I thought I’d gone off about pre-tests here before, but apparently not (at least I can’t find it). So let me do it now. Pre-tests are learner-abusive. Period. *OK, with one (rare) caveat…
First, let’s agree that quizzes are usually not an enjoyable experience. Except when the outcome doesn’t matter, and provides valuable information (e.g. the ‘Cozmo quiz’ where you learn things about yourself). However, when you don’t know the answers (by definition, or you wouldn’t need it), it’s just a tedious process in most cases.
There are two major arguments for pre-tests, which I’ll argue against. One is that it helps the learner understand what’s coming, serving as an advance organizer, activating relevant knowledge. Yes, it will do that. However, there are much less cruel ways to do it, such as dramatically or humorously exaggerating the consequences of not having the knowledge, drilling down from the larger context, etc. Doing it through a random quiz, particularly when you’re not already expected to know the information, just leads to frustration and/or boredom.
The other reason used to justify pre-tests is to show the delta from before and after the learning experience. This is also wrong, since you shouldn’t even be developing the learning unless you already know they don’t know the material. Consequently, the only thing you should need to demonstrate is that they know can achieve your objectives. And beyond, that it leads to improved performance and better outcomes.
The only qualification to this is when the pre-assessment is used to allow the student to test-out. That is, by passing a pre-assessment, they can skip material they already know. Even then, it might be a preference, rather than required.
So, please, don’t abuse your learners, and don’t give pre-tests unless it allows the learner to test-out of the learning (and only if they want to).