Indigenous Knowledge-Responsive Blended Learning in Mathematics Teacher Education: A Conceptual Framework for Engagement and Learning

Thabisa Maqoqa; Vuyokazi Momoti

doi:10.58905/jse.v7i1.835

Authors

Thabisa Maqoqa Faculty of Education, Walter Sisulu University, South Africa
Vuyokazi Momoti Faculty of Education, Walter Sisulu University, South Africa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58905/jse.v7i1.835

Keywords:

Blended Learning, Culturally Responsive Pedagogy, Indigenous Knowledge Systems, Mathematics Teacher Education, Student Engagement

Abstract

This conceptual review examines how Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) can strengthen blended learning in mathematics teacher education. It synthesises 30 peer-reviewed and policy sources through a structured narrative review guided by four questions concerning pedagogical orchestration, culturally grounded mathematical meaning-making, student engagement and enabling conditions. The review finds that effective blended learning depends on purposeful connections between online and face-to-face activity; IKS contributes when community practices generate mathematically rigorous inquiry rather than decorative examples; engagement is behavioural, emotional, cognitive and agentic; and learning benefits remain conditional on equitable access, lecturer capability, multilingual participation and ethical knowledge governance. Drawing on social constructivism, culturally responsive pedagogy, ethnomathematics and the Community of Inquiry, the article proposes an integrated framework linking theoretical foundations, pedagogical design, engagement processes and learning outcomes. The framework indicates that culturally grounded hybrid pedagogy can strengthen mathematical reasoning, learner voice, belonging, and transferable problem-solving skills. Its principal limitation is conceptual status; multi-institutional empirical testing is required before claims of effectiveness or achievement can be established.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

A. Cohen, R. T. Nørgård, and Y. Mor, “Hybrid learning spaces—Design, data, didac-tics,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 1039–1044, 2020, doi: 10.1111/bjet.12964.

D. H. Tong, B. P. Uyen, and L. K. Ngan, “Blended learning in mathematics teacher ed-ucation: A systematic review,” International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, vol. 18, no. 17, pp. 196–222, 2023, doi: 10.3991/ijet.v18i17.36985.

M. De Bruijn-Smolders and F. R. Prinsen, “Effective student engagement with blended learning: A systematic review,” Heliyon, vol. 10, e39439, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39439.

D. Gudoniene et al., “Hybrid teaching and learning in higher education: A systematic literature review,” Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 2, art. 756, 2025, doi: 10.3390/su17020756.

C. Hoyles, “Transforming the mathematical practices of learners and teachers through digital technology,” Research in Mathematics Education, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 209–228, 2018, doi: 10.1080/14794802.2018.1484799.

A. Raes, “Exploring student and teacher experiences in hybrid learning environments: Does presence matter?” Postdigital Science and Education, vol. 4, pp. 138–159, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s42438-021-00274-0.

Department of Basic Education, Professional Development Framework for Digital Learning. Pretoria, South Africa: Republic of South Africa, 2018.

Department of Higher Education and Training, National Plan for Post-School Education and Training. Pretoria, South Africa: Republic of South Africa, 2023.

U. D’Ambrosio, “Ethnomathematics and its place in the history and pedagogy of math-ematics,” For the Learning of Mathematics, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 44–48, 1985.

G. Ladson-Billings, “Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy,” American Edu-cational Research Journal, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 465–491, 1995, doi: 10.3102/00028312032003465.

G. Gay, Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3rd ed. New York, NY, USA: Teachers College Press, 2018.

C. Nicol, J. Archibald, and J. Baker, “Designing a model of culturally responsive math-ematics education: Place, relationships and storywork,” Mathematics Education Re-search Journal, vol. 25, pp. 73–89, 2013, doi: 10.1007/s13394-012-0062-3.

M. Rosa and D. C. Orey, “Exploring cultural dynamism of ethnomodelling as a peda-gogical action for students from minority cultural groups,” ZDM–Mathematics Educa-tion, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 423–434, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s11858-023-01539-7.

S. Meeran, S. M. Kodisang, M. M. Moila, M. N. Davids, and M. V. Makokotlela, “Eth-nomathematics in the intermediate phase: Reflections on the Morabaraba game as in-digenous mathematical knowledge,” African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Sci-ence and Technology Education, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 171–184, 2024, doi: 10.1080/18117295.2024.2340095.

T. J. Moloi, M. S. Mosia, M. E. Matabane, and K. T. Sibaya, “The use of indigenous games to enhance the learning of word problems in Grade 4 mathematics: A case of Kgati,” International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 240–259, 2021, doi: 10.26803/ijlter. 20.1.13.

P. Owusu and A. Obuo Addo, “Alikoto: Mathematics instruction and cultural games in Ghana,” Cogent Education, vol. 10, no. 1, art. 2207045, 2023, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2207045.

N. Nkopodi, M. Jakovljevic, and P. Photo, “Criteria for enhancing student wellbeing in STEM classrooms: ICT and indigenous knowledge in South African higher education,” Discover Education, vol. 3, art. 152, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s44217-024-00251-2.

J. A. Ogodo, “Culturally responsive pedagogical knowledge: An integrative teacher knowledge base for diversified STEM classrooms,” Education Sciences, vol. 14, no. 2, art. 124, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14020124.

L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press, 1978.

D. R. Garrison, T. Anderson, and W. Archer, “Critical inquiry in a text-based environ-ment: Computer conferencing in higher education,” The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 2, nos. 2–3, pp. 87–105, 2000, doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6.

Republic of South Africa, Protection, Promotion, Development and Management of In-digenous Knowledge Act 6 of 2019, Government Gazette no. 42647, 2019.

R. T. Nørgård, “Theorising hybrid lifelong learning,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 1709–1723, 2021.

J. C. Tovar-Gálvez, “The epistemological bridge as a framework to guide teachers to design culturally inclusive practices,” International Journal of Science Education, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 760–776, 2021, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2021.1883203.

C. Rwodzi and L. De Jager, “Remote learning as an option by resilient English teachers in Gauteng resource-constrained secondary schools,” Perspectives in Education, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 62–78, 2021, doi: 10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.6.

P. E. Saal, N. Mdlulwa, and S. Hannan, “Unlocking the power of play: Exploring key influences of digital game-based learning adoption among South African mathematics teachers,” Computers in the Schools, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 2024, doi: 10.1080/07380569.2024.2405518.

P. Wachira and J. Mburu, “Culturally responsive mathematics teaching and constructiv-ism: Preparing teachers for diverse classrooms,” Multicultural Learning and Teaching, vol. 14, no. 1, art. 20160023, 2019, doi: 10.1515/mlt-2016-0023.

M. A. Selepe, “Supporting neurodiverse learners via cultural play and technology in early childhood mathematics,” South African Journal of Childhood Education, vol. 15, no. 1, art. a1674, 2025.

UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research. Paris, France: UNESCO, 2023.

V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis,” Qualitative Re-search in Sport, Exercise and Health, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 589–597, 2019, doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806.

S. J. Tracy, “Qualitative quality: Eight ‘big-tent’ criteria for excellent qualitative re-search,” Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 837–851, 2010, doi: 10.1177/1077800410383121.