Content uploaded by Paula Peres
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Paula Peres on Jul 27, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
THE ECOLOGY OF HIGHER EDUCATION – A SYSTEMATIC
LITERATURE REVIEW
Paula Peres [pperes@iscap.ipp.pt], Unit for e-Learning and Pedagogical Innovation,
Polytechnic of Porto, Portugal
Abstract
The process of literature review has been developed in a variety of ways, through systematic
narrative models, scoping review, integrative review, critical review, review of the state of the
art, mapping review, meta-analysis, etc. This article presents a practice of the systematic
integrative review of the literature in the field of educational sciences in higher education.
Precisely, it presents the systematic literature review process in the field of educational
management, current higher education paradigms, curriculum design to the current
information society and pedagogical innovation in higher education. The integrative review
has resulted in a trajectory on evolution and the state of the art on the concerns of nowadays
higher education. This process enabled the formulation of a theory supported on the
intersection (integration) of the various studies analyzed.
Abstract in Portuguese
Resumo O processo de revisão da literatura tem sido desenvolvido de diversas formas,
através de modelos narrativos sistemáticos, revisão por objetivo, revisão integrativa, revisão
crítica, revisão do estado da arte, revisão por mapeamento, meta-análise, etc. Este artigo
apresenta uma prática de revisão sistemática e integrativa da literatura no campo das
ciências da educação no domínio do ensino superior. Concretamente, apresenta o processo
sistemático de revisão da literatura no campo da gestão nos processos educativos, dos
paradigmas educacionais no ensino superior, considerando o desenho curricular e a
inovação pedagógica. A revisão integrativa resultou numa trajetória que descreve a
evolução e o estado da arte sobre as atuais preocupações vividas no ensino superior. Este
processo permitiu a formulação de uma teoria suportada na interseção (integração) dos
vários estudos analisados.
Keywords: Curriculum Design; Higher education; Education Management; Pedagogical
Innovation.
Introduction
The literature review aims to get a wider compression on a given subject through analysis
and synthesis, more or less systematic, of previous works. It is an essential and structuring
work for the creation of knowledge and for the immersion of gaps and fields of action in
specific areas of knowledge. The simple synthesis of general knowledge about a given
subject is not described in a cause-and-effect relationship. The process of literature review
requires a complex organization and discussion of the matter under study.
There are several ways to review the literature. You can choose to simply research a
particular topic in scientific databases, trying to gather, systematize and discuss, in a
narrative way, the state of the art of a subject. More precisely and rigorously, methods should
be applied to the selection of the papers to be studied and to the forms of analysis.
According to Whitemore and Knafl (2005), existing methodologies will continue to proliferate
and involve as well as the complexity of the topics to be studied.
Below is an overview of the process of literature review with application in a particular
context of the field of education sciences in higher education. After the brief description of the
main methods of literature review, a case of application and main results of the first stage of
an integrative literature review process is presented. It ends with the theorizing that resulted
from the systematization of the generated knowledge.
General Methods of Literature Review
According to Greenhalgh (1997) the literature review process comprises a synthesis of
primary studies that contains clearly stated objectives, materials and methods and is
conducted according to a clear and reproducible methodology. A rigorous literature review
process should be developed by using systematization strategies using clear, reproducible
sequences, methods and techniques. When it takes the narrative form, used to describe the
state of the art on a specific subject, from a theoretical or conceptual point of view, without
indicating the methodology applied or the criteria used in the selection of sources, it is more
permeable to the influence of the researcher.
The data collection that supports the literature review process is usually carried out based on
bibliographic sources for later analysis and systematization of previous research results,
developed by several authors.
In the field of education, and in social areas in general, the systematic review of literature
seeks to discover evidence of facts, contradictions and gaps, in the sense of support to the
creation of knowledge. For this, methods are used for data collection, categorization,
evaluation and synthesis of research results.
The systematic review of the literature follows a methodology that involves the formulation of
a more or less specific central research question, the collection of existing studies on the
subject, the critical evaluation of the studies collected, the collection of data presented in
each study, the Analysis and presentation of results, interpretation of results and production
of a summary of the work. The methods to be used may include several forms, namely:
meta-analysis, mapping review, state of the art, scoping review and integrative literature
review.
The meta-analysis combines the results of several primary studies using statistical formulas.
In this process, each collected data is encoded, synthesized and recorded in a database.
Subsequently, the data is categorized for the formulation of calculations. It is an important
instrument for quantitative studies. The mapping review method foresees the elaboration of a
concept map where the concepts studied and analyzed are presented and interconnected.
Initially the researcher defines the general topic to study and writes it in the middle of a blank
sheet. It then includes the various related terms. These terms will be used as search
keywords. In the next step, the researcher searches the databases and records on the map
the articles found in each of the themes and their possible links. While the researcher is
doing the reading the terms and the map is growing, being possible to identify trends, in a
visually described result (see Fink, 1998; Chiou, 2009). The state-of-the-art method
corresponds to a systematic review of a particular theme in which the process of selecting
articles is directly related to the quality of the research process (repeatable experience). This
reviewing usually takes a narrative form. The scoping review method corresponds to a
systematic review, but the process of selecting articles is not as related to the quality of the
research process, as it is essentially to the comprehensiveness. Articles are selected by
relevance to address the research question (and not just the quality itself). It is an exploratory
process and all studies in a given field can be included. The relevance, ideas and results of
the works found are discussed with specialists and stakeholders in the area. This type of
literature review results from an interactive performance, allowing the participation of a
number of professionals from different areas (Poth & Ross, 2009). Integrative review is a
summary of empirical or theoretical studies for a comprehensive understanding of a
particular phenomenon. This method aims to draw an analysis and synthesis to the existing
knowledge allowing the creation of new knowledge. The term "integrative" comes from the
integration of opinions, concepts or ideas. This method allows the extraction of general
conclusions and the synthesis of the knowledge state of a given subject in addition to
pointing knowledge gaps. Among the methods of literature review this is considered the
broadest (Mendes, Silveira, & Galvão, 2008).
Next, we present the steps of an integrative literature review process in the particular context
of higher education.
Integrative Review of Literature in the Context of Higher Education
The process of integrative literature review follows different steps, as illustrated in the
following image:
Figure 1. Main steps of an integrative literature review process
The research process leading to the extraction of knowledge about the main concerns in the
context of higher education is summarized below.
First step: Set Question Research
The rigorous definition of the research question is fundamental and its nature influences the
success achieved. Very complex research questions make difficult the research processes.
The research process developed intends to answer the following questions: What model of
pedagogical innovation should IES follow? What implications does the management of HEIs
have?
This question / sub-question falls into the area of social sciences, a subarea of education.
Second Step: Identify Databases to be Consulted; Define Search Keywords
The Science Citation Index (SCI), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and Arts and
Humanities (A & HCI) indexes of Thomson Reuters / ISI For the year 2011, the 2011 Science
and Social Sciences editions of the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), integrated in the ISI Web
of Knowledge were selected.
The method “Report-based expansion” was used to determine the keywords. This method
uses the terms found in the first searches on original terms. Specifically, we used the b-on
search engine according to the query based on the research question was selected, the first
10 documents found were selected and the most repeated terms extracted. Specifically the
following search terms were defined:
1. Education management / governance IES; IES Administrative innovation; Curricular
organization; Curricular innovation; IES management; Educational policies; IES
model;
2. Higher Education / e-learning / b-learning;
3. Curriculum design / competencies / models curricular quality; Educational planning;
4. Pedagogical Innovation; IES pedagogy.
Step Three: Conduct Research in the Chosen Databases
The application of the research based on the key terms identified resulted in thousands of
articles, as exemplified by the following figures:
Figure 2. Search for papers in b-on
Figure 3. Research in ISI of knowledge
Fourth Step: Eligibility Criteria (Inclusion / Exclusion)
Given the impossibility of analyzing all the works published in this area, it is always
necessary to apply mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion of the articles collected. For this
study semantic filters were defined (e.g. IE – Teaching Institutions instead of Internet
explorer), evidence filters (example: the experiment is repeatable, the research process is
supported by evidence , is the evidence complete?), Language filters (Articles in Portuguese
and English – reflections of the national and international reality), filters according to the
nature of the works (only scientific articles of academic journals with online article availability)
and temporal filters (only works done since 2010).
Fifth Step: Using the Cutting Criteria
The application of each of the eligibility criteria was reducing the number of papers to be
studied, as shown in the images below:
Título Autores Título da fonte Data de publicação Ano da publicação
Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education: A Proposed Direction Forward Based on Psychological Science Subotnik, Rena F.; Olszewski-Kubili us, Paula ; W orr ell, Fra nk C . PSYCH OLO GIC AL SC IEN CE IN T HE PUBL IC I NTE REST JAN 20 11 2011
Versatile, Immersive, Creative and Dynamic Virtual 3-D Healthcare Learning Environments: A Review of the Literature Hansen, Margaret M. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH 2008 2008
Barriers to Faculty Pedagogical Change: Lack of Training, Time, Incentives, and ... Tensions with Professional Identity? Brownell, Sara E.; Tan ner, Kimb erly D. CBE- LIFE SCI ENC ES ED UC ATIO N DEC 20 12 2012
Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process? Henderson, Charles; Dancy, Melissa; Niewiadomska-Bugaj, Magdalena PHYSICAL REVIEW SPECIAL TOPICS-PHYSICS EDUCATION RESEARCH JUL 31 2012 2012
Investigating university students' ada ptation to a digital learner co urse portfolio Lopez-Fernandez, Olatz; Luis Rodriguez-Illera, Jose COMPUTERS & EDUCATION APR 2009 2009
Entrepreneurship education and the business school Binks, M; Starkey, K; Mahon, CL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS & STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT FEB 2006 2006
Understanding the real barriers to technology-enhanced innovation in higher education Schneckenberg, Dirk EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 20092009
Using reflection to promote teamwork understanding in engineering design education Hirsch, Penny L.; Mckenna, Ann F. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION 2008 2008
Academic Environments in Detail: Holland's Theory at the Subdiscipline Level Lattuca, Lisa R.; Terenzini, Patrick T.; Harper, Betty J.; Yin, Alex C. RESEARCH IN HIG HER EDUCATION FEB 2010 2010
Quality in e-learning - a conceptual framework based on experiences from three international benchmarking projects Ossiannilsson, E.; Landgren, L. JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED LEARNING FEB 2012 2012
Figure 4.Successive application of the eligibility criteria
Results Obtained
Step 6: Analyse Critically and Evaluate the Studies
As a result of the process, it was possible to verify the existence of several works in this area
of knowledge. Essentially framed in group of keywords 3 and 4 (3 – Curriculum design /
competencies / models curricular quality; Educational planning; 4 – Pedagogical Innovation;
Pedagogy IES) and less at the level of group of key words 1 and 2 (1 – Education
management / governance IES; IES Administrative innovation; Curricular organization;
Curricular innovation; IES management; Educational policies; Model IES; 2 – Higher
Education / e-learning / b-learning). There was also a trend in the evolution of the number of
publications in this area.
The following terms stand out:
Figure 5. Key terms most found in literature review process
Regarding the titles of scientific journals, the following publications were analyzed: The
following terms stand out:
Figure 6. Title of scientific journals analyzed
Conclusions
Step 7: Prepare a Summary Summing up the Information Available
The following is a summary of the main concepts / concerns identified in the articles studied
and integrated into the anchor of the research keywords that guided the research process.
"academy of management learning &
education",
1
"british journal of educational technology", 1
"business horizons", 1
"current opinion in environmental
sustainability",
1
"educational technology & society", 1
"educational technology and society", 1
"higher education", 4
"international journal of management
education",
4
"internet and higher education", 2
"journal of accounting education", 1
"journal of cleaner production", 6
"plos one", 1
"procedia - social and behavioral sciences" 13
"procedia economics and finance", 2
"studies in educational evaluation", 1
"teaching and teacher education", 1
"the international journal of management
education".
2
At a conceptual level, there are concerns about governance and current challenges facing
HEIs, it is concluded that as a management model, HEIs should seek to develop a structure
of Global Quasi- Companies, look for models of competitiveness, in a complex system
guided by values of prestige and shared market. Management should be supported by
entrepreneurial visions (Pucciarelli & Kaplan, 2016) and in the assumption of corporate social
responsibility (Pucciarelli & Kaplan, 2016; Hesselbarth & Schaltegger, 2014). It is essential
that higher education institutions seek to respond to the competitiveness that emerges in the
context of an increasingly free and global market where brand and marketing, leadership and
strategy issues are increasingly structuring. The new educational practices that emerge in
higher education institutions, as well as the driving force of the students themselves, require
regulatory and financing policies. Increasingly, institutions should seek co-creation of
management and knowledge models integrating the vision of key stakeholders (Pucciarelli &
Kaplan, 2016; Bolton & Nie, 2010), including collaboration with industry and teachers
(Sheppard, Minocha, & Hristov, 2015).
Above all, it is important to ensure the sustainability of HEIs, when making decisions about
which management models should be adopted (Figueiró & Raufflet, 2015; Viegas et al.,
2016). This sustainability should reflect the comprehensive assessment and individual
options that best fits in the dynamics of the complex reality (Viegas et al., 2016). This vision
also incorporates the concept of humanization of technologies (technologies for the
production of knowledge, change and annexation of meaning) (Mâţă & Suciu, 2011), of
flexibility and administrative innovation, change management and adult training throughout
the life. This view implies the promotion and development of specific skills from teachers
(Mâţă & Suciu, 2011), including training of general and specific skills as well as technological
skills (Ponnan & Ambalavanan, 2014). Nonetheless, the significant number of higher
education institutions that are resistant to the adoption of new technologies (Watty, McKay, &
Ngo, 2015) is not negligible.
As far as learning environments are concerned, it is concluded that these should be
developed according to a transdisciplinary paradigm (Dlouhá & Burandt, 2015) and
interdisciplinary (Crişan & Enache, 2011). The perspective should be self-sufficient,
interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary, a sustainable creation centred on the
course / program / student (Figueiró & Raufflet, 2015). The specialization of higher education
institutions should increasingly be supported by the capacity to generate knowledge in
detriment of physical or geographical boundaries. The concept of higher education grows in
the direction of transnationality, with no boundaries to education (Brown, 2013). The
relationship with students should engage international students (Larina, 2015) and flexibility
for the concepts of Homeschooling (Neuman & Guterman, 2016). It requires new definitions
that consider the characteristics of mobile learning and informal learning (Singh et al., 2014)
that are structured around complex systems and skills relationships and blended-learning
environments (Caird & Lane, 2015) or e-learning (Songkram, Khlaisang, Puthaseranee, &
Likhitdamrongkiat, 2015; Pavel, Fruth, & Neacsu, 2015; O’Connor, 2014). This should
include specifications for adaptation to personal environments learning (PLE), the PLPlan
(personal learning plans) and PLNetwork (personal learning network) (Dočekal & Tulinská,
2015), a guideline for the development of autonomous capabilities of Critical and social
learning, considering social and historical movements (Lotz-Sisitka, Wals, Kronlid, &
McGarry, 2015), including the promotion of critical thinking and fluency in foreign languages
(Rivža, Bikse, & Brence, 2015) .The personal networks should result n the co-creation of
knowledge (Bolton & Nie, 2010) and knowledge networks (Fenwick & Edwards, 2014).
Among other characteristics, learning environments should be flexible, interactive,
collaborative, e-learning, lifelong learning and be adapted to student workers (Azeiteiro,
Nicolau, Caetano, & Caeiro, 2015). Collaboration can also be promoted in a regional
dimension (regionalization of education) and for local communities (Anand, Bisaillon,
Webster, & Amor, 2015).
In a more operational dimension, many studies have emphasized the importance of changing
curricula, but few have presented concrete solutions of how to do it, where the educational
paradigm is explicit (Figueiró & Raufflet, 2015). Nevertheless, the literature reveals that
curricular design should not neglect traditional models, but it should add to the concerns of
research in the field of education and technology, with a strong emphasis on competence
development and evaluation (Koenen, Dochy, & Berghmans, 2015). Pedagogical mediation
processes become more and more stressful, and teachers should be able to offer
appropriate mentoring in a coaching format, interacting and guiding students (Koenen et al.,
2015; Dlouhá & Burandt, 2015). Pedagogical support must be involved in technological,
pedagogical and content dynamism. The first steps of the learning process should be to
reach objectives classified in the first and second levels of the Bloom taxonomy, in a second
step levels 3 and 4 and in the last step levels 5 and 6 (Mouasher & Lodge, 2016). Skills / soft
skills should be developed at all stages of the pedagogical process (Mouasher & Lodge,
2016; Hesselbarth & Schaltegger, 2014; Singh, Thambusamy, & Ramly, 2014). They should
promote self-learning and self-direction (Dlouhá & Burandt, 2015). The MOOCS can be used
for specific purposes and can bridge individual learning deficits (teachers and students)
(Toven-Lindsey, Rhoads, & Lozano, 2015; O’Connor, 2014). The pedagogical practices
should promote learning in a business context (students + employers), in a more than
experimental environment (Sheppard et al., 2015), based on real problems (Carriger, 2015)
in a concept of Embedding enterprise education. Among the learning strategies different
versions of: seminars / lessons, case studies, discussions, demonstrations, tutorials can be
used; Screencast tutorial, Walkthrough assignments; Capstone projects (Smith & Paton,
2014; Alwehaibi, 2012), simulations, interactive evaluation, (Pozdeeva & Obskov, 2015)
creative tasks, group work, learning games, interactive lessons, heuristic conversation,
performance, discussions, study of Cases, projects. 3D Projects (Baumann, Mantay,
Swanger, Saganski, & Stepke, 2016).
Future Work
With this work it was possible to design the current scenario of higher education in
conceptual and operational terms. In a paradigmatic dimension, attention is focused on the
definition of theories and management models that give response to the current challenges
of governance and management of HEIs, namely a model of flexibility and inclusion and
personalization of formal and informal spaces in a knowledge network. In a more operational
dimension, there is a concern with the selection of implementation methodologies that
contemplate current visions using digital methods, techniques and tools to support learning
and guarantee the quality of processes and results achieved.
Recognizing that this type of research and eligibility strategies in the selection of scientific
papers may leave out important works such as books, unsubscribed journals, publications in
other languages, reports, etc. It is expected in a future work to develop the deeper
theorization on the subject studied, namely with the inclusion of elements derived from
experience in context, combined with other theories on the subject, namely through books
and other authors, with the respective validation by pairs.
References
1. Alwehaibi, H. U. (2012). Novel program to promote critical thinking among higher education
students: Empirical study from Saudi Arabia. Asian Social Science, 8(11), 193–204.
doi:10.5539/ass.v8n11p193
2. Amirault, R. J. (2015). Technology transience and the challenges it poses to higher
education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 16(2), 1.
3. Anand, C. K., Bisaillon, V., Webster, A., & Amor, B. (2015). Integration of sustainable
development in higher education – a regional initiative in Quebec (Canada). Journal of
Cleaner Production, 108(Part A), 916-923. doi: 101016 / j.jclepro.2015.06.134
4. Azeiteiro, U. M., Nicolau, P., Caetano, F. J. P., & Caeiro, S. (2015). Education for sustainable
development through e-learning in higher education: experiences from Portugal. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 106, 308-319. doi: 10.1016 / j.jclepro.2014.11.056
5. Baumann, T., Mantay, K., Swanger, A., Saganski, G., & Stepke, S. (2016). Education and
Innovation Management: A Contradiction? How to Manage Educational Projects if Innovation
is Crucial for Success and Innovation Management is Mostly Unknown. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 226, (Proceedings of the 29th IPMA World Congress WC2015 (28-30
September – 1 October, Panama)), 243-251. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.06.185
6. Bolton, D., & Nie, R. (2010). Creating Value in Transnational Higher Education: The Role of
Swinburne University of Technology. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(4),
701-714. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2010.56659888
7. Brown, M. D. (2013). The Engaging Presenter Part I. How to prepare. Michael Brown &
Bookboon.com. Retrieved from http://bookboon.com/en/the-engaging-presenter-part-i-ebook
8. Brown, M. G. (2016). Blended instructional practice: A review of empirical literature on
instructors' adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching. The Internet and Higher
Education, 31, 1-10. doi: 10.1016 / j.iheduc.2016.05.001
9. Caird, S., & Lane, A. (2015). Conceptualising the role of information and communication
technologies in the design of higher education teaching models used in the UK. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 58-70. http://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12123
10. Carriger, M. S. (2015). Problem-based learning and management development – Empirical
and theoretical considerations. The International Journal of Management Education, 13(3),
249-259. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.07.003
11. Charalambous, N., & Christou, N. (2016). Re-adjusting the Objectives of Architectural
Education. Procedia – Social And Behavioral Sciences, 228, (2nd International Conference on
Higher Education Advances, HEAd’16, 21-23 June 2016, Valencia, Spain), 375-382. doi:
10.1016 / j.sbspro.2016.07.056
12. Chiou, C.-C. (2009). Effects of concept mapping strategy on learning performance in
business and economics statistics. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1), 55-69.
13. Crişan, A., & Enache, R. (2011). Designing customer oriented courses and curricula in higher
education. A possible model. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11, 235-239.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.01.068
14. Darwin, S. (2016). What contemporary work are student ratings actually doing in higher
education? Studies in Educational Evaluation. doi: 10.1016 / j.stueduc.2016.08.002
15. Dočekal, V., & Tulinská, H. (2015). The Impact of Technology on Education Theory. Procedia
– Social And Behavioral Sciences, 174, (International Conference on New Horizons in
Education, INTE 2014, 25-27 June 2014, Paris, France), 3765-3771. doi: 10.1016 /
j.sbspro.2015.01.1111
16. Dlouhá, J., & Burandt, S. (2015). Design and evaluation of learning processes in an
international sustainability oriented study program. In search of a new educational quality and
assessment method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 247-258. doi: 10.1016 /
j.jclepro.2014.09.096
17. Eft (2015). Educação, Formação & Tecnologias – ISSN 1646-933X. Retrieved from
http://eft.educom.pt/index.php/eft
18. Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2014). Networks of knowledge, issues of learning, and criticality
in higher education. Higher Education, 67(1), 35. doi: 10.1007 / s10734-013-9639-3
19. Figueiró, P. S., & Raufflet, E. (2015). Review: Sustainability in higher education: a systematic
review with focus on management education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 22-33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.118
20. Fink, A. (1998). Conducting literature research reviews: from paper to the Internet. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage
21. Greenhalgh, T. (1997). Systematic review and meta-analyzes. British Medical Journal,
315(7109), 672-675.
22. Gregory, S., Scutter, S., Jacka, L., McDonald, M., Farley, H., & Newman, C. (2015). Barriers
and enablers to the use of virtual worlds in higher education: an exploration of educator
perceptions, attitudes and experiences. Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 3-12.
23. Hesselbarth, C., & Schaltegger, S. (2014). Educating change agents for sustainability –
Learnings from the first sustainability management master of business administration. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 62, 24-36. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.03.042
24. Holgaard, J. E., Hadgraft, R., Kolmos, A., & Guerra, A. (2016). Strategies for sustainable
development – Danish and Australian perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112(4),
3479-3491. doi: 10.1016 / j.jclepro.2015.09.063
25. Ignatyeva, I. (2015). The Trend of Technologization of Modern Education (the Use of
Humanitarian Technologies). Procedia – Social And Behavioral Sciences, 214, (Worldwide
trends in the development of education and academic research, Sofia, Bulgaria, 15-18 June,
2015.), 606-613. doi: 10.1016 / j.sbspro.2015.11.766
26. Koenen, A. K., Dochy, F., & Berghmans, I. (2015). A phenomenological analysis of the
implementation of competence-based education in higher education. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 50, 1-12. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.04.001
27. Komenda, M., Vita, M., Vaitsis, C., Schwarz, D., Pokorná, A., Zary, N., & Dušek, L. (2015).
Curriculum Mapping with Academic Analytics in Medical and Healthcare Education. PLoS
ONE, 10(12), 1. doi: 10.1371 / journal.pone.0143748
28. Larina, L. N. (2015). Practical Application of Total Quality Management System to Education
of International Students. Procedia – Social And Behavioral Sciences, 215, (International
Education and Cross-Cultural Communication, Problems and Solutions, IECC 2015, 9-11
June 2015, Tomsk, Russia), 9-13. doi: 10.1016 / j.sbspro.2015.11.566
29. Lotz-Sisitka, H., Wals, A. E. J., Kronlid, D., & McGarry, D. (2015). Transformative,
transgressive social learning: Rethinking higher education pedagogy in times of systemic
global dysfunction. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 16, 73-80.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.07.018
30. MacPhail, A., Tannehill, D., & Goc Karp, G. (2013). Preparing physical education for
teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 33, 100-112. doi: 10.1016 / j.tate.2013.02.008
31. Mâţă, L., & Suciu, A. I. (2011). Curriculum innovative model focused on developing
pedagogical competences of teachers of Language and communication. Procedia – Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 12, (International Conference on Education and Educational
Psychology 2010), 274-282. doi: 10.1016 / j.sbspro.2011.02.036
32. Mendes, K. D. S., Silveira, R. C. D. C. P., & Galvão, C. M. (2008). Integrative review:
research method for the incorporation of evidence in health and nursing. Text & Context –
Nursing, 17(4), 758-764. http://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-07072008000400018
33. Neuman, A., & Guterman, O. (2016). Academic achievements and homeschooling-It all
depends on the goals. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51, 1-6.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.005
34. Mouasher, A., & Lodge, J. M. (2016). The search for pedagogical dynamism – Design
patterns and the unconscious process. Educational Technology and Society, 19(2), 274-285.
35. O’Connor, K. (2014). MOOCs, institutional policy and change dynamics in higher education.
Higher Education, 68(5), 623-635. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9735-z
36. Orţan, F. (2015). Curricular and Socio-Pedagogical Aspects Regarding the Employment of
Graduates (philological profile) in Pre-University Education. Procedia – Social And Behavioral
Sciences, 180, (The 6th International Conference Edu World 2014 “Education Facing
Contemporary World Issues”, 7th–9th November 2014), 87-94. doi: 10.1016 /
j.sbspro.2015.02.090
37. Pavel, A., Fruth, A., & Neacsu, M. (2015). ICT and E-Learning – Catalysts for Innovation and
Quality in Higher Education. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, (2nd Global Conference on
Business, Economics, Management and Tourism), 704-711. doi: 10.1016 / S2212-5671 (15)
00409-8
38. Pedaste, M., Pedaste, K., Lukk, K., Villems, P., & Allas, R. (2014). A Model of Innovation
Schools: Estonian Case-study. Procedia – Social And Behavioral Sciences, 112,
(International Conference on Education & Educational Psychology 2013), 418-427.
39. Pérez-Montoro, M., & Tammaro, AM (2012). Outcomes of the Bologna Process in LIS higher
education: comparing two programs in Europe. International Information And Library Review,
44(4), 233-242. doi: 10.1016 / j.iilr.2012.10.002
40. Ponnan, R., & Ambalavanan, B. (2014). Innovations to Broadcasting Curriculum to Meet
Workplace Expectations. Procedia – Social And Behavioral Sciences, 123, (Taylor's 6th
teaching and learning conference 2013: transformative higher education teaching and
learning in practice proceedings of the Taylor's 6th teaching and learning conference 2013
(TTLC2013), November 23, 2013, Taylor's University Lakeside Campus, Selangor Daruh
Ehsan, Malaysia), 160-169. doi: 10.1016 / j.sbspro.2014.01.1410
41. Poth, C., & Ross, S. (2009). Meta-analysis, Systematic Review, or Scoping Review?
Comparing Methodologies in Educational Research. Paper presented at the Annual
Conference Congress – The Canadian Society for the Study of Education, Ottawa, Canada.
42. Pozdeeva, S., & Obskov, A. (2015). Justification of the Main Pedagogical Conditions of
Interactive Teaching a Foreign Language in High School. Procedia – Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 206, (XVth International Conference “Linguistic and Cultural Studies: Traditions
and Innovations”), 166-172. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.047
43. Pucciarelli, F., & Kaplan, A. (2016). Competition and strategy in higher education: Managing
complexity and uncertainty. Business Horizons, 59(3), 311-320.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.01.003
44. Rivža, B., Bikse, V., & Brence, I. (2015). Evaluation of Higher Education Study Programmes
and Their Development Trends the Drivers of Regional Growth. Procedia Economics And
Finance, 26, (4th World Conference on Business, Economics and Management (WCBEM
2015), 643-650. doi:. 10.1016 / S2212-5671 (15) 00804-7
45. Ruhi, U. (2016). Research Notes: An experiential learning pedagogical framework for
enterprise systems education in business schools. International Journal of Management
Education, 14(2), 198-211. doi: 10.1016 / j.ijme.2016.04.006
46. Sheppard, E., Minocha, S., & Hristov, D. (2015). Practice Weeks @ Bedfordshire: An
innovative response to criticisms of management education. International Journal of
Management Education, 13(1), 106-117. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.01.003
47. Singh, P., Thambusamy, R. X., & Ramly, M. A. (2014). Fit or Unfit? Perspectives of
Employers and University Instructors of Graduates’ Generic Skills. Procedia – Social And
Behavioral Sciences, 123, (Taylor's 6th Teaching And Learning Conference 2013:
Transformative Higher Education Teaching And Learning In Practice Proceedings Of The
Taylor's 6th Teaching And Learning Conference 2013 (TTLC2013), November 23, 2013,
Taylor's University Lakeside Campus, Selangor Daruh Ehsan, Malaysia), 315-324. doi:
10.1016 / j.sbspro.2014.01.1429
48. Smith, A. M. J., & Paton, R. A. (2014). Embedding enterprise education: A service based
framework transferable skills. International Journal of Management Education, 12(3), 550-
560. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2014.02.002
49. Songkram, N., Khlaisang, J., Puthaseranee, B., & Likhitdamrongkiat, M. (2015). E-learning
System to Enhance Cognitive Skills for Learners in Higher Education. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 174, (International Conference on New Horizons in Education, INTE
2014, 25-27 June 2014, Paris, France), 667-673. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.599
50. Toven-Lindsey, B., Rhoads, R. A., & Lozano, J. B. (2015). Virtually unlimited classrooms:
Pedagogical practices in massive open online courses. Internet and Higher Education, 24, 1-
12. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.07.001
51. Viegas, C. V., Bond, A. J., Vaz, C. R., Borchardt, M., Pereira, G. M., Selig, P. M., & Varvakis,
G. (2016). Critical attributes of Sustainability in Higher Education: The categorization from
literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 126, 260-276.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.106
52. Wahab, N. A., & Mustapha, R. (2015). Reflections on Pedagogical and Curriculum
Implementation at Orang Asli schools in Pahang. Procedia – Social And Behavioral Sciences,
172, (Contemporary Issues in Management and Social Science Research.), 442-448. doi:
10.1016 / j.sbspro.2015.01.376
53. Watty, K., McKay, J., & Ngo, L. (2015). Innovators or inhibitors? Accounting faculty resistance
to new educational technologies in higher education. Journal of Accounting Education, 36, 1-
15. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2016.03.003
54. Whittemore, R. & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: updated methodology. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546-553.
