Why and Where Future Teachers Fail to Successfully Design Experiments of Complex or Counterintuitive Everyday Life Problems

This study investigates the ability of future primary school teachers to design experiments when confronted with everyday life problems, particularly those involving complex phenomena or counterintuitive outcomes. Data were collected using a content analysis approach from the written assignments submitted during a Science Education university course, where students were asked to formulate hypotheses and design relevant experiments based on worksheets having a specific structure. Their responses were assessed using a six-dimensional rubric that evaluates key elements of experimental design, including hypothesis formulation and variable manipulation. Findings indicate that while students generally performed well across most dimensions, they encountered significant difficulties in two: forming hypotheses and identifying/manipulating variables. Non-parametric statistical analysis revealed that these challenges are strongly linked to the nature of the problems. Specifically, hypothesis formulation was hindered in problems with counter intuitive outcomes, whereas variable manipulation became problematic in tasks with higher complexity, i.e., involving more variables. These results demonstrate that these failures are not merely a procedural deficit, but are rooted in the interplay between conceptual knowledge and metacognitive shortcomings in handling complexity. They also underscore the need for targeted interventions and pedagogical reform in teacher education, focused on developing higher-order experimental competence, which can help future teachers become more comfortablewith designing tasks, hopefully integrating them in their future classrooms.