Annual Reports and Information Staff (Annual Reports)

K–12 Learning and Engagement Domain

Disparities in Performance on Tests

Last Updated: August 2023 | Suggested Citation

Achievement in Reading, Mathematics, and Science

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assesses student performance in reading, mathematics, and science at grades 4, 8, and 12 in both public and private schools across the nation. NAEP reading scale scores range from 0 to 500 for all grades. NAEP mathematics scale scores range from 0 to 500 for grades 4 and 8 and from 0 to 300 for grade 12. NAEP science scores range from 0 to 300 for all three grades. Even though some scale scores within each subject have the same range, the scale scores were derived separately and, therefore, scores cannot be compared across grades.¹² This construct looks at the performance of students in reading, mathematics, and science—by race/ethnicity, sex, school poverty level, English learner (EL) status, disability status, and by state when available—as well as changes in performance over time. Although each NAEP administration includes a different group of students (e.g., students who are in grade 4 in 2019 and students who are in grade 4 in 2022), changes in performance over time can be viewed as an indirect measure of learning growth as it allows for measurement of the increases and decreases in the performance of specific subgroups over time. This indicator also includes information from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (ECLS) that provides direct measures of students’ learning growth in reading, mathematics, and science—from the time they entered kindergarten in fall 2010 through spring 2016, when most students were in fifth grade.

Reading–Grade 4

At grade 4, the average reading score in 2022 was highest for Asian students (241), followed by White students (227). The average reading score was lowest for Black (199) and American Indian/Alaska Native (197) students in 2022.

From 2011 through 2022,¹³ the average reading scores for Asian and White 4th-grade students were higher than those of their peers of other racial/ethnic groups. In addition, the achievement gaps¹⁴ between Asian students and students of other groups generally grew larger over time. For instance,

the Asian-Black achievement gap was larger in 2022 (42 points) than in 2019 (36 points) and 2011 (31 points);
the Asian-Hispanic achievement gap was larger in 2022 (36 points) than in 2019 (30 points) and 2011 (30 points); and
the Asian-White achievement gap was larger in 2022 (14 points) than in 2019 (9 points) and 2011 (5 points).

In contrast, the achievement gaps between White students and students of other racial/ethnic groups in 2022 was generally not measurably different from the corresponding gaps in 2019 or 2011. The only exceptions were the following:

The White-Black achievement gap was larger in 2022 (28 points) than in 2011 (25 points).
The White-Hispanic achievement gap was smaller in 2022 (22 points) than in 2011 (24 points).

At grade 4, the average reading score in 2022 was higher for female students than for male students (221 vs. 214). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1992.
The 2022 achievement gap between female and male 4th-grade students (6 points) was not measurably different from the gap in 2019 or 1992.

In 2022, the average NAEP reading score for 4th-grade EL students (190) was lower than the score for their non-EL peers (222). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1998, when NAEP reading scores disaggregated by students’ EL status first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap between non-EL and EL 4th-grade students (32 points) was not measurably different from the gap in 2019, but it was smaller than the gap in 1998 (43 points).

In 2022, the average reading score for 4th-grade students identified as students with disabilities¹⁵ (183) was lower than the score for their peers who were not (223). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1998, when NAEP reading scores disaggregated by students’ disability status first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap by students’ disability status (40 points) was smaller than the gap in 2019 (42 points), but it was not measurably different from the gap in 1998. The narrowing of the achievement gap from 2019 to 2022 was mainly due to the decline in the average reading score of 4th-grade students who were not identified as students with disabilities (from 226 in 2019 to 223 in 2022).

NAEP scores can also be disaggregated by the poverty level of the school students attended. However, findings by school poverty level should be interpreted with caution, due to the relatively higher rate at which school poverty data are missing.¹⁶

In 2022, the average reading score for 4th-grade students in high-poverty schools (211) was lower than the scores for those in mid-low poverty schools (222) and low-poverty schools (237).
The 2022 achievement gap between 4th-grade students in low-poverty schools and those in high-poverty schools (25 points) was smaller than the achievement gap in 2019 (34 points). This was driven in part by the increase in the average reading score of students in high-poverty schools (from 206 in 2019 to 211 in 2022).

Figure 7. Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading scale scores of 4th-grade students, by selected characteristics: 2019 and 2022

¹Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

²The nonresponse rate for free or reduced-price lunch was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

NOTE: Includes students in public, private, Bureau of Indian Education, and Department of Defense Education Activity schools. The reading scale scores range from 0 to 500. Race categories exclude persons of Hispanic ethnicity. Although rounded numbers are displayed, the figures are based on unrounded data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2019 and 2022 Reading Assessments, NAEP Data Explorer. See Digest of Education Statistics 2022, tables 221.10 and 221.12.

NAEP results also permit state-level comparisons of the reading achievement of 4th- and 8th-grade students in public schools.¹⁷ The national average reading score for 4th-grade public school students decreased from 219 in 2019 to 216 in 2022. Among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, reading scores in 2022 for 4th-grade public school students

were higher than the national average score in 7 states;
were lower than the national average score in 7 states and the District of Columbia;
were higher than the 2019 scores in 0 states;
were lower than the 2019 scores in 29 states and the District of Columbia; and
ranged from 202 in New Mexico to 227 in Massachusetts.

In 2022, the average reading score was 235 for 4th-grade students in Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) public schools. This score was not measurably different from the score in 2019.

Figure 8. Change in average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading scale scores of 4th- and 8th-grade public school students, by state or jurisdiction: 2019 to 2022

Reading–Grade 8

At grade 8, the 2022 patterns in average reading scores by race/ethnicity were similar to those observed for grade 4. At grade 8, the average reading score was highest for Asian students (283) in 2022, followed by White students (268). The average reading score was lowest for American Indian/Alaska Native students (246) and Black students (244) in 2022.

From 2011 through 2022, the average NAEP reading scores for Asian and White 8th-grade students were generally higher than the scores of their peers of other racial/ethnic groups. In addition, the 2022 achievement gaps between Asian students and students of other groups were generally larger than in 2011. For instance,

the Asian-Black achievement gap was larger in 2022 (39 points) than in 2011 (28 points);
the Asian-Hispanic achievement gap was larger in 2022 (32 points) than in 2011 (25 points); and
the Asian-White achievement gap was larger in 2022 (14 points) than in 2019 (11 points) and 2011 (3 points).

In contrast, although the White-Black and White-Hispanic achievement gaps were smaller in 2022 than in 2019, only the White-Hispanic gap was smaller in 2022 than in 2011:

The White-Black achievement gap was smaller in 2022 (25 points) than in 2019 (28 points).
The White-Hispanic achievement gap was smaller in 2022 (18 points) than in 2019 (20 points) and 2011 (22 points).

The narrowing of the White-Black and White-Hispanic achievement gaps from 2019 to 2022 was primarily driven by the decline in the average reading score of White 8th-grade students (from 272 in 2019 to 268 in 2022), while the reading score of their peers of other racial/ethnic groups did not change measurably during this period.

At grade 8, the average NAEP reading score in 2022 was higher for female students than for male students (265 vs. 256). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1992.
The 2022 achievement gap between female and male 8th-grade students (8 points) was smaller than the female-male achievement gap in 2019 (11 points) and 1992 (13 points).

The 2022 average NAEP reading score for 8th-grade EL students (225) was lower than the score for their non-EL peers (264). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1998, when these disaggregated scores first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap between non-EL and EL 8th-grade students (39 points) was smaller than the achievement gap in 2019 (45 points) and 1998 (46 points).
From 2019 to 2022, the average reading score of 8th-grade non-EL students decreased by 2 points, while the score of their EL peers increased by 4 points, leading to the narrowing of the achievement gap during this period.

In 2022, the average reading score for 8th-grade students identified as students with disabilities (229) was lower than the score for their peers who were not (265). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1998, when these disaggregated scores first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap by 8th-grade students’ disability status (37 points) was smaller than the gap in 2019 (39 points), but it was not measurably different from the gap in 1998. This narrowing of the achievement gap from 2019 to 2022 was due to the decline in the reading score of 8th-grade students who were not identified as students with disabilities (from 268 in 2019 to 265 in 2022).

In 2022, the average NAEP reading score for 8th-grade students was lower for those in high-poverty schools (258) and mid-high-poverty schools (254) than for their peers in mid-low-poverty schools (264) and low-poverty schools (274).
The achievement gap between 8th-grade students in low-poverty schools and those in high-poverty schools in 2022 (17 points) was smaller than the achievement gap in 2019 (30 points). From 2019 to 2022, the average reading score of 8th-grade students in low-poverty schools decreased by 4 points, while the score of their peers in high-poverty schools increased by 9 points, leading to the narrowing of the achievement gap during this period.

Figure 9. Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading scale scores of 8th-grade students, by selected characteristics: 2019 and 2022

¹Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

²The nonresponse rate for free or reduced-price lunch was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

At grade 8, the national average reading score for public school students decreased from 262 in 2019 to 259 in 2022. Among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, reading scores in 2022 for 8th-grade public school students

were higher than the national average score in 9 states;
were lower than the national average score in 11 states and the District of Columbia;
were higher than the 2019 scores in 0 states;
were lower than the 2019 scores in 33 states; and
ranged from 248 in New Mexico to 270 in New Jersey.

In 2022, the average reading score was 282 for 8th-grade students in DoDEA public schools. This was an increase from the score in 2019 (280).

Reading–Grade 12

The most recent reading assessments for grade 12 students were conducted in 2019, before the pandemic. At grade 12, the average NAEP reading score in 2019 was highest for Asian students (299), students of Two or more races (295), and White students (295). The average reading scores of students in these racial/ethnic groups were higher than those for Pacific Islander students (278), Hispanic students (274), and American Indian/Alaska Native students (272). The reading score was lowest for Black students (263).

Since 2013,¹⁹ the average NAEP reading score has been generally higher for 12th-grade students who were Asian, White, and of Two or more races than for their peers of other racial/ethnic groups. Additionally, the 2019 achievement gaps between these three groups and other groups were generally not measurably different when compared with the corresponding achievement gaps in 2015 or 2013. The only exceptions were as follows:

The Asian-Black achievement gap was larger in 2019 (36 points) than in 2013 (29 points).
The achievement gap between students of Two or more races and those who were Black was larger in 2019 (32 points) than in 2013 (23 points).

These growing achievement gaps were driven in part by a decline in the average reading score of Black 12th-grade students (from 268 in 2013 to 263 in 2019).

At grade 12, the average NAEP reading score in 2019 was higher for female students than for male students (292 vs. 279). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1992
The 2019 achievement gap between female and male 12th-grade students (13 points) was not measurably different from the gap in 2015 or in 1992.

In 2019, the average NAEP reading score for 12th-grade EL students (235) was lower than the score for their non-EL peers (288). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1998, when these disaggregated scores first became available.
The 2019 achievement gap between non-EL and EL students (53 points) was not measurably different from the achievement gap in 2015, but it was larger than the gap in 1998 (46 points).

In 2019, the average NAEP reading score for 12th-grade students who were identified as students with disabilities (252) was lower than the score for their peers who were not (290). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1998, when these disaggregated scores first became available.
The 2019 achievement gap by 12th-grade students’ disability status (38 points) was not measurably different from the achievement gap in 2015, but it was smaller than the achievement gap in 1998 (48 points).

In 2019, the average NAEP reading score for 12th-grade students in high-poverty schools (266) was lower than the scores for 12th-grade students in mid-high-poverty schools (278), mid-low-poverty schools (288), and low-poverty schools (301).

Figure 10. Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading scale scores of 12th-grade students, by selected characteristics: 2015 and 2019

^‡Reporting standards not met. Either there are too few cases for a reliable estimate or the coefficient of variation (CV) is 50 percent or greater

¹Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

²The nonresponse rate for free or reduced-price lunch in 2019 was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2015 and 2019 Reading Assessments, NAEP Data Explorer. See Digest of Education Statistics 2022, tables 221.10 and 221.12.

Findings in the reading portion of this indicator come from Reading Performance in the Condition of Education. For more information see tables 221.10, 221.12, 221.40, and 221.60 from the Digest of Education Statistics 2022.

Mathematics–Grade 4

At grade 4, the average NAEP mathematics score in 2022 was highest for Asian students (259), followed by White students (246). The average mathematics score was lowest for Black students (217) in 2022.

From 2011 through 2022,²¹ the average NAEP mathematics scores for Asian and White 4th-grade students were generally higher than those of their peers of other racial/ethnic groups.²² In addition, the achievement gaps between Asian and White students and students of other groups were generally larger in 2022 than in 2011.^23,24 For instance,

the Asian-Black achievement gap was larger in 2022 than in 2011 (42 vs. 34 points);
the Asian-Hispanic achievement gap was larger in 2022 than in 2011 (35 vs. 28 points);
the White-Black achievement gap was larger in 2022 than in 2011 (29 vs. 25 points); and
the White-Hispanic achievement gap was larger in 2022 than in 2011 (21 vs. 20 points).

In contrast, the achievement gap between Asian and White students and students of other racial/ethnic groups in 2022 was generally not measurably different from the corresponding gap in 2019. The only exceptions were the following:

The Asian-Black achievement gap was larger in 2022 than in 2019 (42 vs. 39 points).
The White-Black achievement gap was larger in 2022 than in 2019 (29 vs. 25 points).
The White-Hispanic achievement gap was larger in 2022 than in 2019 (21 vs. 18 points).

At grade 4, the average NAEP mathematics score in 2022 was higher for male students than for female students (239 vs. 233). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 2003.
From 1990 to 2000, there was no measurable difference between the average mathematics scores for male and female students. The 2022 achievement gap between male and female 4th-grade students (6 points) was larger than the male-female achievement gap in each assessment year from 2003 to 2019 (ranging from 1 to 3 points).

In 2022, the average NAEP mathematics score for 4th-grade EL students was lower than the score for their non-EL peers (216 vs. 239). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1996, when NAEP mathematics scores disaggregated by students’ EL status first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap between non-EL and EL 4th-grade students (23 points) was not measurably different from the gaps in 2019 or 1996.

In 2022, the average NAEP mathematics score for 4th-grade students identified as students with disabilities²⁵ (212) was lower than the average score for students who were not (240). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1996, when NAEP mathematics scores disaggregated by students’ disability status first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap by students’ disability status (28 points) was smaller than the gap in 2019 (30 points) but it was not measurably different from the gap in 1996.

In 2022, the average NAEP mathematics score for 4th-grade students in high-poverty schools (230) was lower than the scores for those in mid-low-poverty schools (242) and low-poverty schools (253).
The 2022 achievement gap between 4th-grade students in low-poverty schools and those in high-poverty schools (23 points) was smaller than the achievement gap in 2019 (27 points). This was driven by a decline in the average mathematics score of students in low-poverty schools (from 258 in 2019 to 253 in 2022).

Figure 11. Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics scale scores of 4th-grade students, by selected characteristics: 2019 and 2022

¹Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

²The nonresponse rate for free or reduced-price lunch was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

NOTE: Includes students in public, private, Bureau of Indian Education, and Department of Defense Education Activity schools. The 4th-grade mathematics scale scores range from 0 to 500. Race categories exclude persons of Hispanic ethnicity. Although rounded numbers are displayed, the figures are based on unrounded data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2019 and 2022 Mathematics Assessments, NAEP Data Explorer. See Digest of Education Statistics 2022, tables 221.10 and 221.12.

NAEP results also permit state-level comparisons of the mathematics achievement of 4th- and 8th-grade students in public schools.²⁷ The national average mathematics score for 4th-grade public school students decreased from 240 in 2019 to 235 in 2022. Among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, mathematics scores in 2022 for 4th-grade public school students

were higher than the national average score in 16 states;
were lower than the national average score in 13 states and the District of Columbia;
were higher than the 2019 scores in 0 states;
were lower than the 2019 scores in 41 states and the District of Columbia; and
ranged from 221 in New Mexico to 243 in Wyoming.

In 2022, the average 4th-grade mathematics score was 178 for students in Puerto Rico public schools, which was lower than it was in 2019 (185). In Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) public schools, the average 4th-grade mathematics score in 2022 was 250, which was not measurably different from the score in 2019.

Figure 12. Change in average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics scale scores of 4th- and 8th-grade public school students, by state or jurisdiction: 2019 to 2022

Mathematics–Grade 8

At grade 8, the 2022 patterns in average mathematics scores by race/ethnicity were similar to those observed for grade 4. At grade 8, the average mathematics score was highest for Asian students (306) in 2022, followed by White students (285). The average mathematics score was lowest for Black students (253) in 2022.

From 2011 through 2022, the average NAEP mathematics scores for Asian and White 8th-grade students were higher than those of their peers of other racial/ethnic groups. In addition, the achievement gaps between Asian students and students of other groups were generally larger in 2022 than in 2011, although the achievement gap in 2022 was not measurably different from the gap in 2019.²⁸ For instance,

the Asian-Black achievement gap in 2022 (53 points) was larger than the gap in 2011 (43 points) but was not measurably different from the gap in 2019; and
the Asian-Hispanic achievement gap in 2022 (45 points) was larger than the gap in 2011 (35 points) but not measurably different from the gap in 2019.

In contrast, the 2022 achievement gaps between White students and students of other racial/ethnic groups with lower average scores were generally not measurably different from the corresponding gaps in 2019 or 2011. The only exception was the gap between White students and students of Two or more races, which was larger in 2022 (8 points) than in 2011 (5 points).

At grade 8, the average NAEP mathematics score in 2022 was higher for male students (275) than it was for female students (273). This pattern has held true for each assessment year between 2003 and 2011 and in 2017. In other assessment years since 1990, there was no measurable difference between the average mathematics scores for male and female students.
The achievement gap between male and female 8th-grade students was larger in 2022 (2 points) than in 2017 (1 point).

In 2022, the average NAEP mathematics score for 8th-grade EL students (241) was lower than the score for their non-EL peers (277). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1996, when these disaggregated scores first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap between EL and non-EL 8th-grade students (36 points) was smaller than the gap in 2019 (42 points) and the gap in 1996 (46 points). This was driven by a decline in the average mathematics score of non-EL 8th-grade students (from 285 in 2019 to 277 in 2022).

In 2022, the average NAEP mathematics score for 8th-grade students identified as students with disabilities (243) was lower than the average score for their peers who were not (279). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 1996, when these disaggregated scores first became available.
The 2022 achievement gap by 8th-grade students’ disability status (36 points) was smaller than the gap in 2019 (40 points) and the gap in 1996 (42 points).

In 2022, the average NAEP mathematics score for 8th-grade students in high-poverty schools (271) was lower than the scores for 8th-grade students in mid-low-poverty schools (280) and low-poverty schools (293).
The achievement gap between 8th-grade students in low-poverty schools and those in high-poverty schools was smaller in 2022 (23 points) than in 2019 (36 points). This was driven both by a decline in the average mathematics score of students in low-poverty schools (from 301 in 2019 to 293 in 2022) and an increase in the average mathematics score of students in high-poverty schools over the same period (from 265 in 2019 to 271 in 2022).

Figure 13. Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics scale scores of 8th-grade students, by selected characteristics: 2019 and 2022

¹Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

²The nonresponse rate for free or reduced-price lunch was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

NOTE: Includes students in public, private, Bureau of Indian Education, and Department of Defense Education Activity schools. The 8th-grade mathematics scale scores range from 0 to 500. Race categories exclude persons of Hispanic ethnicity. Although rounded numbers are displayed, the figures are based on unrounded data.

At grade 8, the national average NAEP mathematics score for public school students decreased from 281 in 2019 to 273 in 2022. Among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, mathematics scores in 2022 for 8th-grade public school students

were higher than the national average score in 18 states;
were lower than the national average score in 16 states and the District of Columbia;
were higher than the 2019 scores in 0 states;
were lower than the 2019 scores in 49 states and the District of Columbia; and
ranged from 259 in New Mexico to 284 in Massachusetts.

In 2022, the average 8th-grade mathematics score was 216 for students in Puerto Rico public schools, which was lower than it was in 2019 (222). In DoDEA public schools, the average 8th-grade mathematics score in 2022 was 292, which was not measurably different from the score in 2019.

Mathematics–Grade 12

The most recent NAEP mathematics assessments for grade 12 students were conducted in 2019, before the pandemic. At grade 12, the average mathematics score in 2019 was highest for Asian students (175), followed by White students (159) and students of Two or more races (157). The average mathematics scores of students in these racial/ethnic groups were higher than those for Hispanic students (138), American Indian/Alaska Native students (136), Pacific Islander students (135), and Black students (128).

Since 2013,³⁰ the average NAEP mathematics score was generally highest for 12th-grade students who were Asian and White. Generally speaking, however, the achievement gaps between these two racial/ethnic groups and other groups in 2019 did not differ measurably compared with the corresponding achievement gaps in 2015 or 2013. The only exceptions were the following:

The Asian-Black achievement gap was larger in 2019 (46 points) than in 2013 (42 points).
The Asian-Pacific Islander achievement gap was larger in 2019 (39 points) than in 2013 (23 points).

These growing achievement gaps were primarily driven by declines in the average mathematics scores of Black 12th-grade students (from 132 in 2013 to 128 in 2019) and Pacific Islander 12th-grade students (from 151 in 2013 to 135 in 2019).

In 2019, the average 12th-grade NAEP mathematics score was higher for male students (152) than for female students (149). This pattern has held true for every assessment year since 2005.
The 2019 achievement gap between male and female 12th-grade students (3 points) was not measurably different from the gap in each assessment year since 2005.

In 2019, the average NAEP mathematics score for 12th-grade EL students (111) was lower than the average score for their non-EL peers (152). This pattern has held true in every assessment year since 2005.
The achievement gap between non-EL and EL students in 2019 (41 points) was not measurably different from the achievement gap in 2015, but it was larger than the achievement gap in 2005 (31 points).

In 2019, the average NAEP mathematics score for 12th-grade students identified as students with disabilities (119) was lower than the score of students who were not (154). This pattern has held true in every assessment year since 2005.
The 2019 achievement gap by 12th-grade students’ disability status (35 points) was not measurably different from the gap in each assessment year since 2005.

In 2019, the average NAEP mathematics score for 12th-grade students in high-poverty schools (133) was lower than the scores for 12th-grade students in mid-high-poverty schools (143), mid-low-poverty schools (153), and low-poverty schools (167).

Figure 14. Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics scale scores of 12th-grade students, by selected characteristics: 2015 and 2019

^‡Reporting standards not met. Either there are too few cases for a reliable estimate or the coefficient of variation (CV) is 50 percent or greater.

¹Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

²The nonresponse rate for free or reduced-price lunch in 2019 was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

NOTE: Includes students in public, private, Bureau of Indian Education, and Department of Defense Education Activity schools. The 12th-grade mathematics scale scores range from 0 to 300. Assessment was not conducted for grade 12 in 2022. Race categories exclude persons of Hispanic ethnicity. Although rounded numbers are displayed, the figures are based on unrounded data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2015 and 2019 Mathematics Assessments, NAEP Data Explorer. See Digest of Education Statistics 2022, tables 222.10 and 222.12.

Findings in the math portion of this indicator come from Mathematics Performance in the Condition of Education. For more information see tables 222.10, 222.12, 222.50, and 222.60 from the Digest of Education Statistics 2022.

Science –Grades 4, 8, and 12

The most recent science assessments were conducted in 2019, before the pandemic.

At grade 4:

In 2019, the average science score was highest for Asian/Pacific Islander (166) and White (163) students. It was lowest for Black students (130). In between, the scores were 159 for students of Two or more races,³² 141 for American Indian/Alaska Native students, and 138 for Hispanic students.
Compared with the 2009 average scores, the 2019 scores were higher for students across all reported racial/ethnic groups except for White students.
Starting in 2015, separate data for Asian and Pacific Islander students were collected for all grade levels.³³ In 2019, the average score was 168 for Asian students and 142 for Pacific Islander students.
Compared with the 2015 average scores, the 2019 scores were lower for White and Black students.

At grade 8:

In 2019, the average science score was highest for Asian/Pacific Islander (167) and White (165) students. It was lowest for Black students (133). In between, the scores were 159 for students of Two or more races, 144 for American Indian/Alaska Native students, and 141 for Hispanic students. The average score was 168 for Asian students and 139 for Pacific Islander students in 2019.
Compared with 2009, average scores in 2019 were higher for students across all reported racial/ethnic groups. However, there were no measurable differences in average scores between 2015 and 2019 for students of any reported racial/ethnic group.

At grade 12:

Similar to grades 4 and 8, the average science score at grade 12 in 2019 was highest for Asian/Pacific Islander (164) and White (161) students. It was lowest for Black students (125). In between, the scores were 156 for students of Two or more races, 142 for American Indian/Alaska Native students, and 136 for Hispanic students. The average score was 166 for Asian students and 137 for Pacific Islander students in 2019.
Compared with 2009 and 2015, average scores in 2019 were not measurably different for students of any reported racial/ethnic group.

Science Achievement Gaps:

While the average science scores for White 4th- and 8th-grade students were higher than those of their Black and Hispanic peers in 2019, racial/ethnic achievement gaps in 2019 were smaller than in 2009.
At grade 4, the White-Black achievement gap was 33 points in 2019, compared with 36 points in 2009. The White-Hispanic achievement gap was 24 points in 2019, compared with 32 points in 2009.
At grade 8, the White-Black achievement gap was 32 points in 2019, compared with 36 points in 2009. The White-Hispanic achievement gap was 24 points in 2019, compared with 30 points in 2009.
The average science scores for White 12th-grade students were higher than those of their Black and Hispanic peers in 2019.
At grade 12, the White-Black achievement gap (35 points) and the White-Hispanic gap (25 points) in 2019 were not measurably different from the corresponding gaps in 2009.

Figure 15. Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) science scale scores of 4th-, 8th-, and 12th-grade students, by race/ethnicity: 2009, 2011, 2015, and 2019

— Not available.

¹ Students who identified with two or more race categories (e.g., White and Black) were classified as “other” and reported as part of the “unclassified” category prior to 2011; from 2011 on, they have been classified as “Two or more races.”

NOTE: Includes public and private schools. Scale ranges from 0 to 300 for all grades, but scores cannot be compared across grades. Race categories exclude persons of Hispanic ethnicity. Assessment was not conducted for grades 4 and 12 in 2011. Although rounded numbers are displayed, the figures are based on unrounded data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009, 2011, 2015, and 2019, Science Assessment, NAEP Data Explorer. See Digest of Education Statistics 2021, table 223.10.

At grade 4:

The average science score for male 4th-grade students in 2019 (151) was not measurably different from the score in 2009 but lower than the score in 2015 (154).
The average score for female 4th-grade students in 2019 (151) was higher than in 2009 (149) but lower than in 2015 (154).
While there was a 1-point gap between male and female 4th-grade students in 2009, there was no measurable gap between males and females in 2015 or 2019.

At grade 8:

The average science score for male 8th-grade students in 2019 (154) was higher than the score in 2009 (152) but was not measurably different from the score in 2015.
The average score for female 8th-grade students in 2019 (153) was higher than the score in 2009 (148) but was not measurably different from the score in 2015.
In 2019, there was no measurable gap between males and females. In comparison, the gap between male and female 8th-grade students was larger in 2009 (4 points) and in 2015 (3 points).

At grade 12:

The average science scores for male (151) and female (148) 12th-grade students in 2019 were not measurably different from the corresponding scores in 2009 or 2015.
There was no measurable difference in the gap between males and females across these years for 12th-grade students.

Since 2009, the average science scores for English learner (EL) students have been lower than the scores of their non-EL peers.

At grade 4, the 2019 achievement gap between non-EL and EL students (34 points) was smaller than the gap in 2009 (39 points).
At grade 8, the 2019 achievement gap (46 points) was not measurably different from the gap in 2009.
At grade 12, the 2019 achievement gap (53 points) was larger than the gap in 2009 (47 points).

In 2019, students in high-poverty schools had lower average science scores than students in mid-high poverty, mid-low poverty, and low-poverty schools.³⁴

At grade 4, the average science score for students in high-poverty schools (136) was lower than the scores for students in mid-high poverty schools (147), mid-low poverty schools (159), and low-poverty schools (170). This translates to an achievement gap of 33 points between high- and low poverty schools at grade 4. This gap was 34 points at grade 8 and 35 points at grade 12.

Findings in the science portion of this indicator come from Science Performance in the Condition of Education. For more information see table 223.10 from Digest of Education Statistics 2021.

Learning Growth in Reading, Mathematics, and Science Achievement

The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLS-K:2011) assessed children’s skills in reading, mathematics, and science in kindergarten through grade 3. Trained assessors conducted individually administered, two-stage adaptive assessments (with the exception of the spring kindergarten science assessment, which was a nonadaptive one-stage assessment) in which assessors asked children questions related to images presented on a small easel and entered the children’s responses into a study computer. This construct examines learning growth using reading and mathematics assessments that were administered in the fall and spring of kindergarten through grade 2 and in the spring of grade 3, as well as science assessments were administered in the spring of kindergarten, in the fall and spring of grades 1 and 2, and in the spring of grade 3.³⁵ Possible scores on the assessments range from 0 to 141 in reading, 0 to 135 in mathematics, and 0 to 87 in science.³⁶

Students who were living in poverty and who did not have a parent who completed high school at the time they entered kindergarten tended to score lower in reading, mathematics, and science over each of their first four years of school compared to their peers who had neither risk factor at kindergarten entry.

In reading, fall kindergarten scores were higher, on average, for students who had neither risk factor (54 points) than for students who had the single risk factor of living in poverty (48 points), the single risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school (47 points), and both the risk factor of living in poverty and the risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school (45 points).³⁷

This pattern persisted in the spring data collections in kindergarten, first grade, second grade, and third grade.

Spring third-grade reading scores were higher, on average, for students who had neither risk factor (114 points) than for those with the single risk factor of living in poverty (106 points), those with the single risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school (105 points), and those with both risk factors (102 points).
In addition, students with the single risk factor of living in poverty at kindergarten entry scored higher in reading across all data collections than students with both risk factors.

Figure 16. Average reading scale scores of fall 2010 first-time kindergartners, by time of assessment and risk factors related to parent education and poverty: Fall 2010 through spring 2014

NOTE: Estimates weighted by W7C17P_7T170. Scores on the reading assessments reflect performance on questions measuring basic skills (print familiarity, letter recognition, beginning and ending sounds, rhyming words, and word recognition); vocabulary knowledge; and reading comprehension, including identifying information specifically stated in text (e.g., definitions, facts, and supporting details), making complex inferences from texts, and considering the text objectively and judging its appropriateness and quality. Possible scores for the reading assessment range from 0 to 141. Estimates pertain to a sample of children who were enrolled in kindergarten for the first time in the 2010–11 school year. Most of the children were in first grade in 2011–12, second grade in 2012–13, and third grade in 2013–14, but some of the children were in other grades. In 2013–14, for example, 6 percent of the children were not in third grade (e.g., were in second grade, fourth grade, or ungraded classrooms). Information on risk factors and student and family characteristics are based on data collected during the kindergarten year. Parents’ highest level of education is the highest level of education achieved by either of the parents or guardians in a two-parent household, by the only parent in a single-parent household, or by any guardian in a household with no parents. Poverty status is based on preliminary U.S. Census income thresholds for 2010, which identify incomes determined to meet household needs, given family size and composition. For example, a family of three with one child was below the poverty threshold if its income was less than $17,552 in 2010.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLS-K:2011), Kindergarten–Third Grade Restricted-Use Data File. See Digest of Education Statistics 2016, table 220.40.

In mathematics, while students who had neither risk factor scored highest at each data collection, differences in scores among the other risk factor groups varied by grade level.

In the fall of kindergarten, the average score was highest for first-time kindergartners who had neither risk factor (37 points), and the average score for those who had the single risk factor of living in poverty (30 points) was higher than the average scores for those with the single risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school (27 points) and for those who had both the risk factor of living in poverty and the risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school (26 points).³⁸
In the spring data collections for kindergarten and first grade, students with neither risk factor had the highest average scores, and students with the single risk factor of living in poverty had higher average scores than students with both risk factors.
In the spring data collections for second and third grade, average mathematics scores were highest for students with neither risk factor and lowest for students with both risk factors; no measurable differences were observed between the average scores for students having either of the single risk factors. For instance, students with neither risk factor had the highest average spring third-grade score (101 points), and students who had either the single risk factor of living in poverty or the single risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school had higher average scores (94 and 95 points, respectively) than students who had both risk factors (89 points).

Figure 17. Average mathematics scale scores of fall 2010 first-time kindergartners, by time of assessment and risk factors related to parent education and poverty: Fall 2010 through spring 2014

NOTE: Estimates weighted by W7C17P_7T170. Scores on the mathematics assessments reflect performance on questions on number sense, properties, and operations; measurement; geometry and spatial sense; data analysis, statistics, and probability (measured with a set of simple questions assessing children’s ability to read a graph); and prealgebra skills such as identification of patterns. Possible scores for the mathematics assessment range from 0 to 135. Estimates pertain to a sample of children who were enrolled in kindergarten for the first time in the 2010–11 school year. Most of the children were in first grade in 2011–12, second grade in 2012–13, and third grade in 2013–14, but some of the children were in other grades. In 2013–14, for example, 6 percent of the children were not in third grade (e.g., were in second grade, fourth grade, or ungraded classrooms). Information on risk factors and student and family characteristics are based on data collected during the kindergarten year. Parents’ highest level of education is the highest level of education achieved by either of the parents or guardians in a two-parent household, by the only parent in a single-parent household, or by any guardian in a household with no parents. Poverty status is based on preliminary U.S. Census income thresholds for 2010, which identify incomes determined to meet household needs, given family size and composition. For example, a family of three with one child was below the poverty threshold if its income was less than $17,552 in 2010.

Differences in science scores among the risk factor groups also varied by grade level.

In the spring data collections for kindergarten and first grade, students with neither risk factor had the highest average science scores.
In addition, students with the single risk factor of living in poverty had higher average scores than students with the single risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school as well as higher average scores than students with both the risk factor of living in poverty and the risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school. For example, the average spring kindergarten science score was highest for first-time kindergartners who had neither risk factor (33 points), and the average score for those who had the single risk factor of living in poverty (29 points) was higher than the average score for those with the single risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school and higher than the average score for those with both risk factors (25 points each).³⁹

Similar to the pattern observed in mathematics, average science scores in the spring data collections for second and third grade were highest for students who had neither risk factor and lowest for students who had both risk factors; no measurable differences were observed between the average scores for students who had either of the single risk factors.

For instance, students with neither risk factor had the highest average spring third-grade score (58 points), and students who had either the single risk factor of living in poverty or the single risk factor of not having a parent who completed high school had higher average scores (52 and 51 points, respectively) than students who had both risk factors (47 points).

Figure 18. Average science scale scores of fall 2010 first-time kindergartners, by time of assessment and risk factors related to parent education and poverty: Spring 2011 through spring 2014

NOTE: Estimates weighted by W7C17P_7T170. Science was not assessed in the fall of kindergarten. Scores on the science assessment reflect performance on questions on physical sciences, life sciences, environmental sciences, and scientific inquiry. Possible scores for the science assessment range from 0 to 87. Estimates pertain to a sample of children who were enrolled in kindergarten for the first time in the 2010–11 school year. Most of the children were in first grade in 2011–12, second grade in 2012–13, and third grade in 2013–14, but some of the children were in other grades. In 2013–14, for example, 6 percent of the children were not in third grade (e.g., were in second grade, fourth grade, or ungraded classrooms). Information on risk factors and student and family characteristics are based on data collected during the kindergarten year. Parents’ highest level of education is the highest level of education achieved by either of the parents or guardians in a two-parent household, by the only parent in a single-parent household, or by any guardian in a household with no parents. Poverty status is based on preliminary U.S. Census income thresholds for 2010, which identify incomes determined to meet household needs, given family size and composition. For example, a family of three with one child was below the poverty threshold if its income was less than $17,552 in 2010. Although rounded numbers are displayed, the figures are based on unrounded estimates.

Findings in the learning growth section of this indicator come from Risk Factors and Academic Outcomes in Kindergarten Through Third Grade in the Condition of Education. For more information see tables 220.40, 220.41, and 220.42 from the Digest of Education Statistics 2016.

¹²For more information on NAEP, including the history of the assessment, sampling procedures, and the transition from paper-based assessments to digitally based assessments, please see https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/.

¹³This indicator presents grades 4 and 8 trend analyses for race/ethnicity since 2011, when NAEP began reporting separate data for Asian students, Pacific Islander students, and students of Two or more races.

¹⁴Throughout this indicator, score differences (gaps) are calculated using unrounded data and, therefore, may differ from values calculated using the rounded scores presented.

¹⁵Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

¹⁶Nonresponse for this variable was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

¹⁷NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and are not comparable to results from assessments administered by state education agencies.

¹⁸Nonresponse for this variable was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

¹⁹In 2013, NAEP began reporting separate data at the 12th-grade level for Asian students, Pacific Islander students, and students of Two or more races. Thus, this indicator presents grade 12 trend analyses for race/ethnicity since 2013.

²⁰Nonresponse for this variable was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

²¹This indicator presents grades 4 and 8 trend analyses for race/ethnicity since 2011, when NAEP began reporting separate data for Asian students, Pacific Islander students, and students of Two or more races.

²²The only exception was 2019, when the average mathematics score for Pacific Islander students was not measurably different from the score for White students.

²³The only exception was the White-American Indian/Alaska Native scale score gap, which was not measurably different between 2011 and 2022.

²⁴Throughout this indicator, score differences (gaps) are calculated using unrounded data and, therefore, may differ from values calculated using the rounded scores presented.

²⁵Students with disabilities include those with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those with a 504 plan.

²⁶Nonresponse for this variable was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

²⁷NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and are not comparable to results from assessments administered by state education agencies.

²⁸The only exception was the Asian-Pacific Islander scale score gap, which was not measurably different between 2011 and 2022.

²⁹Nonresponse for this variable was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

³⁰In 2013, NAEP began reporting separate data at the 12th-grade level for Asian students, Pacific Islander students, and students of Two or more races. Thus, this indicator presents grade 12 trend analyses for race/ethnicity since 2013.

³¹Nonresponse for this variable was greater than 15 percent but not greater than 50 percent.

³²Students who identified with two or more race categories (e.g., White and Black) were classified as “other” and reported as part of the “unclassified” category prior to 2011; from 2011 on, they have been classified as “Two or more races.”

³³In 2011, NAEP began reporting separate data for Asian students, Pacific Islander students, and students of Two or more races. However, the 2011 NAEP science assessment only collected data for grade 8.

³⁴High-poverty schools are defined as schools where 76 to 100 percent of the students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (FRPL); mid-high poverty schools are schools where 51 to 75 percent of the students are eligible for FRPL; mid-low poverty schools are schools where 26 to 50 percent of the students are eligible for FRPL; and low-poverty schools are schools where 25 percent or less of the students are eligible for FRPL.

³⁵Although assessment data were also collected in the fall of grades 1 and 2, results are not included in here because the assessments were only administered to a subsample of ECLS-K:2011 students.

³⁶Estimates pertain to a sample of children who were enrolled in kindergarten for the first time in the 2010–11 school year. Most of the children were in first grade in 2011–12, second grade in 2012–13, and third grade in 2013–14, but some of the children were in other grades. In 2013–14, for example, 6 percent of the children were not in third grade (e.g., were in second grade, fourth grade, or ungraded classrooms). Due to the study’s large sample size, many differences (no matter how substantively minor) are statistically significant. In this indicator, mean score differences are considered substantively meaningful if they are at least one-fifth of a standard deviation in size. Therefore, mean score differences are reported only if they are statistically significant at the p < .05 level and are at least one-fifth of a standard deviation in size.

³⁷The fall kindergarten reading score for the full ECLS-K:2011 sample has a mean of 51 and a standard deviation (SD) of 11.1. Scale score gaps that are greater than or equal to 2.2 points (0.2 of an SD) are considered substantively meaningful for the purposes of this analysis. For example, the scale score gap between students who had neither risk factor (54 points) and those who had both risk factors (45 points) was 0.8 SD.

³⁸The fall kindergarten mathematics score for the full ECLS-K:2011 sample has a mean of 33 and a standard deviation (SD) of 11.4. Scale score gaps that are greater than or equal to 2.3 points (0.2 of an SD) are considered substantively meaningful for the purposes of this analysis. For example, the scale score gap between students who had neither risk factor (37 points) and those who had both risk factors (26 points) was 1.0 SD.

³⁹The spring kindergarten science score for the full ECLS-K:2011 sample has a mean of 31 and a standard deviation (SD) of 6.9. Scale score gaps that are greater than or equal to 1.4 points (0.2 of an SD) are considered substantively meaningful for the purposes of this analysis. For example, the scale score gap between students who had neither risk factor (33 points) and those who had both risk factors (25 points) was 1.2 SD.

Suggested Citation

National Center for Education Statistics. (2023). Performance on Tests. Education in Equity Dashboard. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved [date], from [URL].