Thailand TOEIC Reading: 230 in 2024, 224 in 2025

The figures, with the year kept attached

Sources: 2024 report, Table 1, printed page 5 and 2025 report, Table 1, printed page 5. Checked on 27 September 2026. Positions are our calculation from the rows, not an ETS ranking of national education systems.

The 2024 table also includes Congo Republic at Reading 228, below Thailand’s 230. That row matters: the earlier “third lowest of 35” claim was incorrect. In 2025, Indonesia and Mongolia are the only listed countries below Thailand.

What the number 230 does not mean

A section score is a scaled score, not a count of correct answers. Dividing 230 by 495 does not produce an accuracy percentage, and 230 does not mean the candidate answered 46 or 47 of 100 questions correctly. Do not use a homemade proportional conversion from a five-question practice session to this scale.

Nor is the mean a pass mark, a hiring threshold or a forecast of your own result. For official interpretation, consult ETS score-use resources; our score guide explains how to keep section targets separate from a total-score goal.

A learner with Reading 230 and Listening 400 needs a different study plan from someone with the same Reading score and Listening 200. The same national mean cannot determine both plans. Start with your own section results and the tasks that cost you time.

Why these are not national-population averages

The reports describe test takers and questionnaire information. Native country is not necessarily the country where the test was taken. The country table uses a participation threshold, so it is a selected set of groups rather than every country in the world.

People who sit a workplace English test are not a random sample of a country’s population. Different mixes of students, employees, purposes and testing programmes can affect comparisons. A lower mean in the later report does not establish that the same people became worse readers, or identify a cause.

Use “test takers from Thailand in the report,” not “Thai people have this English level.” Keep the report year beside every score and any comparison.

How to use the Listening–Reading gap in a study plan

The difference between the two reported means is a reason to inspect Reading performance, not proof that time pressure caused the gap. The reports do not isolate a causal explanation for this country comparison. Vocabulary, grammar, comprehension and pacing should be checked separately.

Use Reading pacing for a time budget and Part 7 scanning for locating evidence. Neither method turns a national average into a personal diagnosis.

A two-week review routine you can adapt

1. 1Days 1–2: complete a short baseline and classify each error as vocabulary, grammar, evidence or time. Keep Listening and Reading notes separate.
2. 2Days 3–6: practise one recurring weakness per day. Explain the answer before checking the key; a correct guess still needs review.
3. 3Days 7–10: combine sentence questions with short passages. Record time as well as correct answers, using comparable task types.
4. 4Days 11–14: revisit missed patterns with new examples and compare with the baseline. Adjust the next cycle according to remaining errors.

This is a proposed routine, not a tested promise of a particular score increase. If subject–verb choices are the problem, start with agreement. If unfamiliar workplace words slow every sentence, choose one context from the vocabulary guide.

A short set can help you practise consistently, but five questions cannot reproduce the endurance or scaled scoring of an official test. Use longer timed practice when assessing pacing across an entire Reading section.

A citation note for writers and teachers

A precise description is: “In ETS’s 2024 reported group, test takers with Thailand as their native country had a TOEIC Reading mean of 230; the corresponding 2025 mean was 224.” Link the edition used and label any rank as a calculation from its country table.

The data support a descriptive comparison. They do not support a claim about why an education system succeeds or fails, how a particular person will score, or whether an individual’s skills declined between years. To discuss a cause, you would need evidence designed to test that cause.

Our original question-bank study is a separate source: it measures our practice material, not ETS test takers. Do not combine its difficulty labels with the country means as if they were one dataset. See our guide to TOEIC difficulty for the distinction between task difficulty and time management.

Source and calculation notes

The stable year-specific 2024 file is hosted by IIBC. The general ETS report URL currently serves the 2025 edition and may be replaced later. Both tables were visually checked, and all country rows were counted before calculating positions. The site’s original plan used an incomplete comparison; this page corrects it.

View the calculation summary and source URLs. A review of this article should check the report title as well as the URL before updating any year or figure.