The question of what it means to follow the "Standards" is discussed. It is argued that the "Standards" consists of statements of general principles, and that interpretation for specific applications requires professional judgment. As a result, disagreements among professionals on the applicability of particular standards to specific situations are inevitable. Consequently, effective monitoring or enforcement is problematic. The need for a revision of the "Standards" is considered. It is concluded that while some modifications may be desirable, they might be accomplished by the creation of an addendum rather than a complete revision. It is suggested that the effort and required resources for a complete revision might be better spent on the development and adoption of a companion set of standards dealing with the use of aggregate test results in accountability systems and/or a casebook that would illustrate the application of the "Standards" to specific situations.