Achievement Gaps: How Hispanic and White 

Students in Public Schools Perform in 

Mathematics and Reading on the National 

Assessment of Educational Progress

HIGHLIGHTS

NCES 2011-485 U.S. DEPARtMENt of EDUCAtioN
B

About the Study 

The report, Achievement Gaps: How Hispanic 

and White Students in Public Schools Perform 

in Mathematics and Reading on the National 

Assessment of Educational Progress, provides 

a detailed portrait of Hispanic and White academic achievement gaps and how students’ 

performance has changed over time at both 

the national and state levels. 

The report presents achievement gaps using reading and mathematics assessment data from NAEP for the 4th- and 8th-grade students. All 

results are for public school students.

Comparisons in the report are made between the most recent assessment year (2009) and all previous assessment years beginning from 

1990. In addition, the report also examines national achievement gap 

data by gender, students’ English Language Learner status and eligibility for the National School Lunch Program.

From 1990 to 2009, according to NAEP data, the Hispanic student population increased at grade 4 from 6 percent to 22 percent and at grade 8 

from 7 percent to 21 percent. This report is the first to present comprehensive national and state data on the performance of these students 

in comparison to their White peers.

For the full report, please visit http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/

studies/gaps/
1 

Scores of Hispanic and White students rise in 

2009, but the overall achievement gap remains

Trends in NAEP mathematics and reading 

scores and gaps since earliest comparison 

year, by grade and student group: 2009

Scores

Mathematics Gap Hispanic White

4th Grade 

National Public

NSLP1

Eligible

Not Eligible

8th Grade

National Public

NSLP1

Eligible Narrowed

Not Eligible

Scores

Reading Gap Hispanic White

4th Grade

National Public

NSLP1

Eligible Narrowed

Not Eligible

8th Grade

National Public

NSLP1

Eligible Narrowed

Not Eligible

 no significant change in score or score gap.

 increased score. 1 National School Lunch Program

NOTE: Comparison year for National Public is 1990 for mathematics and 1992 for reading; 

NSLP comparisons are made to 2003.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center 

for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), Various 

years: 1990-2009 Mathematics and Reading Assessments.

n In 2009, at the national level, the achievement gap 

between Hispanic and White students at grades 4 

and 8 in mathematics and reading was between 

21 and 26 points on the NAEP scale.

2009 Hispanic-White Achievement Gaps

White-

 Hispanic

Non-ELL 

HispanicELL 

Hispanic

WhiteNon-ELL 

Hispanic

Mathematics

Grade 4 21 19 14

Grade 8 26 34 19

Reading

Grade 4 25 29 15

Grade 8 24 39 15

NOTE: Group that comes first has the higher score. White includes ELL and non-ELL White 

students. 

n Mathematics gap narrowed for Hispanic and White 

8th-graders eligible for the National School Lunch 

Program (NSLP) in 2009 compared to 2003.

n Reading gap also narrowed for eligible 4th- and 

8th-graders in 2009 compared to 2003.

n Reading and mathematics gap narrowed between 

White and non-ELL Hispanic students in both 

grades since the earliest available comparison year.

Hispanics are the second largest racial/ethnic group in the United States, comprising 16 percent of the nation’s population, according to the 2010 Census. The size of the Hispanic population varies by state; the five states with the largest 

Hispanic population are California, Florida, Illinois, New York, and Texas.

According to NAEP reading data, more Hispanic students (76 percent at grade 4 and 72 percent at grade 8) compared 

to White students (29 percent at grade 4 and 24 percent at grade 8) are eligible for the National School Lunch Program. 

In 2009, 35 percent of all Hispanic fourth-graders and 20 percent of Hispanic eighth-graders were identified as English 

language learners, compared to 9 and 5 percent for all students (including Hispanics) at the two grades.
2

State and National Gap Comparisons for 

Mathematics, 2009

The gap in most states did not differ significantly from the national gap for mathematics in both grades. The following 

figures show the states where the gap is significantly larger or smaller than the national gap.

Grade 8

Jurisdictions

0 500

Scale score

240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320

Hispanic Gap White

Connecticut

Colorado

California

National Public 266

256*

267

263

 292

 289

 299*

 298*

New York 262 294

Rhode Island 255* 286*

Washington 264 295*

SMALLER

LARGER

Hawaii

Georgia

Florida

DoDEA1

Delaware 278*

281*

274*

270*

276*

 294*

 294

 289*

 289

 282*

Alaska 275* 293

Arkansas 269 284*

Indiana 273* 291

Kentucky 272 282*

Michigan 269 286*

Oklahoma 263 282*

Tennessee 270 282*

Virginia 274* 294

Wyoming 269 289*

Missouri 284* 290*

 33*

 32*

 34* 

 32* 

 31*

 32*

26

 18*

 15*

 16*

13*

 15*

 19*

 6*

 18*

 10*

 17*

6*

 19*

 12*

 19*

 20*

Grade 4

Jurisdictions

0 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 500

Scale score

National Public 227 248

Connecticut 227 253*

District of Columbia 227 270*

Kentucky 227 241*

Louisiana 230 241*

New York 231* 248

Oklahoma 229 241*

Rhode Island 219* 247

Utah 219* 246*

Wyoming 231 244*

Massachusetts 232* 258*

DoDEA1 235* 245*

Florida 238* 250*

Georgia 231* 247

California 219* 247

Arkansas 233* 245*

Missouri 237* 245*

Montana 241* 247

SMALLER

LARGER

Hispanic Gap White

 28*

 26*

43*

26*

 28*

 27*

 12*

 10*

 12*

 15*

 14*

 10*

 8*

6*

 17*

 12*

 13*

 21

* Significantly different (p<.05) from the nation (public) when comparing one state to the nation at a time.

1 Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic schools).

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

Eight states—AR, DoDEA, 

FL, GA, KY, MO, OK, WY—had 

smaller achievement gaps 

in 2009 between Hispanic 

and White students than the 

national gap at both grades. 

Three states—CA, CT, RI—

had larger achievement gaps 

in 2009 between Hispanic 

and White students than the 

national gap at both grades.
3 

State and National Gap Comparisons for 

Reading, 2009

The gap in most states did not differ significantly from the national gap for reading in both grades. The following 

figures show the states where the gap is significantly larger or smaller than the national gap.

* Significantly different (p<.05) from the nation (public) when comparing one state to the nation at a time.

1 Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic schools).

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.

0 500

Scale score

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310

Jurisdictions Hispanic White

National Public 248 271

Alaska 260* 269

DoDEA1 269* 278*

Florida 260* 272

Kentucky 265* 269*

Missouri 260* 270

South Carolina 259* 267*

Wyoming 259* 269

Gap

 9*

9*

 11*

 3*

 10*

 8*

 11*

 24

SMALLER

Grade 8

Grade 4

0 500

Scale score

180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260

National Public 204 229

Jurisdictions Hispanic White

Alaska 215* 226*

California 196* 227

Colorado 204 236*

Connecticut 205 238*

Delaware 216* 235*

District of Columbia 207 256*

DoDEA1 223* 234*

Florida 223* 233*

Hawaii 215* 226

Iowa 207 224*

Kentucky 215* 228

Louisiana 206 219*

Maryland 221* 237*

Minnesota 194* 230

Missouri 216* 228

Montana 219* 228

South Dakota 216* 227*

Utah 194* 225*

Wyoming 212* 224*

 31*

 32*

 33*

49*

 36*

 11*

 18*

11*

10*

 12*

 16*

 13*

 13*

15*

 12*

 9*

 11*

 13*

Gap

 25

31*

SMALLER

LARGER

Six states—AK, DoDEA, FL, 

KY, MO, WY—had smaller 

achievement gaps in 2009 

between Hispanic and White 

students than the national 

gap at both grades.

Six states —CA, CO, CT, 

DC, MN, UT—had larger 

achievement gaps in 2009 

between Hispanic and White 

students than the national 

gap at grade 4.

No state had a larger 

achievement gap than the 

24-point national gap at 

grade 8.
4

National trends for Mathematics

The mathematics achievement gap showed few changes when comparing both 1990 and 2007 to 2009.

n	 From 2007 to 2009, scores remained unchanged for n	 From 1990 to 2009, gaps between Hispanic and White 

both Hispanic and White students in grade 4, and the students were 19 points at grade 4 and 24 points at 

gap remained at 21 points. The scores for both groups grade 8.

increased at grade 8, but the gap remained at 26 

points.

Mathematics achievement score gaps between Hispanic and White public school students 

at grades 4 and 8: Various years, 1990–2009

1990n 1992n 1996 2000 2003 2005 2007 2009

Scale score

0

200

250

300

500

269* 276* 279* 283* 287* 288* 290* 292

245* 247* 249* 252* 258* 261* 264* 266

White

Hispanic

Gap

24 29 30 31* 28* 26 26 26

National 

average

Grade 8

Scale score

0

175

225

275

500

1990n 1992n 1996 2000 2003 2005 2007 2009

219* 227* 231* 233*

243* 246* 248 248

199* 201* 207* 207*

221* 225* 227 227

Gap

White

19 26* Hispanic 24

21 26*

21 21 21

National 

average

Grade 4

n

 Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment.

* Significantly different (p<.05) from 2009.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1990–2009 

Mathematics Assessments.

NAEP has collected data on the performance of various racial/ethnic groups since the early 1990s, making it possible to 

explore changes in gaps over time. Achievement gaps—statistically significant differences in average score between two 

student groups—can narrow in the ways shown on the following page.
5 

National trends for Reading

The reading achievement gap showed few changes when comparing both 1992 and 2007 to 2009.

n	 From 2007 to 2009, scores were not significantly differ- n	 From 1992 to 2009, scores increased for both Hispanic 

ent for White students and remained unchanged for and White students but gaps did not differ significantly at 

Hispanic students at grade 4; scores for both groups grades 4 and 8. 

increased at grade 8. In 2009, the 25-point gap in grade 

4 and the 24-point gap in grade 8 were not statistically 

different than the gaps in 2007.

Reading achievement score gaps between Hispanic and White public school students at 

grades 4 and 8: Various years, 1992–2009

1992n 1994n 1998 2000 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009

Scale score

0

160

210

260

500

227*227* 228* 230 229 223* 222* 223* 223*

204 204 199*199* 201*

188* 192* 186* 194*

Gap

White

Hispanic

28 36* 31 35* 28 28* 26 26 25 

National 

average

1992n 1994n 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009

Scale score

0

200

250

300

500

265* 265* 268* 271 270* 269* 270* 271

238* 239* 241* 245 244* 245* 246* 248

Gap

White

Hispanic

27 25 27 26 27* 24 24 25

National 

average

Grade 4

Grade 8

n

 Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment.

* Significantly different (p<.05) from 2009.

NOTE: Data were not collected at grade 8 in 2000. Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 

Reading Assessments.

Ways gaps can narrow

The average scores of both groups increase, 

while the score of the lower performing 

group increases even more. 

The average scores of the higher performing 

group does not change, while the score of 

the lower performing group increases.

The average scores of both groups do not 

change, but the gap narrows.

The average scores of the higher performing 

group declines, while the score of the lower 

performing group increases. 

The average scores of the higher performing 

group declines, while the score of the lower 

performing group does not change.

The average scores of both groups decline, 

but the score of the higher performing group 

declines even more. 
6

State trends for Mathematics, 2007–2009

IL

TX

WI

KY

MI

NY

PA

NC

GA

FL

OH

LA

CA

AK

OR

WA

MT

ID

WY

CO UT

NV

NM AZ

ND

SD

NE

KS

MN

IA

MO

IN

OK AR

TN

MS AL

SC

VA WV

ME

NH

VT

HI

DE

MD

DC

DoDEA1

RI

MA

CT

NJ

Grade 4

DE

MD

DC

DoDEA1

RI

IL

TX

WI

KY

MI

NY MA

PA

NC

GA

FL

OH

LA

CA

AK

OR

WA

MT

ID

WY

CO UT

NV

NM AZ

ND

SD

NE

KS

MN

IA

MO

IN

OK AR

TN

MS AL

SC

VA WV

ME

CT

NH

VT

NJ

HI

UT

Grade 8

Grade 4 Grade 8

Ways the Gap Narrowed

Hispanic students’ scores increased while White students’ scores did not change. No states AR, DE, MO

 Ways the Gap Widened

Hispanic students’ scores decreased and White students’ scores did not change. TX No states

Hispanic students’ scores did not change, while White students’ scores increased. RI No states

 Ways the Gap did not Change

Both Hispanic and White students’ scores increased. DC CT, NV

Hispanic students’ scores did not change, while White students’ scores increased. KY ID, NH, SD, UT, WA

Hispanic students’ scores did not change, while scores of White students decreased. NY, WY No states

Both Hispanic and White students’ scores did not change. 41 states 33 states

Data not available. 5 states 9 states

1 Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic schools). 

NOTE: Data for the comparisons between 2009 and the first assessment year are not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2007 and 2009 Mathematics 

Assessments.

Two states—TX and RI—had 

gaps that widened at grade 4 

in 2009 compared to 2007.

Six states—CT, DC, MA, 

NJ, NY, RI—had gaps that 

narrowed at grade 4 in 2009 

since 1992.

Three states—AR, DE, 

MO—had gaps that narrowed 

at grade 8 in 2009 compared 

 to 2007.

Two states—CT and RI—had 

gaps that narrowed at grade 8 

in 2009 compared to 1990.

One state—MD—had a gap 

that widened at grade 8 in 

2009 compared to 1990.

The gap did not change in 

 45 states at grade 4 and 

40 states at grade 8 in 2009 

compared to 2007.
7 

State trends for Reading, 2007–2009

Grade 4

Grade 8

KY

ND

MS

WV

VT ME

AK

RI

FL

MD

WY

IL

TX

WI

MI

NY MA

PA

NC

GA

OH

LA

CA

OR

WA

MT

ID

CO UT

NV

NM AZ

SD

NE

KS

MN

IA

MO

IN

OK AR

TN

AL

SC

VA

CT

NH

NJ

HI

DE

DC

DoDEA1

IL

TX

WI

KY

MI

NY MA

MD

PA

NC

GA

FL

OH

LA

CA

AK

OR

WA

MT

ID

WY

CO UT

NV

NM AZ

ND

SD

NE

KS

MN

IA

MO

IN

OK AR

TN

MS AL

SC

VA WV

ME

CT

NH

VT

NJ

HI

UT

NM

DE

DC

DoDEA1

RI

Grade 4 Grade 8

Ways the Gap Narrowed

Hispanic students’ and White students’ scores did not change. AK No states

Hispanic students’ scores increased while White students’ scores did not change. No states RI, SC, WY

 Ways the Gap did not Change

Both Hispanic and White students’ scores increased. No states CT

Hispanic students’ scores did not change, while White students’ scores increased. RI NM, UT

Hispanic students’ scores increased, while White students’ scores did not change. FL, MD No states

Hispanic students’ scores did not change, while scores of White students decreased. WY No states

Both Hispanic and White students’ scores did not change. 41 states 36 states

Data not available. 6 states 10 states

1 Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic schools). 

NOTE: Data for the comparisons between 2009 and the first assessment year are not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2007 and 2009 Reading 

Assessments.

One state—AK—had a gap 

that narrowed at grade 4 in 

2009 compared to 2007.

Two states—NJ and NY—had 

gaps that narrowed at grade 4 

in 2009 compared to 1992.

One state—CO—had a gap 

that widened at grade 4 in 

2009 compared to 1992.

Three states—RI, SC, WY—

had gaps that narrowed at 

grade 8 in 2009 compared 

to 2007.

No states had a change in 

their gaps at grade 8 in 2009 

compared to 1998.

The gap did not change in 

45 states at grade 4 and 

39 states at grade 8 in 2009 

compared to 2007.
8

National School Lunch Program

The gap between Hispanic and White students eligible for NSLP narrowed in 2009 when compared to 2003, in grade 

8 mathematics and in grades 4 and 8 reading (see full report for reading results).

n	 In 2009 at grade 4, White not eligible students had n	 At grade 8, White not eligible students had an average 

an average score of 253 (left side of graph), while score of 297 (left side of graph), while White eligible 

White eligible students had a score of 236 (right side students had a score of 276 (right side of graph), 

of graph), resulting in a gap of 17 points. Hispanic not resulting in a gap of 21 points. Hispanic not eligible 

eligible students had an average score of 237, while students had an average score of 275, while Hispanic 

Hispanic eligible students had a score of 225, resulting eligible students had a score of 263, resulting in a gap 

in a gap of 12 points, smaller 17-point gap between of 12 points, smaller 21-point gap between White eliWhite eligible and White not eligible students. This pat- gible and White not eligible students. This pattern is 

tern is similar at grade 4 reading. similar at grade 8 reading.

Mathematics achievement score gaps between Hispanic and White public school students 

at grades 4 and 8, by eligibility for the National School Lunch Program: Various years, 

2003–2009

Scale score

0 

175

225

275

500 

2003 2005 2007 2009 2003 2005 2007 2009

234* 236 236 231*

250* 252 253 247*

222* 224 225 218*

235 235 237 232*

White

Gap

Hispanic

Not eligible Eligible 

17

12 12 12 11 15 15 16

Grade 4

Scale score

0

225

275

325

500

2003 2005 2007 2009 2003 2005 2007 2009

275 276 271* 273*

295* 297 291* 292*

261 263 254* 257*

273 275 269* 271*

White

Gap

Hispanic

17* 15* 14 13 22 21 22 23

Not eligible Eligible

Grade 8

* Significantly different (p<.05) from 2009.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 2003–2009 

Mathematics Assessments.
9 

English Language Learners

The gap between White and non-ELL Hispanic students narrowed in both grades in 2009 compared to the earliest 

assessment year in reading and mathematics (see full report for mathematics results).

n	 In 2009, the 15-point reading gap between grade 4 n	 In 2009, the 15-point reading gap between grade 8 

White and non-ELL Hispanic students was narrower White and non-ELL Hispanic students was narrower 

than the 24-point gap in 1998. Scores increased for than the 22-point gap in 1998, but not significantly 

both groups but the increase was larger for non-ELL different than the gap in 2007. Scores increased for 

Hispanic students. In 2009 at grade 4, the 29-point both groups but the increase was larger for non-ELL 

achievement gap between non-ELL Hispanic and ELL Hispanic students. In 2009 at grade 8, the 39-point 

Hispanic students was not statistically different from achievement gap between non-ELL Hispanic and ELL 

the gap in 1998. Hispanic students was statistically different from the 

gaps in 1998 and 2007.

Reading achievement score gaps between Hispanic and White public school students at 

grades 4 and 8, by English Language Learner status: Various years, 1998–2009

1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009

Scale score

0

160

210

260

500

227*227* 228* 230 229 223* 223*

215 214 210* 209* 211*

199* 199*

211* 215 214 210* 209* 199* 199*

183 184 184 185 179

166* 166*

White

Gap

Non-ELL 

Hispanic

24* 23* 18* 18* 16* 14 15

Gap

ELL 

Hispanic

Non-ELL 

Hispanic

33 30 34

25* 27 31 29

White–Non-ELL Hispanic Non-ELL Hispanic–ELL Hispanic

Grade 4

1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009

Scale score

0

200

250

300

500

268* 271 270* 269* 270* 271

246* 252* 252* 253* 254* 256

246* 252* 252* 253* 254* 256

215 222* 218 220* 219 217

White

Gap

Non-ELL 

Hispanic

22* 19*19* 17* 16 15

Gap

ELL 

Hispanic

Non-ELL 

Hispanic

32* 31* 34* 32* 35* 39

White–Non-ELL Hispanic Non-ELL Hispanic–ELL Hispanic

Grade 8

* Significantly different (p<.05) from 2009.

NOTE: Data were not collected at grade 8 in 2000. Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. White includes ELL and non-ELL White students.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1998–2009 

Reading Assessments.
U.S. DEPArTmENT Of EDUcATiON

Arne Duncan John Q. Easton Jack Buckley

Secretary Director Commissioner

U.S. Department Institute of National Center for

of Education Education Sciences Education Statistics

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), located National Center for Education Statistics 

within the U.S. Department of Education and the Institute of Institute of Education Sciences 

Education Sciences, is the primary federal entity for collecting U.S. Department of Education 

and analyzing data related to education. 1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006-5651 The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is 

a congressionally mandated project sponsored by the U.S. To download the full report and highlights, please visit 

Department of Education and administered by NCES. The http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/studies/gaps/

Commissioner of Education Statistics is responsible by law Contact: Taslima Rahman 

for carrying out the NAEP project. The National Assessment (202) 502-7316 Governing Board is responsible for setting policy for NAEP, taslima.rahman@ed.gov including the NAEP achievement levels. June 2011

“Our mission is ensure equal access to education and to 

promote educational excellence throughout the nation.”

www.ed.gov