High-level analog circuit design is a complex problem domain in which evolutionary search has recently produced encouraging results. However, little is known about how to best structure evolution for these tasks. The choices of circuit representation, fitness evaluation technique, and genetic operators clearly have a profound effect on the search process. In this paper, we examine fitness evaluation by comparing the effectiveness of four fitness schedules. Three fitness schedules are dynamic { the evaluation function changes over the course of the run, and one is static. Coevolutionary search is included, and we present a method of evaluating the problem population that is conducive to multiobjective optimization. Twenty-five runs of an analog amplifier design task using each fitness schedule are presented. The results indicate that solution quality is highest with static and coevolving fitness schedules as compared to the other two dynamic schedules. We discuss these results and offer two possible explanations for the observed behavior: retention of useful information, and alignment of problem difficulty with circuit proficiency.