An experiment was carried out to examine i) the effectiveness of meaningful learning over rote learning, and ii) the interaction between meaningfulness of learning and the methods of presentation. Three sets of 8 pairs of a simulus (S) and a response word (R) wete learned. The pair in the Ist set consisted of a word as S and a nonsense syllable (NS) as R. The pair in the the 2nd set had a word as S and two NSs, which had already been learned in the Ist set, as R. What the word in the 2nd set represented was equivalent to the combined meaning of the words in the Ist set, which had been associated to the NSs, elements of R. For example, a pair of water-bottleゥネUMA, NUYO in the 2nd set implied the association water-bottleゥゥゥ water, vessel, because Ss had learnecl in the Ist set that waterゥネUMA and vesselゥノUYO. The pair in the 3rd set had a word as S and 3 NSs as R. Learning the Ist and the 2nd set, Ss had establlshed an experimental "cognitive structure" whlch were relevant to the learning of the 3rd set. Similarly to the 2nd set,a half of the pairs in the 3rd set could be learned meaningfully, i. e. subsumed Into the "cognltlve structure" in a non-arbitrary and non-verbatiln fashion. Another half of the pairs, however, could only be learned by rote, because what S (a word) meant was different from the combination of the meanings of the 3 NSs which had been acqulred at the previous stages of Iearning. Two different but equivalent forms were prepared for the Ist and 2nd 8 pairs, controlling the difficulties of individual pairs in the 3rd set. (NSS in the Ist set were common to both forms.) Those who had learned the one form could learn a half of the pairs in the 3rd set meaningfully, while those who had learned another form could learn another half meaningfully. Each pair was written on a drawing paper, S in the upper and R in the lower row. In the learning of the Ist and 2nd sets, (10 and 3 trials respectively) only S was presented for 2 sec. at first then both S and R were presented for 8 sec. For the 3rd set (3 trials), S was presented for 10. sec., during which Ss were instructed to recall the paired R, then S and R for 5 sec. (S→SR presentation) ; S and R were presented simultaneously for 15 sec. (SR presentation) . Four classes of 7 grades served as Ss. The experiment was administered to one class at a time.