Recently, there has been a revival of interest in educational researh fo-cusing on the training of architects. The initial goal of this research pro-gram was to develop and evaluative test that could serve as a better predic-tor of student's performance in a university level program in architecturethan traditional intelligence measures. A secondary goal was to determinewhether there was a significant difference in architecture student's ablili-ties with regard to linguistic versus graphic communication. A final goalwas to determine whether there was a significant divergence in the per-formance of students from architecture schools in three different countries-i.e., Ireland, Nigeria, and the United States-on the evaluative test.Since the late 1940's, there have been various attempts In the United King-dom and the United States to develop alternative means of screening appli-cants for entrance into school of architecture. The reason for seeking othermeans of evaluation is that, although traditional university entrance examstest the applicants abilities in mathematics, sciences, and humanities, theyhave not necessarily served as a good predictor of succes in architecture.After considerable discussion with architectural educators regarding theunique characteristics of the discipline of architecture, it was generallyagreed that any evaluative test of architecture students should assess twokey abilities: 1. Visual communication, and2. there-dinesional visualization.An evaluation instrument consisting of sixty-eight (68) written questionsand graphic problems was developed. The instrument draws from previouswork done by other researchers such as. l.N. Uzagba. It was administered toa total of 246 students in the first, second, and third years of the programsof schools of architecture in Ireland, Nigeria, and the United States. The re-search addresses both the reliability and validity of the evaluative instru-ment. It then proceeds to address a number of content questions:1. Is there a significant difference in performance of the students in thefirst, second, and third years?2. It there a singificant difference in Irish, Nigerian, and United Sates stu-dent's performance?3. Is it possible to predict a student's score in their third year based ontheir first year performance on the test?4. Is there a significant difference between student's performance on thewritten questions versus the graphic problems?The paper will examine these questions, providing tentative answers. It willalso examine the key conceptual and methodological issues of the research.Finally, It will conclude with some indications of how architectural eductionin there different cultures seems to impact student's performance as wellas how future researchers may wish to proceed in arriving at better pre-dictors of student success architecture programs.