The feasibility of implementing self-paced computerized tailored testing evaluation methods in an undergraduate measurement and evaluation course, and possible differences in achievement levels under a paced versus self-paced testing schedule were investigated. A maximum likelihood tailored testing procedure based on the simple logistic model had previously been used for evaluation in this course; however, scheduling of the testing sessions had been determined by the instructor. The basic thrust of the initial question addressed the possibilities of having students determine when they would prefer to take the exams. The study also investigated whether or not there would be significant differences in achievement level of students allowed to schedule their exams and those whose exams were scheduled by the instructor. One hundred and seventy-two undergraduate students participated in the study. Students were randomly assigned to nine experimental groups consisting of combinations of two exams with the following testing schedules: paced tailored test, self-paced tailored test, and traditional paper and pencil test. Results on a comprehensive final were used as dependent measures. Since computerized tailored testing did not, in itself, affect achievement, and since it provides immediate feedback to the student, it is concluded to be an increasingly feasible method of testing. (Author/CTM)