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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Linder Elem

Travis County · Region 13: Austin · 619 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
59/1002025-26
Change
−22 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−18.6 ptsvs 77.6 average · 1,939 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,769 of 1,939tied with 55 others
F59

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 82 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 77.6 average for 1,939 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

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

Linder Elem is rated F by TEA, scoring 59 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 77.6 average for 1,939 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 22 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,769th of 1,939 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 55 others).

4 consecutive years rated unacceptable. At three or more years, Texas law provides for state intervention.

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 Progress

Identification reason: CSI Low Performance

TEA track year 2 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

2026-27 school year

Public Education Grant transfer eligibility

Students assigned to this campus may request a transfer under the state's PEG program.

A request is not guaranteed. A receiving district may apply its enrollment rules, and transportation is not automatically provided.

Read the official PEG rules and list

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
33.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,939 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
9.2%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,939 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 averageLinder Elem 8157595959 2021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26

2021-22 is shown under the refreshed methodology TEA adopted in 2023, so it is comparable with later years. Under the original scoring it was rated B with 82 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
2025-26F5977.6 1,939 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25F5977.3 1,922 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24F5973.8 1,904 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23F5773.3 1,899 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22B8181.9 1,874 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 Achievement50 F−20.2 vs similar economic context · 1,795 reporting
  • School Progress58 F−20.8 vs similar economic context · 1,792 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps66 D−8.9 vs similar economic context · 1,782 reporting
  • Academic Growth58 F−15.2 vs similar economic context · 1,768 reporting
  • Relative Performance52 F−24.7 vs similar economic context · 1,791 reporting
  • Linder Elem
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,939 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement50F10
School Progress58F2
Closing the Gaps66D4
Academic Growth58F2
Relative Performance52F8

Closest to moving up: School Progress, 2 points 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 School Progress (58), so Student Achievement (50) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 58.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level42%−24 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting
  • Meets grade level20%−21 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting
  • Masters grade level7%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level50%−19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting
  • Meets grade level25%−19 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting
  • Masters grade level9%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level36%−30 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,791 reporting
  • Meets grade level18%−21 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,791 reporting
  • Masters grade level7%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,791 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level35%−28 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,692 reporting
  • Meets grade level11%−23 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,692 reporting
  • Masters grade level3%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,692 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,939 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
619
Economically disadvantaged
93.9%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
64.8%+23.3 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
19.7%+2.2 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
91.0%−2.0 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
38.1%+14.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Linder Elem

African American: 9%Hispanic: 81.3%White: 3.4%American Indian: 0.2%Asian: 4.2%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 1.8%
  • African American 9%
  • Hispanic 81.3%
  • White 3.4%
  • American Indian 0.2%
  • Asian 4.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 1.8%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,939 reporting for every category shown · 1,939 in full cohort

African American: 15%Hispanic: 76.8%White: 5.1%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.2%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 1.5%
  • African American 15%
  • Hispanic 76.8%
  • White 5.1%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 1.5%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
619
Economically disadvantaged students
581
Emergent bilingual students
401
Special education students
122

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
183
Students in TEA mobility denominator
569
TEA-published mobility rate
32.2%

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 619 students in 2025–26, an increase of 32 (5.5%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
619

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
+32

Increase · +5.5%

Change since 2021–22
+105

Increase · +20.4%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
619
Selected comparison
564.1

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,920 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Linder Elem
School yearStudents enrolledLinder ElemChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 514 First available year 611.1
2022–23 557 Increase of 43 (8.4%) 607.3
2023–24 549 Decrease of 8 (1.4%) 597.4
2024–25 587 Increase of 38 (6.9%) 590.4
2025–26 619 Increase of 32 (5.5%) 564.1

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
Not reported

Rate not available

Disciplinary actions
Not reported

Rate not available

Cumulative year-end enrollment
709

2024–25

TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Linder Elem
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 475 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2021–22 617 Not reported — Not reported — — —
2022–23 659 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2023–24 666 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2024–25 709 Not reported — Not reported — — —
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Linder Elem in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline Not reported — Not reported — — —
In-school suspensions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Out-of-school suspensions Not reported — Not reported — — —
DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
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.

$7k$31k$55k20182020202220242025
  • Linder Elem
  • Parent district: Austin ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$52,515
Selected comparison
$13,203

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,921 rated schools reporting

+$39,312 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $52,515 per student for this campus, $26,839 per student for its parent district, Austin 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
YearLinder ElemParent district: Austin ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$10,989$13,757$13,054$8,343 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,827 rated schools reporting
2019$12,395$14,067$13,108$8,356 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,852 rated schools reporting
2020$11,540$16,747$14,058$8,856 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,856 rated schools reporting
2021$12,241$18,042$14,797$9,699 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,858 rated schools reporting
2022$11,320$18,220$15,708$11,267 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,875 rated schools reporting
2023$10,038$16,721$16,792$11,831 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,899 rated schools reporting
2024$16,688$19,064$18,125$12,695 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,908 rated schools reporting
2025$52,515$26,839$18,972$13,203 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,921 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
$67,515−$895 vs similar economic context
Teachers
45+5.5 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.7−1.0 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Linder Elem

1 to 5 years: 33.2%6 to 10 years: 15.5%11 to 20 years: 39.8%21 to 30 years: 9.3%Over 30 years: 2.2%
  • 1 to 5 years 33.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 15.5%
  • 11 to 20 years 39.8%
  • 21 to 30 years 9.3%
  • Over 30 years 2.2%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,939 reporting for every category shown · 1,939 in full cohort

Beginning: 7.5%1 to 5 years: 27.1%6 to 10 years: 18.8%11 to 20 years: 27.2%21 to 30 years: 14.9%Over 30 years: 3.4%
  • Beginning 7.5%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.1%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.8%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 14.9%
  • Over 30 years 3.4%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Linder Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classLinder Elem · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten16.518.1
Grade 12118.3
Grade 21318.3
Grade 316.618.5
Grade 418.418.4
Grade 517.119.1

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.

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

1 measure

  • 5of 194

    Per-student spending

    Travis County · of the 194 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 227901160.