Multiple-choice (MC) analogy items are often used in cognitive assessment. However, in dynamic testing, where the aim is to provide insight into potential for learning and the learning process, constructed-response (CR) items may be of benefit. This study investigated whether training with CR or MC items leads to differences in the strategy progression and understanding of analogical reasoning in 5- to 6-year-olds (N = 111). A pretest-training-posttest control group design with randomized blocking was utilized, where two experimental groups were trained according to the graduated prompts method. Results show that both training conditions improved more during dynamic testing compared with untrained controls. As expected, children in the CR condition required more prompting during training and showed different strategy-use patterns compared with the MC group. However, the quality of solution explanations was significantly better for children in the CR condition. It appears that possible performance advantages of training with CR items are most apparent when active processing is required. In the future, we advise including items such as CR or analogy construction in dynamic testing that allow for fine-grained analysis of strategy-use to further discern differences in children's analogical reasoning understanding.