Reasons why there are few incentives for test publishers to make significant innovations in what is tested or how it is tested are given. A brief discussion of research on growth spurts in the brain, hemispheric differences, and other neurological phenomena is followed by a discussion of some conclusions drawn from this work. While skepticism is expressed over the great inferential chasms one must leap to arrive at some conclusions, hope is expressed that the field will ultimately prove fruitful in permitting more sensitive assessment of individual children. Recent studies in cognitive psychology are discussed and hope is expressed that these areas, too, will lead to improved assessment although their current relevance to practice is not great. Finally, some areas of investigation that are currently being ignored are mentioned as being potential sources of useful evaluation. (Author)