Can Quizgecko grade a written answer in the learner's own words?
Quizgecko marks a correct written answer in the learner's own words as correct. The graded screen shows 'Correct' with +15 XP, and the explanation credits the response's meaning rather than matching its phrasing; the related-material panel points to the same electric-circuits chapter as the input file.
1 of 1 test case passed
Every test case in this scenario has a result.
The test case
Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above is based on this test case.
A correct answer in the learner's own wordingPassEvidence
“Adding another lamp to a series loop makes the battery's job tougher, since there's still just one route for the electricity to travel. Because of that extra resistance, less charge moves through the circuit overall — and since every part of a series loop shares the exact same flow, that reduced amount shows up equally at every single point, not just near the new lamp.”
Response to input 1 (message 1 of 2) The current decreases everywhere because the additional lamp makes it harder for the battery to drive current through the single loop. Response to input 1 (message 2 of 2) Spot on! You nailed how the extra resistance makes it harder for the battery, causing the current to decrease everywhere in the circuit.
Transcribed from Proof 4 · Screenshot
| ✓ | Expected: The response is judged fully correct even though its wording differs from the reference answer.Found: The screen shows 'Correct' and +15 XP, and the explanation uses the answer's meaning rather than matching phrasing. |
The test required meaning-based grading for a correct answer written differently from the reference. The graded screen shows 'Correct' with +15 XP, and the explanation credits the learner's reasoning rather than matching phrasing, so the wording difference did not lower the score.
Related chapter link. The related-material panel points to the same electric-circuits chapter as the input document.
Configuration and setup
How this tool was set up for the run and what the test needed in place. Each row is a fact from the run's records; a fact the records do not hold is left out, not guessed.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
Each test case gets one result per tool: Pass, Fail or Not gradable. A test case we haven't run yet shows Untested. There are no partial results.
- Pass: the tool did everything the test expected, and nothing it said contradicts the correct answer.
- Fail: at least one expected behaviour clearly didn't happen; the test case's result says which one and quotes the tool.
- Not gradable: our evidence couldn't settle the outcome (for example a record we needed is missing). It is never counted as a fail, and the test case's result says what's missing.
Where this sits in the benchmark
This page is one cell of a larger study: one tool, one scenario. Only this benchmark's frame appears here.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Quiz Generation → | 15 scenarios · 10 tools |
| Capability | Grading → | |
| Scenario | The learner answers correctly in their own words → | |
| Tool | Quizgecko → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · Quizgecko product page →
History of this result
What has happened to this result since it was first published. Runs and grades are never overwritten: a retest or a re-grade publishes a new result and keeps the earlier one readable.
Act on this result
Nothing filed here edits the run or the grade. A challenge opens a review, and a review can produce a new run or a re-grade — which becomes the current result and leaves this one in the history.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →The same record is available as structured data through the AI Demos MCP server, with the counts, the coverage and every per-test-case reason carried as fields.
Verify the proof files
These files support this result. Open a file to inspect the original evidence.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.