Students may avoid working on difficult tasks because it takes them longer to complete those tasks, which results in a delay to reinforcement. Research studies show that reinforcer and response dimensions can be manipulated within a concurrent operants framework to bias choice allocation toward more difficult tasks. The current study extends previous literature on concurrent choice assessments by examining the effects of reinforcement schedules and fluency interventions on the choice allocation between low and high effort math tasks. The study was conducted with 4 second graders in an elementary school. The choice assessment conducted prior to fluency training (Phase 1) examined the effects of enriching the reinforcement schedule for the high effort tasks on student choice. During fluency training (Phase 2), strategies to increase fluency rates on high effort tasks were implemented. The choice assessment following fluency training (Phase 3) examined changes in choice pattern when the same choice alternatives were available as in Phase 1. A concurrent schedules with reversal design was used to identify student response allocation to tasks under different reinforcement conditions during the choice assessments. The fluency training phase was conducted as a case study design. The three important findings of this study were: (a) prior to fluency training, the 4 students allocated more time to low effort tasks when equal reinforcement was provided for both types of math tasks; the students then shifted to high effort tasks as the reinforcement schedule was enriched for these tasks; (b) fluency training strategies were effective in increasing the rate at which high effort tasks were accurately completed; and (c) all 4 students switched more quickly to high effort tasks following fluency training. Implications for educators are discussed.

Multiple choice testing has been introduced as an assessment instrument in almost all educational systems during the past twenty years. A growing body of research seems to indicate that tests structured to a multiple choice format favour males. In the ACT, Queensland and Western Australia, a multiple choice examination known as ASAT was used to moderate student scores. Using data from the 1989 ASAT Paper 1, as well as data from the ACT Year 12 cohort of that year, an investigation was made of the items in the ASAT paper. This investigation attempted to identify specific types of questions that enabled males, on average, to perform better than females. Questions, which had a statistically significant difference between the results of males and females, were examined further. An ASAT unit was given to students to complete and their answers to a questionnaire concerning the unit were taped and analysed. The study found that males performed better, on average, than females on the 1989 ASAT Paper 1. The mean difference in the quantitative questions was much greater than in the verbal questions. A number of factors appear to contribute to the difference in performance between males and females. A statistically significant number of females study Mathematics at a lower level, which appears to contribute to females lower quantatitive scores. Females seem to be considerably more anxious about taking tests and this anxiety remains throughout a multiple choice test. Females lack confidence in their ability to achieve in tests and are tentative about "risktaking" which is an element of multiple choice tests. The language of the test and male oriented content may contribute to females' negative performance in multiple choice testing.