International Educational Review

Professional Development for K–12 Mathematics Teachers: A Systematic Literature Review of Technology, Pedagogy, and Equity

Bernard Justus Wekullo 1 *
1 Texas Tech University* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
International Educational Review, Volume 4, Issue 1, 2026, pp. 5-23
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 4 DOWNLOADS: 1 Publication date: 15 Apr 2026
ABSTRACT
This systematic literature review (SLR) analyzed peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2009 and 2024 to identify key characteristics, patterns, and emerging trends in professional development programs for K–12 STEM teachers. The review placed particular emphasis on the integration of emerging technologies, mathematics education practices, and equity-oriented initiatives. Studies involving both pre-service and in-service teachers were included to capture professional learning across the teacher preparation and career continuum, while dissertations, gray literature, and higher education–focused studies were excluded to ensure consistency, relevance, and comparability across sources. Priority was given to empirical journal articles that explicitly examined teacher professional growth in relation to technology integration, pedagogical change, and equity-focused practices within mathematics education. The findings indicate a growing emphasis on technology-enabled instruction, with increased attention to digital tools that support conceptual understanding, student engagement, and inquiry-based learning. At the same time, the literature reflects evolving pedagogical approaches that foreground teacher capacity building, collaborative learning, and the development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Equity-oriented frameworks were also prominent, highlighting efforts to address access, inclusion, and culturally responsive instruction in technology-enhanced mathematics classrooms. Despite these advances, the review identified notable gaps, particularly the limited presence of cross-cutting professional development models that meaningfully integrate technology, pedagogy, and equity in sustained and coherent ways. Additionally, relatively few studies examined long-term impacts of professional development on instructional practice and student outcomes. Limitations of this review include the potential exclusion of relevant insights from non-journal publications and non-English sources. Future research should prioritize longitudinal investigations of integrated professional development models and expand inquiry into underrepresented international contexts, especially in the Global South, to enhance the global relevance and equity of STEM teacher professional development.
KEYWORDS
Emerging technologies, Equity in mathematics, Mathematics education, Professional development, Systematic literature review
CITATION (APA)
Wekullo, B. J. (2026). Professional Development for K–12 Mathematics Teachers: A Systematic Literature Review of Technology, Pedagogy, and Equity. International Educational Review, 4(1), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.58693/ier.412
REFERENCES
  1. Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. (2011). ICT use in the teaching of mathematics: Implications for professional development of pre-service teachers in Ghana. Education and Information Technologies, 16, 423-439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-010-9141-9
  2. Akçay, A. O. (2024). Case Studies: Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers' Integration of Technology into Instructional Activities Using a Cognitive Demand Perspective. Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, 16(1), 238-266. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12454
  3. Arhin, J., Boateng, F. O., Akosah, E. F., & Gyimah, K. (2024). Perceptions and readiness of high school mathematics teachers for integration of ICT tools in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Pedagogical Research, 9(1), 100-179. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/14032
  4. Baser, D., Akkus, R., Akayoglu, S., Top, E., & Gurer, M. D. (2021). Training in-service teachers through individualized technology-related mentorship. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 3131-3151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10004-9
  5. Blanchard, M. R., LePrevost, C. E., Tolin, A. D., & Gutierrez, K. S. (2016). Investigating technology-enhanced teacher professional development in rural, high-poverty middle schools. Educational Researcher, 45(3), 207-220. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16644602
  6. Bray, A., & Tangney, B. (2016). Enhancing student engagement through the affordances of mobile technology: a 21st century learning perspective on Realistic Mathematics Education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(1), 173-197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015-0158-7
  7. Buss, R. R., Foulger, T. S., Wetzel, K., & Lindsey, L. (2018). Preparing teachers to integrate technology into K–12 instruction II: Examining the effects of technology-infused methods courses and student teaching. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education,
  8. 34(3), 134-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2018.1437852
  9. Cheah, Y. H., Oliveri, A. R., & Hughes, J. E. (2023). Unpacking K-12 teachers’ technology-supported, equitable practices: A mixed-methods systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125, 103984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103984.
  10. Chen, C.-L., & Wu, C.-C. (2020). Students’ behavioral intention to use and achievements in ICT-Integrated mathematics remedial instruction: Case study of a calculus course. Computers & education, 145, 103740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103740.
  11. Cho, Y., & Marshall Egan, T. (2009). Action learning research: A systematic review and conceptual framework. Human Resource Development Review, 8(4), 431-462. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484309345656
  12. Davis, J. D., & Witt, N. E. (2022). Pre-service Teachers’ Use of Technology as Reorganizer to Promote Differing Levels of Conceptual Understanding. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 8(3), 287-316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-022-00110-5
  13. Dockendorff, M., & Zaccarelli, F. G. (2024). Successfully preparing future mathematics teachers for digital technology integration: A literature review. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 55(5), 1171–1203. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2024.2309273
  14. Garrard, J. (2004). Health sciences literature review made easy: The matrix method. Jones & Bartlett.
  15. Gonscherowski, P., & Rott, B. (2022). How do pre-/in-service mathematics teachers reason for or against the use of digital technology in teaching? Mathematics, 10(13), 2345. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10132345
  16. Hidayat, A., & Firmanti, P. (2024). Navigating the tech frontier: a systematic review of technology integration in mathematics education. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2373559. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2373559
  17. Hill, J. E., & Uribe-Florez, L. (2020). Understanding Secondary School Teachers' TPACK and Technology Implementation in Mathematics Classrooms. International journal of technology in education, 3(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.v3i1.8
  18. Hohlfeld, T. N., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Dawson, K., & Wilson, M. L. (2017). An examination of seven years of technology integration in Florida schools: Through the lens of the Levels of Digital Divide in Schools. Computers & education, 113, 135-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.05.017
  19. Kartal, B., & Çınar, C. (2024). Preservice mathematics teachers’ TPACK development when they are teaching polygons with geogebra. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 55(5), 1171-1203. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2022.2052197
  20. Li, M., Vale, C., Tan, H., & Blannin, J. (2024). A systematic review of TPACK research in primary mathematics education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14727
  21. Liang, M., Lim, C. P., Park, J., & Mendoza, N. B. (2023). A review of ICT-enabled learning for schoolgirls in Asia and its impacts on education equity. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(2), 267-293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10178-w
  22. Liu, M., Ko, Y., Willmann, A., & Fickert, C. (2018). Examining the role of professional development in a large school district's iPad initiative. Journal of research on technology in education, 50(1), 48-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1387743
  23. Lyublinskaya, I., & Du, X. (2024). Preservice teachers’ TPACK learning trajectories in an online educational technology course. Journal of research on technology in education,
  24. 56(4), 444-461. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2160393
  25. Mailizar, M., Hidayat, M., & Al-Manthari, A. (2021). Examining the impact of mathematics teachers’ TPACK on their acceptance of online professional development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 37(3), 196-212. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2021.1934613
  26. Matthew J. Page, Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy C. Hoffmann, Cynthia D. Mulrow, Larissa Shamseer, Jennifer M. Tetzlaff, Elie A. Akl, Sue E. Brennan, Roger Chou, Julie Glanville, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Manoj M. Lalu, Tianjing Li, Elizabeth W. Loder, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Steve McDonald, Luke A. McGuinness, Lesley A. Stewart, James Thomas, Andrea C. Tricco, Vivian A. Welch, Penny Whiting, David Moher (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88,105906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906 .
  27. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M., & Prodromou, T. (2016). Pre-service teacher training on game-enhanced mathematics teaching and learning. Technology, Knowledge and Learning,
  28. 21, 379-399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-016-9275-y
  29. Moon, J., Yeo, S., Si, Q., & Ijeluola, A. S. (2024). A scoping review of game-based learning for mathematics teacher education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2024.2337934
  30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2023). NCTM annual meeting and exposition.
  31. https://www.nctm.org/research2023/
  32. Nicholas, K., & Fletcher, J. (2017). What is happening in the use of ICT mathematics to support young adolescent learners? A New Zealand experience. Educational review,
  33. 69(4), 474-489. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2016.1237476.
  34. Nutov, L. (2021). Integrating visual arts into the mathematics curriculum: The case of pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 97, 103-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103218
  35. Qiu, X.-L., & Leung, F. K. (2022). Equity in mathematics education in Hong Kong: Evidence from TIMSS 2011 to 2019. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 10(1), 3-45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-022-00121-z
  36. Radović, S., Marić, M., & Passey, D. (2019). Technology enhancing mathematics learning behaviours: Shifting learning goals from “producing the right answer” to “understanding how to address current and future mathematical challenges”. Education and Information Technologies, 24, 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9763-x
  37. Ratnayake, I., Thomas, M., & Kensington-Miller, B. (2020). Professional development for digital technology task design by secondary mathematics teachers. ZDM, 52(7), 1423-1437.
  38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01180-8
  39. Reichert, J. T., Barone, D. A. C., & Kist, M. (2020). Computational Thinking in K-12: An Analysis with Mathematics Teachers. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education,
  40. 16(6), 18-46. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/7803
  41. Saralar-Aras, İ., & Türker-Biber, B. (2024). Enhancing technological pedagogical content knowledge of prospective teachers through mathematics lesson plan development. Education and Information Technologies, 1-22.
  42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12435-8
  43. Sherman, M. (2014). The role of technology in supporting students’ mathematical thinking: Extending the metaphors of amplifier and reorganizer. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 220-246. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/130321/.
  44. Tan, C. Y., & Hew, K. F. (2017). Information technology, mathematics achievement and educational equity in developed economies. Educational Studies, 43(4), 371-390.
  45. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1277137
  46. Thurm, D., & Barzel, B. (2020). Effects of a professional development program for teaching mathematics with technology on teachers’ beliefs, self-efficacy and practices. ZDM, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01158-6
  47. Weigand, H.-G., Trgalova, J., & Tabach, M. (2024). Mathematics teaching, learning, and assessment in the digital age. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 56(4), 525-541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01612-9
  48. Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971
  49. Xie, K., Kim, M. K., Cheng, S.-L., & Luthy, N. C. (2017). Teacher professional development through digital content evaluation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 1067-1103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9519-0
  50. Xie, Z., Xiao, L., Hou, M., Liu, X., & Liu, J. (2021). Micro classes as a primary school–level mathematics education response to COVID-19 pandemic in China: Students’ degree of approval and perception of digital equity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1),
  51. 65-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10099-0
  52. Yılmaz, Z., Gülbağcı Dede, H., Sears, R., & Yıldız Nielsen, S. (2021). Are we all in this together?: mathematics teachers’ perspectives on equity in remote instruction during pandemic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1), 307-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10099-0
  53. You, H. S., Chacko, S. M., & Kapila, V. (2021). Examining the effectiveness of a professional development program: integration of educational robotics into science and mathematics curricula. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(4), 567-581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09903-6
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.