This study examines how two Slovenian mathematics teachers, "Janez" and "Mojca," incorporate digital tools into their instruction of 6th and 8th-grade students. It is part of a larger research project exploring technology use in mathematics education in Slovenia and Türkiye. Both teachers, Janez and Mojca, demonstrated a student-centred orientation in earlier phases of the project. Using a mixed-methods approach, the research employed observations of four lessons per teacher and pre-/post-lesson interviews. Classroom observations, conducted over four lessons per teacher, were followed by in-depth interviews. Using the Structuring Features of Classroom Practice (SFCP) framework, the analysis focused on five key dimensions: working environment, resource system, activity format, curriculum script, and time economy. Prior research, including Bozkurt and Ruthven and Simsek and Clark-Wilson, informed the study. The SFCP-driven analysis was followed by Directed Content Analysis (DCA), a qualitative method that uses existing theory to focus on specific data aspects, in this case, pedagogical mathematical goals. Janez’s lessons revealed a balanced use of traditional and digital tools, such as calculators and interactive whiteboards, to foster conceptual understanding. His classroom practices aligned with the SFCP dimensions, particularly regarding the working environment and curriculum script. He structured lessons to incorporate technology without diminishing the importance of traditional skills like manual calculation, ensuring students engaged with core mathematical concepts before using technological tools for efficiency. For example, using calculators sped up problem-solving while reinforcing foundational skills. His approach carefully managed the time economy, allowing more classroom time for critical discussions and concept exploration. Mojca, in contrast, utilized a more student-centred approach, actively incorporating tools such as Excel and Kahoot to engage students in interactive learning activities. Her focus on technology was evident in the resource system and activity format, where digital tools played a central role in student participation. However, while Excel was used to teach mathematical sequences and summation, some lessons shifted focus towards basic digital skills, occasionally hindering the full achievement of mathematical objectives. Despite technical challenges, Mojca’s use of technology encouraged collaboration and real-time feedback, though her integration of digital tools sometimes limited deeper mathematical inquiry, affecting the curriculum script. Both teachers employed distinct approaches to technology use. Janez used digital tools to complement and enhance traditional teaching, while Mojca emphasized technology to drive student engagement, sometimes at the expense of a more profound exploration of mathematical content. Their differing strategies reflect the challenge of balancing technological integration with pedagogical goals. While previous research has highlighted the limitations of the SFCP framework in mathematics education, this study contributes important refinements. By incorporating a focus on how technology is used to support core mathematical content, this adapted approach allows researchers to emphasise educational objectives more. These improvements make the SFCP framework more effective for analysing technology integration in mathematics classrooms.

Keywords: Technology integration, mathematics education, SFCP framework, digital tools, pedagogical strategies, student engagement.