In Norway digital competence is defined as one of five basic skills in the National curriculum (The Ministry of Education and research, 2006; The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2019). The basic skills are defined as necessary tools for learning and development across all subjects, as stated in the Framework for basic skills (The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2017). In the subject mathematics digital competence involves using graph plotter, spreadsheets, CAS, dynamic geometry programs and programming to explore and solve mathematical problems. It also involves finding, analyzing, processing and presenting information using digital tools.

The background for this study is our work in the project Leadership and Learning for the Development of Teachers Professional Digital Competence (LeadDig). This was a three-year project (2023-2026). The underlying idea for the research project was to develop schools (and teachers) that learn, and we wanted to focus, generally, on the use of iPad and PC in school subjects and, specifically, in mathematics. Digital technologies have the potential to support students’ learning in mathematics by providing multiple representations of mathematical objects and enhancing opportunities for active learning (Hedegus et al., 2017). Despite its potential, technology use in mathematics education remains limited, as its integration into classroom practice is a complex and demanding process (Drijvers, 2019).

Based on these findings we wanted to explore how Norwegian teachers have implemented digital tools in the teaching and learning of mathematics. The research question of this study is:  How do teachers use iPad and other digital tools in mathematics classrooms in three primary schools in Norway?

Theoretical framework

To look at the role of digital tools in the mathematics classroom we chose to connect the role to mathematics teaching practices (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2014) and the pedagogical opportunities map (Pierce & Stacey, 2010).

The mathematics teaching practices (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2014) provide a research-based framework for enhancing teaching and learning of mathematics, and they have the potential to support and promote a deep learning of mathematics. Using digital tools in mathematics teaching might also contribute to better learning, and we wanted to see how digital tools could influence the practices. In total there are eight mathematical teaching practices:

1. Establish mathematical goals to focus on learning
2. Implement tasks that promote reasoning and problem-solving
3. Use and connect mathematical representations
4. Facilitate meaningful mathematical discourse
5. Pose purposeful questions
6. Build procedural fluency from conceptual understanding
7. Support productive struggle in learning mathematics
8. Elicit and use evidence of student thinking

The Pedagogical Opportunities Map (POM) is originally a theoretical framework associated with a specific type of technology (Pierce and Stacey, 2010), but we feel that many of the opportunities highlighted by the framework are suitable for all kinds of technology. POM illustrates that technology can enhance learning in ten different ways, and these ways are organized in three levels: tasks, classroom and subject. For example, technology might support the social dynamics in the classroom by encouraging student participation. It is important to note that POM focuses on the pedagogical opportunities with technology. The framework also illustrates that the functional opportunities of technology can change curriculum and assessment. We can summarize by saying that technology can change what mathematics is taught, how mathematics is assed and how it is taught and learned. In our study the focus is on pedagogical opportunities and how it is taught and learned.

In the Leaddig project, mathematics instruction was observed across multiple classrooms in the five participating schools. The present study focuses on mathematics lessons from two of these schools. Data was collected through unstructured classroom observations (Given, 2008), with attention directed both to mathematics teaching in general and, more specifically, to the use of digital tools in instruction. During the observations, detailed field notes were taken, aiming to document classroom activities and interactions as comprehensively as possible through narrative-style descriptions. The researchers’ role during the observations was neither that of a complete observer nor that of a full participant. Rather, it is best characterized as observer as participant (Given, 2008), as the researchers’ presence in the classroom had some influence on students. Data collection commenced in August 2023 and continued until the time of writing. Our objective was to examine mathematics instruction across multiple educational levels while also observing a diverse set of teachers. This approach was intended to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the practices and conditions present in Norwegian classrooms. The data material was analyzed based on the two frameworks described earlier. First, we tried to connect our observations and field notes to the mathematics teaching practices. For example, we tried to find observations that could help us say something about how the digital tools influenced the practice use and connect representations. Afterwards we analyzed our data material based on the pedagogical opportunities map. What could our observations tell us about how digital tools changed the way mathematics was taught and learned?

Our preliminary findings: The digital technology was used for tasks instead of the students’ workbooks. It was up to the students to translate and understand the multiple representations provided by the technology. It seemed like the teachers held an optimistic view of digital technology, which seemed to reflect an assumption that technology use alone could lead to students’ learning of the content . The use of digital tools did not utilize the opportunities described by the Pedagogical Opportunities Map.

Drijvers, P. (2019). Head in the clouds, feet on the ground—A realistic view on using digital tools in mathematics education. In A. Buchter, M. Glade, R. Herold-Blasius, M. Klinger, F. Schacht, & P. Scherer (Eds.), Vielfaltige Zugange zum Mathematikunterricht (pp. 163–176). Springer. Given, L. M. (Ed.) (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. (Vols. 1-0). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909 Hegedus, S., Laborde, C., Brady, C., Dalton, S., Siller, H. S., Tabach, M., Trgalova, J., & Moreno-Armella, L. (2017). Uses of technology in upper secondary mathematics education. Springer. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2014) Principles to Actions: Ensuring Mathematical Success for All. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston. Pierce, R., & Stacey, K. (2010). Mapping pedagogical opportunities provided by mathematics analysis software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15(1), 1–20. The Ministry of Education and research. (2006). Læreplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet (Midlertidig utg. juni 2006. ed.). The Ministry of Education and research; The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2017). Framework for basics skills. www.udir.no Retrieved from https://www.udir.no/laring-og-trivsel/rammeverk/rammeverk-for-grunnleggende-ferdigheter/ The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2019). Læreplanverket Kunnskapsløftet 2020. Retrieved from https://www.udir.no/laring-og-trivsel/lareplanverket/