it easy to compare both metrics side by side across districts.

The analysis identified 121 schools that demonstrate strong Academic Growth Ratings (A or B) despite having low Student Achievement Ratings (D or F). Two visualizations were generated to help explore this finding: a bubble chart showing the distribution of all schools across growth vs. achievement rating combinations, and a bar chart highlighting the top 20 schools with the highest Academic Growth Scores in this category.

The analysis compared the ten largest districts by student count across all accountability rating domains, including Overall Score, Student Achievement, School Progress, Academic Growth, Relative Performance, and Closing the Gaps. Two data tables were generated showing these districts and their scores side by side, giving a clear picture of how each large district performs across every domain.

The analysis produced two visualizations comparing Overall Ratings and domain scores across Campus Enrollment Type categories. A grouped bar chart shows average scores for each domain (Overall Score, Student Achievement, School Progress, Academic Growth, Relative Performance, and Closing the Gaps) broken down by enrollment type. A second stacked bar chart displays the distribution of Overall Ratings as percentages within each enrollment type category, making it easy to compare how rating grades are distributed across groups.

The analysis examined how schools with the highest percentages of English Language Learner (EB/EL) students perform across rating domains. Two data tables were generated summarizing performance patterns across quintile groups and rating distributions for these schools.

The analysis compared 952 top-rated (A) schools against 2,330 bottom-rated (D/F) schools across several key characteristics. A bar chart and supporting tables were generated showing clear differences between the two groups. Bottom-rated schools tend to serve more economically disadvantaged students (71.5% vs 63.9%), have slightly higher English Language Learner populations (24.0% vs 22.4%), and are larger on average (843 vs 610 students). Interestingly, top-rated schools have a slightly higher proportion of charter schools (17.3% vs 14.8%).

The analysis identified the TX Senate Districts with the widest gaps between School Progress and Closing the Gaps ratings. Two visualizations were generated: a grouped bar chart comparing average School Progress and Closing the Gaps scores side by side for the top 20 districts, and a diverging bar chart showing the direction and magnitude of the gap (School Progress minus Closing the Gaps) for each district. Districts with the tallest bars in the diverging chart have the most pronounced differences between these two ratings.