Insights CommonLit 360 Student Reading Growth During the 2025-2026 School Year

Oct 2, 2026 • 6 min read

A study of the 2025-2026 school year showed that CommonLit usage predicted reading growth

CommonLit conducts an annual study that examines the reading growth of students who took the CommonLit Pre-Assessment and Post-Assessment in a given school year. For the 2025-2026 school year, this study included 322,012 students in Grades 3-12 taught by 6,248 teachers in 1,243 schools in 46 states and Washington D.C. Across all grade bands, students with high CommonLit usage saw significantly higher reading gains compared to students with no recorded usage or low to moderate CommonLit usage. These findings held across schools, regardless of Title I eligibility. This study was reviewed by Instructure's Research team, an external research group, and validated as meeting ESSA Level 3 (“Promising Evidence”) standards.

Instructure ESSA Level 3 (“Promising Evidence”) standards badge.

About the Study

This study examined the relationship between CommonLit usage and reading growth on the Assessment Series. In the 2025-2026 school year, 322,012 students in Grades 3-12 completed the CommonLit Assessment Series at the beginning and end of the year. These students were taught by 6,248 teachers in 1,243 schools in 46 states and Washington D.C. Based on available NCES data, 59% of the schools in this sample were eligible to receive Title I funding.

Key Finding: CommonLit Usage was Positively Associated with Student Reading Growth Across All Grade Bands

Students’ reading growth on the CommonLit Assessment Series was compared across three groups of students: those with high usage of CommonLit, those with low to moderate usage of CommonLit, and those with no recorded usage of CommonLit. For students in Grades 6-12, the “high usage” group included those who engaged deeply with the CommonLit 360 curriculum (available for Grades 6-12) by accessing half or more of the Reading or Writing Lessons in a unit for at least three units. The “low to moderate usage” group included those who accessed some CommonLit lessons, but not to the extent of the high usage group. For students in Grades 3-5, the “high usage” group included those who accessed at least 36 lessons, whereas the “low to moderate” group included those who accessed between 1-35 lessons. Across all grade bands, the “no recorded usage” group included those students who did not submit any digital CommonLit lessons and whose teachers did not download any lessons based on platform data.

To test whether these groups of students had meaningfully different levels of reading growth, we conducted statistical models that controlled for students’ baseline scores on the CommonLit Pre-Assessment, their grade levels, and their schools’ Title I eligibility. Across all grade levels, students in the “high usage” group saw the greatest reading growth from the beginning to the end of the year, compared to the “low to moderate” group and the “no recorded usage” group. In other words, the more students used CommonLit, the higher reading growth they tended to see.

Grades 6-12

Grade 6-12 students in the "high usage" group saw significantly greater reading growth than their peers in the "low to moderate" and "no recorded usage" groups. Compared to their peers in the sample who would score at the median (50th percentile) without using CommonLit, students in the high usage group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 7 percentile points (from the 50th to the 57th percentile; see Figure 1), while those in the low to moderate group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 5 percentile points (from the 50th to the 55th percentile).

This pattern also held among Grade 6-12 students who started the year at the below proficient level: approximately 1 in 3 students in the "high usage" group who started the year scoring "Below Proficient" ended the year at "Proficient" (33%), compared to 30% of students in the "low to moderate" group and 27% of students in the "no recorded usage" group.

Figure 1. Effect sizes and percentile point gains for each usage group in Grades 6-12 (middle and high school).

Middle School Grade Band

Middle school students showed the same pattern: those in the "high usage" group saw significantly greater reading growth than their peers in the "low to moderate" and "no recorded usage" groups. Compared to middle school students who would score at the median (50th percentile) without using CommonLit, those in the high usage group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 5 percentile points (from the 50th to the 55th percentile; see Figure 2), and those in the low to moderate usage group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 3 percentile points (from the 50th to the 53rd percentile).

The same trend held true for middle schoolers who started the year at the below proficient level: nearly 1 in 3 students in the "high usage" group who started the year scoring "Below Proficient" ended the year at "Proficient" (30%), compared to 27% of students in the "low to moderate" group and 26% of students in the "no recorded usage" group.

Figure 2. Effect sizes and percentile point gains for each usage group in the middle school grade band.

High School Grade Band

The pattern held among high school students as well, and even more strongly: those in the "high usage" group saw significantly greater reading growth than their peers in the "low to moderate" and "no recorded usage" groups. Compared to high school students who would score at the median (50th percentile) without using CommonLit, those in the high usage group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 13 percentile points (from the 50th to the 63rd percentile; see Figure 3), while those in the low to moderate usage group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 7 percentile points (from the 50th to the 57th percentile).

This trend was even more pronounced among high schoolers who started the year behind: more than 2 in 5 students in the "high usage" group who started the year scoring "Below Proficient" ended the year at "Proficient" (41%), compared to 32% of students in the "low to moderate" group and 27% of students in the "no recorded usage" group.

Figure 3. Effect sizes and percentile point gains for each usage group in the high school grade band.

Elementary School Grade Band

Finally, elementary school students showed a similar relationship between usage and growth. Compared to elementary school students who would score at the median (50th percentile) without using CommonLit, those in the high usage group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 4 percentile points (from the 50th to the 54th percentile; see Figure 4), and those in the low to moderate usage group saw reading growth that can be translated into a gain of 1 percentile point (from the 50th to the 51st percentile).

A similar story unfolded among elementary students who started the year behind: about 1 in 3 students in the "high usage" group who started the year scoring "Below Proficient" ended the year at "Proficient" (33%), compared to 30% of students in the "low to moderate" group and 29% of students in the "no recorded usage" group.

Figure 4. Effect sizes and percentile point gains for each usage group in the elementary school grade band.

In sum, across all grade bands, CommonLit usage was positively associated with students’ reading growth on the CommonLit Assessment Series. This relationship was significant even when accounting for important factors such as baseline scores on the Pre-Assessment, grade levels, and schools’ Title I eligibility status. Students who engaged deeply with CommonLit saw significantly higher reading growth compared to students with lower or no CommonLit usage. For more information about the study, check out the technical research report here.

Get These Results in Your District

Want to see these results in action? Connect with our team to learn how CommonLit 360 can support your school.

Chat with our team