Many states have a disconnected body of laws regarding educator evaluation. Uncoordinated legislation can create problems with respect to evaluation, appropriate standards and methods to be employed, and implementation strategies. This paper describes Utah's educator-evaluation legislation to illustrate this phenomenon. Four statutory provisions are examined--the Utah Orderly Termination Procedures Act, the Educational Professional Practices Act, the Career Ladder Act, and the Educator Evaluation Act. The analysis focuses on the congruency between the intent of state legislative provisions and evaluation purposes. The paper also examines the relation of technical soundness to evaluation purposes. Effective evaluation programs include several elements that are difficult to implement when legislation is assembled in a piecemeal manner: (1) a crisp and functional articulation of the evaluation purposes; (2) evaluation methods that match assessment purposes; (3) technical soundness, such as reliability and validity; and (4) feasibility and practicability. Utah's major educator evaluation laws illustrate a number of difficulties commonly found nationwide--vague legislative language, variable terminology, unclear assessment standards, intersecting and incompatible laws, mixed purposes, and unclear use of the term "competence." Recommendations for administrators and policymakers are included. (LMI)