Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    An AI-Driven Work Force
    AI and Microcredentials
Sign In
Teaching

Open-Book, Closed-Book, or ‘Cheat Sheet’? Researchers Test the Merits of Different Exam Types

By Dan Berrett December 12, 2012

Like many faculty members, Afshin M. Gharib and William L. Phillips have strong preferences for giving certain types of examinations.

Both men, associate professors of psychology at Dominican University of California, have kept up a running debate on the topic. Mr. Gharib likes open-book tests because the scores result in a normal, bell-shaped distribution curve and do not stress out his students.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

Like many faculty members, Afshin M. Gharib and William L. Phillips have strong preferences for giving certain types of examinations.

Both men, associate professors of psychology at Dominican University of California, have kept up a running debate on the topic. Mr. Gharib likes open-book tests because the scores result in a normal, bell-shaped distribution curve and do not stress out his students.

Mr. Phillips favors tests in which students can prepare a crib sheet with material from the course. He has held fast to the belief that the act of preparing a crib sheet produces an added educational benefit.

Most professors, they acknowledge, go with a third option, the traditional closed-book style, which many see as the most-rigorous of test types.

To help settle their debate, Mr. Gharib and Mr. Phillips conducted a study of their students. The results appear in their paper, “Cheat Sheet or Open-Book? A Comparison of the Effects of Exam Types on Performance, Retention, and Anxiety,” on which they collaborated with Noelle Mathew, an undergraduate student at Dominican. The article was published recently in Psychology Research.

They studied 297 students who took eight sections of an introductory psychology course and 99 students in four sections of a statistics course. Mr. Gharib taught the psychology sections and Mr. Phillips instructed in statistics. They used the same texts, assignments, and exams in each of their sections.

Students in the psychology course took all three forms of tests—open-book, closed-book, and one in which they could prepare a letter-size piece of paper with as much information as they wanted, an approach the researchers called a “cheat sheet” exam.

Students in the statistics course took the open-book and cheat-sheet exams. They did not take a closed-book test because it seemed unrealistic to expect students to remember long formulas, said Mr. Phillips.

Students in the psychology course scored best on the open-book exam, with cheat-sheet test scores coming in slightly lower, and closed-book exams last. Statistics students fared better on the open-book exams than they did on the cheat-sheet test.

“I think I won,” said Mr. Gharib.

Pop Quiz

Two weeks after taking the second of the three tests, the students were given a surprise closed-book quiz to measure how well they had retained the material. To the researchers’ surprise, students retained the material equally well, regardless of the type of exam they had originally taken.

ADVERTISEMENT

The researchers also found that students who do well on one type of exam also fare well on the other two, a finding that Mr. Gharib said was particularly important.

“Type of exam, it turns out, really is not important,” he said. “You can measure students’ learning and their ability on any type of test you want.”

Mr. Phillips agrees. “It kind of depends on what you want the student to get out of the class and what your expectations are,” he said.

Students also completed a three-question survey about which type of test they thought they would fare best on, which type they would study for, and which they preferred. Students took a pretest measure of anxiety on open-book and cheat-sheet tests.

ADVERTISEMENT

Not surprisingly, students preferred open-book and cheat-sheet exams over closed-book ones and reported the lowest levels of anxiety when taking open-book exams.

But, again, the results yielded a surprise. Students thought they would study most for the closed-book exams, but that view was not reflected in reports of their actual habits. Students in the psychology class spent the most time studying for the cheat-sheet exam, or more than four hours. Open-book exams yielded slightly fewer hours of study, while closed-book exams resulted in the least amount of time studying, 3.32 hours.

Statistics students, who took only two types of tests, also spent more time studying for cheat-sheet exams.

Another finding weakened Mr. Phillips’s argument for cheat-sheet exams. An independent scorer evaluated the students’ cheat sheets for organization and richness of detail. Higher-scoring cheat sheets, it turned out, had a weak relationship to performance on the exam.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I was more adamant that the cheat sheet would result in better retention over all, and that wasn’t the case,” he said. “I think I might use more of an open book.”

Both men cautioned against applying their findings too widely. They believe that disciplinary differences may complicate results. They also want to study the effects of take-home exams.

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Teaching & Learning
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
berrett-edletter-portrait.png
About the Author
Dan Berrett
Dan Berrett is a senior editor for The Chronicle of Higher Education. He joined The Chronicle in 2011 as a reporter covering teaching and learning. Follow him on Twitter @danberrett, or write to him at dan.berrett@chronicle.com.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Photo illustration showing internal email text snippets over a photo of a University of Iowa campus quad
Red-state reticence
Facing Research Cuts, Officials at U. of Iowa Spoke of a ‘Limited Ability to Publicly Fight This’
Photo illustration showing Santa Ono seated, places small in the corner of a dark space
'Unrelentingly Sad'
Santa Ono Wanted a Presidency. He Became a Pariah.
Illustration of a rushing crowd carrying HSI letters
Seeking precedent
Funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions Is Discriminatory and Unconstitutional, Lawsuit Argues
Photo-based illustration of scissors cutting through paper that is a photo of an idyllic liberal arts college campus on one side and money on the other
Finance
Small Colleges Are Banding Together Against a Higher Endowment Tax. This Is Why.

From The Review

Football game between UCLA and Colorado University, at Folsom Field in Boulder, Colo., Sept. 24, 2022.
The Review | Opinion
My University Values Football More Than Education
By Sigman Byrd
Photo- and type-based illustration depicting the acronym AAUP with the second A as the arrow of a compass and facing not north but southeast.
The Review | Essay
The Unraveling of the AAUP
By Matthew W. Finkin
Photo-based illustration of the Capitol building dome propped on a stick attached to a string, like a trap.
The Review | Opinion
Colleges Can’t Trust the Federal Government. What Now?
By Brian Rosenberg

Upcoming Events

Plain_Acuity_DurableSkills_VF.png
Why Employers Value ‘Durable’ Skills
Warwick_Leadership_Javi.png
University Transformation: a Global Leadership Perspective
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin