Different instructional programs were developed for three mathematics aptitude item formats to determine the relative susceptibility of each to special instruction. Subjects were male and female high school junior volunteers in 12 schools. In the seven weeks between a pre‐ and posttest, experimental Ss received 21 hours of instruction for one of the three formats; control Ss received no special instrucion. Each of the three formats was found susceptible to instruction directed toward it. The complex formats were most susceptible. Female Ss were slightly less able mathematically at the outset and benefited less from instruction than males. Mean gains of nearly a full standard deviation for groups instructed for the complex formats were considered to be of practical consequence.

The research literature on short‐term instruction (STI) and intermediate‐term instruction (ITI) for the SAT‐Mathematics and SAT‐Verbal was reviewed. Selected studies of STI and ITI for tests other than the SAT‐M and SAT‐V, and of testwiseness (TW), per se, were included in the survey if they were judged relevant to the question of special instruction for the SAT. The research studies were reviewed and interpreted within the framework of a score components model which posited four content‐related and two TW score components, as well as two secondary ones (test‐taking confidence and efficiency), that are theoretically subject to STI and ITI effects. In addition, examinee, item, and instructional characteristics were considered, as these relate to the score components model. Basic discrepancies between negative and positive findings were noted for both the SAT‐M and the SAT‐V. These were generally resolved in favor of recognizing meaningful STI effects for the SAT‐M, but remain unresolved for the SAT‐V. Recommendations were made for SAT‐M and SAT‐V research allowing STI effects to be partitioned according to examinee, item, and instructional characteristics, as these apply to selected test score components.

No abstract