Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of 2 case question formats (multiple choice and open ended) to prompt faculty members and students to explore multiple solutions and use factual evidence to defend their solutions. METHODS: Doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) faculty members and students responded to 2 pharmacy law/ethics cases, one followed by a case question prompt in multiple-choice format and the other by a question in open-ended format. The number of conclusions and the quality of the arguments generated were assessed using general linear modeling. RESULTS: PharmD faculty members outperformed students on every outcome variable measured, demonstrating expert problem-solving skills. All participants provided better quality arguments when the case prompt question was in multiple-choice format. CONCLUSIONS: The better quality arguments prompted by multiple-choice case questions suggests this format should be used when constructing case question prompts.