Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active
Methodologies in Web of Science
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i20.15619
Mª Elena Parra-González;!Adrián Segura-Robles;
Manuel-Ricardo Vicente-Bújez; Jesús López-Belmonte (*)!
Universidad de Granada, Granada, España
jesuslopez@ugr.es
Abstract—Teaching and teaching trends are in continuous transformation.
Teachers play new roles in the teaching and learning processes. This situation
implies the need for new competencies, knowledge, and skills in teachers to car-
ry out their tasks, thus adjusting them to the requirements of contemporary so-
ciety. The incidence of technology and new training resources has led to an in-
crease in innovative practices in learning situations. The purpose of this study is
to analyze the production of active methodologies in the Web of Science data-
base. The aim of it is to determine the state of the art within the scientific litera-
ture from a bibliometric perspective. In addition to the study of the main indica-
tors of bibliometric production, a word analysis has been carried out. 2208 doc-
uments have been analyzed to achieve this. The study was carried out with the
SciMAT software. The results reveal that scientific production has been in-
creasing. The publications are mainly in English with a wide variety of topics,
outstanding among them Higher Education in the early years. The study con-
cludes that the research has specialized in topics such as the active profile of
students and the influence of innovative practices on the learning process.
Keywords—Bibliometric analysis, scientific production, active methodologies,
scientific mapping, SciMAT.
1 Introduction
The society of the 21st century is immersed in a whirlwind of changes and facing a
profound transformation as a result of social advances and technologies derived from
our global and multicultural system having a direct impact on our lives [1]. In this
context, institutions also evolve, and among these, our educational system. A system
that, as we currently know it, is structured as a complex reality (both in its organiza-
tion and in its operation) in which many socio-cultural factors have an interrelated
impact that, in turn, have a very direct impact on classroom work [2].
The school is immersed in continuous changes to respond to the new demands that
are demanded from contemporary society. School agents need to become aware of its
protagonist and social importance. This favors the training of new generations in
problem-solving, teamwork and it adapts to the global and technological world in
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
71
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
which it operates, demanding from teachers its talent to evolve, to learn and use its
competences in the reformulation of the teaching function [3]. The teacher becomes
the central axis of this reality since it is increasingly obvious that education profes-
sionals must be able to design tasks and learning situations that make it possible to
solve problems, apply learned knowledge and stimulate learning of student activity
[4]. In their daily practice, the teacher is not only required knowledge related to the
different areas of the curriculum (linguistics, mathematics, art, etc.). Teachers are the
mastery of a series of skills and abilities (handling of new technologies, good disposi-
tion, and capacity for teamwork, etc.) that lead him to implement in his classes an
original and attractive methodology. These methodologies should awaken the motiva-
tion of the student and allows him to build his own knowledge, giving the latter a
more active, responsible, and autonomous role in the teaching-learning process [5].
Thus, for [6] success in reinventing educational systems worldwide will depend on
the transformation of both pedagogical and methodological processes and the redesign
of learning tasks so that these should not only be limited to school, but must encom-
pass peer learning, intergenerational collaboration, and community relations. In addi-
tion, information and communication technologies (ICT) can be used to support ef-
forts for pedagogical and methodological transformation. Still, it is essential to recog-
nize that 21st-century learning experiences must incorporate more than just technolo-
gy [7].
The role of teachers should no longer be, therefore, the mere transmission of a se-
ries of objectives and contents, but rather that of interacting with the social and cul-
tural environment in which they carry out their activity [8]. Having teachers who
know and apply new work methodologies helps to accept situations that, in traditional
teaching, from literacy and passive listening, leave out of the teaching-learning pro-
cess for students who present problems in reading or writing comprehension like this
as well as students with diversity [9]. In this sense, all countries aspire to have respon-
sible teachers, passionate about their profession, competent, well trained, and willing
to update this training in emerging methodologies. It is not surprising that now, con-
cern for the quality of teaching and the implementation of new methodological and
pedagogical processes is a constant in all European educational systems. A good part
of the efforts of the authorities responsible for them is dedicated to realizing the chal-
lenge that both the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) and the European Union (EU) itself have summarized in three words: attract-
ing, training and retaining effective teachers. Thus, the experts claim the need to guar-
antee conditions related to the attitudes and interpersonal skills of future teachers
where practical skills, knowledge, motivations, ethical values, and emotions are com-
bined and a system characterized by its transversely, dynamism, and its integral char-
acter [10].
These premises will enable the adoption of new methodological paradigms in the
classroom that allow teachers to plan their activity by offering diverse teaching meth-
ods. These methodologies guarantee the acquisition of a series of competencies that
lead them to abandon the linear process of programming based on objectives, in favor
of an updated vision of what it means to teach [11]. Thus, the main transformation we
are facing today is the change in the role of students that must pass from observing
72
http://www.i-jet.org
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
passively to leading their own teaching-learning process. The amount of learning that
takes place outside the classroom due to new technologies has made students become
an active subject in this process, and see themselves as creators of information and
ideas, as well as a consumer of these.
There are multiple sources to stop and delve into to understand how new advances
in education and pedagogy are developing [12,13], and growing if we unite education
and technology [14-16] observing that the pedagogical and methodological principles
prevailing in the 21st century must be based on Personalization by turning school
activities into meaningful and authentic experiences. These activities are based on
their own needs and learning rhythms with a vision of education that goes beyond the
acquisition of specific knowledge or skills, and that can be configured as creative,
divergent, and open activities. Active participation where it is about interacting
through collaborative methodologies, inter-level, and open to the participation of
teachers and students from any part of the world in the planning and development of
the educational process where intellectual risks must be assumed. Productivity, as an
element that implies overcoming the physical and organizational limits of the class-
room through the union of formal and informal learning contexts, taking advantage of
global resources and tools, and disseminating the results of the student globally, ex-
trapolating what is studied and learned to everyday life situations.
There are different approaches and new patterns of learning and teaching, giving to
the community examples and implementations of new didactic approaches for work-
ing with students and with diversity in the classroom [17], whatever its origin. Among
them, we can highlight the effect of motivation on learning, self-efficacy, and blended
learning on student success. All this from the hand of technology that has fostered
both the appearance and the advancement and transformation of other existing meth-
odologies. Likewise, technology has generated new learning spaces, as well as its
diffusion throughout the world [3,7,8]. With all that said, scientific and political rea-
sons justify our interest in proposing, through this research, an analysis regarding the
bibliometric level and the evolution of scientific production.
2 Aims of the Research
Usually, science follows a growing process that increases our knowledge on a sub-
ject; that is, science is cumulative. Therefore, it must be known what is written and
how the research topics that are worked on typically evolve [18]. This type of litera-
ture review seeks to detect, achieve, and consult the bibliography and other materials
that could be useful for the study [19]. To know a research topic and its evolution
implies knowing it's most relevant and publications and how it has evolved over the
years [20].
This research aims to search and analyze the terms "Active Methodologies" (and
the derivations of the morpheme, using * option). The search has been carried out
within the scientific publications in the Web of Science (WoS) database.
After having carried out the search process on the studies that have covered these
concepts, they have been analyzed from a bibliometric perspective. This research
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
73
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
acquires an exploratory nuance and contributes to reducing the gap caused by the
absence of scientific publications about this topic. Moreover, the results and conclu-
sions found in this work can serve as the basis and as a start point for future research-
es, and it can foster the interest of members of the scientific community in this field of
knowledge.
To conclude, this research aims to analyze the overall projection of such terms in
the scientific WoS database. The specific aims to conduct the research are:
• To know the scientific production of the concepts "active methodologies" and
"education" in the WoS database
• To analyze the scientific evolution of "active methodologies" and "education" in
the WoS database
• To specify the most highlighted topics about "active methodologies" and "educa-
tion" in the WoS database
• To find out the most productive and influential authors about "active methodolo-
gies" and "education" in the WoS database
3 Materials and Method
3.1 Research design
A bibliometric methodology was conducted to achieve the aims proposed for this
research. This has been done using scientometrics to search, report, record, analyze,
and predict the scientific productions [21]. This research has been carried out follow-
ing experts in documentary analysis [22].
Different analytical techniques were used to carry out this research, such as scien-
tific mapping, the quantification of bibliometric indicators (language, publication
date, publication area, type of document, organizations, authors, sources, countries,
and citations), and the structure and dynamic development of the terms. To proceed
with an effective analytical structure and presentation of the results found, previous
studies, which have followed this type of research design, have been analyzed too.
These studies are found among the impact literature indexed in the Journal Citation
Reports (JCR) [23-25].
In clarification, this research has been based on an analysis of co-words and au-
thors [23], thus, applying certain academic indices to establish academic performance
(h, g, hg, q2) [26]. This type of study has been chosen for being an innovative method
of documentary analysis that is having a great projection in the field of education [27-
29]. This will help to generate maps with nodes that will be able to establish the posi-
tion and the performance of the subdomains of the analyzed constructs. Finally, these
actions will allow determining the thematic development of the established terms
[30].
74
http://www.i-jet.org
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
3.2 Procedure and data analysis
Different procedures were carried out to do this research: a) Selection of the data-
base; b) Establishment of the keywords to analyze; c) Preparation of the search equa-
tion ("Educational") AND ("innovation"); d) Searching with the equation in the WoS
search field under the TOPIC tag, to specify in the documents title, abstract and key-
words of the existing production.
These actions reported an initial figure of 2578 scientific documents that span from
the year 2000 to 2019. Publications of the year 2020 were not taken into consideration
as the year had not ended yet and including them could lead to a bias in the investiga-
tion. 558 documents were deleted due to the duplication of them or indexing errors,
they had. Finally, the research was carried out with an analysis unit of 2208 docu-
ments.
These actions were carried out following the protocols of the PRISMA-P matrix
for the scientific literature reviews. This protocol has been chosen to follow a model
validated by the scientific community that includes a set of standardized items to
collect information from publications and avoid biases in the analysis process [31].
This led to the creation of a flow diagram (figure 1).
Fig. 1. Flowchart according to the PRISMA Declaration.
Several tools were used to conduct the analysis of the production abovementioned,
such as Analyze Results, Creation Citation Report, and SciMAT. The first two ones
are offered by the WoS on its own platform. They allow the extraction and even the
analysis of data per year, authors, countries, types of documents, institutions, lan-
guages, and even medium and most cited documents. Regarding SciMAT, a software
which analyzes scientific production, taking into account the words longitudinally and
considering their structural and dynamic development. Experts, which have used this
tool, were followed to be able to carry out an accurate, efficient, and effective analysis
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
75
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
[32]. SciMAT allowed the recognition, reproduction, determination, and performance
processes of the documents, which are detailed below:
• Recognition: within this process, the publications' keywords were analyzed (n =
5512). A co-occurrence node map and a standardized network of co-words were
done. This was done through a keyword debugging, thus analyzing 4991, finally.
At last, the most incidental topics and concepts were established through a cluster-
ing algorithm.
• Reproduction: within this process, the creation of a strategic diagram and a the-
matic network was based on the principles of centrality and density. Four areas
were specified in the originated graphs whose particularities are detailed in motor
and important issues (upper right area), isolated and entrenched issues (upper left
area), and issues that are projected or are disappearing (lower left area) and issues
with a low and transversal level of development (lower right area).
• Determination: within this process, the created nodes corresponded to the differ-
ent periods (P) or time intervals, which were analyzed. For the co-words study, five
periods were configured, following as a criterion 500 documents per period. The
common keywords between such periods create the strength of association.
• Performance: This process obtained the reported connections between the key-
words and other concepts that determine the trend of the nodes. For this, various
production indicators were established along with their respective inclusion crite-
ria. Specifically, this process covered several protocols: 1-Analysis unit refers to
the study sample. In particular, it refers to the keywords determined by both the au-
thors and WoS in each of the publications; 2-The frequency threshold delimits the
minimum threshold for each period, based on the keywords of the recovered doc-
uments; 3-Network type refers to the type of network that is going to be formed. In
this study, a network of co-occurrence of keywords is elaborated; 4-Co-occurrence
union value threshold determines the configured periods; 5-The normalization
measure determines the threshold of union or minimum connection for the occur-
rence. The normalization of the network was produced by the equivalence index eij
= cij2 / Root (ci - cj); 6-The clustering algorithm allows to generate the associa-
tions between the themes or subnets of the maps. Specifically, the simple centers
algorithm has been used; 7-The evolutionary measure determines the similarity
necessary to prepare the evolution map that was made using the Jaccard index and
the transition map using the inclusion rate as an overlapping measure (table 1).
Table 1. Production indicators and inclusion criteria.
Configuration
Values
Analysis unit
Keywords authors, keywords WoS
Frequency threshold
Keywords: P1 = (3), P2 = (4), P3 = (5), P4 = (6), P5 = (6)
Network type
Co-occurrence
Co-occurrence union value threshold
Keywords: P1 = (2), P2 = (2), P3 = (2), P4 = (2), P5 = (2)
Normalization measure
Equivalence index
Clustering algorithm
Maximum size: 9; Minimum size: 3
Evolutionary measure
Jaccard index
Overlapping measure
Inclusion Rate
76
http://www.i-jet.org
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
4 Results
Among the 2208 publications retrieved, there are 3,311 affiliations and 5,422 au-
thors from 82 countries. Figure 2 shows the statistical results of the diachronic evolu-
tion of production
a) The countries with the highest production
b) The most productive authors
c) The main areas of research
About the evolution of production throughout these years, a positive trend is shown
from 2000 to 2014. Afterward, this growth trend is changing, highlighting the produc-
tion of 2017 with 342 documents. Regarding the main language in which the docu-
ments are available, it is English (60%), followed by Spanish (39%). Many docu-
ments are published in both languages (English and Spanish). Regarding the most
productive authors on the subject, SEIN-ECHALUCE ML, GARCIA-PENALVO FJ.,
and FIDALGO-BLANCO A. stand out with 11 documents each one.
Fig. 2. Diachronic evolution of production (a), production by language (b), the most productive
authors (c), and main areas of research (d).
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
77
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
4.1 Development of thematic analysis
It is necessary to use the frequency of the concurrence of the words of a text to
build a thematic network. Later they are grouped using a simple center algorithm, one
of the most efficient in the scientific literature [33,34]. In this case, the most repre-
sentative word of a source are the keywords proposed by authors.
For each time, two types of strategic diagrams have been generated to analyze the
most prominent themes. The size of the sphere in the first diagram is proportional to
the count of posts associated with each topic, while in the second, the size of the
sphere is proportional to the count of citations received for each topic. We divide the
20 years into five periods, that is, [2000–2010], [2011–2013], [2014–2015], [2016–
2017] and [2018–2019].
Figure 3 shows the evolution of the keywords throughout the analyzed period and
the number of words that are extracted from one period inside. Among all the periods
analyzed, there are coincidence levels of less than 30% (<0.30), which shows that the
thematic areas worked on have been different, have not been maintained over time, or
that the variety of lines of research has been quite wide.
Fig. 3. Keywords continuity between intervals.
The main themes identified, obtained based on the established time intervals, are
shown (Table 2) based on the classic bibliometric indicators (h-index, g-index, hg-
index, q2-index). In this case, in the first period (P1) it is observed that the keyword
with the highest H index is "HIGHER-EDUCATION", with a value much higher than
that found in the second word, "INNOVATION". For the second time range (P2), the
word with the highest H index is again "HIGHER-EDUCATION", in this case, fol-
lowed by the terms "EDUCATION" and "USA". For the second time range (P2), the
word with the highest H index is again "HIGHER-EDUCATION", in this case, fol-
lowed by the terms "EDUCATION" and "USA". For the third period, we find
"EDUCATIONAL-INNOVATION" first, followed by "EDUCATION", a term that is
maintained from the previous period. In the fourth period (P4) we find
"MOTIVATION" first, followed by "STUDENTS". For the last period (P5), the topic
with the highest H index is "EDUCATIONAL-INNOVATION" closely followed by
"IMPACT."
78
http://www.i-jet.org
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
Table 2. Classic bibliometric indicators (h-index, g-index, hg-index, q2-index) for analyzed
periods.
2000-2010 Period
Docs
H Index
G Index
Hg Index
Q2 Index
Cites
HIGHER-EDUCATION
40
9
17
12.37
13.08
328
INNOVATION
9
5
5
5
8.37
129
MOTIVATION
3
3
3
3
10.82
240
CLASSROOM
3
3
3
3
5.48
99
COMPETENCES
4
1
2
1.41
2.83
9
2011-2013 Period
Docs
H Index
G Index
Hg Index
Q2 Index
Cites
EDUCATION
18
4
7
5.29
10.77
107
HIGHER-EDUCATION
29
6
11
8.12
6.93
153
USA
7
4
6
4.9
6.93
53
TECHNOLOGY
7
3
4
3.46
4.9
26
ICT
6
2
4
2.83
4
19
ECTS
4
1
1
1
1
1
2014-2015 Period
Docs
H Index
G Index
Hg Index
Q2 Index
Cites
EDUCATIONAL-INNOVATION
71
9
17
12.37
14.7
374
EDUCATION
14
6
12
8.49
9.8
158
ICT
7
1
1
1
2
4
TECHNOLOGY
9
3
4
3.46
3.46
16
ACTIVE-LEARNING
4
1
1
1
1.41
5
2016-2017 Period
Docs
H Index
G Index
Hg Index
Q2 Index
Cites
MOTIVATION
16
5
9
6.71
6.32
91
STUDENTS
17
4
8
5.66
6
73
EDUCATIONAL-INNOVATION
50
4
5
4.47
5.29
65
ACTIVE-LEARNING
14
1
1
1
4.8
23
2018-2019 Period
Docs
H Index
G Index
Hg Index
Q2 Index
Cites
EDUCATIONAL-INNOVATION
90
4
5
4.47
4
68
INNOVATION
13
1
1
1
1
2
SCIENCE
5
1
1
1
1.41
3
IMPACT
6
3
3
3
3.46
18
The detected networks can be represented by two measures, that is, the centrality
and the density of Callon. The Callon centrality index measures the degree of interac-
tion between networks. The internal strength of the network can be measured by the
density defined as internal links between all the keywords that are grouped around a
specific topic. The analysis of the diagrams proposed shows a clear trend in the first
two periods, with those studies related to "Higher Education" prevailing. In the third
and fourth periods, "technology" and "motivation" stand out as the main themes. An-
other of the themes that you have talked about in the different periods is "Educational
innovation."
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
79
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
Carrying out a deeper analysis of the main themes of each period we found that, for
period 1, the topic with the most impact is HIGHER EDUCATION, which focuses its
studies on "sustainable development," "e-learning" and "sustainability," "e-portfolio,"
"Educational innovation," "Information technology," "active learning" and "academic
performance." For period 2, the main topic with the most impact is HIGHER
EDUCATION, in which the research is related in this case to "community", "team-
work," "action research," "Blended learning," "reform," "organizations "in addition
to" Educational innovation," "Information technology." For P3, the driving theme is
again, EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION. In this case, the topics that govern these
researches are centered on "Higher Education", "Learning by doing", "E-learning",
engineering education," "motivation," "information technology" and ICT. For period
4, the term with the most impact is MOTIVATION, whose guiding themes are "high-
er education," "Performance," "Gamification," "Blended Learning," "Achievement,"
"engineering education," "E-learning" and "Learning by doing." For the last period,
the trend seems to be similar to that of period 3, with EDUCATIONAL
INNOVATION being the main theme, in this case, the main themes that guide the
research are "performance," "ICT," "Gamification," "Schools," "Students," "Gamifi-
cation," "engineering education," "Higher Education" (figure 4).
Fig. 4. Strategic diagram of h index. (a) Interval 2000–2010; (b) Interval 2011–2013; (c) Inter-
val 2014–2015; (d) Interval 2016–2017; (e) Interval 2018–2019
80
http://www.i-jet.org
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
4.2 Thematic evolution
The thematic evolution allows us to study the relationships between the themes
worked over different periods, through conceptual links (solid line) or non-conceptual
links (stitched lines). The thickness of them indicates the strength of these relation-
ships, following the results of figure 5. On the other hand, the size of the sphere repre-
sents the index h of the documents that belong to each topic. The shades of colors
bring together the labeled subjects within the same thematic area.
The scientific production analyzed is characterized by being varied, a main pattern
is observed between the different periods. Although at the beginning, the investiga-
tions were exclusively focused on a higher education field, this topic has been losing
strength. In the last two periods, the topics centered on students ('STUDENTS'), ac-
tive learning ('Active learning'), educational innovations in general ('Educational
innovation'), and those developed in the field of science stand out. Although it is not a
topic that has followed a standard evolution of the literature, the last section shows the
potential for dissemination of those studies that show the impact of this type of meth-
odology in the educational field.
Fig. 5. Thematic evolution of the analyzed area 2000-2019.
5 Discussion and Conclusion
The importance of this study is that there is no other research about these terms and
therefore, it is original and gives the scientific community the knowledge and infor-
mation about this field. Despite this, it has followed the technical view, in several
parts of the research, of other studies which have done a literature review and are well
situated among the researches of this category [18,19,24,25].
Nowadays, teaching has become a space for sharing content in an interactive way,
where the student assumes a leading role and becomes an active person in the learning
process [4]. The situation that teaching is going through requires that education pro-
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
81
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
fessionals have a series of technological competences and skills, in addition to a solid
training in the theoretical content of the subject they teach, to adapt the means, forms,
tools, and channels to spread knowledge [5]. These training practices lead to teaching
innovation to find new ways to develop their profession adjusted to the techno-
pedagogical paradigms of today's society, characterized by rapid access to infor-
mation from any electronic medium [8].
The information which reflected in the existing literature on the state of the ques-
tion reveals a growing projection on studies related to innovation in education. The
data shows a positive and growing evolution, with 2017 being the most prolific year
of all so far. In these studies, the English language predominates mainly, something
classic in scientific literature, since it is the official language of most of the journals
indexed in WoS [32]. Only about a third of the production is written in Spanish. Re-
garding the area in which these publications are collected, it stands out above the rest
Education Educational Research, as a category that indexes studies concerning the
educational field in which the analyzed research focuses Sein-Echaluce, M.L., Garcia-
Penalvo, F.J. and Fidalgo-Blanco, A. are the most productive researchers on this top-
ic.
The study of the keywords, of the reported production of the different configured
periods, shows how the topics investigated have been diverse. Specifically, the first
period focuses on Higher Education, followed by Innovation. The second period re-
peats Higher Education, accompanied by Education and USA. The third period focus-
es on Educational Innovation and Education, just like the predecessor period. Motiva-
tion and Student have more publications in the fourth period. Moreover, in the last
and fifth-most current period, Educational Innovation reappears together with Impact.
In the different periods in which the motor themes are repeated, these highlights
have undergone internal variations such as the case of Higher Education. In the first
period, it included concepts such as "sustainable development," "e-learning" and "sus-
tainability," "e-portfolio," "Educational innovation," "Information technology," "ac-
tive learning" and "academic performance." In contrast, in the second period, it focus-
es mainly on "community," "teamwork," "action research," "Blended learning," "re-
form," "organizations," as well as "Educational innovation," and "Information tech-
nology."
Regarding the evolution of the topics in this diverse scientific production, it was in-
itially characterized by dealing with aspects related to Higher Education. This finding
is in analogy with what [35,36] expounded. However, over the years, this topic has
been decreasing the volume of production to give way in other periods to research
focused on students, active learning, educational innovation with a generic character,
and the scientific field of innovation. It also highlights the impact of innovation, as a
topic that is being analyzed by researchers in recent years.
It is concluded that the scientific production on educational innovation has been in
positive projection from the beginning of its origin to the present day. English stands
out as the main language in the writing of publications. Also, there is a glimpse of a
variety of themes throughout the course of research on educational innovation at
WoS, initially focused on Higher Education, until today with themes focused on the
82
http://www.i-jet.org
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
active action of the student and the impact that the innovation involves in learning
environments.
The purpose of this study is based on making known to researchers interested in
the subject the importance that educational innovation has had throughout its journey
through the scientific literature, as well as revealing the topics covered in the different
articulated periods. All this to offer the scientific community those booming topics on
which the current state of the issue addressed in the present work is based.
This research has presented different limitations. Only one database (WoS) has
been used, so the results shown reflect only one perspective of the scientific literature.
On the other hand, the configuration of the periods in which the scientific production
has been grouped has been made at the discretion of the researchers, so that each
interval brings together a similar volume of publications. Also, the purification of the
reported data from WoS to carry out the final analysis of the publications also implies
the particular decision of the researchers, as well as the establishment of certain ex-
clusion criteria.
As a future line of research, the aim is to analyze the scientific production on edu-
cational innovation linked to the most prominent themes in recent years. All this to
carry out a meta-analysis of the existing literature that supports the basic knowledge
of these booming topics.
6 References
[1] O. Rodríguez and P. M. Concepción, “La integración escuela-familia-comunidad: un reto
para la educación contemporánea”. Educación y Sociedad, Vol. 1, no. 18, pp. 70-80, 2020.
[2] D. Pareja de Vicente, J.J. Leiva Olivencia and A. Matas Terrón, “Percepciones sobre di-
versidad cultural y comunicación intercultural de futuros maestros”. Revista Electrónica
Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, Vol. 1, no. 23, pp. 75-87, 2020. https://
doi.org/10.6018/reifop.403331
[3] Z. Nurbekova, V, Grinshkun, G, Aimicheva, B, Nurbekov and K. Tuenbaeva, “Project-
Based Learning Approach for Teaching Mobile Application Development Using Visuali-
zation Technology”. IJET, Vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 130-143, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.
v15i08.12335
[4] S. Cheon, J. Reeve and M. Vansteenkiste, “When teachers learn how to provide classroom
structure in an autonomy-supportive way: Benefits to teachers and their students”. Teach-
ing and Teacher Education, no. 90, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.103004
[5] S. Bradley and C. Green, The economics of education. A Comprehensive Overview. Aca-
demic press. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2017-0-02304-2
[6] C. Scott, El futuro del aprendizaje; ¿qué tipo de aprendizaje se necesita en el siglo XXI?
Organización de las naciones unidas. 2015.
[7] D. Scaradozzi, L. Screpanti, L. Cesaretti, M. Storti and E. Mazzieri, “Implementation and
assessment methodologies of teachers’ training courses for STEM activities”. Technology,
Knowledge and Learning, Vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 247-268, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s107
58-019-09406-9 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9356-1
[8] S. Wichadee, “A development of the blended learning model using edmodo for maximiz-
ing students' oral proficiency and motivation”. iJET, Vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 137-154, 2017.
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v12i02.6324
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
83
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
[9] V. Marín-Díaz and B. E. Sampedro-Requena, “La Realidad aumentada en Educación Pri-
maria desde la visión de los estudiantes”. Alteridad, Vol. 1, no. 15 pp. 61-73, 2020. https://
doi.org/10.17163/alt.v15n1.2020.05
[10] E. Pulham and A. C. R. Graham. “Comparing K-12 online and blended teaching compe-
tencies: a literatura review”. Distance Education, Vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 411-432, 2018. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1476840
[11] S. Deliligka, I. Syrmpas and A. Bekiari, “Motivational Climate in the Physical Education
Context through the Perspective of Teachers and Students”. Physical Educator, Vol. 1, no.
77, pp. 78-109, 2020. https://doi.org/10.18666/tpe-2020-v77-i1-8524
[12] P. Rios and A. Vieira, “The emerging of a gender discourse in education: the differences in
the school space”. Tempos e Espaços em Educação. vol. 13, no. 32, pp.1-17, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.20952/revtee.v13i32.13061
[13] M. Kultaieva, N. Radionova, O. Ivastchenko and N. Grigorova, “Representación en prácti-
cas educativas: afirmaciones reales y replanteamiento de la tradición pedagógica”. Dilemas
Contemporáneos: Educación, Política y Valores, no. 7, pp. 1-14, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.46377/dilemas.v33i1.2181
[14] J. Adell, M. Llopis, F. Esteve and M. Valdeolivas, “El debate sobre el pensamiento
computacional en educación”. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia,
Vol. 1, no. 22, pp. 171-186, 2019. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.22.1.22303
[15] A. Bartolomé, L. Castañeda and J. Adell, “Personalisation in educational technology: the
absence of underlying pedagogies”. International Journal of Educational Technology in
Higher Education Vol. 1, no. 15, p. 1-17, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0095-0
[16] L. Castañeda and N. Selwyn, “More than tools making sense of the ongoing digitizations
of higher education”. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Educa-
tion, Vol. 1, no. 15, p. 1-10, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0109-y
[17] R. Rafiola, P. Setyosari, C. Radjah and M. Ramli, “The Effect of Learning Motivation,
Self-Efficacy, and Blended Learning on Students’ Achievement in The Industrial Revolu-
tion 4.0”. IJET, Vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 71-82, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i08.12525
[18] A. Durán-Sánchez, J. Álvarez-García, M. de la Cruz del Río-Rama and E. González-
Vázquez, “Literature Review of Wine Tourism Research: Bibliometric Analysis (1984–
2014),” in Wine and Tourism, M. Peris-Ortiz, M. de la C. Del Río Rama and C. Rueda-
Armengot, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 257-273. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-18857-7_18
[19] R. Hernández-Sampieri, C. Fernández-Collado, P. Baptista-Lucio, S. Méndez-Valencia
and C. P. Mendoza-Torres, Metodología de la investigación, 1st ed. Mexico, D.F.:
McGrawHill, 2014.
[20] H. F. Moed, Applied evaluative informetrics. Cham: Springer, 2017.
[21] M. A. Martínez, M. J. Cobo, M. Herrera and E. Herrera-Viedma, “Analyzing the Scientific
Evolution of Social Work Using Science Mapping”. Research on Social Work Practice,
Vol. 2, no. 25, pp. 257-277, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731514522101
[22] J. A. Moral-Muñoz, E. Herrera-Viedma, A. Santisteban-Espejo and M. J. Cobo, “Software
tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review”. El Profesio-
nal de La Información, Vol. 1, no. 29, pp. 1-20, 2020.. https://doi.org/10.3145
/epi.2020.ene.03
[23] P. Hallinger and J. Kovačević, “A bibliometric review of research on educational admin-
istration: Science mapping the literature, 1960 to 2018”. Review of Educational Research,
Vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 335-369, 2019. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319830380
[24] J. López-Belmonte, A. Segura-Robles, A. J. Moreno-Guerrero and M. E. Parra-González,
“Machine Learning and Big Data in the Impact Literature. A Bibliometric Review with
84
http://www.i-jet.org
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
Scientific Mapping in Web of Science”. Symmetry, Vol. 4, no. 12, pp. 1-15, 2020. https://
doi.org/10.3390/sym12040495
[25] M. E. Parra-Gonzalez and A. Segura-Robles, “Scientific production on gamification in ed-
ucation: a scientometric analysis”. Revista de Educación, Vol. 386, no. 5, pp. 113-131,
2019. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2019-386-429
[26] J. E. Hirsch, “An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output”. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 46, no. 102, pp. 16569-16572, 2005. https://doi.
org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
[27] M. J. Cobo, A. G. López-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma and F. Herrera, “Science mapping
software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools”. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 7, no. 62, pp. 1382-1402,
2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
[28] E. Herrera-Viedma, J.R. López-Robles, J. Guallar and M.J. Cobo, “Global trends in coro-
navirus research at the time of Covid-19: A general bibliometric approach and content
analysis using SciMAT”. El Profesional de la Información, Vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 1-20, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.may.22
[29] A. Segura-Robles, A.J. Moreno-Guerrero, E. Parra-González, E. and J. López-Belmonte,
“Review of Research Trends in Learning and the Internet in Higher Education”. Social
Sciences, Vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 1-16, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci9060101
[30] J. R. López-Robles, J. R. Otegi-Olaso, I. Porto Gómez and M. J. Cobo, “30 years of intel-
ligence models in management and business: A bibliometric review”. International Journal
of Information Management, no. 48, pp. 22-38, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.
2019.01.013
[31] G. Urrútia and X. Bonfill, “Declaración PRISMA: una propuesta para mejorar la publica-
ción de revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis”. Medicina clínica, Vol. 135, no. 11, pp.
507-511, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2010.01.015
[32] J. Montero-Díaz, M. J. Cobo, M. Gutiérrez-Salcedo, F. Segado-Boj and E. Herrera-
Viedma, “A science mapping analysis of ‘Communication’ WoS subject category (1980-
2013)”. Comunicar, Vol. 55, no. 26, pp. 81-91, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3916/C55-2018-08
[33] J. R. López-Robles, J. Guallar, J. R. Otegi-Olaso and N. K. Gamboa-Rosales, “El profe-
sional de la información (EPI): Bibliometric and thematic analysis (2006-2017)”, EPI, Vol.
28, no. 4, pp. 1-24, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2019.jul.17
[34] M. J. Cobo, A. G. López-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma and F. Herrera, “An approach for de-
tecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical applica-
tion to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field,” Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 146-166,
2011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002
[35] É. Archambault, É. Vignola-Gagné, G. Côté, V. Larivière and Y. Gingrasb, “Benchmark-
ing scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing data-
bases”. Scientometrics, Vol. 3, no. 68, pp.329-342, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-
006-0115-z
[36] Y. Liu and J. Fang, “What is The Hot Topic of Graduate Education Research? —A Litera-
ture Analysis Based on SSCI Articles in 2015-2019”. In 2019 2nd International Confer-
ence on Education, Economics and Social Science (ICEESS 2019). Atlantis Press. https://
doi.org/10.2991/iceess-19.2019.28
iJET ‒ Vol. 15, No. 20, 2020
85
Paper—Production Analysis and Scientific Mapping on Active Methodologies in Web of Science
7 Authors
Mª Elena Parra-González is a Spanish PhD, professor and researcher on Educa-
tional Sciences University of Granada, Faculty of Education, Economy and Technol-
ogy, in Ceuta, Spain. Her line of research focuses on educational technology and
active methodologies in learning spaces.
Adrián Segura-Robles is a Spanish PhD, professor and researcher on Educational
Sciences University of Granada, Faculty of Education, Economy and Technology, in
Ceuta, Spain. His line of research focuses on educational technology and active meth-
odologies in learning spaces. He is a reviewer for WOS journals.
Manuel-Ricardo Vicente-Bújez is a professor and researcher at the University of
Granada (Spain). He belongs to the Department of Didactics of Musical, Plastic and
Body Expression. His line of research focuses on educational technology and active
methodologies in learning spaces.
Jesús López-Belmonte is a professor and researcher at the University of Granada
(Spain). He belongs to the Department of Didactics and School Organization. He
develops his scientific activity in the AREA Research Group (Hum-672). His line of
research focuses on educational technology and active methodologies in learning
spaces.
Article submitted 2020-05-16. Resubmitted 2020-07-04. Final acceptance 2020-07-05. Final version
published as submitted by the authors.
86
http://www.i-jet.org