A study examined teachers' reactions to the conceptual framework developed and used in designing the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in Reading. A total of 312 classroom teachers (of 1000 surveyed) responded to a questionnaire about the "Reading Framework," a document used in developing the 1992 NAEP. Subjects were members of the International Reading Association, and 82% of them were elementary teachers. Results indicated that: (1) more teachers favor exclusive use of authentic passages than those who want passages written to test specific skills; (2) assessing reading to perform a task and reading to be informed were perceived as more essential than assessing reading for literary experience; (3) there was strong support for the four cognitive aspects of reading that were used to develop questions that assess constructing, extending, and examining meaning; (4) there was virtual unanimity for including open-ended test items but differences of opinion about the proportion of open-ended to multiple-choice items; (5) there was far more enthusiasm for investigating portfolio assessment and metacognition than there was for assessing fourth graders' reading fluency; and (6) there were more teachers who favored state-by-state reporting than opposed it. Findings suggest that overall, there is considerable support from many teachers for the rationale articulated in the framework for the 1992 NAEP in Reading. (Appendixes presenting the questionnaire and response data, the cover letter accompanying the questionnaire, and an overview of NAEP and plans for the 1992 Assessment in Reading are attached.) (RS)