NAEP

NAEP
Name	NAEP
Other names	National Assessment of Educational Progress
Established	1969
Jurisdiction	United States
Administered by	National Center for Education Statistics

NAEP The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a recurring assessment program measuring student achievement in the United States. It provides nationally representative data on student performance in subjects such as reading, mathematics, science, and writing, and informs policymakers, researchers, and educators. NAEP results are used alongside data from the National Center for Education Statistics, Office for Civil Rights (United States Department of Education), and state assessments to analyze trends and disparities.

Overview

NAEP produces national, state, and select urban district results through program cycles coordinated by the U.S. Department of Education, the Institute of Education Sciences, and contractors such as the American Institutes for Research, Educational Testing Service, and ACT, Inc.. NAEP assessments include subject frameworks developed with input from panels including members associated with the National Academy of Sciences, American Educational Research Association, and the National Council on Teacher Quality. NAEP reporting integrates achievement-level definitions influenced by standards debates linked to the No Child Left Behind Act, the Every Student Succeeds Act, and reviews by the Government Accountability Office. NAEP data collections intersect with large-scale studies like the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study and administrative datasets from the U.S. Census Bureau.

History

NAEP began after congressional action influenced by lawmakers such as representatives on the Committee on Education and Labor (United States House of Representatives) and hearings involving figures from the Carnegie Corporation and the Ford Foundation. Early technical design drew from statistical methods used by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (1969) initial evaluations and consulting groups that included analysts from the RAND Corporation and the Mathematica Policy Research. Over decades, NAEP adapted through policy episodes tied to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 reauthorizations, the passage of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994, and reactions to the Nation at Risk report. Chronological milestones include expansions to long-term trend studies analogous to efforts by the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium and methodological revisions recommended by panels associated with the National Research Council.

Assessment Design and Content

NAEP frameworks define constructs and item specifications developed with professionals affiliated with the American Institutes for Research, the College Board, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, and the National Science Teachers Association. Content areas encompass reading, mathematics, science, writing, arts, civics, geography, and technology and engineering literacy, aligning with work by the Common Core State Standards Initiative debates and guidance from subject-matter bodies such as the Council of Chief State School Officers. Item types include multiple-choice, constructed-response, and performance tasks; psychometric models use item response theory foundations from research by Frederick Lord and Georges Rasch traditions. Scaling and equating procedures reflect practices found in analyses by Educational Testing Service and recommendations from panels at the National Academy of Education.

Administration and Participation

NAEP sample designs employ stratified multistage probability methods similar to approaches used by the Current Population Survey and the National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Field operations are managed in partnership with contractors that have worked on projects with the U.S. Census Bureau and the Institute of Education Sciences. Participation policies—both mandatory and trial voluntary models—have intersected with legal and policy discussions involving the United States Congress, state chiefs in the National Governors Association, and urban district leaders such as those in the Council of the Great City Schools. Protocols for accommodations and English learner considerations draw on standards from the Office for Civil Rights (United States Department of Education) and research from the Migration Policy Institute.

Reporting and Use of Results

NAEP reports present scale scores, proficiency-level distributions, and subgroup comparisons used by analysts at institutions like the Brookings Institution, the Urban Institute, and the Pew Research Center. Data products support secondary analyses in academic journals produced by authors affiliated with Harvard Graduate School of Education, Stanford Graduate School of Education, and the University of Michigan School of Education. Policymakers reference NAEP in legislative debates in the United States Senate and committee reports from the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. NAEP releases also influence curricular and accountability discussions involving state departments such as the California Department of Education and the Texas Education Agency.

Criticisms and Controversies

Critiques of NAEP address sampling errors, accommodation rules, and reporting thresholds; scholars from the American Educational Research Association, the Heritage Foundation, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have offered divergent evaluations. Debates over alignment with state standards and the Common Core State Standards Initiative prompted disputes among governors in the National Governors Association and lawmakers in the United States Congress. Controversies over district participation have involved litigation and policy actions by the New York City Department of Education, the Chicago Public Schools, and municipal coalitions represented by the Council of the Great City Schools. Methodological critiques cite analyses by the Government Accountability Office and recommendations from the National Research Council for transparency and improved sampling, while defenders point to technical reviews by the Institute of Education Sciences and independent contractors such as the Northwest Evaluation Association.

Category:Educational assessment in the United States