Scientometrics

, Volume 105, Issue 1, pp 665–681 | Cite as

The effect of technology on learning research trends: a bibliometric analysis over five decades

Article

Abstract

This study examines the effect of technology availability on traditional and evolving learning research output and trends by using bibliometric tools of analysis. Exponential growth in education and learning research output occurred as of the first half of the 1990s with the introduction of the World Wide Web. Rather than becoming an integral part of learning research, the support of network technologies for learning has grown into a research stream which is separate from traditional research areas such as formal and informal learning. It is affiliated with the sciences, including the medical field, more strongly than with the natural home of educational studies, the social sciences. Keyword analysis indicates terms of broad interest, yet their occurrence in the research publications shows the divergence between traditional learning and technology-based research streams. The community of technology-assisted learning research is undergoing evolution. We provide recommendations to promote a more cohesive research community to better navigate in a borderless digital world where learning occurs formally and informally.

Keywords

Learning research Technology-assisted learning Internet and web learning Formal and informal learning Educational research policy 

References

  1. Bjarnason, S. (2001). Managing the changing nature of teaching and learning. Minerva, 39(1), 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bradford, S. C. (1934). Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering, 137, 85–86.Google Scholar
  3. Colardyn, D., & Bjornavold, J. (2004). Validation of formal, non-formal and informal learning: Policy and practices in EU member states1. European Journal of Education, 39(1), 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davies, C., & Eynon, R. (2013). Studies of the internet in learning and education: broadening the disciplinary landscape of research. (pp. 328) Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Diodato, V. P. (1994). Dictionary of bibliometrics. New York: Haworth Press.Google Scholar
  6. Eaton, S. E. (2010). Formal, non-formal and informal learning: The case of literacy, essential skills, and language learning in canada. London: Infed.Google Scholar
  7. Gray, B. (2004). Informal learning in an online community of practice. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 20–35.Google Scholar
  8. Hofstein, A., & Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Bridging the gap between formal and informal science learning. Studies in Science Education, 28(1), 87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Malcolm, J., Hodkinson, P., & Colley, H. (2003). The interrelationships between informal and formal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 313–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Morillo, F., Bordons, M., & Gómez, I. (2003). Interdisciplinarity in science: A tentative typology of disciplines and research areas. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(13), 1237–1249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. OECD. (2005). E-learning in tertiary education. OECD observer, December.Google Scholar
  12. OECD. (2010). Recognition of non-formal and informal learning. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/skills-beyond-school/recognitionofnon-formalandinformallearning-home.htm.
  13. Vardi, M. Y. (2012). Will MOOCs destroy academia? Communications of the ACM, 55(11), 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information and Knowledge ManagementUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations