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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Emile Elem

Bastrop County · Region 13: Austin · 581 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
50/1002025-26
Change
−25 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−32.2 ptsvs 82.2 average · 1,682 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,679 of 1,682tied with 1 other
F50

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 72 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 82.2 average for 1,682 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Current strength

Chronically absent lower than the similar-context average

11.3% −2.9 pts vs 14.2%

  • 11.3% is 2.9 percentage points lower than the 14.2% average among 1,633 schools 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 school.

Read the full rating context and placement

Emile Elem is rated F by TEA, scoring 50 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 82.2 average for 1,682 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 25 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,679th of 1,682 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 1 other).

1 consecutive year rated unacceptable.

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. Who this school serves
  7. Student counts behind the percentages
  8. Enrollment over time
  9. Discipline and removal from class
  10. Spending per student
  11. Teachers and actual class size
  12. Where this school ranks best
  13. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

Official state and federal designations can carry support, reporting requirements or a family transfer option that a single A–F rating does not explain.

2026 federal improvement status

Comprehensive Support and Improvement

Official support label: Comprehensive Identified

Identification reason: CSI Low Performance

TEA track year 1 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
18.8%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,682 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
1.0%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,682 rated schools reporting

Selected comparison percentages are the share of reporting schools in that group found on each dated list. They are neutral prevalence context; changing the comparison never changes this school's official status.

These are dated TEA statuses, fetched 24 August 2026; they are not added to or subtracted from this site's rating.

5 years of ratings

Follow the solid line to see how this school has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.

Compare against
9080706050 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageEmile Elem 7572677350 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 C with 72 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
2025-26F5082.2 1,682 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25C7382.4 1,655 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24D6780.5 1,628 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23C7281.0 1,608 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22C7583.6 1,586 reporting83.7 7,283 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 Achievement59 F−22.9 vs similar economic context · 1,624 reporting
  • School Progress54 F−27.6 vs similar economic context · 1,619 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps30 F−49.4 vs similar economic context · 1,605 reporting
  • Academic Growth53 F−22.9 vs similar economic context · 1,590 reporting
  • Relative Performance54 F−25.3 vs similar economic context · 1,619 reporting
  • Emile Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,682 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement59F1
School Progress54F6
Closing the Gaps30F30
Academic Growth53F7
Relative Performance54F6

Closest to moving up: Student Achievement, 1 point below D 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 school that better measure is Student Achievement (59), so School Progress (54) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 59.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level57%−21 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,624 reporting
  • Meets grade level32%−22 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,624 reporting
  • Masters grade level12%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,624 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level63%−17 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,622 reporting
  • Meets grade level39%−20 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,622 reporting
  • Masters grade level13%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,622 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level56%−19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,616 reporting
  • Meets grade level31%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,616 reporting
  • Masters grade level11%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,616 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level40%−39 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,504 reporting
  • Meets grade level15%−38 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,504 reporting
  • Masters grade level9%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,504 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,682 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 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate — a comparison TEA does not publish.

Counts in the comparison controls describe full cohort membership, not the denominator of every average. Each average uses only schools for which TEA reported that measure; metric-specific reporting counts are shown on the STAAR, graduation and CCMR rows and may vary.

Who this school serves

Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.

Students
581
Economically disadvantaged
49.3%−0.5 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
28.2%+15.3 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
19.7%+1.0 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.0%+0.4 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
11.3%−2.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Emile Elem

African American: 2.2%Hispanic: 59%White: 33.4%American Indian: 0.2%Asian: 0.2%Two or More Races: 5%
  • African American 2.2%
  • Hispanic 59%
  • White 33.4%
  • American Indian 0.2%
  • Asian 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 5%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,682 reporting for every category shown · 1,682 in full cohort

African American: 9.5%Hispanic: 40.3%White: 42.2%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 3.3%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 4.2%
  • African American 9.5%
  • Hispanic 40.3%
  • White 42.2%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 3.3%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 4.2%

Student counts behind the percentages

Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.

Students in this TEA accountability summary
578
Economically disadvantaged students
285
Emergent bilingual students
163
Special education students
114

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
74
Students in TEA mobility denominator
508
TEA-published mobility rate
14.6%

The mobility count and rate use TEA’s separate 2024–25 campus denominator shown above, not current enrollment. This site does not recalculate a missing rate.

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 581 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 25 (4.1%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
581

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−25

Decrease · −4.1%

Change since 2021–22
−204

Decrease · −26.0%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
581
Selected comparison
650.9

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,645 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Emile Elem
School yearStudents enrolledEmile ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 785 First available year 651.6
2022–23 803 Increase of 18 (2.3%) 656.5
2023–24 586 Decrease of 217 (27.0%) 656.2
2024–25 606 Increase of 20 (3.4%) 652.7
2025–26 581 Decrease of 25 (4.1%) 650.9

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting schools in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this school'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.

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
49

7.5% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
116

17.74 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
654

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
7.5%
Selected comparison
11.9%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,299 rated schools reporting

−4.4 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
17.74
Selected comparison
26.5

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,394 rated schools reporting

−8.8 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Emile Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 808 25 3.1% 65 8.04 9.5% 18.1
2021–22 855 32 3.7% 73 8.54 11.8% 25.8
2022–23 856 30 3.5% 52 6.07 12.2% 27.7
2023–24 645 18 2.8% 32 4.96 12.3% 28.1
2024–25 654 49 7.5% 116 17.74 11.9% 26.5
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Emile Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 49 7.5% 116 17.74 11.9% 26.5
In-school suspensions 44 6.7% 89 13.61 10.7% 20.3
Out-of-school suspensions 14 2.1% 18 2.75 6.0% 8.4
DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
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 schools can be read on the same basis. Each average uses only group members for which TEA reported that rate; this school'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.

Spending per student

The campus and its parent district stay fixed while the selected same-sector txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference remain visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.

$6k$16k$27k20182020202220242025
  • Emile Elem
  • Parent district: Bastrop ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$11,131
Selected comparison
$12,005

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,653 rated schools reporting

−$874 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $11,131 per student for this campus, $25,556 per student for its parent district, Bastrop ISD, $18,972 per student for the Texas average.

Not reported in this TEA campus finance record: TEA peer group.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearEmile ElemParent district: Bastrop ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$6,506$10,347$13,054$7,856 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,528 rated schools reporting
2019$6,804$10,786$13,108$8,041 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,547 rated schools reporting
2020$7,026$11,313$14,058$8,536 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,559 rated schools reporting
2021$7,631$12,465$14,797$8,934 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,577 rated schools reporting
2022$7,181$13,295$15,708$10,257 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,588 rated schools reporting
2023$8,872$20,192$16,792$10,717 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,607 rated schools reporting
2024$10,454$18,189$18,125$11,549 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,626 rated schools reporting
2025$11,131$25,556$18,972$12,005 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,653 rated schools 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 and actual class size

Average salary
$62,716−$4,241 vs similar economic context
Teachers
38−4.6 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.2−4.8 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Emile Elem

Beginning: 15.8%1 to 5 years: 15.8%6 to 10 years: 28.9%11 to 20 years: 13.2%21 to 30 years: 21.1%Over 30 years: 5.3%
  • Beginning 15.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 15.8%
  • 6 to 10 years 28.9%
  • 11 to 20 years 13.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 21.1%
  • Over 30 years 5.3%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,682 reporting for every category shown · 1,682 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.6%1 to 5 years: 24.2%6 to 10 years: 19.3%11 to 20 years: 29.6%21 to 30 years: 16.8%Over 30 years: 4.2%
  • Beginning 5.6%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.3%
  • 11 to 20 years 29.6%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.8%
  • Over 30 years 4.2%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Emile Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classEmile Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten1818
Grade 11918.4
Grade 217.518.5
Grade 321.219
Grade 42219
Grade 521.420

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 6 of 12 categories for this campus; the categories are not combined into a made-up campus-wide average. Each selected comparison average uses only schools reporting that same grade or subject.

Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.

Where this school ranks best

Out of 105 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 29

    Attendance

    Bastrop County · of the 29 that report this measure

  • 2of 29

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Bastrop County · of the 29 that report this measure

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

1 measure

  • 10of 31

    Math — Masters

    Bastrop County · 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 school 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 school; any tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones no school 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 the full dataset · this campus's district

Single-file records are pre-built for district-level records only, so there is no per-campus CSV to link here. Producing both formats for every entity would consume most of the 20,000-asset deployment limit before pages and shared data are counted. This campus is a row in the bulk files on the download page, keyed by its TEA id 011901101.