Knowledge gap finder: diagnosing misunderstandings and targeted exercises
The "Knowledge gap finder" tool helps teachers or students themselves understand which specific concepts are missing for correct problem-solving and receive recommendations for targeted practice. It does not assign grades but analyzes the submitted text: what the student did, where the reasoning broke down, and what exercises make sense. Below is how to prepare source material and goal, how to read the result, how to turn it into assignments, and how to check that the misunderstanding is truly addressed. Separately we will cover limitations: the tool works only with text, does not save history and may make errors, so its conclusions must be checked independently.
Open tool: Knowledge gap finder ↗What the tool does and which fields to work in
"Knowledge gap finder" is a text-based tool. You insert learning material and formulate a goal, and on output you get an analysis: which concepts, according to the submitted text, are understood incorrectly, and which exercises will help fix this. This is diagnostics, not automatic grading: the tool does not set scores, it explains exactly where in the reasoning an error occurred.
The interface is a web form with two text fields. In the "Source material" field you place a text fragment up to 8000 characters: a definition, problem statement, reference solution or student answer. In the "Goal or desired result" field (up to 1000 characters) you describe the skill you are checking. Then you select the output language, press Generate, and the result appears in a separate panel. You can copy it or download it as a plain text TXT file. Vectors only SVG and PNG. Speech eSpeak WAV. Subtitles SRT. No DOCX, PDF export, batch processing, automatic saving, integration, OCR in proofreader, settings panels, highlighting changes, special comparison modes, direct publishing, email delivery, upload documents, premium plan, registration, speech voice cloning, photorealistic image generation or audio/video generation.
Important to understand the purpose: the tool does not replace a teacher and does not guarantee infallibility. If a student erred due to inattention rather than misunderstanding, the analysis may suggest unnecessary practice. Therefore always evaluate the result critically and if necessary clarify with the student how they reasoned.
Source material: "A 20% discount reduces the price by 20% of the original. If a second discount of 10% is applied after the first, the final price is not equal to the sum of the discounts." Goal: "Check understanding of sequential percentage changes".
How to prepare source material
Do not paste the entire textbook. Take exactly the fragment related to the skill being checked: a definition, rule, example solution or problem statement. The more precise the context, the clearer it is to the tool what exactly you are diagnosing. If you are analyzing a student answer, insert it verbatim, preserving the line of reasoning, not just the final number.
Remove unnecessary characters, formatting remnants and extraneous notes. If the student answer contains several steps, it is better to preserve their order: the exact sequence of reasoning shows where the gap arose. With a volume exceeding 8000 characters, reduce the material to its essence, leaving key conditions and the line of solution.
It is useful to decide in advance what counts as evidence of understanding. For percentages, for example, it is the ability to explain why the second discount is calculated from the new price. Then both the source material and the goal will be formulated so that the analysis becomes specific, not general.
Source material: "Student solves: 20% + 10% = 30%, therefore 1000 − 300 = 700 rubles." Goal: "Determine whether the student understands that sequential discounts are applied to different bases."
How to formulate the goal
The goal is not a lesson topic, but a specific ability you are checking. Instead of "check knowledge of percentages" write: "Identify whether the student understands that percentages cannot be added directly." Such a formulation sets the tool direction and makes recommendations applicable.
If you are diagnosing your own solution, the goal can sound like a question to yourself: "Find logical errors in my derivation of the formula" or "Check whether any case where the base changes was missed." This helps use the tool for self-preparation, not only for working with others answers.
Keep the goal within 1000 characters and avoid vague words like "figure out" or "improve". The more specifically the desired result is formulated, the more useful the analysis and the easier it will be later to check whether the gap is closed.
Goal: "Check whether the student can apply the formula for compound percentage and explain why the base changes after the first change."
How to read the result and turn it into exercises
After pressing Generate you will receive a textual report with an analysis of presumed gaps and suggestions for practice. Read it as a hypothesis, not a verdict: check whether the conclusion matches what the student actually thought. If in doubt, ask a clarifying question before moving to assignments.
From the report you need to make a specific exercise. If it says the student adds percentages, give a step-by-step calculation task: price 1000, after first discount 20% — 800, after second 10% of 800 — 80, final 720. Then ask to compare with the erroneous answer 700 and explain the discrepancy.
Choose exercises by student level. For a serious gap start with simple tasks on the basic principle, then complicate. One assignment is not enough: give several similar examples with different numbers so the skill is reinforced, not bound to one answer.
Recommendation: "Suggest a reverse task: after two discounts the price became 720 rubles. Find the original price." This checks understanding of sequential changes.
Example analysis: sequential discounts
A student claims: "A 20% discount, then another 10% — it is the same as 30%." You insert the problem statement and his answer into the "Source material" field, and in the goal write that you are checking understanding of different percentage bases. The tool analyzes the text and returns a report indicating a presumed gap.
The report may state that the student did not account for: the second discount is calculated from the new price. Then an exercise is built step-by-step: 1000 → 800 after the first discount, 80 is 10% of 800, final 720. Comparison with the erroneous 700 makes the error visual.
After the calculation ask the student to formulate the rule in their own words: to find the price after several discounts, you need to multiply sequentially by (1 − discount). Then give a task with other numbers for independent checking. Thus you reinforce the skill and see whether the gap remains.
Source material: "Product 1000 rub. Discount 20%, then 10%. Student: 1000 − 30% = 700." Goal: "Check understanding of sequential percentage changes." Result: "Gap: student adds percentages. Recommendation: solve step-by-step and compare with erroneous answer."
How to check that the gap is closed
Do not limit yourself to a correct answer on a familiar task. Ask the student to explain in their own words why adding percentages is not possible, and give a counterexample where it yields an absurd result. If they can explain and provide a counterexample, understanding is likely present.
Give a transfer task: instead of discounts — sequential increase by 10% and 20%. If the student applies the same principle (multiplying by 1.1 and 1.2) and gets 32%, the idea of changing base is mastered. If they again add percentages, return to basic exercises.
It is useful to ask the student themselves to create a task with a similar trap and solve it. If they manage, this is a good sign of understanding. If not — return to the cycle: analysis of gap, exercise, check.
Check task: "The price increased by 10%, then another 20%. By how many percent did the final price increase?" Correct answer: by 32% (1.1 × 1.2 = 1.32). Answer 30% means the gap is not closed.
Limitations and typical errors
The tool analyzes only the submitted text. If the context is not described it may not take it into account. An error due to inattention and an error due to misunderstanding look similar in text, therefore conclusions are worth checking with clarifying questions before assigning practice.
The model may make errors, and queue and availability may vary. The tool does not save history and does not integrate with other systems: the result must be copied or downloaded manually. It works only with text and does not analyze audio, video or images — oral answer first needs transcription.
Take these limitations into account when planning. If a student gave a correct answer but the tool indicated a gap, first check whether the error was accidental. And remember: the analysis is a starting point for discussion, not a final diagnosis.
If a student answered correctly but the tool indicates a gap, ask a clarifying question about the solution path before moving to exercises.
How to embed the tool in regular practice
Use "Knowledge gap finder" not only for error analysis but also for prevention. After learning a new topic ask the student to solve a problem and analyze their answer: thus hidden gaps are discovered before they solidify. Regular use develops self-analysis skills.
For self-preparation the tool is useful too: insert your own solutions and look for weak spots. For example, when preparing for an exam solve a problem and check whether there are logical errors. This saves time and makes preparation targeted.
Keep a gap log: record which errors occur most often and return to them after some time. Combine analysis with oral explanation, counterexamples and flashcards. So diagnostics and practice work together.
Once a week choose one complex topic, solve a problem and run the answer through the tool. Record identified gaps and make a repetition plan for next week.
"Knowledge gap finder" is a practical assistant for diagnosing misunderstandings and selecting targeted exercises. It does not replace a teacher, but helps quickly see weak points and build effective practice. Work in a cycle: prepare precise source material and a specific goal, get the analysis, turn it into exercises, check understanding on new tasks. Remember the limitations: the tool works only with text, may make errors, does not save history and does not integrate with other systems. Combine it with oral explanation, counterexamples and repetition so that the gap is truly closed.
Open tool: Knowledge gap finder ↗Interface translations are machine-assisted and may need refinement.