4.5 Article

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

期刊

SCIENCE & EDUCATION
卷 32, 期 3, 页码 845-869

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11191-022-00337-z

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study utilizes bibliometric mapping method to analyze the hot topics and development trends in the field of science education. The results show that researchers from different regions have maintained relatively close cooperation, and influential literature mainly focuses on the standards, methods, practice, and reflection of science education. The research in the past 20 years covers seven hot topics and can be divided into three stages.
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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据