Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
School experiments are central to physics education, but preparing future teachers for experimental instruction requires more than procedural laboratory skill; it also involves self-regulation, inquiry orientation, motivation, collaboration, and pedagogical reasoning. Because these dimensions may combine differently within individual preservice teachers, this study used a person-centered approach to identify learning profiles among 218 preservice physics teachers enrolled in a Techniques of School Experimentation course at a Kazakhstani university. Using multidimensional survey data and K-means cluster analysis, four profiles emerged: highly engaged and competent experimenters, steady and competent experimenters, developing experimenters, and low-engagement or struggling experimenters. The profiles reflected a clear engagement–competence continuum, with higher-profile students reporting stronger planning, inquiry, reflection, collaboration, mastery orientation, and ability to connect experiments to future physics teaching. Cluster membership was associated with year of study, expected course performance, and intention to teach physics, but not with gender, prior high-school physics background, or prior experiment experience. These findings indicate that preservice physics teachers in the same methods course differ substantially in their readiness for experimental instruction. The study contributes an empirically grounded diagnostic framework for understanding experimental readiness as a coordinated engagement–competence continuum among preservice physics teachers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sugirbekova et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: