Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Differences between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of education: profiles to describe congruence and friction

  • Published:
Instructional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Teachers and students have their own perceptions of education. Congruent perceptions contribute to optimal teaching–learning processes and help achieving best learning outcomes. This study investigated patterns in differences between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of their learning environment. Student profiles were identified taking into account the degree of congruence/friction with teachers’ perceptions. Teacher profiles were identified based on their differences in perceptions to students. Profiles were validated with regard to learning-related student characteristics and approaches to teaching. Tenth graders (N = 994) of four secondary schools filled out the Inventory of Perceived Study Environment-Extended (IPSEE) and the Inventory of Learning Styles. Their teachers (N = 136) filled out the teacher version of the IPSEE and the Approaches to Teaching Inventory. Latent class analyses were conducted to define profiles with respect to the magnitude of differences in perceptions. Results showed three student profiles: Closest match profile (30 %), intermediate profile (59 %), and distal profile (11 %). While closest match students had desirable learning-related characteristics, others did not and are at risk for destructive friction. Two teacher profiles described idealistic teachers (70 %) and adaptive teachers (30 %), which related to approaches to teaching. Subgroups of students and teachers provide a comprehensive picture of those who are at risk because of too large differences in perceptions. This study stresses that differences in perceptions deserve detailed attention for optimising learning environments. Involving both students and teachers in the instructional design process could be a way to better account for perceptions of both stakeholders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). The automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait concept and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broekkamp, H., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Van den Bergh, H. (2002). Importance in instructional text: Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of task demands. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 260–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook-Sather, A. (2003, March/April). Listening to students about learning differences. Teaching Exceptional Children, pp 22–26.

  • De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., Entwistle, N., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (Eds.). (2003). Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions. Oxford: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Brok, P. J., Bergen, T. C. M., & Brekelmans, J. M. G. (2006). Convergence and divergence between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of instructional behaviour in Dutch secondary education. In D. L. Fisher & M. S. Khine (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to research on learning environments: World views (pp. 125–160). Singapore: World Scientific.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, M. (1978). Children’s mind. London: Fontana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doppelt, Y. (2004). Impact of science-technology learning environment characteristics on learning outcomes: Pupils’ perceptions and gender differences. Learning Environments Research, 7, 271–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Midgley, C., Reuman, D., Mac Iver, D., & Feldlaufer, H. (1993). Negative effects of traditional middle schools on students’ motivation. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 553–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elen, J., Clarebout, G., Léonard, R., & Lowyck, J. (2007). Student-centred and teacher-centred learning environments: What students think? Teaching in Higher Education, 12, 105–117. doi:10.1080/13562510601102339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elen, J., & Lowyck, J. (1999). Metacognitive instructional knowledge: Cognitive mediation and instructional design. Journal of Structural Learning & Intelligent Systems, 13, 145–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N., & Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments. Higher Education, 19, 169–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, L., & Peck, S. C. (2008). Unexpected pathways through education: Why do some students not succeed in school and what helps others beat the odds? Journal of Social Issues, 64, 1–20. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00545.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research, 1, 7–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., & O’Brien, P. (1985). Student and teacher perceptions of the environment of elementary school classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 85, 567–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7, 255–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kershner, R., & Pointon, P. (2000). Children’s views of the primary classroom as an environment for working and learning. Research in Education, 64, 64–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2005). Towards more powerful learning environments through combining the perspectives of designers, teachers and students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 645–660. doi:10.1348/000709905X43616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2007a). Teachers’ perspective on innovations: Implications for educational design. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 985–997. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.06.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Broers, N. (2008). Does a new learning environment come up to students’ expectations? A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 535–548. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Könings, K. D., van Zundert, M. J., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2007b). Participatory design in secondary education: Its desirability and feasibility according to teachers and students. Educational Studies, 33, 445–465. doi:10.1080/03055690701423648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2005). Exploring high school students’ and teachers’ preferences toward the constructivist Internet-based environments in Taiwan. Educational Studies., 31, 149–167. doi:10.1080/03055690500095522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luyten, L., Lowyck, J., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2001). Task perception as a mediating variable: A contribution to the validation of instructional knowledge. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 203–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, L. M., Shelley, M. A., White, C. J., & Baumann, U. (2011). Tutor and student perceptions of what makes an effective distance language teacher. Distance Education, 32, 397–419. doi:10.1080/01587919.2011.610290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. A. (1986). Cognitive engineering. In D. A. Norman & S. W. Draper (Eds.), New perspectives on human-computer interaction (pp. 31–62). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1993). Development of an approaches to teaching questionnaire. Research and Development in Higher Education, 15, 468–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1997). Relations between perceptions of the teaching environment and approaches to teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S., & Dai, D. Y. (2001). Abilities, interests, and styles as aptitudes for learning: A person-situation interaction perspective. In R. J. Sternberg & L. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roelofs, E. C., & Terwel, J. (1999). Constructivism and authentic pedagogy: State of the art and recent developments in the Dutch national curriculum in secondary education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 201–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rost, J. (2004). Testtheorie und Testkonstruktion [Test theory and test construction]. Bern: Hans Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N., Oswald, F. L., Friede, A., Imus, A., & Merritt, S. (2008). Perceived fit with an academic environment: Attitudinal and behavioural outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 317–335. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidel, T. (2006). The role of student characteristics in studying micro teaching-learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 9(3), 253–271. doi:10.1007/s10984-006-9012-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shavelson, R. J., & Seidel, T. (2006). Approaches in measuring learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 9(3), 195–197. doi:10.1007/s10984-006-9010-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37, 57–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2012). Ten steps to complex learning (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermetten, Y. J., Vermunt, J. D., & Lodewijks, H. G. (2002). Powerful learning environments? How university students differ in their response to instructional measures. Learning and Instruction, 12, 263–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vermunt, J. D. H. M. (1992). Leerstijlen en sturen van leerprocessen in het hoger onderwijs: Naar procesgerichte instructie in zelfstandig denken [Learning styles and regulations of learning in higher education: Towards process-oriented instruction in autonomous thinking]. Amsterdam/Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermunt, J. D. (2007). The power of teaching-learning environments to influence student learning. British Journal of Education Psychology Monograph Series II, 4, 73–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermunt, J. D., Bouhuijs, P. A. J., & Picarelli, A. (2003). Vragenlijst Leerstijlen voor het Voortgezet Onderwijs (VLS-VO) [Inventory of Learning Styles for Secondary Education (ILS-SE)]. Maastricht University, The Netherlands: Expertise Center Active Learning.

  • Vermunt, J. D., & Verloop, N. (1999). Congruence and friction between learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 9, 257–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vermunt, J. D., & Vermetten, Y. J. (2004). Patterns in student learning: Relationships between learning strategies, conceptions of learning, and learning orientations. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 359–384. doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0005-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Davier, M. (1999). WINMlRA: A program system for analyses with the Rasch-model, with the latent class analysis and with the mixed-Rasch model. Kiel: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. (2004). Teachers as scholars of their students’ conceptions of learning: A Hong Kong investigation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 361–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wierstra, R. F. A., Kanselaar, G., Van der Linden, J. L., & Lodewijks, H. G. L. C. (1999). Learning environment perceptions of European university students. Learning Environments Research, 2, 79–98. doi:10.1023/A:1009962024666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Development and Research, Faculty of Health Medicine & Life Sciences, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Karen D. Könings & Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer

  2. TUM School of Education, Friedl Schöller Endowed Chair of Teaching and Learning Research, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany

    Tina Seidel

  3. Centre for Learning Sciences and Technologies, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands

    Saskia Brand-Gruwel

Authors
  1. Karen D. Könings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tina Seidel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saskia Brand-Gruwel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen D. Könings.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 7.

Table 7 Means and Standard Deviations of Students’ Learning-Related Characteristics and Marks Received in Their Classes, Separately for the Different Profiles
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Könings, K.D., Seidel, T., Brand-Gruwel, S. et al. Differences between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of education: profiles to describe congruence and friction. Instr Sci 42, 11–30 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9294-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9294-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation