The motivation for the work stems from a persistent gap in education systems worldwide. Governments and educational administrations increasingly call for the identification and dissemination of good practices with digital technologies in order to improve teaching quality, and international repositories such as the European School Education Platform and the UNESCO ICT in Education Repository collect and share such experiences. Yet defining what actually counts as a good practice has remained surprisingly elusive. Previous literature reviews have highlighted criteria such as effectiveness, transformative effect, sustainability, legitimacy and replicability, while regional agencies in Spain have emphasized features including curriculum integration, institutional support, improved outcomes, interdisciplinarity, inclusion and the involvement of the educational community. Without clear, observable criteria, judgments about quality risk being subjective and inconsistent.

To anchor the instrument in a coherent theoretical framework, the research team, based at the Department of Pedagogy of Universitat Rovira i Virgili, turned to Activity Theory, a cultural-historical framework originally developed by Vygotsky, Leontiev and Engestrom. Activity Theory conceives educational practice as an intentional, object-oriented action involving students and teachers working toward a common goal, mediated by physical and sociocultural tools. The theory models an activity system through its core components, including the subject, tools, community, rules, division of labor and object, and it emphasizes the dynamic, dialectical interactions among these elements. This holistic view aligns closely with the structure of a learning situation and allows observers to detect tensions, contradictions and disruptions within the classroom activity system, which the researchers see as essential to understanding how digital technologies are actually integrated into teaching and learning.

The study adopted a Design-Based Research approach, a methodology structured around iterative cycles of analysis, design, development and evaluation. The first cycle began with a systematic literature review following the PRISMA 2020 model, searching databases including Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, SciELO and Dialnet for publications from 2013 to 2023 describing educational practices with digital technologies at any educational level. From an initial pool of 718 publications, 27 studies were selected for full content analysis using ATLAS.ti software. This analysis identified 26 variables linked to the seven components of Activity Theory, each operationally defined with its theoretical meaning, the type of evidence required for observation and its intended use within the guideline, forming the initial prototype of the instrument.

Validation proceeded through the Delphi method, a structured technique for aggregating expert judgment over successive rounds. The team formed a coordinating group and recruited a panel of experts across four professional profiles: teachers from early childhood, primary and secondary education; university professors; researchers; and professionals involved in educational management. Thirty-two experts were invited and 26 completed the competence questionnaire, which calculated an Expert Competence Index combining self-assessed knowledge and the quality of argumentation sources. Twenty-three experts scored at or above the 0.8 threshold denoting high competence and continued into the Delphi rounds, a panel size consistent with established guidance that Delphi studies typically require between 15 and 35 participants.

The three Delphi rounds progressively sharpened the instrument. In the first round, 23 experts ranked the variables derived from each Activity Theory component, and the researchers computed a Relative Importance Index to convert the rankings into interpretable percentages, selecting the two highest-priority variables per component to yield 14 variables and 14 indicators. In the second round, 20 experts rated the clarity and relevance of the proposed indicators, with most indicators exceeding 85 percent positive validation and five achieving unanimous acceptance; all indicators met the Content Validity Index threshold of at least 78 percent, the criterion the team used to classify indicators as excellent. In the third round, nine experts assessed their satisfaction with the revised indicators, and mean scores rose while standard deviations fell, with two indicators reaching a perfect average of 4.00 with zero variability, confirming that the iterative refinements had addressed the panel’s concerns.

With the validated prototype in hand, the team moved to pilot testing in authentic educational settings, an essential step for establishing external validity and feasibility. The pilot involved eight educational practices distributed across four stages, early childhood, primary, secondary and higher education, with two practices per stage, all hosted by different public institutions that had previously collaborated with the university. Sessions lasted one hour in the school stages and two hours at university, with class sizes ranging from 28 students in early childhood settings to as many as 80 university students. Researchers observed each practice simultaneously using individual copies of the guideline and then jointly interviewed the observed teachers with a complementary 13-question semi-structured interview guide, allowing triangulation of the observational data.

Reliability analyses during the pilot demonstrated that different observers could apply the instrument consistently. Weighted Cohen’s Kappa values ranged from 0.64 to 1.00 across the 14 indicators, with 10 of the 14 indicators exceeding 0.80, indicating substantial to almost perfect agreement according to commonly accepted interpretive benchmarks. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients, calculated under the two-way random-effects absolute-agreement model, ranged from 0.67 to 1.00 for single measures, while the global ICC reached 0.89 for single measures and 0.94 for average measures. These figures confirm that the guideline is robust, internally coherent and replicable across observers and contexts, a critical property for any instrument intended to support fair evaluation of teaching quality.

The pilot also generated concrete improvements to the instrument’s design and usability. The researchers added a new section capturing contextual information such as the observed teacher’s name, type of session, school type and dimensions, and technological devices used, reoriented the layout from horizontal to vertical for easier field use, reorganized indicators so that all indicators for each component appeared on the same page, expanded the open-observation field from three to seven lines, and moved illustrative examples directly into the guideline itself. One indicator was reworded to replace a conjunction with a disjunctive form, broadening its scope to capture situations in which community resources or external agents are identified but not necessarily used. Post-pilot analysis showed that 58 percent of the modifications involved new sections, 32 percent design adjustments and 10 percent content changes.

Beyond its immediate technical achievement, the instrument carries significant practical potential. The authors note that teacher training has traditionally emphasized technical mastery of digital tools rather than their pedagogical integration, and the observation guideline is well positioned to serve as a formative assessment tool, a self-reflection resource in mentoring programs, or an evidence-based component in departmental evaluations of technology-enhanced teaching. Its flexible design allows adaptation to different disciplines, educational levels and modalities, including hybrid and virtual environments. The authors caution that further research is needed, including criterial and convergent validation, sensitivity testing to detect changes in teaching practice over time, assessment of transferability across educational systems, and development of an English-language version, but the validated guideline already represents a substantial step toward making the evaluation of good digital teaching practices systematic, transparent and grounded in direct evidence from real classrooms.

Subject of Research: Design and validation of an Activity Theory-based observation instrument for identifying good educational practices with digital technologies through direct classroom observation

Article Title: Good educational practices with digital technologies: validation of an instrument for direct classroom observations

Article References: Good educational practices with digital technologies: validation of an instrument for direct classroom observations. (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44322-026-00065-0

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44322-026-00065-0

Keywords: digital technologies, educational practices, classroom observation, Activity Theory, Delphi method, instrument validation, teacher digital competence, Design-Based Research, educational research, inter-rater reliability, content validity, teaching and learning

One of the central findings of the study is that myths are often disseminated through undergraduate teacher education and professional training programs. This indicates that institutions responsible for preparing future educators bear a significant responsibility for either perpetuating these myths or dismantling them effectively. In many cases, educators rely heavily on popular science articles and secondary summaries rather than engaging directly with primary, peer-reviewed research, which tends to be more nuanced and updated to reflect the current scientific consensus. This reliance on accessible but simplified or outdated sources further entrenches misconceptions. Therefore, the path forward must involve curricular reforms at the university level to introduce teacher candidates explicitly to the nature of educational research, helping them develop critical appraisal skills that can discern between robust evidence and anecdotal or commercially motivated claims.

Interestingly, the study revealed a nuanced approach to correcting these entrenched myths. It showed that anecdotal refutations—using concrete stories and relatable case studies—were sometimes more effective than purely scientific explanations in shifting beliefs. This is a pivotal insight because it underscores the emotional and experiential dimensions of belief change, which purely factual arguments alone may not sufficiently address. Teachers may internally resist changing views that are intertwined with their identity, teaching philosophies, or simplifications that help make sense of complex educational phenomena. Thus, interventions combining rigorous scientific data with compelling narratives about classroom realities might hold more promise for fostering genuine conceptual change among educators.

However, notwithstanding these interventions, some misconceptions, particularly those connected with learning styles and multiple intelligences, exhibit remarkable resistance to change. The pervasiveness and longevity of these ideas can, in part, be attributed to their intuitive appeal and widespread acceptance in popular culture. Such myths often promise straightforward solutions to the complex task of personalizing education, making them difficult to dislodge even when confronted with contradictory evidence. This tenacity calls for more robust and sustained efforts that go beyond single-session refutations or cursory mentions in teacher training. Continuous engagement through workshops, reflective practices, mentorship, and community learning networks is necessary to challenge these deeply ingrained beliefs effectively over time.

The implications of this persistence of myths extend far beyond academic debates. Believing in unsupported or disproven educational concepts can directly affect classroom practices, potentially leading to the inefficient use of resources and missed opportunities to employ more effective, research-backed teaching strategies. For instance, investing time and classroom attention aligned strictly with the idea of learning styles may divert focus from more impactful, universal instructional techniques that promote cognitive engagement across all learners. Consequently, dispelling these myths is not merely an academic exercise but a critical step toward enhancing educational outcomes on a systemic level.

Policymakers hold a particularly strategic position in shifting the paradigms within teacher education and professional development frameworks. The study emphasizes the need for system-level mandates that require evidence-based curricula in all teacher preparation programs. Accreditation bodies must stipulate rigorous standards that ensure programs explicitly address and dismantle common educational myths. Moreover, external audits and reviews should be implemented to monitor compliance and effectiveness, thereby fostering a culture of accountability. Without such structural changes, efforts to reform teacher beliefs risk being fragmented and short-lived, falling prey to entrenched traditions or the allure of commercially attractive but unfounded pedagogical products.

The study additionally calls for long-term research aimed at understanding how beliefs evolve in educators over time and what kinds of interventions produce lasting change. Many existing interventions focus only on immediate or short-term belief shifts, which may not translate into enduring conceptual transformation or changes in classroom behavior. Investing in longitudinal studies would provide valuable insights into the durability of belief change and inform the design of more effective professional development programs. Complementary to this, professional learning opportunities need to be rooted firmly in empirical evidence rather than outdated practices or commercially driven training modules, which often perpetuate myths under the guise of innovation.

At the school level, administrators act as crucial agents of change, uniquely positioned to influence teacher beliefs and classroom practices. Schools must conduct thorough reviews of their instructional materials and pedagogical activities to identify where these outdated myths implicitly or explicitly persist. This might involve removing learning style inventories or discarding lesson plans based exclusively on multiple intelligences frameworks, replacing them with strategies aligned to the best available research. Administrators can steer school cultures toward reflective, research-informed practice by fostering environments that encourage critical examination of long-standing beliefs and their impact on teaching effectiveness.

Creating structured opportunities for teachers to engage in critical reflection and dialogue is another pivotal role for school leaders. Facilitating peer collaboration, reflective journaling, and discussion groups within safe and supportive environments allows educators to question ingrained assumptions and experiment with evidence-based alternatives. Through such processes, teachers can gradually reconcile new information with existing beliefs, reducing resistance to change and fostering a culture of continuous professional growth founded on scientific literacy.

Moreover, professional learning initiatives organized by schools should move beyond merely introducing new instructional strategies. They need to actively challenge existing, ineffective methods by presenting research findings that debunk widely held myths. Disseminating research like that of Tunga and colleagues plays an essential part in helping teachers grasp the broader consequences of their pedagogical choices. Given that many educators derive ideas from popular books, videos, and social media—sources often steeped in anecdote rather than evidence—administrators must guide staff toward reputable, current research, setting a model for informed decision-making grounded in empirical rigor.

Underlying these recommendations is the recognition that dismantling educational myths is a complex, ongoing process requiring multi-layered interventions across various educational strata. Teacher educators, policymakers, and school administrators each play indispensable roles in catalyzing this change. For teacher educators, integrating explicit myth-debunking content into curricula and encouraging research literacy is paramount. Policymakers must enforce standards and support longitudinal research, while school leaders should cultivate reflective professional cultures and monitor instructional authenticity. Collectively, these initiatives can reshape the pedagogical landscape, helping teachers transition from myth-bound practices to those supported by the best available evidence, ultimately enhancing student learning and educational equity.

The persistence of myths in education epitomizes a broader challenge in knowledge translation, where scientific evidence encounters deep-seated beliefs, cultural narratives, and institutional inertia. The findings from this study caution against complacency and underscore the necessity of intentional, multifaceted efforts to realign educational practice with scientific understanding. As educational professionals worldwide grapple with the rapid pace of change and mounting expectations, ensuring they are equipped with accurate knowledge is critical for meeting the demands of modern classrooms and fostering meaningful, lasting learning experiences for all students.

By emphasizing that educational myths often derive from good intentions yet flawed interpretations, this study humanizes the struggle, reminding us that belief change is rarely straightforward. It requires patience, empathy, and pragmatism—elements captured in the advocacy for diverse refutation techniques combining scientific data with relatable narratives. This balanced approach respects the complexity of teacher cognition and underscores the importance of storytelling in professional learning, enabling educators not only to learn new information but also to integrate it meaningfully into their practices and identities.

Ultimately, the stakes are high; perpetuating myths can inadvertently undermine efforts to enhance educational quality on a broad scale. This comprehensive research provides a roadmap for addressing this issue head-on, calling for systemic reforms that prioritize research literacy, critical reflection, and evidence-based practice at every level of the educational ecosystem. The outcomes promise not only to transform teacher education but also to reverberate through classrooms, improving learning experiences and outcomes for generations of students.

Subject of Research:
The persistence and prevalence of educational myths among teachers, and the effectiveness of interventions aimed at changing educators’ beliefs.

Article Title:
Educational myths among teachers: prevalence and refutational intervention for belief change.

Article References:
Tunga, Y., Celik, B. & Cagiltay, K. Educational myths among teachers: prevalence and refutational intervention for belief change.
Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 1619 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05470-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

Mathematical problem posing, a skill often overshadowed by problem solving, is increasingly recognized as a critical element of effective mathematics education. Unlike problem solving, which focuses on finding solutions to given problems, problem posing centers on the generation of new problems. This creative process fosters deeper engagement with mathematical concepts and enhances learners’ ability to think flexibly and critically. Despite its importance, fostering competence in problem posing has remained a pedagogical challenge, partly due to the limited consolidation of evidence around intervention efficacy. Zhang and colleagues’ meta-analysis fills this gap by rigorously evaluating a wide array of instructional approaches.

The meta-analysis incorporated studies covering diverse educational contexts, learner age groups, and intervention designs, offering a panoramic view of the field. Through systematic coding and statistical synthesis, the authors identified not only which strategies were most effective but also the conditions under which interventions yielded the greatest improvements in students’ problem posing abilities. This analytical granularity reveals nuanced insights that could refine curriculum design and teacher professional development programs tailored to cultivate this vital skill.

One salient conclusion from the meta-analysis is the pivotal role of scaffolding in enhancing mathematical problem posing. Interventions that provided students with structured guidance—such as problem templates, prompts, or exemplars—demonstrated significantly greater effectiveness compared to those leaving learners to generate problems independently. This finding underscores the importance of balancing creative freedom with cognitive supports, enabling learners to internalize problem posing heuristics while gradually building autonomy.

Additionally, the analysis highlighted the efficacy of collaborative learning environments in nurturing problem posing competence. Interventions incorporating peer interaction, group discussions, or collaborative task design tended to outperform solitary activities. This suggests that social constructivist approaches, wherein learners negotiate problem ideas and receive immediate feedback, amplify cognitive engagement and inspire more sophisticated mathematical inquiries.

Age and developmental stage emerged as crucial moderators of intervention success. Younger learners, particularly in primary education, showed marked benefits from interventions emphasizing concrete manipulatives and visual representations intertwined with problem posing tasks. Conversely, secondary and post-secondary learners responded best to metacognitive strategies encouraging reflection on the problem posing process itself. Such differentiation signals the need for age-appropriate scaffolding tailored to cognitive readiness.

Interestingly, technological integration received focused attention in the meta-analysis. Digital tools, ranging from interactive problem posing platforms to intelligent tutoring systems, featured prominently in many of the reviewed studies. While results varied, technology generally augmented the effectiveness of interventions, especially when it provided immediate feedback or adaptive support. This alignment with digital pedagogy trends portends a future where technology serves as a dynamic ally in developing problem posing skills.

The meta-analysis further dissected the nature of problem posing tasks employed across interventions. Tasks that challenged learners to reformulate existing problems or generate novel problems within authentic STEM contexts were particularly potent in elevating competence. Such contextualization tethered abstract mathematical ideas to real-world phenomena, enhancing relevance and motivation.

Moreover, the researchers explored the impact of teacher training in problem posing pedagogy. Professional development programs aimed at equipping educators with strategies to foster student-generated problems manifested as critical enablers of intervention success. Teachers’ ability to facilitate meaningful problem posing activities, provide constructive scaffolding, and create a classroom culture valuing creativity and inquiry directly influenced outcomes.

While the meta-analysis paints an encouraging picture, it also illuminates enduring challenges. Chief among these is the variability in assessment methods for problem posing competence, which complicates cross-study comparisons. The authors urge for standardized, reliable measures capturing both the quantity and quality of student-generated problems to advance research rigor and practical application.

Zhang and colleagues also advocate for longitudinal studies to examine the durability of intervention effects. The temporal stability of gains in problem posing competence remains underexplored. Understanding whether improvements persist and translate into general mathematical proficiency is essential for validating educational investments.

Implications from this meta-analysis extend well beyond the mathematics classroom. Problem posing nurtures critical thinking, creativity, and problem framing skills that are indispensable across STEM disciplines and in addressing complex, real-world challenges. Embracing instructional strategies that systematically enhance these competencies equips learners not only as mathematicians but as innovative problem solvers prepared for the demands of the 21st century.

This landmark research resonates with ongoing educational reforms that prioritize active learning, learner agency, and integration of technology. By elucidating evidence-based pathways to cultivate mathematical problem posing, Zhang et al. provide a clarion call for educators to rethink traditional paradigms focused predominantly on problem solving. The cultivation of problem posing competence heralds a paradigm shift towards deeper mathematical literacy.

As educational institutions globally navigate post-pandemic recovery and the increasing digitization of learning environments, this meta-analysis emerges as a timely guide. It underscores the need for adaptive, scaffolded, and socially interactive pedagogies supported by technology. Harnessing these insights could democratize access to high-quality mathematics education that fosters not only knowledge acquisition but also the generative capabilities essential for innovation.

In sum, this comprehensive synthesis by Zhang, Stylianides, and Stylianides represents a milestone in mathematics education research. By systematically identifying effective intervention strategies and illuminating their mechanisms, it sets a robust evidence base for transforming how mathematical problem posing is conceptualized and taught. Its implications ripple across educational practice, research, and policy, marking a decisive step towards nurturing a new generation of mathematically empowered thinkers.

Subject of Research: Enhancing mathematical problem posing competence through educational interventions.

Article Title: Enhancing mathematical problem posing competence: a meta-analysis of intervention studies.

Article References:
Zhang, L., Stylianides, G.J. & Stylianides, A.J. Enhancing mathematical problem posing competence: a meta-analysis of intervention studies. IJ STEM Ed 11, 48 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00507-1

Image Credits: AI Generated