The National Assessment Governing Board, the federal body responsible for overseeing the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), has released details for its standing committee meetings and quarterly board meeting set for November 20 and 21, 2025. These gatherings, to be held at the Hilton Arlington National Landing in Arlington, Virginia, will address key aspects of NAEP's operations, including budget considerations, assessment methodologies, and emerging technologies. The meetings combine open sessions for public transparency with closed portions to safeguard confidential information, reflecting the board's mandate under the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act. This development underscores ongoing efforts to refine the nation's primary tool for measuring student achievement, amid broader debates on educational data and policy.
Background and Statutory Role
The National Assessment Governing Board was established by the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act, codified at 20 U.S.C. 9621. It sets policy for NAEP, which is administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) within the Department of Education. NAEP, often called the Nation's Report Card, evaluates student performance in subjects like reading, mathematics, and science across grades 4, 8, and 12. The board's duties include selecting assessment subjects, defining achievement levels, and ensuring the validity and reliability of tests through expert consultations. This framework draws from widely accepted professional standards in education measurement. Key players include board chair Mark White, executive director Lesley Muldoon, and NCES acting commissioner Matthew Soldner. The meetings occur against a backdrop of evolving educational challenges, such as post-pandemic learning recovery and debates over standardized testing's role in policy, as seen in prior NAEP releases highlighting achievement gaps.
Standing Committee Agendas
On November 20, the Executive Committee convenes from 8:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. ET in an open session to examine participation in the Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) and trends in state assessments compared to NAEP. TUDA provides district-level data, aiding urban education policy, and this discussion could inform how NAEP aligns with state-level metrics amid varying accountability systems under laws like the Every Student Succeeds Act.
Simultaneously, from 3:15 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. ET, three other committees meet in open sessions. The Assessment Development Committee will review the NAEP item development process and plan Content Advisory Groups for various subjects. These groups involve teachers, curriculum experts, and public members to ensure assessments reflect diverse perspectives, as required by the board's statutory process for item review.
The Committee on Standards, Design and Methodology will discuss the NAEP School Device Bridge Study, which likely explores how device types affect test administration and results, addressing equity issues in digital assessments. Meanwhile, the Reporting and Dissemination Committee will update on strategic communications, debrief the recent NAEP results release, and review reporting processes. This includes open discussions on improving public access to data, crucial for stakeholders like educators and policymakers.
On November 21, the Nominations Committee meets in closed session from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. ET to evaluate applications for 2026 board vacancies. This closure, justified under exemption 6 of the Government Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6)), protects personal privacy.
Quarterly Board Meeting Details
The plenary sessions blend hybrid formats, allowing in-person and virtual attendance. On November 20, from 9:45 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. ET, the meeting opens with remarks from chair Mark White, agenda approval, and minutes from the August 2025 session. At 9:55 a.m., Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent will speak and swear in new and reappointed members, followed by their remarks at 10:10 a.m. Executive director Lesley Muldoon updates on board work at 10:30 a.m., with NCES acting commissioner Matthew Soldner reporting at 10:45 a.m.
A closed session from 11:15 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. ET covers NAEP budget and 2026 administration details, including proprietary contract costs, protected under exemption 9(B) of the Government Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B)) to prevent adverse financial impacts. The open session resumes from 12:15 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. with a discussion on NAEP sampling, essential for representative national data. From 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., senior advisor Amber Northern presents on the future role of education research.
On November 21, from 8:45 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. ET, the meeting starts with committee reports and member discussions. A closed session from 9:55 a.m. to 11:10 a.m. ET reviews Long-Term Trend assessment content, shielding secure items under exemption 9(B). The final open session from 11:15 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. focuses on priorities for next-generation NAEP, including artificial intelligence to enhance agility, efficiency, and quality.
Key Players and Perspectives
Board members represent diverse stakeholders, including educators, state officials, and public representatives, ensuring balanced input as mandated. NCES officials like Soldner and Gina Broxterman contribute technical expertise. Perspectives vary: advocates for innovation see AI as a way to modernize NAEP, potentially reducing costs and improving adaptability, while critics worry about equity in technology access, echoing debates in cases like the 2015 NAEP digital transition. Political forces, such as federal education funding priorities, influence discussions, with NAEP data often cited in congressional hearings on achievement gaps.
Implications and Broader Context
Short-term, these meetings could shape immediate NAEP adjustments, like refining sampling for better representation amid declining participation rates noted in recent reports. Long-term, exploring AI aligns with national pushes for data-driven education, as in the Department of Education's strategic plans, but raises questions on validity and bias. Different views emerge: some educators favor enhanced reporting for actionable insights, while privacy advocates stress closed sessions' necessity. No direct legal precedents apply, but the board's actions build on frameworks from prior assessments, ensuring compliance with federal advisory committee standards.
In summary, these meetings highlight the board's commitment to evolving NAEP amid educational shifts. Potential next steps include implementing committee recommendations, such as new advisory groups or AI pilots. Ongoing debates may center on balancing innovation with equity, influencing future policy as NAEP continues to inform national education strategies. Challenges include maintaining assessment security and public trust, with trajectories depending on budget outcomes and technological advancements.