The politics of assessment in New Jersey are examined in this study. Two basic questions addressed are: (1) what roles did competing interest groups play in the development and utilization of statewide assessment? and (2) has the controversy over the Educational Assessment Program (EAP) changed the impact of any of these groups on the future development of assessment policy in New Jersey? The paper follows the standard presentation of a case study analysis. First, the setting of the controversy is examined by tracing the development and application of statewide testing in New Jersey from 1970 to the present. The primary sources in this effort were court decisions in Robinson v. Cahill and Chappell v. Commissioner of Education and newspaper accounts. Second, the actors involved in the controversy over statewide testing are delineated, and from interviews with these actors their positions on the use of EAP to evaluate education in New Jersey are related. Third, the role of these groups are explored in four events--the reappointment of Carl Marburger as Commissioner of Education, the Chappel v. Commissioner of Education case, the legislation of statewide minimum standards--in order to ascertain how they influenced the development and use of statewide tests. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of the consequences of the EAP controversy on future assessment activities and the effectiveness of the EAP. (Author/RC)