In 2026, ~50,000 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population, submitted AP Art and Design: 2D portfolios for evaluation by professors and teachers.

Unlike most AP subjects, AP Art and Design: 2D is assessed entirely through a portfolio of student work rather than an exam. The Development Committee of faculty who design the portfolio requirements and scoring rubrics embed a breadth of conceptual and technical challenges that reflect the high standards of university-level studio art programs. I was thrilled that their work to create a superb way of measuring students’ artistic skills was selected for a dedicated chapter in the most recent volume of the Gordon Commission’s Handbook on Assessment in the Service of Learning, published several months ago and available as a free download here.

Specifically, students’ portfolios are composed of two required components:

1.Sustained Investigation (60% of the score): A body of 15 images demonstrating inquiry, experimentation, revision, and synthesis of materials, processes, and ideas. This ensures that artistic excellence is assessed holistically, rewarding not just technical proficiency but also creative thinking, artmaking, and conceptual sophistication.

This component is scored on four rubric dimensions:

A. Inquiry. Students earning these points provided both written and visual evidence that aligned to demonstrate the student’s intentional approach to defining an inquiry and then pursuing it through their sustained investigation. To earn an AP 3, students typically earned at least 3 points on this dimension, to earn an AP 4, 4 points, and to achieve an AP 5, 5 points.

B. Practice, Experimentation, and Revision. This rubric dimension rewarded students for taking creative risks, exploring multiple directions, and showing how their ideas and artmaking changed and developed over time — a hallmark of sophisticated artistic process that is the clearest differentiator between portfolios earnings AP 5s, which typically earned full points on this dimension, and AP 4s, which did not.

C. Materials, Processes, and Ideas. Students received their highest ratings, overall, on this dimension, which assesses how students utilize and reflect on the materials, processes, and ideas that shape their work. This suggests that this year's 2D students brought particular strength in connecting the technical and conceptual aspects of their practice.

D. Skills. Students also generally performed very well on this dimension, which evaluates command of the required 2D artmaking skills, indicating that many AP 2D Art and Design students are demonstrating remarkable technical proficiency alongside conceptual depth.

2.Selected Works (40% of the score): A selection of 5 works that best represent the student's creativity, range of skills, and mastery of 2D media and processes. Each work submitted needed to stand on its own as a unique work of art while also showcasing range across technique and conceptual depth. To attain an AP 5, students were typically missing no more than one point on this section of the portfolio.

Unlike most AP Exams, AP Art and Design: 3D is assessed entirely through a portfolio of student work rather than a written exam. I’m always excited to hear of the acclaim the AP Art and Design Development Committee of professors and art teachers has received from institutions nationwide for their design of a rigorous, multi-dimensional portfolio structure that measures student mastery across both conceptual and technical dimensions of 3D art-making.

What makes the portfolio rubrics especially well aligned to college and career practices for art making is that students are assessed not just on the quality of finished works, but on their capacity for sustained intellectual and artistic inquiry — the same kind of iterative, reflective practice that professional artists and designers pursue. Students must document and justify the development of their ideas, demonstrating growth and decision-making across their body of work.

The AP Art and Design: 3D portfolio is composed of two required components:

• Sustained Investigation (60% of the score): A body of 15 images demonstrating inquiry-driven, iterative exploration of a central artistic question or idea, evaluated across four criteria: Inquiry; Practice, Experimentation, and Revision; Materials, Processes, and Ideas; and Skills.
• Selected Works (40% of the score): A selection of 5 works (with views from multiple angles, showcasing how the works interact with space) that best represent the student’s range of skills and mastery of 3D media and processes.

Sustained Investigation

Students generally received their highest scores on the “Materials, Processes, and Ideas” rubric row. Students earning an AP 3 typically earned at least 3 points on this row, an AP 4, at least 4 points, and an AP 5, at least 5 points.

Students found the “Practice, Experimentation, and Revision” dimension to be the most challenging this year. This component asked students to show both visual and written evidence of ways their portfolio developed through practice, experimentation, and revision. This is aspect of the portfolio rubric most differentiated AP 4s, who were able to articulate such development, progression, and revision, from AP 3s, who weren’t.

Selected Works

Students earning all or all-but-one of the points on this section of their portfolio – the standard for an AP 5 -- demonstrated exceptional technical command of required 3D skills, written evidence, and synthesis alongside a coherent and compelling artistic vision.

Last summer, a survey of schools nationwide asked which of the 40+ AP subjects they most expected to grow within their schools this year. The #1 response: AP African American Studies. And those survey results proved prescient, as AP African American Studies had the highest growth rate of any AP subject this year, expanding the number of participating students by 40% over 2025.

As a result, ~30,000 students took the AP African American Studies Exam in 2026, roughly 1 in 580 of the nation's 17.4 million high school students.

Big kudos to these pioneering students. Over the course of the year, they conducted original research, developed their own scholarly argument, and presented it, including an oral defense. On exam day, they showed up and answered 60 multiple-choice questions spanning the full range of course content, wrote three short-answer responses drawing on text and visual sources as well as their own independent knowledge, and completed a seven-point document-based essay synthesizing primary and secondary sources on the New Negro Movement. That is a remarkable body of work!

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ)

The multiple-choice section covers four major content units as well as cross-cutting skill dimensions. Students performed at high levels across all four units, demonstrating consistent knowledge and understanding of the breadth of topics in this course. Specifically:

Students earned especially high scores on questions related to Unit 4: Movements and Debates. Students achieving AP 5s typically earned all points possible, and students achieving AP 4s typically earned all but 1-2 of these points.

Students scored similarly well on questions related to Unit 2: Freedom, Enslavement, and Resistance.

The most challenging unit, though performance on it was still strong, was Unit 1: Origins of the African Diaspora. Students earning an AP 5 typically answered all or all but one of these questions correctly.

Free-Response Questions

Each AP exam has multiple versions for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-african-american-studies.pdf

Q1: Text-Based Short Answer. This question focuses on a primary source, a 1964 SNCC position paper. Students were asked to describe the document's claims, provide historical context, explain, with a specific example, how Black women contributed to the cause of advancement between 1900 and 1950, and then explain how twentieth-century Black women activists drew upon the work of their nineteenth-century predecessors.

This series of tasks escalated in difficulty, and thereby served to differentiate among AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, with accurate responses to Part D differentiating especially clearly between exams receiving a 5 and those receiving a 4. Part B clearly differentiated between exams receiving an AP 3 and exams receiving an AP 4, as the ability to summon and describe context for any of a wide range of primary sources is a high standard for college students who earn a B grade or better (i.e., the equivalent of an AP 4), but is usually not achieved by college students receiving a grade of C (i.e., the equivalent of an AP 3). Altogether, the combination of prompts within Q1 made it the most difficult question in this free-response section.

Q2: Visual Short Answer. This question focuses on a visual source, a photograph of a West African griot from the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African Art. Students were asked to describe the griot's historical role, identify continuations of that tradition during enslavement, and trace its influence on twentieth-century cultural and artistic forms, including the Harlem Renaissance and the development of hip-hop. This cross-temporal, cross-disciplinary question reflects the kind of deep cultural and historical literacy the course is designed to build

Accurate responses to Part A, describing an important role played by early West African griots, differentiated students earning AP 3s, who were consistently able to produce such a description, from students receiving AP 2s, who were not. Part C was most challenging and served to qualify students earning AP 4s and 5s.

Q3. Short Answer. This question asked students to describe the impact of restrictive laws before 1900 (including slave codes and Black Codes), describe the effect of a specific law or court ruling after 1950, and explain how African Americans advocated for social equality after 1950 using a specific example. Most students knew this material well, and Q3 earned by far the highest scores within this free-response section: 42% of students earned all points possible within Q3.

The Document-Based Question (DBQ) is the most extensive and demanding task within the free-response section, and this year focused on the New Negro Movement. The DBQ required students to synthesize evidence from five distinct primary and secondary sources — including an excerpt from Alain Locke's Enter the New Negro, a census chart tracking Black urbanization, and a film still from Cabin in the Sky — while constructing an original, thesis-driven argument about the extent to which the movement's objectives were achieved. High-performing students demonstrated contextualization, source analysis, and sophisticated reasoning.

Given the rigor of this task, it served to differentiate among scores of 3, 4, and 5. Students achieving an AP 5 typically earned perfect scores, all points possible, on this DBQ. Students earning AP 3s and 4s earned some but not all of the points possible. The clearest differentiator between AP 4s and AP 5s was whether the student was able to explain how or why the primary source’s perspective, purpose, context, or audience was relevant to the argument, as students achieving AP 5s consistently earned this point, whereas students achieving AP 4s did not. Students earning 4s were also much more likely to earn the point for contextualization and outside evidence than students earning 3s, whose essays typically consisted of a thesis and associated evidence, without the demonstration of additional skills or sophistication. Individual Student Project (12 points) and Exam Day Validation (2 points)

The Individual Student Project (ISP) is one of my favorite components of this AP course. Over the course of the year, students identify a research topic, gather and evaluate primary and secondary sources, develop an original argument, and present their findings, including an oral defense. In addition to receiving scores for their project, on exam day, students responded in writing to a timed, proctored prompt: "Identify the source you found to be most useful in your research. Explain how it deepened your understanding of your topic." There is no course pack of documents to draw from, only what the student has actually read, thought about, and internalized across a year of disciplinary exploration.

Here's what performance looked like across the ISP rubric:

Row A, Selected Sources points were earned by 73% of students.

Row B, Presentation Claim, was earned by 88% of students, the strongest-performing component across the entire free-response section. Nearly every student was able to articulate a defensible claim anchoring their yearlong research.

Row C, Presentation Evidence, was earned by 66%, with students consistently grounding their presentations in specific, well-chosen evidence from their research.

Row D, Presentation Comparison was earned by 67% of students.

64% of students earned all Oral Defense points.

On exam day, 56% of students earned the full 2 Exam Day Validation points. The distinction between 1 and 2 points when responding to this prompt was the difference between describing what a source contributed versus explaining how it changed or deepened understanding, a valuable analytical step.

The 2026 AP Art History exam scores: 5: 15%; 4: 25%; 3: 27%; 2: 24%; 1: 9%

The 2026 AP Art History exam was taken by ~25,500 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Art History Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

The MCQ section spans ten geographic and chronological content areas, five thematic categories, seven skills, and four media types.

Students demonstrated superb knowledge of artworks from Unit 1: Global Prehistory (30,000–500 BCE), the highest-scoring content area on the exam. This performance reflects students’ strong foundational understanding of some of the earliest surviving artistic traditions, from Paleolithic cave paintings to Neolithic funerary objects in China. Notably, 51% of students earned every point possible on questions related to these works.

By contrast, the most challenging content area for this year’s students was Unit 5: Indigenous Americas (1000 BCE - 1980 CE); 8% of students answered all these questions correctly.

AP Art History Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the primary form. The free-response questions are available here: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-art-history.pdf

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the FRQs deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty levels to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

Looking at this year’s questions, I’m impressed by the ways the committee members who design the AP Art History FRQs drew upon works from across the globe -- from ancient Mesopotamia and Mesoamerica, Baroque Europe, 20th-century American architecture, Hindu South Asia, and contemporary Korea – to provide students with opportunities to think as art historians.

FRQ #1, the Long Essay: Comparison presented students with an image of Sumerian Votive Figures (c. 2900–2600 BCE) and asked them to select and compare another work of art in which the human form is also altered.

Students were asked to describe the visual characteristics of the Votive Figures and a selected comparison object, and these entry-level points were earned by 92% and 84% of this year’s students, respectively. But to achieve a score of 3 or higher, students needed to move beyond description to explain meaningful similarities and differences between the two works or how the artists’ stylistic choices reflected the beliefs and values of their respective cultures.

FRQ #2, the Long Essay: Visual and Contextual Analysis, asked students to select a work of art from the Indigenous Americas (1000 BCE to 1980 CE) that expresses cultural values through references to the natural world.

This long essay, more difficult than FRQ1, serves to differentiate among AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, as students receiving AP 2s find this essay extremely challenging and earn few or no points on it. In contrast:

While students receiving AP3s are typically able to generate a thesis and provide supporting evidence, those earning AP 4s were also successful in explaining their reasoning in how relevant visual and contextual evidence supported their claim. Students earning AP 5 scores were more likely to demonstrate nuanced argumentation by qualifying their claims, drawing meaningful connections, and earning the complexity point.

FRQ #3, Visual Analysis, presented students with Peter Paul Rubens's The Coronation of Marie de Medici (c. 1622–25), a work outside of the required image set. This question focused on baseline, foundational art history knowledge and visual analysis skills; students receiving AP 2s earned most of the points on this FRQ, which served to differentiate among 1s, 2s, and 3s, with students who earned a 3 or higher able to earn all points possible here.

FRQ #4, Contextual Analysis, asked students to analyze Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater (1936–39, Bear Run, Pennsylvania). In five structured points, students had to describe a visual characteristic of the building, describe its location, explain two distinct ways the site influenced Wright's design decisions, and explain how Fallingwater demonstrates broader changes in early 20th-century architectural design. The question rewarded close observation of how the built form responds to the natural landscape, and broad contextual knowledge of modernist architecture. It served to distinguish students receiving AP 5, who were typically able to earn all the points possible on this question, and other students, who were not.

For example, 14% of students were able to write about the connection between Fallingwater and the broader rise of modernism in early 20th-century architecture — such as cantilever construction, open floor plans, buildings designed around their natural surroundings, and the blurring of indoor/outdoor space. This was the hardest point on FRQ #4, generally earned by students who achieved AP 5s.

FRQ #5, Attribution of an Unknown Work, showed students a Chola bronze sculpture of Shiva Nataraja (South India/Tamil Nadu, c. 10th–12th century CE) and asked them to correctly attribute it to its culture of origin.

The attribution question is traditionally among the most demanding questions on the exam because it requires students to apply their knowledge to an unfamiliar work rather than analyze a required image. Accordingly, it aimed to differentiate between AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, as students receiving AP 1s and 2s generally found it too challenging. Students earning AP 3s were able to correctly attribute the piece and justify the attribution using visual evidence. Students earning 4s were able also to draw upon contextual evidence to explain religious beliefs and practices of the culture of origin. And students earning AP 5s typically earned 100% of the points possible across all parts of this FRQ.

FRQ #6, Continuity and Change, presented students with Summer Trees by Song Su-nam (1979 CE), a required work from the course curriculum created using ink on paper. Students were asked to describe the work’s subject matter and medium, explain how it demonstrates continuity with earlier East Asian artistic traditions, how it demonstrates change from those traditions, and connect it to Global Contemporary art.

This was a moderately challenging question, differentiating between AP 2s, 3s, and 4s, as the most difficult points were typically attainable by students earning AP 4s, and students earning AP 3s could move beyond description to explanations of continuity / change, whereas students earning AP 2s were usually only able to describe the work.

The 2026 AP Biology Exam scores:

5: 15%; 4: 25%; 3: 31%; 2: 21%; 1: 8%

The 2026 AP Biology Exam was taken by 318,000 students, about 2% of the overall U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions

Students scored highest, overall, on questions about Ecology (Unit 8). Generally, students achieving AP 5s earned all 10 points possible here, students achieving AP 4s earned 9/10 points, and students achieving AP 3s earned 8/10 points.

Students scored nearly as well on questions about Natural Selection (Unit 7). Students earning AP 5s generally earned all 8/8 points possible here, students earning AP 4s attained 7/8 points, and students earning AP 3s attained 6/8 points.

Questions related to the Chemistry of Life (Unit 1) were overall, and by far, the most challenging for students; 7% of students earned perfect scores on this unit’s questions, suggesting a need for more review / focus on these topics.

Free-Response Questions

The six FRQs collectively span the AP Biology curriculum — from molecular signaling and gene regulation to cellular energetics, meiosis, natural selection, and ecological analysis — asking students to interpret experimental data, construct graphs, evaluate hypotheses, and reason across biological scales. It’s terrific how the Development Committee designed these questions to embed classic content knowledge inside authentic scientific investigations, so that students who have truly mastered the material reveal themselves through how they apply their knowledge, not merely through what they recall.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1 asked students to investigate how molecular signals regulate plant stomatal closure. Students first recalled the structural components of a nucleotide, then interpreted experimental figures comparing stomatal size responses to different chemical treatments, justified the use of controls, and predicted outcomes based on mutation data. In the most integrative steps, students had to reason from molecular receptor function to transcriptional regulation — tracing a signaling cascade from cell surface to nucleus.

The real mix of difficulty levels across the 9 points available in FRQ #1 helped to identify a wide range of abilities:

Parts B.i. and B.ii. helped differentiate students receiving AP 1s from students receiving AP 2s, as students receiving AP 1s could typically only earn point B.ii, whereas students receiving AP 2s could typically earn both of these points, the two easiest in FRQ #1.

Parts C.i., C.ii, and C.iii helped differentiate students earning AP 4s, who could typically justify, describe, and predict here, whereas students earning AP 3s were less effective at part C.i., justifying.

Part D differentiated well between students achieving AP 4s and those achieving AP 5s, as D.ii. was the most difficulty point in FRQ #1, usually only earned by students receiving an AP 5, whereas students achieving AP 4s could typically answer part D.i. accurately. So if you’re able to complete both sections of Part D accurately and well, you’re very much performing in the AP 5 range.

FRQ #2, a long free-response question about gene expression regulation, presented students with data on mRNA levels across cells with different AGO2 genotypes and asked them to construct a bar graph, interpret statistical overlap, calculate percent change, and connect molecular-level findings to a cellular phenotype (meiotic arrest). The multi-step quantitative and reasoning demands — including graphing with appropriate error bars, applying statistical reasoning to determine equivalence, and explaining how the absence of a protein leads to a downstream meiotic failure — make this question an excellent showcase of the scientific reasoning AP Biology teaches.

Part A effectively distinguished students achieving AP 3s, who can consistently describe where ribosomes are found in eukaryotic cells, from students receiving AP 2s, who could not.

In Part B, students receiving 2s could typically earn partial credit, whereas students earning AP 3s were much more able to work effectively across the various tasks here of appropriately plotting and labeling their graphs and interpreting the statistical overlap.

Part C differentiated AP 4s, as they were generally much more able to succeed on this part than AP 3s. Similarly, Part D differentiated AP 5s, as they were the only group consistently successful at supporting the scientific claim and explaining the effect on the dividing cells.

FRQ #3, a short free-response scientific investigation about cyanide and cellular respiration, tested students' ability to analyze an experimental design, identify control groups, predict outcomes, and connect inhibited cellular respiration to the switch to fermentation. Across 4 points, students had to demonstrate understanding of electron transport chain function and the metabolic consequences of its disruption.

This question aimed at identifying performance at the AP 3, 4, and 5 levels, as students receiving 1s and 2s were not usually able to earn any of the points on this somewhat challenging FRQ. Students achieving AP 5s were generally able to sail through all parts of this question thoroughly and well. And the clearest boundary point between students receiving AP 4s and AP 3s was Part D, the most challenging part of this question, and one that AP 3s were not likely to earn.

FRQ #4, the most difficult question in this year’s free-response section, asked students to describe chromosome movement in Meiosis I, explain why chromosomes are visible during cell division, predict mRNA production differences from nondisjunction, and justify why triploid organisms cannot produce normal gametes. The progression from descriptive recall to predictive reasoning to mechanistic justification models precisely how AP Biology builds scientific argument across four parts in a single short-response format.

Similar to FRQ #3, this question focused squarely on differentiating performance across the scores of AP 3, 4, and 5. Students earning AP 3s could typically only succeed on Part A, whereas students earning AP 4s could also generally succeed on Part B, and only AP students achieving 5s were able to earn the especially difficult points in Parts C and D.

FRQ #5 required students to connect abiotic selective pressures to phenotypic shifts, read a geographic map figure, identify a region by storm intensity, and explain how divergent selective pressures could drive speciation through reproductive isolation. The question integrates Units 7 and 8 and demonstrates that AP Biology students are expected to reason about evolution at both the mechanistic and population levels simultaneously.

This was the easiest question on this year’s free-response section, and thus provided opportunities to differentiate students receiving AP 2s from those receiving 1s, as students receiving 2s were able to earn points in Part B and/or Part C, but unable to describe the role that changes in abiotic factors have in natural selection in the ways students receiving AP 3s and especially 4s were able to do. Part D served to identify students achieving AP 5s, so if you were able to earn that point, it’s likely you’re on track for a 5.

FRQ #6 asked students to interpret a box-and-whisker plot comparing annual percent change in raptor populations across three African regions, identify medians and extremes, evaluate a scientific hypothesis using the data, and explain ecosystem-level consequences of losing top predators.

This question aimed to differentiate clearly among students receiving AP 3s, 4s, or 5s, as the high difficulty level was generally above the knowledge and skills of students receiving AP 1s and 2s. Specifically, students receiving AP 3s were expected to succeed on Part A, while students receiving credit for Part B and Part C were students earning AP 4s or 5s, and students succeeding on part D were achieving an AP 5.

The 2026 AP Calculus AB Exam scores:

5: 20%; 4: 28%; 3: 17%; 2: 24%; 1: 11%

The 2026 AP Calculus AB Exam was taken by ~292,000 students, roughly 2% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Calculus AB Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

Students earning scores of 3 or higher scored very well on questions related to Unit 1: Limits and Continuity. Students achieving an AP 5 typically answered 100% of these questions right, whereas to earn a 4, students typically missed no more than 1 point, and to earn a 3, students typically missed no more than 2 points.

The two most difficult MCQs measured aspects of Unit 6: Integration and Accumulation of Change, and were typically only earned by students achieving AP 5s. Students receiving AP 2s were generally unable to earn many points on questions related to this unit, so this unit is very much a differentiator between students earning scores of 3+, who were able to succeed on a variety of these questions, and students earning scores of 1 and 2, who could not.

AP Calculus AB Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-calculus-ab.pdf

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, the Modeling Rates of Change question, required students to estimate a rate of change, construct a midpoint Riemann sum, interpret the meaning of a definite integral in context, set up and evaluate a definite integral for accumulation, and apply the Intermediate Value Theorem. The question spans nine points, creating a broad range of difficulty:

• The two points in Part C, which required students to provide a definite integral for accumulation and evaluate it using the calculator, were earned by 80% and 72% of students respectively, meaning that most students who understood the fundamentals of integration could set up and execute these computations. Accordingly, these points differentiated between students receiving AP scores of 2, who were generally able to earn these points, and students receiving AP scores of 1, who were not.
• Comprised of points that were aspirational for most students, Part D was exceptionally difficult, and so provided opportunities for the most advanced students to demonstrate exceptionally strong knowledge and skills.

FRQ #2, the Area and Volume question, presented two functions f and g bounding regions and asked students to calculate areas of regions using definite integrals, set up an integral for the volume of a solid with rectangular cross sections, and set up an integral for the volume of a solid generated by revolving a region about the y-axis.

Other than the first point within Part C (presenting an integrand of a certain form in a definite integral for the area of a region), which some students receiving an AP 2 were able to earn, this FRQ, like most AP Calculus FRQs, focuses on differentiating performance among AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, who were each typically able to earn a variety of points across this FRQ, with AP 5s typically earning all points possible.

FRQ #3, the Modeling with Differential Equations question, was the most difficult FRQ on this year's exam, laser focused on differentiating between scores of 4 and 5, with students achieving AP 5s able to earn significantly more points on this question than other students. The question asked students to explain why a given slope field could not represent the given differential equation, find the slope of a tangent line, determine whether a tangent line approximation is an overestimate or an underestimate, and solve the differential equation using separation of variables.

FRQ #4, the Graphical Analysis question, presented students with the graph of f′ (the derivative) for a twice-differentiable function f and asked them to use the graph to evaluate a related derivative, identify points of inflection of the graph of f, determine where the function f is increasing and concave down, and determine the locations of absolute extrema of the function f. While students receiving AP 1s were unable to engage with the difficulty of this FRQ, the question provided multiple opportunities for students receiving AP scores of 2, 3, 4, and 5 to distinguish themselves — a question that differentiates performance very well across this spectrum. For example:

• Students achieving an AP 3 were typically able to set up and answer Part A correctly, answer Part C, and earn other points throughout this FRQ, while students receiving an AP 2 were not.
   
• Students achieving an AP 4 or an AP 5 were generally able to earn some of the points available in the more difficult Part D, whereas students earning an AP 3 typically did not.

FRQ #5, the Particle Motion question, provided students with analytical and graphical representations of the velocity of a toy car moving along a straight path. Students overall scored higher on this FRQ than any other on this exam.

Part A (finding acceleration as the derivative of the given velocity function) included a basic entry point that differentiated between students receiving AP 2s, who could typically earn this point, and students receiving AP 1s, who could not.

Students achieving AP 3s, 4s, and 5s generally earned the majority of points possible across this FRQ. Part D served as the key differentiator between students earning AP 4s and 5s, who were usually able to earn points in this part, and students earning AP 3s, who were often less able to succeed on Part D.

FRQ #6, the Analysis of Functions question, presented students with a table of values for a twice-differentiable function f and its derivative. Without a graphing calculator, students had to evaluate a limit, apply the chain rule to find a related derivative, solve an initial value problem, find the derivative of a function defined by an integral, and apply the product rule to find a derivative.

From a psychometric perspective, this question may be the best on the exam, as the available points very neatly differentiate performance levels across the spectrum of students receiving AP 2s, 3s, 4s, and 5s. (Students receiving AP 1s typically earned no points on this question, which was beyond their ability level.)

• The points available in Part B and one of the points available in Part D were all points that students earning an AP 3 could consistently earn, whereas students receiving an AP 2 had more mixed performance here.
   
• Students receiving AP 5s generally earned all points in Part C, something students earning other scores could not usually achieve.

The 2026 AP Calculus BC exam scores:

5: 46%; 4: 22%; 3: 14%; 2: 14%; 1: 4%

The 2026 AP Calculus BC exam was taken by ~171,000 students — roughly 1% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Calculus BC Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ)

• AP Calculus BC students scored especially well on questions related to Unit 1: Limits and Continuity (35% earned all points) and Units 4 and 5: Applications of Differentiation, such that students earning AP 3+ scores answered most of these questions correctly.
• The most challenging MCQ content area was Unit 10: Infinite Sequences and Series, a unit requiring students to master convergence tests, power series, and error bounds for series approximations, for example. Earning 100% of these points was rare, given how difficult and advanced this unit is; 3% of students achieved a perfect score on this unit.

AP Calculus BC Free-Response Questions (FRQ)

Each AP exam has multiple versions for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-calculus-bc.pdf

Collectively spanning the AP Calculus BC curriculum, the six FRQs included rate modeling with tabular data, polar curve analysis, differential equations, graphical reasoning, area-volume applications, and Maclaurin series. Throughout the FRQs, students must communicate reasoning. For example, they needed to construct arguments, interpret a definite integral in context, evaluate the validity of a slope field, and determine the convergence of a series.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

The following commentary will focus on the questions unique to Calculus BC:

FRQ #2 — Polar Curve: Area and Tangent Lines

Q2, the Polar Curve question, tested students' ability to work with polar functions — finding the area of a polar region using a definite integral, working with the slope of a line tangent to a polar curve, and analyzing curve behavior.

The second point in Part C (answer using a derivative test) and both points for Part D were the most difficult points of this FRQ. These served to differentiate students achieving AP 5s, who could typically earn these points, from other students.

FRQ #5 — Area, Volume, and Perimeter

Q5, the Area-Volume question, asked students to evaluate a definite integral without the use of a calculator, write an integral expression for the volume of a solid of revolution, write an integral for the perimeter of a region (arc length), and evaluate an improper integral.

Students receiving AP 1s were not usually able to earn points on this question. Rather, it served especially well to differentiate among AP 3s, 4s, and 5s. For example:

• Students earning AP 3s consistently earned points across Parts A and B, as well as the antiderivative point in Part D, whereas students receiving AP 2s did not.
• Students earning AP 5s were consistently able to succeed on Part C, the most difficult part of this FRQ, whereas students receiving AP 3s and 4s were more likely to struggle and only earn partial points here.

FRQ #6 — Maclaurin Series

In this demanding question, which tended to differentiate between AP scores of 4 and 5, students were given a Maclaurin series for a function g and asked to find the sum of g(3) (an alternating geometric series), find a series for the derivative g', justify an error bound, and write a Maclaurin series for a related function.

• In Part B, students earning AP 3s could typically write two terms of the series for g', while students earning AP 4s were more likely to proceed and write the remaining two terms.
• In Part D (ii), students earning AP 4s were typically able to write two terms of the series for the related function, and students earning AP 5s were typically able to write all three terms.
• Part C was the most challenging segment of this FRQ, with these points generally earned only by students achieving AP 5s.

In 2026, ~185,000 AP students took the AP Chemistry Exam — roughly 1% of the U.S. high school population.

 Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• Students performed especially well on questions covering Unit 1: Atomic Structure and Properties (70% of students earned most of the points available on such questions), Unit 4: Chemical Reactions (74% of students earned most of these points), and Unit 9: Thermodynamics and Electrochemistry (72% earned most of these points).
• The most challenging MCQ content area was Unit 7: Equilibrium, a unit that requires students to write equilibrium expressions, calculate equilibrium quantities, predict shifts using Le Chatelier's Principle, and relate Ksp to ion concentrations in solubility problems. 34% of students answered most of these questions correctly. Almost as challenging were the questions related to Unit 6: Thermochemistry; 49% of students got most of these right.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-chemistry.pdf

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, the KCl Calorimetry and Solubility question (10 points), is a multi-part investigation anchored in dissolution thermochemistry, and it was the most difficult of the long questions on this year’s exam, serving to differentiate among exams scoring AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, as students receiving AP 1s and 2s were generally unable to earn many of these points. The breadth of knowledge and skills demanded here, from conceptual reasoning about atomic structure to multi-step calorimetric calculations to qualitative equilibrium analysis, is a great representation of rigorous, college-level lab chemistry.

• Part B (describing how to identify when dissolution ends) was a key differentiator between AP 3s and AP 2s, as AP 3s were consistently able to earn this point, whereas AP 2s were not.
• Part D (applying error analysis to justify a directional claim about the calculated enthalpy) was the most challenging part of this question, typically achieved only by students receiving AP 5s.

FRQ #2, the Chromium Species question (10 points), asked students to work through various concepts, from Lewis structures to electrochemical stoichiometry using Faraday's laws, and first-order reaction kinetics. The final part required students to draw a natural log of concentration versus time graph to demonstrate their understanding of how changing reactant concentration shifts a kinetics curve. Almost as challenging as FRQ 1, this question also served to differentiate among students scoring AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, as students receiving scores of AP 1s and 2s were generally unable to earn many of these points.

• Part E (using data specifically from the concentration versus time graph to support that the reaction is first order) was the most challenging point on Q2, and it differentiated between students receiving an AP 5 and those earning an AP 4, who were not usually able to earn this point.
• Part B(i) (writing a balanced net ionic equation for the reaction between chromate and a strong acid) was almost as challenging, also often making the difference between whether a student received a 4 or a 5.

FRQ #3, the Nitrous Acid question (10 points), was somewhat less challenging than the two other long questions, serving also to differentiate between scores of AP 2 and 3. Across this FRQ, students were asked to demonstrate a range of college-level chemistry knowledge and skills, from identifying conjugate acid-base pairs to calculating various weak acid equilibrium quantities to analyzing the results of a titration experiment.

• Part D (using the titration curve to determine the pH at the equivalence point) was an important distinguishing point for students earning AP 3s, requiring a fundamental understanding of the stoichiometric endpoint; students receiving AP 2s were not typically able to earn this point.
• Part G (calculating the K value for the neutralization reaction) was the most difficult point on this question, usually only earned by students achieving AP 4s and 5s.

FRQ #4, the P4 and P2 Equilibrium question, spans molecular structure reasoning all the way to thermodynamic argumentation — in just four points.

• The second point of Part B (calculating Kp from partial pressures) was earned by most students, but was not typically attained by students receiving 1s and 2s.
• Part C (justifying whether the reaction was endothermic based on thermodynamic principles) was the most challenging part of this question, typically performed accurately by students receiving 4s and 5s.

FRQ #5, the CBrClF2 Molecular Structure question (4 points) was challenging, distinguishing between scores of AP 4 and 5, as students receiving other scores were not usually able to earn many of these points. This question weaves together VSEPR theory, electronegativity, and intermolecular force reasoning — three important and interconnected concepts in first-semester college chemistry.

• Part B (explaining bond angle differences via electron cloud size and repulsion) was the most challenging point, generally only earned by the students receiving AP 5s.

FRQ #6, the Vanadium(II) Spectrophotometry question (4 points), was a moderately challenging question, and helped to distinguish among students within the score range of AP 3, 4, and 5, as students with lower scores generally could not engage with this level of difficulty. This question was anchored in an authentic laboratory context: students had to draw a particle diagram to represent the dilution of a V2+ solution; apply Beer's Law to calculate molar absorptivity from a standard curve; use molar absorptivity to find the concentration of an unknown solution; and assess the effect of a volumetric error on the calculated molarity — correctly determining the direction of the error and supporting the claim with a valid justification.

• Part A (drawing a particle model consistent with dilution by a factor of 2) is an effective differentiator between students achieving AP scores of 2, which could not earn this point, and scores of 3, which could.

FRQ #7, the Na2O Enthalpy question (4 points), was another challenging one. Students had to apply Hess's Law to calculate ΔH°; identify the limiting reactant from reactant masses; calculate the energy released from that amount of limiting reactant; and explain why Na2O has weaker lattice energy than Rb2O by connecting the separation between ions to Coulombic force

• Part C (requiring students to invoke the relationship between ionic separation and lattice energy using Coulomb's law reasoning) was earned by 17% of students, typically only achieved by students receiving an AP 5.

~21,000 students took the 2026 AP Chinese Language & Culture exam, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population. 70% of the AP Chinese students were heritage speakers of Chinese. 

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• Multiple-choice performance was consistently strong with students earning, on average, ~85% of the MCQ points across all 15 content and skill subsections.
• Students did exceptionally well on Unit 4 questions (How Science and Technology Affect Our Lives), with AP 4s and AP 5s typically answering 100% of these questions right.
• The most demanding MCQ subsection was Making Connections; AP 5s were the only group able to succeed on 100% of these questions.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-chinese-language.pdf

The committee of professors and teachers designed the FRQs to require students to demonstrate proficiency across four distinct modes: interpersonal writing, presentational writing, interpersonal speaking, and presentational speaking. These modalities mirror the range of real-world language demands that college students face in Chinese language courses. Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the FRQs deliberately include some very advanced and difficult points designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty levels to differentiate among AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and foundational points to distinguish AP 1s from AP 2s.

Written Section:

FRQ 1: The Story Narration task presented students with four sequential images depicting a woman who misses a birthday party due to a traffic delay, requiring them to compose a complete narrative in written Chinese addressed to a friend. The task demands not only vocabulary range and grammatical accuracy but the compositional skill to infer cause, describe sequence, and convey emotional context across a non-Roman script. This question is the easiest of the FRQs, differentiating the AP 1s from the AP 2s, as students earning a 2 or higher needed to be able to earn most of these points.

FRQ 2: The Email Response task asked students to read an email from a friend requesting advice about the use of technology for learning Chinese and then compose a culturally appropriate written reply in Chinese. The task rewarded not just linguistic precision but also the ability to match the right tone, directly address the request for advice, and craft a well-developed response in an interpersonal written format.

Speaking Section:

FRQ 3: The Interpersonal Speaking task (Conversation) placed students in a simulated six-turn spoken exchange with a Chinese-speaking interlocutor planning a family visit, requiring spontaneous real-time responses (20 seconds per turn) on topics ranging from best travel times and local transportation to dining and gift recommendations. This is a cognitively demanding question that requires knowledge of cultural and practical vocabulary under the pressure of real-time verbal responses without preparation. Accordingly, FRQ 3 especially differentiates students who should receive an AP 3 from those who receive an AP 2: students receiving AP 3s are expected to earn the majority of these points.

FRQ 4: The Cultural Presentation task asked students to choose one traditional Chinese value and deliver a two-minute oral presentation (after four minutes of prep) explaining what the value is and why it matters. Doing this well required cultural knowledge, a clear line of argument, and the ability to sustain a coherent, developed response in spoken Chinese. This was the most challenging of the FRQs, which distinguished the AP 5s, who were expected to earn all or all but one of these points, from the AP 4s.

The 2026 AP Computer Science A Exam scores:

5: 25%; 4: 26%; 3: 15%; 2: 11%; 1: 23%

The 2026 AP Computer Science A exam was taken by ~81,500 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Computer Science A Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• AP Computer Science A students demonstrated their strongest MCQ performance on Unit 3: Class Creation; 50% of students earned all possible points on these questions.
• The most challenging MCQ content area was Unit 4: Data Collections; 28% of students earned virtually all available points on these questions.

AP Computer Science A Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-computer-science-a.pdf

I’m grateful for the ways the Development Committee of professors and teachers designed these four questions. Each FRQ is grounded in a recognizable real-world context — username management in an online platform, modeling a refillable bottle, analyzing student attendance records across courses, and computing scores across a game board — making the computational thinking feel authentic rather than artificially contrived.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, a Methods and Control Structures question about the Account class, required students to implement one constructor and one method of a website username-management class across seven points. In Part A, students wrote the Account constructor: given a requested username, they had to use the provided isAvailable method to check availability and, if the username was taken, iteratively append increasing integers (“Luis-Cruz1”, “Luis-Cruz2”, …) until an available username was found — a task that requires a correct loop structure with a termination condition, correctly calling a method, and proper string concatenation. In Part B, students wrote getShortenedName: given a username that may contain hyphens (but never at the start, end, or consecutively), return a version with each hyphen and the character immediately preceding it removed, so that “Amy-Marie-Lin” becomes “AmMariLin”. This requires students to traverse the string character by character, correctly identify hyphen positions, and build the return string while skipping two characters at each hyphen occurrence.

The overall difficulty of this question was such that it differentiated well across the 1-5 AP scale. Students receiving AP 1s were typically unable to earn any of these points, whereas students achieving AP 5s typically earned all points possible on Part A of this FRQ, and all or all but one of the points possible on the slightly more difficult Part B.

FRQ #2, a Class Design question, asked students to write the complete Bottle class from scratch across seven points. The class models a refillable liquid container with a fixed capacity: students needed to declare appropriate instance variables, write a constructor that initializes the state of the bottle, and implement an updateAmount method that subtracts a given amount of liquid and — crucially — automatically refills the bottle back to capacity if the remaining amount falls below 25% of capacity. The method returns the amount remaining after the update. A worked example table was provided, showing a case where the amount of liquid fell below 25% of capacity (triggering a refill) and an edge case where the amount of liquid was exactly equal to 25% of capacity (showing that a refill is not triggered). This question tests the full class-design skill: choosing the right instance variables, correctly maintaining the state of the bottle as liquids are removed, and handling boundary thresholds precisely.

This was the least challenging of this year’s FRQs, designed to collect significant data points to enable differentiation of students receiving AP 1s from students receiving AP 2s, who could typically earn a moderate number of points, and then to differentiate students receiving AP 2s from students achieving AP 3s, who, like AP 4s and AP 5s, earned most or all of the available points.

FRQ #3, a Data Analysis with ArrayList question, asked students to write a single method across 5 points. The method, moreHistoryThanMathAbsences, in the Attendance class, maintains two ArrayList<CourseRecord> objects representing students enrolled in a history course and a math course, respectively. The method must return the count of students enrolled in both courses whose absence count in history exceeds their absence count in math. This requires students to iterate over one list, look up each student’s ID in the other list using getStudentID() to find a match. If a match is found, getAbsences() is used to compare the two absence totals — a cross-list lookup pattern that tests their ability to work with multiple ArrayLists simultaneously, apply string comparison correctly, and maintain a count of absences that meet the criteria.

This was a good question for determining which students should receive an AP 3 or higher, as these students consistently earned the majority of the 5 points, whereas students earning AP 4s generally earned 4 of these points, and students earning AP 5s typically earned all 5 points here.

FRQ #4, a 2D Array question, asked students to write a single method across 6 points. The method, getPointsForRow in the GameBoard class, maintains a 2D array of Space objects (each with a color and a point value). The method returns the sum of point values in a specified row — with a scoring bonus: if every space in the row is the same color, the sum is doubled. Students had to correctly traverse the given row in the 2D array, call the getColor() and getPoints() methods on the Space objects in the row, accumulate the point total, determine whether all spaces in the row share a color (requiring comparison of each space’s color to a reference), and apply the conditional doubling. A concrete worked example was provided: a mixed-color row returning 1300, and an all-red row returning 2000 (double the sum of 1000). The color-uniformity check, requiring students to iterate and compare colors across all elements in the row, is the most syntactically and logically demanding element of this question.

This question was laser focused on the skills expected of students achieving 3s, 4s, and 5s, and students receiving 1s and 2s were not usually able to engage with this especially challenging content. Students achieving AP 3s were expected to earn 1-3 of these points, students achieving AP 4s were expected to earn 4-5 of these points, and students achieving AP 5s were expected to achieve all 6 points possible here.

The 2026 AP Computer Science Principles Exam scores:

5: 10%; 4: 23%; 3: 30%; 2: 21%; 1: 16%

The 2026 AP Computer Science Principles exam was taken by 163,000 students, ~1% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Computer Science Principles Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• Students showed superb mastery of questions that assessed their understanding of abstraction in program development: students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s generally answered 100% of these questions right, and students earning AP 3s typically earned at least 75% of these points.
• Students performed at similarly high levels on questions related to computing innovations. Students attaining AP 4s and 5s typically earned more than 90% of these points, and students attaining AP 3s typically earned more than 75% of these points.
• The most challenging MCQ content for students focused on code analysis. These questions differentiated AP 5s, who were typically able to earn 100% of these points, from AP 4s, who typically earned 90% of these points, from AP 3s, who typically earned 70% of these points, from students receiving AP 2s, who typically earned 50% of these points.

AP Computer Science Principles Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

The AP CSP free-response section consists of a Create Performance Task and two Written Response tasks. The free-response questions are available here: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-computer-science-principles.pdf

Create Performance Task, the Program Design and Development task:

This task — the cornerstone of AP CSP's project-based learning model — required students to create an original program that incorporated a student-developed procedure, list manipulation, selection, and iteration, and then document their work through a video, a Personalized Project Reference, and written responses. This project has 6 points possible, and contributes 30% of the overall AP score. Students achieving AP 5s generally earned all points possible, students achieving AP 4s earned all but 1 point, and students achieving AP 3s earned all but 2 points.

Written Response Prompt 1, about Program Documentation, asked students to describe one piece of documentation that would be appropriate to include with or in their program and explain how another programmer could use that documentation to better understand a specific code segment. This prompt assessed students’ understanding of appropriate uses of program documentation, including acknowledgment of code segments written by someone else or descriptions of what a code segment does or how it works. Earning this point was one of the most telling differentiators of AP scores of 3+ from AP scores of 1 and 2, as students achieving AP 3+ scores consistently earned this point, whereas other students did not.

Written Response Prompt 2, a three-part response based on each student’s own Personalized Project Reference, asked students to reason about how their program’s iteration works, how erroneous behavior can occur with some inputs, and how their use of data abstraction manages complexity:

Part A, about Iteration and Loop Termination, asked students to identify the variable(s) that control when the first iteration statement in their procedure stops, give specific values that cause the loop to terminate, and explain why those values produce termination. Students who understand the relationship between their loop structure and the variables that control it were best positioned to answer this precisely. 46% of students earned this point, which required them to identify the specific variables and values controlling an iteration statement and explain why the loop terminates.

Part B, about Procedure Test Cases, asked students to write a specific procedure call with accepted arguments that would cause their procedure to behave incorrectly, describe the incorrect behavior, and explain why it occurs. If no such call could exist, students were asked to explain why this was the case for their procedure. This prompt tested students’ ability to analyze their own code and identify edge cases, boundary conditions, or logical gaps that might surface in real-world testing. This point was the most challenging to earn, as it required students to identify specific argument values that would cause their own procedure to behave incorrectly and explain why — a genuinely rigorous testing and debugging exercise that mirrors the work of real software engineers. Accordingly, earning this point differentiated students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s, who were typically able to earn this point, from students earning AP 3s, did not typically earn this point.

Part C, about Data Abstraction, asked students to explain how their list uses abstraction to manage complexity in the program, then describe how the relevant code segment would need to change if the list were removed — or explain why the same behavior would be impossible without the list. This prompt asks students to reason about the fundamental benefit of data structures as an abstraction mechanism, connecting a specific design choice in their own code to a broader principle of computer science. 43% of students earned this point —which required students to explain how their use of a list manages the complexity of their program.

Students were best prepared for their exam-day written responses when their programs contained elements they understood well and could explain accurately, including how data are stored and used, how their procedure worked, and how their code used selection and iteration to produce its intended result. Well-designed programs gave students clear, authentic opportunities to engage with the concepts assessed by the exam-day prompts.

In 2026, ~23,000 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population, submitted an AP Art and Design: Drawing portfolio for evaluation by professors and teachers.

Unlike most AP exams, AP Art and Design: Drawing has no multiple-choice section. Students are assessed entirely through a portfolio submitted at the end of the year, evaluated by a national convening of college art professors and high school art educators.

The portfolio has two components:

• The Sustained Investigation, in which students develop a body of 15 images exploring an individual artistic inquiry.
• Selected Works, in which students submit 5 works demonstrating their technical mastery and artistic range. This portfolio format demands sustained discipline over months— mirroring the expectations of a college foundation drawing course and requiring the kind of long-term artistic commitment that builds genuine creative and technical expertise.

Across the various dimensions of the rubric, a few patterns stood out to me:

• Students demonstrated their strongest performance on the Skills rubric row, which assesses drawing issues. The strong performance here reflects the good focus many AP Drawing students and teachers dedicated to practice, development, and skill refinement.
• Practice, Experimentation & Revision was the most challenging component, and rewarded visible evidence of artistic risk-taking and revision, a rubric row that very much differentiated portfolios earning AP 5s and AP 4s from those earning AP 3s, which were much less effective at demonstrating this.

Selected Works were evaluated against college-level standards for drawing, such as command of mark-making, line, surface, space, light and shade, and composition.

• Students earning high scores on this section were those demonstrating clear written evidence, synthesis, and drawing skills, with portfolios earning an AP 5 generally not missing more than one point across this entire section of the portfolio.

The 2026 AP English Language and Composition exam was taken by 631,000 students, ~4% of the U.S. high school population.

The exam questions and essay topics were developed by a committee of college faculty, including English professors from Duke University, Florida State University, the University of Maryland and the University of California systems — and master AP teachers from across the nation.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ)

1.The highest-performing area were questions assessing students’ ability to accurately identify Claims and Evidence within texts across a wide range of styles and complexities. These students are reading arguments carefully and identifying how evidence functions. Students achieving AP 5s typically answered 100% of these questions correctly, while students achieving AP 4s generally only missed a single point, and students achieving AP 3s typically earned 75% or more of the possible points.

2.Students also scored very well on questions related to analyzing and understanding the Rhetorical Situation in reading (about 81%). Students earning AP 4s and 5s generally answered 100% of these questions right, and students earning AP 3s missed only a single point here.

3.The most challenging MCQ area was Style — questions in which students were asked to identify features and aspects of writers’ style in the passages they analyzed. Only 5 MCQs focus on this area, and they neatly differentiated across student abilities: generally, students achieving AP 5s earned all 5 points possible, students earning AP 4s earned 4 of the 5 points, and students earning AP 3s earned 3 of these 5 points. Attending to a writer's word choice, syntax, and tone at the sentence level remains the area with the most room for further growth and improvement.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ) https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-english-language.pdf

Over a single 2-hour-and-15-minute session, students wrote three complete essays — a source-based synthesis argument, a rhetorical analysis, and an original argument — each demanding sustained reasoning and control of written English.

These three free-response questions span the core of the discipline — synthesizing sources into an argument, analyzing another writer's rhetorical choices, and constructing one's own argument — and I love that the committee anchored them in sources and ideas that students are not likely to already have examined in class: the value of napping and how we rest, what it means to do creative work, and how much weight we should give to other people's opinions. This is part of what the committee must do: select source material that students will not already have studied in class, so that on exam day students are drawing upon their own skills, not an interpretation already given to them by a teacher or AI.

Moreover, unlike AP English Literature and Composition, which focuses on novels, stories, drama, and poetry, AP English Language and Composition focuses on reading and analyzing non-fiction (speeches, essays, articles) and on writing argumentative, evidence-based, rhetorically effective essays, a powerful skill that is an anchor for a wide variety of career pathways.

Because AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response rubrics deliberately include foundational points that separate AP 1s from 2s, mid-range points that distinguish 2s, 3s, and 4s, and a small number of advanced points designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s.

FRQ #1, the Synthesis question on the value of napping, required students to read six authentic sources — reporting from national and international news outlets, a research university's findings, a data graph from a nonprofit health foundation, and a documentary photograph — then weigh competing evidence and build a defensible position. In short: college-level information literacy: evaluating real sources and putting them into conversation.

Nearly every student — about 98% — earned the thesis point, stating a defensible position. This is the foundational move that is expected even among students receiving AP 1.

The evidence-and-commentary rubric row is what most meaningfully differentiates across scores of 2, 3, 4, and 5. AP students receiving a 2 were usually able to earn just one of these points, whereas AP students receiving a 5 typically earned perfect scores on this row, not missing a single point. Selecting apt evidence from the sources and using commentary to explain how the evidence supports a line of reasoning — rather than merely quoting the sources — is what moved an essay up this scale.

FRQ #2 asked students to analyze how writer Laura Amy Schlitz uses rhetorical choices—including an extended kite-flying metaphor—to convey what it means to be a writer.

Why include a speech by a children's-book author, whose syntax and vocabulary in this speech are quite simple, on a college-level exam? Because the professors and educators who build the AP exams select passages the way college English faculty do: by stylistic, rhetorical, and interpretive complexity—not by Lexile scores, which measure only syntax, sentence length, and vocabulary. By that narrow metric, Ernest Hemingway, John Steinbeck, Elie Wiesel, Richard Wright, Zora Neale Hurston, and Toni Morrison would all be disqualified: their Lexile scores are similar to Schlitz’s.

The statistics for this question are clear. FRQ #2 had a mean/max difficulty of .57—the hardest question on this year's exam, and consistent with the difficulty of FRQ #2 in prior years. Rhetorical and thematic complexity simply aren't the same as syntactical complexity, which is rarely the deciding factor when faculty choose what's worth analyzing.

As in FRQ #1, AP students receiving a 2 were usually able to earn just one of the evidence and commentary points, whereas AP students receiving a 5 typically earned perfect scores on this row, not missing a single point.

An impressive ~30,000 students earned the sophistication point for the skill with which they unpacked Schlitz’s rhetorical choices and strategies.

FRQ #3, the Argument question based on a claim by physician, engineer, and former astronaut Mae Jemison, asked students to argue the extent to which they found Jemison's claim valid.

Students generally found this essay slightly less challenging than FRQ #1, and significantly less challenging than FRQ #2, as demonstrated in their points earned.

Almost all students — about 98% — established a defensible thesis, the foundational point expected even of students receiving an AP 1.

Students receiving 2s were typically able to generate more effective evidence and commentary than in their other two essays, earning 2 of the 4 points possible here, so the real differentiation this essay provided was for students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s, who consistently earned all or all but one of the points possible.

So: real kudos to the students who succeeded on this exam. Three full essays, six sources to weigh, an artful piece of rhetoric to analyze, and an original argument to defend — all in a single sitting. The committee built a demanding, content-rich measure of college-level reading and writing, and it’s exciting to see such a significant number of students meeting these high standards.

The 2026 AP English Literature and Composition Exam was taken by ~440,000 students, about 3% of the U.S. high school population.

As an avid reader and former English major, I’m always eager to see which novels and plays students select from their AP English Literature and Composition courses as the focus of their AP Exam essays.

Throughout the course, teachers and students dedicate significant time to in-depth readings of novels and plays so that they have a repertoire of full-length works to draw upon when confronted with an essay topic that is not pre-announced.

Here are the top 6 works students most frequently selected as the focus of their essays this year, after the topics were revealed during the exam (topics vary by time zone): In alphabetical order:

• Death of a Salesman
• Fences
• Frankenstein
• The Great Gatsby
• Romeo and Juliet
• Their Eyes Were Watching God

Other novels AP students frequently focused their essays on this year include: Animal Farm; Anna Karenina; Beloved; Bless Me, Ultima; Brave New World; Ceremony; Crime and Punishment; Divine Comedy; Great Expectations; The House of Mirth; Invisible Man; Jane Eyre; King Lear; Les Misérables; Macbeth; The Metamorphosis; Native Son; Nineteen Eight-Four; Othello; Pride and Prejudice; Song of Solomon; The Awakening; The Scarlet Letter; Things Fall Apart; and Wuthering Heights.

AP English Literature Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

Students scored highest on questions about long works (novels and dramas); 16% of students – generally, the students achieving AP 5s, answered all of these questions without missing a single point, and students achieving AP 3s and AP 4s answered most of these questions correctly.

The most challenging genre was poetry, but many students nonetheless demonstrated strong abilities to analyze such complex and compact use of language: students achieving AP 3s and 4s and 5s answered most of these questions correctly.

The single strongest skill students demonstrated was analyzing the function of word choice, imagery, and symbols: students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s typically earned perfect scores across this body of questions, while students earning AP 3s generally missed no more than a single point on these. This skill of close reading is at the heart of literary interpretation, and indicates that successful AP English Literature students are reading for how a text creates meaning, not just what it says. Kudos to these teachers and students for the time and care spent working across such a variety of novels, plays, poems, and short stories to develop this skill.

AP English Literature Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-english-literature.pdf

The three free-response questions span the range of literary analyses: a poetry analysis, a prose fiction analysis, and an open literary argument. In the two hours allotted to this section, students seeking a score of 3 or higher needed to read several pieces of literature and then produce three complete, evidence-based analytical essays — each one demanding a defensible interpretation, well-chosen textual evidence, and clear reasoning about how an author builds meaning.

So: very big congratulations to the students who succeeded on this exam. Students closely analyzed a 1984 poem and a 2010 novel passage they had likely never seen before, and then argued an interpretation of a major work of fiction entirely from memory. This is rigorous, traditional literary study: thesis, evidence, and interpretation, performed three times over in 120 minutes, thus generating significant evidence of the student’s skills.

I also love that the committee anchored these prompts in texts of real literary merit and genuinely human subject matter — a runner’s fleeting memory of a sister, a child who tastes her mother’s hidden sadness in a birthday cake, and the timeless tension between old ways and new — the kind of material that has always been at the center of serious study of literature.

Another important consideration for the committee that designs the exam is selecting rich texts that have not been widely read in classes worldwide, as one of the most important aspects of the AP Exam is determining whether students, without coaching from a teacher or AI, can read a literary text they’ve never seen before and interpret it with sound evidence and reasoning.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the rubrics for these essays deliberately include some advanced points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to separate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to distinguish AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, the “Marking Time” Poetry Analysis, asked students to read Christopher Gilbert’s 1984 poem — in which a speaker observes his surroundings during a morning jog — and analyze how Gilbert uses literary elements and techniques to convey the speaker’s complex reflections. Each essay is scored across three rows: a thesis point, up to four points for evidence and commentary, and a single sophistication point.

Nearly all students (94%) earned the thesis point by establishing a defensible interpretation — a foundational skill, and one of the points that helps separate AP 1s from AP 2s (only the lowest performers did not establish a workable claim).

The extent to which students utilized literary evidence effectively and crafted substantive commentary distinguishes students achieving AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, from students receiving AP 2s, who typically earned 2 points for the quality of their evidence and commentary, whereas students receiving AP 5s earned all points possible for the textual evidence they identified and cited, and the commentary they crafted to make their argument clear and powerful for readers.

FRQ #2, the “Lemon Cake” Prose Fiction Analysis, presented a passage from Aimee Bender’s 2010 novel The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake, in which a narrator discovers she can taste the feelings of the person who prepared her food. Students analyzed how Bender conveys the narrator’s complex experience of eating a cake made by her mother — a passage rich in tone, imagery, and shifting emotion.

93% of students earned the thesis point, again showing that students reliably develop their essays around a defensible interpretation.

So it’s the use of evidence and commentary that most determines whether students will attain a score of 3 or higher. As with FRQ #1, students receiving AP 2s typically earned 2 points for the quality of their evidence and commentary, whereas students receiving AP 5s earned all points possible for the textual evidence they identified and cited, and the commentary they articulated throughout their essay.

FRQ #3, the Literary Argument on the Tension Between the Old and the New, asked students to choose a novel or play and analyze how the tension between old and new contributes to the work’s overall meaning. Crucially, students wrote this essay about a full-length work entirely from memory.

Many students performed very well on this essay, the highest scoring of the three on this year’s exam.

91% of students earned the thesis point, demonstrating that they could commit to an interpretive argument about a self-selected text — a hallmark of independent literary thinking.

Where the students gained points in comparison to FRQ 1 and FRQ 2 was in their use of evidence and the quality of their commentary, with the majority of students earning 3+ points here.

In addition, the point for sophistication was earned by about 8% of students on this essay — the most on any of the three essays, yet still rare enough to sharply distinguish AP 5s.

Across all three essays, students achieving an AP 5 typically earn at least one point for sophistication, remarkable since these are timed essays without the opportunity for additional reflection or revision (which is why this additional citation point is not required across all three essays to earn an AP 5).

The 2026 AP Environmental Science Exam scores:

5: 13%; 4: 29%; 3: 27%; 2: 15%; 1: 16%

The 2026 AP Environmental Science exam was taken by ~245,000 students, roughly 1.6% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Environmental Science Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs):

Students demonstrated strong understanding of Unit 7: Atmospheric Pollution and Unit 5: Land and Water Use. Typically, students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s answered 100% of these questions correctly, students achieving AP 3s only missed a single point within this unit, and students receiving AP 2s answered all but two such questions right.

Their performance was similarly strong on questions related to Unit 5, Land and Water Use. To achieve an AP 5, students generally answered 100% of these questions right, to achieve an AP 4, at least 91% of these questions right, and to achieve an AP 3, at least 80% of these questions right.

Questions about Unit 2: The Living World - Biodiversity helped to distinguish students earning AP scores of 3 or higher, who were typically able to answer most of these questions correctly, from students receiving AP scores of 1 and 2, who were not. Based on this, students may benefit from more instructional emphasis on concepts related to biodiversity.

The most challenging MCQs required Skill 6: Mathematical Routines. Math remains one of the most differentiating skills for students in this course, as students were generally able to answer a meaningful number of these questions correctly in order to receive an AP 3 or higher, and typically answered all or all-but-one correctly to receive an AP 5.

AP Environmental Science Free-Response Questions (FRQs):

The FRQ section is designed to assess students' capacity to integrate topics across the AP Environmental Science course framework and apply their understanding of these topics to real-world scenarios. For the 2026 exam, the FRQ section covered topics such as species distribution, climate adaptation, energy systems, aquatic pollution, and wildlife conservation. Each free response question includes 10 points and is designed to assess a range of skill levels within the same question, with a focus on higher-order skills expected of college-level learning in environmental science.

Here’s a link to this year’s questions: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-environmental-science.pdf

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty levels to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

This section as a whole required students to demonstrate their understanding of experimental design (Q1), analyze real environmental data (Q2), and use mathematical operations to analyze an environmental problem (Q3). To be blunt: the faculty committee who wrote these questions was laser-focused on the higher-order skills that represent college-level performance.

FRQ #1: Design an Investigation

This question presented students with a diagram of five bird species' current and predicted future elevation distributions within a tropical mountain range. Among other tasks, students had to interpret species richness patterns, reason about climate conditions at different elevations, and explain predator-prey dynamics in response to shifting prey communities. The question required students to demonstrate the capacity to apply fundamental concepts to a breadth of scenarios grounded in terrestrial ecology, marine biology, and climate systems.

Part A was a basic entry point that requires a fundamental skill expected even among many students receiving AP 1s: the ability to accurately read a scientific diagram. 93% of students earned this point.

Part C differentiated between students receiving an AP 2 and those receiving an AP 1; it required students to verbalize an understanding of a core principle in predator / prey dynamics.

Parts D and F, which require students to understand and explain a scientific prediction, and to identify an independent variable within a scientific experiment, distinguish students achieving AP 3s, who were able to earn these points, from students receiving AP 2s, who are not.

Part G, which required students to articulate an experimental design question relevant to the stimulus, was the best differentiator between students achieving AP 4s and students achieving AP 3s; students receiving the lower score were usually unable to demonstrate this skill.

Part H, in which students were asked to explain how sediment volume changed experimental conclusions, was the most difficult point to earn, typically achieved only by students receiving AP 5s, and Part I (in which students needed to describe a positive feedback loop in the Arctic) was also quite challenging, the best differentiator between AP 4s, who often could not earn this point, and AP 5s, who typically could; 17% of students earned the point for Part I.

FRQ #2: Analyze an Environmental Problem and Propose a Solution

This question used a graph of energy consumption by source from 1950 to 2020 to assess students' ability to read longitudinal data, explain mechanisms behind energy transitions, and reason about electricity generation from both fossil fuel and nuclear sources. The question then shifted to aquatic ecology, asking students to explain how excess nutrients from runoff can drive eutrophication and hypoxia, and to propose and justify a realistic solution to this problem.

Part B – as in FRQ 1, the point requiring basic, accurate understanding of scientific data within a graph – was expected even among many students receiving an AP 1. 96% of students were able to earn this point, the easiest within this year’s entire FRQ section.

Part A was the key differentiating point between AP scores of 2 and 1, as students receiving an AP 1 were generally unable to recall and state with accuracy a renewable energy source that is used to generate electricity.

Part E, H, and I distinguished students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s from students achieving AP 3s, who were able to succeed on the other parts of this FRQ, but often found these three parts too challenging.

FRQ #3: Analyze an Environmental Problem and Propose a Solution Doing Calculations

This question required students to apply mathematical skills to the analysis of a real-world conservation scenario involving ocelots. Students estimated percent change in ocelot habitat, applied the Rule of 70 to estimate population doubling time, and reasoned through dietary needs based on available prey and assumptions about trophic energy transfer. They also proposed and justified a realistic solution to wildlife-vehicle collisions.

Part A, in which students identified an environmental consequence of a reduced ocelot population, was earned by 85% of students, serving as the key differentiator between AP 2s and AP 1s on this question.

Parts B, C – each of which require mathematical calculations – were the most significant differentiators between students achieving AP 4s and students receiving AP 3s, as students receiving AP 3s were not consistently able to earn all four of these points.

Part E, which required students to calculate the number of individual prey needed to fill a particular dietary component for ocelots, was the clearest distinction between students earning a 3, who were generally able to succeed on these tasks, and students receiving a 2, who were not.

Part D, which did not require a mathematical operation, was the most challenging part of this FRQ, usually only earned by students receiving AP 4s and 5s.

The 2026 AP European History Exam scores: 5: 16%; 4: 33%; 3: 25%; 2: 18%; 1: 8%

The 2026 AP European History exam was taken by ~91,000 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

AP European History Free-Response Questions (FRQ)

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. The commentary below focuses on the version taken by the majority of AP European History students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-european-history.pdf

AP European History Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs)

AP European History performed well across all units of the course, but strongest on questions related to Units 3 and 4 — Absolutism and Constitutionalism, and the Scientific, Philosophical, and Political developments of 1648–1815. AP teachers’ skill in teaching the Enlightenment, the rise of constitutional monarchies, and early modern state-building was evident.

AP European History Short Answer Questions (SAQs)

SAQ 1, the secondary source analysis based on historian Jonathan Healey’s work on 17th-century England: Many students handled Parts A and B well, demonstrating a solid ability to read and understand complex historical texts. Part C, which asked students to extend or modify the argument with additional evidence, was the most challenging part, distinguishing students earning AP 4s and 5s from those earning other scores.

SAQ 2, the primary source analysis of the Munitions Girls painting: Students earning AP 3s were able to succeed on parts A and B, reflecting their preparedness to analyze visual primary sources and situate them historically, whereas students receiving AP 1s and 2s were not. As with SAQ 1, Part C proved the most difficult, again serving as a key differentiator between AP 4s/5s and lower scores.

AP European History Document-Based Question (DBQ): Peter the Great and Catherine the Great

The DBQ asked students to analyze documents related to Peter the Great and Catherine the Great, and then to craft an evidence-based essay that argued which of the two leaders did more to transform Russia. Here is how students fared on each rubric row: •

• 87% of students earned the Thesis/Claim point — a strong result, showing that the large majority of AP European History students can construct a historically defensible argument after analyzing primary sources. 
• 56% of students earned the Contextualization point, placing the rulers’ programs within the broader context of European intellectual, political, or cultural history. •
• 95% of students earned at least one Evidence from Documents point, demonstrating the ability to use primary source content as historical evidence. 
• 35% of students earned the Evidence Beyond the Documents point — a strong differentiator of AP 4s and 5s, requiring students to summon relevant, outside historical knowledge not contained in the document set.
• 35% of students earned the Analysis and Reasoning: Sourcing point, demonstrating they could evaluate a document’s historical context, purpose, audience, or point of view.
• 27% of students earned the Analysis and Reasoning: Complex Understanding point. This was the most advanced point to earn on the DBQ, requiring students to demonstrate a nuanced understanding of the historical topic through sophisticated connections, qualifications, or corroborations.

AP European History Long Essay Questions (LEQ)

Students chose one of three Long Essay prompts. Here is a summary of performance across the three options:

LEQ 4, the World War I question, was selected by about three times more students than those who selected LEQ 3 and LEQ 2, and it was also the highest-scoring Long Essay topic: an impressive 24% of students who wrote this essay achieved perfect scores of 6/6 points on it (I believe this is the strongest performance I’ve ever seen on an AP European History long essay!). The prompt clearly drew well-prepared students, and performance on all four scoring rows was notably strong: 73% earned the Thesis point, 73% earned the Contextualization point, 60% earned both Evidence points, and 29% earned both Analysis and Reasoning points — all well above LEQ 2 and LEQ 3 performance.

LEQ 3, the 19th-Century Industrialization and Reform question, showed a noteworthy pattern: 83% of students earned the Contextualization point — the highest contextualization success of any LEQ this year — but 57% of students earned the Thesis point, 35% earned both Evidence points, and 11% earned both Analysis and Reasoning points, all lower than student performance on LEQ 4. 10% of students who wrote this essay achieved perfect scores of 6/6 points on it.

LEQ 2, the Social Hierarchies (1450-1600) question, is the one I would have selected to write about if I’d taken this year’s exam, since I’ve spent the past year immersed in 15th-century European history for my personal reading project – all those Burgundians, all those Florentines – but it would likely have been my undoing, as it proved to be quite a difficult topic for those who selected it. 58% of students earned the Thesis point, 68% earned the Contextualization point, 36% earned both Evidence points, and 13% earned both Analysis and Reasoning points. 10% of students who chose this topic achieved perfect scores of 6/6 points on it, demonstrating impressive historical reasoning ability across a topic that spanned multiple centuries.

2026 AP French Language and Culture Score Distribution

5: 15%; 4: 23%; 3: 33%; 2: 23%; 1: 6%

(Total group scores, including students with out-of-class exposure to French)

About 20,000 students took the 2026 AP French Language and Culture Exam. 25% of the AP French students had additional exposure to French beyond the classroom.

AP French Language and Culture Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

The MCQ section of AP French assesses interpretive reading and interpretive listening, requiring students to demonstrate comprehension across a wide range of authentic French-language texts and audio sources.

Students scored exceptionally well on questions related to Unit 6: Environmental, Political, and Societal Challenges; students achieving AP 4s earned 88% or more of the points possible.

Students found MCQs related to Unit 4: How Science and Technology Affect our Lives the most challenging, and these questions very much differentiated between students achieving AP 5s, who were generally able to answer all of these questions accurately, and other students, who struggled to varying degrees with these questions.

AP French Language and Culture Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I’ll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-french-language.pdf

AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, and AP world language and culture exams score free-response tasks holistically. Each task is rated on the 0–5 scale, with the response matched to the score-level description it best fits. Raters consider how task completion, language use, and communicative effectiveness work together to evaluate real-world communicative ability.

The AP French Development Committee of professors and AP teachers did a superb job designing these four questions, which each functioned especially well at differentiating student performance levels across the full range of student proficiency levels reported on the AP 1-5 scale, with FRQ 3 and FRQ 4 being especially pristine examples of questions for which each point on the score scale clearly signals a different level of French language proficiency.

Written Section:

FRQ 1, the Formal Email Reply about Welcoming Senegalese Exchange Students: Students had 15 minutes to write a formal email reply in French to a school principal, responding to a request for ideas on integrating a group of Senegalese exchange students into their school community. This task encouraged students to draw on the La quête de soi (Personal and Public Identities) course theme, proposing inclusive activities and communication strategies for the school’s French club in the appropriate style. This question tested not just vocabulary and grammar, but intercultural sensitivity and the pragmatic sophistication expected in university-level French writing.

This question served to differentiate between scores of AP 2, 3, 4, and 5, as students earning AP 3s were typically able to earn 3 of the 5 points, students earning AP 4s were typically able to earn 4 of the 5 points, and students earning AP 5s were typically able to earn all 5 points. Students receiving either AP 1s and AP 2s were usually able to earn 2 of the 5 points.

FRQ 2, the Argumentative Essay on Cash vs. Cashless Payment: Students synthesized three sources on the essay question "Faut-il éliminer l’argent liquide (en espèces) ?" ("Should cash be eliminated?") and had 40 minutes to write a well-organized argumentative essay in French. The sources were carefully chosen across the Francophone world: a Belgian web article on the advantages of digital payment, an infographic from the Institut d’émission des départements d’outre-mer on payment habits, and an audio clip a French radio station discussing a study on why the French remain attached to cash. Students needed to read, listen, synthesize, and take a position—integrating all three sources into a structured, paragraphed argument while appropriately citing them.

This received the highest scores of the four FRQs, and like FRQ 1, served to differentiate between scores of AP 2, 3, 4, and 5, as students earning AP 3s were typically able to earn 3 of the 5 points, students earning AP 4s were typically able to earn 4 of the 5 points, and students earning AP 5s were typically able to earn all 5 points. Students receiving either AP 1s and AP 2s were usually able to earn 2 of the 5 points.

Speaking Section:

FRQ 3, the Interpersonal Speaking Conversation about Post-Graduation Transitions: Students participated in a simulated spontaneous conversation with a classmate organizing a support group for the transition from high school to university, with 20 seconds per turn to respond. Across five exchanges, students had to greet and suggest memorable graduation activities, advise on maintaining friendships, articulate the biggest challenges of university life, and propose strategies for successful transitions and building new friendships. This task drew upon the La famille et la communauté course theme.

This was the most challenging task in this year’s free-response section, and also the best designed to differentiate across the full spectrum of 1-5 performance levels, with the points students were able to earn on this task typically predictive of the overall AP score of 1-5 they received.

FRQ 4, the Cultural Presentation on the Role of Travel: After four minutes of preparation, students delivered a two-minute oral presentation comparing the role of travel in a Francophone community of their choice to travel’s role in their own community. Drawing on the La vie contemporaine course theme, this task required students not only to demonstrate cultural knowledge about a Francophone community but to organize a coherent, developed oral argument under time pressure.

Students receiving AP 2s were generally able to earn 1-2 points, and students earning AP 3s, 4s, and 5s were typically earning 3, 4, and 5 points, respectively, on their presentation.

The 2026 AP German Language & Culture Exam scores:

5: 24% 4: 17%; 3: 27%; 2: 22%; 1: 10%

(Total group scores, including students with out-of-class exposure to German)

~4,200 students took the AP German Language and Culture exam. 30% of the AP German students had additional exposure to German beyond the classroom.

AP German Language & Culture Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

The MCQ section of AP German assesses interpretive reading (Part A) and interpretive listening (Part B), requiring students to demonstrate comprehension across a wide range of authentic German-language texts and audio sources.

Students showed their strongest MCQ performance on questions about Unit 5: Factors that Impact Quality of Life; 43% of students earned 80% or more of these points.

The most challenging MCQ content was related to Unit 6: Environmental, Political and Social Challenges; 36% of students earned 80% or more of these points.

AP German Language and Culture Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-german-language.pdf

The committee of professors and teachers designed these four free-response tasks to require students to demonstrate authentic communicative proficiency across all four modes — interpersonal writing, presentational writing, interpersonal speaking, and presentational speaking — mirroring the range of real-world language demands that college students face in German language courses.

AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, and AP world language and culture exams score free-response tasks holistically. Each task is rated on the 0–5 scale, with the response matched to the score-level description it best fits. Raters consider how task completion, language use, and communicative effectiveness work together to evaluate real-world communicative ability.

Written Section:

FRQ 1: Interpersonal Writing — Email Reply. This task invited students to read a written prompt in German and compose a written reply, responding fully to posed questions and contributing new information to sustain the exchange. With 15 minutes to compose the full response and an expectation of accurate, idiomatic written German, this task rewarded students with strong command of formal register, grammatical range, and the ability to respond in the moment.

Students overall scored highest on this FRQ: generally, students achieving AP 5s earned perfect marks here, as did most students achieving AP 4s. Students achieving AP 3s typically missed only a single point here.

FRQ 2: Presentational Writing — Argumentative Essay on E-Scooter Use in German Cities. Students synthesized three sources — two written and one audio — to compose a persuasive argumentative essay in German. The audio source was a first-person German monologue titled “Warum ich E-Scooter liebe” (“Why I Love E-Scooters”), in which a speaker reflects on the convenience, spontaneity, and accessibility of electric scooters as urban transportation in Germany, including their value for people with mobility challenges. Students had 6 minutes to read the essay topic and written sources, heard the audio twice while taking notes, then had 40 minutes to plan and write their essay — a task requiring not only fluent written German but the ability to synthesize an authentic native-speaker audio source into a structured, source-cited argument.

The audio source added an important layer of real-world authenticity: students had to process an argument delivered in colloquial German, then integrate it into their written case. Students who succeeded in doing so demonstrated the kind of integrated interpretive and presentational skill that college German programs build toward over multiple years of study.

Students earning scores of 5 presented strong argumentative essays that effectively integrated content from all three sources in support of their arguments. At the score point of 4, students generally summarized information from all three sources but showed limited integration. Students earning scores of 3 typically provided an appropriate essay that summarized information from at least two of the three sources.

Speaking Section:

FRQ 3: Interpersonal Speaking — Conversation about Sports and Physical Activity. Students participated in a five-turn simulated spoken conversation in German. The conversation, with a virtual peer and set after school hours, moved through a sequence of personal and social topics: why the student was still at school after hours; their opinion on swimming; the importance of children learning to swim in school; favorite summer activities; and preferences for gym vs. outdoor exercise. Each response turn allowed 20 seconds. The scenario required students to move between personal opinion, general cultural commentary, and spontaneous social exchange — all in spoken German, without preparation time.

Students earning scores of 5 clearly maintained the exchange and provided the required information with frequent elaboration, while most students earning scores of 4 generally did so with some elaboration. Students earning scores of 3 typically maintained the exchange and provided most required information with little to no elaboration, while most students earning scores of 2 provided some required information in a minimally appropriate way.

FRQ 4: Presentational Speaking — Cultural Comparison. Students had 4 minutes to read the presentation topic and prepare, then 2 minutes to deliver an oral presentation in German comparing a cultural practice or phenomenon in the German-speaking world with their own community. This task required students to produce a fluent, organized, culturally informed monologue in formal spoken German, drawing on specific examples from German-speaking culture and structuring their presentation around a clear comparison with their own or another community.

Responses earning scores of 5 typically earned all 5 points by effectively treating the topic, clearly comparing the target culture with the student’s own or another community, and supporting the comparison with relevant details and examples. Responses earning scores of 4 and 3 generally earned 4 and 3 points, respectively, with less developed treatment of the topic, comparison, and support. Responses earning scores of 2 and 1 usually earned only 2 or 1 point, reflecting limited or minimal treatment of the topic and cultural comparison.

The 2026 AP Comparative Government & Politics exam was taken by approximately 30,000 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ)

1. Students performed best on questions related to Unit 1 (Political Systems, Regimes, and Governments and Unit 3 (Political Culture and Participation). Because these topics are fundamental, students earning scores of 3, 4, or 5 were expected to answer virtually all of these questions right. Even to earn a score of 2, students needed to answer the majority of these questions correctly.

2. The most challenging MCQ content area was Party and Electoral Systems and Citizen Organizations (Unit 4). The questions often require students to compare the mechanisms of citizen participation and electoral competition with cross-national nuance.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ) https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-comp-gov-pol.pdf

I’ve been genuinely impressed by the thematic range of this year’s four free-response questions. The Development Committee designed questions that move students fluidly between conceptual analysis, quantitative data interpretation, cross-national comparison, and sustained evidence-based argumentation. Taken together, the four FRQs span the course’s big ideas: political socialization and ideology, state stability and fragility, civil liberties and social movements, and the institutional foundations of accountability.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some especially difficult points designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, the Political Socialization question, required students to engage with one of the discipline’s most foundational concepts across four graduated tasks. Part A asked students to describe political socialization itself; Part B to describe its relationship to political ideology; Part C to explain how the state can influence the process; and Part D — the most demanding task — to explain why authoritarian regimes are typically more involved in shaping political socialization than democratic ones. Each part builds on the prior, moving from definition to relationship to causal explanation. Many students knew this content well; ~30% of this year’s group earned all points possible on this FRQ.

FRQ #2, the Fragile States Index question, presented students with a multi-country line graph tracking state fragility scores from 2014 to 2024. The question required students to read data accurately, describe trends, apply conceptual knowledge about political party systems, and then synthesize data and course knowledge to draw a conclusion about Nigeria’s political stability and to explain the relationship between party systems and fragility scores.

• Parts A and B, which asked students to interpret the data (identifying the second-most fragile country in 2016 and describing the diverging trends of Russia and Iran from 2020 to 2024), were designed to differentiate AP scores of 2 from AP scores of 1, and were points earned by most students.
• Part D was a moderately difficulty point to earn, distinguishing AP 3s from AP 2s by requiring interpretation and explanation of the data, a fundamental skill for college success.
• Parts C and E were the most demanding tasks in Q2, earned by 29% and 24% of students respectively. Part C required students to summon and articulate an important course concept; Part E asked them to explain what the data reveal about the relationship between a country’s party system and its fragility score, an inferential task requiring synthesis across the graph and conceptual frameworks. These two parts were decisive in identifying AP 5 performance.
• The steep gradient within Q2, from ~90% of students answering Parts A and B correctly to 24% answering Part E effectively, is a hallmark of a psychometrically strong question: it spread student responses effectively across the full score range, from AP 1 through AP 5, with each part of the question yielding meaningful information about student mastery of the course content and skills.

FRQ #3, the Civil Liberties and Social Movements question, is the exam’s Comparative Analysis question and effectively differentiates between AP scores of 4 and 3, with students expected to answer all parts of this question thoroughly and accurately to receive an AP 4. Students were asked to compare how government policies on civil liberties affect social movements in two different course countries — requiring them first to describe a characteristic of a social movement (Part A), then to describe one way each of two countries protects or restricts civil liberties (Part B), and finally to explain how those protections or restrictions actually affect social movements in each country (Part C). The question demands both accurate country-specific knowledge and the ability to draw a causal line from institutional design to political outcomes.

FRQ #4, the Argument Essay on Legislative Independence and Corruption, asked students to develop a defensible argument as to whether having an independent legislative branch promotes or discourages corruption in a country, drawing on the course concepts of separation of powers, transparency, and accountability. This is a rigorous prompt, the most challenging question on this year’s exam. It rewarded students who could construct a coherent line of reasoning, support it with specific evidence from course countries, and meaningfully engage with an opposing view. Scored on four dimensions — Claim/Thesis, Evidence, Line of Reasoning, and Response to Alternate Perspectives — this question assessed a variety of academic writing and argumentation skills expected in college-level political science.

The most challenging point to attain for this essay was the point for responding to an opposing or alternate perspective, using refutation, concession, or rebuttal. 26% of students this year earned this point.

To earn an AP 5, students were expected to achieve all points possible for this essay, and to earn an AP 4, students were earning all but one point. Students earning AP 3s were able to articulate a thesis statement and support it with evidence, but their evidence was typically less substantive and their line of reasoning less effective than among students earning AP 4s and 5s.

The 2026 AP United States Government and Politics exam was taken by ~430,000 students, roughly 2.5% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs):

Students scored highest on questions related to Civil Rights and Liberties (Unit 3) and Political Participation (Unit 5); AP students scoring 3 or higher generally answered all or all but a few of these questions right.

The most challenging group of questions was related to Foundations of American Democracy (Unit 1); 28% of students answered all or all but one of these questions correctly.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I’ll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-us-gov-pol.pdf

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, the Concept Application Question that required electoral systems analysis in a historical context:

Q1, the Concept Application question, centered on the 1992 presidential election and Ross Perot’s independent candidacy, asking students to describe the impact of a third-party candidate, explain the structural barriers that limited that impact, and apply a voting behavior model to explain citizen decision-making, the sort of evidence-based reasoning required in college political science courses. The question parts differentiate between students receiving AP 2s, who were not usually able to answer multiple parts of the question, and those receiving AP 3s or higher, who were.

FRQ #2, the Quantitative Analysis Question on State Income Tax Rates and Federalism This four-part question used a 2023 data map to assess data literacy and political reasoning. The question collected info used to place students on both ends of the score scale, with several relatively easy points, and one especially challenging one that distinguished scores of 5 from scores of 4.

• 1.Parts A & B require accurate reading of the data map, foundational points earned by almost all students, including those receiving 1s.
• 2.Part C was the most challenging part of this question. For students receiving AP 5s, the only group to consistently earn this point, this part required constructing an inferential argument about participatory democracy from the data rather than simply describing it.
• 3. Part D explaining federalism through state income tax variation distinguished between AP students receiving scores of 3 or better, who were typically able to explain this relationship accurately, while students receiving scores of 1 and 2 could not.

FRQ #3, the SCOTUS Comparison Question: McCulloch v. Maryland and Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc

This question required students to apply constitutional knowledge to an unfamiliar Supreme Court case, the most rigorous task on the exam. Students needed to identify the Supremacy Clause as the constitutional principle common to both the studied case McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) and the provided case Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. (1989). They then had to explain how facts in both cases led to similar holdings and analyze how Bonito Boats illustrates the doctrine of stare decisis. The development committee’s crafting of this question is always one of the highlights of this exam for me, a great model for assessing college-level legal reasoning.

The rigor of all parts of this question is such that it serves to differentiate between AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, as exams scoring 1 and 2 are not typically earning any points on this FRQ. Students receiving an AP 3 must know constitutional principles well enough to be able to summon and state the Supremacy Clause as the common one across both cases. Students receiving an AP 4 must be able to move further into the question and explain the relationship between the facts of the cases and the resultant holdings, and students receiving an AP 5 must receiving perfect scores across all parts of this question.

FRQ #4, the Argument Essay on the Expansion of Voting Access

The Argument Essay asked students to draw upon three of the foundational documents for the course, including Article I of the U.S. Constitution, the First Amendment, and the “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, to develop and defend a position on whether social movements or congressional actions have done more to expand voting opportunities in the United States. The essay required a defensible thesis, multiple pieces of specific evidence, logical reasoning connecting evidence to the claim, and a rebuttal of an opposing perspective, all within a timed, proctored environment.

Here’s what performance looked like:

Exams receiving an AP 2 were able to provide some evidence within their essay, which distinguished the work from a score of 1, but otherwise earned very few points.

On the other end of the spectrum, students achieving an AP 5 generally earned perfect scores on their essays, hitting the marks across all rows of the rubric. Exams receiving an AP 3 or an AP 4 earned a mix of points across various rubric categories, but not perfect scores.

Congrats to the students who completed the course and took this exam. In a single sitting, students interpreted a geographic data map, engaged in legal analysis of a Supreme Court case they had never seen before, applied voting behavior models to a historical election, and constructed a sustained argumentative essay drawing on foundational documents — all within the 100 minutes devoted to the free-response section. And they did all this after having spent 80 minutes answering 55 multiple-choice questions across the range of course topics.

Looking ahead to next year, four more required foundational documents have been added to the course: The Emancipation Proclamation; Federalist No. 39; The Gettysburg Address; and core principles from Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations. See more info here: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap-us-government-and-politics-course-and-exam-description-clarifications-effective-fall-2026.pdf

The 2026 AP Human Geography exam was taken by ~300,000 students, about 2% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

Students did exceptionally well on questions requiring Data Analysis skills. Students achieving AP 5s typically answered 100% correctly; students achieving AP 4s got more than 90% right; and students earning AP 3s earned more than 80% of these points. It’s exciting to see the success students are achieving when interpreting quantitative and visual geographic data.

Students also performed very well on questions related to Unit 7: Industrial and Economic Development Patterns and Processes, demonstrating command of geography concepts that underpin real-world decisions about where industries locate and how development spreads.

The most challenging MCQs focused on Unit 4: Political Patterns and Processes, 22% of students answered all or all but one of these questions correctly.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-human-geography.pdf

aken together, Q1, Q2, and Q3 span population geography, agricultural practices, and cultural landscape analysis, inviting students to demonstrate command of a variety of geography concepts and skills during 75 minutes of analyzing, describing, and explaining.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty levels to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1: Demographic Changes This question required students to analyze demographic and political processes, including migration, population policy, technological change, and centrifugal forces.

Parts A, C, and D were entry-level points. These points were earned by 80%, 80%, and 92% of this year’s students, respectively.

Parts B and G were moderately difficult. These points were earned by 66% and 45% of students, respectively.

Parts E and F were the most challenging parts of this FRQ. These points were earned by 28% and 34% of students, respectively.

FRQ #2: Agricultural Trade

Point D of this question, earned by 21% of students, was the single hardest point across all three FRQs, requiring students to express their understanding of commodity dependence.

FRQ #3: Cultural Landscape Part C and Part G were earned by 71% and 66% of students, respectively. These points demonstrated that higher performing students were consistently able to explain the patterns within the source maps.

The 2026 AP Italian Language & Culture Exam scores:

5: 19%; 4: 22%; 3: 28%; 2: 20%; 1: 11%

(Total group scores, including students with out-of-class exposure to Italian)

~2,500 students took the AP Italian Language and Culture exam. 24% of the AP Italian students had additional exposure to Italian beyond the classroom.

AP Italian Language & Culture Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

The interpretive reading and listening sections of the AP Italian exam assessed students' ability to understand authentic Italian texts — newspaper articles, literary excerpts, infographics, podcasts, interviews, and radio broadcasts.

AP Italian students performed most strongly on the questions related to Unit 2: The Influence of Language and Culture; 21% of students got all the points available on these questions.

The most challenging MCQ questions were from Unit 3: Influences of Beauty and Art; 13% of students answered all or all but one of these questions correctly.

AP Italian Language & Culture Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-italian-language.pdf

The AP Italian exam's free-response section spans all five modes of communication — interpretive reading, interpretive listening, interpersonal writing, presentational writing, and presentational speaking — requiring students to demonstrate genuine, college-level proficiency across the full range of language use.

AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, and AP world language and culture exams score free-response tasks holistically. Each task is rated on the 0–5 scale, with the response matched to the score-level description it best fits. Raters consider how task completion, language use, and communicative effectiveness work together to evaluate real-world communicative ability.

Written Section:

FRQ 1— Email Reply: A Summer in Sardinia — required students to read and respond formally, in Italian, to an email from Marina Pintus of the Cagliari Ufficio Informagiovani (a regional youth information office in Sardinia's capital), who was writing to help plan the student's summer stay before university. Students had to address two specific questions — their preferred accommodation setting and the activities they hoped to pursue — while also including a formal greeting, a formal closing, and at least one follow-up question of their own. This task demanded not only functional writing proficiency but also command of Italian formal register and polite conventions, skills that are central to real-world Italian communication in professional and institutional contexts.

Students overall scored highest on this FRQ: generally, students earning scores of 5 and 4 maintained the exchange and provided all required information with elaboration. Students achieving scores of 3 typically maintained the exchange and provided some of the required information with little to no elaboration.

FRQ 2 — Argumentative Essay: Is Street Art a Legitimate Art Form? — required students to write a fully developed argumentative essay in Italian, integrating evidence from three distinct sources: an article documenting how street art in Milan has transformed neighborhoods; an infographic reporting Italian youth attitudes toward graffiti; and an audio book review debating whether graffiti constitutes art or vandalism. Students had 6 minutes to read the print sources, listened to the audio twice, and then had 40 minutes to compose their essay. I find this task particularly impressive: to succeed, students had to synthesize perspectives across three authentic Italian-language sources, take a clear position, and construct a cohesive argumentative essay.

Most students performed very well on this challenging task. Students earning scores of 5 presented strong argumentative essays that effectively integrated content from all three sources in support of their arguments. At the score point of 4, students generally summarized information from all three sources but showed limited integration. Students earning scores of 3 typically provided an appropriate essay that summarized information from at least two of the three sources.

Speaking Section:

FRQ 3 — Simulated Conversation: Planning a Summer Visit with an Italian Friend — placed students in a five-exchange spoken conversation with Federica, a friend living in a small Italian village, in anticipation of the student's month-long summer visit. Moving through an escalating sequence of prompts, students had to describe their favorite free-time activities, express and justify a preference among outdoor options, weigh in on city versus countryside living with supporting examples, name Italian cities they'd most like to visit and explain why, and then confirm scheduling for a follow-up call. With just 20 seconds per turn, students had to respond spontaneously in Italian — demonstrating not only vocabulary and grammar under real-time pressure but the kind of interactive conversational fluency that signals authentic proficiency.

Performance was strong on this task. Students earning scores of 5 clearly maintained the exchange and provided the required information with frequent elaboration, while most students earning scores of 4 generally did so with some elaboration. Students earning scores of 3 typically maintained the exchange and provided most required information with little to no elaboration, while most students earning scores of 2 provided some required information in a minimally appropriate way.

Overall, performance here was just slightly lower than on the writing tasks, consistent with the added cognitive demand of real-time spoken production, a demanding skill that distinguishes students seeking AP 3s and above.

FRQ 4 — Cultural Comparison: The Role of Physical Activity in Italian Life — asked students to deliver a 2-minute oral presentation in Italian (after just 4 minutes of preparation) comparing the role of physical activity — including school and after-school sports, ways of staying active, and gym versus outdoor fitness culture — in an Italian-speaking community with their own community or another of their choosing. To succeed fully, students needed to articulate specific, accurate observations about physical activity and wellness in Italian life and to construct a genuine comparative argument on the fly.

This was the most challenging task in this free-response section, and best evaluated the full range of student abilities across the full 5-point AP scale. Responses earning scores of 5 typically earned all 5 points by effectively treating the topic, clearly comparing the target culture with the student’s own or another community, and supporting the comparison with relevant details and examples. Responses earning scores of 4 and 3 generally earned 4 and 3 points, respectively, with less developed treatment of the topic, comparison, and support. Responses earning scores of 2 and 1 usually earned only 2 or 1 points, respectively, reflecting limited or minimal treatment of the topic and cultural comparison.

• AP Japanese is the first subject this year for which the scoring work is largely complete, enabling us to begin sharing key results.
• ~3,400 students took the AP Japanese Language & Culture Exam, less than 1 percent of the U.S. high school population. 55% of the AP Japanese students were heritage speakers of Japanese.
• The 2026 AP Japanese Language and Culture Exam scores: 5: 47%; 4: 10%; 3: 15%; 2: 7%; 1: 21% (Total group scores, including heritage speakers)

 Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• Students performed especially well on questions related to Unit 3, Influences of Beauty and Art and Unit 1, Families in Different Societies; 65% of students earned most or all points available on such questions.
• The most challenging MCQs were related to Unit 4, How Science and Technology Affect Our Lives; 37% of students earned most or all of these available points.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-japanese-language.pdf

The committee of professors and teachers designed these free-response questions to require students to demonstrate authentic communicative proficiency across four distinct modes — interpersonal writing, presentational writing, interpersonal speaking, and presentational speaking — mirroring the range of real-world language demands that college students face in Japanese language courses. Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately includes some very advanced / difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, some moderately challenging points, designed to differentiate between AP 4s, AP 3s, and AP 2s, and novice-level points, designed to differentiate AP 1s from AP 2s.

Written Section:

FRQ1: The text-chat task about artificial intelligence required six written exchanges. Students had 90 seconds per turn to move through a deliberately escalating sequence, describing AI's presence in their country, explaining its benefits, advising on its risks, and predicting its future. Students read and responded to these messages in Japanese using hiragana, katakana, and kanji in real time, reflecting the kind of digital literacy that is increasingly central to authentic Japanese communication. Students unable to produce accurate, contextually appropriate written Japanese did not succeed on this task, the most difficult on the exam. Given its difficulty, this question differentiated especially well between AP 5s and AP 4s, with 5s reserved for students able to earn all or most of the 36 points possible.

FRQ 2: The compare-and-contrast article on weather required students to produce structured, extended written Japanese of 300–400 characters or more — a task that rewards not just vocabulary breadth but grammatical precision, organizational skill, and the ability to develop an argument across multiple paragraphs in a non-Roman script language that college students typically study for years before reaching this level.

Speaking Section:

FRQ 3: The interpersonal speaking task placed students in a simulated conversation about preparing for a Japanese speech contest, requiring them not only to respond spontaneously in Japanese but to demonstrate the kind of meta-linguistic and cultural self-awareness (explaining their topic choice and presentation approach) that signals genuine proficiency. This dialogue contained points spread across a broad mix of difficulty levels, including novice, intermediate, and advanced points, enabling differentiation of student performance across the 5-point AP scale, with students earning AP 2s needing to earn at least 10 points in the dialogue – equivalent to a college D, to distinguish themselves from AP 1s.

FRQ 4: The cultural presentation. An extremely demanding task, in which students delivered a 2-minute oral presentation (after just 4 minutes of prep) presenting their own view or perspective on the role of transportation in Japanese culture, covering at least five distinct aspects or examples, with a proper introduction, supporting details, personal perspective, and a concluding remark. This FRQ was overall the highest-scoring of all of the free-response questions this year, and effectively differentiated between AP 3s and AP 2s, with students required to earn most of these points in order to receive an AP 3, while AP 5s were reserved for students who earned near-perfect and perfect scores on these presentations.

The 2026 AP Latin exam was taken by 4,500 students, representing roughly 0.03% of the U.S. high school population.

This is an especially high-ability AP population, as you’d expect of students who persist and thrive in the multiple years of Latin that preceded taking AP Latin. The average SAT student of AP Latin students who received an AP 5 last year was a whopping 1500. (Of all AP subjects, only students taking AP Physics C: Electricity & Magnetism have a higher average SAT score, 1512.) And to give you a sense of how high the AP Latin standards are, compared to colleges’ standards nationwide, look at these comparisons:

AP 5s compared to College As:

• Colleges awarded As to 43.6% of their Latin students in their AP-equivalent courses. Those college students’ average SAT score was 1322.
• AP awarded 5s to 20% of AP Latin students, maintaining a high, traditional academic standard in an era of college grade inflation. As noted above, the avg SAT score of AP Latin students who earned a 5 last year was 1500.

AP 3s vs College C/C+/B-:

• Colleges awarded Cs or higher to 92.6% of their Latin students in their AP-equivalent courses. Those college students’ average SAT score was 1214.
• AP awarded 3s or higher to 73.4% of AP Latin students, maintaining a high, traditional academic standard in an era of college grade inflation. The average SAT score of AP students earning a 3 last year was 1381.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• AP Latin students scored slightly higher on questions about Vergil syllabus readings than those from Pliny: 31% of students answered virtually all Vergil questions correctly, while 24% answered virtually all Pliny questions right.
• The most challenging MCQ questions required Skill 1.B: Describe How Grammar Contributes to Meaning; 10% of students answered virtually all of these questions correctly.

AP Latin Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include points of varying difficulty to differentiate across the full score range.

Q1, the Aeneid 4.347–355 Short Answer: this question presented students with nine lines from Book 4 of the Aeneid — Aeneas's famous speech defending his departure from Carthage — and asked eight discrete sub-questions spanning translation, grammatical analysis, scansion, vocabulary identification, passage comprehension, and historical knowledge. Students had to identify one of Aeneas's justifications for leaving Dido, describe the grammatical use of terra, scan an entire hexameter line, describe the setting in lines 5–6, define the word imago in context, identify the case of capitis, translate the clause fraudo fatalibus arvis, and name the Punic Wars — demanding simultaneous grammatical, literary, and historical knowledge within a single question. The combination of linguistic precision and cultural knowledge required here is part of what makes AP Latin so rigorous.

This question is a good example of the way a multi-part FRQ differentiates student abilities across the AP 1-5 scale:

• Students receiving AP 1s could typically answer Part D correctly, providing a description of the setting.
• Students receiving AP 2s could also generally respond effectively to Parts E (the meaning of imago) and H (the Punic Wars)
• Students receiving AP 3s could also typically identify one of Aeneas’s justifications (Part A)
• Students receiving AP 4s could also indicate the scansion of line 4 (Part C) and and identify the case of capitis (line 8)
• Students receiving AP 5s could also perform the two most challenging tasks, Part B and Part G.

Q2, the Epistulae 6.16 Translation: Students received five lines from Pliny the Younger's eyewitness account of his uncle's brave approach toward the eruption of Vesuvius — sailing directly into the danger while dictating scientific observations. Students were required to render the Latin as literally as possible, a demanding task that tests not only vocabulary recognition but precise syntactic parsing of complex subordinate clauses, participial phrases, and comparative constructions. There is little room for interpretation in a literal translation ; students must demonstrate exact grammatical understanding.

This was far and away the most difficult FRQ on this year’s exam, and it provided many opportunities for the top AP Latin students to differentiate themselves. Only students achieving AP 5s were able to earn the majority of the points available for this translation.

Q3, the Aeneid 12.931–938 Short Answer: This question drew from the final dramatic confrontation of the Aeneid — Turnus's dying plea to Aeneas — and asked students to describe Turnus's attitude with a supporting Latin citation and a translation of that Latin, then write a 3–4 sentence analytical response explaining how Turnus attempts to persuade Aeneas to show restraint. The requirement to cite specific Latin and explain its support of an interpretive claim is precisely the kind of evidence-based literary argument that college Latin courses demand.

In contrast to Q2, this was the least challenging of this year’s FRQs, and effectively differentiated students receiving AP 2s, who were typically able to earn a variety of points here, from students earning AP 3s, who were generally able to earn most of these points.

Q4, the Confessiones Project Passage Short Essay: This question used Course Project Passage 1: Augustine's Confessiones 1.14.23, in which Augustine reflects on why he hated learning Greek as a child while happily learning Latin, ultimately arguing that free curiosity is a more powerful teacher than strict compulsion. Students first summarized the passage in 4–5 sentences, providing a summary sentence and then addressing beginning, middle, and end. Then they wrote a 7–8 sentence analytical essay describing how the passage develops Augustine's attitude toward the Greek language, supporting it with at least two specific Latin citations and one piece of relevant contextual or stylistic information. This two-part structure — a comprehension task followed by sustained analytical writing — represents the high level of literary engagement this course demands.

Students receiving 1s and 2s struggled with the summarizing the passage; these points were typically only earned by students achieving 3s, 4s, and 5s.

Q5, the Ovid Fasti Project Passage Short Essay: This question used Course Project Passage 3: Ovid's Fasti 2.83–116, the story of the legendary musician Arion — threatened by greedy sailors, leaping overboard in full regalia, and rescued by a dolphin charmed by his song. Students first summarized the passage in 4–5 complete sentences, then wrote a 7–8 sentence essay describing how the power of music is portrayed across the narrative, supported by at least two specific Latin citations and one contextual or stylistic observation. I find it especially impressive that the Development Committee chose to anchor one of the two Project Passage Short Essays in Ovid's Fasti — a work rarely encountered at the high school level — requiring students to engage seriously with a poem of calendar mythology well outside the standard curriculum.

This essay provided opportunities for students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s to stand out. AP 5s generally received perfect scores of 11/11 points possible on this FRQ, while students receiving AP 4s typically earned 9/11 points. The

AP Latin Course Project's In-Class Checkpoints rounded out the free-response section. A strong 83% of AP Latin students earned all 5 available points here, a sign of solid engagement with the course's in-class component. Congratulations, AP Latin students! Congratulations, AP Latin students!

AP 2026 Macroeconomics exam was taken by 189,000 students, ~1% of the U.S. high school population. 

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• Once again, students demonstrated impressive performance on Unit 1, Basic Economic Concepts questions, with over 55% of students earning all or nearly all the available points in this section. Students also performed well on Unit 2, Economic Indicators and the Business Cycle questions, with 46% of students earning all or nearly all such available points.
• The Financial Sector (Unit 4) was the toughest climb within the MCQs: ~15% of students earned all or nearly all of these points.
• Across the course skills, students found manipulation tasks and numerical analysis most demanding, skills that reflect college-level expectations that students not only recognize economic relationships, but calculate and apply them with precision.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-macroeconomics.pdf

The committee of professors and teachers designed this year’s FRQs to require students to demonstrate analytic fluency across the full scope of the AP Macroeconomics course: graphical construction and interpretation, quantitative calculation, verbal explanation, and multi-step causal reasoning.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some especially difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty levels to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

• FRQ #1, a question about the AD-AS Model and Monetary Policy, was the exam’s 10-point long free-response question, inviting students to construct a correctly labeled AD-AS graph showing an inflationary gap, explain the economy’s long-run self-adjustment, and then analyze the effects of a specific open-market operation on the money market, interest rates, international capital flows, bond prices, investment spending, and unemployment. Performance on this task differentiated especially well between AP 5s and AP 4s. Long, multi-part FRQs like this one provide great measurement value, enabling educators to evaluate student abilities across the full range of the AP score scale, with several points focused on foundational skills expected of AP 2s, and other points requiring greater depth and mastery, as expected of AP 3s and AP 4s, and finally several very challenging points (international capital flows, unemployment changes, and the long-run self-adjustment process) designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s.
• FRQ #2, a question about the Labor Market and the Phillips Curve Model, required students to work from a data table for an economy to calculate the unemployment rate, draw a correctly labeled short-run and long-run Phillips curve, plot numerical equilibrium values, and reason about how shifts in retirement affect the unemployment rate. This question’s combination of data-based calculations, graphing, and verbal explanations is representative of tasks that students earning an AP 4 or higher must consistently be able to do.
• FRQ #3, a question about Policy Effects and the Foreign Exchange Market, required students to work across multiple interconnected tasks: 1) identifying a central bank action in an ample-reserves system, 2) calculating the government spending needed to close a recessionary gap, 3) explaining the price-level effect of the change in government spending, and 4) graphing the resulting exchange-rate effect. This was the most challenging question on the exam, focused on differentiating AP 5s and AP 4s, from AP 3s, as students receiving AP 1s and AP 2s are generally unable to earn these points.

The 2026 AP Microeconomics exam was taken by 127,000 students, roughly 1% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• Students continued to show strong command of Unit 1's Basic Economic Concepts; 27% of students earned all available points on these questions, making this the highest-scoring content area on the MCQ section
• Students also performed well on Big Idea: Costs, Benefits, and Marginal Analysis, a concept that recurs across nearly every unit of the course and also formed the backbone of free-response question #2.
• The most challenging MCQ content area was Production, Cost, and the Perfect Competition Model (Unit 3), a unit requiring students to hold several interrelated cost concepts simultaneously.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I’ll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-microeconomics.pdf

The three FRQs collectively span the AP Microeconomics curriculum — game theory and oligopoly strategy, cost structures and competitive markets, and international trade and tariff policy — requiring students seeking a score of 3 or higher to demonstrate command of the material in the 60 minutes devoted to this section.

So: very big kudos to the students who succeeded on this exam. The quantitative load was high. Students worked through a cost table to calculate average variable cost and economic profit, applied marginal analysis, reconstructed a payoff matrix after a cost shock, and drew a correctly labeled monopoly graph — showing price, quantity, ATC, and deadweight loss — all within one exam, which the committee crafted to be a superb measure of applied economics at the college level.

I also love the way the committee anchored these questions in relevant, real-world contexts, which mirror the kinds of market and policy questions economists analyze: a steel manufacturing duopoly choosing transportation and production strategies, a helmet producer navigating short-run costs and long-run competitive adjustment, and a small open economy weighing the welfare effects of free trade and tariffs.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very advanced and difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty levels to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, a question about Game Theory and Monopoly, required students to analyze strategic decision-making between two steel manufacturers using a payoff matrix and analyze a monopoly. In multi-part steps encompassing ten total points, students had to identify dominant strategies, determine Nash equilibria, recalculate payoffs after a cost shock, and draw a complete monopoly graph. They then had to analyze whether or not a lump-sum tax would affect the monopolist’s price. This is a good example of a free-response question that has points that spread across a range of proficiencies, so that the question contributes well to placing students within the 1-5 score scale.

For example:

• The question's tenth and final point — requiring students to correctly apply lump-sum tax reasoning — was the hardest individual point on the FRQs, a key differentiating point between AP 5s and AP 4s.
• On the other end of the spectrum, the question’s first point is much more basic, asking students to demonstrate their ability to interpret a payoff matrix accurately, a skill that must be demonstrated to earn an AP 2, but not an AP 1.

FRQ #2, a question about Short-Run Production Costs, presented students with a cost schedule for helmet production and required them to identify the market structure, calculate average variable cost and economic profit using provided data, determine the profit-maximizing quantity via marginal analysis, and reason through the long-run competitive adjustment process. This question tested whether students could execute multi-step quantitative reasoning — a hallmark of rigorous economics education — in addition to applying core conceptual frameworks about competitive markets. If a student is able to earn all 5 points on this question, they reach the standards for an AP 5. Similarly, students earning 4 of the 5 points on this question are on track for an AP 4.

FRQ #3: a question about Market Equilibrium, International Trade, and Tariff, placed students in an economic market for cucumbers requiring them to draw a correctly labeled supply-and-demand graph, analyze the effects of free trade at a world price below the domestic equilibrium price, and then evaluate the impact of a tariff on domestic producer surplus. The first point, for part A, differentiates between AP scores of 1 and 2, whereas students earning AP 5s typically answer all five parts of this question effectively.

The 2026 AP Music Theory Exam scores:

5: 18%; 4: 17%; 3: 24%; 2: 26%; 1: 15%

The 2026 AP Music Theory exam was taken by approximately 18,000 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Music Theory Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ)

• Students scored exceptionally well on questions related to Modes and Form (Unit 8). 55% of students answered all of these questions correctly, making this the highest-scoring non-aural MCQ content area on the exam.
• In the aural MCQ section, students performed especially well on questions related to Form and Musical Design, areas where pattern recognition and textural discrimination were rewarded.
• The most demanding aural MCQ questions were related to Pitch. Such questions span 45 points and require students to identify melodic and harmonic intervals, major and minor scales, and chords through listening — tasks that require practice in ear-training every day throughout the entire school year.
• The most challenging non-aural MCQ content was related to Harmony and Voice-Leading IV: Secondary Function (Unit 7); 10% of students earned all available points here.

AP Music Theory Free-Response Questions (FRQ)

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-music-theory.pdf

The nine FRQs collectively cover the full breadth of the AP Music Theory curriculum — aural melodic and harmonic dictation, four-voice part-writing, melody harmonization, and sight-singing performance — requiring students seeking a score of 3 or higher to demonstrate command of both written and performed musicianship.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1 and FRQ #2, the Melodic Dictation questions, required students to listen to and notate a short melody in both pitch and rhythm. The melody of Q1, in F major and compound meter, eased students into melodic dictation through a mostly stepwise, diatonic melody. Q2, written in C minor and a simple meter, challenged students with more rhythmic variety and chromaticism. Both were played multiple times, with students notating on staff paper using only the provided key signature and a single given starting pitch.

These questions were both difficult, as they each contained a number of points that only students receiving AP 5s were able to attain. Accordingly, the measurement value of these questions was differentiation between AP scores of 3, 4, and 5, as students receiving 1s and 2s generally did not have the knowledge and skills to earn multiple points on these questions.

FRQ #3 and FRQ #4, the Harmonic Dictation questions, required students to listen to a four-voice harmonic progression and notate the soprano and bass lines, then supply correct chord symbols — Roman numerals with Arabic numeral inversions — for each of nine chords. Q3 was in E major; Q4 was in B minor. The minor-key progression in Q4 — with its raised leading tone and secondary dominant— added some challenges for the students.

Despite the complexity of Q4, Q3 proved more difficult for all but the most advanced students, largely because of leaps in the bass line and the challenges of hearing the chordal 7th in V7 and differentiating between different types of predominant chords.

Q4 illustrates how a well-designed 24-point question can measure the full range of student ability. To generate AP scores of 1–5, multi-point questions should distribute difficulty evenly across score levels, with roughly 20% of points targeting each tier. Q4 achieves this balance effectively. Students earning a 5 can access points at every difficulty level, while students earning a 4 cannot reach the hardest 20% of points. A 3 cannot reach the hardest 40%, and so on down the scale.

FRQ #5, the Part-Writing from Figured Bass question, was the highest-scoring FRQ on this exam. Set in E minor, students were given a bass line with figured bass symbols — including a 6/5 chord and a cadential six-four chord resolving to a dominant seventh chord — and asked to realize the remaining three voices (soprano, alto, and tenor), while also supplying the Roman numerals.

Students earning AP 5s generally earned at least 23 of the 25 points across all three scoring dimensions — Roman numeral identification, chord spelling and doubling, and voice leading. Students earning AP 4s tended to earn the Roman numeral and chord realization points but dropped voice-leading points on the more chromatic resolutions. Students earning AP 3s generally earned the more accessible Roman numeral points but showed inconsistency in realizing all chords correctly.

FRQ #6, the Part-Writing from Roman Numerals question, was considerably more challenging for students than Q5: Students were given only the chord progression and had to part write the chords in four voices. Set in B-flat major, the provided progression — I, vii°6, I6, V7/vi, vi, ii6/5, V — required students to notate a secondary dominant (V7/vi) and correctly resolve it to vi.

Students earning AP 5s generally realized the full progression with an accurate bass line and clean voice leading. This question differentiated students who earn AP scores of 3 or higher, who are expected and able to earn a significant number of points on this question, from students earning AP 1s and 2s, who typically earned very few points on this question. Generating a correct bass line from Roman numerals alone requires a depth of harmonic understanding that often takes the full course to develop.

FRQ #7, the Melody Harmonization question, is the most open-ended and musically creative task on the exam. Set in D major, 4/4 meter, students were given a two-phrase soprano melody with a complete first phrase (including bass line and chord progression) and asked to compose the bass line and chord progression for part of the second phrase, and the full third and fourth phrases independently, ending with a perfect authentic cadence (PAC).

The phrase-by-phrase scoring model, which evaluates bass line quality and Roman numeral accuracy separately for each phrase, provides a candidate-oriented measurement of students' stylistic control and cadential awareness. This question effectively identified students qualified for AP scores of 3 or higher, as they were able to earn the majority of the points on this task, whereas students receiving 1s and 2s could not.

FRQ #8 and FRQ #9, the Sight Singing questions, are unique tasks within the suite of AP Exams: Upon seeing a melody for the first time and practicing for one minute and fifteen seconds, students are asked to sing the line with accurate pitch and rhythm. This task asks students to demonstrate genuine musical fluency (i.e., audiation) in real time. Each melody is worth 9 points, scored on pitch accuracy, rhythmic accuracy, and continuity.

• An impressive 19% of students – generally the students achieving AP 5s – earned all points possible on Sight Singing Q1 (FRQ#8), which was a four-measure melody in B-flat major, 6/8 meter, notated in bass clef at a Moderato tempo. The diatonic melody featured an outline of a tonic triad as well as one dotted-eighth note rhythm.
• Sight Singing Q2 (FRQ #9) Q9 was the single most challenging FRQ on the 2026 exam. This was a four-measure melody in E minor, 4/4 meter, notated in the treble clef at a Moderato tempo. Because of its descending opening, varied rhythms, and chromaticism, the melody was more challenging than most. Accordingly, this question provided the most advanced students with many different opportunities to demonstrate their exceptional proficiency, and thus best differentiated students achieving AP 5s from students achieving AP 4s, as other students struggled to earn more than several points on this especially difficult task.

The 2026 AP Physics 1 Exam scores:

5: 19%; 4: 24%; 3: 25%; 2: 15%; 1: 17%

The 2026 AP Physics 1 exam was taken by approximately 184,000 students — 1% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions

Students scored highest on questions related to Unit 1, Kinematics, with 25% of students earning 100% of the points possible here.

Students also did very well on questions related to Unit 3, Work, Energy, and Power, with AP students who earned scores of 3+ generally earning most or all of these points.

Free-Response Questions (FRQs)

https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-physics-1.pdf

FRQ #1, a Mathematical Routines question about Projectile Motion and Fluid Flow from a Fountain Nozzle, opened the exam with a rich kinematics scenario: a water droplet that exited a fountain nozzle at an angle above the horizontal, rose to maximum height, and then returned to nozzle height. In the first part, students sketched graphs of both components of velocity as functions of time and then derived symbolic expressions for the exit speed of the water and the volume flow rate through the circular nozzle. In the next part, students transitioned to a comparative reasoning task. The nozzle was replaced by a smaller nozzle, with all other quantities held constant. Students made and justified a claim about how changing the nozzle affects the maximum height of the water. This question requires students to integrate kinematics, continuity of flow, and qualitative reasoning simultaneously.

Across all of this year’s FRQs across the ~40 AP subjects, this is the most pristine I’ve yet seen in the way it so evenly spreads the difficulty of the points across the full 10-points possible, designing points of differing difficulty so that there are at least two points aimed at identifying students qualified for each of the AP score categories of AP 2 to AP 5. It’s a brilliantly designed question, all credit to the Physics professors, teachers, and staff who collaborated to create it. AP students achieving 5s typically earned at least 9 points, students achieving 4s, at least 6 points, students achieving 3s, at least 4 points, and students receiving AP 2s, at least 2 points. A specific example:

In Part B, students receiving AP 2s were typically able to indicate the maximum height of the droplet from the new nozzle, but only students earning AP 3+ scores were typically able to justify their response with qualitative reasoning.

FRQ #2, a Translation Between Representations question about Linear Momentum, Collisions, and Center of Mass Motion, was the most multi-layered question on the exam and showcased multiple representations across four parts. The scenario presented a collision between Disk R and Disk S. First, students drew scaled momentum vectors for the disks after the collision, which required them to illustrate momentum conservation graphically. Students then derived an expression for the kinetic energy of Disk S after the collision, starting from conservation of linear momentum. Next, students sketched a graph of the position as a function of time for both disks and the center of mass after the collision. Finally, students made and justified a claim about the magnitudes of the momentum changes of Disk R and Disk S during the collision. Each part of this question requires a different representational skill: vector diagram, algebraic derivation, graphical reasoning, and conceptual justification.

This FRQ had several components that made it, overall, slightly easier than the others, providing opportunities to differentiate students earning AP 2s from students receiving AP 1s, as students receiving AP 2s were able to attain at least 3 points, several of which were in Part A, across this FRQ.

FRQ #3, an Experimental Design and Analysis question about Blocks Moving Along Surfaces With and Without Friction, presented students with two different experiments that involved frictional forces. In Experiment 1, a block slid down a smooth, curved ramp and onto a rough horizontal surface. The students identified which quantities to measure using a meterstick, indicated a method to reduce uncertainty, and described a linearized graph that could be used to determine the coefficient of kinetic friction between the block and the horizontal surface. In Experiment 2, a block slid various distances down a different rough ramp and passed through a photogate that recorded the speed of the block. Students received data for the distances and the speed of the block, and an equation that relates the distance and the speed. Students identified which quantities to plot to linearize the equation, plotted the data with an appropriate scale, drew a best-fit line, and then calculated an experimental value for the coefficient of kinetic friction based on the slope of the best-fit line. This question illustrates the connection between the physics of frictional forces and the methodology of experimental design and graphical data analysis.

Part D is by far the most challenging part of this FRQ, and served to differentiate students achieving AP 5s from other students. In other words, take a look at Part D of this question and if you’re able to answer it fully, odds are that you’re among the group qualifying for an AP 5.

FRQ #4, a Qualitative-Quantitative Translation question about Rotational Dynamics and the Work-Energy Theorem Applied to Spinning Toys, required students to reason about two spinning toys, Toy X and Toy Y, one with a smaller rotational inertia than the other. A string of the same length was wrapped around the upper portion of each toy. The same constant force was exerted on each string, causing the toys to rotate. Students made and justified a claim as to whether Toy Y reaches a greater, lesser, or equal angular speed as Toy X when the string fully unwound. Students then had to justify their claim using qualitative reasoning. Next, students derived a symbolic expression for the angular speed of Toy X, starting with the work-energy theorem or Newton’s second law in rotational form. Finally, students verified whether their derived expression was consistent with their qualitative reasoning from their claim. The three-part structure of predict qualitatively, derive quantitatively, and verify consistency exemplifies the reasoning cycle AP Physics 1 students develop throughout the course.

This was the most difficult of this year’s FRQs, overall, so its spread of 8 points served to provide opportunities for students aiming at AP 3s, 4s, and 5s to show their stuff, as students receiving AP 2s typically earned just a single point here.

The 2026 AP Physics 2 Exam scores:

5: 20%; 4: 29%; 3: 23%; 2: 21%; 1: 7%

The 2026 AP Physics 2 exam was taken by approximately 25,000 students — less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions

Students scored highest on questions related to Thermodynamics (Unit 9); 15% of students earned perfect marks across all of these questions.

Overall, the most challenging sections were related to Electric Force, Field, and Potential (Unit 10) and Waves, Sound, and Physics Optics (Unit 14). 8% of students earned all of the points possible across the questions for these units.

Free-Response Questions

https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-physics-2.pdf

FRQ #1, a Mathematical Routines question about Ideal Gas Behavior, Maxwell-Boltzmann Distributions, and Thermal Energy Transfer, initially presented students with a scenario that included a monatomic, ideal gas in a fixed-volume container that also contained a very small, thermally conducting sphere. The students sketched a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution representing the number of atoms per unit speed as a function of atom speed for the gas after a heating process, based on a similar distribution for the gas at a lower temperature. The students then derived expressions for both the temperature change of the gas due to the heating process and the specific heat of the sphere. The students were then presented with a scenario in which a thermally conducting sphere was submerged in a liquid, with the initial temperature of the sphere greater than that of the liquid. The students had to qualitatively justify why the absolute value of the temperature change of the sphere had to exceed that of the liquid, given that the sphere had both smaller mass and smaller specific heat. This question illustrates the connection between microscopic models of ideal gas behavior, as represented by Maxwell-Boltzmann distributions, and macroscopic thermal energy transfer, as described by changes in temperature and specific heat.

This question contained a number of tasks generally attainable by students receiving AP 2s, providing opportunities for these students to earn a number of points. Student attaining an AP 3 or higher needed to earn the majority of this FRQ’s points, and students achieving AP 5s typically earned all points possible here.

FRQ #2, a Translation Between Representations question about Energy Levels of a Hypothetical Atom, Photon Emission from an Atom in an Excited State, and the Classical and Modern Theories of Electromagnetic Radiation, initially presented students with a scenario that included an energy-level diagram of a hypothetical atom. The students were asked to draw arrows on the diagram to represent all possible transitions that resulted in the emission of a photon. The students then derived an expression for the wavelength of the highest-energy photon that could be emitted from the hypothetical atom. The students were then presented with a scenario in which a device could emit electromagnetic radiation across a continuous range of wavelengths. The students sketched a graph of photon energy as a function of wavelength and then made and justified a claim about whether the hypothetical atom could emit a photon with the same energy as a photon of a particular energy that could be emitted by the device. This question illustrates the distinction between quantized energy levels, as described by the modern theory of electromagnetic radiation, and the continuous spectrum available from a device, as described by the classical theory of electromagnetic radiation.

Part A of this FRQ contributed to differentiating between scores of 1, 2, and 3, as some points here were attainable by less proficient students, while students receiving AP 3s were typically able to earn full points on Part A. What set AP 5s apart here is their general ability to earn all 12 points possible across the full scope of this FRQ.

FRQ #3, an Experimental Design and Analysis question about Electric and Magnetic Forces Exerted on a Charged Sphere and the Circular Motion of Charged Particles in a Uniform Magnetic Field, presented students with two different experiments. In Experiment 1, the students analyzed a velocity selector that used a variable-emf power supply and parallel, charged, conducting plates to balance the electric and magnetic forces exerted on charged spheres. The students identified which quantities to measure with the available equipment to determine the magnitude of the magnetic field, indicated a method to reduce uncertainty, and designed a linearized graph whose slope could be used to determine the magnitude of the magnetic field. In Experiment 2, identical, charged particles were launched into an external, uniform magnetic field of varying, known magnitude between trials, and the resulting circular orbital radii were provided. The students had to identify which quantities to plot to linearize the relationship between the magnitude of the magnetic field and the orbital radius of the charged particles, plot the provided data, draw a best-fit line, and calculate the mass of the particles based on the slope of the best-fit line. This question illustrates the connection between the physics of charged objects in external fields and the methodology of experimental design and graphical data analysis.

Part A differentiated between AP scores of 3 and 2, as students achieving AP 3s were consistently able to earn full marks on Part A, whereas students receiving AP 2s typically could not.

Part B differentiated AP 3s from AP 4s and 5s; the higher scoring students typically earned full points on Part B, whereas AP 3s earned partial.

Part C was relatively easy, serving to differentiate students receiving AP 2s, who did not usually attain all of the points possible on this part, from students earning 3+ scores, who did.

Part D was the playground for AP 4s and 5s, providing opportunities for them to show their knowledge and skills, as other students generally could not obtain these points.

FRQ #4, a Qualitative/Quantitative Translation question about Electric Potential, Kinetic Energy, and Conservation of Energy Associated with a Charged Sphere in an Electric Field, initially presented students with a scenario in which an electric field was represented by equipotential lines and a positively charged sphere moved from a lower electric potential to a higher electric potential between two indicated points. The students had to indicate and justify whether the final speed of the positively charged sphere was greater than, less than, or equal to the initial speed of the positively charged sphere. The students then derived an expression for the final kinetic energy of the positively charged sphere. Lastly, the students were then presented with a scenario in which a negatively charged sphere with the same mass and initial speed as the original positively charged sphere moved from a lower electric potential to a higher electric potential between the two original indicated points. The students were asked to compare the final kinetic energy of the negatively charged sphere to that of the positively charged sphere. This question illustrates the relationship between electric potential energy of a charged sphere-electric field system, kinetic energy, and the sign of the charge when applying conservation of energy to the motion of charged objects in an electric field represented by equipotential lines.

Too challenging for students receiving AP 1s, the difficulty of these points ranged from a point that students receiving AP 2s could typically earn, to a significant number of advanced points designed to separate students achieving AP 5s, who usually earned all points possible on this FRQ, from students earning AP 4s, who could earn mot but not all of the advanced points.

The 2026 AP Physics C: Electricity & Magnetism Exam was taken by ~32,000 students — less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions

Students scored evenly and well across most topics of the course, but distinctly strongest on questions related to Electric Circuits (Unit 11). Students achieving AP 5s typically answered 100% of these questions correctly.

The questions about Electromagnetic Induction, overall, were slightly more challenging than the other units’ questions; 15% of students answered all of these questions right.

Free-Response Questions https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-physics-c-em.pdf

FRQ #1, the Mathematical Routines question about Magnetic Fields and Forces due to Two Parallel Current-Carrying Wires, considers two long cylindrical wires carrying the same total current I₀ in opposite directions, where Wire S (radius 2a, centered at the origin) has a nonuniform current density that varies radially as J = Cr, and Wire T (radius a, centered at x = 10a) has uniform current density. In Part A, students applied Ampère’s law to derive the magnetic field in Wire S at x = a, requiring them to integrate over the nonuniform current density enclosed by the Amperian loop before applying the law. The students then sketched the magnitude of the total magnetic field as a function of position x along the x-axis from x = 2a to x = 9a, which is the region between the wires. In Part B, students derived the net magnetic force on a charged sphere moving with speed v in the +x-direction at x = 5a, requiring them to determine the superposition of fields from both wires at that location and apply F = qvB. 

This was the distinctly the most difficult FRQ on this year’s exam, with three of the possible points proving especially useful in identifying the advanced proficiency characteristic of students achieving AP 5s.

FRQ #2, the Translation Between Representations question about Electric Fields, Electric Potential, and Superposition from Two Charged Rods, begins with two finite, uniformly charged rods: Rod S oriented along the x-axis from −3L to −L, and Rod T oriented along the y-axis from L to 3L, both with positive linear charge density +λ. In Part A, students drew the direction of the net electric field at Point P, located at (−2L, 2L), and at the origin, as well as the direction of the acceleration of a negatively charged sphere released at the origin. In Part B, students derived a symbolic expression for the magnitude of the net electric field at the origin by integrating over the rods and using superposition principles. In Part C, after Rod T is removed, students sketched the electric potential at the origin as Rod S moves away in the −x-direction. Finally, in Part D, students compared the sketch from Part C to the case where a negatively charged Rod W (charge density −λ) simultaneously recedes in the +y-direction at the same speed. This question showcases the full calculus machinery of the electrostatics units: vector field superposition, integration over finite charge distributions, and qualitative reasoning about potential as a scalar sum.

In contrast to FRQ 1, this FRQ provided multiple opportunities for students receiving AP 1s and AP 2s to demonstrate their knowledge and skills, such that this question best differentiated students receiving AP 2s, who were generally able to earn a significant number of points on this FRQ, from students receiving AP 1s, who could usually earn just a few.

FRQ #3, the Experimental Design and Analysis question about Inductance from LC Circuit Oscillation and RL Circuit Data Analysis, challenged students across two distinct experiments. In Experiment 1 (Parts A and B), multiple charged capacitors of known capacitance and a voltmeter that measures potential difference as a function of time are available. Each trial connects the inductor L₁ to a different capacitor in an LC circuit. In Part A, students identified which measured quantities would allow determination of L₁ via a linear graph − for example, by measuring the potential difference across the capacitor long enough to determine the period of oscillation. Students also described a method to reduce experimental uncertainty. In Part B, students identified the quantities to plot that would produce a linear relationship – for example, by recognizing that the oscillation period T is related to L₁ by T² = 4π²L₁C, so L₁ could be found from the slope of a plot of T² vs. C. In Experiment 2 (Parts C and D), a new inductor L₂ is connected to a 12 V battery and a 10 Ω resistor; five measured pairs of current I and rate of change of current dI/dt are provided. Students were expected to recognize that the Kirchhoff’s loop rule equation ε - IR - L(dI/dt) = 0 linearizes as LdI/dt = ε − IR. Therefore, one approach would be to plot ε – IR vs. dI/dt to yield a line whose slope equals L₂. The students then graphed the data, drew a best-fit line, and calculated L₂ from the slope.

Similar to FRQ #2, this FRQ, overall the least challenging on this year’s exam, provided multiple opportunities to differentiate between AP 1s, 2s, and 3s, with students achieving 3+ scores typically able to earn the majority of the points, and students earning AP 2s able to obtain significantly more points across these various tasks than students receiving AP 1s.

FRQ #4, the Qualitative/Quantitative Translation question about Electromagnetic Induction in a Square Conducting Loop, asked students to reason about the induced current in a square conducting loop held in a time-varying magnetic field Bz = B₀ cos(2πt/t₁) initially directed in the +z-direction. In Part A, students indicated the direction of the induced current during the interval 0 < t < t₁/4 using Lenz’s law and justified the answer using qualitative reasoning that addressed the magnetic field due to the induced current in the loop opposing the change in the external magnetic field. In Part B, the students derived a symbolic expression for the induced current I as a function of time by applying Faraday’s law and Ohm’s law. In Part C, the students compared the maximum induced current in a new loop with both side length and resistance doubled relative to the original loop and justified their answer by referencing the functional dependence of the expression for the induced current derived in Part B – specifically, that the maximum emf is proportional to s² and inversely proportional to resistance, so I₂ = 2I₁.

This final question focused squarely on the more advanced students in the course, providing many opportunities for students earning AP 3s to distinguish themselves from performance at the AP 2 level. Students achieving AP 5s typically earned perfect scores on this FRQ, so if you’re wondering whether you’re on track for a 5, take another look at this question, and if you can answer all parts of it thoroughly and accurately, odds are that you’re among this year’s AP 5s.

The 2026 AP Physics C: Mechanics exam was taken by ~70,000 students — less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions

Students soared through the questions related to Linear Momentum (Unit 4): an impressive 41% earned perfect scores across this topic area.

Students also generally scored well on questions related to Unit 5 (Torque and Rotational Dynamics) and Unit 6 (Energy and Momentum of Rotating Systems). Students achieving AP 5s typically missed no more than a single point across all of these questions.

Free-Response Questions https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-physics-c-mech.pdf

FRQ #1, a question about Velocity-Dependent Resistive Forces, Normal Force, Friction, and a Sliding Cube Inside a Decelerating Box, opened the exam with a rich, multi-layered application of Newton’s second law. A box of mass M decelerates horizontally under a resistive force F_r = −bv, while a cube of equal mass M remains against the box’s interior right wall. Because the resistive force is velocity-dependent, the deceleration is not constant — it decreases over time as the system slows — and so the normal force F_N exerted on the cube by the wall decreases with time as well. The nonzero normal force causes friction between the cube and the wall, preventing the cube from moving down the wall until the normal forces decreases to a critical value. In Part A, students determined the acceleration of the cube in terms of F_N, derived F_N as an explicit function of time (requiring them to solve the equation of motion for the decelerating box-cube system, yielding F_N = ) 1/2 b(v_0)e^(-bt/2M) for the combined system), and sketched the frictional force on the cube versus time — a curve that begins at a constant value and later decreases exponentially, proportional to F_N, after static friction can no longer support the cube’s weight. In Part B, students derived t_crit, the moment when the decreasing friction force can no longer support the cube’s weight against gravity, which requires setting the maximum static friction equal to Mg and solving for the time at which the exponentially decaying F_N causes the friction force to cross that threshold.

This was an exceptionally challenging FRQ, by far the toughest of this year’s exam, aimed at providing the most advanced students – students qualifying for AP 5s -- with opportunities to demonstrate their knowledge and thereby differentiate themselves from students receiving other scores, who could not typically earn most of the possible points across this beast of an FRQ.

FRQ #2, the longest question on the exam (suggested 30 minutes), about Projectile Motion, Midair Explosion, Momentum Conservation, and Center-of-Mass Kinematics, requires students to translate concepts across several different representations. A projectile of mass 4M is launched at angle θ with speed v_0; at the apex of its trajectory, it explodes into Piece Q (mass M) and Piece R (mass 3M), with the pieces separating horizontally. Piece Q lands back at x = 0; Piece R lands at x = x_2. Across four parts, students drew scaled momentum bar diagrams for each piece at the moment of explosion — requiring them to apply momentum conservation graphically and recognize that Piece Q’s horizontal momentum is one fourth the magnitude of and opposite to the center-of-mass momentum, and that both pieces have zero vertical momentum at the apex — then derived a symbolic expression for x_2 starting from conservation of momentum, extended a velocity-vs-time graph from pre-explosion through post-explosion for both pieces and the center of mass (Piece Q moving backward at speed (v_0)cosθ to land at x = 0, Piece R moving forward faster than (v_0)cosθ, and the center of mass continuing at (v_0)cosθ as required by Newton’s first law for the system), and finally reasoned whether Piece R lands farther when Piece Q instead drops straight down — correctly concluding x_new < x_2 because Piece Q retaining zero horizontal velocity results in less horizontal momentum for Piece R than when Q moves backward.

This was a challenging question, and provided students earning AP scores of 3+ with multiple opportunities to earn points and show their proficiency in calculus-based physics, differentiating themselves from students receiving AP 2s, who generally earned just 1 of the available points here.

FRQ #3, a question about Kinetic Friction Measurement with a Spring and Block, and Spring Constant Determination via Energy Conservation, challenged students across two experiments. In Experiment 1 (Parts A and B), a block of known mass m rests against a spring of known constant k; beyond position x = 0, there is friction. Students — with only a meterstick — identified which distances to measure, proposed an uncertainty-reduction method, and designed a linearizing graph: by measuring the initial compression x_0 and the distance d the block slides before stopping on the rough surface, energy conservation gives 1/2 k(x_0)^2 = (μ_k)mgd, so plotting x_0^2 vs. d yields a line whose slope is 2(μ_k)mg/k. In Experiment 2 (Parts C and D), a new spring k_new launches a 2.0 kg block up a ramp with negligible friction; students measure maximum height h for five compression distances s and are given five (s, h) data pairs. Energy conservation gives 1/2(k_new)s^2 = mgh, so plotting h vs. s^2 yields a line through the origin with slope k_new/(2mg). Students graphed the data, drew a best-fit line, and extracted k_new from the slope.

Students overall earned higher scores on this FRQ than any of the others on this year’s exam, and provided students across the range of AP 2-5 with opportunities to show how far they could go along the spectrum of skills measured by this FRQ, as the distribution of points across these different levels of proficiency was very even.

Part B served to differentiate AP 4s and AP 5s from other students, as this was the most difficult section of this FRQ. In turn, Part D served to differentiate AP 4s from AP 3s, as AP 3s generally found Part D to be beyond their skills.

FRQ #4, a question about Rotational Dynamics, Work-Energy Theorem, and the Effect of Crank Arm Length on a Unicycle Wheel, asked students to reason about three scenarios involving a unicycle wheel of rotational inertia I_W being spun by a crank arm with a constant perpendicular force F. In Scenario 1 (crank arm length ℓ_1), in Scenario 2 (crank arm length ℓ_2 > ℓ_1), and in Scenario 3 (the wheel on the ground, free to roll without slipping). In Part A, students indicated that ω_2 > ω_1 and justified conceptually that the longer crank arm exerts a greater torque and does more work over one full rotation (the force travels a larger arc length 2πℓ_2 vs. 2πℓ_1), so the wheel gains more rotational kinetic energy. In Part B, they derived ω_1 from the work-energy theorem: the work done is F·2πℓ_1 (force times arc length of one rotation), setting this equal to 1/2 (I_W)(ω_1)^2 and solving. In Part C, students argued that ω_3 < ω_1 because when the unicycle is on the ground, the same applied torque must now also accelerate the translational motion of the unicycle — the wheel’s rotational kinetic energy and the system’s translational kinetic energy are both supplied by the same work input F·2πℓ_1, leaving less energy available for rotation alone.

Students receiving AP 2s could typically begin the question and earn a point, but it was sufficiently challenging to serve primarily for providing a range of difficulties well suited to distinguishing between AP 3s, 4s, and 5s.

The 2026 AP Precalculus Exam scores:

5: 29%; 4: 29%; 3: 24%; 2: 11%; 1: 7%

The 2026 AP Precalculus exam was taken by ~300,000 students, roughly 2% of the U.S. high school population.

AP Precalculus Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

• Students generally scored higher on questions about exponential and logarithmic functions than other functions (polynomial, rational, trigonometric and polar).
• Students performed especially well on questions that required them to deploy their skill of supporting conclusions with a logical rationale or appropriate data. Students achieving AP 5s typically earned 100% of these points, and students achieving AP 4s, all but one. And students achieving AP 3s were also able to answer most of such questions correctly. This is exciting to see, as one of the focus areas in AP Precalculus is helping students develop the ability to communicate with precise language and provide rationales.

AP Precalculus Free-Response Questions (FRQ):

Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I’ll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-precalculus.pdf

The four FRQs reflected major strands of the course — functions, modeling with exponential and sinusoidal functions, and procedural and symbolic algebraic fluency — and required students to work with equations, graphs, tables, and real-world contexts alike.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, Q1, the Function Concepts question, presented students with the graph of an increasing function and an analytic presentation of a logarithmic function. Students had to evaluate a function composition, find inputs satisfying each of the functions presented, express limiting behavior using formal limit notation, and identify function behavior from a graph. This was a somewhat challenging question, suited to differentiating performance across the AP scores of 2, 3, 4, and 5, as students receiving AP 1s typically earned no points on this FRQ.

Part C.i. (identifying a key feature of the function from the graph) and Part A.ii were both typically earned by all students earning AP 3s, differentiating them from students receiving AP 2s, who did not typically earn both of these points.

Part B.ii. (correctly expressing the behavior of a function using formal limit notation as x approaches a value) was the most challenging point to earn on this FRQ, generally only earned by students achieving AP 5s. But C.ii, (providing a rationale and reasoning for their answer) was the clearest borderline between AP 4s and AP 5s, as students achieving 5s consistently earned this point whereas students achieving 4s did not.

Part B.i. was the clearest differentiator between students earning AP 4s and students earning AP 3s, as students earning AP 4s were consistently able to answer this part correctly, whereas students earning AP 3s did not.

FRQ #2, Q2, the Modeling a Non-Periodic Context question, asked students to model the decreasing value of a a car. To do so, they needed to write a system of equations from real-world data and solve for unknown constants, compute an average rate of change, use it to estimate a value, and then determine a domain limitation for the function model. I’m impressed by the way this question mirrors the kinds of quantitative reasoning that students will be expected to use in college courses across math, business, science, and social science – it's a terrific, and quite challenging, question, servinging to identify students who should receive AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, and students receiving AP 1s and 2s were usually unable to engage with this level of rigor.

Parts A.i. and B.i. were the points that differentiated students earning AP 3s from students receiving AP 2s, who were usually unable to write these equations and find the average rate of change for the value of the car. Parts A.ii and B.ii differentiated students earning AP 4s, who were much more likely to be able to find these values and estimate the favlue of the car using the average rate of change, than students earning AP 3s.

Parts B.iii (understanding the relationship between average rate of change, the secant line, and the function model) and C (explaining how to determine a domain limitation) were designed to identify the most advanced students, and were generally only earned by students achieving an AP 5, as both of these tasks required students to explain advanced mathematics accurately.

FRQ #3, Q3, the Modeling a Periodic Context question, asked students to determine the coordinates of five labeled points on the graph of the sinusoidal height function, then construct an explicit formula for the function by identifying the values of amplitude, period, phase shift, and vertical translation. Notably, this question was completed without a calculator, requiring students to work with the geometric and algebraic structure of sinusoidal functions from first principles.

Overall, students scored highest on this FRQ, which contained tasks at a variety of difficulty levels. Students receiving AP 2s could usually only perform one of the tasks within this FRQ correctly, students earning AP 3s could typically perform 2-3 of the tasks right, students earning AP 4s could typically perform 4-5 of the tasks accurately, and students earning AP 5s generally completed 100% of the tasks effectively.

FRQ #4, Q4, the Symbolic Manipulations question, was the most demanding of the four FRQs and did not allow a calculator. Students had to solve equations involving logarithmic and exponential functions, rewrite an exponential function in an equivalent form, rewrite a trigonometric expression using the double-angle identity for sine, and find all solutions to a trigonometric equation within a specified interval. The breadth of symbolic and procedural demands made this question, the hardest of the FRQs, an excellent measure of overall precalculus mastery among the top students, as these points were aimed at providing students receiving AP 5s multiple opportunities to distinguish themselves from AP 4s, as this question was generally beyond the abilities of students receiving AP 1s, 2s, and 3s.

Students achieving AP 4s consistently earned points A.ii. and B.i., differentiating themselves from students earning AP 3s, who could not typically perform these tasks, while all other points on this FRQ were earned much more consistently by students achieving AP 5s than by students who achieved AP 4s.

I'm grateful to the AP Precalculus Development Committee for crafting an exam with such substantial and wide-ranging mathematical demands. Within a single exam, they asked students to evaluate compositions of functions and express limiting behavior in formal notation, fit exponential models to real-world data, construct and interpret sinusoidal functions from geometric context, and execute multi-step symbolic manipulation across logarithmic, exponential, and trigonometric functions — all without a calculator on half the FRQ section.

Congratulations to the AP Precalculus students who rose to meet these challenges!

This AP Psychology Exam was taken by over 379,000 students, 2% of the U.S. high school population, making it one of the most widely taken AP Exams. A

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ)

• Students performed exceptionally well on questions assessing Unit 1: Biological Bases of Behavior and Unit 2, Cognition, with 45-50% of students earning most or all available points for these sections.
• Students also performed well on MCQs assessing Skill 2: Evaluate Research Design, with 45% earning most or all available points — an indicator that many students are internalizing AP Psychology’s emphasis on scientific literacy and critical evaluation of studies.
• The most challenging MCQ content area was Unit 4, Social Psychology and Personality, suggesting students may benefit from more focus on these topics.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ) https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-psychology.pdf

I’ve been so impressed by the way the exam Development Committee of professors and teachers has designed these two FRQs to provide students with real-world, relevant opportunities to demonstrate scientific reasoning. Both questions place students in the role of a practicing psychological scientist: reading real peer-reviewed research, evaluating methodology, interpreting data, and constructing evidence-based arguments about human behavior.

FRQ#1, the Article Analysis Question on cell phone absence and anxiety, presented students with a study on whether not answering a ringing phone triggers anxiety. To earn all points, students needed to: identify the research method, operationally define anxiety as measured, interpret a statistically significant result, identify an ethical guideline, assess generalizability, and argue whether the evidence supports or refutes a FOMO explanation. Part C, in which students needed to describe the statistical significance, was the key differentiator for AP 5s, the most challenging part of this FRQ for students. Otherwise, to earn an AP 3, students needed to answer most parts of this question correctly, and generally scored very well on Part E, in which they explained the generalizability of the study, and Part A, in which they identified the research method.

FRQ#2, the Evidence-Based Question on retrieval and long-term memory retention, asked students to read and analyze three peer-reviewed studies examining how different learning schedules affect retrieval and retention of recently learned information. Students selected evidence from the sources and explained how each piece of evidence connected to a psychological concept, applying a different psychological concept to their second piece of evidence. Students did a terrific job forming a defensible claim (94% of AP Psychology students earned this point) and identifying supporting evidence. The challenge for some was connecting evidence to a psychological concept in Part C, which was a key differentiator between AP 4s and AP 5s. Students earning AP 5s are typically meeting all of the standards represented in this question, not missing any points.

AP Research papers were developed and submitted by ~53,000 students this year, less than 1% of the high school population.

About the AP Research scores

We hear often from Higher Education and employers about the need for students to develop and demonstrate durable skills. And when we surveyed AP students across all 40+ subject areas last year to ask whether what they learned in the AP course was relevant to their futures, AP Research received higher ratings than any other AP subject, period. (The next highest-rated for future relevance were Calculus, English Literature, Seminar, Spanish Language, and Spanish Literature.)

And this makes sense to me, given the persistence, self-management, and transferable skills students develop and demonstrate in AP Research. Over the course of the year, each student independently designs, plans, and carries out an original scholarly investigation on an academic topic, problem, issue, or idea of their own choosing—selecting their own research question, methodology, and sources. This kind of sustained, self-directed inquiry mirrors the authentic work of university researchers.

The course culminates in a 4,000–5,000-word academic paper and a 15–20-minute presentation with oral defense. (Students must defend their research question, methodology, and findings before a panel of evaluators—answering probing questions that test the depth and rigor of their scholarship.) The paper accounts for 75% of the AP score, and the presentation and defense for 25%.

The scoring rubric is designed to reward papers that go beyond summarizing existing research to make genuine contributions to knowledge: articulating a clear and defensible research question, applying a sound and replicable methodology, presenting logical reasoning supported by sufficient evidence, and demonstrating mastery of academic conventions including accurate citation.

The topics AP Research students pursue reflect genuine intellectual curiosity across virtually every discipline—from the sciences and social sciences to the humanities and the arts. Each year, the range and inventiveness of the research questions students generate impresses and sometimes astonishes the faculty who read and score these papers.

In short, AP Research students build and use a set of transferable research and writing skills—including literature review, research design, data analysis or textual analysis, argumentation, and citation—that are directly applicable in college coursework regardless of major. Students who complete AP Research demonstrate that they can identify a meaningful question, engage seriously with the scholarly literature, collect and analyze evidence, and communicate findings to an academic audience.

AP Research scores of 5: Papers earning AP 5s demonstrated original inquiry—a well-defined research question, a detailed and replicable methodology, logical reasoning that ties evidence to conclusions, and skillful use of academic conventions.

AP Research scores of 3 or higher: Papers earning at least a 3 advanced meaningfully beyond summary—they articulated a focused research purpose, engaged credibly with sources, and presented findings in appropriate academic form.

The 2026 AP Seminar exam was taken by approximately 167,000 students — about 1% of the U.S. high school population.

The 2026 AP Seminar assessment is a portfolio-based program comprising three components, each evaluated by trained AP Readers:

Performance Task 1 (Team Project and Presentation), Performance Task 2 (Individual Research-Based Essay and Presentation), and an End-of-Course Exam. Because AP Seminar has no multiple-choice questions, I’ll focus my commentary below on the various scored projects, presentations, and essays. 2026 AP Seminar Assessment Tasks Performance Task 1 — The Individual Research Report (IRR) and the Team Project and Presentation (TMP): Student teams collaboratively researched a complex problem or issue, produced Individual Research Reports, and delivered a multimedia team presentation, followed by an oral defense. The team task required students to identify a shared research question, divide analytical labor across the team's Individual Research Reports, and then develop and present an argument for the best solution to their problem. In the IRR, Readers evaluated each student's ability to understand and analyze context (row 1), understand and analyze arguments (row 2), evaluate sources and evidence (row 3), understand and analyze perspectives (row 4), and apply conventions of citation and grammar (rows 5–6).

IRR Row 6 — Apply Conventions: 50% of AP Seminar students earned all 3 available points on this dimension, making it the highest-scoring row in the IRR.

IRR Row 1 — Understand and Analyze Context: Students earning scores of 3 or higher earned at least 4 of 6 available points on understanding and contextualizing the team's research problem, and students achieving AP 4s and 5s typically earned all 6. Earning full marks required students not only to identify relevant context but to articulate its significance with precision — a differentiator for AP 4s and AP 5s.

Performance Task 2 — The Individual Research-Based Essay and Presentation (IWA + IMP + OD): Each student independently developed a research question arising from the 2026 stimulus materials on the theme Connections — analyzing sources spanning urban geography, public health, ecology, memoir, sports, and satellite technology. They gathered additional credible sources representing diverse perspectives and composed a 2,000-word written argument. They then developed and delivered a 6–8-minute multimedia presentation conveying their argument, followed by a two-question oral defense with their teacher. The IWA rubric assessed seven dimensions: understanding and analyzing context (rows 1–2), understanding and analyzing perspectives (row 3), establishing an argument (row 4), selecting and using evidence (row 5), and applying conventions of citation and grammar (rows 6–7).

The 2026 stimulus materials are remarkable in their disciplinary reach and intellectual substance. The committee juxtaposed a peer-reviewed geography study, a U.S. Surgeon General's advisory on the health consequences of social isolation, a Smithsonian excerpt on road infrastructure, Haruki Murakami's memoir essay on returning to earthquake-devastated Kobe, an Associated Press photojournalism piece on remnants of the Berlin Wall, Ann Killion's personal essay on Candlestick Park and shared memory, and a rigorous arXiv sustainability assessment of low-Earth-orbit satellite megaconstellations.

• IWA Rows 1–2 — Understand and Analyze Context: 67–69% of students earned all 5 available points on the contextual understanding rows — where students needed to accurately situate their argument within a broader intellectual and disciplinary context. These were the highest full-marks rates of any IWA row.
• IWA Rows 3-6 – students achieving AP 4s and AP 5s were typically able to earn full marks across these rubric row, while AP 3s consistently earned most but not full points here.

End-of-Course Exam: Part A asked students to read a single source — a Nature editorial titled "More-Powerful AI Is Coming" — and respond to three short-answer prompts: identifying the author's argument (A1), explaining the line of reasoning and connections between claims (A2), and evaluating the effectiveness of the evidence (A3). Part B presented four sources connected by a shared theme — Robert Frost's "The Road Not Taken," a Forbes article on nonlinear career paths, an OECD report on global teenage career preparation, and a Barbara Bush commencement address — and asked students to identify a connecting theme, develop an original perspective, and write a logically organized, well-reasoned argument incorporating at least two of those sources. Some highlights:

EOC Part A Row 1 — Understand and Analyze Argument: This row best differentiated students achieving AP 5s, who were able to earn all 3 points possible on this row, from students achieving AP 4s, who could not.

EOC Part B overall: Students achieving AP 3s typically earned the majority of these points, while students achieving AP 5s generally earned perfect scores of 24/24 points possible here.

The 2026 AP Spanish Language and Culture exam was taken by approximately 198,000 students, roughly 1% of the U.S. high school population. 72% of the AP Spanish Language and Culture students had additional exposure to Spanish beyond the classroom.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

The MCQ section of AP Spanish Language and Culture assesses interpretive reading and interpretive listening, requiring students to demonstrate comprehension across a wide range of authentic Spanish-language texts and audio sources.

Students performed very well across all areas of the multiple-choice section, but especially on questions related to Unit 2: The Influence of Language and Culture; 37% of students earned all points possible on such questions.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): Each AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-spanish-language.pdf

AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, and AP world language and culture exams score free-response tasks holistically. Each task is rated on the 0–5 scale, with the response matched to the score-level description it best fits. Raters consider how task completion, language use, and communicative effectiveness work together to evaluate real-world communicative ability.

Written Section:

FRQ #1: The Interpersonal Writing: Email Reply task placed students in the role of a community member responding to a formal email from the director of the local public library, who is planning a renovation and seeking resident input. Students had 15 minutes to write a reply in Spanish that addressed two substantive questions — what role the library should play in today’s world, and what technology or other resources should be made available and why. (The curricular theme is “La ciencia y la tecnología.”) Students who could produce appropriately formal, contextually responsive written Spanish did well on this task. It required not just vocabulary breadth, but the ability to construct substantive, organized ideas in real time under timed conditions.

This task provided especially clear identification of students qualifying for AP 4s and AP 5s: students achieving AP 5s were consistently able to earn perfect scores on this task, and students achieving AP 4s consistently earned all but one of the points possible.

FRQ #2: The Presentational Writing: Argumentative Essay task asked students to write a persuasive essay in Spanish on the theme ¿Se debe eliminar la tarea escolar? (“Should school homework be eliminated?”), synthesizing three sources: a print article from the Spanish newspaper ABC presenting multiple perspectives on homework from parents, teachers, and advocacy groups; a data visualization from Argentina showing how much time students spend on homework and how often they need adult support; and an audio recording of a Colombian radio report on a senator’s proposal to ban homework entirely, featuring voices of students, parents, and the senator himself. (The curricular theme is “Las familias y las comunidades.”) Students had 55 minutes to develop and defend a clear position, integrating evidence from all three sources. This task rewarded not just vocabulary breadth but analytical depth, organizational skill, and the ability to synthesize multiple viewpoints into a coherent written argument.

This task provided especially clear identification of students qualifying for AP 2s and AP 3s: students achieving AP 3s were consistently able to earn at least 3 points on this essay, and students achieving AP 2s consistently earned at least 2 points on it. I was struck by how skillfully the Development Committee of professors and AP teachers who designed this exam anchored this essay in a real-world debate that spans the Spanish-speaking world — drawing on sources from three different countries and multiple stakeholder voices. Students who engaged deeply with all three sources produced essays that were substantially more persuasive.

Speaking Section:

FRQ #3: The Interpersonal Speaking: Conversation task immersed students in a simulated phone conversation with a supervisor who had reviewed their application to volunteer over the summer. Across five spoken exchanges, each with just 20 seconds to respond, students were asked questions such as why they believed the work was important and how they would participate in the work. Altogether, the conversation prompts aimed to measure whether students could sustain a spontaneous, contextually appropriate spoken exchange in Spanish. (The curricular theme is “Las familias y las comunidades.”)

This task best served to distinguish between scores of 1, 2, 3, and 4. Students receiving an AP 1 were typically able to earn 1 point, students receiving an AP 2 generally earned 2-3 points, students receiving an AP 3 typically earned 3-5 points, and students achieving an AP 4 or higher generally all 5 points possible.

FRQ #4: The Presentational Speaking: Cultural Comparison task asked students to deliver a 2-minute oral presentation — after just 4 minutes of preparation — on the role of health-promoting habits in a Spanish-speaking community, comparing that community’s approach to their own or another community. (The curricular theme is “La vida contemporánea.”) This is an intellectually demanding task: it requires cultural knowledge, the ability to draw specific and accurate cross-cultural comparisons, a clearly organized presentation, and sustained oral proficiency -- all in Spanish, on the spot.

The rigor of this task is such that it serves to differentiate among scores of 2, 3, 4, and 5, as students receiving an AP 1 were generally unable to demonstrate the proficiency required to earn points here. Students receiving an AP 2 typically earned 1-2 points, and students achieving scores of 3, 4, and 5 generally earned 3, 4, and 5 points on their presentation, respectively.

The 2026 AP Spanish Literature and Culture exam was taken by ~29,000 students, less than 1% of the U.S. high school population.

The AP Spanish Literature and Culture course asks high school students to read, analyze, and write about 38 literary works spanning six centuries of Spanish-language literature from Spain, Latin America, and the United States — all in Spanish. The reading list is nothing short of a who's-who of celebrated writers in the Western literary tradition: students encounter Cervantes' Don Quijote, poetry and a play by Lorca, García Márquez's fiction, sonnets by Garcilaso de la Vega and Góngora, Pablo Neruda's surrealist verse, and colonial-era chronicles, alongside voices from the 20th-century Latin American literary boom and contemporary U.S. Hispanic authors. The course traces the origins of Spanish-language literature from medieval New World chronicles through the publication of the first modern novel, and then onward to the Nobel Prize–winning poetry and magical realism of Pablo Neruda and Gabriel García Márquez. The breadth is remarkable: students move from 14th-century medieval prose to Golden Age drama to Romanticism to the Theater of the Absurd — all while comparing literary works to their cultural and historical contexts, connecting them to works of visual art, and writing sophisticated literary analyses using correct literary terms entirely in Spanish. This is a college-level reading list that would be challenging in any university introductory Spanish Literature course — and these 29,000 AP students with the help of their inspiring teachers are tackling it in high school.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

Students scored well across all units of the course, but especially on questions related to the literature that was the focus of Unit 4 (La literatura romántica, realista y naturalista) and Unit 5 (La generación del 98 y el Modernismo). Students achieving AP 5s earned all or all but one of these points.  

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-spanish-literature.pdf

ach AP exam has multiple versions, for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students.

The four FRQs collectively ask students to explain a literary text, compare a text with a work of visual art, analyze a single text in a broader cultural context, and compare two texts across periods and genres — all written in Spanish and requiring nuanced command of literary vocabulary, textual analysis, and cultural knowledge – a demanding set of tasks in this timed, proctored, AI-blocked exam-taking environment.

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, with points of varying difficulty designed to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

FRQ #1, Short Answer — Text Explanation: Students were asked to explain how the theme of la transformación is developed in “Chac Mool,”, identifying the literary period and author. This question tested close-reading skills and period knowledge across two scored dimensions, the content of their response and the proficiency of their written Spanish.

To achieve an AP 4 or an AP 5, students earned all points possible on this question. Students earning AP 3 were typically able to achieve 5 of the 6 points possible, whereas students receiving AP 2s earned 3-4 of the 6 possible points. Students receiving 1s earned 2 or fewer points.

FRQ #2, Short Answer — Text and Art Comparison: This question required students to compare the theme of carpe diem in two Golden Age works – a sonnet by Garcilaso de la Verga and a painting in the Prado Museum by Juan van der Hamen y León.

This was the most difficult of this year’s FRQs, differentiating between performance at the AP 5 level (such students were able to earn all 6/6 points), and performance at the AP 4 level (such students typically earned 5/6 points).

FRQ #3, Essay — Analysis of a Single Text: Students wrote an essay analyzing La casa de Bernarda Alba by Federico García Lorca. Students were asked to explain how the text represents the characteristics of la tragedia as a genre, and to situate their analysis in the cultural context of la España rural de principios del siglo XX. Students also had to incorporate a discussion of literary devices — i.e., symbolism, metaphor, dramatic structure — that support the analysis. With a maximum of 10 points possible (5 for Content, 5 for Language), this is the kind of rigorous, analytic – and AI-proof -- writing task central to college-level humanities education.

Students who scored a 4 or 5 demonstrated especially comprehensive abilities to analyze multiple dimensions of the text. They explained how Lorca's work expresses both genre conventions and Spanish rural culture at the same time, using evidence from the text. Accordingly, students achieving an AP 5 typically earned all 10 points possible, students achieving an AP 4 generally earned at least 8 points, and students achieving an AP 3 typically earned 7 points.

FRQ #4, an Essay — Text Comparison: The essay required students to compare the theme of el amor across two 19th century poems, one from the required reading list by Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer, and one that is not on the required reading list by Rosalía de Castro. This question represents an especially high-order task on the exam: synthesizing ideas across multiple works, constructing a comparative thesis, and executing it in sophisticated literary Spanish – which makes student performance on this essay – the highest scores of any of this year’s FRQs – all the more remarkable.

Students who achieved an AP 5 earned all 10 points possible on these essays, while students who achieved an AP 4 typically earned 9 points, and students who achieved an AP 3 generally earned at least 7 of these points. Students receiving an AP 2 had a wide range of performance on this question, generally earning 2-6 points of the 10 possible, a solid effort, even if not at the level required for college credit.

The 2026 AP Statistics exam was taken by 281,000 students, ~2% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ):

1. Students performed strongest on questions related to Units 1 and 2 (Exploring One-Variable and Two-Variable Data). The high performance here indicated that many AP Statistics students have solid foundational skills in summarizing and interpreting distributions. To receive an AP 5, students were expected to answer all 10 of these questions right, while to receive an AP 4, students were expected to miss no more than one; students receiving AP 3s were expected to answer 7/10 correctly.

2. The most challenging MCQ content area was Units 4 and 5: Probability and Sampling Distributions, a conceptually demanding area that requires students to reason about randomness, probability rules, and the behavior of sample statistics — the theoretical backbone of all of statistical inference. Accordingly, the difficulty level of these questions is such that they serve well to identify students who qualify for an AP 5.

Free-Response Questions (FRQ): https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-statistics.pdf

Across this 90-minute section, students were asked to calculate five-number summaries and compare distributions, design a randomized experiment and interpret statistical significance, apply normal and binomial probability models, conduct a two-sample t-test from summary statistics, analyze a two-way table with conditional probabilities and a chi-square readiness check, and work through a multi-part linear regression analysis complete with confidence and prediction intervals. In other words, the faculty committee who designed these questions did a wonderful job of replicating the scope of a first college-level course in Statistics — no corners cut.

(As I think about what AP teachers do so admirably, this is one of those moments where I feel such awe and gratitude for the ways teachers use the scope of the exam to ensure the students in their class have the benefit of no topics falling by the wayside. There are so many pressures on teachers to let stuff slide – from snow days to spring fever to parents demanding that their children receive high grades – but AP teachers tell me all the time that they’re able to invoke the AP Exam’s demands as a reason for maintaining high standards and motivating students to spend the extra time on task that learning at the advanced level in high school demands. The TIMSS study found that AP students were studying two more hours per week than students taking a similar curriculum without a culminating AP Exam. No wonder the AP students in the study outperformed students from all other countries – that two additional hours of study each week makes a huge, cumulative difference in student learning. But this is also an important reminder that with such a significant amount of additional work, students should not be pressured to take more than 1-2 AP courses per year in high school – the load that the AP Program’s own research shows is sufficient to optimize college completion rates.)

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points, designed to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s.

Q1, Exploring Distributions: asked students to determine a five-number summary from raw data, use it alongside a boxplot to compare center and variability in context, and then explain via a stem-and-leaf plot the shape characteristics a boxplot inherently conceals. This last task, asking students to articulate why a summary representation loses information about gaps or clusters in a distribution, is a sophisticated statistical reasoning skill, which distinguished scores of AP 4 and AP 5 from the other scores. Otherwise, this was the easiest FRQ, generating data essential to differentiating between AP 1s, which were only expected to earn at least 1 of these points, from AP 2s, which were expected to earn at least 2 of the 4 points possible here.

Q2, Experimental Design and Statistical Significance: was the most challenging short free-response question, providing opportunities to identify students who should receive a 5 versus those who should receive a 4. Students had to identify treatments, experimental units, and the response variable; describe a randomization procedure; and interpret the meaning of statistical significance in context.

Q3, Probability Models: required students to apply three distinct probability models in a single question — normal, binomial, and geometric — in the context of a sports team's game-opening musical performances. Students calculated a normal probability, used the binomial distribution to find P(X ≥ 3) across ten games, and then switched to the geometric distribution to calculate the mean and standard deviation of the number of games until a long performance occurs — and interpret that standard deviation in context. This question was almost as demanding as Q2, with each part building on independent probabilistic reasoning skills, such that it served to distinguish between AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, who are expected to earn some or all of these points, while students unable to engage with any parts of this question are receive 1s and 2s.

Q4, Two-Sample t-Test: presented students with a randomized experiment comparing two fertilizer brands across 116 trees. Given summary statistics for both groups, students had to conduct a full two-sample t-test: stating hypotheses, checking conditions, computing the test statistic, finding a p-value, and drawing a conclusion in context at the α = 0.05 level. The ability to execute all steps of a significance test accurately — and communicate conclusions appropriately — is a cornerstone of college-level Statistics and this question does an excellent job, across its four points, of differentiating the knowledge and skills of a wide range of performance levels: students are expected to score perfectly here to receive an AP 5, earn at least three of the points to earn an AP 4, and at least two of the points to earn an AP 3.

Q5, Two-Way Tables, Conditional Probability, and Chi-Square Readiness: gave students a two-way table of 4,193 professional basketball, football, and baseball players categorized by age group. Students were asked to calculate and interpret conditional probabilities, read a mosaic plot, reason about mutual exclusivity and independence (showing work numerically), and assess the conditions for a chi-square test of independence. This question contains several especially difficult points that evaluate students’ qualifications for an AP 5, which students receiving the other AP scores are unable to earn.

Q6, Linear Regression: Inference, Confidence Intervals, and Prediction Intervals: was the capstone 4-point investigative task, and it asked students to engage deeply with linear regression analysis using data from 30 professional baseball teams. Students described a scatterplot relationship, used a least-squares regression equation to make a prediction, compared a circled outlier team to others of its salary class, evaluated the relative strength of linear association across high- and low-salary subgroups, calculated both a 95% confidence interval for a mean response and a 95% prediction interval for a single team, and — in the most sophisticated part — explained why prediction intervals are wider than confidence intervals by connecting the conceptual logic of individual-vs.-mean variability to the mathematical structure of the standard error formulas. This question provides a variety of opportunities for students aiming for AP 4s and AP 5s to distinguish themselves, as several of these are quite advanced points. 

The 2026 AP United States History Exam scores:

5: 14%; 4: 37%; 3: 23%; 2: 18%; 1: 8%

The 2026 AP United States History Exam was taken by ~554,000 students — roughly 3% of the U.S. high school population.

AP United States History Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ) AP US History students performed solidly across the MCQ section, with an overall mean of 65% correct. A few patterns stood out:

• Students demonstrated the strongest performance on questions related to Period 1 (1491–1607), Period 2 (1607–1754), and Period 7 (1890–1945). More than 25% of students answered all these questions correctly.
• The most challenging MCQ content related to Period 4 (1754–1800) and Period 9 (1980–Present). About 5% of students answered each of these questions right.

AP United States History Free-Response Questions (FRQ)

Each AP exam has multiple versions for different time zones. I'll focus the commentary below on the version taken by most students: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-us-history.pdf

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions are designed to include tasks of varying difficulty to differentiate students across the full score range. Here is how students fared on each component:

SAQ 1, the Reconstruction historiography question, invited students to analyze passages from two professional historians who reached divergent conclusions about Reconstruction's outcomes and summon evidence related to each argument. This is typically the most difficult of the short-answer questions, mirroring the ways historians must evaluate multiple, contending perspectives. Students receiving AP 1s and 2s were not usually able to meet the demands of this challenging of a question, so SAQ 1 served to differentiate among AP 3s, 4s, and 5s, with students earning AP 3s able to accurately distill the arguments within the secondary sources, and students earning AP 4s and 5s consistently able to summon additional evidence related to the historians’ arguments.

SAQ 2, a primary source analysis, centered on a 1761 speech by Minweweh, a leader of the Anishinaabe (Ojibwe) people, delivered to an English trader at Fort Detroit. Students were asked to identify Minweweh's purpose, explain the developments that produced the circumstances he describes, and trace consequences through 1840. This demanded careful attention to perspective, historical context, and cause and effect across more than eighty years of history. Students generally performed well on this question, with most students who received AP 2s able to demonstrate some relevant knowledge / skills and 27% of students earning all points possible.

SAQ 3, in which students described and explained the ideas, rise, and influence of the Patriot movement from 1765–1783, was the highest-scoring FRQ question on this year's exam. An impressive 45% of students earned all points possible here. This question also differentiated well across scores of 2, 3, and 4, as students receiving AP 2s were typically able to describe the movement’s ideas, unlike students receiving AP 1s. Students receiving AP 3s were generally able to earn most of the possible points, and students receiving AP 4s and 5s were typically earning all points possible.

SAQ 4 asked students to describe and explain the influences on and of the 1945–1970 civil rights movements. More challenging than SAQ 3, 27% of students earned all points possible on this question. The ability to describe a specific reform advocated by such movements differentiated between AP 2s and AP 3s, as students earning AP 3s were consistently able to do this, whereas students receiving AP 2s were not.

The Document-Based Question (DBQ) presented students with seven primary sources ranging from religious addresses and anonymous pamphlets to factory workers' recollections, legislative petitions, a magazine illustration, and speeches by Dorothea Dix and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Students were charged with evaluating the extent to which women’s participation in public life in the US changed from 1783 to 1855 Earning full marks requires reading and analyzing the seven sources, constructing a defensible thesis, providing historical context, analyzing documents for point of view and purpose, deploying outside evidence, and demonstrating complex understanding — a genuinely demanding set of tasks to complete within a 1-hour, proctored, AI-blocked window. The DBQ serves well to differentiate students who qualify for college credit from those who don’t, as students receiving an AP 3+ score earned most of these points, whereas students earning 1s and 2s did not.

Crafting a historical claim / thesis: 81% of students earned the thesis point, a differentiator between AP scores of 1 and 2, as students receiving a 2 tended to earn this point, whereas students receiving a 1 did not. Contextualization: the ability to situate their argument within a broader historical context differentiated AP scores of 3, 4, and 5 from lower scores, as students who earned a 3 or higher were typically demonstrating this knowledge and skill.

Use of evidence from the primary source documents: this skill also differentiated between AP scores of 1 and 2, as students receiving a 2 were able to extract at least some historical evidence from the documents, whereas students receiving a 1 were not. Students receiving a 4 or higher typically earned full points for this skill.

Outside evidence: The ability to summon additional evidence beyond the seven primary sources was knowledge that differentiated AP scores of 3 from AP scores of 4 and 5, as students achieving AP 4s and 5s were consistently able to demonstrate this skill, while students earning AP 3s often did not.

Sourcing: Similarly, students achieving AP 4s much more consistently earned the sourcing point — requiring them to explain how the point of view, purpose, historical situation, or audience of two or more of the documents is relevant to their argument--than students earning AP 3s.

Complexity of analysis and reasoning: 17% of students earned the complex understanding point, the most demanding point on the DBQ, a differentiator between students achieving AP 5s, who are consistently earning this point, and students earning AP 4s, who are much less consistently earning this point within the intensity of timed, proctored essay writing.

Long Essay Questions: Students chose from three options:

LEQ 2, in which students evaluated how geography influenced European colonization in the Americas from 1500 to 1754, 14% of students — typically, those achieving AP 5s — earned all points possible. On the other end of the spectrum, students receiving AP 1s did not usually earn any points on this essay, while students receiving AP 2s were distinguished from those earning AP 1s by their ability to generate a thesis and/or some relevant evidence. Essays that qualified students for scores of 3 and 4 demonstrated multiple skills related to thesis, evidence, contextualization, and/or analysis and reasoning.

LEQ 3, in which students evaluated how westward expansion influenced US society from 1865 to 1898, was by far the most challenging of the three LEQ options. A key problem with these essays: responses often focused on aspects of westward expansion prior to the specified period. Accordingly, many students who selected this topic failed to generate a valid thesis statement (50% of the students who attempted this essay earned this point), let alone support it with accurate evidence, analysis, and reasoning. 6% of students earned all points possible for this essay.

In contrast, LEQ 4, in which students evaluated how politics influenced US society from 1945 to 2000, earned the highest overall scores of the three LEQs. 22% of students earned all points possible on it, and the majority of essays earned full points for use of evidence.

All said: very big congratulations to AP US History students and teachers this year. Working through a seven-document DBQ, analyzing competing scholarly interpretations of Reconstruction, reading a primary source from a Native American leader in 1761, and constructing sustained historical arguments spanning anywhere from fifty to five hundred years of American history — all within 2 hours and 10 minutes of free-response time that followed a similarly comprehensive multiple-choice section — is a genuine intellectual achievement. I'm impressed by the knowledge and historical thinking skills this exam invited students to develop and proud of what so many of them demonstrated.

The 2026 AP World History: Modern exam was taken by ~443,000 students, roughly 3% of the U.S. high school population.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs)

AP World History: Modern students performed well across all units and thematic learning objectives. A few notable patterns stood out

• Students showed their strongest MCQ performance on questions focused on Units 3 and 4 — Land-Based Empires and Transoceanic Interconnections (1450–1750 CE). Students earning AP 3s typically answered at least 70% of these questions correctly, students earning AP 4s: ~85% right, and students earning AP 5s generally answered 100% of these questions correctly. These results indicate that AP World History students with scores of 3+ have developed solid understanding of the early modern period and the forces that shaped it.
• The most challenging MCQ content was for Units 7 and 8 — Global Conflict and the Cold War and Decolonization (1900–present). Nonetheless, students earning scores of 3+ were able to answer most or all of these questions correctly, while students receiving scores of 1 and 2 were not.

AP World History: Modern — Exam Design and Rigor

The AP World History: Modern Exam Development Committee — composed of university historians and experienced AP teachers — built a 2026 free-response section that I find genuinely impressive in its breadth and intellectual ambition. It’s also important to note that students do all of this writing within a fixed time limit in a proctored room on an AI-blocked platform.

Here's a link to this year's free-response questions: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap26-frq-world-history-modern.pdf

Since AP scores are reported on a 5-point scale, the free-response questions deliberately include some very difficult points to differentiate AP 5s from AP 4s, points of varying difficulty to differentiate AP 4s, 3s, and 2s, and more foundational points to separate AP 2s from AP 1s. 

Short Answer Questions (SAQs)

Each AP exam has multiple versions for different time zones. The commentary below focusses on the version taken by the majority of AP World History: Modern students:

SAQ 1, the Mansa Musa and Trans-Saharan Trade question, focused on a secondary source, asked students to identify historical causation (Mansa Musa’s motivations), deploy outside evidence to extend a scholarly claim, and explain the impacts of long-distance trade routes on particular societies – a robust and challenging task that primarily differentiated AP students achieving scores of 4 and 5, who could typically answer all parts of the question thoroughly, and students earning scores of 3, who did not typically earn all points possible on this question.

SAQ 2, which asked students to analyze a 1549 primary source (a letter by Spanish Jesuit missionary Francis Xavier written from India) and SAQ 3 (describing and explaining Indian Ocean trade networks) were each less challenging than SAQ 1, serving well to differentiate between students receiving AP scores of 2, who could usually answer one part of these questions correctly, and students receiving AP scores of 3+, who earned most or all points possible.

SAQ 4 (describing and explaining global trade from 1750-1914), was far and away the most challenging SAQ; in fact, it was the lowest-scoring of all the FRQs. Students receiving 1s and 2s were generally unable to earn any points on this question, which instead differentiated between performance at AP 3, 4, and 5 levels.

Document-Based Question (DBQ)

This question asked students to evaluate the extent to which twentieth-century military conflicts changed the role of women in society, by analyzing seven primary documents from China, the British Empire, Tsarist Russia, France, Mexico, Kenya, and the Soviet Union. The DBQ is always one of the most impressive tasks across all AP subjects, and this year’s was no exception, given the intellectual sophistication this question demanded — students had to hold multiple imperial and national contexts in view simultaneously and synthesize across them to write a compelling historical argument.

The DBQ serves well to differentiate students who qualify for college credit from those who don’t, as students receiving an AP 3+ score earned most of these points, whereas students earning 1s and 2s did not.

Crafting a historical claim / thesis: 86% of students earned the thesis point, a differentiator between AP scores of 1 and 2, as students receiving a 2 consistently earned this point, whereas students receiving a 1 did not.

Use of evidence from the primary source documents: this skill also differentiated between AP scores of 1 and 2, as students receiving a 2 were able to extract at least some historical evidence from the documents, whereas students receiving a 1 were not. Students receiving a 3 or higher typically earned full points for this skill.

Outside evidence and contextualization. These two historical thinking skills differentiated AP scores of 3 from AP scores of 4 and 5, as students achieving AP 4s and 5s were generally able 1) to summon and integrate outside evidence into this source-based essay, and 2) to situate their argument within a broader historical context. Students earning AP 3s demonstrated these skills less consistently than students earning AP 4s and 5s.

Sourcing. Similarly, students achieving AP 4s more consistently earned the sourcing point — requiring them to explain how the point of view, purpose, historical situation, or audience of two or more of the documents is relevant to their argument — than students earning AP 3s.

Complexity of analysis and reasoning. 22% of students earned the complex understanding point, the most demanding point on the DBQ, a differentiator between students achieving AP 5s, who are consistently earning this point, and students earning AP 4s, who are much less consistently earning this point within the intensity of timed, proctored essay writing.

Long Essay Question (LEQ)

Students choose one of three long essay prompts. Here’s a summary of their performance on each:

• LEQ 2, in which students evaluated the relationship between military conflicts and state building in Afro-Eurasia (1200–1600), proved more challenging for students than the other two LEQ topics. 25% of students achieved all or all but one of the total points possible, but the overall difficulty of this essay was such that students receiving 1s did not earn any points on it.
• LEQ 3, in which students evaluated migrations from 1600-1900 and their relationship to social and cultural changes, was somewhat less difficult for students than LEQ 2, as students receiving 1s were typically able to earn several points related to their thesis or evidence they cited. 25% of students achieved all or all but one of the total points possible.
• LEQ 4, in which students evaluated whether peacemaking efforts in the 20th century were successful, had the highest overall scores of any of the Long Essay topics. 34% of students achieved all or all but one of the total points possible.