Undergraduate Students’ Preferences for Constructed Versus Multiple-Choice Assessment of Learning
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Multiple-choice questions provide a broad range of assessments of critical thinking and provide an ample evaluation of higher cognitive functions.
“Multiple-choice questions provide a broad range of assessments of critical thinking and provide an ample evaluation of higher cognitive functions.12,13”
From The Scientific Knowledge of Bard and ChatGPT in Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Diabetes Technology: Multiple-Choice Questions Examination-Based Performance (2025) · cites this paper as [12]
MCQs provide a robust framework for assessing higher cognitive functions by promoting critical thinking and the application of knowledge.
“Moreover, MCQs provide a robust framework for assessing higher cognitive functions, by promoting critical thinking and the application of knowledge.12,13”
From The Scientific Knowledge of Bard and ChatGPT in Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Diabetes Technology: Multiple-Choice Questions Examination-Based Performance (2025) · cites this paper as [12]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Meo, S. A., Al-Khlaiwi, T., AbuKhalaf, A. A., Meo, A. S., & Klonoff, D. C. (2025) · Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology · doi:10.1177/19322968231203987 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mingo, M. A., Chang, H.-H., & Williams, R. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
- Corresponding author
- Williams, Robert L.
- Venue
- Innovative Higher Education
- Published
- 2017-09-14
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 143-152
- ISSN
- 0742-5627 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1758
- OpenAlex
- W2754818681
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 2.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Innovative Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- student preferences, assessment preferences, constructed-response assessment, multiple-choice tests, essay exams, performance evaluation, term papers, objective assessment, exam performance, undergraduate students, educational psychology course
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
