New York City’s latest reading scores deserve attention. The share of students in grades 3 through 8 who scored proficient on the state English Language Arts exam fell from 56.3% in 2025 to 50.3% this year.
Those numbers should prompt serious questions about what is happening in classrooms and whether NYC Reads — the city’s sweeping changes to reading instruction — is producing the results students need.
But as researchers and professors of education, we would caution against treating a single assessment as a verdict on NYC Reads. That is especially important given the questions raised about whether the 2025 state test results provide a reliable year-to-year comparison.
Here, three types of data matter: the state test scores, school-administered reading screeners that help teachers identify students who need additional support, and implementation data that show whether schools are using the new approach as intended. Right now, those measures are not telling the same story.
The city’s spring reading screener data continue to move upward. Among students in kindergarten through second grade, the share performing above the national median increased from 34.2% in 2022, the year before NYC Reads launched, to 42.5% in 2026. Across grades K-5, the increase was from 36.8% to 43.4%.
Implementation data also show progress. Across nearly 50,000 classroom observations, more than 90% showed the use of science-of-reading-aligned, grade-level materials similar to those used in states that have posted notable literacy gains, including Louisiana and Mississippi.
None of this means we should dismiss the state test. When one important measure changes dramatically while other indicators move in a different direction, that discrepancy demands investigation.
Spring 2026 was the first year every student in grades 3 through 8 was required to take New York’s state ELA and math tests on a computer. The state also acknowledged technical interruptions affecting some schools during this year’s testing window.
At the same time, we see reasons for optimism in the classrooms.
Teachers are increasingly using screening data to identify students who are struggling and provide support earlier. Teacher knowledge is growing, too. In an analysis conducted by The Reading Institute, approximately 1,200 city educators who participated in its 10-hour science-of-reading professional learning course demonstrated a 34% improvement in their general knowledge of how children learn to read.
As university professors, we are also seeing greater alignment between the evidence-based reading instruction aspiring teachers learn in their preparation programs and what they encounter in city schools.
Still, NYC Reads can and should improve.
Foundational skills and knowledge-building are important, but students also need time to actually read. They need appropriate books in their hands, including decodable texts, and opportunities to take books home. Schools should also consider whether independent reading is moving unnecessarily onto computers when children would benefit from sustained engagement with print.
The new ELA state scores are an important part of the evidence. So are the screener results and implementation data. Together, they can help the city determine where NYC Reads is making progress and where more work is needed.
When those three measures point in different directions, the responsible next step is to investigate why. We should use this moment to examine the discrepancy, determine where implementation needs to improve, and continue building on the parts of NYC Reads that are moving in the right direction.
Miles is the founder of The Reading Institute and a professor at Brooklyn College. Neuman is a professor of childhood and literacy education at NYU and a former U.S. assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education.