Every few years, testing experts at the U.S. Department of Education weigh state assessments against their “gold standard,” the National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as “the nation’s report card.”

In released in 2021, two states stood out, but not in a good way. Both Iowa and Virginia established fourth grade reading standards that only measured up to  “below basic” on NAEP. 

In Virginia, the revelation sparked a public outcry.

Former Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin seized on the discrepancy, often called the “honesty gap,” to push through tougher standards and assessments. His administration to the mismatch and Aimee Guidera, his education secretary, traversed the state, preparing that many of their children’s scores would soon be going dramatically down. News coverage kept up with the for and against the changes.

But in Iowa, Gov. Kim Reynolds, also a Republican, has stayed silent on the matter. In fact, there’s been so little reaction to the gap that some state capitol insiders had no idea it existed. 

“I was shocked,” said Dustin Miller, a lobbyist. “If this is our future workforce, we need to ask questions about this.”

This past spring, he took part in what he called a “master class” on K-12 issues offered by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation. The foundation had just released calling on business leaders in states with large honesty gaps to advocate for higher standards.

In Iowa, 75% of fourth graders reached proficiency in reading in 2025 on the , one of the highest rates in the nation. But the rate is deceptive, masking the fact that less than a third of Iowa’s students hit the proficiency mark on NAEP. Sean Finn, a policy analyst with Common Good Iowa, a left-leaning think tank, noted those results when that the state was no longer a leader in education.

Largely behind closed doors, the state is now updating its assessment system. It adopted new standards in 2024, and this past spring, administered new tests based on those standards. But so far, state officials have devoted scant public attention to the matter. In a state where Gov. Reynolds has been criticized for , Anne Discher, executive director of Common Good Iowa, said she’s not surprised.  

“I am not sure that we are experiencing a state government that prioritizes openness with the public,” she said.

Carmen Gwenigale-Ogoli, director of curriculum, instruction and assessment for the Iowa City School District, said the “Iowa Department of Education has not yet released extensive information” about the testing changes. 

Some teachers in her district, however, participated in a standard-setting process in June. They were among the 155 educators who met in Des Moines to recommend the minimum scores students must earn to pass the new tests, also known as cut scores. 

Heather Doe, a spokeswoman for the state education agency, pushed back on the suggestion that officials haven’t informed districts of the changes to come. The information, she said, has been “broadly shared,” and Director McKenzie Snow discussed the process at the School Administrators of Iowa’s recent meeting. In November, the state board will vote on final cut score recommendations. 

But Brad Buck, executive director of the organization, said he couldn’t tell from Snow’s comments whether the changes will be significant.

Doe said a date for the release of the cut scores hasn’t been set. She wouldn’t say whether they’ll accord with NAEP, but said the teachers were informed “by the high expectations” of the national test. If they raise the bar, that could result in fewer students passing the test. 

Because of the update, this year’s results to previous years, but they should “provide families with clearer information about student progress,” Doe said. 

‘Healthy thing’

Not all state officials are convinced their proficiency cut scores should match NAEP’s.

Republican state Sen. Lynn Evans, chair of the education committee and a former superintendent, said it’s a “healthy thing” to compare state and NAEP performance levels. But he called NAEP a “one-shot assessment” only given to a sample of students, and is skeptical of the honesty gap.

“NAEP is a dipstick. Only certain school districts give it,” he said. “I always leaned more into locally developed assessments. To me, that’s a truer test of how students perform.”

A new from NCES, released in July, showed that Maine’s fourth grade reading standards also fall in the below basic range. But Janette Kirk, chief of federal programs at the Maine Department of Education, said the agency would wait for a final study, expected in the coming months, before making any adjustments. 

She said officials agreed with NCES’ statements that the reviews are not intended to “suggest that NAEP achievement levels are more valid than state standards or that states should emulate NAEP standards.”

In recent years, several states, like Wisconsin and New York, have lowered expectations on state tests, saying the post-pandemic decline in student performance called for a “new normal.” 

Virginia chose to go in a different direction. Its tougher cut scores, phased in over time, are set to this school year. In June, the state education agency, now under Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger, , but the state board rejected it. 

Andrew Rotherham, a former Virginia state board member, said some leaders struggle with the honesty gap topic, likening it to “water on cats for some people.” But in Virginia, he said, on the timeline was the right thing to do. He also acknowledged that it’s politically difficult to implement higher standards when the public thinks their schools are doing well. 

“The phase-in will be a transition, it will be confusing,” he recently wrote, “and it will require state leadership to help people understand what’s going on.”

New Jersey is currently going through the same shift, one that has in releasing scores. With two kids in middle school in the state, Charles Barone, senior director of the National Parents Union’s Center for Innovation, said it’s important for states to be transparent with the public when . 

It’s a highly technical process, he said, one that both Republicans and Democrats sometimes avoid. 

“I think the right is torn between culture warriorism and rigor,” he said. “And the left has mixed feelings about high-stakes testing.”

Youngkin, he said, didn’t need the Democratic-controlled legislature to approve the new standards and assessments. The state board, which made the final decision, was largely made up of .

But in Iowa, with a GOP majority in the state House and Senate, Reynolds focused on accomplishing her top , a universal education savings account program. 

The presence of the honesty gap didn’t stop Reynolds from receiving a lot of positive attention from Education Secretary Linda McMahon. In January the secretary granted the state a waiver from some rules governing federal funds. The governor pointed to the state test results when asking the administration for more flexibility. 

“We’re proving that I think we’re up to the task, that we’re definitely on the right track,” she said at a .

McMahon also for advancing “education freedom” and chose the state as the first recipient of a , which expands the federal financial aid program to cover short-term training programs.

Barone predicted that Reynolds would not be hurt if she chose to leave the testing issue alone. With the governor leaving office in January, he said, “she has a good enough legacy that she doesn’t have to worry about spending a lot of time on the honesty gap.”

Clarification: The headline on this story has been updated to clarify that Iowa’s standards were identified as below basic.

Disclosure: Andy Rotherham sits on Âé¶čŸ«Æ·â€™s board of directors.

But that era ended abruptly Monday when the U.S. Department of Education put Carr, who has worked across both Republican and Democratic administrations, on paid leave. A department spokeswoman cited the fact that Biden appointed Carr to the position. Carr’s term was set to expire in 2027.

“I’m still processing and have no words to share right now. It’s a lot to take in,” Carr said in an email, declining to answer further questions. 

The move, coming less than a week after officials canceled an upcoming math and reading test for 17 year olds, raises questions about the future of the congressionally mandated National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Carr earned respect from both sides of the aisle with her ability to present the results — both promising and discouraging — in an objective way. Some former officials say the decision to put her on leave reflects President Donald Trump’s desire to streamline NAEP. But others say losing her expertise at a time when student performance still hasn’t recovered from the pandemic could compromise the integrity of the assessment program.

“Without knowledgeable decision makers like Peggy Carr, it is likely that the scientific quality of NAEP, and other important data collections, will be eroded,” said Eric Hanushek, a Stanford University economist and former member of the National Assessment Governing Board, which sets NAEP policy. He added that political interpretations of the data could undermine public trust in the assessment’s value. “Today, schools and states must face up to the reality of their performance. If given the chance, some states will argue that their poor performance is just a matter of poor data — allowing them to avoid addressing any performance problems.”

Andrew Ho, a Harvard University assessment expert and also a former board member, called Carr an “institution” and “truth teller” who presented testing results in a nonpartisan way.

But others say politics had nothing to do with the decision to let Carr go. 

Mark Schneider, a Trump appointee who stepped down last March as director of the Institute for Education Sciences, which includes NCES and NAEP, said the program’s increasing costs during Carr’s tenure were out of step with an administration determined to cut spending. 

“NAEP is going to take a haircut. I don’t think there’s a question about that,” said Schneider, Carr’s former supervisor and NCES commissioner under George W. Bush. “The question is ‘How do you prioritize what it does in a harsh fiscal environment?’ ”

He argued that canceling the long-term trend test for 17 year olds is just the first step toward making NAEP, which costs $192 million, a leaner operation that concentrates on math and reading. 

“We’ve been doing main NAEP since the 1990s. Why do we need long-term trend tests?” he asked. “NAEP has grown and grown and grown, and from my perspective, it’s way too expensive.”

‘Did a lot of homework’

Carr began her long career with the federal government as a chief statistician in the Office for Civil Rights before moving to NCES in 1993. For over 20 years, she served as associate commissioner for assessment and has long translated NAEP and international assessment results for reporters, educators and policymakers. 

“She did a lot of homework preparing and rehearsing for presentations of NAEP results, so that she knew the results thoroughly and could answer any questions,” said Andrew Kolstad, who served as her senior technical adviser in the 1990s. “People in the department and in the testing industry called on her for her experience.”

Chester Finn, president emeritus of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute and former chair of the board, said Carr won his respect for “meticulously” fact-checking his , Assessing the Nation’s Report Card: Challenges and Choices for NAEP.

She offered a number of critical judgments “without ever once trying to compromise my authorial integrity or get in my face,” he said. “In her day job, she’s been superb at explaining and interpreting NAEP data without spinning it or crossing the line into causation.”

When students took the first NAEP tests after COVID school closures, Carr wanted to brace the public for sharp declines. In an exclusive interview with Âé¶čŸ«Æ· in 2022, she said that while scores for fourth and eighth graders in reading and math were already falling prior to the pandemic, “it’s more than likely we’re going to see the bottom drop even more.”

While some former commissioners served under only one president, others worked through transitions to new administrations. Carr served as acting commissioner under President Barack Obama and Trump until the latter appointed Lynn Woodworth. Under Biden, Woodworth stayed on until the end of his term in 2021. 

Carr wasn’t alone in asking for more resources for NCES, which collects and analyzes data on all aspects of education, including enrollment trends and the state of the teacher workforce. During his tenure Woodworth pushed for more and equipment, rather than contracting with outside agencies, but said his requests were always denied.

Schneider applauded Carr for driving the requirement under No Child Left Behind to administer the core NAEP math and reading tests every two years. The law required states to participate to receive federal funds. 

​​”Someone had to turn NAEP into that machine to deliver on a regular basis data required by law,” he said. “She deserves all the credit in the world for that.”

Carr also led the transition to a in 2018 and to of students’ answers in 2022. But Schneider, who has indicated he wouldn’t rule out returning to his former position, said the program hasn’t kept up with “modern data-collection techniques.”

He’d prefer the next commissioner to have state-level experience and to be more “critical of these big research houses” like ETS, which has held NAEP contracts for roughly 40 years and just won in January. 

“The challenge for NAEP, and more broadly for NCES,” Schneider said, “is modernization — creating new data systems that are faster, cheaper, better.”