Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Hot Topics and Frontier Evolution of Science Education Research: a Bibliometric Mapping from 2001 to 2020

  • Article
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bibliometric mapping serves as a method to systematically evaluate and visually demonstrate the development of a research field. CiteSpace and VOSviewer, two research tools of bibliometric mapping, were used in the present study to analyze, synthesize, and visualize the hot topics as well as frontier evolution of science education. Co-authorship analysis, co-citation analysis, co-occurrence analysis, cluster analysis, and content analysis were conducted based on 6278 articles selected from seven SSCI journals. Researchers from countries/territories in North America, Europe, Oceania, and West and East Asia had maintained relatively tighter cooperation with each other. Highly influential literature mainly focused on the standards, methods, practice, and reflection of science education. In the past two decades, the literature on science education covered seven hot topics: conceptual issues in science education, gender, scientific argumentation, professional development, science learning, evolution, and peer review. The research on science education in the past 20 years can be divided into three phases: the first stage focused on knowledge learning, identity, and informal education; the second stage emphasized formal education, scientific literacy, and social-science issues; and the third stage highlighted scientific argumentation and STEM education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agarwal, A., Durairajanayagam, D., Tatagari, S., Esteves, S., Harlev, A., Henkel, R., & Bashiri, A. (2016). Bibliometrics: Tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics. Asian Journal of Andrology, 18(2), 296–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 653–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D. L., Fisher, K. M., & Norman, G. J. (2002). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 952–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arici, F., Yildirim, P., Caliklar, Ş, & Yilmaz, R. M. (2019). Research trends in the use of augmented reality in science education: Content and bibliometric mapping analysis. Computers and Education, 142, 103647. 1-103647.23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besley, J. C., Dudo, A., & Storksdieck, M. (2015). Scientists’ views about communication training: Scientists’ views of communication training. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(2), 199–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlone, H. B., Johnson, A., & Scott, C. M. (2015). Agency amidst formidable structures: How girls perform gender in science class: AGENCY, STRUCTURE, AND GIRLS IN SCIENCE. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 474–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., Hu, Z., Liu, S., & Tseng, H. (2012). Emerging trends in regenerative medicine: A scientometric analysis in CiteSpace. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 12(5), 593–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, L., & Xiao, S. (2021). Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 32, 100377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crandall, C. S. (2019). Science as dissent: The practical value of basic and applied science. Journal of Social Issues, 75(2), 630–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curry, M. J., & Lillis, T. (2004). Multilingual scholars and the imperative to publish in English: Negotiating interests, demands, and rewards. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 663–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R. (2007). Science education research internationally: Conceptions, research methods, domains of research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(1), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., Duschl, R. A., Grandy, R., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22(9), 2109–2139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duszak, A., & Lewkowicz, J. (2008). Publishing academic texts in English: A polish perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(2), 108–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart, M. (2002). The paradox of peer review: Admitting too much or allowing too little? Research in Science Education (australasian Science Education Research Association), 32(2), 241–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2005). Using the contextual model of learning to understand visitor learning from a science center exhibition. Science Education, 89(5), 744–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, E. B., & Toti, F. A. (2021). Multivariate and longitudinal profile of brazilian journals on science education from 2013 to 2019 what is the role of physics education? Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00279-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forawi, S. A. (2016). Standard-based Science Education and critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 20, 52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichsen, P., Driel, J. H. V., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education (Salem, Mass.), 95(2), 358–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Pérez, D. (1996). New trends in Science Education. International Journal of Science Education, 18(8), 889–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grinis, I. (2019). The STEM requirements of “Non-STEM” jobs: Evidence from UK online vacancy postings. Economics of Education Review, 70, 144–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, C., Yang, C., Wang, S., Wu, W., Su, J., & Liang, C. (2020). Evolution of topics in education research: A systematic review using bibliometric analysis. Educational Review, 72(3), 281–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, K. (2016). Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 58–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorde, D., & Dillon, J. (2012). Science education research and practice in Europe: Retrospective and prospective. Sense Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kachru, B. B. (1986). The power and politics of English. World Englishes, 5(2–3), 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaptan, K., & Timurlenk, O. (2012). Challenges for science education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 763–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucio-Arias, D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). The dynamics of exchanges and references among scientific texts, and the autopoiesis of discursive knowledge. Journal of Informetrics, 3(3), 261–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A. J., Kennett, R., Pearson, J., Mansour, M., Papworth, B., & Malmberg, L. (2021). Challenge and threat appraisals in high school science: Investigating the roles of psychological and physiological factors. Educational Psychology (Dorchester-on-Thames), 41(5), 618–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martín, P., Rey-Rocha, J., Burgess, S., & Moreno, A. I. (2014). Publishing research in english-language journals: Attitudes, strategies and difficulties of multilingual scholars of medicine. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 16, 57–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medina-Jerez, W. (2018). Science education research trends in Latin America. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(3), 465–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Min, H. (2014). Participating in international academic publishing: A Taiwan perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 188–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E., Lockwood, C., & Jordan, Z. (2018). What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potkonjak, V., Gardner, M., Callaghan, V., Mattila, P., Guetl, C., Petrović, V. M., & Jovanović, K. (2016). Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering: A review. Computers & Education, 95, 309–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. J. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. J. S. (1970). Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology, and nonscience. In C. E. Nelson & D. K. Pollock (Eds.), Communication among scientists and engineers (pp. 3–22). Heath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, J. G., & Nelson, P. A. (1958). A view of Science Education review and forecast. The Journal of Education, 141(2), 1–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, H. (1870). Science education in Germany. Nature, 1, 475–477.

  • Roth, W. (2002). Editorial power/authorial suffering. Research in Science Education (australasian Science Education Research Association), 32(2), 215–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahin, D., & Yilmaz, R. M. (2020). The effect of augmented reality technology on middle school students’ achievements and attitudes towards Science Education. Computers & Education, 144, 103710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89, 634–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxton, E., Burns, R., Holveck, S., Kelley, S., Prince, D., Rigelman, N., & Skinner, E. A. (2014). A common measurement system for K-12 STEM education: Adopting an educational evaluation methodology that elevates theoretical foundations and systems thinking. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 40, 18–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, R. J. (1985). Higher education as a maturing field? Evidence from referencing practices. Research in Higher Education, 23(2), 150–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F., & Demastes, J. W. (2003). Intentions and beliefs in students’ understanding and acceptance of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 510–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. (2018). Characterizing highly cited method and non-method papers using citation contexts: The role of uncertainty. Journal of Informetrics, 12(2), 461–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soler, J. (2019). Academic publishing in english: Exploring linguistic privilege and scholars’ trajectories. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 18(6), 389–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, M. P., Hartmeyer, R., & Bentsen, P. (2017). Systematically reviewing the potential of concept mapping technologies to promote self-regulated learning in primary and secondary Science Education. Educational Research Review, 21, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stocklmayer, S. M., Rennie, L. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). The roles of the formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective Science Education. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuckey, M., Hofstein, A., Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Eilks, I. (2013). The meaning of “relevance” in Science Education and its implications for the science curriculum. Studies in Science Education, 49(1), 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, B., & Watters, J. J. (2015). Perspectives on Australian, Indian and Malaysian approaches to STEM education. International Journal of Educational Development, 45, 42–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolbert, S., Schindel, A., & Rodriguez, A. J. (2018). Relevance and relational responsibility in justice-oriented science education research. Science Education, 102(4), 796–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trna, J., & Trnova, E. (2015). The current paradigms of Science Education and their expected impact on curriculum. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 271–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C. C., & Wen, M. L. (2005). Research and trends in science education from 1998 to 2002: A content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 3–14.

  • Vhurumuku, E., & Mokeleche, M. (2009). The nature of science and indigenous knowledge systems in south Africa, 2000–2007: A critical review of the research in science education. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(1), 96–114.

  • Wang, S., & Wang, H. (2011). Development of International Science Education: Path, problems and countermeasures. Educational Science Research, 10, 73–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., Hu, R., & Liu, M. (2017). The geotemporal demographics of academic journals from 1950 to 2013 according to Ulrich’s database. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 655–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanez, G. A., Thumlert, K., de Castell, S., & Jenson, J. (2019). Pathways to sustainable futures: A “production pedagogy” model for STEM education. Futures, 108, 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, W., & Liu, E. (2016). An International perspective: Researches and trends in Science Education. Studies on Science Popularization, 1, 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ye, J., Chen, D., & Kong, L. (2019). Bibliometric analysis of the wos literature on research of science teacher from 2000 to 2017. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(5), 732–747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 320058, China

    Shutao Wang, Yaoyao Chen & Xinlei Lv

  2. Jing Hengyi School of Education, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, 311121, China

    Jianmei Xu

Authors
  1. Shutao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yaoyao Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xinlei Lv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jianmei Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jianmei Xu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, S., Chen, Y., Lv, X. et al. Hot Topics and Frontier Evolution of Science Education Research: a Bibliometric Mapping from 2001 to 2020. Sci & Educ 32, 845–869 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00337-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00337-z

Search

Navigation