Students enrolled in a Psychology of Learning course were assigned to either a lecture section, one of two similar personalized instruction sections, or a fourth section that rotated across all three teaching procedures. All students took identical midterms and a final examination. After correcting test performance for differences in the cumulative grade point average of students in the four sections, examination performance of students in the personalized sections was found to be superior to that of students in the lecture section. An analysis of class section examination performance by item type revealed that students in the lecture section scored lower on all item types, but the greatest differences occurred on items that required written responses (essay and fill‐in items) rather than recognition responses (multiple choice items). A gross analysis of student performance in the class rotated across the instructional procedures suggests that personalized instruction had its greatest impact on students with “average” to “poor” academi