Regardless of how one might feel about the recent developments in teacher evaluation systems, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and adequate yearly progress (AYP), or student assessments for high-stakes promotion decisions, educators overwhelmingly agree that use of multiple measures is better than reliance on a single measure such as a large-scale, standardized assessment. In designing systems of multiple measures, however, it is critical to be aware of the different purposes of multiple measures and how those purposes impact the selection of measures, frequency of administration, aggregation of results across measures, and interpretation and use of results. All of the multiple measures available might not have been intended to meet the same purpose, and therefore, should be used and interpreted appropriately.