Talking Tech, Teaching with Tech: How Primary Teachers Implement Digital Technologies in Practice

Abstract

This paper explores how primary school teachers integrate digital technologies into their classroom practice, with a particular focus on the extent to which their stated intentions align with what actually takes place during lessons. Drawing on data from the Bulgarian SUMMIT project on digital transformation in education, the study employed a mixed-methods design combining semi-structured interviews, structured lesson observations, and analysis of teaching materials. The sample included 44 teachers from 26 Bulgarian schools, representing a range of educational contexts. The analysis was guided by the Digital Technology Integration Framework (DTIF), which distinguishes between three modes of technology use—Support, Extend, and Transform—based on the depth of pedagogical change. The findings indicated a strong degree of consistency between teachers’ accounts and observed practices in areas such as the use of digital tools for content visualisation, lesson enrichment, and reinforcement of knowledge. At the same time, the study highlights important gaps between teachers’ aspirations and classroom realities. Although many spoke of wanting to promote independent exploration, creativity, collaboration, and digital citizenship, these ambitions were rarely realised in observed lessons. Pupil autonomy and opportunities for creative digital production were limited, with extended and transformative practices appearing only occasionally. No significant subject-specific differences were identified: teachers across disciplines tended to rely on the same set of familiar tools, while more advanced or innovative uses of technology remained rare. Rather than offering a definitive account of progress, the study raises critical questions about teachers’ digital pedagogical competencies, contextual constraints and the depth of technology integration in everyday classroom practice. While digital tools are increasingly present, their use often remains limited to supporting traditional instruction, with extended and transformative applications still aspirational rather than routine. The findings draw attention to context-specific challenges in the Bulgarian primary education system and the importance of aligning digital innovation with pedagogical intent. This highlights the need for sustained professional development focused on learner-centred digital pedagogies, along with stronger institutional support and equitable access to infrastructure.

1. Introduction

Digitalisation in education, including in primary grades, is increasingly shaping the modern learning process. Digital technologies have the potential to enhance learning outcomes and foster new teaching strategies that support the development of students’ critical skills. Although there is “a lack of consensus of an appropriate age and approach to introducing Digital Technology concepts within primary schools” [1], the implementation of digital technologies in this early period can be particularly useful, providing different approaches and tools to address children’s different needs [2], increase interest in learning content and support motivation to learn [3,4]. However, for digitalisation to be effective in education, it should be aligned with the needs of students living in an increasingly digital world [5,6,7], which is especially critical in primary education [8]. This, in turn, requires continuous teacher training to constantly update teachers’ pedagogical digital competencies so that they can adapt and keep up with increasingly demanding digital education [6,9,10,11,12,13]. Teachers should possess general digital competences, which include technological skills to employ various online platforms and applications [14,15], but also pedagogical digital competences, which include the integration of digital tools into pedagogical practice, critical consideration of the decisions, and training of students who use technology for learning [16]. The pedagogical digital competences of primary teachers are particularly complex, as they face a unique challenge: integrating technology effectively while adapting it to young learners’ cognitive and emotional needs [8]. In addition, it is often necessary to actively involve parents in the digital educational process, which further complicates primary teachers’ role [8]. Furthermore, the multidisciplinary nature of primary education requires teachers to adapt digital tools to subject-specific pedagogical goals, with significant variation in technology use across disciplines (e.g., interactive simulations in science vs. collaborative writing tools in language) [17].

These challenges highlight the need for more in-depth research into how digital technologies are actually integrated into teaching in primary education. This study, conducted within the framework of the Sofia University Marking Momentum for Innovation and Technological Transfer (SUMMIT) project (European Union-NextGenerationEU, through the National Recovery and Resilience Plan of the Republic of Bulgaria, project No BG-RRP-2.004-0008; https://summit.uni-sofia.bg/, accessed on 13 July 2025), adopts a practical perspective by exploring how primary teachers implement digital technologies in their everyday teaching. It aims to go beyond teachers’ declarations and observe how technology is applied in real classroom settings. Therefore, the study attempts to answer the following questions:

• What purposes, strategies and tools do primary teachers declare when integrating digital technologies in education, and how do these align with their actual classroom practices?
• What is the level of digital technology integration in primary teachers’ instructional practices, and how is it reflected in their declared and observed practices?
• How does the use of digital technologies vary by subject in primary classrooms, and what distinctive patterns can be observed?

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Theoretical Models for Analysing Digital Technology Integration in Schools

There are various frameworks for analysing and understanding the integration of digital technologies in school education. Among them, the Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition (SAMR) model [18] stands out, which describes four levels of technological integration: from the replacement of traditional resources with digital ones, to the complete transformation of learning activities. This model is widely used to understand how technology can enrich or transform learning. Another important framework is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) [19], which looks at the interaction between three main components: technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge. According to this framework, the successful integration of technology depends on the teacher’s ability to balance and connect these three types of knowledge in the learning process. The contemporary debate on the pedagogical use of technology is also complemented by the Digital Technology Impact Framework (DTIF) [20], which considers not only the instrumental characteristics of technologies, but also their impact on pedagogical practices and the context of learning. The DTIF builds on earlier work by Twining, originally published as the Computer Practice Framework (2002) and later adapted as the ICT Innovation Framework, empirically tested in the NP3 project (2017) (https://oro.open.ac.uk/50630/1/NP3%20Meta-analysis%20report%2017-06-29%20compressed.pdf., accessed on 4 September 2025). These precursors provide evidence of the framework’s feasibility, while its most recent formulation appears in Aubrey-Smith & Twining (2023) [21]. DTIFis a multidimensional framework that addresses three dimensions: (1) quantity (proportion of study time that students are using digital technology); (2) focus (the learning could be ABOUT or WITH digital technology, or neither of them); (3) mode which relates to the impact on what or how students learn. Additionally, when the focus is learning WITH technology (when the subject is other than digital technology), the DTIF identifies three uses that are related to the possibility of pedagogical transformation. These are the following three modes:

• Support: technologies are used to support existing pedagogical practices without significantly changing them.
• Extend: technology enables learning and teaching practices that go beyond the capabilities of the traditional classroom (e.g., enabling collaboration across distances or providing access to a wider range of resources);
• Transform: technology is leading to a fundamental change in the way we teach and learn, creating entirely new pedagogical practices.

DTIF is further clarified in the book “From EdTech to PedTech” [21] which presents the transition from EdTech (an approach in which technology is seen as a separate tool applied linearly for specific purposes, e.g., presentation of a lesson, which has a potential to support the learning process, but does not fundamentally change the pedagogy) to PedTech (the approach in which technologies are viewed through the prism of the pedagogical idea—their function is evaluated against pedagogical values and how they contribute to learning goals). PedTech approach requires the teacher to comprehend technology in the context of their pedagogical position. DTIF offers a broader and more contextualised approach compared to TPACK and SAMR. While TPACK focuses on the intersection of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge, and SAMR analyses levels of technological integration from substitution to transformation, DTIF considers not only the instrumental characteristics of technologies but also their impact on pedagogical practices and the learning context. This multidimensional perspective allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the real impact of digital technologies on teaching and learning. It provides a structured way to analyse the quantity, focus, and mode of technology use, making it particularly suitable for studies aimed at evaluating the real impact of digitalization in education. Besides SAMR, TPACK and DTIF there are also other frameworks that explore technology integration in education, but because of its multi-layered nature, the DTIF proves to be feasible for assessing the real impact of digital technologies on learning and teaching, taking into account the complex interconnections between technology, pedagogy and context.

2.2. Practices in Integrating Digital Technologies in Primary Education

Primary school teachers often adopt blended learning models to combine the strengths of traditional instruction with affordances of digital technologies [22]. Within this framework, digital tools are frequently embedded in pedagogical approaches such as gamification, collaborative learning [23,24,25,26], and flipped classroom [27,28], which enhance student engagement, creativity, and motivation. Recent literature emphasises that the integration of digital technologies in primary education is achieved through a wide range of strategies and tools that not only facilitate subject-specific learning but also contribute to the development of students’ digital competences. Among the most common practices for digital integration is the use of digital storytelling which has been shown to enhance language development, creativity, and digital literacy [29,30,31,32,33,34]. Another prevalent approach is the integration of game-based applications [35,36] and augmented reality [37,38,39], which promote engagement and concept understanding, particularly in mathematics and science [36,38]. Teachers use digital tools not only as content delivery mechanisms, but also as a means for student-centred learning, where pupils create digital content, collaborate on projects, and engage in multimedia-based problem-solving [24]. The used digital environments often rely on students’ active involvement and provide real-time feedback, fostering motivation and autonomy. In addition, platforms such as Scratch and robotics are frequently employed to support computational thinking and coding skills from an early age [40,41,42,43].

In the Bulgarian context, research highlights the need to develop digital, media and information literacy from an early age [44,45,46], along with the implementation of diverse pedagogical strategies aimed at developing students’ 21-st-century skills [45,47,48]. Despite many national policy initiatives, a serious challenge in Bulgaria remains the lack of sufficient ICT (Information and Communication Technology) resources in schools [44], as well as the insufficient preparation of teachers in the field of digital pedagogy [49,50,51]. Recent studies point to a growing emphasis within Bulgarian teacher training programmes on the preparation of pre-service and in-service teachers with practical skills for the integration of digital technology into their instructional practice [50,51]. These developments reflect a broader shift towards promoting innovative, learner-centred pedagogies that effectively use digital tools in the everyday classroom. However, to be successful, such efforts must be accompanied by sustained institutional support, targeted professional development, and access to appropriate digital resources.

Another key aspect in the practical integration of digital technologies is the recognition of specific pedagogical frameworks that adopt models such as TPACK (Technological Educational Content Knowledge), which emphasises the interaction between content, pedagogy, and technology in educational practices and has the potential to transform educational environments by providing meaningful learning experiences [52]. Recent studies suggest that although the TPACK model is widely recognised in theory, its implementation in classroom settings remains limited, particularly in contexts where digital pedagogy is underdeveloped and lacks structured professional development support [53]. Shambare and Simuja [53] highlight that teachers’ technology knowledge and the integration of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technology knowledge to form a holistic TPACK framework remain areas requiring significant support. Lower proficiency in technology-related domains underscores the need for structured professional development, guidance, and contextualised support. Furthermore, the integration of technology is highly context-dependent: teachers demonstrate varying proficiency across TPACK domains depending on the specific challenges, tasks, and resources available in their schools. This indicates that, even when teachers understand TPACK conceptually, translating it into consistent classroom practice is constrained by context, access to technology, and professional development opportunities.

2.3. Use of Digital Technologies in Different Subjects in Primary Grades

In Bulgaria, as in many countries, primary education is typically delivered by one teacher across multiple subjects—mathematics, language, science, arts, etc. The integration of digital technologies in these different subjects also implies different pedagogical practices. The choice and effectiveness of digital tools often depends on the subject area. For instance, science teachers frequently use simulations and data visualisation tools, while language teachers implement platforms for collaborative writing and multimedia storytelling [17]. This consideration is particularly relevant in primary education, where teachers often instruct multiple subjects within the same classroom. In these early grades, the integration of digital technologies should be adaptable to support diverse learning objectives across subjects such as mathematics, science, language arts, and social studies. Therefore, primary teachers face the additional challenge of selecting and implementing digital tools that can effectively address the varied content areas they teach, while also promoting holistic development and digital competence among young learners.

The implementation of digital tools in education has the potential to foster critical thinking and decision-making skills, particularly in subjects like mathematics, where technology can transform abstract concepts into engaging, interactive experiences [54]. In the field of mathematics, there are various teaching strategies that use digital storytelling and gamification, which potentially stimulate the active participation of students and further improve their mathematical competence. This is evidenced by Ünal and Çil, who demonstrate the use of digital stories to effectively introduce concepts and improve math learning [55]. In subjects such as science and social sciences, digital tools are increasingly being incorporated to promote engagement and deepen understanding. The application of STEM-based models in digital classrooms not only challenges students’ thinking but also provides them with the necessary skills for the future. Research by Zainil et al. (2022) highlights that STEM-based digital classroom models positively impact students’ development of 21st-century skills [56]. For example, using platforms such as Minecraft Education Edition allows educators to teach complex concepts through an interactive and playful approach, improving not only comprehension but also learning pleasure [57].

In digital language learning, the use of adaptive learning algorithms and technologies such as virtual reality (VR) to improve English as a Foreign Language (EFL) proficiency is trending. Bahari et al. (2024) demonstrate how these technologies personalise learning experiences, promoting self-regulating learning skills in students [58]. Research indicates that integrating digital tools into language learning in primary grades supports both language acquisition and cognitive development [34]. This is especially true when combined with game-based methods [30] and the use of game-based learning apps, such as the Scramword app, that actively engage students. Such tools allow learners to interact with language materials through different levels of difficulty while providing immediate feedback, which is crucial for vocabulary retention and motivation [59]. These interactive elements can be especially effective in vocabulary acquisition, which is a critical aspect of language learning [60].

Additionally, digital technologies offer opportunities for personalised learning paths for students, supporting differentiated learning [61]. Adapting to different learning styles is essential, and digital technologies are creating new ways of communication that could serve these different learning preferences [62]. While digital technologies have the potential to transform primary education in all subjects, the effectiveness of their implementation depends on teacher preparedness, pedagogical practices used and alignment with educational objectives. Specific approaches to integrating digital technologies will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

2.4. Integrating Digital Technologies in Primary Education: Between Talking Tech and Actual Practice

A critical aspect of the discussion on the integration of digital technologies in primary education is examining the discrepancies between teachers’ attitudes toward digital technologies and their actual classroom practices. Previous studies consistently demonstrate that teachers express positive attitudes and value beliefs about the role of digital technologies in education [63,64], but these attitudes are not always realised in their daily pedagogical practice [65,66].

For instance, Abedi (2024) found that while teachers perceive ICT as a means of accessing information and improving learning materials, its actual use remains predominantly teacher-centred [65]. Teachers rarely actively engage students in creating their own knowledge through technology, thus opportunities for transformative learning are limited. These results correspond to the conclusions of Drenoyianni & Bekos (2023) that there is a mismatch between political expectations for the technologies integration, teachers’ understanding of them and their practical application in the classroom [67].

Similar findings are reported by Alberola-Mulet et al. (2021), who highlight that although teachers recognise the potential of digital resources as a motivational tool, they often use them mainly to convey knowledge through a whiteboard or computer [66]. This further illustrates a predominantly traditional approach to technology integration. Szyszka et al. (2022) also noted that teachers’ positive attitudes towards ICT coexist with its limited use, with institutional support and school culture playing a key role in the frequency of use [68].

A significant contribution to the theoretical framework stems from research exploring the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their actual use of technology [69,70,71]. These studies reveal that traditional pedagogical beliefs often dominate constructivist beliefs and influence the way teachers plan and conduct the learning process. Although teachers recognise the potential of digital technologies to support specific learning goals, they use them in a way that aligns with their preconceived beliefs about teaching and learning rather than innovative practices [72,73].

These observations highlight the need to investigate not only what teachers’ declared attitudes and beliefs towards ICT but also what they actually do in the classroom. Understanding this disparity is key for designing effective professional development programmes and education policies that address the real challenges of technology integration [64,67].

3. Methodology

3.1. Research Design

This study employed a mixed-methods research design aiming to investigate the integration of digital technologies in primary education by exploring teachers’ declared practices and the way these practices are implemented in the classroom. The research design, combining quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection and analysis, ensures triangulation and increased validity of the results. It also enables to achieve a more comprehensive and in-depth understanding of such a complex phenomenon as technology integration in education. Quantitative elements in this study consisted of descriptive counts and frequencies of specific practices observed across lessons, as well as the categorization of teachers’ declared intentions regarding the role of technology (supportive, extensive, transformative). These quantitative indicators were integrated with qualitative interview, observation and lesson plan data, providing a richer understanding of the pedagogical rationales and contextual factors that shape technology use. Mixed methods are particularly suitable for research on technology integration in education, where self-reports often diverge from actual classroom practice [74]. Quantitative approaches alone cannot capture the nuanced decision-making and constraints teachers face, while qualitative approaches alone may lack representativeness and generalisability [75]. By integrating both strands, this study not only identifies the prevalence of particular practices but also explains why teachers adopt or avoid certain uses of digital technologies in their pedagogical work.

The study was conducted as part of a broader national research project focused on digital transformation in education—SUMMIT DigEdu-SU. The paper research methodology follows the SUMMIT project’s multi-perspective approach described by Mizova et al. [9]. It explores not only the digital technology teachers report using, but also the purposes and strategies behind their use, with particular attention to alignment between declared and observed practices. The Digital Technology Impact Framework (DTIF) [20] served as the analytical lens, providing a structure to assess the depth and type of technology integration (support, extend, transform).

3.2. Research Instruments and Data Collection

Three types of instruments were used for data collection, all developed and validated within the framework of the SUMMIT project:

(1) Semi-structured interview in online format conducted over approximately 60 min. It was designed to explore teachers’ attitudes, experiences, and practices related to the use of digital technologies in education. The interview covers five thematic areas: Integration of technologies in the school; Experience with digital technologies; The role of technologies in teaching; Integration of technologies in the classroom; Teachers ‘views on the future of technology in education. For the purposes of the study, only questions from the fourth thematic block—Integration of technologies in the classroom—were used. These questions explore teachers’ views on integrating digital technology in primary education, their declared learning objectives and tools, and their self-reported strategies. These interviews focused primarily on how teachers perceive and implement ICT in relation to curriculum, age-specific needs, and learning outcomes. The questions were formulated to encourage participants to provide concrete examples from their practice, allowing for deeper insight into the actual application and effectiveness of digital tools in the learning process. Teachers were invited to adopt a critical stance regarding the benefits and harms of technology in terms of learning and teaching in their subject and to provide examples in support of their claims. The interviews’ data was triangulated with the data collected with other instruments—the classroom observation protocol and lesson plan.

(2) Classroom observations were carried out using a structured observation protocol. This instrument is designed to document teaching practices involving digital technologies during a lesson. It includes general contextual information such as the teacher’s name, subject, grade level, classroom organisation, and availability of digital tools. Before the observation, the teachers were asked to provide to the researcher the lesson plans encompassing the lesson learning objectives, planned teaching and learning activities, the intended role of technologies (support, extend, transform), assessment strategies, and digital resources used in preparation. During the lesson, each learning activity is recorded in detail, including the type of activity, teacher and student actions, use of technologies, duration, assessment methods, and the digital competences developed. Observers also note any discrepancies and impressions. Student engagement is assessed using a rubric-based table that rates indicators such as attention, interest, and participation. A summary of digital materials used—such as presentations or videos—is also included. Observations aimed to document actual ICT integration during teaching sessions, with a focus on how technologies were used, for what purposes, and with what pedagogical effects.

(3) Lesson plans were collected in advance from participating teachers using a structured template designed to capture the lesson details described in the previous paragraph. These plans were analysed to cross-reference declared intentions with both interview responses and observed classroom practices, thus allowing for a deeper understanding of how teachers conceptualise the use of digital tools and to what extent these intentions align with their actual teaching practice. Rather than being coded as a separate data set, lesson plans were used as a contextual resource that supported the interpretation of interviews and observations. In this way, the lesson plans provided additional validation of the consistency (or discrepancy) between teachers’ stated objectives and their actual classroom practices.

3.3. Participants

The SUMMIT project, of which this study is part, initially employed a stratified random sample of 359 schools, designed to be nationally representative in terms of region, settlement type, school size, and school type. For the second, qualitative phase of the project focused on digital technology use in primary education, a purposively selected analytical micro-subsample of 30 schools, comprising 270 teachers, was drawn from the broader sample. This embedded subsample preserved the structural logic of the main sample while allowing in-depth exploration of teachers’ practices, contextual factors, and digital pedagogical strategies through interviews, observations, and lesson plan analysis. From this subsample, 44 primary teachers from 26 schools participated in the present study. All participants were certified primary teachers teaching multiple subjects, ensuring that observed practices captured integration of digital technologies across different disciplines (see

Table 1. Profile of Participating Teachers by Degree, Experience, School Type and Grade Taught (2024/2025 Academic Year).

Degree (N of Teachers = 44)		Professional Experience (N of Teachers = 44)		School Type (N of Teachers = 44)		School Location (N of Teachers = 44)		Grade in 2024/2025 Academic Year (N of Teachers = 44)
Bachelor	8	Up to 5 years	10	Primary School (from 1st to 4th grade)	12	Regional city (Capital)	3	1st grade (ages 6–7)	10
Master	35	6–10 years	6	Basic School (from 1st to 7th grade)	23	Regional city	19	2nd grade (ages 7–8)	5
PhD	1	11–20 years	9	Secondary School (from 1st to 12th grade)	9	Town	7	3rd grade (ages 8–9)	9
		Over 21 years	19			Village	15	4th grade (ages 9–10)	16
								1st & 2nd grade	2
								3rd & 4th grade	2

). The gender distribution (43 female and 1 male) reflects the demographic profile of the Bulgarian primary teaching workforce, which is predominantly female (According to the Bulgarian National Statistical Institute (NSI) (https://www.nsi.bg/statistical-data/197/618, accessed on 3 September 2025), in the 2024/2025 school year only about 5% of primary teachers in Bulgaria were men, reflecting the strongly feminised profile of the profession).

This approach allowed the study to maintain contextual diversity and analytical depth while supporting comparability with the larger quantitative phase. Although the broader SUMMIT project was designed to be nationally representative at the school level, the present study relies on this smaller qualitative subsample. As such, its purpose is not to achieve statistical representativeness, but to provide an in-depth understanding of primary teachers’ practices, which should be interpreted as illustrative rather than generalisable to all teachers.

3.4. Data Analysis

The qualitative interview data were analysed through categorical content analysis using the software QDA Miner, (V 2025.0.4). A hierarchical coding scheme was applied, based initially on a set of predefined categories aligned with the interview questions. These deductive categories were subsequently refined and extended with additional inductive codes that emerged during the coding process. The predefined categories included: Instructional purpose and depth of digital technology use (DTIF), Digital resources used, Subject-Specific Integration of Digital Technologies, Development of students’ digital competences, and Key aspects of students’ digital literacy.

Observational data and lesson plans were analysed to identify alignment with the declared practices and to categorise technology use according to DTIF’s three modes: support, extend, and transform. In this study, the qualitative data from interviews and observation protocols were also subjected to quantitative content analysis, for example, by reporting the frequency of tool use or the distribution of technologies across subjects and grade levels, in order to complement and contextualise the qualitative findings.

3.5. Procedure

The data collection process was conducted between September 2024 and January 2025. First, First, semi-structured interviews were held with each teacher in a one-on-one format, mostly online, with only one conducted in person. Specifically, the interviews were designed to explore teachers’ experiences, attitudes, and declared practices regarding the integration of digital technologies in primary classrooms, with questions encouraging specific examples of their classroom implementation. Following the interviews, classroom observations were conducted during lessons that teachers pre-selected to represent their usual practices, and teachers submitted these lesson plans for document review. In all cases, one lesson per teacher was observed. While a single observation per teacher limits generalizability, teachers pre-selected a lesson demonstrating their typical practices, and detailed pre-observation interviews combined with analysis of submitted lesson plans were used to triangulate findings and support the reliability of the results.

All participants signed informed consent forms and were assured of the confidentiality of their responses and the anonymity of their participation. They were explicitly informed that the study involved both interviews and classroom observations and consented to being observed during their teaching. Participants were advised of their right to withdraw from the study at any time without any consequences. All data were anonymised during analysis and reporting to protect the identities of participants. The research follows the ethical guidelines of Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski” and complies with national and institutional regulations regarding academic research. Ethical clearance was obtained from the university’s institutional review board prior to data collection.

4. Findings

4.1. Declared Learning Goals, Tools, and Strategies for Using Digital Technologies vs. Observed Practice

Teacher interviews and classroom observations provided a nuanced view of how digital technologies are understood and applied in Bulgarian primary schools. Interviews with 44 teachers revealed a broad conceptualisation of the educational purposes digital tools can serve. Teachers described a wide range of strategies and tools aligned with these goals, reflecting a shared intention to enhance both instruction and pupil learning.

These self-reported aims were analysed alongside observational data from 44 lessons, comprising 203 distinct classroom activities. Of these, 133 involved the use of digital technologies—demonstrating their substantial, though inconsistently applied, presence in everyday teaching. Although each lesson featured some digital element, the tools’ pedagogical roles and the depth of their integration varied considerably.

The findings were organised into four thematic domains: technology integration in: (1) teaching, (2) learning, (3) assessment, and (4) pedagogical communication—to reflect the main pedagogical purposes that teachers themselves emphasised in interviews and to allow a clear comparison between declared intentions and observed classroom practices. In addition to the four thematic domains, a fifth section summarises the specific digital tools used by teachers, providing a practical overview to complement the pedagogical analysis.

4.1.1. Using Digital Technologies to Support Teaching

Findings from both the teacher interviews and classroom observations demonstrated that digital technologies are widely used to support teaching in primary education. Of the 44 interviewed teachers, 42 reported using digital tools to improve instructional delivery. These tools were primarily applied to serve two pedagogical goals: (1) visualising learning content and (2) enriching or diversifying lessons. Both goals were strongly reflected in classroom practices, where digital technology was observed in 43 of the 44 lessons.

• Visualisation of learning content

Visualisation of learning content was the most frequently mentioned strategy, cited by 34 teachers. This use was especially valued when introducing new or abstract concepts, with 18 teachers explicitly referring to its importance for young learners. As one teacher with 28 years of experience from a medium-sized urban school explained, “young children think figuratively—when we visualise it to them, they will perceive it better”. Interviewees emphasised that videos, images, and animations helped make difficult ideas more accessible, especially in subjects like science, where 24 teachers described using visual tools to illustrate phenomena such as dew and frost. This emphasis on visualisation was also evident in classroom observations. In 34 of the observed lessons, teachers integrated digital resources such as electronic textbooks (i.e., digital versions of printed textbooks that include embedded videos, interactive tasks, quizzes, and additional educational resources), Ucha.se videos (Bulgarian educational platform with video presentations of the educational content in various subjects), and YouTube videos to support their explanations. A teacher with 14 years of experience explained that “this visualisation (through video) affects more senses… in this way, they remember more and participate more actively”. Typically projected onto a whiteboard, these materials were used to reinforce understanding and make abstract content more tangible.

During interviews, teachers noted that visual content often captures pupils’ interest and helps sustain their attention—especially among younger learners, which was reflected in classroom observations. For instance, in a Year 1 class, a teacher used an electronic textbook to present letters in varying fonts and colours, adding a playful visual layer to an otherwise routine task. In another case, a geography teacher showed a short film to complement the lesson, commenting that the combination of sound and image helped pupils follow the content more easily. Some educators considered more broadly the power of digital media to deepen learning, with one teacher with 37 years of experience observing that pupils often “grasp more than what is explicitly taught” when they can see, hear, and imitate all at once. These examples suggest that visualisation, when well-integrated, can do more than illustrate content—it can enrich pupils’ sensory experience and support more intuitive learning.

Interactive whiteboards were specifically mentioned in 7 interviews as valuable for enlarging images and playing animations. They were observed in 15 lessons and mostly used by the teacher rather than the pupils. According to both interviews and observations, tools like PowerPoint and Canva also supported visualisation by helping teachers break down abstract topics into manageable steps. For instance, a teacher with 27 years of experience used a slide-based presentation to guide pupils through a lesson about autumn, projecting key vocabulary with related images and pausing frequently for reflection and feedback. Some teachers (3 mentions) stated that they use videos to demonstrate technical or practical skills in subjects like technology, where it was “very useful to show how to make a particular product” (a teacher with 14 years of experience). A few others (2 mentions) reported that they apply similar strategies in handwriting instruction, and one teacher claimed using videos to support physical education lessons through demonstrating movements. A similar approach was observed in a music lesson, where the teacher from a middle-sized school played a video of a musical performance instead of modelling rhythm or engaging pupils with instruments directly. These examples suggest a pattern in which digital media are used to facilitate demonstration, potentially increasing efficiency at the expense of hands-on student participation.

While the above approaches helped make learning content clearer and more engaging, they rarely encouraged active student interaction with digital technologies. In most lessons, digital content was operated by the teacher and projected onto a shared screen. Only a few observations involved students interacting directly with digital devices or tools.

• Enriching Content and Diversifying Lessons

Enriching and diversifying instruction was the second most cited goal for using digital technologies in teaching, mentioned by 41 interviewees. Teachers reported using digital resources to supplement the curriculum, offer varied content formats, and maintain pupil engagement. A common stated strategy involved the usage of electronic textbooks, which were favoured by 25 teachers for their interactive features, including videos, exercises, and simulations. These were often paired with platforms like LearningApps, PowerPoint, or Ucha.se, and were regularly observed in lessons. For example, in a geography-themed lesson, a teacher from a big-sized school opened with a short Ucha.se video and followed it with a gamified quiz projected on the whiteboard. Pupils took turns choosing answers by coming to the front and interacting with the teacher’s laptop, creating an atmosphere that was more lively and interactive than a typical review. In another case, a teacher with 19 years of experience (used a Gamma presentation on adjectives, pausing for discussion and guiding students through questions and examples to explore the topic more actively.

Several teachers reported in the interviews how they use creative digital tools to enrich lesson content. In one interview, a teacher from a middle-sized school described how she uses Google Earth to take her class on virtual journeys to countries like Italy and Egypt, helping pupils visualise distant places and encouraging them to map out travel routes—making geography more concrete and engaging. Another teacher with 32 years of experience shared that she develops her own games and puzzles and uses augmented reality cards to bring abstract topics, like the solar system and the human body, to life in a more interactive way. Since such practices were not observed in the classroom, it remains unclear whether they are regularly implemented or primarily reflect teachers’ aspirations to experiment with more creative approaches to lesson design.

In contrast to most observed lessons, where technology was used in limited or conventional ways, one standout example featured a teacher from a small-sized private school with 5 years of experience who transformed a standard maths class into a digital escape room using the Joyteka platform. Instead of working through exercises in a textbook, pupils tackled seven logic and arithmetic challenges woven into a game-like storyline. Each correct solution unlocked the next step, building momentum and excitement. For the final task, they scanned a QR code hidden on a handmade paper clock, which triggered a holographic video that revealed the last puzzle. The lesson ended with a group reflection and a points-based reward system that could be carried over into future lessons—turning a standard review session into a memorable and deeply engaging learning experience.

4.1.2. Using Digital Technologies to Support Learning

Teachers across both interviews and classroom observations consistently demonstrated efforts to utilise digital technologies to support pupils’ learning. While practices varied in complexity and purpose, most were directed at increasing engagement, reinforcing knowledge, and, to a lesser extent, developing digital competencies. The majority of teachers described their use of educational platforms and digital media as a means to create a more stimulating and interactive environment. In the classroom, digital tools were often embedded into revision and reinforcement tasks, while a few examples illustrated more learner-centred approaches, including self-paced learning or collaborative inquiry.

• Engagement and Motivation

Digital technologies were widely perceived by teachers as a powerful way to enhance pupil motivation and engagement. In the interviews, 30 out of 44 teachers explicitly mentioned this function. Many spoke about how digital activities were seen by pupils as fun, game-like alternatives to more traditional tasks, helping them to stay attentive and willing to participate.

A teacher with 15 years of experience working in a small rural primary school explained that digital tools allowed her to present material “in a more engaging way, making it much easier for them to understand… I am able to capture their attention thanks to digital technology.” Another teacher with just two years of experience, reported “an increased understanding of the material and a much higher motivation” when digital resources were used in the classroom. Teachers highlighted that pupils often perceived digital tasks as games, which in turn made learning more enjoyable. For instance, one teacher with only one year of experience from a private small-sized school discussed the use of Duolingo and Khan Academy, noting how “students are motivated to move to the next level… because otherwise Duolingo returns them to the beginning.” Similarly, a teacher with 17 years of experience from a middle-sized primary school shared that “when we play an educational digital game to review or reinforce knowledge, everyone wants to participate and eagerly raises their hands”.

These insights from the interviews were echoed in 26 of the observed lessons, where teachers made purposeful use of digital technologies to energise the classroom and maintain attention. Gamified tools such as Wordwall, LearningApps, and Kahoot were regularly integrated into activities designed to revise content or introduce light competition. For example, in a grammar revision lesson, a teacher from a small-sized village school used Wordwall at the interactive board, inviting pupils one by one to take turns responding to prompts. Their enthusiastic participation suggested high engagement. Another teacher from a big-sized school with 27 years of experience, working in a Bulgarian language class, facilitated a Wordwall quiz on sentence types; despite an initial technical issue, the students showed visible disappointment when the activity was cut short, indicating their high motivation and involvement in the task.

Kahoot was observed in two lessons. In one instance, a teacher with 17 years of experience used it in a social studies revision session, asking pupils to answer time-bound questions via laptops or smartphones. The real-time scoreboard created a lively, participatory atmosphere. Another teacher from big-sized school with 32 years of experience integrated Kahoot at the end of a lesson, with anonymised class numbers used for login and a support teacher distributing devices. The competitive element, combined with visual feedback, encouraged widespread engagement.

Multimedia resources, including educational videos from platforms like Ucha.se (used in 10 lessons) and YouTube (used in 11 lessons), also contributed to sustaining motivation, particularly with their interactive features (Ucha.se provides an opportunity to take a test (to apply knowledge) after watching the video), though typically controlled by the teacher. For example, a video on a geographical topic was projected by a teacher with 34 years of experience, with pupils watching and then answering questions about the content as a group, while one student selected the responses on the computer. Although students rarely interacted directly with the tools, the shift in format introduced a visual and auditory change in pace that appeared to sustain attention and reinforce understanding.

• Knowledge Reinforcement and Skill Development

In both interviews and classroom observations, a dominant function of digital technologies was the reinforcement of previously introduced content and the development of skills. This was explicitly stated by 37 out of the 44 interviewed teachers and evidenced in 42 of the 44 observed lessons. The strategies adopted largely revolved around interactive exercises, structured repetition, and visual representations aimed at deepening understanding and promoting retention. Interviewed teachers frequently referred to Bulgarian educational platforms such as Ucha.se and Academico (Bulgarian educational platform with video lessons in various subjects) as essential tools in their practice. Sixteen teachers reported regular use of these platforms, citing their ability to support learning through video content and accompanying practice tasks. Ucha.se, in particular, was praised for its integrated test feature following the video, allowing pupils to immediately apply what they had learned.

Teachers also reported the benefits of interactive platforms such as Wordwall (11 mentions) and Kahoot (7 mentions), which they used not only to practise skills but also to sustain attention and bring a sense of enjoyment into revision. A teacher with 10 years of experience reflected that digital tools contribute to better memory retention “by linking learning with emotion through interactive and visual elements”. The same teacher added that these platforms improved reading comprehension, as “students tend to focus more when text is displayed on a screen”. Another popular tool mentioned in the interviews was LearningApps, valued for its accessibility via QR codes. As one teacher with 8 years of experience described, “I present the code on the board, they scan with the tablets, both have fun and open the test. They solve it and this is basically what I use most often”.

These examples from the interviews found clear echoes in classroom practice. In 42 of the observed lessons, digital tools were intentionally woven into activities designed to consolidate knowledge and develop subject-specific skills. The most common approach involved pairing short, structured inputs—such as educational videos—with follow-up interactive tasks to reinforce understanding. Ucha.se, for instance, was used in 10 lessons, typically following a consistent pattern. In one science lesson, a teacher from big-sized school with 35 years of experience began by showing a short Ucha.se video introducing the parts of a plant. Immediately afterwards, pupils completed interactive tasks using Wordwall and LearningApps, which provided visual cues, instant feedback, and a way to revisit the key content through repetition. Another teacher from a small-sized village school with only 2.5 years of experience used Izzi, a Bulgarian digital textbook platform, in a reading lesson. She guided pupils through interactive story cards that built vocabulary and improved comprehension. The children read aloud, answered embedded questions, and worked in pairs—blending traditional literacy tasks with digital interaction. Wordwall was especially popular and appeared in various forms across lessons. One teacher with 4 years of experience used the “Wheel of Fortune” template for a vocabulary game. Pupils took turns at the board, clearly enjoying the balance between friendly competition and peer support. In a different math lesson, a primary school teacher used Wordwall for a whole-class revision activity, which smoothly transitioned into paper-based follow-up exercises, linking the digital review to more conventional practice. Kahoot was observed in two lessons as a timed quiz projected on an interactive screen, with students participating via laptops or smartphones. The tool supported formative assessment while maintaining high levels of pupil engagement.

Only four teachers introduced more complex, integrative formats. One such example, described earlier, was a mathematics lesson structured as a digital escape room. In this activity, pupils worked collaboratively to solve logic problems under time constraints, applying their knowledge in a playful, game-based format. The activity encouraged critical thinking, teamwork, and application of knowledge in a game-based structure. Other observed activities included the use of digital puzzles for geography revision. Two teachers projected visual tasks such as a jigsaw map of Bulgaria or matching natural landforms, promoting both spatial reasoning and group participation.

• Developing Digital Competencies

While the explicit teaching of digital skills is most often associated with the Bulgarian school subject Computer Modelling, taught in Grades 3 and 4, many teachers reported integrating digital competencies across other subjects as well. According to 32 interviewed teachers, pupils were regularly encouraged to use digital tools to search for information, complete assignments, or develop basic operational skills. At the same time, in 22 of the observed lessons, pupils had incidental opportunities to engage with technology in ways that supported the development of digital fluency—even if this was not the main instructional goal.

Digital information search emerged as one of the most common strategies, mentioned in the interviews. All 32 teachers said they assigned homework that required pupils to use the internet to research topics such as animals, geographical features, historical figures, or mathematical curiosities. As one teacher from a big-sized village school explained, “They have to search the internet for information, look for a relevant proverb, riddle, or something along those lines”. Another from a middle-sized village school claimed that she integrated digital searches even into elective mathematics classes, assigning pupils tasks like finding data about the solar system or the first astronauts. This focus on digital research was reflected in some of the classroom observations. During a specific lesson in a big-sized regional city school, students collaborated in small groups to investigate Thracian relics. Each team utilised a laptop connected to the internet to seek further information and photographs beyond the textbook material. They examined the gathered material, chose pertinent graphics with the teacher’s assistance, and submitted their results for publication. Ultimately, group representatives conveyed the findings to the class. This exercise integrated the cultivation of fundamental search and assessment abilities with cooperative learning and digital presentation. In a separate instance, an educator with 21 years of experience utilised ChatGPT -4o to formulate questions pertaining to the lesson subject. Students were encouraged to evaluate which questions were significant and which needed refining, thus initiating the development of a critical perspective on AI-generated information.

Teachers also reported that they aimed to build basic operational skills such as using a mouse or keyboard (4 interview mentions), opening and editing documents in Word or PowerPoint (13 mentions), and navigating websites or digital platforms. For example, one teacher with 28 years of experience reflected that “few children use the mouse—they try on the touchscreen, the touchpad, but they have to know at least where the mouse is”. Another teacher with 34 years of experience stressed the importance of teaching even younger pupils how to send and open digital files or use a browser to look up information. Similar practices were visible in the classroom. In several observed lessons, pupils scanned QR codes to access digital activities independently, practising navigation and browser switching. In an English lesson in a middle-sized village school, children used Google Translate on their own smartphones to check word meanings and pronunciation, building confidence in digital dictionaries. A Bulgarian language class in a middle-sized town school involved the use of an online dictionary to explore synonyms, reinforcing linguistic skills while engaging with digital tools.

Only seven teachers adopted more exploratory or creative approaches. In one lesson in a big-sized regional city school, pupils used Scratch to animate scenes, experimenting with basic programming logic and visual design. Another class in a middle-sized town school used Google Maps to locate landmarks and calculate distances—transforming a geography lesson into an interactive spatial reasoning task. These examples, though infrequent, illustrate a readiness among some educators to push beyond basic digital operations and introduce more complex, student-driven activities.

Importantly, online safety and digital responsibility were highlighted in 17 of the interviews, though they were not explicitly addressed in any observed lessons. Some teachers shared that they organise discussions or invite guest speakers to talk about internet risks and safe behaviours. One teacher with 19 years of experience stated that at the initial stage it is most important for “the child to have basic computer skills” and then to be aware of “Internet safety, recognising dangers, managing personal information…”.

Additionally, while teachers acknowledge the importance of digital literacy, some express concerns about students’ home access to technology and the need for parental support, as well as the limitations of current curricula in fully integrating digital competencies across all subjects (16 mentions).

• Self-Paced Learning and Problem Solving

Although less frequently discussed than other pedagogical goals, seven teachers emphasised the value of digital technologies in supporting self-paced learning and independent problem-solving. They shared examples where digital tools were used to promote greater learner autonomy. These encompassed opportunities for students to undertake independent research, develop presentations or projects, and engage in assignments necessitating problem-solving abilities. For example, one educator from a small-sized private school articulated the creation of digital “escape room” scenarios: “I use different applications and make them in the form of an escape room, just to be interesting to students. They do not understand that by solving tasks that much more than usual achieve results. But they should be interested.” Another teacher highlighted the benefits of digital resources for learners with special educational needs, allowing them to progress through materials at their own pace and revisit content when necessary.

Strikingly, this emphasis on learner autonomy was also evident in exactly seven of the observed lessons—mirroring the number of teachers who discussed it in interviews. In these cases, teachers intentionally created space for pupils to work independently or at their own rhythm. One particularly illustrative case was the mathematics lesson designed as a digital escape room. Here, students engaged independently with computers, advancing through a series of interrelated logic exercises. This approach fostered problem-solving, perseverance, and critical thinking, enabling students to progress at their own pace. The teacher functioned mostly as a facilitator, providing assistance solely as necessary. In another observed lesson in a big-sized regional city school, pupils participated in a collaborative science project that required them to research a topic online, organise the information, and present it using an interactive platform. While the initial stage of the task was completed in class, pupils were invited to continue working at home, blending synchronous and asynchronous learning and providing flexibility in terms of pace and depth of engagement. A third example involved a science lesson in a middle-sized regional city school focused on food chains. Pupils used an interactive LearningApps exercise to reconstruct food chains, supported by teacher instructions written in their notebooks. While individual pupils completed the task on the board, the rest worked independently to recreate the diagrams in their notebooks. The course incorporated colour-coded feedback, background music, and a brief self-assessment assignment, prompting participants to reflect on their experiences using phrases such as “I struggled,” “Could be better,” and “Success.” This framework provided a level of customisation, motivating learners to assume responsibility for their advancement within a supportive environment.

4.1.3. Using Digital Technologies for Assessment

Teachers were increasingly drawing on digital technologies to support assessment, with a particular focus on formative purposes. In interviews, the majority of educators (37) described using a variety of digital tools to check understanding, provide timely feedback, and encourage pupil reflection. This trend was also evident in 24 of the observed lessons, where technology was used to make assessment more interactive, accessible, and attuned to learners’ needs.

• Formative Assessment

While some teachers use e-gradebooks for real-time grades and progress, others explicitly state they do not use technology for formal “placement” grades or summative assessment, focusing instead on “reinforcement and teaching new knowledge”. In the interviews, 32 teachers shared that they used digital quizzes and tests to check understanding and provide real-time feedback. Twenty-seven of them mentioned specific platforms, including SmartTest (a Bulgarian AI-integrated platform for creating tests), Kahoot, LearningApps, Google Forms, and Ucha.se. One teacher with 27 years of experience described very typical practice using online tests, noting that “We use online tests like Kahoot, ClassBuddy (a Bulgarian platform similar to Kahoot but offering a wider variety of question types), and WordWall, but we usually solve them together as a class. Not everyone joins individually on a smartphone—it’s a bit challenging. Still, they evaluate their overall class performance with comments like ‘Oh, we did well,’ and this collective feedback motivates them. Even students who usually struggle are engaged.” Notably, three teachers commented that digital tools help shift students’ attention away from grades and towards performance and effort—making formative assessment more meaningful and less stressful.

Formative use of digital technologies was evident in 20 observed lessons, where teachers employed the abovementioned interactive platforms to check pupil understanding and provide immediate feedback. These tools were often projected on an interactive whiteboard, with tasks solved collectively or through turn-taking at the board. While such activities often did not provide individual progress monitoring, they effectively revealed misconceptions and sustained student engagement through gamified formats and prompt visual feedback. During a lesson in a small-sized village school, a teacher displayed a multiple-choice quiz and paused after each question to encourage class debate, utilising the automatic responses as a catalyst for deeper contemplation. In another case in a middle-sized town school, pupils interacted with drag-and-drop games on LearningApps, where correct answers triggered green highlights—offering real-time cues that helped learners monitor their understanding. Videos from Ucha.se were frequently used as starting points for formative assessment. For example, in a science lesson in a big-sized regional city school, pupils watched a short film on natural phenomena and then answered embedded questions together as a class. Misunderstandings were addressed through peer correction and replaying selected segments of the video. Similarly, in a reading comprehension lesson in a small-sized village school, the teacher used IZZI to guide pupils through an interactive text, asking follow-up questions and projecting immediate feedback, which helped reinforce key ideas as they emerged. A smaller group of teachers took a more hands-on approach by designing their own assessment activities using tools like Google Forms or digital escape rooms.

• Progress Tracking

Seventeen teachers spoke about using digital gradebooks such as Shkolo (Bulgarian digital platform that supports school administration and communication by providing tools for managing grades, attendance, schedules, homework, and messaging between teachers, students, and parents) to monitor pupils’ academic progress, attendance, and behaviour. They appreciated the convenience of automated calculations and the way the system could highlight emerging issues—like drops in performance or frequent absences—prompting timely intervention. For some, the ability to spot these patterns early was especially valuable. One teacher remarked how the platform’s automatic grade averages saved her considerable time, while others pointed to its role in keeping both staff and parents better informed about pupils’ overall development. Yet, these monitoring practices did not appear in any of the observed lessons—which is not surprising, given that tracking is typically carried out outside of regular class time. In the classroom, digital tools were typically used to provide immediate feedback rather than to support longer-term tracking or data-informed intervention. Although platforms such as Ucha.se and Kahoot include basic tracking features, these were not actively used during teaching. This gap points to a distinction between how digital tools are used for administrative purposes outside the lesson and how they are—or are not—integrated into the flow of everyday classroom instruction.

• Self-Assessment

Although mentioned by just four teachers, the use of digital tools to support self-assessment emerged as a small but promising strand of classroom practice. These teachers described how technology could help pupils better understand their progress and reflect on their learning in more meaningful ways. One teacher with 15 years of experience shared that she projects a digital scorecard during lessons, giving pupils a clear view of their results and helping them make sense of their achievements. Another with 4 years of experience noted that when students receive immediate feedback, they are less inclined to question their marks, suggesting that such transparency can support greater learner ownership. Notably, in all four cases, these self-assessment strategies were also observed in the classroom, indicating a strong alignment between teachers’ stated intentions and their enacted practices. In each instance, teachers integrated moments of digital self-assessment—usually towards the end of a task—encouraging pupils to consider how they had performed and what they might improve. In one lesson in a middle-sized regional city school, after working on food chains in LearningApps, pupils placed their notebooks into piles marked “I struggled”, “Could be better”, or “Success”. This low-pressure, visual method gave them a discreet way to express how confident they felt. Another teacher with 20 years of experience used a Wordwall quiz followed by a class discussion, inviting pupils to rate their own certainty about the answers and explore what had made some questions more difficult.

4.1.4. Using Digital Technologies for Pedagogical Communication

Just over a quarter of the teachers (12 out of 44) spoke about using digital technologies to support pedagogical communication. While this may appear as a less prominent area of digital practice, it is arguably appropriate given the pupils’ young age and limited capacity for direct digital interaction. Consequently, communication tools were primarily used to keep in touch with parents. Eleven teachers mentioned using messaging apps like Viber or Messenger to send reminders, homework, or updates when a child was absent. These tools were valued for their speed and ease of use, especially when it came to sharing information promptly and maintaining regular contact. Shkolo, the electronic gradebook platform, was also frequently mentioned as a way to send grades, messages, and learning resources to parents. Fewer teachers—nine overall—shared that they also communicated with pupils through digital means, most often in the later years of primary education. For instance, some used Viber group chats with Year 3 or Year 4 students to answer questions or receive homework. A couple of teachers reported using more informal platforms such as TikTok, Telegram, or Snapchat, seeing these as a way to connect with pupils on more familiar ground. Five teachers also noted that digital tools sometimes supported peer-to-peer collaboration, especially for projects. Platforms like Canva, for example, were used to allow pupils to work together asynchronously.

In the observed lessons, however, such uses of technology were almost entirely absent—which is expected, given that most digital communication typically takes place outside regular classroom time. Only one lesson included a clear example of digital communication. In this case, a third-grade teacher arranged a live video call with a local museum staff member via Viber. While the teacher mediated the interaction, pupils listened, responded to questions, and shared personal connections with the topic. One pupil recognised the speaker as a relative, which added a personal and emotional dimension to the learning. The activity was categorised as both interaction and collaboration through digital technologies, demonstrating how digital tools can enrich the classroom experience when thoughtfully integrated.

4.1.5. Digital Tools Used by the Teachers

This section summarises the digital tools most frequently used by teachers, offering insight into the core resources that shape their classroom practice.

Table 2. Digital tools used by the teachers.

Type of Digital Resource	Mentioned in the Interviews	Observed in Practice
Electronic Textbooks	37 mentions of e-textbooks of different publishers	In 25 observed lessons
Video and 3D Visualisation Platforms	Ucha.se (29 mentions) Academico (12 mentions) Khan Academy (3 mentions) MozaBook/MozaWeb for 3D visualisation (4 mentions) YouTube (9 mentions)	YouTube (11 lessons) Ucha.se (10 lessons) Academico (2 lessons) Talking.de (1 lesson)
Interactive Apps	Wordwall (11 mentions) Kahoot (7 mentions) Live Worksheets (8 mentions) LearningApps (7 mentions) Google Forms for tests/surveys (5 mentions) ClassBuddy (3 mentions) SmarTest (3 mentions) Mind map (for concept maps) (2 mentions)	Wordwall (11 lessons) LearningApps (9 lessons) QR codes (3 lessons) Kahoot (2 lessons) Scratch (2 lessons) Live Worksheets (1 lesson) Google Forms (1 lesson) Google Maps (1 lesson) Planeta 42 Games (1 lesson) Google Translate (1 lesson) ChatGPT (1 lesson) Jigsawplanet (1 lesson) Joyteka (1 lesson) rechnik.chitanka.info (1 lesson)
Apps for creating multimedia resources	PowerPoint for presentations (13 mentions) Canva for designing resources (8 mentions) Book Creator (3 mentions)	PowerPoint presentations (14 lessons) Canva presentations (2 lessons) GAMMA (2 lessons) Genially (1 lesson)
AR/VR	Google Earth for virtual tours (2 mentions)	No use of AR/VR tools was observed
Communication tools	Viber groups (7 mentions) Facebook Messenger groups (2 mentions) Snapchat (1 mention) Telegram (1 mention) TikTok (used by students for communication, but discouraged for educational purposes) (6 mentions)	Viber for remote lecture (1 lesson)

presents these tools by type. The most frequently mentioned digital resource, based on teacher reports (37) and classroom observations (25 lessons), is the electronic textbook (regardless of publisher).

The data in Table 2 highlight clear patterns in how digital tools are being used in Bulgarian primary classrooms. Electronic textbooks stood out as the most consistent resource, with 37 mentions in interviews and use in 25 observed lessons, showing their central place in everyday teaching. Platforms like Ucha.se, Wordwall, and LearningApps were also widely used, supporting both engagement and knowledge reinforcement, though their actual use in classrooms was somewhat less frequent than teachers reported. Video and visualisation tools, particularly Ucha.se, showed strong consistency across interviews and observations, confirming their role in helping pupils grasp new or abstract concepts. However, more innovative tools such as AR/VR applications or platforms for student-created content, while occasionally mentioned in interviews, were rarely seen in practice. This points to a gap between teachers’ aspirations to experiment with new approaches and the realities of classroom use. Overall, the evidence suggests that teachers rely heavily on a small set of familiar, trusted tools, with less frequent use of newer or more creative technologies.

4.2. Levels of Technology Integration (DTIF)

Based on both the teachers’ interviews and observed classroom practices, it can be concluded that primary school teachers use digital technologies for a variety of educational purposes. These uses can be categorised according to their specific functions in the learning process. For this purpose, the Digital Technology Integration Framework (DTIF) (Aubrey & Twinning, 2023) [21] was applied, as it classifies digital technology use into three modes—Support, Extend, and Transform—based on the extent to which pedagogical practices are changed. In the analysis, attention is paid both to the functions of technologies for teaching (how teachers design and deliver instruction) and for learning (how pupils engage with and use technology).

• Support—Technologies are used to support existing pedagogical practices without significantly changing them.

Interview data indicate that the support mode is a very common way technologies are used in primary classrooms. A total of 31 teachers reported using digital tools to facilitate, improve, or make traditional activities more attractive, without substantially changing their underlying pedagogy. From a teaching perspective, these tools were mainly applied to visualise and illustrate new or abstract content, making explanations clearer and more engaging. From a learning perspective, however, pupil interaction was limited, with most activities focusing on following teacher-led demonstrations or completing structured, whole-class tasks. The analysis of the interviews demonstrates that primary teachers apply digital technologies in a variety of ways in their pedagogical practice, in order to increase the effectiveness of learning and student motivation. However, their approaches are mainly related to the support mode of using technology, with its main function being to visualise and illustrate the learning content, especially in the introduction of abstract concepts and natural processes, in order to facilitate understanding and engage children’s attention.

Observation data confirmed that digital technologies mainly were used to support teaching: 42 of 44 lessons used them for visualisation (34 lessons) and content enrichment (43 lessons). Common digital tools—PowerPoint, digital textbooks, and educational videos—were typically teacher-operated and projected via multimedia or interactive whiteboards. These practices improved clarity and engagement but offered few opportunities for student autonomy or creativity.

• Extend—Technology enables teaching practices that go beyond the capabilities of the traditional classroom.

This mode of technology integration provides new opportunities that would not be easily feasible without technology. All 44 interviewed teachers described activities in which they use technologies with an extended mode. Teachers stated that they encourage students to search the internet for information about projects or homework using Google Earth for virtual field trips (4 mentions), YouTube for additional materials (9 mentions), or other data-specific platforms (42 mentions). This expands learning opportunities beyond the physical classroom and provides access to experiences and information that would otherwise be impossible or difficult to achieve/perform (2 mentions). Also, according to the teachers, students create presentations (PowerPoint, Canva) (16 mentions), e-books (Book Creator, Write Reader) (3 mentions), posters and collages (2 mentions), animated drawings (1 mentions), which goes beyond traditional writing tasks and develops new creative skills. For teaching, this mode represents diversification of methods and richer access to content. For learning, it introduces opportunities for pupils to produce digital outputs and engage in more interactive tasks, though often under close teacher guidance. The use of interactive applications that provide instant feedback and allow students to compete with each other (Kahoot, Wordwall, LearningApps, etc.), while widely reported by teachers, could be further expanded in teaching practice depending on the teacher’s approach.

However, observational data reveal a different picture: only 12 of the 44 observed lessons demonstrated practices aligned with the extend mode. These lessons included interactive digital activities such as online quizzes, games, or collaborative research tasks. In 10 of them, gamified platforms were used to encourage participation and motivation. In several cases, pupils developed basic digital competencies by using tablets, QR codes, or digital dictionaries to complete tasks. This gap highlights that while teachers aspire to extend learning through digital means, in practice pupils’ engagement with such opportunities remains limited.

• Transform—Technology is leading to a fundamental change in the way we teach and learn, creating entirely new pedagogical practices—4 teachers, 9 mentions.

Among the interviewed primary teachers, direct examples of a complete transformation of pedagogical practices are scarce, as the focus remains on basic skills and adaptation to new technologies. However, some aspects can be considered as indicators of potential transformation or serve as precursors to change. One such opportunity is for students to create their own e-books and “share them with a wide audience” through platforms such as Book Creator (2 mentions) or create animated drawings (1 mention), changing their role from passive users of information to active creators and potential “publishers”, which is a fundamental change in the dynamics of learning and creativity. Other transformative approaches are digital escape room games for math (1 mention) and augmented reality (AR) maps for planets or the human body (2 mentions), providing more immersive and interactive learning experiences. From a teaching perspective, these activities reposition the teacher as a facilitator rather than a director of learning; from a learning perspective, they enable pupils to exercise autonomy, collaborate, and create original digital content.

Observations also revealed a small number of lessons (only 5 out of 44) with elements that aligned with the transform mode of the DTIF model. A particularly illustrative case involved a digital escape room in which students independently solved maths tasks on laptops, controlled their pace of work, and received automatic feedback—demonstrating autonomy and problem-solving. Another example involved group-based online research, in which pupils used laptops to explore information, evaluate its relevance, and submit their findings to the teacher, who printed the results for further class discussion. Transformative potential was also evident in lessons where learners presented digital projects, they had created themselves, including animations developed in Scratch, PowerPoint slides, audio recordings, and videos with voice narration. While these practices remain rare, they indicate a promising shift toward more student-driven, creative, and self-regulated uses of technology.

4.3. Subject-Specific Styles and Patterns

In this study, we aimed to determine whether teaching different school subjects leads to distinct styles and strategies for integrating digital technologies. Therefore, we compared lessons in STEM subjects (Mathematics, Science/Human & Society, and Human & Nature/and Technology) with those in Humanities and Arts, including Bulgarian Language and Literature, English Language, Music and Visual Arts. Observations of primary school lessons in STEM subjects, as well as in the Humanities and Arts, reveal that digital technologies are widely integrated, though primarily in a supportive role. While direct interaction by students with personal devices is often limited, especially in lower primary grades, teachers employ a variety of tools and methods to enhance the learning process. The integration of digital technologies in both STEM and H&A lessons shows strong similarities in goals and pedagogical approaches. Teachers in both domains use digital tools primarily for visualisation, knowledge reinforcement, assessment, and to support digital competency development—though the latter was more frequently declared than observed. Pedagogically, teacher-led demonstrations and blended methods combining traditional and digital resources are common across both groups. Gamification and the use of custom digital materials are also widely practiced. While the overall practices are aligned, STEM lessons show a greater tendency to experiment with innovative tools and platforms. STEM teachers more frequently use advanced resources like Scratch and Joyteka and platforms such as LearningApps and Canva are more prevalent in STEM than in H&A lessons (see

Table 3. Integration of Digital Technologies in STEM vs. Humanities & Arts Lessons.

Category	Common Practices (STEM & H&A)	Differences Between STEM and H&A
Goals of Digital Tool Use	- Visualisation & Engagement (videos, animations) - Knowledge Consolidation (interactive exercises, games) - Formative Assessment & Progress Tracking (quizzes, e-diaries) - Developing Digital Competencies (declared, but not observed)	No significant differences
Pedagogical Approaches	- Teacher-Led Demonstrations (PowerPoint: 16/21 H&A, 15/22 STEM) - Mediated Interactive Exercises/Games (Ucha.se: 16/21 H&A, 16/22 STEM; Academico: 8/21 H&A; 7/22 STEM) - Blending Traditional & Digital Methods - Gamification (quizzes, competitions in19/21 H&A & 20/22 STEM lessons) - Teacher-Created/Adapted Resources (e.g., presentations, games, worksheets, tests)	No significant differences
Digital Platforms & Resources	- PowerPoint: 16/21 H&A, 15/22 STEM - Ucha.se (16/22 STEM, 16/21 H&A) - Academico (7 STEM, 8 H&A)	- LearningApps.org: 9/22 STEM vs. 2/21 H&A - Kahoot: reported in STEM (5/22), not observed - Canva & Book Creator: more frequent in STEM (15/22) than H&A (5/21) - Innovative Tools: Scratch, Joyteka.com, Jigsaw Planet—used in STEM and not in H&A
Level of Digital Transformation	Technology used to support or extend learning, not fully transform it	STEM lessons demonstrated more experimentation with advanced tools

).

In conclusion, while STEM teachers show slightly more varied use of interactive and creative digital tools, the overall patterns of technology integration remain largely similar across both groups. The findings do not point to a subject-specific approach to digital pedagogy; rather, they suggest a shared set of foundational goals and general practices, regardless of subject area.

5. Discussion

5.1. Alignments and Gaps Between Teachers’ Declared Practices and Classroom Realities

This discussion interprets the findings by comparing teachers’ stated practices in interviews with what was observed during classroom visits. The aim is to reflect on how digital technologies are actually integrated into teaching, identifying both areas of alignment and divergence—and considering the factors that may account for these patterns.

5.1.1. Consistencies Between What Teachers Say and What They Do

The classroom observations largely confirmed the patterns described by teachers in the interviews, particularly regarding the Support mode of technology use, as defined by the Digital Technology Integration Framework (DTIF) (Aubrey & Twining, 2023) [21]. A small group of widely used tools—such as electronic textbooks, Ucha.se, PowerPoint, Wordwall, and LearningApps—dominated both data sources. These tools were typically operated by the teacher, projected for whole-class instruction, and used to present material clearly, diversify activities, and support comprehension through visualisation, repetition, and game-like tasks. Teachers frequently emphasised the benefits of visual content, especially when introducing new or abstract concepts. This was mirrored in 34 observed lessons, where videos, animations, and images were used to sustain attention and facilitate understanding—particularly in science and other concept-heavy subjects. The consistent reliance on teacher-led visualisation points to a shared pedagogical conviction about its value in early education.

Another strong area of alignment was the use of digital tools for content enrichment and pupil engagement. Teachers described using technologies to “wake up the class” or “make learning fun,” and such intentions were reflected in observed lessons where digital resources added energy and variety. Even when learner interaction was limited, the emotional tone and novelty of digital elements contributed positively to the classroom environment. Reinforcement and practice also emerged as a consistent theme. Tools like Ucha.se, Wordwall, and LearningApps were used for repetition and revision, often through short videos, interactive tasks, and structured exercises. These were effective in maintaining pupil interest and supporting learning in a familiar, accessible way.

Quantitative comparisons reinforced the alignment:

• Electronic textbooks were the most frequently mentioned tool (37 teachers) and the most commonly observed (25 lessons).
• PowerPoint appeared with near-perfect consistency (13 mentions, 14 observations).
• Wordwall and Ucha.se also showed high agreement between reported and observed use.

While most activities followed a fixed, teacher-directed format, they reflected purposeful integration of digital tools to enhance clarity, motivation, and engagement. Instances of student autonomy or creative digital production (e.g., digital escape rooms, collaborative projects) were rare, but their presence in both data sources suggests an emerging shift towards more interactive, learner-centred practices.

In sum, the data indicate strong consistency between what teachers say and what they do, particularly in areas that reinforce and support traditional pedagogy. These practices align with the Support and, to a lesser extent, Extend modes of the DTIF, showing that while digital technologies are not radically transforming classroom practice, they are being meaningfully used to enhance it.

5.1.2. Inconsistencies and Discrepancies Between Lessons Observations and the Teachers’ Interviews

While interviews and observations showed broad agreement on the supportive use of digital technologies, key discrepancies emerged regarding student agency, digital skills development, and assessment practices. Teachers often described learner-centred scenarios: students researching online, creating presentations, or working independently. However, such practices were rarely observed. In most classrooms, digital tools were operated by the teacher and used for whole-class instruction—videos, slideshows, or quizzes—with pupils playing a passive role. A similar gap was found in the development of digital competencies. Many teachers highlighted goals such as fostering information literacy, online safety, and content creation. Yet in none of the 44 observed lessons did such topics arise. Digital tasks were typically closed-ended and teacher-directed, limiting opportunities for learners to explore or create with technology. Assessment practices further illustrated this disconnect. Teachers valued digital tools for formative purposes—tracking progress, reducing anxiety, and promoting self-reflection—yet in practice, tools like Wordwall or LearningApps were mostly used in teacher-led reviews. Even with automated features, teachers often relied on manual tracking or used digital quizzes as informal check-ins rather than structured evaluation tools. Discrepancies also appeared at the level of specific tools. Some frequently mentioned platforms (e.g., Academico, Live Worksheets, Kahoot, Google Forms) were observed in only a few lessons, while others (e.g., Scratch, QR codes, ChatGPT) appeared in classrooms but were rarely discussed. This suggests a divide between aspirational discourse and daily routines. Mentions of AR/VR and TikTok reflected broader awareness of digital culture, but these tools were absent from classroom practice.

Many of these mismatches appear to stem from structural constraints, such as limited access to devices, unreliable infrastructure, time constraints, or low levels of digital readiness among pupils. Some teachers indicated a willingness to implement more creative or autonomous learning activities but were likely limited by external factors. While important topics such as digital citizenship and online safety were repeatedly emphasised in interviews, their absence from observed lessons may be explained by several factors. One explanation suggested by teachers themselves relates to limited parental support, which may discourage them from addressing online risks directly in the classroom. In addition, it is plausible that the relatively weak embedding of these topics in the national curriculum, as well as the lack of systematic teacher training in this area, further constrain their integration into everyday lessons. These findings suggest that, although teachers are aware of the importance of online safety, both contextual barriers and systemic factors may limit its translation into practice.

In summary, while interviews portrayed an optimistic view of digital innovation in primary teaching, observations revealed a more traditional reality. Most practices aligned with the Support mode of the DTIF framework—enhancing instruction rather than transforming it. Only 12 of 44 lessons demonstrated Extend mode activities, despite all 44 teachers reporting such intentions. Interestingly, the rarely reported Transform mode was observed in five cases, suggesting isolated yet promising innovation. These findings highlight the gap between intended and actual use of technology in the classroom and point to a need for targeted professional development and institutional support to help teachers move beyond basic integration and adopt more extended and transformative digital pedagogies.

5.2. Relating Findings to Existing Literature

This section analyses the findings of the study in the context of existing national and international literature on digital technology integration in primary education. By comparing observed classroom practices and teacher-reported experiences with previously documented trends, the discussion aims to identify areas of convergence and divergence, and to explore how broader pedagogical frameworks relate to current practices in the Bulgarian context.

The findings of this study largely support the literature finding that primary school teachers frequently adopt blended learning models, integrating digital technologies into traditional instruction to enhance learning experiences [22]. This integration typically takes the form of supplementing lessons with digital presentations, online exercises, and multimedia elements, rather than a complete transformation of teaching and learning processes. In spite of growing international consensus that digital technologies should be used to promote student-centred learning and foster autonomy [24], the current study reveals a different picture within Bulgarian primary classrooms. While some digital environments inherently support real-time feedback and active participation, the observed practices were largely teacher-directed. Pupils were rarely involved in the creation of digital content or in collaborative, multimedia-based problem-solving tasks. This indicates that, although the pedagogical potential of technology is acknowledged in theory, its implementation still follows traditional instructional models in practice. The findings point to a persistent reliance on teacher-centred approaches, implying the need for further professional development focused on participatory and autonomous digital pedagogies.

As far as teacher preparation is concerned, it is important to note that the present study supports earlier findings in the literature regarding the challenges of translating positive attitudes into effective practice. Although teachers often express enthusiasm about the potential of digital technologies, this does not consistently result in innovative or regular integration into classroom teaching. Bulgarian primary teachers generally viewed digital tools as helpful for engaging students and supporting instruction, yet their application remained largely teacher-centred and focused on content reinforcement rather than on fostering student autonomy or creativity. This finding reinforces the persistent gap between belief and practice identified in previous studies [65,66,68], which calls for further research aimed at identifying the factors that influence teachers’ ability and willingness to implement more effective digital pedagogies.

The current study also confirms previous research highlighting the prominence of gamification as a widely adopted strategy for integrating digital tools in primary education [23,24,25,26,35,36]. Across both interviews and observations, game-based activities were frequently used to support pupil engagement and motivation. However, other pedagogical approaches commonly associated with digital integration—such as collaborative learning, flipped classroom models, and augmented reality—were far less evident. Although some teachers mentioned these strategies in interviews, they did not translate into observable classroom practices. This discrepancy may reflect aspirational thinking or isolated experimentation rather than embedded pedagogical routines. While international studies emphasise the potential of these methods to enhance interaction, critical thinking, and conceptual understanding [27,28,37,38,39], which should be developed from an early age [44,45,46], the findings here suggest that their uptake in Bulgarian primary classrooms remains limited.

Interestingly, despite the strong emphasis on digital storytelling in the literature as a tool to enhance language development, mathematical understanding, creativity, and digital literacy [29,30,31,32,33,34,55], such practice did not emerge in either the classroom observations or teacher interviews conducted in the current study. Similarly, although platforms such as Scratch and robotics kits are widely recognised for their role in developing computational thinking and coding skills from an early age [40,41,42,43], these tools were observed only once throughout all lessons. Moreover, in contrast with the literature that highlights the growing use and benefits of innovative technologies, such as adaptive learning systems, virtual reality, and specialised language learning applications [30,34,54,58], our observations revealed a notable absence of these tools in classroom practice. Taken together, the limited presence or complete absence of such innovative practices suggests that their integration is still far from mainstream in the Bulgarian primary education context. This discrepancy may point to limited teacher awareness of these emerging approaches and tools, or to a lack of confidence and training in their effective implementation. Addressing this gap represents a valuable opportunity for targeted professional development and calls for further investigation into the systemic enablers and barriers to meaningful digital innovation in early education settings. In addition to the variety of practices that teachers could employ, no differences were observed in the use of digital tools across different subjects, despite OECD (2021) reporting subject-specific applications [17]. In fact, the study found no notable variation between disciplines, which may reflect a tendency among primary teachers to apply familiar digital strategies uniformly, regardless of the subject matter.

Generally, these findings suggest that the integration of digital technologies in Bulgarian primary education is still largely at an early, generalised stage. While some tools are being used regularly, their application tends to be broad and unspecialised, primarily serving a supportive function without in-depth digitally pedagogical approaches. There remains significant room for improvement in developing more sophisticated and subject-specific digital teaching practices. As highlighted in the literature, this implies the need for targeted support to help teachers apply technologies in pedagogically meaningful ways [49,50,51].

5.3. Limitations of the Study

This study has its limitations. First, classroom observations were limited to a single lesson per teacher, which may not fully cover the complexity and variability of their practices over time. Although only one lesson per teacher was observed (due to institutional and logistical constraints), teachers pre-selected a lesson that best represented their typical practices, and detailed pre-observation interviews and analysis of submitted lesson plans were used to triangulate findings, partially mitigating this limitation and supporting the reliability of the results. Second, the relatively small sample size limits the generalizability of the findings. A larger-scale study involving more teachers across different regions and school contexts would provide a more comprehensive picture. Third, the study focuses primarily on declared and observed practices, without incorporating direct feedback from students, which could offer valuable insights into the effectiveness of digital technology integration from a learner’s perspective.

5.4. Recommendations for Future Research

Future research could benefit from implementing longitudinal designs to observe teachers’ technology integration over an extended period. Moreover, expanding the sample size and including diverse educational contexts would improve the representativeness and applicability of the results. Additionally, involving students’ perspectives could bring insights into the impact of digital technologies on learning outcomes and engagement. Further studies could also explore the influence of school leadership and institutional support on effective technology integration in primary education.

6. Conclusions

This research set out to examine how Bulgarian primary teachers from 30 selected across the country make use of digital technologies in their everyday practice, based on data from 44 semi-structured and the same number of lesson plans and observed lessons, to compare their self-reported intentions with actual classroom practices. Regarding teaching, learning, assessment, and communication, teachers primarily integrated digital technologies in a supportive, teacher-directed manner. Although they intended to promote student-centred practices, collaborative learning, and digital competence development, classroom observations showed these intentions were only partially realised. This indicates a persistent gap between teachers’ aspirations to experiment with new approaches and the realities of classroom implementation, with a predominant reliance on familiar, trusted tools. With respect to digital resources and tools, teachers relied consistently on familiar platforms such as Ucha.se, Wordwall, PowerPoint, and electronic textbooks, which were present in 43 out of 44 observed lessons and were frequently mentioned in interviews. These tools were mainly used to support instruction through visualisation, content enrichment, and structured revision activities, while more innovative platforms, such as AR/VR applications or tools for student-created content, were rarely implemented. The predominant teacher-led approach aligns with the “Support” mode of the Digital Technology Integration Framework (DTIF), showing that digital tools are embedded in everyday teaching but primarily enhance traditional practices rather than transform them.

The value of this study lies in providing a grounded account of where Bulgarian primary schools currently stand. Our findings demonstrate both the progress made in embedding digital tools into everyday lessons and the limits that still hold back more innovative, learner-centred approaches. A recurring theme in the findings was that while teachers are confident and often enthusiastic about using digital platforms to deliver content and sustain attention, their professional preparation does not always extend to more ambitious pedagogical uses. Many expressed a wish to nurture critical thinking, collaboration, and digital citizenship, but these goals were not consistently visible in practice. Further research is needed to explore the factors and barriers that hinder teachers from developing and applying these key competencies. What emerges is a picture of teachers well-prepared to use technology for supportive purposes but less equipped to design lessons that extend or transform learning. Addressing this will require sustained professional development, not only to build technical skills but also to strengthen teachers’ capacity to design lessons that give pupils greater independence and space for creativity.

Training programmes should place greater emphasis on learner-centred digital pedagogies, helping teachers develop strategies for encouraging autonomy, creativity, and digital citizenship. Our findings also highlight the need to improve infrastructure and ensure reliable access to digital tools, as these contextual factors directly influence how teachers can integrate technology into everyday practice. In addition, a more targeted and strategic approach to developing pupils’ digital competences—supported by clear guidance and practical resources for teachers—could strengthen the integration of these skills across subjects and better prepare learners for the demands of a digital world.

In conclusion, our findings contribute to the international discourse by illustrating how, in contexts with limited resources and uneven digital readiness, the integration of technology in primary education remains largely supportive rather than transformative. They underscore the need for global strategies that go beyond infrastructure and address the pedagogical and contextual factors essential for meaningful digital innovation in early education.