National Achievement Survey 2025 Explained: Himachal’s Surprise Success Story

The National Achievement Survey (NAS) 2025 results, released on July 2, brought a notable shift in educational performance rankings, with Himachal Pradesh making a remarkable leap from its modest 21st position in 2021 into the top five. While Punjab and Kerala continued to hold their leading positions, it was Himachal’s impressive 16-rank jump that garnered significant attention. This recent development underscores the dynamic nature and profound policy implications of the NAS, a crucial assessment tool that provides a systemic health check of the Indian education landscape, offering vital insights for policymakers and educators alike.

What is the National Achievement Survey all about?

• What are its core objectives and scope?
  • The National Achievement Survey (NAS) is a comprehensive educational assessment survey conducted nationwide, serving as a critical indicator of the overall health and effectiveness of India’s education system. It is a nationwide assessment conducted every three years by the Ministry of Education, measuring the learning outcomes of students in   government and government-aided schools in Classes 3, 5, 8, and 10. It tests core subjects such as language, mathematics, and science, providing States with data to inform policy. Its fundamental purpose extends beyond individual student evaluation; it functions as a system-level diagnostic tool for the entire school education framework. This implies that the findings are not merely about individual student scores but about the efficacy of educational policies, curriculum design, and teaching methodologies at a macro level, thereby guiding strategic interventions rather than individual student remediation.  
  • The primary goals of NAS include evaluating children’s progress and learning competencies, identifying specific learning gaps, and informing the implementation of appropriate remedial actions across various administrative levels, from national to district.  
  • The survey encompasses students in Classes 3, 5, 8, and 10, attending a diverse range of schools, including state government schools, government-aided schools, private unaided schools, and central government schools.  
  • Subjects assessed vary according to the class level:
    • For Classes 3 and 5, the core subjects evaluated are Language, Mathematics, and Environmental Studies (EVS).  
    • Class 8 assessments cover Language, Mathematics, Science, and Social Science.  
    • For Class 10, the subjects include Modern Indian Language, Mathematics, Science, Social Science, and English.  
• How has it evolved over time?
  • The NAS originated as an independent initiative by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). In 2000, recognizing its alignment with the broader national objective of achieving 100% literacy, the survey was integrated into the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), managed by the Ministry of Education.  
  • Since its inception in 2001, the NAS has been conducted eight times, typically adhering to a three-year cycle. The most recent comprehensive survey was held on November 12, 2021, following a delay caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic.  
  • A significant methodological shift has occurred, moving NAS from a primary focus on content-based testing to a more advanced competency-based assessment. For example, both the NAS 2017 and NAS 2021 cycles emphasized competency-based test questions that directly reflected the learning outcomes developed by NCERT. This progression signifies a maturation in India’s approach to large-scale educational evaluation, indicating a move towards more statistically robust and pedagogically relevant measurements, essential for aligning with modern educational philosophies like those articulated in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.  
  • Furthermore, the data analysis methodology has seen considerable advancement. From Cycle 3 onwards (e.g., NAS 2010/11), the survey adopted the Item Response Theory (IRT) for data analysis, marking a shift from the earlier Classical Test Theory (CTT) model. IRT is a sophisticated psychometric model that measures the true underlying ability of students, enabling more accurate and meaningful   comparison of scores over time, thereby increasing the efficiency, accuracy, and overall usefulness of the results. This technical upgrade is critical for tracking progress and evaluating the long-term impact of policy interventions.  

Who are the key stakeholders in NAS governance?

• What roles do various bodies play?
  • The Ministry of Education, Government of India, serves as the paramount authority, overseeing the implementation of the sample-based NAS and providing comprehensive strategic guidance.  
  • The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) is entrusted with the crucial task of developing the overarching Assessment Framework and meticulously identifying grade-wise subject-specific Learning Outcomes. NCERT also plays a central role in conducting the surveys and publishing technical reports derived from the findings.  
  • For specific cycles, such as NAS 2021, the administration of the survey was specifically delegated to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE).  
  • A National Steering Committee provides oversight for the test administration. This committee comprises members from pivotal organizations including the Department of School Education and Literacy, CBSE, NCERT, UNICEF, the National Informatics Centre (NIC), and NITI Aayog. The multi-tiered and multi-agency involvement, encompassing national ministries and various state-level bodies, highlights the immense scale and inherent logistical complexities of NAS. While this distributed responsibility aims for comprehensive coverage and local relevance across a vast and diverse nation, it also introduces intricate accountability pathways, where monitoring deficiencies at any single level can significantly impact overall data quality and reliability.  
  • At the state level, several key bodies are instrumental:
    • State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERTs) / State Institutes of Education (SIEs) are vital players, with the Director of the SCERT often serving as the State Coordinator.  
    • State Project Directors (SPDs) of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) unit function as State Level Coordinators for Monitoring and are responsible for nominating members to the District Monitoring Unit.  
    • District Institute of Education and Training (DIETs), through their Principals acting as District Coordinators, are responsible for facilitating assessments, including arranging for replacement schools if original sampled schools are unable to conduct the assessment due to unforeseen circumstances.  
    • The MIS Coordinator and UDISE Team manage critical operational tasks such as training, OMR sheet design and scanning, pre-survey updates, post-survey verification, and the crucial uploading of data to the NAS Web Application.  
    • The District Monitoring Unit (DMU), comprising the District Education Officer and Block Education Officer, reports to the State Level Coordinator-Monitoring regarding the implementation and progress of NAS activities.  
  • On the ground, approximately 2 lakh Field Investigators (FIs), often D.El.Ed Trainees from DIETs or other trained personnel, and around 1.24 lakh Observers were engaged for NAS 2021 to ensure the fair conduct and integrity of data collection. Observers are typically inter-ministerial officials and are explicitly not from the conducting agencies like SCERTs/SIEs & DIETs, maintaining an independent layer of oversight.  

How is the National Achievement Survey conducted?

• What methodology and assessment tools are used?
  • The NAS employs a sophisticated two-stage sampling design, with schools serving as the primary sampling unit. Stratification is extensively utilized, and for NAS 2021, the design aimed to provide data at the level of school-administration type within school districts. The selection of sampled schools is rigorously based on   Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE+) data, specifically UDISE+ 2019-20 data for the NAS 2021 cycle. The immense scale of the survey, involving approximately   3.4 million students from 118,000 schools in NAS 2021, aims to ensure national and district-level representativeness. However, practical considerations, such as the replacement of schools with fewer than 6 students or the exclusion of certain categories like unrecognized private schools, introduce inherent limitations to the comprehensiveness of the overall sample. This represents a tension between achieving statistical representativeness and managing practical logistical constraints, potentially affecting the complete picture of learning outcomes, especially in marginalized or remote areas.  
  • The assessment design is meticulously structured:
    • A notable feature of NAS 2021 was its simultaneous administration on a single day across the entire country for all four assessed grades, facilitating a comprehensive and synchronized assessment.  
    • The tests utilize multiple test booklets with varying numbers of multiple-choice (MC) items: 50 questions for Classes 3 and 5, 60 questions for Class 8, and 70 questions for Class 10.  
    • A modular matrix design was implemented in NAS 2021, allowing each student to take a combination of only two subjects. This approach enables increased content coverage without unduly increasing the cognitive load on students.  
    • To facilitate longitudinal analysis and enable comparison of results across cycles, common items from NAS 2017 were deliberately included in the NAS 2021 assessments.  
  • In addition to the achievement tests, Pupil Questionnaires (PQ), Teacher Questionnaires (TQ), and School Questionnaires (SQ) are administered. These instruments are crucial for collecting rich contextual information pertaining to student demographics, school environment, teaching practices, and the broader impact of external factors like the pandemic.  
  • Recognizing India’s profound linguistic diversity, the tests are adapted and administered in multiple languages of instruction, with translations into 15 regional languages for NAS 2010/11, and a general mention of 22 languages for broader adaptation.  
• How is data collected and analyzed?
  • The primary method for data collection involves recording responses on Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheets, which are then processed and evaluated.  
  • For data analysis procedures, NAS employs both Item Response Theory (IRT) and Classical Test Theory (CTT). From Cycle 3 onwards, IRT, specifically the 2PL model, has been utilized as the primary scaling methodology for the multiple-choice items. This methodological refinement, particularly the adoption of IRT and the focus on competency-based items, reflects a continuous effort to enhance the statistical rigor and educational relevance of the survey, aligning it with international best practices in large-scale assessment.  
  • Unlike some international assessments, NAS 2021 did not incorporate an additional conditioning step (which uses background information) to generate plausible values, instead relying on a single proficiency score for each student.  
  • The analysis also extends to examining the association between student achievement and various contextual variables derived from the accompanying questionnaires.  
  • Results are reported using scale scores and proficiency levels, providing detailed insights at the national, state, and district levels.  
  • To ensure the integrity and reliability of the data, rigorous training and continuous monitoring of field investigators are integral to the process, ensuring data quality through standardized test administration protocols.  

Why is NAS significant for Indian education?

• What is its impact on policy and curriculum?
  • NAS serves as a cornerstone for evidence-based policymaking by providing quantifiable data on student achievement. This data acts as a rich repository of evidence, enabling policymakers to precisely identify systemic gaps, design appropriate syllabi, and allocate educational resources more efficiently. This moves educational governance from anecdotal evidence to data-driven strategies, crucial for a large and diverse country.  
  • Himachal Pradesh’s recent rise in the NAS is particularly significant as it signals a reversal of a long-standing decline in the state’s public education system. Once a model for other hill states, Himachal’s public schooling had struggled for years, marked by issues like contractual hiring of teachers, inadequate recruitment, and compromised academic standards. This led to a significant exodus of students to private schools, even in remote villages, as public confidence waned. A stark example of this decline was a Class 8 student reportedly unable to pass a Class 3-level math test.
  • The findings are instrumental in developing targeted interventions, which can be categorized as long-term, mid-term, and short-term, aimed at improving learning levels and facilitating differential planning based on specific data-driven insights.  
  • NAS data critically informs curriculum and instructional improvements, helping evaluate whether the current curriculum aligns with desired learning outcomes and guiding the development of optimal pedagogical approaches. For instance, following the NAS 2017 report, the   Punjab education department realigned its syllabus on the NCERT pattern and subsequently introduced its own Punjab Achievement Survey (PAS) to better prepare students and assess learning loss, demonstrating a direct policy response to NAS findings.  
  • The survey provides crucial feedback that integrates seamlessly with the broader goals of national educational reforms, particularly the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which emphasizes competency-based education, and the NIPUN Bharat Mission, focused on foundational literacy and numeracy.  
  • By providing clear metrics across schools and institutions, NAS significantly enhances accountability within the education system, supporting departments in monitoring teacher effectiveness and student performance.  
  • The 2021 survey specifically illuminated the profound effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on education, offering critical insights into the effectiveness of multi-faceted learning approaches and highlighting challenges such as the digital divide. For example, the survey revealed that only 45% of students found online learning joyful, 38% encountered difficulties, and a significant 24% lacked access to necessary devices at home.  
• How does it influence teacher training and capacity building?
  • The diagnostic report cards generated from NAS findings are instrumental in capacity building for teachers and officials involved in education delivery. These reports provide granular data that directly empowers educators by highlighting specific student learning gaps, enabling them to tailor their teaching methods effectively.  
  • Following surveys like NAS 2021, workshops are systematically conducted at different levels for educational administrators and teachers, focusing on interpreting the results and planning targeted interventions.  
  • NAS actively supports capacity building at the state and Union Territory level through the establishment of Master Trainer Programs. These programs train a cadre of State Level Master Trainers (SLMTs), who then disseminate findings and provide direct support to teachers in implementing alternative instructional strategies to address identified learning deficiencies.  
  • In collaboration with supporting agencies, NCERT develops comprehensive intervention handbooks and ICT-based learning resources/materials specifically designed to address the learning gaps identified by NAS data in classrooms. This fosters a more responsive and effective teaching-learning environment at the grassroots level.  

How did Himachal Pradesh achieve its high rank?

• What recent reforms contributed to its success?
  • Since taking office, the Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu-led government in Himachal Pradesh has implemented a combination of rational restructuring and a renewed commitment to public education.
  • Faced with demographic shifts, notably a declining fertility rate highlighted in the NFHS-5, the administration took decisive action to consolidate resources.
  • More than 1,000 under-enrolled schools were merged, which allowed for the better deployment of teachers and infrastructure across the state.
  • The entire school education system was unified under a single directorate, spanning from pre-primary to Class 12, thereby enhancing focus and accountability within the administrative framework.
  • School-level decision-making was actively encouraged, fostering a greater sense of ownership and identity among students.
  • Teachers and meritorious students were provided with valuable exposure visits, both nationally and internationally, to learn from and adopt innovative educational practices.
  • A cluster-based model of school management was adopted to promote peer learning among schools, facilitate the sharing of resources, and encourage greater community participation in the educational process.

What do the recent NAS results reveal?

• What are the key national performance trends?
  • The NAS 2021 survey indicated a discernible relative decline in student learning outcomes compared to NAS 2017, a trend predominantly attributed to the pervasive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education. This national decline, particularly in core subjects like Mathematics and Language, coupled with exacerbated disparities, suggests that the pandemic disproportionately impacted vulnerable student populations, highlighting systemic inequities and the urgent need for targeted recovery efforts.  
  • The average national performance (out of a total score of 500) in NAS 2021 across key subjects was as follows:
    • Language:311.  
    • Mathematics:266.  
    • Environmental Studies (EVS):295.  
    • Modern Indian Languages:260.  
    • Science:228.  
    • Social Science:243.  
    • English:277.  
  • The survey consistently highlights persistent learning gaps across various grades. For instance, 43% of Class 6 students struggled to grasp main ideas in texts, and a staggering 63% of Class 9 students failed to identify simple patterns in numbers or comprehend basic numerical sets like fractions and integers.  
  • Mathematics emerged as a particularly significant challenge across grade levels, with 54% of Class 6 students unable to compare whole numbers or read large numbers, and 55% of Class 3 students struggling to arrange numbers up to 99 in ascending or descending order.  
  • The results also revealed persistent socio-demographic disparities. While girls generally outperformed boys in most subjects, the performance of rural schools consistently lagged behind urban schools in higher classes. Furthermore, students from OBC, SC, and ST communities experienced a notably higher educational decline compared to other demographic groups.  
• How do states compare in recent surveys? A comparative analysis of state performance in recent National Achievement Surveys reveals varied trajectories, as summarized in the table below. It is important to note that performance metrics, such as overall ranking or specific subject scores, may vary across different survey cycles due to evolving assessment methodologies and the specific data points available.

Table: Comparative State Performance in National Achievement Surveys (NAS)

What are the limitations and challenges of NAS?

• What are its inherent methodological constraints?
  • A notable limitation of the NAS, being a school-based assessment, is its exclusion of several categories of children. This includes students enrolled in private unaided schools, unrecognized schools, institutions of religious learning, as well as children who are out of school or absent on the day of the assessment. This inherent design choice means the survey does not provide a truly comprehensive picture of learning outcomes across all children in the country.  
  • The NAS primarily measures what is easily testable, and not necessarily what is most meaningful for a holistic education. Broader aims of education, such as critical thinking, emotional growth, civic awareness, and equity, are not fully captured by the survey.
  • In earlier cycles, NAS provided information primarily at the national and state levels, with limited district-level representation. While later cycles aimed for district-level data, this historical limitation affected localized planning.  
  • Comparability issues across cycles exist due to shifts in analytical methodologies. For instance, the transition from Classical Test Theory (CTT) to Item Response Theory (IRT) from Cycle 3 onwards means that results of earlier rounds are not directly comparable with later ones. This complicates the tracking of long-term trends.  
  • The survey’s focus on grade-level competencies, while important for curriculum alignment, may not fully capture foundational skills that are a prerequisite for higher-level learning. This can obscure deeper learning deficits.  
  • The sampling procedure at the school level appears to imply that only children present on the day of the assessment were included. This could introduce a sampling bias, potentially misrepresenting student achievement if absent students have different learning profiles.  
• What operational difficulties does it face?
  • Monitoring deficiencies have been identified during survey implementation. For example, observations from the NAS (Cycle 3) Class 5 report indicated that NCERT teams “relied too heavily on the state and district coordinators to carry out the monitoring tasks” without sufficient central oversight.  
  • Discrepancies in data have been observed between official records like DISE data (District Information System for Education) and actual school enrollments used for sampling. Such inconsistencies can compromise the accuracy and representativeness of the sampled schools and students.  
  • Allegations of “fudged data” have surfaced, with some state governments dismissing previous high rankings as unreliable. For instance, the Aam Aadmi Party government in Punjab initially claimed the state’s top rank in NAS 2021 was “fudged” before celebrating its success in NAS 2024. This raises serious questions about data reliability and political influence on reported outcomes.  
  • Research indicates that NAS scores can be unrealistically high and may contain “little information about relative state performance” when compared with other independent surveys, suggesting fundamental concerns about the survey’s overall data reliability.  
  • Significant logistical challenges persist, particularly in remote and tribal areas, impacting effective administration and data collection. These include issues such as a lack of trained personnel and technological constraints.  
  • The reporting style of NAS findings, while academically rigorous, has been described as “a report by experts for experts”. This technical language can limit its accessibility and actionable utility for a wider audience, including policymakers, teachers, and parents.  

What is the way forward for NAS?

• What are the recommendations for improvement?
  • Strengthening monitoring mechanisms and ensuring robust oversight throughout the survey process is crucial to enhance data integrity and reliability.  
  • Enhancing data sharing with states and Union Territories is vital to enable them to conduct independent research and analysis on variables of interest, fostering greater utility and transparency.  
  • Developing dynamic item banks for various subjects and classes, with items piloted and regularly replenished, can ensure the continuous relevance and quality of assessment tools.  
  • Promoting the development and adaptation of ICT-based learning resources/materials for classroom transactions, linked to NAS findings, can increase outreach and address identified learning gaps more effectively.  
  • Integrating NAS findings directly into State Annual Work Plans & Budgets (AWPBs) can ensure that educational planning and resource allocation are evidence-based and targeted towards improving learning outcomes.  
  • Systematic curriculum review and reform based on NAS data can ensure that educational content and pedagogical practices are aligned with desired learning outcomes and modern educational philosophies.  
  • For states like Himachal Pradesh, the commitment must deepen by regularising teacher appointments, expanding holistic assessments beyond standardized tests, and ensuring that rural and marginalised students are not left behind.
• How can its utility be enhanced?
  • A critical enhancement involves shifting the assessment focus towards higher-order thinking skills rather than merely recall-based learning. This aligns with the National Education Policy 2020’s vision for holistic student development, ensuring NAS evaluates how students think, learn, and apply knowledge in real-life situations.  
  • Leveraging complementary assessments like the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) can provide a more comprehensive “health check” of learning levels from different angles, offering international benchmarks and a wider dialogue about educational quality.  
  • Sustained political will and careful interpretation of results are essential to translate data into meaningful policy and practice, avoiding superficial ranking or misinterpretation.  
  • Embracing digital transformation in NAS operations, including the use of smartphones, tablets, and online dashboards, promises improved data efficiency, transparency, and real-time reporting. Furthermore, the future integration of   AI and advanced data analytic tools could provide predictive insights from NAS data, guiding micro-level interventions and proactive educational planning. This strategic evolution emphasizes a shift towards a more dynamic, technologically integrated, and policy-responsive assessment system, indicating a vision to make NAS a more sophisticated and actionable tool for educational transformation.  
  • In the short term, scaling back the survey size to generate only state-level estimates, rather than district-level, could enhance data reliability, allowing for a gradual scale-up once quality issues are addressed.  

What is the conclusion regarding NAS?

The National Achievement Survey stands as a monumental exercise in India’s pursuit of educational excellence and equity, providing invaluable system-level diagnostics for the health of its vast school education system. While it has demonstrably evolved in its methodological rigor and policy integration, particularly in aligning with the National Education Policy 2020 and informing targeted interventions, persistent challenges related to data reliability, inclusivity, and operational complexities demand continuous refinement. The recent performance shifts, such as Himachal Pradesh’s significant improvement, highlight the dynamic nature of educational outcomes and underscore the critical need for a robust, transparent, and continuously adapting assessment mechanism. However, it is crucial to recognize that NAS, while an important signal, measures what is easily testable and does not fully capture broader educational aims like critical thinking, emotional growth, civic awareness, or equity. Therefore, its success should not become the sole benchmark for educational excellence, and a holistic view of education, encompassing socio-emotional well-being and quality of teaching-learning relationships, is essential to truly guide India’s educational trajectory.

Q. What are the critical implications of the National Achievement Survey’s findings for addressing educational disparities and fostering equitable learning outcomes in a diverse nation like India? (250 words)