Our ICT related Mathematics and Science subject interventions are an attempt to promote the socioconstructivist generative tool usage as presented in Figure 1. For that reason, we posit that pedagogy is underpinned by:

social constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978),

constructionism (Papert & Harel, 1992; Kafai, Ching & Marshall, 1997; Kynigos, 2015),

learning as design (Perkins, 1986; Kafai, Ching & Marshall, 1997),

projectbased learning elements (Kokotsaki, Menzies & Wiggins, 2016; Kraus & Boss, 2013).
Figure 1: ICT implementation matrix (Du Plessis, 2016)
The mentioned theories hold promise to:

promote motivation and interest,

encourage greater selfefficacy as well as development of the critical outcomes of the Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS), and

improve results related to curriculum related knowledge and skill aspects in comparison to learners not exposed to our intended intervention.
The implementation of the proposed interventions affords opportunities for:

cognitive growth,

greater interest and motivation,

greater satisfaction towards learning,

greater selfefficacy,

an improvement related to the development of the critical outcomes; and

better results in science and mathematics content facilitated by our approach.
Table 1 presents a holistic overview of possible interventions, their theoretical grounding, research focus and phases.
Table 1: Mixed method research
Intervention

Theoretical grounding

Possible research focus

Phases

Tanks coding


Social constructivism

Motivation theory

Selfefficacy theory

Game theory


Motivation and interest

Selfefficacy

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Mixed Method Research: Pragmatic paradigm

Phase 1: Pretesting of controlled and experimental groups

Phase 1: Openended questionnaire

Phase 2: Intervention of between 4 to 12 weeks [Teachers to be part of project]

Phase 3: Posttesting of controlled and experimental groups

Phase 3: Openended questionnaire

Phase 4: Teachers implement similar project

Phase 5: Drawings as data prompting tool with individual teachers

Phase 6: Focus group interviews with teachers

Phase 7: Joint evaluation by teachers and researchers

Droning


Social constructivism

Selfefficacy theory

Game theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Artefact creation


Social constructivism

Constructionism

Selfefficacy theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

YouTube videos for learning


Selfregulated learning

Selfefficacy theory

Satisfaction related theory

Diffusion of innovation theory

UTAUT theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Science notebook for writing science


Scientific literacy

Social constructivism: Types of talk (cumulative, disputational and exploratory talk)

Selfefficacy theory

Diffusion of innovation theory

UTAUT theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Table 2 focuses on the qualitative dimension of the intended research
Table 2: Qualitative research
Intervention

Theoretical grounding

Possible research focus

Phases

Tanks coding


Social constructivism

Motivation theory

Selfefficacy theory

Game theory


Motivation and interest

Selfefficacy

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Qualitative Research: Interpretivist and Critical paradigm

Phase 1: Openended questionnaire on science or mathematics learning experiences

Phase 1: Individual or Focus group interviews on science or mathematics learning experiences

Phase 2: Intervention

Phase 3: Openended questionnaire on science or mathematics learning experiences

Phase 3: Individual or Focus group interviews on science or mathematics learning experiences

Droning


Social constructivism

Selfefficacy theory

Game theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Artefact creation


Social constructivism

Constructionism

Selfefficacy theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

YouTube videos for learning


Selfregulated learning

Selfefficacy theory

Satisfaction related theory

Diffusion of innovation theory

UTAUT theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Science notebook for writing science


Scientific literacy

Social constructivism: Types of talk (cumulative, disputational and exploratory talk)

Selfefficacy theory

Diffusion of innovation theory

UTAUT theory


Motivation and interest

Thinking skills

Critical outcomes

Influence on Mathematics learning

Our intervention has as its aim to enable teachers to utilise the pedagogy that we intend to model. In order to achieve possible adoption of our innovations, we will be embracing Rogers’ (2003) diffusion of innovation perspective through his perceived attributes theory which postulates that the following aspects have to be planned for when presenting the innovation, namely simplicity, trialability, observability, relative advantage and compatibility. Another vital aspect is that of support (Wilson, Sherry, Dobrovolny, Batty & Ryder, 2001) which then results in the acronym, STORCS. Linked to these attributes, is the innovationdecision process theory which highlights knowledge, persuasion, decision making to adopt or to reject, implementation and possible reinvention, and confirmation or rejection (Rogers, 2003).