Skip to main content
2 of 2
Full references are better

This blog post points out psychometric issues with the Calculus Concept Inventory:

This NSF project report, "Year 1 (Expanded) Annual Report for DUE-1625678 Project DIRACC: Developing and Investigating a Rigorous Approach to Conceptual Calculus" discusses a "Calculus 1 Concept Inventory" (C1CI) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319875221_Year_1_Expanded_Annual_Report_for_DUE-1625678_Project_DIRACC_Developing_and_Investigating_a_Rigorous_Approach_to_Conceptual_Calculus; also see https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1625678 which says more about ongoing work.

I also came across a reference to "a validated Statistics Concept Assessment, the Benchmark Assessment for Statistics Introductory Concepts (BASIC)" in an email to a statistics mailing list from Michael Pearson of the MAA dated Nov 30, 2023.

This website lists a lot of physics concept inventories, but also has a page about math concept inventories: https://www.physport.org/recommendations/Entry.cfm?ID=124939