US test scores in Reading in 2026?
Short Answer
Both the model and the market expect a significant decrease in US test scores in Reading in 2026, with no compelling evidence of mispricing.
1. Executive Verdict
- Projected 30%+ chronic absenteeism creates significant systemic headwinds.
- ESSER grant expiration causes widespread cuts to literacy support programs.
- Over 10 million students use AI literacy platforms, reporting reading gains.
- Bellwether states show modest 2025 Grade 4 reading proficiency gains.
- 2024 state early literacy policy changes will not immediately impact scores.
Who Wins and Why
| Outcome | Market | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Significant decrease | 67.0% | 64.2% | Persistent chronic absenteeism and significant funding cuts are likely to decrease reading scores. |
| No significant difference | 30.0% | 25.5% | Positive educational initiatives might offset declines, resulting in no significant overall change. |
| Significant increase | 16.0% | 10.3% | Accelerated positive educational trends could potentially drive an increase in reading scores. |
2. Market Behavior & Price Dynamics
Historical Price (Probability)
Outcome probability
Date
This market exhibits a modest long-term upward trend, with the probability for a "YES" outcome rising from 55.0% to a current price of 67.0%. The trading has been confined to a range between 54.0% and 67.0%. Recently, the market has seen a period of significant volatility, characterized by sharp, back-and-forth price swings. Notably, the price dropped 8.0 percentage points on April 22nd, spiked 8.0 points on April 24th, dropped another 9.0 points on April 27th, and then surged 10.0 points on April 28th. This choppy price action suggests considerable disagreement and uncertainty among traders.
With no specific news or external catalysts provided in the context, the cause of these dramatic price swings is not apparent. The movements are likely attributable to internal market dynamics and shifting sentiment rather than a reaction to a fundamental development. A clear resistance level has been established at 67.0%, a point the market has repeatedly tested and is currently trading at. A short-term support level appears to be forming in the 57.0% to 59.0% zone, which served as the floor for the two most recent drops. The total volume of 1,331 contracts suggests a moderately active market over its lifetime. Despite the recent turbulence, the overall upward trend and current price indicate that market sentiment has grown more optimistic over time, assigning a two-thirds probability to a "YES" outcome.
3. Significant Price Movements
Notable price changes detected in the chart, along with research into what caused each movement.
📈 April 28, 2026: 10.0pp spike
Price increased from 57.0% to 67.0%
Outcome: Significant decrease
What happened: No supporting research available for this anomaly.
📉 April 27, 2026: 9.0pp drop
Price decreased from 66.0% to 57.0%
Outcome: Significant decrease
What happened: No supporting research available for this anomaly.
📈 April 24, 2026: 8.0pp spike
Price increased from 59.0% to 67.0%
Outcome: Significant decrease
What happened: No supporting research available for this anomaly.
📉 April 22, 2026: 8.0pp drop
Price decreased from 67.0% to 59.0%
Outcome: Significant decrease
What happened: No supporting research available for this anomaly.
4. Market Data
Contract Snapshot
The market resolves to "Yes" if US average test scores for eighth graders experience a "Significant decrease" in 2026, as verified by the Nation's Report Card. Conversely, it resolves to "No" if a "Significant decrease" does not occur, given that all listed outcomes (Significant decrease, No significant difference, Significant increase) are mutually exclusive. The market closes after the outcome is released, resolving by 10:00 AM ET, or by December 31, 2027, if no data is released; trading is prohibited for employees of Source Agencies or those with material non-public information.
Available Contracts
Market options and current pricing
| Outcome bucket | Yes (price) | No (price) | Last trade probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Significant decrease | $0.67 | $0.43 | 67% |
| No significant difference | $0.30 | $0.78 | 30% |
| Significant increase | $0.16 | $0.89 | 16% |
Market Discussion
The market largely expects a "Significant decrease" in US reading test scores for eighth graders in 2026, with a 67% probability. Key arguments for this outcome cite the ongoing negative impact of the pandemic on students who were in middle school then, as well as the perceived detrimental effect of AI tools like ChatGPT on high schoolers. There is a minority view for "No significant difference" (30%), but the prevailing consensus leans towards continued decline.
5. How Are 2024 Reading Policies Impacting State Proficiency Scores?
| States strengthening literacy policies | 15 states (in 2024) [^] |
|---|---|
| Most recent reading assessment | 2024 NAEP Reading Assessment [^] |
| Release year of 2024 NAEP results | 2025 [^] |
Legislative changes in 2024 will not immediately impact proficiency scores. Fifteen states strengthened their early literacy policies in 2024, adopting the "Science of Reading" approach [^]. This action aligns with a broader national effort to enhance reading instruction [^]. However, it is too early to expect the full effects of these 2024 policy enhancements on reading proficiency scores to appear in the same year or the immediate following year (2025), as educational reforms typically require several years to produce measurable changes in student outcomes.
Current NAEP data provides a baseline, but predates full policy effects. The most recent national and state-level reading proficiency data, specifically for grades 4 and 8, stems from the 2024 NAEP Reading Assessment [^]. The outcomes of this assessment were released or detailed in 2025 [^]. While these 2024 NAEP results establish a baseline for subsequent comparisons, they primarily reflect educational environments present before the comprehensive implementation and maturation of the "Science of Reading" policy changes that were reinforced in 2024.
6. What is the Projected Chronic Absenteeism Rate for 2024-2025?
| Projected 2024-2025 Chronic Absenteeism Rate | 30% or higher (Attendance Works) [^] |
|---|---|
| Pre-Pandemic (2018-2019) Chronic Absenteeism Rate | Approximately 15% (U.S. Department of Education, Attendance Works) [^] |
| Increase from Pre-Pandemic to 2024-2025 | Approximately doubled [^] |
Chronic absenteeism in 2024-2025 remains significantly elevated, potentially doubling pre-pandemic levels. While comprehensive, final national data from the U.S. Department of Education for the entire 2024-2025 academic year is typically released after the school year concludes [^], analyses from Attendance Works indicate a continuation of significantly elevated rates. Attendance Works highlights that chronic absenteeism remains roughly double the pre-pandemic levels [^], suggesting a national rate for 2024-2025 in the range of 30% or higher. Reports tracking into 2024-2025, such as those by the RAND Corporation, also confirm that chronic absenteeism continues to be a struggle [^].
Current absenteeism rates represent a substantial increase from pre-pandemic figures. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, for the 2018-2019 school year, the national rate of chronic absenteeism was approximately 15% of all students, as reported by the U.S. Department of Education [^]. Attendance Works consistently cited this 15% figure as the pre-pandemic national average, defining chronic absenteeism as missing 10% or more of school days [^]. Therefore, the current indications for the 2024-2025 school year, suggesting rates around 30% or more, reflect an approximate doubling of chronic absenteeism compared to the pre-pandemic baseline [^].
7. How are Expiring ESSER Grants Impacting School Programs and Staffing?
| Reduce/eliminate tutoring programs (National) | 50% of school systems [^] |
|---|---|
| Reduce/eliminate reading/literacy support (National) | 49% of school systems [^] |
| Illinois districts cutting tutoring programs | 67% of districts [^] |
The expiration of federal ESSER grants is causing widespread cuts in education support roles. The Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) grants are leading to significant reductions in positions across U.S. school districts. A May 2025 AASA survey, encompassing over 300 school system leaders from 47 states, indicated that approximately 50% of responding school systems plan to reduce or eliminate high-impact tutoring programs due to the cessation of federal COVID-19 relief funding [^]. Similarly, 49% of these school systems anticipate reducing or eliminating reading and literacy support positions [^]. These planned impacts are expected during the FY25 period as districts grapple with the 'funding cliff' [^].
Specific data for largest districts is unavailable, but national trends persist. While explicit data for the 100 largest U.S. school districts was not provided, these national surveys offer a broad indication of trends affecting districts of various sizes. An additional survey conducted in Fall 2025 across Illinois school districts further supports these trends, with 67% of districts expecting to cut tutoring programs and 59% expecting to cut literacy and reading programs [^]. This 'funding cliff' has compelled many districts to consider significant personnel cuts, with more than two-thirds of school districts generally anticipating reductions in staffing as ESSER funds expire [^]. These cuts primarily impact positions initially funded by the temporary federal aid, which aimed to address learning loss and support students following the pandemic [^].
8. What are leading K-8 AI literacy platforms' student enrollment and reading gains?
| Total Student Enrollment (2024-2025) | 10.8 million students (across Lexia, Amplify, Amira Learning) [^] |
|---|---|
| Lexia Core5 Reading Gain | 1.5 grade levels [^] |
| Amplify mCLASS Reading Gain | 1.25 grade levels [^] |
Leading K-8 AI literacy platforms enrolled over 10 million students. For the 2024-2025 academic year, the aggregated student enrollment across Lexia, Amplify, and Amira Learning platforms reached approximately 10.8 million students. Specifically, Lexia programs served over 6.5 million students [^]. Amplify's mCLASS reading programs supported 3.2 million K-8 students [^], and Amira Learning enrolled 1.1 million K-8 students [^].
Students using these platforms achieved significant reading proficiency gains. During the 2024-2025 academic year, users of these platforms reported substantial progress in reading proficiency. Students utilizing Lexia® Core5® Reading achieved an average gain of 1.5 grade levels [^], while Lexia® PowerUp Literacy® users averaged 2.0 grade levels of gain [^]. Amplify's mCLASS program reported an average reading level gain of 1.25 grade levels [^]. Furthermore, Amira Learning users demonstrated an average growth of 1.7 grade levels in reading proficiency [^].
9. How Did Bellwether States Perform on 2025 Grade 4 Reading Assessments?
| Florida ELA Proficiency | 61% of Grade 4 students [^] |
|---|---|
| Texas Reading Proficiency | 62% of Grade 4 students achieved "approaches grade level or above" [^] |
| California ELA Standards Met | 56% of Grade 4 students met or exceeded state standards [^] |
Bellwether states showed modest gains in 2025 Grade 4 reading proficiency. Florida's F.A.S.T. program reported that 61% of Grade 4 students achieved proficiency in English Language Arts (ELA), representing a 2 percentage point increase from the previous year [^]. In Texas, the Spring 2025 STAAR results indicated that 62% of Grade 4 students met or exceeded the "approaches grade level" standard in reading, showing a 3 percentage point improvement from 2024 [^]. California's CAASPP program, specifically the Smarter Balanced ELA test, showed that 56% of Grade 4 students met or exceeded the state standards, marking a 2 percentage point increase from the prior year [^].
No correlation data exists between 2025 state results and national NAEP scores. The available research does not contain information or analysis linking the 2025 state assessment outcomes directly to historical predictions of subsequent national NAEP scores. Therefore, no correlation data can be established from the provided materials.
10. What Could Change the Odds
Key Catalysts
Catalyst analysis unavailable.
Key Dates & Catalysts
- Expiration: December 31, 2027
- Closes: December 31, 2027
11. Decision-Flipping Events
- Trigger: Catalyst analysis unavailable.
13. Historical Resolutions
No historical resolution data available for this series.
Get Real-Time Research Updates
Sign up for early access to live reports, historical data, and AI-powered market insights delivered to your inbox.
