A brief summary of standard setting knowledge is presented, derived from about 20 methods that utilize a judgmental review process, the approach most relevant to the standard-setting strategies proposed in this special issue. Criteria for judging effectiveness and critiques of the methods discussed in the issue are offered. (SLD)

This review of methods for validating writing assessments was conceptualized within a framework suggested by S. Messick (1989) that included five operational components of construct validation: (1) content representativeness; (2) structural fidelity; (3) nomological validity; (4) criterion-related validity; and (5) nomothetic span. (SLD)

The articles of this special issue propose two methods of deriving an initial standard and one method for determining the extent to which the standard should include compensation. Much work remains to be done on further development of the methods and the larger issues of policy regarding performance assessment. (SLD)

The three standard-setting approaches described in this special issue are summarized and contrasted: (1) judgmental policy capturing; (2) the extended Angoff method; and (3) the dominant profile method. An integrative summary of findings is followed by recommendations for modifying the methods. (SLD)

This article provides a framework for the rest of the articles in this special issue comparing the utility of three standard-setting methods with complex performance assessments. The context of the standard setting study is described, and the methods are outlined. (SLD)

The validity of several criticisms of objective tests is addressed, and the viability of some alternatives to objective testing is discussed. Evidence against multiple-choice tests is not as strong as has been claimed. Authentic assessments may not always be better, and research about new forms of assessment is necessary. (SLD)

The old era of educational assessment and reasons for its demise are described. The new era will be different and will present four challenges to the assessment community: (1) new assessment targets; (2) technical challenges of alternative assessments; (3) demystifying assessment and evaluation; and (4) reexamining assessment priorities. (SLD)