Digital Writing Pads in Mathematics Education: Challenges Experienced by Private School Teachers

This study explored the challenges experienced by mathematics teachers from a private school located in Bulua, Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines, in integrating digital writing pads into classroom instruction. While digital writing pads have been recognized for their potential to enhance visualization and interactivity in mathematics learning, their adoption remains inconsistent and often problematic. Using a qualitative design, three mathematics teachers from private schools were purposively selected as participants. Data were collected through semi-structured survey-interviews and analyzed thematically.
Findings revealed three major categories of challenges: (1) pedagogical difficulties, including adjustments in teaching pace and classroom management when using digital pads; (2) technical issues, such as device responsiveness, connectivity problems, and software limitations; and (3) institutional constraints, particularly the lack of structured training and technical support. These challenges resulted in reduced instructional efficiency, student disengagement, and limited integration of digital writing pads in mathematics lessons.
The study concludes that successful integration of digital writing pads requires not only teacher competence but also reliable infrastructure and strong institutional backing. It is recommended that private schools provide continuous professional development, strengthen ICT infrastructure, and establish supportive policies to promote effective digital pedagogy. Future research may broaden the scope to include public schools or investigate student perspectives to enrich the understanding of digital tool integration in mathematics education.

digital writing pads, mathematics education, private school teachers, challenges, qualitative research

1. Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(9), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.887089 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Anshari, M., Alas, Y., Hardaker, G., Jaidin, J. H., Smith, M., & Ahad, A. D. (2016). Smartphone habit and behavior in Brunei: Personalization, gender, and generation gap. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 719–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.063 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Daher, W., & Anabousy, A. (2020). Teaching and learning mathematics with digital technologies: A systematic review. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(21), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i21.16359 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Gupta, M., & Pandey, S. (2018). The role of ICT in higher education for the 21st century: ICT as a change agent for education. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, 9(1), 485–488. https://doi.org/10.26483/ijarcs.v9i1.5421 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000276961 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Loong, E. Y. K. (2014). Using digital technologies in mathematics teaching: Teacher perspectives. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(2), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-013-0119-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Niess, M. L. (2011). Investigating TPACK: Knowledge growth in teaching with technology. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(3), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.44.3.c [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Tewksbury, R. (2009). Qualitative versus quantitative methods: Understanding why qualitative methods are superior for criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology, 1(1), 38–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9620.00170 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Interplay of Students’ Emotional Intelligence and Attitude toward Mathematics on Performance in Grade 10 Algebra
• Numerical Simulation of Fitzhugh-Nagumo Dynamics Using a Finite Difference-Based Method of Lines
• Fixed Point Theorem in Controlled Metric Spaces
• Usage of Moving Average to Heart Rate, Blood Pressure and Blood Sugar
• Exploring Algebraic Topology and Homotopy Theory: Methods, Empirical Data, and Numerical Examples