Abstract
Surveying the history of the first thirty years of assessment of negotiation students, the authors find a great deal of creativity, but also a great deal of illogic. To set the stage for the detailed chapters which follow, the authors analyze the multiple purposes behind assessment, and outline a range of possibilities. They also identify seven criteria which any responsible evaluation system should try to satisfy, and discuss a key distinction: the different purposes of formative and summative assessment. It is essential, they contend, that modern systems of assessment address both.