Diagnostic Assessments

Determining prior knowledge to effectively teach students.

On this page:

The Importance of Diagnostic Assessments

Assessments used before instruction are called diagnostic assessments. Students begin your course with prior knowledge, using past experiences to actively make meaning of new experiences in your course (see Constructivism). Assumptions about what students already know, or “should” know are built into course design and may be incorrect. Therefore, determining what students know, before teaching a topic, can help improve teaching in two ways:

  • Effectiveness: Understanding students' prior knowledge allows you to begin teaching students at an appropriate starting point as well as providing instruction and scaffolding within students’ Zone of Proximal Development. 
  • Misconceptions: If students have misconceptions about a topic, these will prevent students from building correct understandings of new content. Therefore, it is best to determine common misconceptions and their prevalence before teaching a topic, ensuring that incorrect prior knowledge is addressed. 

Choosing Diagnostic Assessments

While we will focus on conceptual inventories (assessments that check for student understanding), often, current conceptual inventories may not exist or cover content that you want to assess. Consider the following steps for creating your own measure:

  1. Content: Determine what pre-existing content, knowledge or abilities students may need for your course, or that you assume they will know or have encountered.
  2. Instrument: Creating a rigorous assessment of actual student knowledge is time-consuming and beyond the scope of this page. Given time constraints for test creation and delivery, a feasible diagnostic assessment will focus on student self-assessment. This can be done through asking students either yes/no questions of whether they understand or have encountered a topic, or rating on a scale how familiar or confident they are with a topic. Using close-ended questions will automate analysis, though you may consider including open-ended questions asking about content students find difficult or have struggled with in the past.
  3. Delivery: Automating this assessment can be very helpful and provide valuable feedback. It can be created as a test in UB Learns or using other survey software such as Panopto or Top Hat. Please refer to the Teaching Technologies Gateway for information on approved third-party software

Creating your own diagnostic assessment is not as rigorous as a previously validated or tested conceptual inventory, but it is a feasible way to gauge each new group of students.

Conceptual Inventories

Conceptual Inventories (CIs) are designed to identify critical, common misconceptions and content knowledge among students (see Figure 1 below). These can be administered in large lectures and tend to be multiple choice quizzes or tests, with answers based on the more common misunderstandings about a topic. CIs can be administered again after misconceptions have been addressed to determine whether there has been conceptual change.

A list of CIs by discipline is provided below. Many of the CIs are already available for you to use, while others may require permission from the author before using.

It is important to understand that CIs do not include all the possible misconceptions or content knowledge that students may have about a topic. In addition, students can answer correctly in the CI without understanding why it is so. It is recommended to use other formative assessments in conjunction with CIs.

  • Anderson, D. L., Fisher, K. M., & Norman, G. J. (2002). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of research in science teaching, 39(10), 952-978.
  • Baum, D. A., Smith, S. D., & Donovan, S. S. (2005). The tree-thinking challenge. Science, 310(5750), 979-980.
  • Bowling, B. V., Acra, E. E., Wang, L., Myers, M. F., Dean, G. E., Markle, G. C., ... & Huether, C. A. (2008). Development and evaluation of a genetics literacy assessment instrument for undergraduates. Genetics, 178(1), 15-22.
  • Bretz, S. L., & Linenberger, K. J. (2012). Development of the enzyme–substrate interactions concept inventory. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 40(4), 229-233.
  • Fisher, K. M., Williams, K. S., & Lineback, J. E. (2011). Osmosis and diffusion conceptual assessment. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 10(4), 418-429.
  • Hartley, L. M., Wilke, B. J., Schramm, J. W., D'Avanzo, C., & Anderson, C. W. (2011). College students' understanding of the carbon cycle: Contrasting principle-based and informal reasoning. BioScience, 61(1), 65-75.
  • Kalas, P., O’Neill, A., Pollock, C., & Birol, G. (2013). Development of a meiosis concept inventory. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 655-664.
  • Klymkowsky, M. W., & Garvin-Doxas, K. (2008). Recognizing student misconceptions through Ed's Tools and the Biology Concept Inventory. PLoS Biol, 6(1), e3.
  • Lin, S. W. (2004). Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test for high school students’ understanding of flowering plant growth and development. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 175-199.
  • Mann, M., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). A pencil and paper instrument to diagnose students' conceptions of breathing, gas exchange and respiration. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 44(2), 55.
  • Marbach-Ad, G., Briken, V., El-Sayed, N. M., Frauwirth, K., Fredericksen, B., Hutcheson, S., ... & Mosser, D. (2009). Assessing student understanding of host pathogen interactions using a concept inventory. Journal of microbiology & biology education, 10(1), 43-50.
  • Nadelson, L. S., & Southerland, S. A. (2009). Development and preliminary evaluation of the measure of understanding of macroevolution: introducing the MUM. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78(2), 151-190.
  • Odom, A. L. (1995). Secondary & college biology students' misconceptions about diffusion & osmosis. The American Biology Teacher, 409-415.
  • Perez, K. E., Hiatt, A., Davis, G. K., Trujillo, C., French, D. P., Terry, M., & Price, R. M. (2013). The EvoDevoCI: a concept inventory for gauging students’ understanding of evolutionary developmental biology. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 665-675.
  • Price, R. M., Andrews, T. C., McElhinny, T. L., Mead, L. S., Abraham, J. K., Thanukos, A., & Perez, K. E. (2014). The genetic drift inventory: A tool for measuring what advanced undergraduates have mastered about genetic drift. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13(1), 65-75.
  • Shi, J., Wood, W. B., Martin, J. M., Guild, N. A., Vicens, Q., & Knight, J. K. (2010). A diagnostic assessment for introductory molecular and cell biology. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9(4), 453-461.
  • Smith, J. J., Cheruvelil, K. S., & Auvenshine, S. (2013). Assessment of student learning associated with tree thinking in an undergraduate introductory organismal biology course. CBE Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 542–552. http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-08-0066
  • Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., & Knight, J. K. (2008). The genetics concept assessment: a new concept inventory for gauging student understanding of genetics. CBE-life sciences Education, 7(4), 422-430.
  • Villafañe, S. M., Bailey, C. P., Loertscher, J., Minderhout, V., & Lewis, J. E. (2011). Development and analysis of an instrument to assess student understanding of foundational concepts before biochemistry coursework. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 39(2), 102-109.
  • Wang, J. R. (2004). Development and validation of a two-tier instrument to examine understanding of internal transport in plants and the human circulatory system. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 131-157.
  • Biological Sciences (University of Pittsburgh)
    Collection of assessments in biological sciences – measuring content knowledge, affect/attitude and self-efficacy.
  • Biology (San Diego State University)
    Annotated collection of research articles (with and without actual items) on the development and implementation of conceptual inventories for various Biology topics.
  • Cloonan, C. A., & Hutchinson, J. S. (2011). A chemistry concept reasoning test. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(2), 205-209.
  • Krause, S., Birk, J., Bauer, R., Jenkins, B., & Pavelich, M. J. (2004, October). Development, testing, and application of a chemistry concept inventory. In Frontiers in Education, 2004. FIE 2004. 34th Annual (pp. T1G-1). IEEE.
  • McClary, L. M., & Bretz, S. L. (2012). Development and assessment of a diagnostic tool to identify organic chemistry students’ alternative conceptions related to acid strength. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2317-2341.
  • Mulford, D. R., & Robinson, W. R. (2002). An inventory for alternate conceptions among first-semester general chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(6), 739-744.
  • Chemistry (University of Pittsburgh)
    Collection of assessments in biological sciences – measuring content knowledge, meta-cognitive skills, affect/attitude and self-efficacy.
  • JCE Resources for Chemistry Instructors (ChemEd X)
    Question bank for verified Chemistry Instructors; sample questions are free, full access requires payment.
  • Herman, G. L. (2011). The development of a digital logic concept inventory (doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).
  • Computer Science (University of Pittsburgh)
    Collection of assessments in computer science – measuring content knowledge, affect/attitude and self-efficacy.
  • Knudson, D., Noffal, G., Bauer, J., McGinnis, P., Bird, M., Chow, J., & Abendroth‐Smith, J. (2003). Development and evaluation of a biomechanics concept inventory. Sports Biomechanics, 2(2), 267-277.
  • Krause, S., Decker, J. C., & Griffin, R. (2003, November). Using a materials concept inventory to assess conceptual gain in introductory materials engineering courses. In Frontiers in Education, 2003. FIE 2003 33rd Annual (Vol. 1, pp. T3D-7). IEEE.
  • Martin, J., Mitchell, J., & Newell, T. (2003, November). Development of a concept inventory for fluid mechanics. In Frontiers in Education, 2003. FIE 2003 33rd Annual (Vol. 1, pp. T3D-23). IEEE.
  • Simoni, M. F., Herniter, M. E., & Ferguson, B. A. (2004, June). Concepts to questions: Creating an electronics concept inventory exam. In Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.
  • Steif, P. S., & Dantzler, J. A. (2005). A statics concept inventory: Development and psychometric analysis. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(4), 363-371.
  • Streveler, R. A., Miller, R. L., Santiago-Román, A. I., Nelson, M. A., Geist, M. R., & Olds, B. M. (2011). Rigorous methodology for concept inventory development: Using the ‘assessment triangle’ to develop and test the thermal and transport science concept inventory (TTCI). International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(5), 968-984.
  • Wage, K. E., Buck, J. R., Welch, T. B., & Wright, C. H. (2002, June). The signals and systems concept inventory. In Proceedings, ASEE Annual Conference.
  • Allen, k. (2006). The statistics concept inventory: development and analysis of a cognitive assessment instrument in statistics (doctoral dissertation, University of Oklahoma).
  • Epstein, J. (2007, September). Development and validation of the Calculus Concept Inventory. In Proceedings of the ninth international conference on mathematics education in a global community (Vol. 9, pp. 165-170). Charlotte, NC.    
  • Mathematics (University of Pittsburgh)
    Collection of assessments in mathematics – measuring content knowledge and affect/attitude.
  • Gray, G. L., Costanzo, F., Evans, D., Cornwell, P., Self, B., & Lane, J. L. (2005, June). The dynamics concept inventory assessment test: A progress report and some results. In American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. (Request access by visiting https://sites.esm.psu.edu/dci/)
  • Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30(3), 141-158.
  • Nieminen, P., Savinainen, A., & Viiri, J. (2010). Force concept inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 6(2), 020109.
  • Singh, C., & Rosengrant, D. (2003). Multiple-choice test of energy and momentum concepts. American Journal of Physics, 71(6), 607-617.
  • Thoads, T. R., & Roedel, R. J. (1999, November). The wave concept inventory-a cognitive instrument based on Bloom's taxonomy. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 1999. FIE'99. 29th Annual (Vol. 3, pp. 13C1-14). IEEE.
  • Williamson, K. E., Willoughby, S., & Prather, E. E. (2013). Development of the Newtonian gravity concept inventory. Astronomy Education Review, 12(1), 010107.
  • Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. (2001). Introductory thermal concept evaluation: Assessing students' understanding. The Physics Teacher, 39(8), 496-504.
  • Physics (University of Pittsburgh)
    Collection of assessments in Physics – measuring content knowledge in a broad range of topics (i.e., mechanics, electricity & magnetism, heat, temperature and thermodynamics, modern physics, quantum mechanics, astronomy, waves), affect/attitude and self-efficacy.
  • PhysPort Assessments
    Ninety-six research-based assessments in physics with a wiki-style search feature where users can choose assessment focus, format, and research validation.
  • Bailey, J. M., Johnson, B., Prather, E. E., & Slater, T. F. (2012). Development and validation of the star properties concept inventory. International Journal of Science Education, 34(14), 2257-2286.
  • Libarkin, 2008. Concept Inventories in Science: Manuscript prepared for the National Research Council
  • Libarkin, J. C., & Anderson, S. W. (2005). Assessment of learning in entry-level geoscience courses: Results from the Geoscience Concept Inventory. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 394-401.
  • LoPresto, M. C., & Murrell, S. R. (2011). An astronomical misconceptions survey. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(5), 14-22
  • Geological Sciences (University of Pittsburgh)
    Collection of assessments in biological sciences – measuring content knowledge and affect/attitude.

Using Diagnostic Assessments

If you want to use a diagnostic assessment in your course, consider the following:

  • Which topics have been difficult for students in the past because of prior knowledge issues?
  • Do you plan on assessing all topics at the beginning of the course, or each topic before they are taught?
  • Do you have a plan for how to approach topics that involve concepts students find difficult to learn? See Misconceptions.

Next Steps

When you are done choosing or creating diagnostic assessments continue:

or move on to:

Journal article with general principles to effectively use diagnostic assessments.