Developing and integrating digital resources in online mathematics instruction and assessment during Covid-19

Abstract

Technological tools such as computers and the internet were used to continue education and student assessment in mathematics during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal. This study examined integrating digital resources in teaching, learning, and assessment practices among 456 digitally literate mathematics teachers in secondary schools in Nepal, administering an online questionnaire in Google Forms. The structural equation modeling and mean decrease in accuracy plots were the primary statistical tools used in the data analysis. Findings indicated that the use of digital resources in mathematics teaching in online classes was high during the pandemic in Nepal. The results showed that sharing and integrating digital resources in mathematics instruction significantly affects student assessment, whereas developing and sharing digital resources impacted the integration of such resources in student assessment.

Keywords:

• assessment in mathematics
• digital resources
• student assessment
• COVID-19
• Nepal

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic forced education institutions to close face-to-face classes and run education with online learning, affecting engagement, communication, and quality of learning outcomes (AlMahdawi et al., 2021; Omar et al., 2021). Digital tools may provide different instructional design characteristics and pedagogical affordances that affect student learning (Drijvers, 2015). Past studies on the effectiveness of digital tools in education focused on the types of technologies (Higgins et al., 2019), different uses of digital tools in mathematics and science teaching and learning (Hillmayr et al., 2020), student attitudes toward digital instruction in mathematics learning (Aliasgari et al., 2010), computer-based scaffolding in the learning of math with other STEM fields (Belland et al., 2017), mobile applications in mathematics education (Etcuban & Pantinople, 2018), and the use of computers in collaborative learning environments (J. Chen et al., 2018; Timmis et al., 2016), to name a few as examples. Several studies on digital tools in school settings have been conducted (e.g., Cheung & Slavin, 2013; Ma et al., 2014; Steenbergen-Hu & Cooper, 2013). These tools have been used as digital curricular resources to promote student engagement and knowledge (Cox et al., 2010). Five categories of teachers’ ability to use digital tools have been discussed: drill and practice programs, tutoring systems, intelligent tutoring systems, simulations, and hypermedia systems (Nattland & Kerres, 2009). Although there are several studies on the different uses of digital tools in teaching and learning mathematics and other disciplines, a few focused on teachers’ knowledge, skills, and abilities to use digital tools in teaching (Amhag et al., 2019; Sánchez-Cruzado et al., 2021). In this context, the focus should be shifted from classroom equipment to teachers’ ability to develop, integrate, share correctly, and use classroom equipment in teaching-learning activities (Sailer et al., 2021).

Teaching mathematics online requires different skills, including digital resource development and sharing skills. However, to teach mathematics online, different skills to develop resources, share, and assessment strategies are needed to apply differentiation in teaching (Cevikbas & Kaiser, 2020). Digital technologies have supported mathematics teaching for a long time (Tinsley & Johnson, 1998). Therefore, the uses of such technologies have been underscored by education authorities. For example, the Joint Mathematical Council of the United Kingdom (2011) suggested different digital tools for mathematics and other teachers, for example, dynamic graphing tools, dynamic geometry tools, algorithmic programming languages, spreadsheets, data handling software, dynamic statistical tools, computer algebra systems, data loggers, such as motion detectors and global positioning systems, and simulation software. Mathematics teachers use digital tools, such as open educational resources (OERs), to develop their mathematics curricula and assessment tools. However, most teachers still need help developing curriculum resources and systematically appropriating them (Pepin et al., 2017). Although pupils have used resources in informal settings, most technologically-based resources to support mathematics learning have not been developed in homework, non-formal, or informal contexts (Passey, 2014).

The development of digital resources is the first and foremost condition for conducting the teaching and learning process online (Albrahim, 2020). However, teachers should be able to judge what digital materials might work and what might not in their classroom contexts. For example, hypermedia systems could be much less beneficial than intelligent tutoring systems, such as dynamic mathematical tools (Hillmayr et al., 2020). When they use these types of resources, pupils can often get immediate feedback, automatic grading, and recording of results for the teacher. However, many of these methods need to pay more attention to students’ work management; students may need to be more organized when they complete projects or engage in activities outside of formal settings. As a result, teachers may need help to pinpoint where students have knowledge gaps. Looking at research on the effects of digital technologies on learners and learning across a wide range of topics, one conclusion that can be reached is that the support mechanisms in place, rather than the presence of the tools themselves, are crucial for helping teachers use digital tools. Despite having support mechanisms, professional development opportunities, and mandatory training for mathematics teachers in Nepal, the skills from such training have yet to be translated effectively into classroom practices. Teachers’ capacity to transform the skills of developing and sharing digital tools acquired from training in the actual classroom is a challenge (Falloon, 2020).

A study found that mathematics teachers in Nepal have fundamental computer skills (Joshi, Chitrakar, et al., 2021). Teaching and learning mathematics in Nepal is primarily based on face-to-face interactions, mostly teacher lecturing. Only after the COVID-19 outbreak did the practices shift to an online mode. Teachers beginning to work on a new platform may need skills to design pedagogical actions online, develop digital content, integrate digital technologies, and manage and share resources (Albrahim, 2020). The issues of technological skills and technology affordance in teaching mathematics are prominent in Nepal (Joshi, Chitrakar, et al., 2021; Laudari et al., 2021). Due to the adoption of online teaching and learning, the level of awareness of mathematics teachers in using digital tools has increased (Upadhayaya et al., 2021). However, how far they are skilled in developing digital resources using different applications and sharing them in an online environment for teaching, learning, and assessment has yet to be adequately studied. It is far less known, especially in developing country contexts.

Moreover, the association of developing digital resources, sharing, integrating, and evaluating still needs to be covered in the existing literature. In this context, whether teachers in mathematics teaching develop and use digital tools in online learning in Nepal is still being determined. In order to fill this gap in the literature, the following research questions were formulated for this study:

1. What are the practices for using digital resources in mathematics teaching in online classes?

2. What are correlation of developing, sharing, and integrating digital resources on student assessment?

3. What is the impact of sample characteristics (Gender, teaching level, experience, and time of using digital resources) on developing, sharing, and integrating digital resources into student assessment?

The first research question examines the different practices of using digital resources in mathematics teaching during COVID-19 in Nepal. This research question is significant in understanding the teachers’ use of different digital and online resources to continue mathematics teaching and learning when the physical classes were closed due to health and safety reasons and to prevent the spread of coronavirus. The second research question examines the interrelationship between developing, sharing, and integrating digital resources and teachers’ assessment practices in the mathematics classroom during COVID-19. Likewise, the third research question examined the impact of sample characteristics on teachers’ practices of developing, sharing, and integrating digital resources for student assessment in mathematics during COVID-19 in Nepal.

2. Literature review

2.1. Digital resources in education

The use of digital tools and technologies has been growing in schools and higher education institutions (Amhag et al., 2019). It has been used in reforming education with different initiatives, for example, Next Generation Learning in the UK (R. Chen, 2010), the National Education Technology Plan in the US (Office of Educational Technology, 2017), the digital education initiative in Australia (Alexander et al., 2013), digital learning in schools policy initiative in Victoria Government, Australia (2021), Educational Technology Plan of Singapore (Ministry of Education Singapore, 2021), and Science, technology, and innovation policy in the United Arab Emirates (United Arab Emirates Government, 2015), to name a few. These policies and initiatives have engaged the stakeholders to promote digital resources in education sectors to enhance equity, access, and resources to the schools and higher education institutions, which could prepare them to transform face-to-face education into an online mode during the crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Using digital resources in mathematics teaching in schools and universities impacts mathematical thinking and learning experiences (R. Chen, 2010). Pupils may utilize digital resources in everyday interactions with dynamic mathematics digital tools within or outside formal schooling as part of a mathematics learning experience (Hartley, 2010; Passey, 2011). ICT integration is a pedagogical tool for multidimensional learning replicating different learning scenarios (Hartley, 2010; Passey, 2011, 2014). Organizing educational procedures (such as in-class guidance and online discussion) into many phases (perhaps linked sequentially) might help students acquire and manage knowledge both within and outside of the classroom (Cox, 2010). Furthermore, instructors in many countries (e.g., France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States) are increasingly encouraged to (re-)design the curriculum while organizing their lessons. One of the concerns raised is the coherence of their work with developing curriculum content integrating digital tools (Confrey, 2016), which is strongly associated with new reform textbooks compatible with the integration of digital tools and online teaching and learning tool. Integrating digital resources enhances self-regulated learning and provides positive emotions related to satisfaction with online teaching and online mathematical achievement (Cho & Heron, 2015). Studies showed significant investments in shifting face-to-face classrooms to online into school and university classrooms to integrate technology before COVID-19 and beyond, the resources that have been committed to equipping teachers with digital skills, and the findings regarding the efficiency of teachers to use in the teaching-learning process. Integrating digital tools to improve learning is more than just a technical matter concerned with computers. Integration of digital technology and ICT might have taken place for the first time during COVID-19 in many developing countries. The teaching-learning process involves communication with teachers, students, and peers, such as developing, sharing, and evaluating digital resources. In this regard, Buabeng-Andoh (2012) pointed out the ongoing obstacles, such as the lack of teachers with ICT skills, confidence, and communication using digital resources.

2.2. Digital tools for assessment in mathematics

The use of digital tools is changing the landscape of classroom teaching and learning, but it has also penetrated the assessment practices to conduct formative, summative, and diagnostic assessments across disciplines (Deeley, 2018; Robertson et al., 2019; Timmis et al., 2016). Digital skills for assessment encompass knowing how to use digital tools and applications to assess students’ learning, and it is necessary to train the teachers to conduct the assessment (Dawson, 2017). Turning to primarily summative assessment of learning, the Yerushalmy et al. (2017) team looked into the design of e-tasks for assessment purposes, focusing on e-task design principles that encourage exploration (based on paper-pencil tasks). Students worked on the assignments alone without outside assistance (e.g., the teacher and after learning the topic in class) (Haddif, 2017). The results showed that specific criteria should guide the technological affordances in the redesigned e-tasks (from paper-and-pencil tasks) and evaluate the students: the technology should allow for self-reflection, promote learning during the assessment, and guide students to focus on essential details of the tasks without unnecessary distractions (Haddif, 2017). Considering the numerous obstacles, teachers face when implementing digital tools in students’ assessment is critical. Standalone digital tools are ineffective unless used in the classroom for students’ assessment (Gibson, 2001). Teachers need to personalize digital tools for individual students’ self-assessment and external assessment (Callaghan et al., 2018; Hillman et al., 2019). Using digital tools in students’ assessment to know what students know (or do not know), they can adjust to meet students at their level. Students can use digital tools for formative assessment to self-reflect and assess themselves as learners, determining where they are and where they need to go (Panero & Aldon, 2016). Numerous studies during COVID-19 focus on the use of digital resources and practices of teachers to reach out to students in a different context, for example, computer skills (Joshi, Chitrakar, et al., 2021), integration of digital resources in mathematics teaching (Albrahim, 2020), the issue on technology use (Khanal et al., 2021; Laudari et al., 2021), increased (Gnawali et al., 2022). Technology in the classroom may help access the resources to evaluate student learning themselves and teachers’ practices to evaluate the student’s learning in online classes through digital tools. However, the impacts of the application of digital tools in student assessment in Nepal still need to be fully clear. The use of digital tools for the assessment of students can have a significant impact in the context of technology-related subjects, including mathematics.

2.3. Teacher’s digital skills

Previous research has revealed mixed findings on the difference between male and female teachers using computers or digital tools in their teaching (Gebhardt et al., 2019). Gebhardt et al. (2019) found no difference between male and female instructors regarding their pedagogical use of digital tools or ICT. Regarding gender differences, in the same line, Guillén-Gámez et al. (2021) found no significant difference between male and female teachers, and male teachers under 40 years of age have slightly higher digital skills than female teachers. However, female teachers are more apprehensive and stressed when integrating technology into the classroom (Awofala et al., 2017). For example, Halder and Chaudhuri (2011) revealed the computer anxiety of 84 teachers at the University of Calcutta. Halder and Chaudhuri (2011) discovered a substantial difference between teachers, with female teachers having greater anxiety levels. These findings were in line with Semerci and Aydin (2018). Semerci and Aydin (2018) found no significant differences between males and females in using digital tools in the teaching-learning process, such as developing digital tools and sharing them, using digital tools in students’ assessments, and integrating digital tools into teaching-learning. Female teachers had more worries (Agbatogun, 2010).

Along with gender differences in the use of digital skills in the online classroom, Cantú-Ballesteros et al. (2017) identified significant differences between the level of digital skill of the teachers and its factors, with the sociodemographic variables: age, gender, daily hours that the teacher assigns to using the computer or tablet to support his subjects, weekly hours that the teacher assigns to using the computer or tablet in the classroom to support their subjects. This study revealed that most teachers (65.9%) were classified as intermediate, indicating they had greater competence and flexibility in using ICT in a learning setting. He revealed that some teachers did not use and have novice ICT levels (3.4%), indicating that it is still challenging to integrate and use ICT in pedagogical activities. All characteristics and digital ability showed substantial disparities, and it was determined that individuals with more training had higher averages across the board (Binkley et al., 2012). These studies largely ignored the incorporation of developing, sharing, and using digital skills in students’ assessment. Thus, this generated a lack of primary results that informed the scholars’ and policymakers’ use of digital skills in a mathematics classroom in a different context.

3. Methodology

This quantitative study used a research-team-constructed online questionnaire for a cross-section survey with 1572 mathematics teachers in Nepal during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021. This study utilized an Internet-based online questionnaire with a hybrid method of sampling with a combination of convenience and probability sampling (Fricker, 2017; Schonlau et al., 2002).

3.1. Sample and sampling

A total of 1572 mathematics teachers at the secondary level participated in different training programs by STFT, and MEC was considered the closed-listed population. This population of mathematics teachers was considered a closed population (Fricker, 2017; Schonlau et al., 2002). The Google Forms was shared with all populations through their separate Email for the data collection, but only 456 (29.01%) teachers participated in this survey. Hence, 456 is the sample size of this study based on the convenience of reaching them through the closed population list (Schonlau et al., 2002). Additionally, the Google Forms link was shared with the entire population, satisfying the research’s randomness criteria. The online calculator of Roasoft (2004) showed that 309 is the appropriate sample size for the 1572 population. Hence, the sample meets the representative criteria also. The sample size for the study was 456 that included 44 female and 412 male. The sample of female teachers was 9.6 % whereas the sample of male teachers was 90.4%, and this sampling bias had occurred because of the small number of female mathematics teachers in Nepal compared to male mathematics teachers.

3.2. Sociodemographic characteristics

Gender, teaching experience, teaching level, and time taken for online classes were considered sociodemographic characteristics. About 90.4% of the participants were male. Other demographic characteristics were the duration of the experience (less than ten years and greater than or equal to 10 years), teaching levels (the primary level in grades 1–8, the secondary level in grades 8–10, and higher secondary levels in grades 11–12. The time of online classes represents the practice of online classes started by mathematics teachers. It was measured in two categories: before one year and before more than or equal to one year, finding that around two-thirds (61.8%) were taking online classes before one year. The details of the participant information are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Detail of sociodemographic characteristics (n = 456)

Variables	Categories	Frequency (%)	Variable Categories	Frequency (%)
Gender			Teaching level
	Female	44(9.6)	Basic	97(21.3)
	Male	412(90.4)	Secondary	98(21.5)
Experience			Higher secondary	261(57.2)
	<10 years	213(46.7)	Time of taking online classes
	≥10 years	243(53.3)	Before 1 year	174(38.2)
			Before ≥1 year	282(61.8)

3.3. Research instrument

The self-constructed tool was adopted in the research, containing 13 items. The items were developed based on the practice of the online classes in three-point rating in nature: always, sometimes, and never. The items are categorized into four domains: digital resource development (DRD), sharing digital resources (SDR), integration of digital resources (IRD), and student assessment (SA) which were ensured by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The details of the domains and items are presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

The instrument’s reliability was ensured by the internal consistency of items using Cronbach’s Alpha. The reliability score was 0.81, which exceeds the threshold criteria of 0.70 (Creswell, 2012). Moreover, the composite reliability (CR) was calculated and found to be greater than 0.60, which exceeded the threshold criteria. Similarly, the validity was ensured by content validity, which was ensured by the judgment of five mathematics education-related experts and the total item correlation method. The construct validity was ensured by the item total correlation method, and the correlation value of each item was found to be positively significant with the average score of total items in the interval of 0.31 to 0.65 (Ahrens et al., 2020). The value of CR was more significant than 0.6; hence the value of AVE less than 0.5 is accepted in this research (Lam, 2012). The dimensions of the instrument were ensured by the CFA method.

In contrast, the standard factor loading was found to be from 0.31 to 0.80, which were accepted because of fitting the remaining indices of SEM. Moreover, discriminant and construct validity were measured to establish the validity of the instrument. The discriminant validity was ensured by the square root of average variance extracted (AVE), and construct validity was ensured by the Heterotrait—Monotrait (HTMT) ratio correlation technique (Table 2) which was found to be less than the threshold criteria of 0.90 (Voorhees et al., 2016).

Table 2. Reliability and validity of the instrument

Construct	CR	AVE	HTMT Analysis
			DRD	SDR	IDR	SE
Digital Resource Development (DRD)	0.60	0.30
Sharing Digital Resources (SDR)	0.73	0.44	0.39
Integration of Digital Resources (IRD)	0.63	0.32	0.57	0.73
Student Assessment (SA)	0.66	0.41	0.46	0.74	0.87

3.3.1. Digital Resource Development (DRD)

The teachers’ practices of developing digital resources such as PowerPoint Slides, Notes, Short Videos, and Problem Sets using digital tools for content development-related items were considered in this section. It included the use of Google Drive (classroom, docs, slides, files, Jamboard, forms) to collaborate with students and use mathematical tools to develop content represents the practices of mathematics teachers in collaboration and use of mathematical tools such as software, mobile applications, and online resources in teaching.

3.3.2. Sharing Digital Resources (SDR)

The use of digital resources for collaboration and sharing with students was considered under this domain. At the same time, sharing digital resources represents sharing audio and video materials, text materials, web resources through social media, email, drive and related others, and sharing digital resources through learning management system tools (LMS) such as Moodle, Google Classroom, and other digital library tools.

3.3.3. Integration of Digital Resources (IRD)

Integrating digital resources into teaching mathematics represents using digital technologies in teaching mathematics online. The concept primarily focused on using digital resources for content visualization, like different shapes and concepts, a digital whiteboard, and discussion forums while teaching mathematics.

3.3.4. Students Assessment (SA)

Assessment is essential for evaluating the performance of the learners. Hence, the practices of the learners were measured under this domain. The study’s primary focus is on using online assessment tools like survey form, quizzes and similar others rubrics, and learning management systems (LMS) while assessing mathematics students via an online mode of instruction.

3.4. Data analysis

Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The descriptive statistics mean and standard deviation (SD) were used to find the status of digital resources using practices in online instruction of mathematics. The one-sample t-test was employed to test the significant results of the sample mean with the assumed population mean (2). Additionally, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to find the effect of digital resource development and sharing and integration of digital resources on students’ assessment. Furthermore, the mean decrease in accuracy plots was used to find the contribution of sample characteristics on all categories, including items of the path analysis was used under inferential statistics for the direct and indirect effects of digital resource development, sharing of digital resources, and integrating digital resources into online mathematics instruction on students’ assessments. In contrast, those effects were measured concerning sociodemographic characteristics of digital resources in online instructional practices. The statistical package for social science (SPSS 26) was used as a data analysis tool, but the correlation diagram was calculated in JASP.

4. Results

4.1. Using digital resources in instructional practices

We attempted to answer the first research question: What is the status of practices for using digital resources in mathematics teaching in online classes? Table 3 shows the practices of using digital resources in instructional performance. The one-sample t-test showed that the mean scores were significantly different from the hypothesized mean (>2), indicating teachers’ practices of developing, sharing and integrating digital resources was more often than just sometimes, if not always, in all items except for using rubrics to assess the student’s work and hard-to-develop digital resources for mathematics content. This finding indicated that mathematics teachers had good performance using digital resources to teach mathematics online. The instructional performance was significantly high in each item with dimensions. However, the mean score was low in DRD (Mean = 2.07, SD = 0.48) and high in SDR (Mean = 2.30, SD = 0.47) compared to IRD and SE. Based on the item-wise results, the practices of developing digital resources for mathematics content had a Mean = 1.85 and SD = 0.59. The digital content management through different LMS and digital library tools had a Mean = 2.06 and SD = 0.62. Likewise, the use of discussion forums to facilitate student learning had a Mean = 2.14 and SD = 0.55.

Table 3. Mathematics teachers’ self-reported use of digital resources in instructional practices (n = 456)

Items with dimensions	Mean	SD	t-value	FL	ITC
Digital Resource Development (DRD)	2.07	0.48	2.89*
Hard to develop digital resources for mathematics content	1.85	0.59	−5.54*	0.31	0.31
Use google drive (classroom, docs, slide, file, Jamboard) for developing content	2.19	0.72	5.65*	0.42	0.40
Use of mathematical tools to develop content	2.16	0.66	5.08*	0.80	0.61
Sharing Digital Resource (SDR)	2.30	0.47	13.68*
Share audio and video content online	2.33	0.63	11.15*	0.69	0.60
Sharing web resources using social media, email, drives, etc. in online mode	2.34	0.60	11.94*	0.70	0.65
Sharing digital content through different LMS and digital library tools	2.06	0.62	2.02*	0.60	0.59
Share text content online	2.48	0.61	16.54*	0.66	0.60
Integration of Digital Resources (IRD)	2.29	0.43	14.36*
Digital resources are used to visualize mathematical content	2.40	0.54	15.74*	0.60	0.59
Use of digital whiteboard while teaching mathematics	2.34	0.66	10.82*	0.60	0.59
Use of discussion forum to facilitate the students learning	2.14	0.55	5.35*	0.50	0.51
Students Assessment (SA)	2.21	0.48	9.38*
Use of online assessment tools (online form, quizzes and puzzle) in assessment	2.27	0.61	9.43*	0.70	0.62
Use of rubrics to evaluate the students’ work	2.02	0.66	0.49	0.64	0.58
Use of LMS for students’ assessment	2.35	0.59	12.57*	0.57	0.61

*p < 0.01, ITC- Item total correlation, FL-Factor loading.

Similarly, using rubrics to evaluate the student’s work had a Mean score of 2.02 with an SD of 0.66. The item related to sharing text content online had a Mean value of 2.48 and an SD of 0.61. The use of digital resources to visualize mathematical content (Mean = 2.40, SD = 0.54). The use of LMS for students’ assessment had a Mean value of 2.35 with an SD of 0.59.

4.2. Correlation of variables of using digital resources

We attempted to answer the second research question: What is the relationship of developing, sharing, and integrating digital resources on student assessment? Figure 2 shows the relationship between the variables of using digital resources in instructional performance as DRD, SDR, IDR, and SE. The relationship was found to be significantly positive in each case; however, correlation values were found to be comparatively low in DRD with SDR (r = 0.26) and SE (r = 0.28), whereas high in SE with SDR (r = 0.52) and IRD (r = 0.53).

Figure 2. Relationship between the variables of using digital resources in instructional performs.

4.3. Structural equation modeling

We attempted to answer the third research question: What is the impact of sample characteristics (Gender, teaching level, experience, and time of using digital resources) on developing, sharing, and integrating digital resources into student assessment? The model fit indices were checked based on the threshold criteria of the SEM. The insignificant Chi-square value of the model is considered in the model (Bentler & Bonett, 1980) because other indices are a good fit and were found to be significant in the model. Table 4 shows the value of the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness-of-fit statistic (GFI), and adjusted goodness-of-fit statistic (AGFI). It also shows comparative fit index (CFI) and incremental fit index (IFI) are fulfilling the respective threshold criteria (Bentler & Bonett, 1980; Byrne, 1989; Hooper et al., 2008; Hu & Bentler, 1999; Joshi, Adhikari, et al., 2022; MacCallum et al., 1996; Sarker & Chakraborty, 2021), and hence, SEM deemed appropriate.

Table 4. Model fit indices

Indicators	CMIN	DF	CMIN/DF	GFI	AGFI	IFI	CFI	RMSEA
Model	180.7	56	3.23	0.94	0.91	0.92	0.92	0.07
Threshold criteria			<5	>0.90	>0.90	>0.90	>0.90	<0.08

Figure 3 shows that digital resource development has a significant positive effect (beta = 0.50) in sharing digital resources explaining a 25% variance. Digital resource development (beta = 0.35) and sharing (beta = 0.45) have a significant positive effect on the integration of digital resources explaining 49% variance. Similarly, the digital resource sharing and integration of digital resources have a significant positive effect on students’ assessment, explaining a 58% variance; however, the direct effect of digital resource development (beta = 0.09) have insignificant to students’ assessment.

Figure 3. Effect of DRD, SDR, and IDR on SE.

Figure 4 shows that the sharing of developed content in online mode, using LMS, digital library tools, digital whiteboard, and digital resources to visualize mathematical content, had a significant role in determining students’ assessment. However, the role of sample characteristics was found to be poor concerning digital resource development and sharing and integration of digital resource-related items. Similarly, Figure 5 shows that the role of sharing text content online and the use of mathematical tools to develop content have more contribution to determining the integration of digital resources at the teaching level and experience have more contribution than the use of google drive for developing content, time of online class and gender. Figure 6 shows the effect of sample characteristics and digital resource development on sharing digital resources. The findings indicated that using mathematical tools to develop content has more effect on sharing digital resources. However, the role of the remaining variable was found to be very poor. Finally, the effect of sample characteristics on digital resource development was measured, as shown in Figure 7. The results showed that online class time had a positive high effect on digital resources development. However, the teaching level has a negative contribution indicating that digital resources development is more problematic at a higher level (Table 5).

Figure 4. Effect of sample characteristics, DRD, SDR, and IDR on SE.

Figure 5. Effect of sample characteristics, DRD, and SDR on IDR.

Figure 6. Effect of sample characteristics and DRD on SDR.

Figure 7. Effect of sample characteristics on DRD.

Table 5. Result of the total increase in node purity and mean decrease in accuracy variables

Variables	SE		IRD		SDR		DRD
	MDA	TINP	MDA	TINP	MDA	TINP	MDA	TINP
Gender	5.15e −3	2.42	1.54e −3	1.98	2.51e −3	6.04	0.02	4.29
Experience	5.08e −3	3.09	0.03	5.06	0.02	5.20	0.01	4.27
Teaching Level	7.30e −3	4.59	0.03	7.01	−2.74e −3	9.06	−0.02	4.76
Online class time	3.90e −3	4.07	8.75e −3	4.49	0.02	5.75	0.03	7.20
DRD1	0.02	5.73	0.06	10.10	0.03	9.92
DRD2	0.03	6.03	0.01	6.11	0.03	7.17
DRD3	0.02	8.11	0.09	15.90	0.23	24.10
SDR1	0.03	7.11	0.05	10.70
SDR2	0.13	11.20	0.06	11.70
SDR3	0.13	13.70	0.07	12.30
SDR4	0.05	10.20	0.10	11.90
IDR1	0.09	9.42
IDR2	0.06	9.48
IDR3	0.09	12.70

TINP-Total increase in node purity, MDA-Mean decrease in accuracy DRD-Digital resource development, SDR-Sharing digital resources, IRD-Integration of digital resources, SA-Students assessment.

5. Discussion

The research aimed to study the practices of using digital resources in teaching mathematics through an online mode during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal. The result shows that the level of practice of using digital resources was found to be significantly high in almost all items, which may be the cause of the study being carried out among digitally literate and trained mathematics teachers. However, the result was significantly low regarding developing digital resources for mathematics content. The use of digital resources at the school level in Nepal is new since the pandemic situation, and digital resources for mathematics teaching at that level are rarely found in the public domain (Laudari et al., 2021). Additionally, digital resource practices were found to be significantly high in DRD, SDR, IRD, and SE. These results could be because most of the classes during the pandemic were running virtually. This finding indicates that the teachers were taking online teaching as an opportunity to develop the digital resource, as in the findings from (Sepulveda-Escobar & Morrison, 2020). Digital tools and resources can be used to assess complex mathematical knowledge and skills, such as hypothesis testing and problem-solving (Timmis et al., 2016). Therefore, the application of digital tools in the assessment of students’ learning of mathematics may provide a new innovative alternative to traditional paper-pencil examinations (Raaheim et al., 2018). However, such new trends of assessment through digital tools and technology should emphasize the critical skills of teachers beyond assessing students’ memorization of facts with an inclusive assessment using a variety of sources to inform students’ knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values in a sustainable practice (Adesemowo et al., 2017).

The practice of integrating digital resources and students’ assessment could have been higher compared to digital resource development and sharing of digital resources, indicating that all classroom instruction activities are only partially in practice. Based on the findings, the practices of developing digital resources for mathematics content, digital content sharing through different LMS and digital library tools, use of discussion forums to facilitate the students learning, and use of rubrics to evaluate the student’s work should have more improvement for further online, flipped, and blended mode of instruction at school education (Gnawali et al., 2022; Upadhayaya et al., 2021). Practices of sharing text content online, using digital resources to visualize mathematical content, and using LMS for student assessment were found to be higher among the items. This finding is consistent with Bradley’s (2021) study results showed that the teachers’ role is crucial in the effective facilitation and assessments of students’ learning. The LMS may play a significant role in providing expectations, monitoring students’ learning, planning for remedial activities, engagement in learning, construction of virtual learning communities, and learners’ autonomy (Bradley, 2021). However, more systematic practices are needed on this information all over the nation because this result is derived from trained mathematics teachers only as compared to all items. The relationship between the items was found to be positively significant, indicating that practices of one type of information help to enhance others (Pingping et al., 2017).

Similarly, similar results were found in the case of dimensions such as digital resource development, sharing of digital resources, integration of digital resources, and students’ assessment. Hence, institutions, governments, and other organizations should prioritize enhancing any type of practice that automatically supports enhancing other types of practice (Joshi, Adhikari, et al., 2022; Joshi, Chitrakar, et al., 2021). The contribution of digital resource development is insignificant to student assessment, which may be because student assessment and resource development are slightly different things. This finding indicates that the assessment procedure needs to be more digitalized (Meccawy et al., 2021; Sharadgah & Sadi, 2020). However, it has a significant positive effect on sharing digital resources and integrating them into instructional practices, leading teachers and students to flip classroom practices (Moreno et al., 2020). Hence, concern bodies should enhance the practices of developing mathematical content-related digital resources using applications of Google Drive and mathematical content. The sharing and integration of digital resources significantly affect students’ assessment of their learning. This finding is consistent with Adedokun-Shittu & Shittu (2014), which suggest that integrating digital tools and technologies may align the curriculum and teaching-learning with students’ assessment of and for learning.

However, the impact of technology integration may also negatively correlate with the quality of student assessment and monitoring of the learning outcomes due to the primitive stage of ICT and digital tools in educational institutions (Adedokun-Shittu & Shittu, 2014). Hence, mathematics and other subject teachers should focus on sharing content related to text and audio-visual documents with effective LMS (AlMahdawi et al., 2021; Joshi, Adhikari, et al., 2022; Omar et al., 2021). They may use digital resources for mathematical content visualization and a digital whiteboard to materialize mathematics structures (Greiffenhagen, 2014). They can apply mathematical software to share contents and model mathematical functions (Greefrath et al., 2018). They may use discussion forums to facilitate the students (Albrahim, 2020; Caena & Redecker, 2019; Ferrari, 2012). Despite such advantages and high motivations for using digital tools and technologies in education, there are also challenges in terms of making adjustments in teaching and learning practices and diversifying assessment tools to have multiple sources of information about students’ learning and development (Al-Fraihat et al., 2020; Watson & Watson, 2007).

The role of gender, teaching experience, teaching level, and time of taking online classes was found to be poor in students’ assessment. Whereas sharing and integration of digital resources whereas (Semerci & Aydin, 2018), Gebhardt et al. (2019), and Guillén-Gámez et al. (2021) also found that gender had no significant role in developing, sharing, and using digital tools for the teaching-learning process. Sharing digital content using LMS, digital library tools, digital whiteboards, and digital resources to visualize mathematical content are the main predictors of the student’s assessment; hence, stakeholders should use such resources for better learners’ performance. The way students use digital tools and technologies in online learning mathematics and other disciplines may also affect the teachers’ practices of using the tools for students’ assessment (Bringula et al., 2021). That way, it may also change teachers’ views about distance or online learning performance indicators using digital tools during the COVID-19 pandemic (AlMahdawi et al., 2021; Omar et al., 2021). That means teachers’ perceptions and practices of using such tools in supporting students’ usage of the tool may affect the teaching, learning, and assessment practices in mathematics and other disciplines (Gnawali et al., 2022; Joshi, Adhikari, et al., 2022). Sharing text content and using mathematical tools to develop content are the main predictors of the integration of digital resources; hence concerned teachers have to focus on enhancing those activities for effective integration of instructional technologies (Delgado et al., 2015). Moreover, using mathematical tools to develop content has more effect on sharing digital resources; hence teachers should consider priorities using different software, mobile application, and online resources for developing and sharing content. Additionally, teachers of higher levels should focus more on developing digital content because of the negative contribution of the teaching level on digital resource development.

Digital resource development has a significant effect on sharing digital resources. Therefore, concerned stakeholders focus more on developing digital resources for mathematics content, the use of google drive, and mathematical tools for enhancing the sharing of the content through LMS, the digital library, and sharing audio and video content online. Teacher practices in sharing and developing digital resources significantly positively affected the integration of digital resources. Hence, teachers should have more focus on developing digital resources for mathematics content, use of google drive, LMS, digital library tools, and mathematical tools, sharing audio and video content for enhancing visualization of mathematical content, and use of digital boards and discussion forum to facilitate the students learning (Joshi, Khanal, et al., 2022). Furthermore, the sharing and integration of digital resources significantly affected students’ assessment. Hence more enhancement is needed in sharing audio-visual and other digital content, using LMS, digital library, digital boards, discussion boards, and visualization of content to promote learners’ assessment-related activities.

Teachers can share text content online, thus empowering learners and teachers and expanding the possibilities of new learning experiences (Panworld Education, 2017). Integrating digital tools in teaching and learning may even reconstruct student and teacher agency to play a role as change agents in the classrooms, schools, and society by constructing knowledge on their own and acting as “protagonists of the transformations that can mark the world in which they live” (Barbosa et al., 2019, p. 22). In this sense, teachers’ digital and ICT competency may help transform education by integrating and expanding the digital world within and outside the school (Barbosa et al., 2019). However, for better performance in integrating digital resources, the sociodemographic variable does not matter. Hence, stockholders should focus on enhancing sharing and developing digital resources to integrate digital resources into instructional practices effectively. Additionally, similar results were measured in the case of sharing digital resources, which should be the focus of developing digital resources for their enhancement. Research scholars have emphasized this view, for example, Clark-Wilson (2017) and Hall et al. (2017), to promote the development, application, and sharing of digital resources for teaching and learning mathematics.

6. Conclusion

The findings indicated that the use of digital resources in mathematics teaching in online classes was high during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal. Teachers’ sharing and integrating digital resources influenced student assessment in online instruction instead of digital resource development. Additionally, teacher practices in developing digital resources had a significant positive effect on sharing and integrating digital resources. Likewise, a sense of developing digital resource had a significant effect on the sharing of digital resources. Furthermore, sample characteristics such as experience, gender, teaching level, and time of taking online classes had a minor role in determining the practices of developing, sharing, integrating, and evaluating activities. These results may have policy implications in the sense that policymakers should examine the current policies of digital integration in student learning and assessment and make effective policies and plans for integrating digital resources into instructional practices. The current digital framework, 2019 Digital Nepal Framework (Government of Nepal Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, 2018), needs revision with provisions of explicit integration of digital tools in each classroom with adequate knowledge and skills of each mathematics teachers with a digital competency framework (Joshi, Neupane, et al., 2021). The findings may help mathematics teachers who can take online classes for educational institutions to develop new virtual instructional strategies. These findings can also provide the government and educational institutions with information for blended and flipped classrooms to promote student learning and continuous assessment practices with the use of a variety of digital tools and applications.

However, because the study is limited to digitally trained mathematics teachers in Nepal, the findings will be generalized only to digitally trained mathematics teachers, specifically those who teach online. Additionally, the study is limited to the online survey design among digitally trained teachers and a quantitative research method. Hence, further study can be conducted among teachers of different levels, including different subjects, using the qualitative mixed method by taking large samples focusing on particular areas. So, concerned stakeholders should focus on enhancing this practice because digital resources are necessary for learners at this age (Albrahim, 2020). Skills to develop rubrics using digital technology on an online platform are necessary to conduct an online assessment (Dawson, 2017). Online classes during the pandemic were seen as an opportunity to transform educational activities into a blended model of instruction in Nepal and other developing countries (St-Onge et al., 2022).

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the Dean’s Office, Faculty of Education, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data for this study can be obtained from Harvard Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/YJK1J4

Additional information

Funding

The authors did not receive any funding to conduct this study.