Teacher Practices for Surfacing Students Prior Knowledge as Indicated by the ACOP (n = 24)
| Key Features | Minimum | Maximum | M | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Opportunities were structured/implemented so that students would be aware of their own prior knowledge | 2 | 4 | 3.33 | .08 |
| 2. Opportunities surfaced students’ reasons for how they were thinking | 1 | 4 | 2.50 | 1.18 |
| 3. Opportunities had students record aspects of their prior knowledge. | 1 | 4 | 2.33 | 1.27 |
| 4. Opportunities had students make public aspects of their prior knowledge | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 0.93 |
| 5. Opportunities allowed students’ ideas to be surfaced without judgment | 2 | 4 | 3.71 | 0.55 |
| 6. Opportunities were aligned with student learning goals. | 2 | 4 | 3.13 | 0.85 |
| 1. Opportunities were structured/implemented so that students would be aware of their own prior knowledge | 2 | 4 | 3.33 | .08 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2. Opportunities surfaced students’ reasons for how they were thinking | 1 | 4 | 2.50 | 1.18 |
| 3. Opportunities had students record aspects of their prior knowledge. | 1 | 4 | 2.33 | 1.27 |
| 4. Opportunities had students make public aspects of their prior knowledge | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 0.93 |
| 5. Opportunities allowed students’ ideas to be surfaced without judgment | 2 | 4 | 3.71 | 0.55 |
| 6. Opportunities were aligned with student learning goals. | 2 | 4 | 3.13 | 0.85 |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.