The Global South has increasingly become the subject of scholarly focus across disciplines such as anthropology, education and political science (Haug, Braveboy-Wagner & Maihold 2021). Much of this discourse examines globalisation’s influence and the integration of Western technologies into developing contexts (Cortes, Guix & Carbonell 2021). In South Africa, educational technology is framed as a transformative tool for addressing systemic socio-economic disparities, particularly in under-resourced communities (Achieng & Mlitwa 2024).

Within this context, the Gauteng Department of Education introduced smartboards in township schools, including those in Soshanguve, as part of a broader initiative to enhance learner engagement and improve academic outcomes (Kgosi, Makgato & Skosana 2023; Mugani 2020). Despite widespread installation, smartboards remain underutilised, with teachers often employing them as digital replacements for traditional chalkboards rather than as tools for interactive and learner-centred pedagogy (Mhlongo & Sedumedi 2023; Mihai 2020). This pattern points to a disjunction between policy-driven implementation and the realities of pedagogical integration.

This study investigates the practical realities and constraints associated with smartboard integration in Grade 12 classrooms at a secondary school in Soshanguve. Guided by the TPACK framework, the research explores two questions: (1) How do Grade 12 teachers at Soshanguve Secondary School apply their technological knowledge (TK) to integrate smartboards into teaching and learning? and (2) What pedagogical strategies accompany smartboard use in the classroom?

Although global scholarship on interactive whiteboards is expanding, there remains a marked dearth of empirical studies focusing on the pedagogical enactment of smartboards within South African township schools. This research gap is especially pronounced in relation to teachers’ development across the TPACK domains, notably TK and Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK). Recent findings by Gumede and Mavuru (2025) show that teachers in Gauteng frequently lack the pedagogical strategies necessary for effective smartboard use. Similarly, Shambare and Jita (2024) highlight systemic deficiencies in TPACK among science teachers in resource-constrained settings.

This study therefore contributes to an underexplored nexus of policy implementation, teacher professional development and classroom technology use. By situating smartboard integration within the TPACK framework, the research offers insights into both the enabling and constraining factors shaping educational technology practice in township school environments.

Smartboards represent a significant advancement in educational technology, transforming static learning environments into interactive spaces (Akar 2020; Izadpanah 2024). Their multimedia capabilities cater to diverse learning styles, facilitating visual, auditory and kinaesthetic engagement (Aldalalah 2021). Several studies emphasise their role in enhancing learner participation and enabling teachers to deliver, annotate and adapt digital content dynamically (Khosa & Molotsi 2020).

However, effective integration is contingent not merely on access but on the pedagogical and content-related knowledge teachers bring to technology use. This study is therefore underpinned by the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) framework, which offers a holistic view of teacher competence across technological knowledge (TK), pedagogical knowledge (PK) and content knowledge (CK), as well as their intersections (TPK, technological content knowledge [TCK] and technological pedagogical content knowledge [TPACK]) (Koehler & Mishra 2009; Koehler, Mishra & Cain 2022). Recent research increasingly affirms the framework’s value in contexts with unequal access to training and resources (Shambare & Jita 2024; Yusuf & Olumorin 2023).

Despite national ICT initiatives, many South African teachers still demonstrate limited proficiency beyond basic smartboard functions, such as text display or whiteboard annotation (Hussein et al. 2022). These limitations constrain the pedagogical affordances of smartboards, especially in enabling simulations, visual explanations and interactive problem-solving (Gumede & Mavuru 2025). This disjuncture reflects a broader concern: while hardware provision has improved, pedagogical fluency has not progressed in tandem.

The South African curriculum encourages learner-centred and inquiry-based learning (Bremner, Sakata & Cameron 2022). Smartboards inherently support such pedagogies through multimodal delivery and opportunities for learner participation. In theory, teachers can implement constructivist techniques, differentiated instruction, gamification and visual scaffolding (Mhlongo & Sedumedi 2023). Yet in practice, underpreparedness in TPK and TPACK limits these possibilities. As Gumede and Mavuru (2025) observed, smartboards in township schools are frequently used for content transmission, not interactive engagement, because of insufficient professional development. These patterns are echoed in broader Sub-Saharan African research, which stresses the critical role of context-responsive, TPACK-aligned training (Yusuf & Olumorin 2023).

Furthermore, infrastructural and socio-economic barriers ranging from intermittent electricity and poor connectivity to overcrowded classrooms exacerbate the gap between technological access and effective use (Mokgwathi et al. 2023). Teachers’ autonomy is further curtailed by generic policy prescriptions that fail to address on-the-ground challenges (Moosa, Ncube & Ramnarain 2024). This fragmented policy-to-practice relationship reflects a critical tension in the literature: while digital tools are positioned as equalising forces, their integration in practice often reinforces existing inequalities.

Given this context, the current study applies the TPACK framework to examine how Grade 12 teachers in Soshanguve navigate these constraints in their smartboard usage. It draws attention to the interplay between structural conditions and teacher agency, highlighting the nuanced ways in which teachers attempt to enact technological integration amidst complex realities.

This section presents the results of the data analysis, organised around the research questions and themes that emerged during the coding process. The data from the interviews were analysed using qualitative coding and categorised according to the TPACK framework, which served as a lens to explore the integration of smartboards in teaching and learning. The findings are presented with an emphasis on the voices of the participants, as well as the challenges and opportunities identified through the analysis.

Table 1 presents a comparative overview of participant responses aligned with the core themes identified in the interviews. As shown in Table 1, while all participants acknowledged the presence of smartboards in their schools, only two reported consistent usage. This discrepancy highlights a significant gap between technological access and meaningful pedagogical integration, an issue central to the efficacy of smartboard use in township schools.

Findings for RQ1: How do Grade 12 teachers at Soshanguve Secondary School apply their technological knowledge to integrate smartboards in their classrooms for teaching and learning?

The application of TK by teachers was varied and largely dependent on the availability of functional technology.

This study investigated the integration of smartboards in Grade 12 classrooms at a secondary school in Soshanguve, focusing on teachers’ TK, pedagogical strategies and contextual challenges. Anchored in the TPACK framework, the findings reveal both the potential and limitations of smartboard use in under-resourced South African educational environments.

Teachers demonstrated foundational TK, recognising the affordances of smartboards for multimedia presentation, content annotation and visual enhancement. However, their limited access to functional devices, unreliable internet and inadequate maintenance impeded the translation of this knowledge into sustained classroom use. This reflects findings from Moosa et al. (2024), who identified infrastructural inconsistencies as a key barrier to meaningful technology integration.

As Table 1 illustrates, although smartboards were present in all classrooms, only two teachers reported consistent use. This access–usage gap highlights a disconnect between infrastructure availability and pedagogical application, highlighting the fragility of digital learning initiatives when systemic support is lacking. These infrastructural constraints disrupted not only the development of TK but also impeded the emergence of TPK and TCK, as teachers had few opportunities to align digital tools with their subject-specific pedagogies.

Importantly, these limitations have broader implications for teaching quality and equity. Learners in under-resourced schools face inconsistent exposure to digital learning experiences, deepening the divide between policy ambition and classroom reality. The underdevelopment of TCK means that smartboards are often used for content display rather than as tools to explore disciplinary concepts dynamically.

Despite these barriers, teachers consistently exhibited PK through strategies that prioritised learner engagement, particularly when smartboards were functional. They employed group discussions, interactive exercises and visual aids to support constructivist learning approaches. Yet, the inconsistent use of smartboards meant that opportunities to develop holistic TPACK competencies remained sporadic, especially in subjects requiring visual abstraction such as physical sciences.

A key insight from this study is the absence of structured professional development. Teachers predominantly relied on self-directed learning and informal peer networks to enhance their skills. This reliance on improvisation and fragmented support reflects a structural deficit in institutional investment in capacity-building. As noted by Major, Francis & Tsapali (2021), in low- and middle-income countries, technology-supported interventions are often implemented without sufficient professional development infrastructures, thereby limiting their pedagogical impact. Without consistent and well-supported training initiatives, the integration of technologies such as smartboards remains superficial, hindering the development of TPK.

Moreover, participants reported a lack of clear implementation guidelines, leaving them uncertain about best practices for technology integration. This ambiguity led to ad hoc decision-making rather than systematic instructional planning. The absence of policy frameworks tailored to the infrastructural and socio-pedagogical realities of township schools prevents smartboards from becoming transformative tools. Instead, they remain underutilised artefacts with latent potential.

Overcrowded classrooms, outdated facilities and intermittent internet access collectively undermine the development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). When compounded by insufficient training and support, these conditions render even motivated teachers unable to fully realise the benefits of digital pedagogy. As such, the integration of smartboards must be reconceptualised not only as a technical challenge but also as a matter of systemic equity.

These findings highlight the urgent need for investment in stable infrastructure, ongoing professional development and context-specific pedagogical frameworks. Such interventions would help realise the full promise of smartboards, aligning them with the TPACK model to support meaningful, equitable and sustainable teaching practices.

These insights pave the way for targeted interventions aimed at enhancing smartboard integration through infrastructural investment and capacity-building initiatives and form the basis for the concluding recommendations in the next section.

These findings offer implications for educational policy and technology integration initiatives, especially within the context of under-resourced South African schools. The study examined the integration of smartboards in Grade 12 classrooms at a secondary school in Soshanguve, focusing on teachers’ technological knowledge, pedagogical practices and the contextual factors that shaped the use of smartboard technology. While participants demonstrated foundational technological knowledge and an appreciation for the pedagogical affordances of smartboards, the actualisation of these affordances was significantly constrained by unreliable infrastructure, inconsistent access to functioning equipment and limited institutional support.

By employing the TPACK framework, the study revealed how teachers navigated the intersections of technological, pedagogical and CK. When operational, smartboards enhanced learner engagement through multimedia content, interactive visualisations and collaborative classroom activities. However, these instances were often isolated and inconsistently applied because of infrastructural limitations such as overcrowded classrooms and poor technical maintenance. Additionally, a lack of structured professional development hindered the development of teachers’ TPK and TCK, which are essential for effective integration.

In addressing these challenges, several implications for practice emerge. At the policy level, there is a clear need to establish a coherent framework for technology integration that includes enforceable infrastructure standards, equitable resource allocation and consistent technical support for township schools. Within schools, administrators should prioritise the routine maintenance of smartboards and ensure dedicated support for teachers facing technical difficulties. In parallel, teacher training programmes must be designed to move beyond basic operational knowledge, offering sustained and context-responsive professional development that explicitly incorporates the TPACK model. These programmes should be iterative, practically grounded and sensitive to the specific pedagogical contexts in which teachers operate. Curriculum planners should also embed smartboard integration examples into curriculum documents to encourage subject-specific application, particularly in content-heavy disciplines such as the sciences.

Future research should consider longitudinal approaches that assess how professional development impacts smartboard usage over time and how learners experience technology-enhanced teaching in resource-constrained contexts. Comparative studies between different socio-economic school environments may further clarify which conditions enable or inhibit sustainable technology integration.

Although smartboards present significant potential to improve teaching and learning in South African township schools, this potential can only be realised through coordinated efforts that strengthen infrastructure, invest in teacher capability and align policy with the lived realities of under-resourced classrooms. In doing so, smartboards can be transformed from underutilised technological artefacts into catalysts for pedagogical innovation and educational equity.