A Systematic Review of Pedagogical Challenges in Mathematics Instruction in Geographically Isolated and Disadvantaged Areas (GIDA) Schools

Abstract

Research on mathematics instruction in Geographically Isolated and Disadvantaged Areas (GIDA) remains fragmented, as studies tend to examine single barriers, treat rural education generally, or focus on primary-level and multigrade settings. This systematic review offers an integrated, mathematics-specific synthesis of pedagogical challenges at the secondary level in GIDA, rural, remote, and disadvantaged schools. Following PRISMA 2020, we searched Google Scholar for peer-reviewed, English-language empirical studies; after screening and eligibility checks ([n] records identified, [n] screened, [n] excluded), eleven studies published between 2021 and 2025 were analysed using content analysis. Seven were from South Africa, and one each from the Philippines, Zambia, Ghana, and an international sample; seven were qualitative, three mixed-methods, and one quantitative. Four themes emerged. Resource scarcity and chronic underfunding narrowed teachers’ pedagogical repertoires to procedural, teacher-centred instruction and weakened curriculum implementation and assessment. Teacher underqualification, professional isolation, and deficit beliefs about rural learners reinforced these limits, while poverty and digital exclusion widened learning gaps; for instance, over 56% of Zambian secondary students lacked adequate ICT, electricity, or internet access during COVID-19 school closures. Despite these constraints, teachers sustained learning through contextualised instruction, cooperative learning, and peer consultation. The review shows that these challenges are strikingly similar across countries and that material deprivation and narrowed pedagogical thinking reinforce each other, so resource investment alone is unlikely to suffice; the evidence points to sustained investment in infrastructure, teacher preparation, and technology access, alongside community-responsive professional support. These conclusions are tempered by limitations: the corpus is small and drawn from a single database, dominated by South African and largely qualitative studies, with only one Philippine study, and learning outcomes were rarely measured, so claims about intervention effectiveness remain tentative.