ENHANCING THE TEACHING OF FUNCTIONS IN THE FET PHASE IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN CONTEXT: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF DIGITAL TOOLS AND AI-DRIVEN METHODS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17501/24246700.2025.11203Keywords:
digitalization, digital technology tools, AI methods, functions (FET phases), high school, mathematics teachers and qualitative research, SAMR and TPACKAbstract
This study critically reviews the integration of digital tools in the teaching of Functions within the Further Education and Training (FET) phase in high schools, in the context of the rapidly evolving, AI-driven digitalization era. The increasing influence of artificial intelligence (AI) in education, accelerated by the demands of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) presents new opportunities for transforming mathematics instruction through dynamic, interactive, and technology- enhanced pedagogies. Despite the availability of advanced digital tools such as GeoGebra, Desmos, and various mobile applications, their use in teaching the topic of Functions remains limited and inconsistently applied. Many teachers continue to face challenges in effectively leveraging these technologies to support students' conceptual understanding, thereby reducing the overall impact of digital innovation in the mathematics classroom. To address this gap, the study employs a qualitative case study approach through a systematic literature review, drawing on secondary data from academic databases such as Scopus and Web of Science. The review is framed by the SAMR model and the TPACK framework, which provide a conceptual basis for analysing how digital tools are currently being integrated and how they might be used more effectively. Descriptive and exploratory methods are applied to synthesize insights across the literature. The findings highlight the potential of digital tools and AI-enhanced strategies to improve learner engagement and conceptual mastery in the teaching of Functions. The study concludes by emphasizing the need for intentional, well-supported integration of digital technologies in mathematics education practices.
References
Amador, J. M., Kimmons, R., Miller, B. G., Desjardins, C. D., & Hall, C. (2019). Preparing preservice teachers to become self-reflective of their technology integration practices. In TPACK: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice (pp. 68-95). IGI Global.
Balacheff, N. (1993). Artificial intelligence and real teaching. In Learning from computers: Mathematics education and technology (pp. 131-158). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Clark-Wilson, A., Robutti, O., & Thomas, M. (2020). Teaching with digital technology. Zdm,
-20.
Cirneanu, A. L., & Moldoveanu, C. E. (2024). Use of Digital Technology in Integrated Mathematics Education. Applied System Innovation, 7(4), 66.
Harzing, A. W., & Pudelko, M. (2016). Do we need to distance ourselves from the distance concept? Why home and host country context might matter more than (cultural) distance. Management International Review, 56, 1-34.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2000a). National educational technology standards for students: Connecting curriculum and technology. Eugene, OR: Author.
Keele, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering (Vol. 5). Technical report, ver. 2.3 ebse technical report. ebse.
Li, D., Zhao, L., Ma, S., Shao, S., & Zhang, L. (2019). What influences an individual’s pro- environmental behavior? A literature review. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 146, 28- 34.
Kgosi, A. M. (2021) Mathematics teachers’ professional noticing in the teaching of inverse functions in Grade 12 (Doctoral dissertation).
McGlynn-Stewart, M., Murphy, S., Pinto, I., Mogyorodi, E., & Nguyen, T. (2019). Technology supported early literacy learning in a multilingual community preschool. Education 3-13, 47(6), 692-704.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers’ college record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Kereluik, K. (2009). Looking back to the future of educational technology. TechTrends, 53(5), 49.
Mustafa, B. (2024). From Traditional Classrooms to AI-Integrated Learning Spaces: A Future Perspective. Journal of AI Integration in Education, 1(3), 20-27.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Opesemowo, O. A. G., & Adewuyi, H. O. (2024). A systematic review of artificial intelligence in mathematics education: The emergence of 4IR. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(7), em2478.
Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & McKenzie, J. E. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. bmj, 372.
Puentedura, R. (2006, August). Transformation, technology, and education.
Pettersson, K., Standler, E., & Tambour, T. (2013). Development of students’ understanding of the threshold concept. Retrieve from http://cerme8.metu.edu.tr.
Roshanaei, M., Olivares, H., & Lopez, R. R. (2023). Harnessing AI to foster equity in education: Opportunities, challenges, and emerging strategies. Journal of Intelligent Learning Systems and Applications, 15(4), 123-143.
Saubern, R., Henderson, M., Heinrich, E., & Redmond, P. (2020). TPACK–time to reboot?. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 1-9.
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2). Reproduced in Shulman, L. (2004). wisdom of Practice. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sefton-Green, J. (2004). Literature review in informal learning with technology outside school.
Szilvia, H. (2023). Digital technology in university mathematics education. Multidiszciplináris Tudományok, 13(2), 220-231.
Viberg, O., Mutimukwe, C., Hrastinski, S., Cerratto‐Pargman, T., & Lilliesköld, J. (2024). Exploring teachers'(future) digital assessment practices in higher education: Instrument and model development. British Journal of Educational Technology.
Zulnaidi, H., Oktavika, E., & Hidayat, R. (2020). Effect of the use of GeoGebra on the achievement of high school math students. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 51-72.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Annie Mamoretsi Kgosi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
