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)

Several extensions to the Angoff method of standard setting are described that can accommodate characteristics of performance-based assessment. A study involving 12 panelists supported the effectiveness of the new approach but suggested that panelists preferred an approach that was at least partially conjunctive. (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)

Credentialing programs were surveyed to determine the procedures they use to set performance standards on multiple-choice and open-ended assessments. Implications of the various standard-setting approaches for the National Assessment of Educational Progress are discussed, and it is asserted that generalizing from standard-setting in professional…

The experience of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards illustrates how issues of assessing the content representativeness of performance assessment can be addressed to ensure validity for certification procedures. Explores the challenges of collecting validation evidence when expert judgments of content are used. (SLD)

A performance-standard setting procedure termed judgmental policy capturing (JPC) and its application are described. A study involving 12 panelists demonstrated the feasibility of the JPC method for setting performance standards for classroom teachers seeking certification from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (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)

Development of a multistage dominant profile method for setting standards on complex performance assessments is detailed. The method grew from experiences with a judgmental policy-capturing procedure and an extended Angoff method. The design of an early adolescence English language arts assessment illustrates the complexity of decisions panelists…

A brief history of developments in the assessment of the reliability of credentialing examinations is presented, and some new results are outlined that highlight the interactions among scoring, standard setting, and the reliability and validity of pass-fail decisions. Decision consistency is an important concept in evaluating credentialing…

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)