Tailored testing procedures for achievement testing were applied in a situation that failed to meet some of the specifications generally considered to be necessary for tailored testing. Discrepancies from the appropriate conditions included the use of small samples for calibrating items, and the use of an item pool that was not designed to be homogeneous in content. The item pool contained 180 items concerning educational measurement that were calibrated separately by a one-parameter logistic model and by a three-parameter logistic model. The 110 undergraduate students were each tested at two sessions a week apart with both one-parameter and three-parameter tailored tests at each session. All tests were administered on a computer terminal. The results were studied for several characteristics including: goodness of fit of the observed responses to those predicted by each model; the information function of each test compared to a fifty-item traditional paper-and-pencil test; the reliabilities of the tailored tests; and the content validities of the tailored tests. A unidimensional tailored test of vocabulary was also administered, with satisfactory results. The achievement tests generally produced unsatisfactory results, presumably because of the discrepancies from appropriate conditions. (CTM)