Here in the United Kingdom, we are used to the idea of assessing pupils' work against Levels. In fact, perhaps we are a little too used to it. Our familiarity with the Level Descriptions in the National Curriculum, and the ways they might inform our Key Stage 3 assessments, can stop us from thinking even harder about exactly what it is that we are assessing. In Canada, the setting for this article by John Myers, the notion of levelling work is relatively new. The novelty of levels, and the fact that there are no prescribed levels that must be used, has led some teachers to engage in important work about what it is possible and desirable to assess, how the subtleties of different levels can be captured and how the process of such assessment can be made meaningful to pupils. Myers argues that any kind of assessment framework--what the Canadians call "rubrics"--must "bring to the surface what we value in learning". His account of the Canadian approach provides a fascinating comparison with our own experiences. [A combined list of references and notes is provided.]