Analysis of data on this algebra course, gathered by the Comprehensive Achievement Monitoring (CAM) system, indicated that equivalent scores were yielded by either random or chronological arrangement of the test items on the monitor forms. Chronological arrangement may be permissible, therefore, for normal data processing; random arrangement should be retained for computer processing. A set of nine cognitive ability tests were found to be poor predictors of achievement and, hence, ineffective for scheduling students. Split-half reliability for each text administration and test-retest reliability for each pair of administrations are given, together with test difficulties. An attempt was made to fit learning curves to the data to provide measures of individual performance. No consistent pattern appeared as to the curve providing the best fit over all students and it is suggested that meaningful information cannot be gathered from comprehensive monitors containing only nine items, as did these. The anticipated increase in scores from pretests to posttests did not occur. Since reliabilities and other parameters of the tests were acceptable, other explanations must be sought for the lack of change. For example, content validity of items or relatively sophisticated prior knowledge held by the students. (DG)