Como usar
- Copie o comando e verifique o pacote antes de instalar no seu ambiente de agente.
- Consulte no original as ferramentas, credenciais e ambientes necessários.
- Descreva os dados de entrada e a entrega esperada; confira a saída com as fontes.
npx skills add https://github.com/travisjneuman/.claude --skill learning-gap-analyzerAntes de começar
- A instalação não inclui assinatura de modelo, franquia API ou acesso aos seus arquivos.
- Estrelas e instalações indicam atividade, não um teste independente de qualidade ou segurança.
Documento original do Skill
Renderizado do repositório de origem, preservando títulos, exemplos, código, tabelas, links e imagens.
Learning Gap Analyzer
Frameworks for diagnosing knowledge gaps, creating targeted remediation plans, and designing effective learning strategies using evidence-based techniques.
Knowledge Mapping
Self-Assessment Matrix
KNOWLEDGE MAP: [Subject/Domain]
Topic | Awareness | Understanding | Application | Mastery
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4)
-------------------------|-----------|---------------|-------------|--------
[Subtopic 1] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ]
[Subtopic 2] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ]
[Subtopic 3] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ]
[Subtopic 4] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ]
[Subtopic 5] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ]
LEVELS:
1 - Awareness: I've heard of it, can recognize the term
2 - Understanding: I can explain the concept in my own words
3 - Application: I can use it to solve problems independently
4 - Mastery: I can teach it, adapt it, and combine with other concepts
SCORING GUIDE:
Mark your honest current level for each topic.
Gaps = Topics where your level is below the target level.
Priority = High target importance + large gap size.Concept Dependency Map
PREREQUISITE CHAIN: [Domain]
Build knowledge in this order (each level requires prior levels):
Level 1 (Foundations):
□ [Concept A] → Required for everything else
□ [Concept B] → Required for everything else
Level 2 (Core):
□ [Concept C] ← Requires: A
□ [Concept D] ← Requires: A, B
□ [Concept E] ← Requires: B
Level 3 (Intermediate):
□ [Concept F] ← Requires: C, D
□ [Concept G] ← Requires: D, E
Level 4 (Advanced):
□ [Concept H] ← Requires: F, G
□ [Concept I] ← Requires: G
DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH:
1. Test understanding at Level 3+
2. If gaps found, trace back to prerequisites
3. Start remediation at the earliest gap in the chain
4. Don't skip ahead — build foundations firstGap Identification Methods
Diagnostic Assessment Design
DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE:
PURPOSE: Identify specific knowledge gaps before starting learning plan
STRUCTURE:
Section 1: Foundational concepts (5 questions)
- If <60% correct: Start at Level 1
- Tests: Definitions, basic recall, simple recognition
Section 2: Core understanding (5 questions)
- If <60% correct: Start at Level 2
- Tests: Explanation, comparison, basic application
Section 3: Application (5 questions)
- If <60% correct: Start at Level 3
- Tests: Problem-solving, scenario analysis, transfer
Section 4: Advanced (5 questions)
- If <60% correct: Start at Level 4
- Tests: Synthesis, evaluation, novel situations
QUESTION TYPES:
- Explain in your own words: [concept]
- Given [scenario], what would happen if [variable changed]?
- Compare and contrast: [concept A] vs [concept B]
- Solve: [problem requiring application]
- What's wrong with this: [flawed example]The Feynman Technique for Gap Detection
FEYNMAN TECHNIQUE:
STEP 1: Choose a concept you think you understand
STEP 2: Explain it as if teaching a 12-year-old
- Use simple language
- No jargon
- Include examples
STEP 3: Identify where you get stuck
- Where do you reach for jargon?
- Where does your explanation get vague?
- Where can't you provide a clear example?
→ THESE ARE YOUR GAPS
STEP 4: Go back to source material
- Study specifically the areas where you struggled
- Don't re-read everything — target the gaps
STEP 5: Simplify and retry
- Re-explain using analogies
- If you can explain it simply, you understand it
- If you can't, repeat steps 3-4
TRACKING FORMAT:
Concept: _______________
Explanation attempt: [Your explanation]
Stuck points: [Where it broke down]
Gap identified: [What you need to learn]
Source to study: [Specific chapter, video, article]
Re-explanation: [After studying]
Confidence: [ ] Low [ ] Medium [ ] HighLearning Plan Design
Targeted Remediation Plan
LEARNING PLAN: [Goal]
CURRENT STATE: [Assessment results summary]
TARGET STATE: [Desired competency level]
TIMELINE: [Weeks/months]
WEEKLY TIME BUDGET: [Hours]
PHASE 1: FOUNDATIONS (Weeks 1-N)
Gap: [Specific knowledge gap]
Resources:
- [Resource 1] — Estimated time: [X hours]
- [Resource 2] — Estimated time: [X hours]
Practice:
- [Exercise or application activity]
Milestone: [How you'll know you've closed this gap]
PHASE 2: CORE SKILLS (Weeks N-M)
Gap: [Specific knowledge gap]
Resources:
- [Resource 1] — Estimated time: [X hours]
- [Resource 2] — Estimated time: [X hours]
Practice:
- [Exercise or application activity]
Milestone: [How you'll know you've closed this gap]
PHASE 3: APPLICATION (Weeks M-P)
Gap: [Specific knowledge gap]
Resources:
- [Resource 1] — Estimated time: [X hours]
Practice:
- [Project or real-world application]
Milestone: [Demonstrable competency]
WEEKLY SCHEDULE:
Day | Activity | Duration
Monday | New material (reading/video) | 1 hour
Tuesday | Practice problems | 45 min
Wednesday | Spaced review (flashcards) | 30 min
Thursday | New material | 1 hour
Friday | Application project | 1 hour
Weekend | Weekly review + assessment | 30 minSpaced Repetition System
Optimal Review Schedule
SPACED REPETITION INTERVALS:
First learning: Day 0
First review: Day 1 (24 hours later)
Second review: Day 3 (2 days after first review)
Third review: Day 7 (4 days after second review)
Fourth review: Day 14 (7 days after third review)
Fifth review: Day 30 (16 days after fourth review)
Sixth review: Day 60 (30 days after fifth review)
Maintenance: Every 90 days thereafter
ADJUSTMENT RULES:
If you recalled easily: Move to next interval
If you recalled with effort: Repeat at current interval
If you failed to recall: Reset to Day 1 interval
CARD DESIGN PRINCIPLES:
- One concept per card (atomic)
- Question on front, answer on back
- Include context/example on back
- Use images where possible
- Avoid yes/no questions — require recallActive Recall Techniques
| Technique | How It Works | Best For | Effort Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flashcards | Question → attempt recall → check | Facts, definitions, formulas | Low-Medium |
| Practice problems | Solve without looking at solution | Application, procedures | Medium |
| Free recall | Close book, write everything you know | Comprehensive review | Medium-High |
| Interleaving | Mix topics in practice (don't block) | Discrimination, transfer | Medium |
| Elaborative interrogation | Ask "why?" and "how?" for each fact | Deep understanding | Medium |
| Self-testing | Create and take your own quizzes | All types of knowledge | Medium |
| Teaching others | Explain concept to someone else | Deep mastery verification | High |
Progress Tracking
Weekly Progress Template
WEEKLY LEARNING REVIEW
Week: ___ of ___
Date: __________
HOURS INVESTED:
Planned: ___ hours
Actual: ___ hours
TOPICS COVERED:
□ [Topic 1] — Confidence: [ ] Low [ ] Med [ ] High
□ [Topic 2] — Confidence: [ ] Low [ ] Med [ ] High
□ [Topic 3] — Confidence: [ ] Low [ ] Med [ ] High
ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Quiz/test score: ___/___
Practice problem accuracy: ___%
Concepts recalled via free recall: ___/___
WHAT WENT WELL:
- [Insight or breakthrough]
WHAT WAS DIFFICULT:
- [Struggle point]
- Gap identified: [Specific concept]
ADJUSTMENTS FOR NEXT WEEK:
- [Change to plan based on this week's learning]
SPACED REVIEW DUE:
□ [Topic from Week N-1] — Review due: [Date]
□ [Topic from Week N-3] — Review due: [Date]Mastery Criteria
| Level | Evidence Required | Assessment Method |
|---|---|---|
| Awareness | Can define term and recognize it in context | Multiple choice, matching |
| Understanding | Can explain concept in own words with examples | Short answer, Feynman test |
| Application | Can solve novel problems using the concept | Practice problems, case studies |
| Mastery | Can teach others and combine with other concepts | Teaching exercise, project |
Learning Science Principles
Evidence-Based Strategies
HIGH-IMPACT LEARNING STRATEGIES:
1. RETRIEVAL PRACTICE (Effect: +0.7 SD)
Don't just re-read — test yourself
Implementation: Flashcards, practice quizzes, free recall
2. SPACED PRACTICE (Effect: +0.6 SD)
Distribute learning over time, don't cram
Implementation: Review schedule, interleaved practice
3. ELABORATION (Effect: +0.5 SD)
Connect new info to existing knowledge
Implementation: "How does this relate to...?" questions
4. INTERLEAVING (Effect: +0.4 SD)
Mix different topics/problem types in practice
Implementation: Shuffle practice problems from multiple chapters
5. CONCRETE EXAMPLES (Effect: +0.4 SD)
Connect abstract concepts to specific instances
Implementation: Generate 2-3 real examples for each concept
6. DUAL CODING (Effect: +0.3 SD)
Combine verbal and visual representations
Implementation: Draw diagrams, create concept maps
LOW-IMPACT STRATEGIES (AVOID):
✗ Re-reading (passive, creates illusion of learning)
✗ Highlighting (passive, doesn't require processing)
✗ Summarizing without retrieval (only slightly better)
✗ Massed practice / cramming (poor long-term retention)
