--- title: "California reading scores are up. What the numbers do and do not show." description: "State scores rose 1.8 points, the best year-over-year gain since before the pandemic, and Sacramento credits a literacy spending program. On the national test the state remains well below where it was in 2017, and the weakest readers have fallen furthest." category: "California" category_url: https://herald.la/category/california author: "Mei-Lin Tang" published: 2026-07-20T14:46:00.000Z updated: 2026-07-20T14:46:00.000Z canonical: https://herald.la/article/california-reading-scores-are-up-what-the-numbers-do-and-do-not-show tags: ["education", "literacy", "california", "lausd", "naep"] --- # California reading scores are up. What the numbers do and do not show. State scores rose 1.8 points, the best year-over-year gain since before the pandemic, and Sacramento credits a literacy spending program. On the national test the state remains well below where it was in 2017, and the weakest readers have fallen furthest. California students did better on the state reading test last year, and the state has spent a great deal of money on reading. Those two facts are both true. The link between them is the part worth being careful about, and [CalMatters set out the case](https://calmatters.org/education/k-12-education/2026/07/literacy-california/) this week. ## The good number On the Smarter Balanced assessment, the share of California students meeting or exceeding the English language arts standard rose to about 48.8 percent in 2024-25, from 47 percent the year before. The [governor's office described it](https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/10/09/governor-newsom-announces-california-student-test-scores-improve-significantly-signs-legislation-to-further-bolster-student-literacy-success/) as the largest year-over-year improvement since before the pandemic. Los Angeles Unified did better than the state. The district reported 46.5 percent of students meeting the standard, up 3.4 points on the year, and above where it sat before the pandemic. For a district of LAUSD's size and demographics, moving three points in a year is a substantial result. ## The harder number The state test is not the only measure, and the other one is less flattering. On the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the federally administered exam used to compare states, California fourth graders sat at 29 percent proficient in reading, [about the national average and roughly nine points below where California was in 2017](https://publications.csba.org/california-school-news/march-2025/2024-naep-results-in-math-and-reading/). Worse, the average conceals a split. Students at the top of the distribution have barely moved since 2019. Students at the bottom have fallen by around ten points. An average that rises while its lowest decile falls is not a recovery, it is a widening. ## What was spent The state began putting money into a Literacy Coaches and Reading Specialists grant in 2023, starting at $500 million and adding several hundred million more in subsequent budgets, distributed to high-need schools over multiple years. Two roles were funded: coaches who work with teachers on instruction, and specialists who work directly with struggling readers. Uptake was partial. Within two years, a majority of districts had hired coaches and a minority had hired specialists, and rural districts in particular reported difficulty filling the positions. A grant that cannot be staffed does not do anything, which is the same problem now facing special education staffing in Los Angeles. ## Why attribution is genuinely hard Sacramento's framing is that the investment produced the gains. That claim is plausible and it is not proven, for a reason that has nothing to do with politics. California changed several things at once. Alongside the grants it introduced universal dyslexia screening in the early grades, adopted revised reading guidance emphasizing phonics, expanded transitional kindergarten and retrained teachers. When four or five interventions arrive together and scores move, no one can say from the score alone which one moved them. The [Public Policy Institute of California's work on the early literacy policies](https://www.ppic.org/publication/policy-brief-lessons-from-californias-early-literacy-policies/) has found measurable but modest effects, with second-year results larger than first-year ones, consistent with schools needing time to put the money to use. Modest and real is a perfectly respectable finding. It is a smaller claim than the one in the press release. There is also an awkward fact sitting underneath: California has ranked poorly on how well its teacher preparation programs train new teachers to teach reading. If instruction is what improved, the pipeline producing the instructors has not obviously improved with it. ## Who is still behind Black, Latino and low-income students posted above-average gains, which matters and should be said plainly. English learners did not. Their improvement was slight, and the share reaching the top proficiency band moved by under a point. In a state where a large minority of students are learning English, a literacy strategy that works less well for them is not yet a literacy strategy. ## The honest summary Reading in California is better than last year and worse than 2017. The state's own test shows progress; the national test shows a hole not yet climbed out of. Spending appears to have helped, by an amount that is real and smaller than the announcements imply, and the students furthest behind are still losing ground. All of that can be true simultaneously, and a reader is better served knowing it than being handed either the press release or the rebuttal. ## Sources - [California reading scores are up, thanks to literacy investments. Can the state do more?](https://calmatters.org/education/k-12-education/2026/07/literacy-california/) - [Governor Newsom announces California student test scores improve significantly](https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/10/09/governor-newsom-announces-california-student-test-scores-improve-significantly-signs-legislation-to-further-bolster-student-literacy-success/) - [2024 NAEP results in math and reading](https://publications.csba.org/california-school-news/march-2025/2024-naep-results-in-math-and-reading/) - [Lessons from California's early literacy policies](https://www.ppic.org/publication/policy-brief-lessons-from-californias-early-literacy-policies/)