Teachers’ Digital Practices in Tunisia: Structural Constraints and Contextual Adaptation in Schools
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70232/jrep.v3i4.284Keywords:
Classroom Innovation, Digital Pedagogy, ICT Integration, Professional Agency, Structural Constraints, TunisiaAbstract
The integration of digital technologies is an important priority in Tunisian educational reforms. However, their use in public secondary schools remains constrained by infrastructural, institutional, and professional challenges. This study examines how Tunisian secondary school teachers use digital technologies and adapt their practices to local conditions. It explores the main constraints affecting ICT integration and the strategies teachers develop to address them. A qualitative approach was adopted, combining semi-structured interviews and classroom observations with secondary school teachers from different regions of Tunisia. The data were analyzed through thematic coding, focusing on technological access, institutional support, professional development, and pedagogical practices. The findings reveal persistent challenges, including inadequate infrastructure, unequal access to digital resources, technical difficulties, and limited opportunities for continuous training. Despite these constraints, teachers demonstrate professional agency and adaptability through collaboration, resource sharing, use of freely available digital materials, and flexible adaptation of available technologies to classroom needs. These practices indicate that teachers actively reinterpret and adapt digital policies rather than simply implementing them. The study concludes that ICT integration in Tunisian secondary schools results from the interaction between structural constraints and teacher agency. Sustainable digital integration requires improved infrastructure, stronger institutional support, and continuous professional development. Recognizing teachers’ contextual knowledge and adaptive practices is also essential for developing effective and context-sensitive digital education policies in Tunisia.
References
Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015). The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 21(6), 624–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to coronavirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), i–vi. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3778083
Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., Lambert, S. R., Al-Freih, M., Pete, J., Olcott, D., Jr., Rodes, V., Aranciaga, I. A., Bali, M., Alvarez, A. V., Roberts, J., Pazurek, A., Raffaghelli, J. E., Panagiotou, N., ... Paskevicius, M. (2020). A global outlook to the interruption of education due to COVID-19 pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1–126. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3878572
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/thematic-analysis/book248481
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press. http://search.worldcat.org/title/social-research-methods/oclc/952522373
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/research-design/book270550
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research/book241842
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-inquiry-and-research-design/book246896
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674030107
Day, C. (2018). Professional identity matters: Agency, emotions, and resilience. In P. A. Schutz, J. Hong, & D. C. Francis (Eds.), Research on teacher identity: Mapping challenges and innovations (pp. 61–70). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93836-3_6
Day, C., & Gu, Q. (2018). How successful secondary school principals in England respond to policy reforms: The influence of biography. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 17(3), 332–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2018.1496339
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/the-sage-handbook-of-qualitative-research/book242504
Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
European Commission. (2022). Digital education action plan (2021–2027): Resetting education and training for the digital age. European Commission. http://education.ec.europa.eu/focus-topics/digital-education/actions
Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. http://study.sagepub.com/flick6e
Fullan, M. (2013). Stratosphere: Integrating technology, pedagogy, and change knowledge. Pearson. http://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf
Fullan, M. (2020). System change in education. American Journal of Education, 126(4), 653–670. https://doi.org/10.1086/709975
Fullan, M., Quinn, J., Drummy, M., & Gardner, M. (2020). Education reimagined: The future of learning. New Pedagogies for Deep Learning & Microsoft Education. http://info.microsoft.com/ww-landing-Education-Reimagined-The-Future-Of-Learning.html
Hodges, C. B., Moore, S., Lockee, B. B., Trust, T., & Bond, M. A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning?
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. https://citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. http://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/interviews-3-239402
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. http://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/naturalistic-inquiry-1-842
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass. http://www.wiley.com/enus/Qualitative+Research%3A+A+Guide+to+Design+and+Implementation%2C+4th+Edition-p-9781119003618
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. http://study.sagepub.com/miles4e
OECD. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en
OECD. (2021). The state of school education: One year into the COVID pandemic. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/201dde84-en
OECD. (2023). OECD digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/qualitative-research-evaluation-methods-4-232962
Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(01)00045-8
Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An ecological approach. Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474219426
Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770
Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. http://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/the-coding-manual-for-qualitative-researchers/book273583
Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/education-and-technology-9781474235514/
Selwyn, N. (2022). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (3rd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. http://www.bloomsbury.com/us/education-and-technology-9781350145542/
Tondeur, J., Howard, S. K., & Yang, J. (2021). One-size does not fit all: Towards an adaptive model to develop preservice teachers’ digital competencies. Computers in Human Behavior, 116, Article 106659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106659
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2
Tracy, S. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. http://www.wiley.com/go/tracy2e
Trust, T., & Whalen, J. (2020). Should teachers be trained in emergency remote teaching? Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.70725/307718pkpjuu
Trust, T., Krutka, D. G., & Carpenter, J. P. (2016). “Together we are better”: Professional learning networks for teachers. Computers & Education, 102, 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.06.007
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501
UNICEF. (2022). Pulse check on digital learning. UNICEF. https://www.unicef.org/reports/pulse-check-digital-learning?
van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2020). The digital divide. Polity Press. http://www.wiley.com/en-us/The+Digital+Divide-p-9781509534463
Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.). (2008). International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9
World Bank. (2022). From education to job growth: Supporting a startup surge in Tunisia. World Bank. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/arabvoices/education-job-growth-supporting-startup-surge-tunisia?
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. http://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/case-study-research-and-applications/book250150
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Romdhane Zid, Sameh Hrairi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
