This technical paper discusses several empirical studies and controlled experiments arising from the integration of formal methods into an undergraduate software engineering curriculum. The experiment was motivated, for the most part, by a need to evaluate the influence of formal analysis techniques on teaching efficiency, and on the ability of undergraduate students to gain complex problem solving skills. The experiments took place at Miami University of Ohio, and studied two groups of students: the first group, the “formal group,” was composed of students who were exposed to both object-oriented design and formal methods. The second group, the control group, was students who had taken only a course in object-oriented design using Unified Modeling Language (UML). Each group was subdivided into two-person teams. The population of the control group consisted of a random sample of system analysis majors, whereas the population of the formal methods group was self-selected. Both groups were assigned a project to develop and implement an elevator system. The investigators believed that they had taken special care to make both groups the same, in terms of learning skills and competitiveness, by using ACT tests. The tests did not show any statistical difference between the learning capabilities of each group of students. The investigators concluded the superiority of formal method techniques, using the systems produced by the formal group. They showed that the formal group produced a perfect system, in terms of functional correctness (100 percent program correctness), and had a better design. I found a number of problems in this research, which undermine my confidence in the results. These problems include the experience, the understanding, and the skills of the formal group; the students in the formal group had received much more challenging assignments, training, and instruction as compared to the control group. Therefore, it is hard for me to believe that both groups were equivalent in terms of skill, exposure, and competitiveness. The validity of this experiment, and its complete weakness, has already been discussed in detail by Berry and Tichy.