Articles
DOI DOI: 10.66434/ijssr.v1i1.460

Investigating the integration of digital and traditional pedagogy in social sciences education

Nellsiwe Ntuli 1
  1. 1 University of the Free State, South Africa

Abstract

Many educators support the use of digital and traditional tools in social science education. Social Sciences teachers face many challenges when integrating these tools in schools, especially in Social Sciences classes. This study was also conducted through a desktop approach. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the integration of digital and traditional pedagogy in social sciences education, explore strategies for effectively integrating them, and identify factors that hinder successful integration. This study uses a qualitative literature review, examining various books, articles, and other relevant sources. The findings indicated a difference between global research and local studies in social science education. Integration of digital and traditional pedagogy in social science: The advantages of integrating digital and traditional pedagogy into social science. Integrating digital and traditional teaching methods in social sciences education is important because it benefits both educators and learners in many ways.

How to Cite

Ntuli , N. . (2026). Investigating the integration of digital and traditional pedagogy in social sciences education. International Journal of Studies in Systematic Reviews, 1(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.66434/ijssr.v1i1.460
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) BibTeX

References

  1. Anastasiades, T. (2025, January 14). Revisiting tradition: Sweden's shift from digital to traditional learning in education. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/revisiting-tradition-swedens-shift-from-digital-anastasiades-ac1wc
  2. Anderson, R. K., Boaler, J., & Dieckmann, J. A. (2018). Achieving elusive teacher change through challenging myths about learning: A blended approach. Education Sciences, 8(3), 98; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8030098
  3. Belay Mengistu, T. (2022). Technology Integration and Its Challenges in Swedish Primary Schools (Unpublished Master's thesis). Växjö: Linnaeus University, Sweden.
  4. Blocher, J. M., Armfield, S. W., Sujo-Montes, L., Tucker, G., & Willis, E. (2011). Contextually based professional development. Computers in the Schools, 28(2), 158–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2011.577398
  5. Bolick, C. M., Berson, M. J., Friedman, A. M., & Porfeli, E. J. (2007). Diffusion of technology innovation in the preservice social studies experience: Results of a national survey. Theory & Research in Social Education, 35(2), 174–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2007.10473332
  6. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2015). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  7. Daskan, A., & Yildiz, Y. (2020). Blended learning: A potential approach to promote learning outcomes. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 7(4), 103-108.: https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v7i4p103
  8. Doering, A., Scharber, C., Miller, C., & Veletsianos, G. (2009). GeoThentic: Designing and assessing with technological pedagogical content knowledge. Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(3), 316–336.
  9. Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration?. Educational technology research and development, 53(4), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683
  10. Faizi, R. (2018). Moroccan Higher Education Students' and Teachers' Perceptions towards Using Web 2.0 Technologies in Language Learning and Teaching. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 10(1), 86–96.
  11. Fayyoumi, A., & Elia, G. (2015). A systemic model for measuring the effectiveness of virtual learning programs. International Journal of Information Technology and Management, 14(4), 305–332. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJITM.2015.072047
  12. Fernández-Gutiérrez, M., Giménez, G., & Calero, J. (2020). Is the use of ICT in education leading to higher student outcomes? Analysis from the Spanish Autonomous Communities. Computers & Education, 157, 103969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103969
  13. Giertz, E., Rickne, A., Rouvinen, P., Ali-Yrkkö, J., Arvidsson, N., Broström, A., Gens, M., Johansson, F., Kotiranta, A., Lindmark, S. & Lougui, M. (2015). Small and beautiful-The ICT success of Finland and Sweden. Stockholm, Sweden: Verket för innovation.
  14. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The qualitative report, 8(4), 597-607.
  15. Gulbahar, Y., & Guven, I. (2008). A Survey on ICT Usage and the Perceptions of Social Studies Teachers in Turkey. Educational Technology & Society, 11, 37-51.
  16. Hagene, E. (2024, June 20). Blended learning: What is it, and why should I, as a course provider, know about it? FrontCore. https://frontcore.com/blog/what-is-blended-learning
  17. Hammond, M., & Gamlo, N. (2015, April). How and why do language teachers use ICT in a University in Saudi Arabia? In Global Learn (pp. 248–257). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  18. Hasala, V., & Kelly, R. (2020). The perception and use of ICT in education by primary school teachers in Finland and Japan. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(3), 206–218.
  19. Heafner, T. (2004). Using technology to motivate students to learn social studies. Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 4(1), 42–53.
  20. Hendriks, D. (2016). Comparing traditional and digital learning methods to improve the learning outcomes of young children. Tilburg University, 5–18.
  21. Heo, H., & Kang, M. (2009). Impacts of ICT use on school learning outcome. In F. Scheuermann & F. Pedró (Eds.), Assessing the effects of ICT in education: Indicators, criteria and benchmarks for international comparisons (pp. 189–205). European Communities and OECD.
  22. Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational technology research and development, 55(3), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5
  23. Hong, J. E. (2016). Social studies teachers’ views of ICT integration. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 6(1), 32–48. https://izlik.org/JA62TJ28LL
  24. Hur, J. W., Shannon, D., & Wolf, S. (2016). An investigation of relationships between internal and external factors affecting technology integration in classrooms. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 32(3), 105–114. 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2016.1169959
  25. Luke, C. (2003). Pedagogy, connectivity, multimodality, and interdisciplinarity. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 397–403.
  26. Makwela, V. N. (2019). Paperless classroom experiences in Grade 7 Science in township schools (Unpublished Master's thesis). Pretoria: University of Pretoria, South Africa.
  27. Martorella, P. H. (1997). Technology and the social studies—or: Which way to the sleeping giant?. Theory & Research in Social Education, 25(4), 511–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.1997.10505828
  28. Mir, S. A. (2019). ICT integrated higher education: Prospects and challenges. International Journal of Research in Economics and Social Sciences, 8(2), 1–4.
  29. Mthembu, T. T. (2014). The Role of Circuit Managers in Enhancing Instructional Leadership Practices in Schools: A Phenomenological Approach (Unpublished Master's thesis), Durban: University of Kwa-Zulu-Natal, South Africa.
  30. National Council for the Social Studies. (NCSS) (2013). The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and History. NCSS, Silver Spring.
  31. Ngao, A. I., Sang, G., & Kihwele, J. E. (2022). Understanding teacher educators’ perceptions and practices about ICT integration in teacher education programmes. Education Sciences, 12(8), 549. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080549
  32. Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2015). P21 framework definitions. http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework
  33. Parveen, D. S., & Ramzan, S. I. (2024). The role of digital technologies in education: Benefits and challenges. Int. Res. J. Adv. Eng. Manag, 2(06), 2029-2037. https://doi.org/10.47392/IRJAEM.2024.0299
  34. Patton, M. Q. (2001). Evaluation, knowledge management, best practices, and high quality lessons learned. The American journal of evaluation, 22(3), 329–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-2140(01)00147-3
  35. Rai, N., & Thapa, B. (2015). A study on purposive sampling method in research. Kathmandu: Kathmandu School of Law, 5(1), 8-15.
  36. Rong, L. P., & Noor, N. M. (2019). Digital storytelling as a creative teaching method in promoting secondary school students’ writing skills. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 13(7), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v13i07.10798
  37. Rout, P. C., & Gupta, S. K. (2017). Asset based community development in mountain environs: A strategic application for sustainable community based tourism development in the Jaunsar-Bawar region of Uttarakhand, India. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 6(3), 1–11.
  38. Scott, T. J., & O'Sullivan, M. K. (2005). Analyzing student search strategies: Making a case for integrating information literacy skills into the curriculum. Teacher Librarian, 33(1), 21-25. https://ezproxy.ufs.ac.za/magazines/analyzing-student-search-strategies-making-case/docview/224875577/se-2
  39. Selvi, S. S. (2024). Embracing the Digital Classroom: Factors Shaping Attitudes toward Online Learning. Anusandhanvallari, 3155-3162.
  40. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
  41. Sun, H., Xie, Y., & Lavonen, J. (2024). Effects of ICT use in schools on students’ higher-order thinking skills in science: A comparative study of China and Finland. Research in Science & Technological Education, 42(2), 276–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2022.2116421
  42. Tenny, S., Brannan, G. D., Brannan, J. M., & Sharts-Hopko, N. C. (2017). Qualitative study. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470395
  43. Timotheou, S., Miliou, O., Dimitriadis, Y., Sobrino, S. V., Giannoutsou, N., Cachia, R.,..., & Ioannou, A. (2023). Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review. Education and information technologies, 28(6), 6695–6726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11431-8
  44. VanFossen, P. J., & Waterson, R. A. (2008). “It is just easier to do what you did before…”: An Update on Internet Use in Secondary Social Studies Classrooms in Indiana. Theory & Research in Social Education, 36(2), 124–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2008.10473369
  45. Vincent, J. (2016). Students’ use of paper and pen versus digital media in university environments for writing and reading–a cross-cultural exploration. Journal of Print Media and Media Technology Research, 5(2), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.14622/JPMTR-1602
  46. Zhao, Y., & Bryant, F. L. (2006). Can teacher technology integration training alone lead to high levels of technology integration? A qualitative look at teachers’ technology integration after state-mandated technology training. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 5(1), 53–62.