The integration of digital technologies is reshaping Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education, offering new possibilities for enhancing teaching and learning. National and international bodies such as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM 2000), the National Research Council (1996), and the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE 2000) have long emphasised the need for a technology-rich curriculum in mathematics, science and technology. These organisations advocate and recommend technology not as a supplementary tool, but as an essential, embedded component of the learning process. According to ISTE (2000), digital tools should function as instruments for both learning and communication, seamlessly integrated into subject-specific instruction.

Despite these recommendations and the growing presence of digital technologies, pre-service teachers (PSTs) often enter the profession with a limited understanding of how to apply these tools effectively in the classroom (Grossman, Hammerness & McDonald 2009). Many teachers hold preconceived ideas about teaching that do not align with the demands of a digitalised educational environment (Grossman et al. 2009). For example, tools such as GeoGebra offer opportunities to bridge this gap by enhancing conceptual understanding in topics such as Geometry, Algebra, Functions, and Statistics. Through interactive and visual engagement, PSTs can experience real-time feedback, explore mathematical structures dynamically, and gain insights into abstract concepts. The use of digital tools supports deeper cognitive development by enabling visualisation and encouraging active learning. As Rakha (2023) notes, digitisation involves the integration of digital technologies into the teaching and learning process and promoting more meaningful engagement with content.

We argue that despite the widespread advocacy of technology integration, PST preparation remains inadequately theorised and inconsistently implemented, particularly in contexts such as South Africa. Empirical evidence suggests that teacher educators frequently struggle to effectively model the use of digital tools, leading to PSTs graduating with limited understanding of how to integrate technology meaningfully into mathematics and STEM instruction (Clark-Wilson, Robutti & Thomas 2020; Drijvers & Sinclair 2024). As a result, many PSTs exit teacher education programmes without the competencies required to meet the expectations of 21st-century teaching, which is shaped by the rapid digital transformation of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) (Gümüs 2022; Schwab 2016).

While the integration of digital tools in education offers significant potential, such as enhanced visualisation, interactive learning, and real-time feedback and personalised instruction, its success largely hinges on the readiness and capacity of teachers (Drijvers & Sinclair 2024; Viberg et al. 2024). Challenges often include evaluating the quality of digital resources, embedding them into coherent lesson plans, managing technical difficulties, and navigating limited infrastructure (Forgasz 2006; Mhlongo, Ndlovu & Chirinda 2024; Thomas & Palmer 2014). These barriers underscore the critical need for continuous professional development, not only for in-service teachers but also for teacher educators responsible for preparing PSTs (Pepin et al. 2017).

While global trends emphasise AI integration, adaptive learning platforms, immersive technologies and data analytics, South African teacher education faces distinct challenges, including infrastructure disparities, varying levels of digital access, persistent socio-economic inequalities, and unreliable electricity supply in some regions (Ncube & Tawanda 2025; Oubibi et al. 2024). The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic exposed and exacerbated these digital divides, revealing significant gaps in both teacher and student digital readiness, with many rural students unable to access online learning during lockdowns (Loglo & Zawacki-Richter 2023; Ncube & Tawanda 2025).

This context necessitates strategies that are both globally informed and locally responsive. Recent policy developments in South Africa, including the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA, Republic of South Africa 2024) act and the Department of Basic Education’s (DBE 2023) Digital Learning Framework, signal growing recognition of the need for systematic digital transformation. However, implementation remains uneven, with rural and under-resourced schools particularly at a disadvantage (Ajani 2024). Teacher education institutions thus bear the responsibility of preparing PSTs not only to use technology in well-resourced contexts but also to adapt and innovate within the resource-constrained environments, a capability we term ‘adaptative digital competence’.

To address this gap, teacher educators must take an active role in promoting PSTs’ cognitive and pedagogical development by embedding digital technologies into their training programmes. Digitisation plays a pivotal role in the global education landscape, enabling personalised learning, fostering collaborative and innovative teaching practices (Clark-Wilson et al. 2020; Drijvers & Sinclair 2024; Rakha 2023; Szilvia 2023). Viberg et al. (2024) further argue that this approach supports the cultivation of critical thinking, analytical reasoning, and adaptive problem-solving skills, which align with the evolving demands of modern STEM classrooms. Taylor et al. (2021) affirm that digital technologies hold transformative potential for education. Equipping PSTs with the skills to leverage these tools not only enhances their employability but also ensures their readiness for implementing 21st-century teaching practices. These insights position digital tools not as optional add-ons but as essential components of effective mathematics education and cognitive development.

This study emphasises the need to prepare PSTs for teaching in digitalised STEM classrooms. Digital tools serve as mediating instruments that support learning across all levels, enabling PSTs to engage deeply with mathematical concepts. Tools such as dynamic geometry software and algebraic visualisation platforms help PSTs make abstract concepts more accessible, foster problem-solving abilities, and build stronger conceptual foundations in topics such as geometry and algebra. This research examines the technological strategies and techniques employed by teacher educators in preparing PSTs to integrate digital technology into STEM teaching, with a specific focus on the South African education context. The study aims to examine the strategies used by teacher educators in the South African context to prepare PSTs integrate digital tools in STEM instruction and to evaluate these strategies using technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition (SAMR) as analytical lenses. The study is guided by the following research questions.

This study is based on the TPACK model. As conceptualised by Mishra and Koehler (2006), TPACK highlights the intersection of three primary domains of teacher knowledge:

Technological pedagogical content knowledge (Koehler & Mishra 2009) extends as a framework that helps teachers to integrate technology effectively into their teaching and represents the knowledge teachers need as follows: (1) the conception and use of technology, (2) pedagogical techniques that use technologies in constructive ways to teach content, and (3) technology-based STEM instruction. The framework positions effective teaching as the outcome of balanced integration of these domains, where teachers (1) understand the affordances and limitations of technology, (2) employ pedagogical techniques that leverage technology constructively to teach specific content, and (3) apply technology-based instructional strategies to enhance STEM learning outcomes. Figure 1 illustrates the TPACK framework, emphasising the dynamic interplay among CK, PK, and TK in designing technology-enhanced learning experiences (Koehler et al. 2013b).

The SARM model for Technology Integration was developed by Puentedura (2006). The model is adopted as an analytical framework in this study to evaluate the depth of technology integration in STEM education classrooms.

This model provides a continuum from enhancement (Substitution and Augmentation) to transformation (Modification and Redefinition):

Puentedura (2006) offers an understanding of how the adoption of technology can have an impact on teaching and learning from a simple to a complex concept. The research uses qualitative research methods to obtain detailed descriptions and narratives from STEM teachers involved in the research and to determine how they use exemplification in the context of technology education. The second levels or phases are modification and redefinition, and they represent the transformation of the traditional approaches to teaching and learning to the 21st-century approach, where active integration of technology is projected. In STEM education, the enhancement phases represent the incremental use of digital tools to support existing instructional approaches, while the transformation phases reflect a shift towards 21st-century pedagogy that redefines learning through active, collaborative, and technology-rich engagement. By combining these frameworks, the commentary situates strategies within both the knowledge and integration dimensions of technology-enhanced mathematics teaching.

The TPACK framework guides the examination of teacher educators’ knowledge integration, while the SAMR model is used to map strategies along the technology integration continuum. Together, these frameworks enable the study to identify the depth of digital tool use in STEM teacher education; to analyse strategies concerning both knowledge domains (TPACK) and integration levels (SAMR) and finally evaluate how digital technologies are operationalised without neglecting the exemplification of the use of concrete, illustrative examples that make abstract mathematical concepts accessible to PSTs.

The rapid digital transformation of education has foregrounded the need for PSTs to develop robust TPACK so that they can orchestrate a range of digital tools, AI applications and open resources in STEM classrooms. Recent studies show that while PSTs increasingly encounter digital platforms in their initial teacher education, their preparedness to design inquiry-rich, technology-enhanced STEM learning remains uneven and often tool-centred rather than pedagogy-centred (Aleksieva 2025; Wahono et al. 2025). Technological pedagogical content knowledge provides a useful lens for this conceptual article because it emphasises the intersection of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge. It frames digital tools, AI and open educational resources (OERs) not as add-ons but as integral components of subject-specific STEM teaching strategies, providing fertile ground for technology-rich STEM lessons (Mahlo & Waghid 2023). Recent evidence from TPACK-oriented professional teacher development indicates that when technology integration is explicitly scaffolded around authentic STEM tasks, PSTs report gains in confidence, self-efficacy and readiness to teach in digitally mediated classrooms (Ribeirinha et al. 2025; Wahono et al. 2025).

Artificial intelligence is increasingly positioned as a meta-tool that can personalise learning, support assessment and extend inquiry-based pedagogies in STEM education. Systematic reviews of AI in teaching and teachers’ professional development highlight AI’s growing role in automating routine feedback, providing adaptive practice and supporting data-informed instructional decisions, while simultaneously raising concerns about ethics, bias and teacher agency (Tan, Cheng & Ling 2024). Within PST education, recent bibliometric and empirical studies show a sharp rise in research on AI-supported teacher preparation, especially around AI literacy, generative AI tools and their pedagogical use in designing lessons and assessments (Kuzu 2025; Guan, Zhang & Gu 2025). New models such as AI-integrated TPACK (often referred to as AI-TPACK) explicitly extend the TPACK framework by adding AI-specific TK and design principles, encouraging PSTs to align AI tools with disciplinary goals and learner needs rather than using them in isolation (Pingmuang, Koraneekij & Khlaisang 2025). In STEM contexts, AI-enhanced simulations, intelligent tutoring systems, and data dashboards can deepen problem-based learning and collaborative inquiry. However, it is essential that PSTs are guided to critically interrogate AI outputs, consider issues of transparency and bias, and design tasks that augment rather than replace human reasoning.

A TPACK-informed study on strategies for equipping PSTs with digital tools, therefore, needs to foreground AI not only as a technical innovation but as a pedagogical partner whose educational value depends on teachers’ integrated technological, ethical and subject-specific judgement. Open educational resources and open educational practices (OEPs) have become central to global efforts to democratise access to high-quality STEM learning materials and to foster more participatory forms of knowledge creation. Recent work shows that teachers perceive OERs as powerful levers for inclusive and equitable education, citing their adaptability, cost-effectiveness and potential to support more meaningful and motivating learning experiences (Romero-Ariza et al. 2025). Professional development interventions that explicitly cultivate open practices, such as designing renewable assignments where teachers and students co-create and remix STEM OERs, have been found to strengthen teachers’ capacity to engage in open pedagogy. This contrasts with merely downloading static resources (Arispe, Hoye & Palmer 2023).

Within the South African and broader Global South context, research highlights OERs and OEPs as strategic responses to structural inequities in access to textbooks, laboratories and up-to-date STEM content, while also foregrounding challenges related to connectivity, contextual relevance and institutional support (Madhav & Leibowitz 2024). For PSTs, TPACK-informed OER and OEP design tasks, such as adapting open STEM simulations, creating multilingual open worksheets, or designing inquiry-oriented open problem sets, can help develop multiple types of knowledge. These include TK (e.g. platforms and licensing), PK (e.g. open, collaborative assessment) and content knowledge (e.g. core STEM concepts). In a conceptual study focused on equipping PSTs with digital tools, OERs and OEPs thus represent both content (what resources are used) and practice (how teaching is enacted), aligning firmly with TPACK’s emphasis on situated, design-based learning in teacher education. Another prominent trend is the increasing emphasis on teacher preparation for integrating digital tools into curriculum planning and classroom instruction. Internationally, countries such as France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States encourage teachers to redesign curricula by leveraging digital materials to create meaningful and engaging learning experiences (Confrey 2018; Pepin et al. 2017). Digital curriculum resources (DCR), including e-textbooks and other digital mathematical tools, are viewed as critical for fostering interactive learning and collaborative teaching environments. However, despite their potential, teachers face challenges in evaluating the quality of DCR and incorporating it systematically into their instruction (Geraniou & Mavrikis 2015).

The analysis reveals several important trends in the integration of technology within STEM education. Firstly, the dominance of AI tools, which accounted for 30.2% of the reviewed literature, reflects the rapidly growing role of AI in teaching and learning. This surge demonstrates the transformative potential of AI; however, it also emphasises the need to prepare PSTs to use AI ethically, evaluate AI-generated content critically, and understand the limitations of these technologies. Mathematical software such as GeoGebra and Desmos continues to hold a foundational place in STEM teacher education, representing 22.1% of the reviewed tools. Their widespread use underscores their effectiveness in promoting conceptual understanding and facilitating interactive visualisation of mathematical concepts. Open educational resources also emerged as a crucial area, representing 17.0% of the reviewed technologies. In resource-constrained contexts such as South Africa, OERs offer an equitable solution by providing freely accessible, adaptable, and culturally relevant materials, further reinforcing their importance in supporting fair access to quality education. In contrast, technologies such as hardware and devices appeared far less frequently, at only 5.2%. This could suggest that basic infrastructure has become normalised in some institutions, but it may also point to persistent challenges in under-resourced settings where access to devices remains limited and problematic. This article also highlights that the transformative potential of many advanced technologies remains underutilised. Tools capable of supporting higher-level integration under the SAMR model, such as AI, VR, and collaborative platforms, are present but not yet widespread in practice. Key barriers appear to include limited development of TPACK among teacher educators, insufficient infrastructure, a lack of ongoing professional development, and inadequate institutional support.

Patterns of TPACK integration further illustrate this gap. Full TPACK integration emerges with select tools such as AI (30.2% mentions) (see Table 2) and collaborative platforms, enabling contextualised STEM tasks (e.g. adaptive simulations aligning CK on algebraic structures with PK for collaborative inquiry). However, most practices show siloed knowledge: hardware and infrastructure (5.2%) (see Table 2) emphasises TK alone, while mobile tools and OERs (17%) combine TK with partial PK but neglect South African-specific CK, such as multilingual adaptations. Teacher educators’ low digital confidence exacerbates this, as superficial tool use fails to foster PSTs’ ability to orchestrate technology for 21st-century competencies such as problem-solving.

Finally, the analysis reinforces the importance of contextualising technology use in South Africa. Technologies must function effectively within low-bandwidth environments, multilingual classrooms, and diverse access scenarios, including shared or personal devices under Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) strategies. They must also address electricity constraints and support cultural relevance with locally grounded content and examples. Overall, the categorisation highlights both the progress made and the challenges that remain in ensuring equitable, effective, and transformative technology integration in STEM teacher education.

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Sol Plaatje University Senate Ethics Committee (No. 101179402).

This study emphasises the pivotal role of the TPACK framework in preparing PSTs for 21st-century classrooms, particularly in integrating technology into mathematics teaching. Based on the findings and alignment with the TPACK framework, the following suggestions are proposed: The study further highlights several critical issues and debates surrounding the preparation of PSTs for integrating technology into mathematics instruction. Based on the findings and theoretical insights, the following suggestions are made: