Qualitative study explores data use and its predictors in mathematics teaching, indicating needs for improved data literacy and collaboration.
Mathematics achievement in South African schools continues to be limited by identifiable barriers to instructional improvement, including inadequate technological infrastructure, excessive teacher workloads, and inconsistent institutional support for professional learning. Although data-driven instruction is widely promoted, little is known about how psychological constructs such as instrumental attitudes, perceived control, social norms, and self-efficacy influence teachers’ use of data. This study, therefore, explored mathematics teachers’ perspectives on data use, guided by the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). TPB was selected because, unlike purely cognitive or socio-cultural models, it integrates individual psychological factors, attitudes, perceived control, and self-efficacy with social and contextual influences on behaviour, making it particularly well suited to examining data use within complex, resource-constrained school environments. A qualitative design was employed, involving focus-group discussions with senior-phase mathematics teachers. Data were thematically analysed using NVivo 14, with iterative coding aligned with TPB constructs. Findings revealed that while teachers valued data for diagnosing learning gaps, they perceived data tasks as administratively demanding. Collegial collaboration fostered authentic engagement, whereas hierarchical accountability and limited technological capacity reduced motivation and autonomy. The interaction among attitudes, social norms, and perceived control showed that both belief systems and institutional conditions shape teachers’ behavioural intentions. The study concludes that professional development should strengthen teachers’ data literacy, encourage collaborative learning cultures, and improve infrastructural support to promote effective data-driven mathematics instruction in resource-constrained contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bhekiswayo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: