[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-593976-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-593976-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","australian-journal-of-teacher-education-volume-45-issue-11-article-5","Australian Journal of Teacher Education - Volume 45 - Issue 11 - Article 5","","The science teacher in the modern high school acts as designer and driver of in-class practice, requiring accurate self-knowledge of classroom actions and their effects on learners. This study compares 86 teachers and 2512 Year 9 and 10 students using an instrument probing perceptions of in-class practice. Results show teachers consistently overrate their own practice and student perceptions of classrooms are unrelated to teacher self-perception. Therefore, relying on teachers alone for evaluation is problematic; assessment should be pursued at both teacher and student levels.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/australian-journal-of-teacher-education-volume-45-issue-11-article-5/593976/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/australian-journal-of-teacher-education-volume-45-issue-11-article-5/593976.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Franzy","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-07","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What does the study examine about science teaching practice?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It compares differences in responses from teachers and Year 9/10 students to an instrument that probes perceptions of in-class science practice.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What are the study’s two key findings?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Teachers consistently positively overrate their in-class practice, and these perceptions are completely unrelated to how their students view the classrooms.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why is evaluating only through teacher reports considered problematic?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Because teacher and student perceptions diverge, so teacher-only evaluation does not reliably reflect classroom realities; evaluation should include both teachers and students.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},593976,1792609834,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},2336478945519,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","Australian Journal of Teacher Education  \n\n| Volume 45  Issue 11 | Article 5 |\n| --- | --- |\n| 2020\u003Cbr>Differences in Perception Between Students and Teachers of High School Science: Implications for Evaluations of Teaching and Classroom Evaluation.\u003Cbr>Michael T. Fitzgerald\u003Cbr>Edith Cowan University, Las Cumbres Observatory, Deakin University, [psyfitz@gmail.com](psyfitz@gmail.com)\u003Cbr>Lena Danaia\u003Cbr>Charles Sturt University, [ldanaia@csu.edu.au](ldanaia@csu.edu.au)\u003Cbr>David H. McKinnon\u003Cbr>Edith Cowan University, [d.mckinnon@ecu.edu.au](d.mckinnon@ecu.edu.au)\u003Cbr>Sophie Bartlett\u003Cbr>Cardiff University, United Kingdom, [sophie-bartlett@outlook.com](sophie-bartlett@outlook.com)\u003Cbr>Follow this and additional works at: [https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte](https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte)\u003Cbr> Part of the Science and Mathematics Education Commons, Secondary Education Commons, and the Secondary Education and Teaching Commons |  |\n\nRecommended Citation  \nFitzgerald, M. T., Danaia, L., McKinnon, D. H., & Bartlett, S. (2020) . Differences in Perception Between Students and Teachers of High School Science: Implications for Evaluations of Teaching and Classroom Evaluation.. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 45(11) .  \nRetrieved from [https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol45/iss11/5](https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol45/iss11/5)  \n[This Journal Article is posted at Research Online.](This Journal Article is posted at Research Online.)[ ](This Journal Article is posted at Research Online.)[https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol45/iss11/5](https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol45/iss11/5)  \nDifferences in Perception Between Students and Teachers of High School Science: Implications for Evaluations of Teaching and Classroom  \nEvaluation.  \nMichael Fitzgerald  \nDeakin University / Las Cumbres Observatory, USA  \nDavid McKinnon  \nEdith Cowan University  \nLena Danaia  \nCharles Sturt University  \nSophie Bartlett  \nCardiff University, United Kingdom  \nAbstract: The science teacher in the modern high school acts as the designer and driver of the in-class practice. In this role, the teacher  \nmust broadly assess the effect of the practice on the student. This  \nwould rely on accurate self-knowledge of how they act in class and  \nimpact their students. In this study we explore these issues by  \ncomparing the difference in responses of 86 teachers and 2512 Year 9 and 10 students to an instrument probing their perceptions of their inclass practice. We report two significant findings. First, not only do  \nteachers constantly positively overrate their in-class practice but  \nsecondly, these perceptions are completely unrelated to how their  \nstudents see their classrooms. This implies that using teachers as the  \nsole source of evaluation about their own classroom practice is  \nproblematic and that evaluation should always be endeavoured to be  \nundertaken at the level of both teachers and students.  \nKeywords: science education, teacher evaluation, classroom evaluation, student perceptions, teacher perceptions  \nIntroduction  \nIn the developed world, high school student interest in science has been waning for decades and, in response, has led to many national reports and working groups calling for substantial reforms. (e.g., AAAS 1990, Millar & Osborne (1998) International Bureau for Education 2001, Drury & Allen 2002, Committee for the Review of Teaching and Teacher Education 2003, Lyons & Quinn 2010, Goodrum et al. 2012). Concurrently, a large body of research has been undertaken into students’ opinions of their experiences of school science and independently of their teacher. Reviews by Osborne et al. (2009) and Tytler & Osborne (2012) provide an in-depth overview of recent work and the main points of interest for this field. In particular, they focus on the instruments in the literature used to measure students’attitude towards science, the generation of questions from new datasets, the work on identity as well as the impact of age and gender.  \nThe central instrument, and theoretical st","cbCaiirPHBNQYezR","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiirPHBNQYezR","pdf",862169,21,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n## Student interest in science and calls for reform\n## Teacher interaction questionnaires and prior research\n## Perception gaps between teachers and students","[{\"question\":\"What does the study examine about science teaching practice?\",\"answer\":\"It compares differences in responses from teachers and Year 9/10 students to an instrument that probes perceptions of in-class science practice.\"},{\"question\":\"What are the study’s two key findings?\",\"answer\":\"Teachers consistently positively overrate their in-class practice, and these perceptions are completely unrelated to how their students view the classrooms.\"},{\"question\":\"Why is evaluating only through teacher reports considered problematic?\",\"answer\":\"Because teacher and student perceptions diverge, so teacher-only evaluation does not reliably reflect classroom realities; evaluation should include both teachers and students.\"}]","Australian Journal of Teacher Education - Volume 45 - Issue 11 - Article 5 | PDF",1792078300,53]