THREE STUDIES UNDERTAKEN AT BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY ATTEMPTED TO ASSESS THE RELATIVE EFFICIENCY OF THE UNIVERSITY'S INDIVIDUALIZED APPROACH AND A WHOLE-CLASS APPROACH TO TEACHING SPELLING IN THE ELEMENTARY GRADES. THE FIRST-YEAR STUDY UTILIZED THESE TWO APPROACHES IN GRADES TWO THROUGH SIX. THE SECOND-YEAR PROJECT CONTINUED THE USE OF THESE METHODS IN THE SECOND AND THIRD GRADES, BUT UTILIZED FOUR METHODS IN GRADES FOUR THROUGH SIX BY USING, IN SOME CLASSES, THE SCIENCE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES' SPELLING LABORATORY IN COMBINATION WITH EACH OF THE ORIGINAL METHODS. THE THIRD WAS A LONGITUDINAL STUDY BASED UPON DATA FROM THE OTHER TWO. THE INDIVIDUALIZED METHOD PROVED TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AT LEAST AS MUCH SPELLING GROWTH AS THE WHOLE-CLASS METHOD. HOWEVER, PRIMARY STUDENTS OF LOW READING ABILITY APPEARED TO BENEFIT MORE FROM THE WHOLE-CLASS APPROACH. SYSTEMATIC, INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION IN SPELLING PRINCIPLES WAS FOUND TO BE VALUABLE IN CONJUNCTION WITH EITHER METHOD, PARTICULARLY IN THE FOURTH AND FIFTH GRADES WITH STUDENTS OF MEDIUM OR LOW READING ABILITY. THAT THE LONGITUDINAL STUDY IDENTIFIED MORE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE METHODS TESTED THAN DID EITHER OF THE OTHER STUDIES INDICATES THE VALUE OF USING A METHOD AT LEAST TWO YEARS BEFORE JUDGING ITS EFFICIENCY. (RD)