The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the only accurate and credible indicator of educational performance capable of informing about national trends and state differences in student achievement, serves many different constituencies whose opinions must figure heavily in determining the future directions of the NAEP. To identify, analyze, and compare opinions of some key NAEP constituencies, a multi-stage process was undertaken that began with the identification of some key components through consultation with the National Center for Education Statistics and the National Assessment Governing Board. A survey was developed and administered to representatives of the eight key constituent groups, generally associations of educators and government representatives. With telephone follow-up, the overall response rate was 83% (352) completed surveys. Focus groups were conducted to assess opinions about these issues with representatives of seven other NAEP constituencies, including educational administrators, teachers, and the public. Although the constituent groups did not have identical opinions on the issues discussed in the survey and focus groups, there were many cases in which similar opinions were expressed. Attitudes common to most respondents include the recognition that instructional practices, student characteristics, and school characteristics are important background variables to measure, although they might be measured and reported in a way that would make the process more rapid. A multistep approach could be used to allow the immediate reporting of achievement results with the detailed reporting of background material as available. Most respondents thought that reading and writing should be assessed as individual subjects, while other subjects could be assessed in clusters. Subscale reports were seen as most important for mathematics. Most respondents also thought that NAEP assessments should be administered annually, and that the government should support efforts to link the NAEP to international assessments. Three appendixes present the survey, a summary of responses, and the focus groups protocol for the media group. (Contains 9 tables and 25 figures.) (SLD)