The National Assessment of Educational Progress released data this week showing that U.S. high school seniors in 2024 recorded the lowest reading scores on record and the weakest 12th-grade math results since the current exam format began. Just 22% of seniors tested as "proficient" in math and 35% in reading, both declines of two percentage points from 2019.
The 2019 comparison is notable because that year served as the last pre-pandemic administration of the 12th-grade NAEP; students who were in eighth grade in 2019 comprised the 2024 senior cohort. NAEP officials said the 2024 results continue a pattern of declines that began in 2022 across the fourth- and eighth-grade assessments and now extend to the 12th-grade sample.
The NAEP report said 12th-grade math performance in 2024 was the lowest since the current math assessment for that grade was introduced in 2005. Reading performance for 12th graders was the worst since NAEP began reporting the national assessment for reading in 1992. Officials and analysts highlighted the uneven nature of the declines: higher-performing students have generally maintained their scores while declines have been concentrated among lower-performing students and in schools that were already underperforming.
Researchers and policymakers have offered a range of explanations and prescriptions. Some education analysts point to pandemic-era disruptions in in-person schooling and the shift to remote learning as contributing factors, noting that cohorts who experienced extended interruptions in classroom instruction have faced persistent learning losses. Advocacy groups and some commentators have also cited broader debates over curriculum, instructional methods and school governance.
A commentary in the New York Post argued that teacher unions and other education stakeholders prioritized other concerns during the pandemic and that stronger implementation of specific instructional methods could reverse the trend. The Post cited state-level reforms, including initiatives in Louisiana requiring intensive K-3 teacher training in phonics-based reading instruction, as examples of policies proponents say have improved outcomes. The editorial urged expanded school choice measures, such as charter schools and scholarships to private schools, as part of a policy response. Those views were presented as the Post's opinion.
Separately, research literature has identified specific instructional approaches associated with gains in reading and math in targeted settings. Studies of phonics-based early reading programs have shown improved literacy outcomes when teachers receive training and curricula emphasize phonemic awareness, proponents say. Economists and education researchers, including work by Roland Fryer, have reported that certain practices used in some charter schools — such as concentrated instructional time, data-driven interventions and targeted teacher supports — produced notable gains in mathematics and reading for some low-income urban students. Supporters of such interventions say they can be scaled, while critics caution that results vary by context and implementation.
State and local policymakers are weighing a variety of responses. Some governors and education departments have proposed expanded teacher professional development, investments in early literacy programs, targeted tutoring for students with the largest learning losses and changes to accountability systems. Advocates for charter schools and voucher programs are pressing for policies that would broaden families' options. Teacher unions and many public education officials have defended pandemic-era decisions as responsive to public health concerns and have emphasized the need for resources to address lost instructional time.
Education policy scholars said the NAEP results underscore the complexity of the recovery task: restoring pre-pandemic learning trajectories for millions of students will require sustained interventions, targeted supports for the most affected students, and careful evaluation of which practices produce reliable gains. The release is likely to intensify debates in statehouses and in Congress over how to allocate federal and state funding for education recovery, what instructional approaches to prioritize, and what role school governance and choice should play.
The NAEP results arrive amid heightened political attention to education policy ahead of the 2025-26 school-year budget cycles and upcoming elections in several states. Lawmakers, education officials and advocacy groups said they expect the NAEP findings to inform proposals this fall as states finalize policy agendas and spending plans aimed at addressing persistent performance gaps and the pandemic-era learning decline.