ELEVEN INSTITUTES FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS (THREE MUSIC, TWO ART, TWO THEATER, TWO HUMANITIES, ONE LATIN, AND ONE FILM) WERE EVALUATED ON THE BASIS OF QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES FROM 300 OF THE 430 PARTICIPANTS, FINAL REPORTS OF INSTITUTE DIRECTORS, AND DETAILED REPORTS OF OBSERVERS. THE GREATER EMPHASIS ON SUBJECT CONTENT THAN ON INSTRUCTIONAL METHODOLGY IN THESE INSTITUTES WAS APPROVED BY MOST PARTICIPANTS. INSTITUTES ON A SINGLE SCHOOL SUBJECT, ACCOMPANIED BY EXPLICIT PROPOSALS FOR SCHOOL COURSES, WERE JUDGED TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE IN DEALING WITH INSTRUCTIONAL METHODS THAN WERE INSTITUTES THAT COVERED SEVERAL SUBJECT AREAS, UNACCOMPANIED BY SPECIFIC COURSE PROPOSALS. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT ONE KIND OF INSTITUTE IS MORE LIKELY TO PROMOTE CURRICULAR INNOVATION THAN ANY OTHER KIND. IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT INSTITUTES BE CONTINUED, THAT SINGLE-SUBJECT, EXPLICITLY INNOVATIVE INSTITUTES BE GIVEN PREFERENCE, THAT THE EMPHASIS ON CONTENT OVER METHOD BE CONTINUED, THAT (IN SOME AREAS) SEMINAR AND STUDIO COURSES ARE AT LEAST AS IMPORTANT AS LECTURE COURSES, AND THAT INSTITUTE SCHEDULES BE LESS CROWDED. (AF)