This study addresses the validation of a holistic English assessment process used at Cabrillo College (California). The process of prompt development, scoring rubrics, reader training, scoring, and administration procedures have remained largely unchanged over the years. This report provides new evidence on content validity, consequential and cut score validity, reliability, test bias review, and disproportionate impact. To provide data for the validation study, 18,398 English assessments between fall 1994 and fall 2000 were used. Information was derived from the CAPP system and Cabrillo's MIS database. Procedures and standards of the California Community College Chancellor's Office for assessment instrument validation provided the framework for the analyses in this report. A representative committee of three English faculty reviewed the assessment test for content validity. For each course content item, reviewers checked off the essay grading criteria that would test for that course content item. All 3,932 essays from fall 1999 to fall 2000 were reviewed for interrater reliability. In general, Cabrillo's assessment appears to place students with reasonable accuracy. Proportions of placements were significantly different between ethnicities and between genders. About three-quarters of Cabrillo assessed students felt they were appropriately qualified for the English class in which they were enrolled. Logistic regressions were run to determine the interaction of educational background and demography. (JA)