write an article for publication on the importance of education

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• Education /

Article on the Importance of Education in 100 to 350 Words

• Updated on  
• Jan 9, 2024

Education entails acquiring knowledge to have a greater understanding of the various disciplines that will be used in our everyday lives. ‘ Education ’ refers to the information we gain and experience outside of books or classrooms, as well as the knowledge that we receive and experience in schools, our homes, and as members of society. Our ideas on life alter as a result of learning, education is crucial for personal development and growth in society . In this blog, we will see why we need education for growth and will also look at some articles on the importance of education.

This Blog Includes:

Importance of education, mental aspect of education’s importance, the power of being an educated individual, how can your education benefit your society, articles on importance of education, article on importance of education: 100 words, article on importance of education: 200 words, article on importance of education: 350 words, article on importance of women’s education.

Also Read: Essay On Education System

Also Read: Importance of Education in Development

The value of education at a much younger age. Our first tryst with learning begins at home, and our first teachers are our parents, grandparents, and often siblings. The importance of education lies in its continuity, learning is a lifetime process that will stop with our death. It is the foundation for the development of a healthy individual and society. Our world cannot have a bright future if our culture lacks education.

Education is the key to change. It is an important tool that allows a person to understand his or her rights and responsibilities to his or her family, society, and nation. It improves a person’s ability to view the world and to fight against misdoings such as injustice, corruption, and violence, among other things.

Education is meant to hone talent, sharpen our mindsets and educate us on a myriad of things. In school, we cover a variety of topics such as history, arithmetic, geography, politics, and so on. These subjects sharpen children’s minds and allow the kid to absorb knowledge from all subjects, and his or her mental level is increased. Here are some cognitive benefits of learning and education that ensure growth and development in children:

Education’s importance in our lives provides us with stability in our everyday lives. Everything may be split, but not your education, you must be told. You can improve your chances of getting a better job with the aid of your degree and expertise.

Financial Security

Our financial stability is helped by education. Higher-qualified individuals receive higher-paying employment in this era, allowing them to guarantee their future.

Self-dependency

Education teaches us to be self-sufficient in our daily lives. A person’s education is his alone, and with it, he may feel safe and self-sufficient.

Equality is a right that everyone deserves. If everyone had the opportunity to pursue higher education, there would be a greater likelihood that everyone would earn a large sum of money, and there would be fewer disparities across social classes. It aids in the pursuit of equality.

Confidence is one of the finest aspects of success. Education boosts a person’s self-assurance. You can go further into a topic that you are already familiar with. With the information you’ve obtained through your schooling, you can converse about that issue far better than others.

If you are a Class 12 student, here are some important blogs for you:

Knowledge and education is power. Education enables individuals. Enables them to innovate, understand, adapt, and overcome. Everything we learn helps us in life in one way or the other. It helps make our life convenient and easy. Good education is basically the knowledge that gives people perspective and information about things which can range from being as simple as fixing a water pipe to building a rocket destined for moon. When we are educated, we can adapt to each and every aspect of life better and it also helps us overcome many hurdle of life and gives perspective about a lot things such as finance, planning, etc. All this can make any individual feel powerful because there remains nothing in life that they cannot tackle.

Every nation’s integral part is it’s society and the growth an development of the same is dependent upon the individuals which in turn helps the social and economic progress of the nation. The education system has been evolving from the very first day and now it has several mods and means of the same. It is quite correct to say that any amount or money spent of being educated never goes waste. The more you learn, the you will be able to grow in life. Every aspect of education will one way or the other, help you in your life. And when an individual is educated, he/she can significantly contribute to the growth of the society and the nation, much more than a rich person. Education helps develop characters, personalities and social behaviours. It helps shape the way people think and act. An ultimately it lead to how a society will grow. For this to happen, it is essential that all of the people understand the importance of education.

The process of learning and increasing abilities through courses, literature, training and other mediums is known as education. It assists us in developing our talents and seeking employment to suit our requirements and obligations.

Education is vital to one’s success in life. It is essential for an individual’s entire growth. The process of learning and improving one’s skills is referred to as education. Wisdom and the ability to handle challenges come with knowledge. Education enhances one’s quality of life while also granting social recognition. Though education is essential for everyone, the need for it is most acute during childhood. Starting with children under the age of 10, school education is critical. It serves as a solid basis for their life skills and goals. A person who lacks education is powerless and vulnerable. H/She will find it difficult to deal with life’s challenges.

Related Reads:

Education is a valuable tool for gaining learning and wisdom. Though books are essential to education, the notion encompasses more than just books and bookish knowledge. It isn’t required for education to be only based on books. 

The most important goal of education is to help people with how to read and write. The first step toward literacy is reading and writing. Education provides a person with endless opportunities for growth and advancement. People who have had an education tend to be more calm and self-assured. People who have been educated are disciplined and understand the importance of time. Education allows a person to be more expressive and opinionated. H/She was able to readily communicate his/her viewpoints, which were supported by a clear aim and rationale.

Education benefits not just the individual but also the community. The most important aspect of education is that it goes from one individual to another, then throughout society, and eventually throughout the country. An educated individual makes an effort to teach and inspire everyone with whom he or she comes into contact. Education brings one up to speed on technological advancements as well. A well-educated person can easily adjust to technological developments. Education, more than anything else, is a source of hope. The desire for a better life; the desire for a wealthy and poverty-free existence.

Must Read: Importance of School Education

Human education is a critical instrument in their lives. It is a significant distinction between a civilized and an undisciplined individual. Even if the country’s literacy rate has increased in recent years, more individuals need to be made aware of the importance of education. Every child, whether a male or a girl, must attend school and not drop out. Education is beneficial not just to the individual but also to society. A well-educated individual is a valuable asset to society, contributing to its social and economic development. Such a person is always willing to assist society and the country. It is true to say that education is a stairway to a person’s and a nation’s achievement.

Education makes a person productive, allowing him or her to contribute to society in a positive way. It teaches us how to face many challenges and conquer them. A well-educated individual understands how to act in a polite and non-offensive manner. It shows us how to live a disciplined life while yet making a respectable living. Our future is built on the basis of education. Education is also the sole weapon that may be used to combat numerous issues such as illiteracy, poverty, unemployment, and so on. A person’s education makes them more sensitive to the predicament of their fellow beings. A well-educated individual not only comprehends the issues but also possesses the essential abilities to address them.

An educated individual possesses competent skills and is more capable than someone who is uneducated. However, it is incorrect to think that education alone ensures success. Indeed, success necessitates a solid education, as well as devotion, attention, and hard effort. An educated individual is more sensible and capable of rational thought.

Education allows a person to become self-sufficient. An educated individual does not rely on others and is capable of meeting his or her own requirements. A well-educated person also educates their family, and education benefits, not just the individual but also society and the nation. Education has a significant influence on our outlook, making us more optimistic about life and its objectives.

Also Read: Importance of Education in Child’s Life

There was a period when it was considered that women didn’t need to be educated. We’ve now realized the importance of women’s education . The modern era is the phase of women’s awakening. In every aspect of life, women are striving to compete with males. Many individuals reject female education, claiming that women’s rightful domain is the home, and therefore that money spent on female education is squandered. This viewpoint is incorrect since female education has the potential to bring about a silent revolution in society.

Female education has numerous advantages; educated women may contribute significantly to the country’s growth by sharing the burdens of males in several fields. They may contribute to society as teachers, lawyers, physicians, and administrators, as well as play a key part in wartime. In this time of economic distress, education is a blessing for women. The days of wealth and prosperity are long gone. Middle-class families are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet these days. Female education is important for a country’s growth, thus it should be supported.

Everyone has hope for a better life if they have an education. It’s a type of magic that works in a person’s life to make it far better than it would be if he didn’t have knowledge. To sum up the blog, we believe that everyone should be educated so that they can contribute to making our country proud. Increasing literacy rates can prevent tens of thousands of crimes. Every country should encourage its citizens to receive an education.

Also Read: Importance of Education for Growth and Betterment

Related Articles

Education is a valuable tool for gaining learning and wisdom. Though books are essential to education, the notion encompasses more than just books and bookish knowledge. It isn’t required for education to be only based on books.  The most important goal of education is to help people with how to read and write. The first step toward literacy is reading and writing. Education provides a person with endless opportunities for growth and advancement.

Education teaches us the importance of teamwork, communication, and interpersonal relationships. Education plays an important role in building intellectual and mental development. Education enhances creativity and allows us to express ourselves through various mediums and discover our unique talents. Education serves as a powerful tool for breaking the cycle of poverty

Moral education teaches us important values such as Respect, honesty, compassion, hard work, kindness, gratitude, sharing, cooperation, etc.

This was all about articles on the importance of education! We hope the information provided was helpful! For more information on such informative topics for your school, visit our school education page and follow Leverage Edu .

Team Leverage Edu

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

• Article Writing
• Article On The Importance Of Education

Article on the Importance of Education

Are you educated? Do you think education is a waste of time? This article on the importance of education will give you the answer to that question.

Table of Contents

What can be considered good education, the power of being educated.

• How Can Your Education Benefit Your Society
• FAQs on the Importance of Education

To put it in simple terms, education is the process of acquiring knowledge and skills, building morals, values, and developing habits. Education does not just consist of these. The process of education can be said to be complete only if you are able to put the knowledge you acquire to good use. So, education is not just gaining knowledge and gathering information but developing the ability to apply what you have learned to daily life scenarios.

Is there good education and bad education? This is a question that has been asked for years now. Good education works towards the goal of preparing and empowering individuals to lead a productive life that definitely impacts the economic growth of the society and country they are a part of. Good education is meant to stimulate logical and critical thinking in individuals. Good education does not mean scoring high marks in your assessments. People usually perceive the notion that schooling and scoring good marks in examinations is education. Education is beyond all that. Schooling alone does not lead to learning. Getting a good education depends on a lot of factors, including the environment or society you are in, the social and economic background and the ability of the individual to understand, analyse and act according to the need of the hour.

It is a fact that quality education and skill development comes from strong education systems. Having trained and empathetic teachers is one of the prerequisites to availing good education. Education includes learning about different cultures, religions, communities, economic and social standards and grooming oneself to become a socially responsible individual. With the advancement of technology, teachers have been taken for granted because most children nowadays have their own mobile phones and internet access with which they can find answers to any questions, sometimes questions their parents, siblings, or teachers cannot explain. This is a huge drawback in the process of building a healthy society.

Being educated often makes you feel powerful. Why is that?

Imagine you did not know how to use a mobile phone, a laptop, a match stick or a bulb. What is the use of possessing something that you do not know how to use? In the beginning of time, it was found out that hitting two rocks together produces sparks that can start a fire. Every little thing you come across can teach you something or the other. The more you know, the more powerful you become.

Knowing how to drive a car would come in handy when you have to go somewhere with more people travelling with you. Knowing how to fix a pipe can help you when someone accidentally breaks off a pipe and water keeps flowing. Likewise, everything you learn will help you in one or the other way. Therefore, good education can be defined as the general and specific knowledge people gain by being taught or by experience.

“Education is not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think”, according to Albert Einstein. Gathering a load of information is easily possible in the present age of the internet and technology. Being able to answer every question does not guarantee or prepare you for a life where experience and knowledge is accounted for.

How Can Your Education Benefit Your Society?

Society is an integral part of every nation. The growth and development of individuals help the betterment of the society they are a part of, which in turn helps the social and economic progress of the nation as a whole. The education system has been evolving from day one. The modes and means of education are improvised every now and then according to the changing times.

According to Benjamin Franklin, “An investment in knowledge pays the best interest”. Any amount of money or time spent on getting yourself educated never goes to waste. The more you learn, the more you benefit from it. Even if you think that something that you are learning is not what you are interested in or what you think you need, do not worry because everything you come across will help you in some stage of life. An educated individual has a lot more to give to a society and a nation than a rich person. Being educated shapes the characters and social behaviours of individuals. It changes the way people think and act. The way you look at your fellow beings and treat them varies with every day in the process of learning.

The ultimate goal of education should be action and not just knowledge. In order to attain this goal, it is important to let all kinds of people understand the importance of education and the benefits of being educated in this constantly changing world.

Frequently Asked Questions on the Importance of Education

Why is education important.

Education makes you a better person and gives you stability in life. You become a person people around you can rely on. You can become the hand that lifts up the lowly and provides solutions to all the problems they face. It can also boost your self-confidence and credibility as an individual.

What is the purpose of education?

The purpose of education is to help the development of an individual’s intellectual and emotional self. Education shapes the individual’s character and attitude towards life and fellow beings. It aims to promote the overall development of the individual’s personality.

Is education compulsory?

Most countries have the principle of providing free and compulsory education to all. In India, Article 21 A of the Constitution states that all children from ages six to fourteen should be provided with free and compulsory education and also reserves the right to education as a Fundamental Right.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 12 February 2024

Education reform and change driven by digital technology: a bibliometric study from a global perspective

• Chengliang Wang 1 ,
• Xiaojiao Chen 1 ,
• Teng Yu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5198-7261 2 , 3 ,
• Yidan Liu 1 , 4 &
• Yuhui Jing 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  256 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

7204 Accesses

1 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Development studies
• Science, technology and society

Amidst the global digital transformation of educational institutions, digital technology has emerged as a significant area of interest among scholars. Such technologies have played an instrumental role in enhancing learner performance and improving the effectiveness of teaching and learning. These digital technologies also ensure the sustainability and stability of education during the epidemic. Despite this, a dearth of systematic reviews exists regarding the current state of digital technology application in education. To address this gap, this study utilized the Web of Science Core Collection as a data source (specifically selecting the high-quality SSCI and SCIE) and implemented a topic search by setting keywords, yielding 1849 initial publications. Furthermore, following the PRISMA guidelines, we refined the selection to 588 high-quality articles. Using software tools such as CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Charticulator, we reviewed these 588 publications to identify core authors (such as Selwyn, Henderson, Edwards), highly productive countries/regions (England, Australia, USA), key institutions (Monash University, Australian Catholic University), and crucial journals in the field ( Education and Information Technologies , Computers & Education , British Journal of Educational Technology ). Evolutionary analysis reveals four developmental periods in the research field of digital technology education application: the embryonic period, the preliminary development period, the key exploration, and the acceleration period of change. The study highlights the dual influence of technological factors and historical context on the research topic. Technology is a key factor in enabling education to transform and upgrade, and the context of the times is an important driving force in promoting the adoption of new technologies in the education system and the transformation and upgrading of education. Additionally, the study identifies three frontier hotspots in the field: physical education, digital transformation, and professional development under the promotion of digital technology. This study presents a clear framework for digital technology application in education, which can serve as a valuable reference for researchers and educational practitioners concerned with digital technology education application in theory and practice.

Similar content being viewed by others

A bibliometric analysis of knowledge mapping in Chinese education digitalization research from 2012 to 2022

Digital transformation and digital literacy in the context of complexity within higher education institutions: a systematic literature review

Education big data and learning analytics: a bibliometric analysis

Introduction.

Digital technology has become an essential component of modern education, facilitating the extension of temporal and spatial boundaries and enriching the pedagogical contexts (Selwyn and Facer, 2014 ). The advent of mobile communication technology has enabled learning through social media platforms (Szeto et al. 2015 ; Pires et al. 2022 ), while the advancement of augmented reality technology has disrupted traditional conceptions of learning environments and spaces (Perez-Sanagustin et al., 2014 ; Kyza and Georgiou, 2018 ). A wide range of digital technologies has enabled learning to become a norm in various settings, including the workplace (Sjöberg and Holmgren, 2021 ), home (Nazare et al. 2022 ), and online communities (Tang and Lam, 2014 ). Education is no longer limited to fixed locations and schedules, but has permeated all aspects of life, allowing learning to continue at any time and any place (Camilleri and Camilleri, 2016 ; Selwyn and Facer, 2014 ).

The advent of digital technology has led to the creation of several informal learning environments (Greenhow and Lewin, 2015 ) that exhibit divergent form, function, features, and patterns in comparison to conventional learning environments (Nygren et al. 2019 ). Consequently, the associated teaching and learning processes, as well as the strategies for the creation, dissemination, and acquisition of learning resources, have undergone a complete overhaul. The ensuing transformations have posed a myriad of novel issues, such as the optimal structuring of teaching methods by instructors and the adoption of appropriate learning strategies by students in the new digital technology environment. Consequently, an examination of the principles that underpin effective teaching and learning in this environment is a topic of significant interest to numerous scholars engaged in digital technology education research.

Over the course of the last two decades, digital technology has made significant strides in the field of education, notably in extending education time and space and creating novel educational contexts with sustainability. Despite research attempts to consolidate the application of digital technology in education, previous studies have only focused on specific aspects of digital technology, such as Pinto and Leite’s ( 2020 ) investigation into digital technology in higher education and Mustapha et al.’s ( 2021 ) examination of the role and value of digital technology in education during the pandemic. While these studies have provided valuable insights into the practical applications of digital technology in particular educational domains, they have not comprehensively explored the macro-mechanisms and internal logic of digital technology implementation in education. Additionally, these studies were conducted over a relatively brief period, making it challenging to gain a comprehensive understanding of the macro-dynamics and evolutionary process of digital technology in education. Some studies have provided an overview of digital education from an educational perspective but lack a precise understanding of technological advancement and change (Yang et al. 2022 ). Therefore, this study seeks to employ a systematic scientific approach to collate relevant research from 2000 to 2022, comprehend the internal logic and development trends of digital technology in education, and grasp the outstanding contribution of digital technology in promoting the sustainability of education in time and space. In summary, this study aims to address the following questions:

RQ1: Since the turn of the century, what is the productivity distribution of the field of digital technology education application research in terms of authorship, country/region, institutional and journal level?

RQ2: What is the development trend of research on the application of digital technology in education in the past two decades?

RQ3: What are the current frontiers of research on the application of digital technology in education?

Literature review

Although the term “digital technology” has become ubiquitous, a unified definition has yet to be agreed upon by scholars. Because the meaning of the word digital technology is closely related to the specific context. Within the educational research domain, Selwyn’s ( 2016 ) definition is widely favored by scholars (Pinto and Leite, 2020 ). Selwyn ( 2016 ) provides a comprehensive view of various concrete digital technologies and their applications in education through ten specific cases, such as immediate feedback in classes, orchestrating teaching, and community learning. Through these specific application scenarios, Selwyn ( 2016 ) argues that digital technology encompasses technologies associated with digital devices, including but not limited to tablets, smartphones, computers, and social media platforms (such as Facebook and YouTube). Furthermore, Further, the behavior of accessing the internet at any location through portable devices can be taken as an extension of the behavior of applying digital technology.

The evolving nature of digital technology has significant implications in the field of education. In the 1890s, the focus of digital technology in education was on comprehending the nuances of digital space, digital culture, and educational methodologies, with its connotations aligned more towards the idea of e-learning. The advent and subsequent widespread usage of mobile devices since the dawn of the new millennium have been instrumental in the rapid expansion of the concept of digital technology. Notably, mobile learning devices such as smartphones and tablets, along with social media platforms, have become integral components of digital technology (Conole and Alevizou, 2010 ; Batista et al. 2016 ). In recent times, the burgeoning application of AI technology in the education sector has played a vital role in enriching the digital technology lexicon (Banerjee et al. 2021 ). ChatGPT, for instance, is identified as a novel educational technology that has immense potential to revolutionize future education (Rospigliosi, 2023 ; Arif, Munaf and Ul-Haque, 2023 ).

Pinto and Leite ( 2020 ) conducted a comprehensive macroscopic survey of the use of digital technologies in the education sector and identified three distinct categories, namely technologies for assessment and feedback, mobile technologies, and Information Communication Technologies (ICT). This classification criterion is both macroscopic and highly condensed. In light of the established concept definitions of digital technology in the educational research literature, this study has adopted the characterizations of digital technology proposed by Selwyn ( 2016 ) and Pinto and Leite ( 2020 ) as crucial criteria for analysis and research inclusion. Specifically, this criterion encompasses several distinct types of digital technologies, including Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), Mobile tools, eXtended Reality (XR) Technologies, Assessment and Feedback systems, Learning Management Systems (LMS), Publish and Share tools, Collaborative systems, Social media, Interpersonal Communication tools, and Content Aggregation tools.

Methodology and materials

Research method: bibliometric.

The research on econometric properties has been present in various aspects of human production and life, yet systematic scientific theoretical guidance has been lacking, resulting in disorganization. In 1969, British scholar Pritchard ( 1969 ) proposed “bibliometrics,” which subsequently emerged as an independent discipline in scientific quantification research. Initially, Pritchard defined bibliometrics as “the application of mathematical and statistical methods to books and other media of communication,” however, the definition was not entirely rigorous. To remedy this, Hawkins ( 2001 ) expanded Pritchard’s definition to “the quantitative analysis of the bibliographic features of a body of literature.” De Bellis further clarified the objectives of bibliometrics, stating that it aims to analyze and identify patterns in literature, such as the most productive authors, institutions, countries, and journals in scientific disciplines, trends in literary production over time, and collaboration networks (De Bellis, 2009 ). According to Garfield ( 2006 ), bibliometric research enables the examination of the history and structure of a field, the flow of information within the field, the impact of journals, and the citation status of publications over a longer time scale. All of these definitions illustrate the unique role of bibliometrics as a research method for evaluating specific research fields.

This study uses CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Charticulator to analyze data and create visualizations. Each of these three tools has its own strengths and can complement each other. CiteSpace and VOSviewer use set theory and probability theory to provide various visualization views in fields such as keywords, co-occurrence, and co-authors. They are easy to use and produce visually appealing graphics (Chen, 2006 ; van Eck and Waltman, 2009 ) and are currently the two most widely used bibliometric tools in the field of visualization (Pan et al. 2018 ). In this study, VOSviewer provided the data necessary for the Performance Analysis; Charticulator was then used to redraw using the tabular data exported from VOSviewer (for creating the chord diagram of country collaboration); this was to complement the mapping process, while CiteSpace was primarily utilized to generate keyword maps and conduct burst word analysis.

Data retrieval

This study selected documents from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) in the Web of Science Core Collection as the data source, for the following reasons:

(1) The Web of Science Core Collection, as a high-quality digital literature resource database, has been widely accepted by many researchers and is currently considered the most suitable database for bibliometric analysis (Jing et al. 2023a ). Compared to other databases, Web of Science provides more comprehensive data information (Chen et al. 2022a ), and also provides data formats suitable for analysis using VOSviewer and CiteSpace (Gaviria-Marin et al. 2019 ).

(2) The application of digital technology in the field of education is an interdisciplinary research topic, involving technical knowledge literature belonging to the natural sciences and education-related literature belonging to the social sciences. Therefore, it is necessary to select Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) as the sources of research data, ensuring the comprehensiveness of data while ensuring the reliability and persuasiveness of bibliometric research (Hwang and Tsai, 2011 ; Wang et al. 2022 ).

After establishing the source of research data, it is necessary to determine a retrieval strategy (Jing et al. 2023b ). The choice of a retrieval strategy should consider a balance between the breadth and precision of the search formula. That is to say, it should encompass all the literature pertaining to the research topic while excluding irrelevant documents as much as possible. In light of this, this study has set a retrieval strategy informed by multiple related papers (Mustapha et al. 2021 ; Luo et al. 2021 ). The research by Mustapha et al. ( 2021 ) guided us in selecting keywords (“digital” AND “technolog*”) to target digital technology, while Luo et al. ( 2021 ) informed the selection of terms (such as “instruct*,” “teach*,” and “education”) to establish links with the field of education. Then, based on the current application of digital technology in the educational domain and the scope of selection criteria, we constructed the final retrieval strategy. Following the general patterns of past research (Jing et al. 2023a , 2023b ), we conducted a specific screening using the topic search (Topics, TS) function in Web of Science. For the specific criteria used in the screening for this study, please refer to Table 1 .

Literature screening

Literature acquired through keyword searches may contain ostensibly related yet actually unrelated works. Therefore, to ensure the close relevance of literature included in the analysis to the research topic, it is often necessary to perform a manual screening process to identify the final literature to be analyzed, subsequent to completing the initial literature search.

The manual screening process consists of two steps. Initially, irrelevant literature is weeded out based on the title and abstract, with two members of the research team involved in this phase. This stage lasted about one week, resulting in 1106 articles being retained. Subsequently, a comprehensive review of the full text is conducted to accurately identify the literature required for the study. To carry out the second phase of manual screening effectively and scientifically, and to minimize the potential for researcher bias, the research team established the inclusion criteria presented in Table 2 . Three members were engaged in this phase, which took approximately 2 weeks, culminating in the retention of 588 articles after meticulous screening. The entire screening process is depicted in Fig. 1 , adhering to the PRISMA guidelines (Page et al. 2021 ).

The process of obtaining and filtering the necessary literature data for research.

Data standardization

Nguyen and Hallinger ( 2020 ) pointed out that raw data extracted from scientific databases often contains multiple expressions of the same term, and not addressing these synonymous expressions could affect research results in bibliometric analysis. For instance, in the original data, the author list may include “Tsai, C. C.” and “Tsai, C.-C.”, while the keyword list may include “professional-development” and “professional development,” which often require merging. Therefore, before analyzing the selected literature, a data disambiguation process is necessary to standardize the data (Strotmann and Zhao, 2012 ; Van Eck and Waltman, 2019 ). This study adopted the data standardization process proposed by Taskin and Al ( 2019 ), mainly including the following standardization operations:

Firstly, the author and source fields in the data are corrected and standardized to differentiate authors with similar names.

Secondly, the study checks whether the journals to which the literature belongs have been renamed in the past over 20 years, so as to avoid the influence of periodical name change on the analysis results.

Finally, the keyword field is standardized by unifying parts of speech and singular/plural forms of keywords, which can help eliminate redundant entries in the knowledge graph.

Performance analysis (RQ1)

This section offers a thorough and detailed analysis of the state of research in the field of digital technology education. By utilizing descriptive statistics and visual maps, it provides a comprehensive overview of the development trends, authors, countries, institutions, and journal distribution within the field. The insights presented in this section are of great significance in advancing our understanding of the current state of research in this field and identifying areas for further investigation. The use of visual aids to display inter-country cooperation and the evolution of the field adds to the clarity and coherence of the analysis.

Time trend of the publications

To understand a research field, it is first necessary to understand the most basic quantitative information, among which the change in the number of publications per year best reflects the development trend of a research field. Figure 2 shows the distribution of publication dates.

Time trend of the publications on application of digital technology in education.

From the Fig. 2 , it can be seen that the development of this field over the past over 20 years can be roughly divided into three stages. The first stage was from 2000 to 2007, during which the number of publications was relatively low. Due to various factors such as technological maturity, the academic community did not pay widespread attention to the role of digital technology in expanding the scope of teaching and learning. The second stage was from 2008 to 2019, during which the overall number of publications showed an upward trend, and the development of the field entered an accelerated period, attracting more and more scholars’ attention. The third stage was from 2020 to 2022, during which the number of publications stabilized at around 100. During this period, the impact of the pandemic led to a large number of scholars focusing on the role of digital technology in education during the pandemic, and research on the application of digital technology in education became a core topic in social science research.

Analysis of authors

An analysis of the author’s publication volume provides information about the representative scholars and core research strengths of a research area. Table 3 presents information on the core authors in adaptive learning research, including name, publication number, and average number of citations per article (based on the analysis and statistics from VOSviewer).

Variations in research foci among scholars abound. Within the field of digital technology education application research over the past two decades, Neil Selwyn stands as the most productive author, having published 15 papers garnering a total of 1027 citations, resulting in an average of 68.47 citations per paper. As a Professor at the Faculty of Education at Monash University, Selwyn concentrates on exploring the application of digital technology in higher education contexts (Selwyn et al. 2021 ), as well as related products in higher education such as Coursera, edX, and Udacity MOOC platforms (Bulfin et al. 2014 ). Selwyn’s contributions to the educational sociology perspective include extensive research on the impact of digital technology on education, highlighting the spatiotemporal extension of educational processes and practices through technological means as the greatest value of educational technology (Selwyn, 2012 ; Selwyn and Facer, 2014 ). In addition, he provides a blueprint for the development of future schools in 2030 based on the present impact of digital technology on education (Selwyn et al. 2019 ). The second most productive author in this field, Henderson, also offers significant contributions to the understanding of the important value of digital technology in education, specifically in the higher education setting, with a focus on the impact of the pandemic (Henderson et al. 2015 ; Cohen et al. 2022 ). In contrast, Edwards’ research interests focus on early childhood education, particularly the application of digital technology in this context (Edwards, 2013 ; Bird and Edwards, 2015 ). Additionally, on the technical level, Edwards also mainly prefers digital game technology, because it is a digital technology that children are relatively easy to accept (Edwards, 2015 ).

Analysis of countries/regions and organization

The present study aimed to ascertain the leading countries in digital technology education application research by analyzing 75 countries related to 558 works of literature. Table 4 depicts the top ten countries that have contributed significantly to this field in terms of publication count (based on the analysis and statistics from VOSviewer). Our analysis of Table 4 data shows that England emerged as the most influential country/region, with 92 published papers and 2401 citations. Australia and the United States secured the second and third ranks, respectively, with 90 papers (2187 citations) and 70 papers (1331 citations) published. Geographically, most of the countries featured in the top ten publication volumes are situated in Australia, North America, and Europe, with China being the only exception. Notably, all these countries, except China, belong to the group of developed nations, suggesting that economic strength is a prerequisite for fostering research in the digital technology education application field.

This study presents a visual representation of the publication output and cooperation relationships among different countries in the field of digital technology education application research. Specifically, a chord diagram is employed to display the top 30 countries in terms of publication output, as depicted in Fig. 3 . The chord diagram is composed of nodes and chords, where the nodes are positioned as scattered points along the circumference, and the length of each node corresponds to the publication output, with longer lengths indicating higher publication output. The chords, on the other hand, represent the cooperation relationships between any two countries, and are weighted based on the degree of closeness of the cooperation, with wider chords indicating closer cooperation. Through the analysis of the cooperation relationships, the findings suggest that the main publishing countries in this field are engaged in cooperative relationships with each other, indicating a relatively high level of international academic exchange and research internationalization.

In the diagram, nodes are scattered along the circumference of a circle, with the length of each node representing the volume of publications. The weighted arcs connecting any two points on the circle are known as chords, representing the collaborative relationship between the two, with the width of the arc indicating the closeness of the collaboration.

Further analyzing Fig. 3 , we can extract more valuable information, enabling a deeper understanding of the connections between countries in the research field of digital technology in educational applications. It is evident that certain countries, such as the United States, China, and England, display thicker connections, indicating robust collaborative relationships in terms of productivity. These thicker lines signify substantial mutual contributions and shared objectives in certain sectors or fields, highlighting the interconnectedness and global integration in these areas. By delving deeper, we can also explore potential future collaboration opportunities through the chord diagram, identifying possible partners to propel research and development in this field. In essence, the chord diagram successfully encapsulates and conveys the multi-dimensionality of global productivity and cooperation, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of the intricate inter-country relationships and networks in a global context, providing valuable guidance and insights for future research and collaborations.

An in-depth examination of the publishing institutions is provided in Table 5 , showcasing the foremost 10 institutions ranked by their publication volume. Notably, Monash University and Australian Catholic University, situated in Australia, have recorded the most prolific publications within the digital technology education application realm, with 22 and 10 publications respectively. Moreover, the University of Oslo from Norway is featured among the top 10 publishing institutions, with an impressive average citation count of 64 per publication. It is worth highlighting that six institutions based in the United Kingdom were also ranked within the top 10 publishing institutions, signifying their leading position in this area of research.

Analysis of journals

Journals are the main carriers for publishing high-quality papers. Some scholars point out that the two key factors to measure the influence of journals in the specified field are the number of articles published and the number of citations. The more papers published in a magazine and the more citations, the greater its influence (Dzikowski, 2018 ). Therefore, this study utilized VOSviewer to statistically analyze the top 10 journals with the most publications in the field of digital technology in education and calculated the average citations per article (see Table 6 ).

Based on Table 6 , it is apparent that the highest number of articles in the domain of digital technology in education research were published in Education and Information Technologies (47 articles), Computers & Education (34 articles), and British Journal of Educational Technology (32 articles), indicating a higher article output compared to other journals. This underscores the fact that these three journals concentrate more on the application of digital technology in education. Furthermore, several other journals, such as Technology Pedagogy and Education and Sustainability, have published more than 15 articles in this domain. Sustainability represents the open access movement, which has notably facilitated research progress in this field, indicating that the development of open access journals in recent years has had a significant impact. Although there is still considerable disagreement among scholars on the optimal approach to achieve open access, the notion that research outcomes should be accessible to all is widely recognized (Huang et al. 2020 ). On further analysis of the research fields to which these journals belong, except for Sustainability, it is evident that they all pertain to educational technology, thus providing a qualitative definition of the research area of digital technology education from the perspective of journals.

Temporal keyword analysis: thematic evolution (RQ2)

The evolution of research themes is a dynamic process, and previous studies have attempted to present the developmental trajectory of fields by drawing keyword networks in phases (Kumar et al. 2021 ; Chen et al. 2022b ). To understand the shifts in research topics across different periods, this study follows past research and, based on the significant changes in the research field and corresponding technological advancements during the outlined periods, divides the timeline into four stages (the first stage from January 2000 to December 2005, the second stage from January 2006 to December 2011, the third stage from January 2012 to December 2017; and the fourth stage from January 2018 to December 2022). The division into these four stages was determined through a combination of bibliometric analysis and literature review, which presented a clear trajectory of the field’s development. The research analyzes the keyword networks for each time period (as there are only three articles in the first stage, it was not possible to generate an appropriate keyword co-occurrence map, hence only the keyword co-occurrence maps from the second to the fourth stages are provided), to understand the evolutionary track of the digital technology education application research field over time.

2000.1–2005.12: germination period

From January 2000 to December 2005, digital technology education application research was in its infancy. Only three studies focused on digital technology, all of which were related to computers. Due to the popularity of computers, the home became a new learning environment, highlighting the important role of digital technology in expanding the scope of learning spaces (Sutherland et al. 2000 ). In specific disciplines and contexts, digital technology was first favored in medical clinical practice, becoming an important tool for supporting the learning of clinical knowledge and practice (Tegtmeyer et al. 2001 ; Durfee et al. 2003 ).

2006.1–2011.12: initial development period

Between January 2006 and December 2011, it was the initial development period of digital technology education research. Significant growth was observed in research related to digital technology, and discussions and theoretical analyses about “digital natives” emerged. During this phase, scholars focused on the debate about “how to use digital technology reasonably” and “whether current educational models and school curriculum design need to be adjusted on a large scale” (Bennett and Maton, 2010 ; Selwyn, 2009 ; Margaryan et al. 2011 ). These theoretical and speculative arguments provided a unique perspective on the impact of cognitive digital technology on education and teaching. As can be seen from the vocabulary such as “rethinking”, “disruptive pedagogy”, and “attitude” in Fig. 4 , many scholars joined the calm reflection and analysis under the trend of digital technology (Laurillard, 2008 ; Vratulis et al. 2011 ). During this phase, technology was still undergoing dramatic changes. The development of mobile technology had already caught the attention of many scholars (Wong et al. 2011 ), but digital technology represented by computers was still very active (Selwyn et al. 2011 ). The change in technological form would inevitably lead to educational transformation. Collins and Halverson ( 2010 ) summarized the prospects and challenges of using digital technology for learning and educational practices, believing that digital technology would bring a disruptive revolution to the education field and bring about a new educational system. In addition, the term “teacher education” in Fig. 4 reflects the impact of digital technology development on teachers. The rapid development of technology has widened the generation gap between teachers and students. To ensure smooth communication between teachers and students, teachers must keep up with the trend of technological development and establish a lifelong learning concept (Donnison, 2009 ).

In the diagram, each node represents a keyword, with the size of the node indicating the frequency of occurrence of the keyword. The connections represent the co-occurrence relationships between keywords, with a higher frequency of co-occurrence resulting in tighter connections.

2012.1–2017.12: critical exploration period

During the period spanning January 2012 to December 2017, the application of digital technology in education research underwent a significant exploration phase. As can be seen from Fig. 5 , different from the previous stage, the specific elements of specific digital technology have started to increase significantly, including the enrichment of technological contexts, the greater variety of research methods, and the diversification of learning modes. Moreover, the temporal and spatial dimensions of the learning environment were further de-emphasized, as noted in previous literature (Za et al. 2014 ). Given the rapidly accelerating pace of technological development, the education system in the digital era is in urgent need of collaborative evolution and reconstruction, as argued by Davis, Eickelmann, and Zaka ( 2013 ).

In the domain of digital technology, social media has garnered substantial scholarly attention as a promising avenue for learning, as noted by Pasquini and Evangelopoulos ( 2016 ). The implementation of social media in education presents several benefits, including the liberation of education from the restrictions of physical distance and time, as well as the erasure of conventional educational boundaries. The user-generated content (UGC) model in social media has emerged as a crucial source for knowledge creation and distribution, with the widespread adoption of mobile devices. Moreover, social networks have become an integral component of ubiquitous learning environments (Hwang et al. 2013 ). The utilization of social media allows individuals to function as both knowledge producers and recipients, which leads to a blurring of the conventional roles of learners and teachers. On mobile platforms, the roles of learners and teachers are not fixed, but instead interchangeable.

In terms of research methodology, the prevalence of empirical studies with survey designs in the field of educational technology during this period is evident from the vocabulary used, such as “achievement,” “acceptance,” “attitude,” and “ict.” in Fig. 5 . These studies aim to understand learners’ willingness to adopt and attitudes towards new technologies, and some seek to investigate the impact of digital technologies on learning outcomes through quasi-experimental designs (Domínguez et al. 2013 ). Among these empirical studies, mobile learning emerged as a hot topic, and this is not surprising. First, the advantages of mobile learning environments over traditional ones have been empirically demonstrated (Hwang et al. 2013 ). Second, learners born around the turn of the century have been heavily influenced by digital technologies and have developed their own learning styles that are more open to mobile devices as a means of learning. Consequently, analyzing mobile learning as a relatively novel mode of learning has become an important issue for scholars in the field of educational technology.

The intervention of technology has led to the emergence of several novel learning modes, with the blended learning model being the most representative one in the current phase. Blended learning, a novel concept introduced in the information age, emphasizes the integration of the benefits of traditional learning methods and online learning. This learning mode not only highlights the prominent role of teachers in guiding, inspiring, and monitoring the learning process but also underlines the importance of learners’ initiative, enthusiasm, and creativity in the learning process. Despite being an early conceptualization, blended learning’s meaning has been expanded by the widespread use of mobile technology and social media in education. The implementation of new technologies, particularly mobile devices, has resulted in the transformation of curriculum design and increased flexibility and autonomy in students’ learning processes (Trujillo Maza et al. 2016 ), rekindling scholarly attention to this learning mode. However, some scholars have raised concerns about the potential drawbacks of the blended learning model, such as its significant impact on the traditional teaching system, the lack of systematic coping strategies and relevant policies in several schools and regions (Moskal et al. 2013 ).

2018.1–2022.12: accelerated transformation period

The period spanning from January 2018 to December 2022 witnessed a rapid transformation in the application of digital technology in education research. The field of digital technology education research reached a peak period of publication, largely influenced by factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Yu et al. 2023 ). Research during this period was built upon the achievements, attitudes, and social media of the previous phase, and included more elements that reflect the characteristics of this research field, such as digital literacy, digital competence, and professional development, as depicted in Fig. 6 . Alongside this, scholars’ expectations for the value of digital technology have expanded, and the pursuit of improving learning efficiency and performance is no longer the sole focus. Some research now aims to cultivate learners’ motivation and enhance their self-efficacy by applying digital technology in a reasonable manner, as demonstrated by recent studies (Beardsley et al. 2021 ; Creely et al. 2021 ).

The COVID-19 pandemic has emerged as a crucial backdrop for the digital technology’s role in sustaining global education, as highlighted by recent scholarly research (Zhou et al. 2022 ; Pan and Zhang, 2020 ; Mo et al. 2022 ). The online learning environment, which is supported by digital technology, has become the primary battleground for global education (Yu, 2022 ). This social context has led to various studies being conducted, with some scholars positing that the pandemic has impacted the traditional teaching order while also expanding learning possibilities in terms of patterns and forms (Alabdulaziz, 2021 ). Furthermore, the pandemic has acted as a catalyst for teacher teaching and technological innovation, and this viewpoint has been empirically substantiated (Moorhouse and Wong, 2021 ). Additionally, some scholars believe that the pandemic’s push is a crucial driving force for the digital transformation of the education system, serving as an essential mechanism for overcoming the system’s inertia (Romero et al. 2021 ).

The rapid outbreak of the pandemic posed a challenge to the large-scale implementation of digital technologies, which was influenced by a complex interplay of subjective and objective factors. Objective constraints included the lack of infrastructure in some regions to support digital technologies, while subjective obstacles included psychological resistance among certain students and teachers (Moorhouse, 2021 ). These factors greatly impacted the progress of online learning during the pandemic. Additionally, Timotheou et al. ( 2023 ) conducted a comprehensive systematic review of existing research on digital technology use during the pandemic, highlighting the critical role played by various factors such as learners’ and teachers’ digital skills, teachers’ personal attributes and professional development, school leadership and management, and administration in facilitating the digitalization and transformation of schools.

The current stage of research is characterized by the pivotal term “digital literacy,” denoting a growing interest in learners’ attitudes and adoption of emerging technologies. Initially, the term “literacy” was restricted to fundamental abilities and knowledge associated with books and print materials (McMillan, 1996 ). However, with the swift advancement of computers and digital technology, there have been various attempts to broaden the scope of literacy beyond its traditional meaning, including game literacy (Buckingham and Burn, 2007 ), information literacy (Eisenberg, 2008 ), and media literacy (Turin and Friesem, 2020 ). Similarly, digital literacy has emerged as a crucial concept, and Gilster and Glister ( 1997 ) were the first to introduce this concept, referring to the proficiency in utilizing technology and processing digital information in academic, professional, and daily life settings. In practical educational settings, learners who possess higher digital literacy often exhibit an aptitude for quickly mastering digital devices and applying them intelligently to education and teaching (Yu, 2022 ).

The utilization of digital technology in education has undergone significant changes over the past two decades, and has been a crucial driver of educational reform with each new technological revolution. The impact of these changes on the underlying logic of digital technology education applications has been noticeable. From computer technology to more recent developments such as virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and artificial intelligence (AI), the acceleration in digital technology development has been ongoing. Educational reforms spurred by digital technology development continue to be dynamic, as each new digital innovation presents new possibilities and models for teaching practice. This is especially relevant in the post-pandemic era, where the importance of technological progress in supporting teaching cannot be overstated (Mughal et al. 2022 ). Existing digital technologies have already greatly expanded the dimensions of education in both time and space, while future digital technologies aim to expand learners’ perceptions. Researchers have highlighted the potential of integrated technology and immersive technology in the development of the educational metaverse, which is highly anticipated to create a new dimension for the teaching and learning environment, foster a new value system for the discipline of educational technology, and more effectively and efficiently achieve the grand educational blueprint of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (Zhang et al. 2022 ; Li and Yu, 2023 ).

Hotspot evolution analysis (RQ3)

The examination of keyword evolution reveals a consistent trend in the advancement of digital technology education application research. The emergence and transformation of keywords serve as indicators of the varying research interests in this field. Thus, the utilization of the burst detection function available in CiteSpace allowed for the identification of the top 10 burst words that exhibited a high level of burst strength. This outcome is illustrated in Table 7 .

According to the results presented in Table 7 , the explosive terminology within the realm of digital technology education research has exhibited a concentration mainly between the years 2018 and 2022. Prior to this time frame, the emerging keywords were limited to “information technology” and “computer”. Notably, among them, computer, as an emergent keyword, has always had a high explosive intensity from 2008 to 2018, which reflects the important position of computer in digital technology and is the main carrier of many digital technologies such as Learning Management Systems (LMS) and Assessment and Feedback systems (Barlovits et al. 2022 ).

Since 2018, an increasing number of research studies have focused on evaluating the capabilities of learners to accept, apply, and comprehend digital technologies. As indicated by the use of terms such as “digital literacy” and “digital skill,” the assessment of learners’ digital literacy has become a critical task. Scholarly efforts have been directed towards the development of literacy assessment tools and the implementation of empirical assessments. Furthermore, enhancing the digital literacy of both learners and educators has garnered significant attention. (Nagle, 2018 ; Yu, 2022 ). Simultaneously, given the widespread use of various digital technologies in different formal and informal learning settings, promoting learners’ digital skills has become a crucial objective for contemporary schools (Nygren et al. 2019 ; Forde and OBrien, 2022 ).

Since 2020, the field of applied research on digital technology education has witnessed the emergence of three new hotspots, all of which have been affected to some extent by the pandemic. Firstly, digital technology has been widely applied in physical education, which is one of the subjects that has been severely affected by the pandemic (Parris et al. 2022 ; Jiang and Ning, 2022 ). Secondly, digital transformation has become an important measure for most schools, especially higher education institutions, to cope with the impact of the pandemic globally (García-Morales et al. 2021 ). Although the concept of digital transformation was proposed earlier, the COVID-19 pandemic has greatly accelerated this transformation process. Educational institutions must carefully redesign their educational products to face this new situation, providing timely digital learning methods, environments, tools, and support systems that have far-reaching impacts on modern society (Krishnamurthy, 2020 ; Salas-Pilco et al. 2022 ). Moreover, the professional development of teachers has become a key mission of educational institutions in the post-pandemic era. Teachers need to have a certain level of digital literacy and be familiar with the tools and online teaching resources used in online teaching, which has become a research hotspot today. Organizing digital skills training for teachers to cope with the application of emerging technologies in education is an important issue for teacher professional development and lifelong learning (Garzón-Artacho et al. 2021 ). As the main organizers and practitioners of emergency remote teaching (ERT) during the pandemic, teachers must put cognitive effort into their professional development to ensure effective implementation of ERT (Romero-Hall and Jaramillo Cherrez, 2022 ).

The burst word “digital transformation” reveals that we are in the midst of an ongoing digital technology revolution. With the emergence of innovative digital technologies such as ChatGPT and Microsoft 365 Copilot, technology trends will continue to evolve, albeit unpredictably. While the impact of these advancements on school education remains uncertain, it is anticipated that the widespread integration of technology will significantly affect the current education system. Rejecting emerging technologies without careful consideration is unwise. Like any revolution, the technological revolution in the education field has both positive and negative aspects. Detractors argue that digital technology disrupts learning and memory (Baron, 2021 ) or causes learners to become addicted and distracted from learning (Selwyn and Aagaard, 2020 ). On the other hand, the prudent use of digital technology in education offers a glimpse of a golden age of open learning. Educational leaders and practitioners have the opportunity to leverage cutting-edge digital technologies to address current educational challenges and develop a rational path for the sustainable and healthy growth of education.

Discussion on performance analysis (RQ1)

The field of digital technology education application research has experienced substantial growth since the turn of the century, a phenomenon that is quantifiably apparent through an analysis of authorship, country/region contributions, and institutional engagement. This expansion reflects the increased integration of digital technologies in educational settings and the heightened scholarly interest in understanding and optimizing their use.

Discussion on authorship productivity in digital technology education research

The authorship distribution within digital technology education research is indicative of the field’s intellectual structure and depth. A primary figure in this domain is Neil Selwyn, whose substantial citation rate underscores the profound impact of his work. His focus on the implications of digital technology in higher education and educational sociology has proven to be seminal. Selwyn’s research trajectory, especially the exploration of spatiotemporal extensions of education through technology, provides valuable insights into the multifaceted role of digital tools in learning processes (Selwyn et al. 2019 ).

Other notable contributors, like Henderson and Edwards, present diversified research interests, such as the impact of digital technologies during the pandemic and their application in early childhood education, respectively. Their varied focuses highlight the breadth of digital technology education research, encompassing pedagogical innovation, technological adaptation, and policy development.

Discussion on country/region-level productivity and collaboration

At the country/region level, the United Kingdom, specifically England, emerges as a leading contributor with 92 published papers and a significant citation count. This is closely followed by Australia and the United States, indicating a strong English-speaking research axis. Such geographical concentration of scholarly output often correlates with investment in research and development, technological infrastructure, and the prevalence of higher education institutions engaging in cutting-edge research.

China’s notable inclusion as the only non-Western country among the top contributors to the field suggests a growing research capacity and interest in digital technology in education. However, the lower average citation per paper for China could reflect emerging engagement or different research focuses that may not yet have achieved the same international recognition as Western counterparts.

The chord diagram analysis furthers this understanding, revealing dense interconnections between countries like the United States, China, and England, which indicates robust collaborations. Such collaborations are fundamental in addressing global educational challenges and shaping international research agendas.

Discussion on institutional-level contributions to digital technology education

Institutional productivity in digital technology education research reveals a constellation of universities driving the field forward. Monash University and the Australian Catholic University have the highest publication output, signaling Australia’s significant role in advancing digital education research. The University of Oslo’s remarkable average citation count per publication indicates influential research contributions, potentially reflecting high-quality studies that resonate with the broader academic community.

The strong showing of UK institutions, including the University of London, The Open University, and the University of Cambridge, reinforces the UK’s prominence in this research field. Such institutions are often at the forefront of pedagogical innovation, benefiting from established research cultures and funding mechanisms that support sustained inquiry into digital education.

Discussion on journal publication analysis

An examination of journal outputs offers a lens into the communicative channels of the field’s knowledge base. Journals such as Education and Information Technologies , Computers & Education , and the British Journal of Educational Technology not only serve as the primary disseminators of research findings but also as indicators of research quality and relevance. The impact factor (IF) serves as a proxy for the quality and influence of these journals within the academic community.

The high citation counts for articles published in Computers & Education suggest that research disseminated through this medium has a wide-reaching impact and is of particular interest to the field. This is further evidenced by its significant IF of 11.182, indicating that the journal is a pivotal platform for seminal work in the application of digital technology in education.

The authorship, regional, and institutional productivity in the field of digital technology education application research collectively narrate the evolution of this domain since the turn of the century. The prominence of certain authors and countries underscores the importance of socioeconomic factors and existing academic infrastructure in fostering research productivity. Meanwhile, the centrality of specific journals as outlets for high-impact research emphasizes the role of academic publishing in shaping the research landscape.

As the field continues to grow, future research may benefit from leveraging the collaborative networks that have been elucidated through this analysis, perhaps focusing on underrepresented regions to broaden the scope and diversity of research. Furthermore, the stabilization of publication numbers in recent years invites a deeper exploration into potential plateaus in research trends or saturation in certain sub-fields, signaling an opportunity for novel inquiries and methodological innovations.

Discussion on the evolutionary trends (RQ2)

The evolution of the research field concerning the application of digital technology in education over the past two decades is a story of convergence, diversification, and transformation, shaped by rapid technological advancements and shifting educational paradigms.

At the turn of the century, the inception of digital technology in education was largely exploratory, with a focus on how emerging computer technologies could be harnessed to enhance traditional learning environments. Research from this early period was primarily descriptive, reflecting on the potential and challenges of incorporating digital tools into the educational setting. This phase was critical in establishing the fundamental discourse that would guide subsequent research, as it set the stage for understanding the scope and impact of digital technology in learning spaces (Wang et al. 2023 ).

As the first decade progressed, the narrative expanded to encompass the pedagogical implications of digital technologies. This was a period of conceptual debates, where terms like “digital natives” and “disruptive pedagogy” entered the academic lexicon, underscoring the growing acknowledgment of digital technology as a transformative force within education (Bennett and Maton, 2010 ). During this time, the research began to reflect a more nuanced understanding of the integration of technology, considering not only its potential to change where and how learning occurred but also its implications for educational equity and access.

In the second decade, with the maturation of internet connectivity and mobile technology, the focus of research shifted from theoretical speculations to empirical investigations. The proliferation of digital devices and the ubiquity of social media influenced how learners interacted with information and each other, prompting a surge in studies that sought to measure the impact of these tools on learning outcomes. The digital divide and issues related to digital literacy became central concerns, as scholars explored the varying capacities of students and educators to engage with technology effectively.

Throughout this period, there was an increasing emphasis on the individualization of learning experiences, facilitated by adaptive technologies that could cater to the unique needs and pacing of learners (Jing et al. 2023a ). This individualization was coupled with a growing recognition of the importance of collaborative learning, both online and offline, and the role of digital tools in supporting these processes. Blended learning models, which combined face-to-face instruction with online resources, emerged as a significant trend, advocating for a balance between traditional pedagogies and innovative digital strategies.

The later years, particularly marked by the COVID-19 pandemic, accelerated the necessity for digital technology in education, transforming it from a supplementary tool to an essential platform for delivering education globally (Mo et al. 2022 ; Mustapha et al. 2021 ). This era brought about an unprecedented focus on online learning environments, distance education, and virtual classrooms. Research became more granular, examining not just the pedagogical effectiveness of digital tools, but also their role in maintaining continuity of education during crises, their impact on teacher and student well-being, and their implications for the future of educational policy and infrastructure.

Across these two decades, the research field has seen a shift from examining digital technology as an external addition to the educational process, to viewing it as an integral component of curriculum design, instructional strategies, and even assessment methods. The emergent themes have broadened from a narrow focus on specific tools or platforms to include wider considerations such as data privacy, ethical use of technology, and the environmental impact of digital tools.

Moreover, the field has moved from considering the application of digital technology in education as a primarily cognitive endeavor to recognizing its role in facilitating socio-emotional learning, digital citizenship, and global competencies. Researchers have increasingly turned their attention to the ways in which technology can support collaborative skills, cultural understanding, and ethical reasoning within diverse student populations.

In summary, the past over twenty years in the research field of digital technology applications in education have been characterized by a progression from foundational inquiries to complex analyses of digital integration. This evolution has mirrored the trajectory of technology itself, from a facilitative tool to a pervasive ecosystem defining contemporary educational experiences. As we look to the future, the field is poised to delve into the implications of emerging technologies like AI, AR, and VR, and their potential to redefine the educational landscape even further. This ongoing metamorphosis suggests that the application of digital technology in education will continue to be a rich area of inquiry, demanding continual adaptation and forward-thinking from educators and researchers alike.

Discussion on the study of research hotspots (RQ3)

The analysis of keyword evolution in digital technology education application research elucidates the current frontiers in the field, reflecting a trajectory that is in tandem with the rapidly advancing digital age. This landscape is sculpted by emergent technological innovations and shaped by the demands of an increasingly digital society.

Interdisciplinary integration and pedagogical transformation

One of the frontiers identified from recent keyword bursts includes the integration of digital technology into diverse educational contexts, particularly noted with the keyword “physical education.” The digitalization of disciplines traditionally characterized by physical presence illustrates the pervasive reach of technology and signifies a push towards interdisciplinary integration where technology is not only a facilitator but also a transformative agent. This integration challenges educators to reconceptualize curriculum delivery to accommodate digital tools that can enhance or simulate the physical aspects of learning.

Digital literacy and skills acquisition

Another pivotal frontier is the focus on “digital literacy” and “digital skill”, which has intensified in recent years. This suggests a shift from mere access to technology towards a comprehensive understanding and utilization of digital tools. In this realm, the emphasis is not only on the ability to use technology but also on critical thinking, problem-solving, and the ethical use of digital resources (Yu, 2022 ). The acquisition of digital literacy is no longer an additive skill but a fundamental aspect of modern education, essential for navigating and contributing to the digital world.

Educational digital transformation

The keyword “digital transformation” marks a significant research frontier, emphasizing the systemic changes that education institutions must undergo to align with the digital era (Romero et al. 2021 ). This transformation includes the redesigning of learning environments, pedagogical strategies, and assessment methods to harness digital technology’s full potential. Research in this area explores the complexity of institutional change, addressing the infrastructural, cultural, and policy adjustments needed for a seamless digital transition.

Engagement and participation

Further exploration into “engagement” and “participation” underscores the importance of student-centered learning environments that are mediated by technology. The current frontiers examine how digital platforms can foster collaboration, inclusivity, and active learning, potentially leading to more meaningful and personalized educational experiences. Here, the use of technology seeks to support the emotional and cognitive aspects of learning, moving beyond the transactional view of education to one that is relational and interactive.

Professional development and teacher readiness

As the field evolves, “professional development” emerges as a crucial area, particularly in light of the pandemic which necessitated emergency remote teaching. The need for teacher readiness in a digital age is a pressing frontier, with research focusing on the competencies required for educators to effectively integrate technology into their teaching practices. This includes familiarity with digital tools, pedagogical innovation, and an ongoing commitment to personal and professional growth in the digital domain.

Pandemic as a catalyst

The recent pandemic has acted as a catalyst for accelerated research and application in this field, particularly in the domains of “digital transformation,” “professional development,” and “physical education.” This period has been a litmus test for the resilience and adaptability of educational systems to continue their operations in an emergency. Research has thus been directed at understanding how digital technologies can support not only continuity but also enhance the quality and reach of education in such contexts.

Ethical and societal considerations

The frontier of digital technology in education is also expanding to consider broader ethical and societal implications. This includes issues of digital equity, data privacy, and the sociocultural impact of technology on learning communities. The research explores how educational technology can be leveraged to address inequities and create more equitable learning opportunities for all students, regardless of their socioeconomic background.

Innovation and emerging technologies

Looking forward, the frontiers are set to be influenced by ongoing and future technological innovations, such as artificial intelligence (AI) (Wu and Yu, 2023 ; Chen et al. 2022a ). The exploration into how these technologies can be integrated into educational practices to create immersive and adaptive learning experiences represents a bold new chapter for the field.

In conclusion, the current frontiers of research on the application of digital technology in education are multifaceted and dynamic. They reflect an overarching movement towards deeper integration of technology in educational systems and pedagogical practices, where the goals are not only to facilitate learning but to redefine it. As these frontiers continue to expand and evolve, they will shape the educational landscape, requiring a concerted effort from researchers, educators, policymakers, and technologists to navigate the challenges and harness the opportunities presented by the digital revolution in education.

Conclusions and future research

Conclusions.

The utilization of digital technology in education is a research area that cuts across multiple technical and educational domains and continues to experience dynamic growth due to the continuous progress of technology. In this study, a systematic review of this field was conducted through bibliometric techniques to examine its development trajectory. The primary focus of the review was to investigate the leading contributors, productive national institutions, significant publications, and evolving development patterns. The study’s quantitative analysis resulted in several key conclusions that shed light on this research field’s current state and future prospects.

(1) The research field of digital technology education applications has entered a stage of rapid development, particularly in recent years due to the impact of the pandemic, resulting in a peak of publications. Within this field, several key authors (Selwyn, Henderson, Edwards, etc.) and countries/regions (England, Australia, USA, etc.) have emerged, who have made significant contributions. International exchanges in this field have become frequent, with a high degree of internationalization in academic research. Higher education institutions in the UK and Australia are the core productive forces in this field at the institutional level.

(2) Education and Information Technologies , Computers & Education , and the British Journal of Educational Technology are notable journals that publish research related to digital technology education applications. These journals are affiliated with the research field of educational technology and provide effective communication platforms for sharing digital technology education applications.

(3) Over the past two decades, research on digital technology education applications has progressed from its early stages of budding, initial development, and critical exploration to accelerated transformation, and it is currently approaching maturity. Technological progress and changes in the times have been key driving forces for educational transformation and innovation, and both have played important roles in promoting the continuous development of education.

(4) Influenced by the pandemic, three emerging frontiers have emerged in current research on digital technology education applications, which are physical education, digital transformation, and professional development under the promotion of digital technology. These frontier research hotspots reflect the core issues that the education system faces when encountering new technologies. The evolution of research hotspots shows that technology breakthroughs in education’s original boundaries of time and space create new challenges. The continuous self-renewal of education is achieved by solving one hotspot problem after another.

The present study offers significant practical implications for scholars and practitioners in the field of digital technology education applications. Firstly, it presents a well-defined framework of the existing research in this area, serving as a comprehensive guide for new entrants to the field and shedding light on the developmental trajectory of this research domain. Secondly, the study identifies several contemporary research hotspots, thus offering a valuable decision-making resource for scholars aiming to explore potential research directions. Thirdly, the study undertakes an exhaustive analysis of published literature to identify core journals in the field of digital technology education applications, with Sustainability being identified as a promising open access journal that publishes extensively on this topic. This finding can potentially facilitate scholars in selecting appropriate journals for their research outputs.

Limitation and future research

Influenced by some objective factors, this study also has some limitations. First of all, the bibliometrics analysis software has high standards for data. In order to ensure the quality and integrity of the collected data, the research only selects the periodical papers in SCIE and SSCI indexes, which are the core collection of Web of Science database, and excludes other databases, conference papers, editorials and other publications, which may ignore some scientific research and original opinions in the field of digital technology education and application research. In addition, although this study used professional software to carry out bibliometric analysis and obtained more objective quantitative data, the analysis and interpretation of data will inevitably have a certain subjective color, and the influence of subjectivity on data analysis cannot be completely avoided. As such, future research endeavors will broaden the scope of literature screening and proactively engage scholars in the field to gain objective and state-of-the-art insights, while minimizing the adverse impact of personal subjectivity on research analysis.

Data availability

The datasets analyzed during the current study are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/F9QMHY

Alabdulaziz MS (2021) COVID-19 and the use of digital technology in mathematics education. Educ Inf Technol 26(6):7609–7633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10602-3

Arif TB, Munaf U, Ul-Haque I (2023) The future of medical education and research: is ChatGPT a blessing or blight in disguise? Med Educ Online 28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2023.2181052

Banerjee M, Chiew D, Patel KT, Johns I, Chappell D, Linton N, Cole GD, Francis DP, Szram J, Ross J, Zaman S (2021) The impact of artificial intelligence on clinical education: perceptions of postgraduate trainee doctors in London (UK) and recommendations for trainers. BMC Med Educ 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02870-x

Barlovits S, Caldeira A, Fesakis G, Jablonski S, Koutsomanoli Filippaki D, Lázaro C, Ludwig M, Mammana MF, Moura A, Oehler DXK, Recio T, Taranto E, Volika S(2022) Adaptive, synchronous, and mobile online education: developing the ASYMPTOTE learning environment. Mathematics 10:1628. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10101628

Article   Google Scholar  

Baron NS(2021) Know what? How digital technologies undermine learning and remembering J Pragmat 175:27–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.01.011

Batista J, Morais NS, Ramos F (2016) Researching the use of communication technologies in higher education institutions in Portugal. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0571-6.ch057

Beardsley M, Albó L, Aragón P, Hernández-Leo D (2021) Emergency education effects on teacher abilities and motivation to use digital technologies. Br J Educ Technol 52. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13101

Bennett S, Maton K(2010) Beyond the “digital natives” debate: towards a more nuanced understanding of students’ technology experiences J Comput Assist Learn 26:321–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00360.x

Buckingham D, Burn A (2007) Game literacy in theory and practice 16:323–349

Google Scholar  

Bulfin S, Pangrazio L, Selwyn N (2014) Making “MOOCs”: the construction of a new digital higher education within news media discourse. In: The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 15. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1856

Camilleri MA, Camilleri AC(2016) Digital learning resources and ubiquitous technologies in education Technol Knowl Learn 22:65–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-016-9287-7

Chen C(2006) CiteSpace II: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 57:359–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317

Chen J, Dai J, Zhu K, Xu L(2022) Effects of extended reality on language learning: a meta-analysis Front Psychol 13:1016519. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1016519

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Chen J, Wang CL, Tang Y (2022b) Knowledge mapping of volunteer motivation: a bibliometric analysis and cross-cultural comparative study. Front Psychol 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.883150

Cohen A, Soffer T, Henderson M(2022) Students’ use of technology and their perceptions of its usefulness in higher education: International comparison J Comput Assist Learn 38(5):1321–1331. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12678

Collins A, Halverson R(2010) The second educational revolution: rethinking education in the age of technology J Comput Assist Learn 26:18–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00339.x

Conole G, Alevizou P (2010) A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in higher education. Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, UK: the Open University, retrieved 17 February

Creely E, Henriksen D, Crawford R, Henderson M(2021) Exploring creative risk-taking and productive failure in classroom practice. A case study of the perceived self-efficacy and agency of teachers at one school Think Ski Creat 42:100951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100951

Davis N, Eickelmann B, Zaka P(2013) Restructuring of educational systems in the digital age from a co-evolutionary perspective J Comput Assist Learn 29:438–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12032

De Belli N (2009) Bibliometrics and citation analysis: from the science citation index to cybermetrics, Scarecrow Press. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12032

Domínguez A, Saenz-de-Navarrete J, de-Marcos L, Fernández-Sanz L, Pagés C, Martínez-Herráiz JJ(2013) Gamifying learning experiences: practical implications and outcomes Comput Educ 63:380–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020

Donnison S (2009) Discourses in conflict: the relationship between Gen Y pre-service teachers, digital technologies and lifelong learning. Australasian J Educ Technol 25. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1138

Durfee SM, Jain S, Shaffer K (2003) Incorporating electronic media into medical student education. Acad Radiol 10:205–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1076-6332(03)80046-6

Dzikowski P(2018) A bibliometric analysis of born global firms J Bus Res 85:281–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.054

van Eck NJ, Waltman L(2009) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping Scientometrics 84:523–538 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

Edwards S(2013) Digital play in the early years: a contextual response to the problem of integrating technologies and play-based pedagogies in the early childhood curriculum Eur Early Child Educ Res J 21:199–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293x.2013.789190

Edwards S(2015) New concepts of play and the problem of technology, digital media and popular-culture integration with play-based learning in early childhood education Technol Pedagogy Educ 25:513–532 https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2015.1108929

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Eisenberg MB(2008) Information literacy: essential skills for the information age DESIDOC J Libr Inf Technol 28:39–47. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.28.2.166

Forde C, OBrien A (2022) A literature review of barriers and opportunities presented by digitally enhanced practical skill teaching and learning in health science education. Med Educ Online 27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2022.2068210

García-Morales VJ, Garrido-Moreno A, Martín-Rojas R (2021) The transformation of higher education after the COVID disruption: emerging challenges in an online learning scenario. Front Psychol 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.616059

Garfield E(2006) The history and meaning of the journal impact factor JAMA 295:90. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.1.90

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Garzón-Artacho E, Sola-Martínez T, Romero-Rodríguez JM, Gómez-García G(2021) Teachers’ perceptions of digital competence at the lifelong learning stage Heliyon 7:e07513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07513

Gaviria-Marin M, Merigó JM, Baier-Fuentes H(2019) Knowledge management: a global examination based on bibliometric analysis Technol Forecast Soc Change 140:194–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.006

Gilster P, Glister P (1997) Digital literacy. Wiley Computer Pub, New York

Greenhow C, Lewin C(2015) Social media and education: reconceptualizing the boundaries of formal and informal learning Learn Media Technol 41:6–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1064954

Hawkins DT(2001) Bibliometrics of electronic journals in information science Infor Res 7(1):7–1. http://informationr.net/ir/7-1/paper120.html

Henderson M, Selwyn N, Finger G, Aston R(2015) Students’ everyday engagement with digital technology in university: exploring patterns of use and “usefulness J High Educ Policy Manag 37:308–319 https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2015.1034424

Huang CK, Neylon C, Hosking R, Montgomery L, Wilson KS, Ozaygen A, Brookes-Kenworthy C (2020) Evaluating the impact of open access policies on research institutions. eLife 9. https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.57067

Hwang GJ, Tsai CC(2011) Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: a review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010 Br J Educ Technol 42:E65–E70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01183.x

Hwang GJ, Wu PH, Zhuang YY, Huang YM(2013) Effects of the inquiry-based mobile learning model on the cognitive load and learning achievement of students Interact Learn Environ 21:338–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2011.575789

Jiang S, Ning CF (2022) Interactive communication in the process of physical education: are social media contributing to the improvement of physical training performance. Universal Access Inf Soc, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00911-w

Jing Y, Zhao L, Zhu KK, Wang H, Wang CL, Xia Q(2023) Research landscape of adaptive learning in education: a bibliometric study on research publications from 2000 to 2022 Sustainability 15:3115–3115. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043115

Jing Y, Wang CL, Chen Y, Wang H, Yu T, Shadiev R (2023b) Bibliometric mapping techniques in educational technology research: a systematic literature review. Educ Inf Technol 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12178-6

Krishnamurthy S (2020) The future of business education: a commentary in the shadow of the Covid-19 pandemic. J Bus Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.034

Kumar S, Lim WM, Pandey N, Christopher Westland J (2021) 20 years of electronic commerce research. Electron Commer Res 21:1–40

Kyza EA, Georgiou Y(2018) Scaffolding augmented reality inquiry learning: the design and investigation of the TraceReaders location-based, augmented reality platform Interact Learn Environ 27:211–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1458039

Laurillard D(2008) Technology enhanced learning as a tool for pedagogical innovation J Philos Educ 42:521–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00658.x

Li M, Yu Z (2023) A systematic review on the metaverse-based blended English learning. Front Psychol 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1087508

Luo H, Li G, Feng Q, Yang Y, Zuo M (2021) Virtual reality in K-12 and higher education: a systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2019. J Comput Assist Learn. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12538

Margaryan A, Littlejohn A, Vojt G(2011) Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies Comput Educ 56:429–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004

McMillan S(1996) Literacy and computer literacy: definitions and comparisons Comput Educ 27:161–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(96)00026-7

Mo CY, Wang CL, Dai J, Jin P (2022) Video playback speed influence on learning effect from the perspective of personalized adaptive learning: a study based on cognitive load theory. Front Psychology 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.839982

Moorhouse BL (2021) Beginning teaching during COVID-19: newly qualified Hong Kong teachers’ preparedness for online teaching. Educ Stud 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2021.1964939

Moorhouse BL, Wong KM (2021) The COVID-19 Pandemic as a catalyst for teacher pedagogical and technological innovation and development: teachers’ perspectives. Asia Pac J Educ 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2021.1988511

Moskal P, Dziuban C, Hartman J (2013) Blended learning: a dangerous idea? Internet High Educ 18:15–23

Mughal MY, Andleeb N, Khurram AFA, Ali MY, Aslam MS, Saleem MN (2022) Perceptions of teaching-learning force about Metaverse for education: a qualitative study. J. Positive School Psychol 6:1738–1745

Mustapha I, Thuy Van N, Shahverdi M, Qureshi MI, Khan N (2021) Effectiveness of digital technology in education during COVID-19 pandemic. a bibliometric analysis. Int J Interact Mob Technol 15:136

Nagle J (2018) Twitter, cyber-violence, and the need for a critical social media literacy in teacher education: a review of the literature. Teach Teach Education 76:86–94

Nazare J, Woolf A, Sysoev I, Ballinger S, Saveski M, Walker M, Roy D (2022) Technology-assisted coaching can increase engagement with learning technology at home and caregivers’ awareness of it. Comput Educ 188:104565

Nguyen UP, Hallinger P (2020) Assessing the distinctive contributions of simulation & gaming to the literature, 1970-2019: a bibliometric review. Simul Gaming 104687812094156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878120941569

Nygren H, Nissinen K, Hämäläinen R, Wever B(2019) Lifelong learning: formal, non-formal and informal learning in the context of the use of problem-solving skills in technology-rich environments Br J Educ Technol 50:1759–1770. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12807

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Moher D (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg 88:105906

Pan SL, Zhang S(2020) From fighting COVID-19 pandemic to tackling sustainable development goals: an opportunity for responsible information systems research Int J Inf Manage 55:102196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102196

Pan X, Yan E, Cui M, Hua W(2018) Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: a comparative study of three tools J Informetr 12:481–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.005

Parris Z, Cale L, Harris J, Casey A (2022) Physical activity for health, covid-19 and social media: what, where and why?. Movimento, 28. https://doi.org/10.22456/1982-8918.122533

Pasquini LA, Evangelopoulos N (2016) Sociotechnical stewardship in higher education: a field study of social media policy documents. J Comput High Educ 29:218–239

Pérez-Sanagustín M, Hernández-Leo D, Santos P, Delgado Kloos C, Blat J(2014) Augmenting reality and formality of informal and non-formal settings to enhance blended learning IEEE Trans Learn Technol 7:118–131. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2014.2312719

Pinto M, Leite C (2020) Digital technologies in support of students learning in Higher Education: literature review. Digital Education Review 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2020.37.343-360

Pires F, Masanet MJ, Tomasena JM, Scolari CA(2022) Learning with YouTube: beyond formal and informal through new actors, strategies and affordances Convergence 28(3):838–853. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856521102054

Pritchard A (1969) Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics 25:348

Romero M, Romeu T, Guitert M, Baztán P (2021) Digital transformation in higher education: the UOC case. In ICERI2021 Proceedings (pp. 6695–6703). IATED https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2021.1512

Romero-Hall E, Jaramillo Cherrez N (2022) Teaching in times of disruption: faculty digital literacy in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2022.2030782

Rospigliosi PA(2023) Artificial intelligence in teaching and learning: what questions should we ask of ChatGPT? Interactive Learning Environments 31:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2180191

Salas-Pilco SZ, Yang Y, Zhang Z(2022) Student engagement in online learning in Latin American higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Br J Educ Technol 53(3):593–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13190

Selwyn N(2009) The digital native-myth and reality In Aslib proceedings 61(4):364–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530910973776

Selwyn N(2012) Making sense of young people, education and digital technology: the role of sociological theory Oxford Review of Education 38:81–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2011.577949

Selwyn N, Facer K(2014) The sociology of education and digital technology: past, present and future Oxford Rev Educ 40:482–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.933005

Selwyn N, Banaji S, Hadjithoma-Garstka C, Clark W(2011) Providing a platform for parents? Exploring the nature of parental engagement with school Learning Platforms J Comput Assist Learn 27:314–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00428.x

Selwyn N, Aagaard J (2020) Banning mobile phones from classrooms-an opportunity to advance understandings of technology addiction, distraction and cyberbullying. Br J Educ Technol 52. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12943

Selwyn N, O’Neill C, Smith G, Andrejevic M, Gu X (2021) A necessary evil? The rise of online exam proctoring in Australian universities. Media Int Austr 1329878X2110058. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878x211005862

Selwyn N, Pangrazio L, Nemorin S, Perrotta C (2019) What might the school of 2030 be like? An exercise in social science fiction. Learn, Media Technol 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1694944

Selwyn, N (2016) What works and why?* Understanding successful technology enabled learning within institutional contexts 2016 Final report Appendices (Part B). Monash University Griffith University

Sjöberg D, Holmgren R (2021) Informal workplace learning in swedish police education-a teacher perspective. Vocations and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-021-09267-3

Strotmann A, Zhao D (2012) Author name disambiguation: what difference does it make in author-based citation analysis? J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 63:1820–1833

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Sutherland R, Facer K, Furlong R, Furlong J(2000) A new environment for education? The computer in the home. Comput Educ 34:195–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(99)00045-7

Szeto E, Cheng AY-N, Hong J-C(2015) Learning with social media: how do preservice teachers integrate YouTube and Social Media in teaching? Asia-Pac Educ Res 25:35–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0230-9

Tang E, Lam C(2014) Building an effective online learning community (OLC) in blog-based teaching portfolios Int High Educ 20:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.002

Taskin Z, Al U(2019) Natural language processing applications in library and information science Online Inf Rev 43:676–690. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-07-2018-0217

Tegtmeyer K, Ibsen L, Goldstein B(2001) Computer-assisted learning in critical care: from ENIAC to HAL Crit Care Med 29:N177–N182. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003246-200108001-00006

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Timotheou S, Miliou O, Dimitriadis Y, Sobrino SV, Giannoutsou N, Cachia R, Moné AM, Ioannou A(2023) Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: a literature review. Educ Inf Technol 28(6):6695–6726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11431-8

Trujillo Maza EM, Gómez Lozano MT, Cardozo Alarcón AC, Moreno Zuluaga L, Gamba Fadul M (2016) Blended learning supported by digital technology and competency-based medical education: a case study of the social medicine course at the Universidad de los Andes, Colombia. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0027-9

Turin O, Friesem Y(2020) Is that media literacy?: Israeli and US media scholars’ perceptions of the field J Media Lit Educ 12:132–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

Van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2019) VOSviewer manual. Universiteit Leiden

Vratulis V, Clarke T, Hoban G, Erickson G(2011) Additive and disruptive pedagogies: the use of slowmation as an example of digital technology implementation Teach Teach Educ 27:1179–1188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.06.004

Wang CL, Dai J, Xu LJ (2022) Big data and data mining in education: a bibliometrics study from 2010 to 2022. In 2022 7th International Conference on Cloud Computing and Big Data Analytics ( ICCCBDA ) (pp. 507-512). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/icccbda55098.2022.9778874

Wang CL, Dai J, Zhu KK, Yu T, Gu XQ (2023) Understanding the continuance intention of college students toward new E-learning spaces based on an integrated model of the TAM and TTF. Int J Hum-Comput Int 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2291609

Wong L-H, Boticki I, Sun J, Looi C-K(2011) Improving the scaffolds of a mobile-assisted Chinese character forming game via a design-based research cycle Comput Hum Behav 27:1783–1793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.03.005

Wu R, Yu Z (2023) Do AI chatbots improve students learning outcomes? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Br J Educ Technol. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13334

Yang D, Zhou J, Shi D, Pan Q, Wang D, Chen X, Liu J (2022) Research status, hotspots, and evolutionary trends of global digital education via knowledge graph analysis. Sustainability 14:15157–15157. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215157

Yu T, Dai J, Wang CL (2023) Adoption of blended learning: Chinese university students’ perspectives. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:390. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215157

Yu Z (2022) Sustaining student roles, digital literacy, learning achievements, and motivation in online learning environments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability 14:4388. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084388

Za S, Spagnoletti P, North-Samardzic A(2014) Organisational learning as an emerging process: the generative role of digital tools in informal learning practices Br J Educ Technol 45:1023–1035. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12211

Zhang X, Chen Y, Hu L, Wang Y (2022) The metaverse in education: definition, framework, features, potential applications, challenges, and future research topics. Front Psychol 13:1016300. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1016300

Zhou M, Dzingirai C, Hove K, Chitata T, Mugandani R (2022) Adoption, use and enhancement of virtual learning during COVID-19. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10985-x

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Zhejiang Provincial Social Science Planning Project, “Mechanisms and Pathways for Empowering Classroom Teaching through Learning Spaces under the Strategy of High-Quality Education Development”, the 2022 National Social Science Foundation Education Youth Project “Research on the Strategy of Creating Learning Space Value and Empowering Classroom Teaching under the background of ‘Double Reduction’” (Grant No. CCA220319) and the National College Student Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program of China (Grant No. 202310337023).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science and Technology, Zhejiang University of Technology, Zhejiang, China

Chengliang Wang, Xiaojiao Chen, Yidan Liu & Yuhui Jing

Graduate School of Business, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Malaysia

Department of Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Beihang University, Beijing, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Y.J., C.W.; methodology, C.W.; software, C.W., Y.L.; writing-original draft preparation, C.W., Y.L.; writing-review and editing, T.Y., Y.L., C.W.; supervision, X.C., T.Y.; project administration, Y.J.; funding acquisition, X.C., Y.L. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. All authors have read and approved the re-submission of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuhui Jing .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

Ethical approval was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

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

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Wang, C., Chen, X., Yu, T. et al. Education reform and change driven by digital technology: a bibliometric study from a global perspective. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 256 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02717-y

Download citation

Received : 11 July 2023

Accepted : 17 January 2024

Published : 12 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02717-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

A meta-analysis of learners’ continuance intention toward online education platforms.

• Chengliang Wang

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Our Mission

What Is Education For?

Read an excerpt from a new book by Sir Ken Robinson and Kate Robinson, which calls for redesigning education for the future.

What is education for? As it happens, people differ sharply on this question. It is what is known as an “essentially contested concept.” Like “democracy” and “justice,” “education” means different things to different people. Various factors can contribute to a person’s understanding of the purpose of education, including their background and circumstances. It is also inflected by how they view related issues such as ethnicity, gender, and social class. Still, not having an agreed-upon definition of education doesn’t mean we can’t discuss it or do anything about it.

We just need to be clear on terms. There are a few terms that are often confused or used interchangeably—“learning,” “education,” “training,” and “school”—but there are important differences between them. Learning is the process of acquiring new skills and understanding. Education is an organized system of learning. Training is a type of education that is focused on learning specific skills. A school is a community of learners: a group that comes together to learn with and from each other. It is vital that we differentiate these terms: children love to learn, they do it naturally; many have a hard time with education, and some have big problems with school.

There are many assumptions of compulsory education. One is that young people need to know, understand, and be able to do certain things that they most likely would not if they were left to their own devices. What these things are and how best to ensure students learn them are complicated and often controversial issues. Another assumption is that compulsory education is a preparation for what will come afterward, like getting a good job or going on to higher education.

So, what does it mean to be educated now? Well, I believe that education should expand our consciousness, capabilities, sensitivities, and cultural understanding. It should enlarge our worldview. As we all live in two worlds—the world within you that exists only because you do, and the world around you—the core purpose of education is to enable students to understand both worlds. In today’s climate, there is also a new and urgent challenge: to provide forms of education that engage young people with the global-economic issues of environmental well-being.

This core purpose of education can be broken down into four basic purposes.

Education should enable young people to engage with the world within them as well as the world around them. In Western cultures, there is a firm distinction between the two worlds, between thinking and feeling, objectivity and subjectivity. This distinction is misguided. There is a deep correlation between our experience of the world around us and how we feel. As we explored in the previous chapters, all individuals have unique strengths and weaknesses, outlooks and personalities. Students do not come in standard physical shapes, nor do their abilities and personalities. They all have their own aptitudes and dispositions and different ways of understanding things. Education is therefore deeply personal. It is about cultivating the minds and hearts of living people. Engaging them as individuals is at the heart of raising achievement.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasizes that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,” and that “Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.” Many of the deepest problems in current systems of education result from losing sight of this basic principle.

Schools should enable students to understand their own cultures and to respect the diversity of others. There are various definitions of culture, but in this context the most appropriate is “the values and forms of behavior that characterize different social groups.” To put it more bluntly, it is “the way we do things around here.” Education is one of the ways that communities pass on their values from one generation to the next. For some, education is a way of preserving a culture against outside influences. For others, it is a way of promoting cultural tolerance. As the world becomes more crowded and connected, it is becoming more complex culturally. Living respectfully with diversity is not just an ethical choice, it is a practical imperative.

There should be three cultural priorities for schools: to help students understand their own cultures, to understand other cultures, and to promote a sense of cultural tolerance and coexistence. The lives of all communities can be hugely enriched by celebrating their own cultures and the practices and traditions of other cultures.

Education should enable students to become economically responsible and independent. This is one of the reasons governments take such a keen interest in education: they know that an educated workforce is essential to creating economic prosperity. Leaders of the Industrial Revolution knew that education was critical to creating the types of workforce they required, too. But the world of work has changed so profoundly since then, and continues to do so at an ever-quickening pace. We know that many of the jobs of previous decades are disappearing and being rapidly replaced by contemporary counterparts. It is almost impossible to predict the direction of advancing technologies, and where they will take us.

How can schools prepare students to navigate this ever-changing economic landscape? They must connect students with their unique talents and interests, dissolve the division between academic and vocational programs, and foster practical partnerships between schools and the world of work, so that young people can experience working environments as part of their education, not simply when it is time for them to enter the labor market.

Education should enable young people to become active and compassionate citizens. We live in densely woven social systems. The benefits we derive from them depend on our working together to sustain them. The empowerment of individuals has to be balanced by practicing the values and responsibilities of collective life, and of democracy in particular. Our freedoms in democratic societies are not automatic. They come from centuries of struggle against tyranny and autocracy and those who foment sectarianism, hatred, and fear. Those struggles are far from over. As John Dewey observed, “Democracy has to be born anew every generation, and education is its midwife.”

For a democratic society to function, it depends upon the majority of its people to be active within the democratic process. In many democracies, this is increasingly not the case. Schools should engage students in becoming active, and proactive, democratic participants. An academic civics course will scratch the surface, but to nurture a deeply rooted respect for democracy, it is essential to give young people real-life democratic experiences long before they come of age to vote.

Eight Core Competencies

The conventional curriculum is based on a collection of separate subjects. These are prioritized according to beliefs around the limited understanding of intelligence we discussed in the previous chapter, as well as what is deemed to be important later in life. The idea of “subjects” suggests that each subject, whether mathematics, science, art, or language, stands completely separate from all the other subjects. This is problematic. Mathematics, for example, is not defined only by propositional knowledge; it is a combination of types of knowledge, including concepts, processes, and methods as well as propositional knowledge. This is also true of science, art, and languages, and of all other subjects. It is therefore much more useful to focus on the concept of disciplines rather than subjects.

Disciplines are fluid; they constantly merge and collaborate. In focusing on disciplines rather than subjects we can also explore the concept of interdisciplinary learning. This is a much more holistic approach that mirrors real life more closely—it is rare that activities outside of school are as clearly segregated as conventional curriculums suggest. A journalist writing an article, for example, must be able to call upon skills of conversation, deductive reasoning, literacy, and social sciences. A surgeon must understand the academic concept of the patient’s condition, as well as the practical application of the appropriate procedure. At least, we would certainly hope this is the case should we find ourselves being wheeled into surgery.

The concept of disciplines brings us to a better starting point when planning the curriculum, which is to ask what students should know and be able to do as a result of their education. The four purposes above suggest eight core competencies that, if properly integrated into education, will equip students who leave school to engage in the economic, cultural, social, and personal challenges they will inevitably face in their lives. These competencies are curiosity, creativity, criticism, communication, collaboration, compassion, composure, and citizenship. Rather than be triggered by age, they should be interwoven from the beginning of a student’s educational journey and nurtured throughout.

From Imagine If: Creating a Future for Us All by Sir Ken Robinson, Ph.D and Kate Robinson, published by Penguin Books, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC. Copyright © 2022 by the Estate of Sir Kenneth Robinson and Kate Robinson.

Greater Good Science Center • Magazine • In Action • In Education

Our Best Education Articles of 2019

Looking for inspiration to start the new decade off on the right foot? Our most popular education articles of 2019 explore how children develop purpose, how we can best support our students’ mental health and social-emotional development, why we benefit from listening to each other’s stories, and more.

And…if you want to put the scientific findings from these articles into practice, check out our new website for educators, Greater Good in Education (GGIE), officially launching on February 20, 2020.

In response to our readers’ call for more practical resources for the classroom, GGIE features free research-based practices, lessons, and strategies for educators to foster their students’ and their own well-being, and for school leaders to develop positive school climates—all in the service of cultivating kinder, happier, and more equitable classrooms and schools.

If you’d like to take a deeper dive into the science behind social-emotional learning, mindfulness, and ethical development, join us for our annual Summer Institute for Educators . Applications are due February 15, 2019.

To whet your appetite, here are the 10 best education articles of 2019, based on a composite ranking of pageviews and editors’ picks.

What Are the Best Ways to Prevent Bullying in Schools? , by Diana Divecha: A new study identifies the most effective approaches to bullying prevention.

How to Help Young People Transition into Adulthood , by Betty Ray: Modern “rites of passage” can help teens prepare for an uncertain future.

Five Childhood Experiences That Lead to a More Purposeful Life , by Maryam Abdullah: Research suggests that our paths to finding purpose can be shaped by early childhood experiences.

How Colleges Today Are Supporting Students’ Mental Health , by Amy L. Eva:   Colleges and universities are addressing well-being in students with new and innovative approaches.

How Understanding Your Brain Can Help You Learn , by Jill Suttie: A new book explains six keys to learning that can help anyone overcome barriers to success in school or in life.

Four Ways Schools Can Support the Whole Child , by Lisa Flook: Beyond just teaching academics, schools can foster students’ development in their relationships, identity, emotional skills, and overall well-being.

Honoring the Teacher's Heart: Well-Being Practices for School Change

Join our new online Community of Practice for educators!

How to Support Teens’ Social-Emotional Development , by Amy L. Eva: We need to appeal to teens’ need for status and respect for SEL to work in high schools.

How to Help Students with Learning Disabilities Focus on Their Strengths , by Rebecca Branstetter: We can empower students with learning disabilities with the language we use and the way we teach and guide them.

How to Become a Scientist of Your Own Emotions , by Jill Suttie: A Q&A with researcher Marc Brackett about how to cultivate emotional intelligence in ourselves and our kids.

What Happens When We Listen to Teachers’ Stories? by Amy L. Eva: Teachers of Oakland wants to change the conversation about education by humanizing teachers. 

What Teens Are Actually Thankful For (video), by Jane Park: A first-grade teacher, a best friend, a parent—high schoolers share their gratitude letters with their recipients. 


 A Lesson in Thanks and Vulnerability (podcast): A junior high school teacher spent his life defying stereotypes about how men should express their emotions. Here he takes on a new challenge: getting his students to express gratitude.

About the Author

Amy L. Eva, Ph.D. , is the associate education director at the Greater Good Science Center. As an educational psychologist and teacher educator with over 25 years in classrooms, she currently writes, presents, and leads online courses focused on student and educator well-being, mindfulness, and courage. Her new book, Surviving Teacher Burnout: A Weekly Guide To Build Resilience, Deal with Emotional Exhaustion, and Stay Inspired in the Classroom, features 52 simple, low-lift strategies for enhancing educators’ social and emotional well-being.

You May Also Enjoy

Our Best Education Articles of 2016

Our Best Education Articles of 2018

Our Favorite Books for Educators in 2019

Our Favorite Books for Educators in 2018

Our Best Education Articles of 2017

Advertisement

Writing Research Articles for Publication in Early Childhood Education

• Published: 23 November 2012
• Volume 41 , pages 45–54, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

• Olivia N. Saracho 1  

2027 Accesses

6 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Criticism and testing are of the essence of our work. This means that science is a fundamentally social activity, which implies that it depends on good communication. In the practice of science we are aware of this, and that is why it is right for our journals to insist on clarity and intelligibility. —Hermann Bondi

Published research results in early childhood education contribute to the field’s knowledge, theory, and practice. They also guide future early childhood education research studies. The publication of research articles is an essential requirement for academics. For some researchers, however, writing may be a difficult activity, particularly the process of getting the study published. This article discusses basic issues in scholarly writing and offers guidelines on ways to organize and write scientific research manuscripts that are appropriate for early childhood education and other disciplines. It explains the importance of publishing, defines the meaning of a scientific research publication, and explains the process in manuscript preparation to guide emerging researchers to write research manuscripts that are comprehensible and will have a high probability of being accepted for publication. Finally, it describes the publication process.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Writing and Publishing Qualitative Studies in Early Childhood Education

The Historical Emergence of Early Childhood Education Research in Australia

Early Childhood Education

Albers, C. A., Floyd, R. G., Fuhrmann, M. J., & Martínez, R. S. (2011). Publication criteria and recommended areas of improvement within school psychology journals as reported by editors, journal board members, and manuscript authors. Journal of School Psychology, 49 (6), 669–689.

Article   Google Scholar  

American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35 (6), 33–40.

American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Google Scholar  

Baldwin, C., & Chandler, G. E. (2002). Improving faculty publication output: The role of a writing coach. Journal of Professional Nursing, 18 (1), 8–15.

Council of Biology Editors. (1968). Proposed definition of a primary publication. Council of Biology Editors Newsletter , 1–2.

Cunningham, S. J. (2004). How to write a paper. Journal of Orthodontics, 31 (1), 47–51.

Day, R., & Sakaduski, N. (2011). How to write and publish a scientific paper. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Derntl, M. (2011). Basics of research paper writing and publishing . Estoril, Portugal: RWTH (unpublished manuscript).

Dies, R. R. (1993). Writing for publication: Overcoming common obstacles. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 43 (2), 243–249.

Dixon, N. (2011). Writing for publication for the first time—Try the hunter style. International Journal of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, 1 (2), 38–45.

Dixon, N. (in press). Writing for publication on research with young children. In O. N. Saracho (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in early childhood education . Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Floyd, R. G., Cooley, K. M., Arnett, J. E., Fagan, T. K., Mercer, S. H., & Hingle, C. (2011). An overview and analysis of journal operations, journal publication patterns, and journal impact in school psychology and related fields. Journal of School Psychology, 49 (6), 617–647.

Grant, B., & Knowles, S. (2000). Flights of imagination: Academic women be(com)ing writers. International Journal for Academic Development, 5 (1), 6–19.

Lee, A., & Boud, D. (2003). Writing groups, change and academic identity: Research development as local practice. Studies in Higher Education, 28 (2), 187–200.

Maloy, S. (2001). Guidelines for writing a scientific paper . University of California, Irvine. Retrieved from http://www.marshfieldclinic.org/proxy/mcrf-admin-oswp-rm-guidelines_for_writing_a_scientific_manuscript.1.pdf .

Martínez, R. S., Floyd, R. G., & Erichsen, L. (2011). Strategies and attributes of highly productive scholars and contributors to the school psychology literature: Recommendations for increasing scholarly productivity. Journal of School Psychology, 49 , 691–720.

McGrail, M. R., Rickard, C. M., & Jones, R. (2006). Publish or perish: A systematic review of interventions to increase academic publication rates. Higher Education Research & Development, 25 (1), 19–35.

Morss, K., & Murray, R. (2001). Researching academic writing within a structured programme: Insights and outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 26 (1), 35–42.

Murray, R., & Newton, M. (2008). Facilitating writing for publication. Physiotherapy, 94 (1), 29–34.

Nihalani, P. K., & Mayrath, M. C. (2008). Publishing in educational psychology journals: Comments from editors. Educational Psychology Review, 20 , 29–39.

Peat, J., Elliott, E., Baur, L., & Keena, V. (2002). Scientific writing—Easy when you know how . London: British Medical Journal(BMJ) Books.

Saracho, O. N. (1983). Relationship between cognitive style and teachers’ perceptions of young children’s academic competence. Journal of Experimental Education, 51 (4), 184–189.

Saracho, O. N. (1988). Preschool reading attitudes scale. Early Child Development and Care, 37 , 93–108.

Saracho, O. N. (1995). Relationship between the cognitive styles and play behaviors of preschool children. Educational Psychology, 15 (4), 405–415.

Saracho, O. N. (1997). Using the home environment for emergent literacy. Early Child Development and Care, 127–128 (1), 201–216.

Saracho, O. N. (1998). Socialization factors in the cognitive style and play of young children. International Journal of Educational Research, 29 (3), 263–276.

Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (2010). Families’ selection of children’s literature books. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37 (5), 401–409.

Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (2012). Introduction: A contemporary researcher’s vade mecum (redux) . In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of young children/3rd (pp. 1–15). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.

Selvanathan, S. K., Udani, R. D., Udani, S. D., & Haylett, K. R. (2006). The art of the abstract. Student: British Medical Journal, 14 , 70–71.

Sharp, D. (2002). Kipling’s guide to writing a scientific paper. Croatian Medical Journal, 43 (3), 262–267.

Stegemann, S., & Gastel, B. (2009). Council classics: What constitutes primary publication? Science Editor, 32 (2), 57–58.

Todorovic, L. (2003). Original (scientific) paper: The IMRaD layout. Archive of Oncology, 11 (3), 203–205.

Udani, R. D., Selvanathan, S. K., Udani, S. D., & Haylett, K. R. (2007). Writing up your research. Student: British Medical Journal, 15 , 406–408.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Teaching, Learning, Policy and Leadership, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA

Olivia N. Saracho

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olivia N. Saracho .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Saracho, O.N. Writing Research Articles for Publication in Early Childhood Education. Early Childhood Educ J 41 , 45–54 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0564-3

Download citation

Published : 23 November 2012

Issue Date : January 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0564-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Writing for publication
• First-time author
• Writing an article
• Publication process
• Scholarly writing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

BU Hub Turns Six—and It’s More Important Than Ever

With workers frequently changing jobs and careers, faculty and students reflect on the value and challenges of boston university’s groundbreaking general-education curriculum.

Students in the History of Boston University summer 2021 Hub course taught by Daryl Healea (STH’01, Wheelock’11) (far left) about to embark on a walking tour around Boston to view historical BU locations. Photo by Jake Belcher

Alene Bouranova

Modern Greek Culture and Film. Marine Biology. Introduction to Internet Technologies and Web Programming. History of Boston University. Political Economy in China. Ceramics I. 

These are just a selection of the nearly 2,000 classes that qualify for the Boston University Hub , BU’s general-education undergraduate program for all BU undergraduates. 

With the days of employees staying with one company for decades, or even a lifetime, long gone , and less than 30 percent of college graduates working in the same field they majored in, experts say it’s more important than ever that workers carry a diverse skill set that’s easily transferable between companies and career paths. Today’s average worker will have 12 jobs in their life, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education .

The Hub, which launched in 2018 and just marked its six-year anniversary, is intended for just this purpose. It’s also marking the inaugural mandatory five-year review period for the first round of Hub courses added to the program.

The Hub combines gen-ed principles—giving students a set of versatile skills they can carry into their careers—with a framework of learning outcomes that can be applied to all fields. That means students have almost limitless options to choose from when meeting their Hub requirements: courses differ widely—from, say, Archaeological Science to Religion and Hip Hop—but that’s precisely what makes the program a standout among higher education institutions. 

“When I participate in higher-ed conferences about general education, staff from other universities are always awed by the scale and ambition of what we’ve accomplished,” says David Carballo , a professor of anthropology, archaeology, and Latin American studies in CAS and former assistant provost for general education. Consider: it’s not uncommon for other universities to have general education offerings of around 100 to 200 courses, Carballo says. 

That doesn’t mean the Hub is without some obstacles. 

Some have complained that the program can be unwieldy and overly complicated. For students who come into BU with no Advanced Placement credits, it can be challenging to fit all 26 Hub requirements into their schedule while also meeting requirements for majors and minors. The same is true for students who switch majors and find themselves with a brand-new set of major requirements (though their Hub requirements continue to be met) or for those whose majors don’t have enough overlap with Hub classes. 

But in a time when the American public increasingly questions the value of higher education, ensuring that curricula translate to employment outcomes has never been more vital. For schools with mandatory gen-ed requirements, like BU, the pressure is on to give students the best possible background and skill sets that will help them once they graduate and enter the workforce. 

Hub administrators are aware of its limitations. They’re also mindful of the larger struggles that plague general education, which is why the Hub is so valuable in today’s economic pipeline, Carballo says: “Our ‘big tent’ approach has challenges for sure, but it provides students with just so much choice and flexibility.”

How the Hub works

The Hub requires students to satisfy 26 requirements across six essential capacities: 1) Philosophical, Aesthetic, and Historical Interpretation, 2) Scientific and Social Inquiry, 3) Quantitative Reasoning, 4) Diversity, Civic Engagement, and Global Citizenship, 5) Communication, and 6) Intellectual Toolkit. Each one has subcategories and those subcategories make up the Hub requirements. 

Different courses satisfy different numbers and types of Hub requirements. For example, the course Visual Arts Drawing satisfies both “aesthetic exploration” and “creativity/innovation,” which, respectively, fall under Philosophical, Aesthetic, and Historical Interpretation and Intellectual Toolkit. The Hub structure is laid out here . 

Students are free to choose the courses they want to take. All of BU’s undergraduate schools and colleges offer courses with Hub requirements. Most undergrads are able to satisfy their Hub requirements within 10 to 12 courses, according to the Hub website. Undergraduate transfer students have fewer requirements and meet them within four to five courses.

The Hub also offers a variety of specialty courses , from a two-part introduction to social and racial justice to Cross-College Challenge courses, interdisciplinary electives that put students from different colleges into teams and charge them with solving a real-world problem. And then there are cocurricular courses, or ungraded electives, that focus on a particular Hub area and fulfill one requirement. An example? BU’s Marching Band, which fulfills a Hub requirement in teamwork/collaboration.

The point of the Hub is to impart a diverse but purposeful knowledge set to students while they earn required credits. The six essential capacities that BU’s General Education Committee settled on blend critical thinking with global and historical awareness, in addition to setting students up with the communication skills they’ll need in the working world.

“Training students to be broad, engaged thinkers, to have transferable skills, and to be good citizens are the three pillars of the program,” Carballo says.

Faculty and the Hub

The Hub isn’t just for students. It also allows flexibility and autonomy for faculty. The Hub isn’t mandatory for professors and lecturers—they have always been free to choose whether or not to participate. Faculty who opt in can incorporate up to three requirements in a course’s curriculum. (Some science labs can fulfill four.) Once a faculty member has a proposed curriculum written out, they submit it to a Hub peer review committee for approval. The committee, comprising fellow faculty members, then reviews and recommends any tweaks.

“What I’ve really appreciated about the Hub is that it requires that we, as instructors, include student-facing explanations for what students are gaining in our courses in terms of knowledge, skills, and habits of mind, rather than only in terms of the class’ content,” says Kathleen Vandenderg , a master lecturer in rhetoric in the College of General Studies and a member of the General Education peer review committee.

Vandenberg teaches two Hub courses in CGS, Rhetoric 103 and Rhetoric 104. Students in those courses can earn three Hub requirements each under the Communication and Intellectual Toolkit capacities (such as “research and information literacy” and “digital multimedia expression”). In naming these student outcomes, Vandenberg says, “we are making salient the many ways in which we understand, interpret, and interact with the past, the present, and the future. And we are identifying different approaches to understanding the world.”

What I’ve really appreciated about the Hub is that it requires that we, as instructors, include student-facing explanations for what students are gaining in our courses in terms of knowledge, skills, and habits of mind, rather than only in terms of the class’ content. Kathleen Vandenderg

“Some students will primarily learn to understand their study and work through data,” she continues, “some through aesthetic experiences, some through the study of primary texts and historical artifacts—these capacities highlight that there are many ways to move through the world intellectually and creatively.” 

The Hub evolves

The Hub was designed to constantly evolve, says Lynn O’Brien Hallstein , a CGS professor of rhetoric and current assistant provost for general education. 

“The Hub has always been very mindful of responding to student needs,” O’Brien Hallstein says, “in addition to developing new and exciting ways that make it easier for students to earn their requirements.” She says she and her team regularly check in with academic advisors at the schools and colleges, as well as consulting BU Student Government for feedback. 

One recurring request from students: “pathways” of curated courses to follow in the Hub. That prompted two curricular pathways for students: social and racial justice and environment and society. 

And nothing is set in stone. When the Gen-Ed Committee was established, it built mandatory five-year reviews for Hub courses into the charter. The fall 2023 semester marked the first review. There were 641 courses to review, O’Brien Hallstein says. She and the peer review committee asked faculty members to reflect on their courses and identify what did and didn’t work, and whether or not to change the Hub requirements their course is associated with. 

“We really are trying to build in best practices and give faculty the opportunity to think about how a course is working for them, their students, and for major requirements,” O’Brien Hallstein says.

While that can involve a lot of paperwork, faculty say the Hub framework prods them to be better educators.

“Developing a good class that meets the needs of our learners isn’t a given—just because we may be experts in our field doesn’t make us pedagogical experts,” says Sophie Godley (SPH’17), director of undergraduate education in the School of Public Health and a clinical associate professor. “The Hub pushes all of us at BU to be better, and that is a gift to our community.”

Godley teaches several Hub courses, including the Social and Racial Justice advocacy specialty courses. The Hub helps keep her curricula on track, Godley says. “A challenge for anyone teaching in 2024 is the sheer volume of information, knowledge, research, and change that we all—students and faculty alike—encounter on a daily basis,” she says.

“In a field like mine, and with the variety of courses that I am privileged to teach at BU, narrowing down topics, ideas, theories, skills is an ongoing challenge, so that I don’t end up fire-hosing information in class. The Hub capacities allow me to refine and focus my goals, and I appreciate the opportunity to be clear with myself and my students about where we are headed over the course of our time together.”

Students and the Hub

Of course, the real indicator of success is what students have to say about the Hub. For the expected grumblings about having to take required classes, the Hub is largely designed to meet students where they are. 

Transfer student Tabitha Fortner (CAS’24) came to BU after spending a year at Bentley University. She was able to meet all of her Hub requirements through the courses required for her psychology major and economics minor.

As a transfer, “BU made it easy for me to fulfill my requirements, 100 percent,” Fortner says. “Psychology is just enough hard science and econ is just enough math—I didn’t have to take anything outside of my major or minor to cover all of the Hub units.”

Students do sometimes have to go out of their way to meet requirements. In that case, the hope is that they at least get something valuable from a course.

As a senior, recent grad Bernice Li (Questrom’24) says, she tried and failed to get into The Mind, Brain, and Self, a Hub course she’d wanted to take since freshman year. “There’s often only one section available for some of the more popular Hub courses,” Li says. Instead, she ended up signing up for Introduction to Communication Writing. 

The College of Communication course wasn’t exactly on the business administration major’s radar, but Li says she walked away from it with a tangible skill that should be an asset in the job market. “It definitely helped me improve my technical writing skills,” she says. 

In that vein, the Hub can give students a chance to explore disciplines that they may not otherwise experience.

Alum Rebeckah Muratore (Sargent’22, SPH’22) came to BU on a premed track. Then she signed up for the Hub’s Cross-College Challenge pilot. 

“The experience completely changed my career trajectory,” Muratore says. 

The course charged students with analyzing the proposed merger of the Beth Israel Deaconess and Lahey Health hospital systems. Not only did the class push Muratore to think independently, she says, but it marked her first hands-on exposure to health policy.

“The class introduced me to the importance and excitement of analyzing real-time health policy,” she says. And winning the course’s challenge with her team “gave me the confidence to switch majors and apply to a master’s of public health program to continue that kind of work.”

Now? Muratore has her master’s and works as a health policy analyst at a Bay Area–based data analytics company. 

General education, in general

Sure, keeping track of almost 2,000 courses can be a monumental task. As can making sure students check all of their Hub boxes before they graduate.

But both Carballo and O’Brien Hallstein swear by the importance of general education at BU. 

First and foremost, they hope that the Hub’s breadth helps prepare students for today’s job market.

“We know that not everyone is going to be working in their major after they graduate,” O’Brien Hallstein says. “Folks need to be nimble and ready to change. That’s one of the real strengths of the program—the way that general education prepares students for what we know happens after Commencement.”

But more than anything, Carballo and O’Brien Hallstein say, they hope the Hub creates a generation of lifelong learners. 

“We’re really trying to inculcate in students an engagement in the world,” Carballo says. “If you can find the world interesting, and always find things out there that you want to engage with, life will never be boring. That sort of lifelong learning is a real ethos of the program.

“One way of doing that is not to teach at students, but to make transparent to them the goals for a course, and how they’re going to get there. Showing students those connections, we hope, will keep them interested in the world for the rest of their lives.”

Explore Related Topics:

• Share this story
• 0 Comments Add

Writer/Editor Twitter Profile

Alene Bouranova is a Pacific Northwest native and a BU alum (COM’16). After earning a BS in journalism, she spent four years at Boston magazine writing, copyediting, and managing production for all publications. These days, she covers campus happenings, current events, and more for BU Today . Fun fact: she’s still using her Terrier card from 2013. When she’s not writing about campus, she’s trying to lose her Terrier card so BU will give her a new one. She lives in Cambridge with her plants. Profile

Alene Bouranova can be reached at [email protected]

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

Post a comment. Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest from BU Today

Pov: schism in the methodist church explained, cfa sculpture class: wearable cardboard sculptures, three bu rowing teams competing for national titles this weekend, to do today: harvard art museums at night, leading womanist ethicist and theologian named new mlk professor of religion and black studies at sth, to do today: free dunder-mifflin paint night, can animal organ transplants save thousands of dying people, to do today: knit & crochet night at fenway community center, boston university removes the myles standish name from dorm, pov: remembering charlie pohonich, a final look back at bu’s 151st commencement, how to make the most of memorial day weekend in boston, did you win the free furiosa: a mad max saga tickets for tonight, karen antman stepping down as bu’s medical school dean and medical campus provost, a bu class tackles the massachusetts housing crisis, zesty potato salad, my reflections on the last four years of college: why small life events matter, exploring bu’s vibrant asian student communities for aapi heritage month, photo essay: behind the scenes at a bu commencement.

• Username Password Remember me Sign in New here ? Join Us

• English Language
• 2013 WAEC English La...

2013 WAEC English Language Theory  Write an article for publication in a national newspaper on the importance of education in...

 Write an article for publication in a national newspaper on the importance of education in national development.

Explanation

                THE IMPORTANCE OF EDUCATION IN NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT.

      The fact that education is imperative to national development cannot be over-emphasized. No nation can develop without education In fact, education always engineers development of nations. Industrialized or developed countries of the world like Japan. the United States of America and Britain achieved rapid development because of their exposure to education, especially scientific education

      Modern days inventions especially in the area of technology can not be achieved without education. Technological inventions like aeroplanes, ships, electricity and numerous electronic gadgets that make lives easy for people in the world today could not be accomplished without education. These inventions are nothing but scientific accomplishments which are engendered by scientific researchers. These inventions contribute in no small measure to the development of nations where they are made.

      Apart from this, improvements in the area of medicine and communication come about as a result of education. Nowadays, it is easy to communicate with people across the world. The world is now a global village with the invention of various communication gadgets and the internet. The use of social media could not have been possible without education. The invention of these communication gadgets like mobile phones and the internet makes it easy for the nations that invent them to earn enormous foreign exchange which is used for the development of such nations. The invention of computers through educational research enables countries with such inventions to sell than to developing nations of the world to earn foreign exchange. The resources obtained from the wealth made are used for national development. In the same ways, developing nations buy vaccines to communication and other purposes from nations that produce them thereby developing such nations through wealth generated from such sale.

      In fact, achievements recorded in any nation can not be separated from educational development of such nation. This is the reason why any nation which wishes to develop must adequately structure and fund the education of its people. Tremendous improvement in agriculture could not have been possible without education. Education has been able to move agriculture from its primitive stage to modernity. The contribution of modern facilities like tractors, harvesters, mowers to agriculture could not have been possible without technological education. To say the obvious, these agricultural apparatus are invention of technology which is the result of education. Countries which invent these modern agricultural tools sell them to developing nations and through this. they earn wealth which is used for national developments. Apart, from this these countries are able to feed their citizens.

      Undoubtedly. education is important to national development as nations which neglect the education of their citizens can never witness both economic and social development. Technology development that bring about national development cannot be accomplished in countries where people are wallowing in ignorance.

                                                                                                                                     Helen Enyia.

                                                                                                                                     SS2A2.

Contributions ({{ comment_count }})

Please wait..., modal title, {{ feedback_modal_data.title }}, quick questions.

Post your Contribution

Please don't post or ask to join a "Group" or "Whatsapp Group" as a comment. It will be deleted. To join or start a group, please click here

{{ quote.posted_by.display_name }}

Is college worth it? The answer for half of Americans is striking.

A college degree has often been sold as the key to a higher-quality, affluent life. But a new survey from the Pew Research Center suggests Americans have mixed views about that narrative – and data shows people without degrees have seen their earnings increase in the last decade.

Just 1 in 4 U.S. adults said it was extremely or very important to have a four-year degree if you want a well-paying job in the current economy. Forty percent of respondents said it wasn’t too important or important at all. 

Mirroring those trends, just 22% of adults said the cost of getting a bachelor’s is worth it even if it means taking out student loans. Nearly half said the cost is only worth it when students don’t have to go into debt. 

Graphics explain: How are college costs adding up these days and how much has tuition risen?

Given trends in the labor and economy – combined with skyrocketing tuition and student debt levels – the lackluster confidence among Americans isn’t surprising. For several decades until about 2014, for example, the earnings for young men without a degree trended downward. But the past decade “has marked a turning point,” according to the Pew analysis.

Workforce participation for these young men has stabilized and their earnings have risen. The share of them living in poverty has also fallen significantly. In 2011, for example, 17% of young men with just a high school diploma were living in poverty; in 2023, that rate dropped to 12%. Young women’s outcomes also improved in recent years.

The changing circumstances help explain why people's mindsets about the value of college have shifted. Roughly half of Americans, according to the Pew report, say a four-year degree is less important today than it was in the past to secure a well-paying job. A smaller percentage – about a third – say it’s more important now. 

The skepticism is more pronounced among conservative Americans than people who identify as Democrats or somewhat Democrat. Most Republicans (57%) said it was less important to have a four-year degree. Still, Americans from both parties are more likely to say the importance of a college degree has declined than to say it's increased.

The findings come as the Biden administration works to forgive certain borrowers’ federal student loan debt, which now totals more than $1.6 trillion. On top of barriers to covering tuition, college life has been altered this year by an uptick in culture war tensions on campus, from bans on diversity, equity and inclusion programming to student protests prompted by the Israel-Hamas war. These challenges have fueled debates about whether college is worth it.

Still, the research shows that earnings for degree holders have also trended upward. The income gaps between college graduates and those with just high school degrees or incomplete credentials have persisted. 

And while employment prospects for young men without a degree improved in the past decade, their median annual earnings remain below their 1973 adjusted levels.

Financial aid crisis: How FAFSA 'fixes' have turned College Decision Day into chaos

• Open access
• Published: 28 May 2024

What makes an article a must read in medical education?

• Amin Nakhostin-Ansari 1 ,
• Susan C. Mirabal 2 ,
• Thiago Bosco Mendes 3 ,
• Yuxing Emily Ma 2 ,
• Carolina Saldanha Neves Horta Lima 4 ,
• Kavita Chapla 5 ,
• Stasia Reynolds 6 ,
• Hannah Oswalt 7 ,
• Scott M. Wright 2 , 6 &
• Sean Tackett 2 , 6  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  582 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

4 Altmetric

Metrics details

The dissemination of published scholarship is intended to bring new evidence and ideas to a wide audience. However, the increasing number of articles makes it challenging to determine where to focus one’s attention. This study describes factors that may influence decisions to read and recommend a medical education article.

Authors analyzed data collected from March 2021 through September 2022 during a monthly process to identify “Must Read” articles in medical education. An international team of health sciences educators, learners, and researchers voted on titles and abstracts to advance articles to full text review. Full texts were rated using five criteria: relevance, methodology, readability, originality, and whether it addressed a critical issue in medical education. At an end-of-month meeting, 3–4 articles were chosen by consensus as “Must Read” articles. Analyses were used to explore the associations of article characteristics and ratings with Must Read selection.

Over a period of 19 months, 7487 articles from 856 journals were screened, 207 (2.8%) full texts were evaluated, and 62 (0.8%) were chosen as Must Reads. During screening, 3976 articles (53.1%) received no votes. BMC Medical Education had the largest number of articles at screening ( n  = 1181, 15.8%). Academic Medicine had the largest number as Must Reads ( n  = 22, 35.5%). In logistic regressions adjusting for the effect of individual reviewers, all rating criteria were independently associated with selection as a Must Read ( p  < 0.05), with methodology (OR 1.44 (95%CI = 1.23–1.69) and relevance (OR 1.43 (95%CI = 1.20–1.70)) having the highest odds ratios.

Conclusions

Over half of the published medical education articles did not appeal to a diverse group of potential readers; this represents a missed opportunity to make an impact and potentially wasted effort. Our findings suggest opportunities to enhance value in the production and dissemination of medical education scholarship.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Publishing articles in peer-reviewed journals is intended to make rigorous scholarship available to a large audience [ 1 , 2 ]. However, across fields, over 25% of published articles can go uncited [ 3 , 4 , 5 ] with estimates of 15% of articles in top-tier medical education journals going without any citations [ 6 ]. Even when articles are cited by other studies, they may not capture the attention of the intended audience or practitioners. The failure to translate the evidence from medical education’s primary literature into educational practice may indicate that many are unable to keep up with its innovations and discoveries [ 7 , 8 ].

One reason that so much research receives little attention is the sheer volume of publications; article numbers have increased fivefold in the last 20 years [ 6 ]. Clinician-educators, in particular, face significant time constraints as they try to balance teaching responsibilities with clinical demands, administrative roles, and the need to pursue their own scholarly endeavors [ 9 ]. In clinical medicine, there are a variety of resources that curate and summarize the most important emerging evidence [ 10 , 11 ], but there are no analogous services that regularly and systematically cull medical education scholarship.

If an article is not seen or read, then its discoveries, innovations, and ideas cannot be applied to practice and scholarship. While article citation patterns are routinely measured and studied, little is known about the reading patterns among those involved in medical education. While some journals offer data on the number of downloads and views for published articles, those measures are specific to the journal and do not provide insight into the reasons people decide to read the articles [ 12 ]. To our knowledge, there have been no systematic efforts to understand what may influence someone to read a medical education article or recommend it to others. Therefore, this study analyzed data collected as part of a monthly process undertaken to select Must Read articles in medical education. In this process, reviewers make a rapid judgment on whether to read an article, rate selected full texts, then choose 3–4 Must Read articles, which are recommended on a dedicated website [ 13 ] for individuals who are interested in medical education.

Materials and methods

This study was a retrospective analysis of the data collected during the Must Read process from March 2021 to September 2022. While Must Read cycles are conducted each month, we focused on this 19-month period, because different rating scales for full-text review were in place before and after this time frame. This study was considered not human subjects research by a Johns Hopkins Medicine IRB on April 20, 2023(IRB00384814).

Review process

Setting and process development.

The review process was developed during 2019 and 2020 by appraising the peer-reviewed literature and consulting with experienced medical educators to consider how best to identify Must Read articles. We conducted six rounds of pilot cycles during the initial phase to refine the review process. After multiple iterations, we arrived at the final method to identify medical education Must Reads. This involved a systematic search, screening titles and abstracts, full text review, and a meeting to achieve consensus. The process was also guided by the wisdom of crowds model, where everyone’s opinions were independent and had the same value [ 14 ]. We limited the number of Must Reads to 3–4 each month based on feedback from pilot rounds, the effort required to create succinct article summaries, and technical considerations for the Must Reads website.

Reviewing team

The reviewing team consisted of health sciences educators, medical trainees, learners, and educational scholars from the U.S., Brazil, and Iran. Participation was voluntary, and the number of reviewers per cycle varied based on reviewer availability. Two individuals participated every month in order to provide consistency in the final selection of Must Reads across months; however screening and full text review were done independently and not influenced by any other reviewers.

Identifying articles

Each month, we searched PubMed using a search strategy developed in collaboration with an informationist and refined during our pilot cycles to retrieve medical education articles. In addition to searching for medical education articles in general, the search strategy specifically retrieved all articles published in the eight general medical education journals with the highest impact factor from Clarivate’s Journal Citation Reports (JCR) in the category of “Education, Scientific Disciplines [ 15 ]”: Academic Medicine, Advances in Health Sciences Education, BMC Medical Education, Journal of Surgical Education, Medical Education, Medical Teacher, Perspectives on Medical Education, and Teaching and Learning in Medicine. Perspectives on Medical Education was included in the search starting in February 2022 after it received a JCR impact factor. Throughout the study period, we also included the Journal of Graduate Medical Education, which does not have a JCR impact factor, but was felt to be important based on feedback during process development. We used PubMed’s filter to retrieve only articles with abstracts, and the search retrieved articles published two months prior to the search date to account for variations in journal indexing rates into PubMed. A sample of our search query for August 2022 is outlined in supplementary file 1.

Screening articles

Each cycle, all reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts and voted yes or no using Covidence systematic review software (Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia). The reviewers were instructed to vote quickly based on their interest in reading the article. All reviewer votes were tallied and those with the most votes were selected for full text review.

Full text review

During our development process, we recognized that 8–12 full text reviews achieved the desired compromise for expeditious and thorough review with the need to identify at least three articles to highlight as Must Reads. Each cycle, all reviewers independently rated each full text based on five criteria: relevance to a broad audience, methodological rigor, readability, originality, and whether it addressed a critical issue in medical education. Reviewers could rate each criterion as 1 (“not worth the time”), 2 (“good enough to read”), and 3 (“absolutely a Must Read”). Mean scores across all reviewers for each criterion and the total score were calculated each month prior to a 1-hour, online, end-of-month meeting where reviewers discussed their opinions about the articles and chose 3–4 Must Reads.

Variables in the must read database

Core variables.

Each month, for each article, we recorded the full citation information (including title, abstract, and author information), each reviewer’s votes during screening, and their ratings of full-text articles for each of the five criteria.

Additional variables

We retrieved the 2021 Scopus cite score for each journal from which an article was selected for full text review. The cite score is the average number of citations in the prior three years for each document in a journal according to the Scopus database and is updated annually [ 16 , 17 ]. We used the cite score in our study as it is freely available and comparable to the JCR impact factor in evaluating citation rates [ 17 ]. In addition, for each full text we reviewed, we manually extracted the first author’s h-index and the country of their institutional appointment from Scopus in February 2023. We also recorded whether all authors were from the same country or two or more countries based on their affiliations.

Statistical analysis

At the screening stage, we calculated the percentage of votes for each article as the number of positive votes divided by the number of reviewers for that month. We used Pearson’s correlation test to assess the relationship between the percentage of votes and word counts for article titles and abstracts.

When comparing full text variables associated with selection as a Must Read, we used the Mann-Whitney test to compare continuous and ordinal variables. Fisher’s exact or Chi-square tests were used as appropriate to compare categorical variables between groups. We used Pearson’s correlation to test the association between the percentage of Must Read articles from the nine medical education journals and their corresponding cite scores.

We performed a series of unadjusted binary logistic regressions that used each full text review criterion rating as the independent variable and selection as a Must Read article as the dependent variable. We also performed a multivariate regression using a mixed effects model that included all predictor variables as fixed effects and reviewers as random effects. For this model, we evaluated for collinearity between the criteria ratings using the variance inflation factor (VIF) and Pearson’s correlation test. A VIF of higher than 10 and a correlation coefficient of higher than 0.7 are considered indicators of the presence of collinearity, and their thresholds were not exceeded [ 18 ]. For ease of interpretation, we report unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios to correspond to a 0.1 increase in a criterion rating along its 1–3 scale.

All analyses were performed using R version 4.2.1 (2021-11-01). P  < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

A total of 17 reviewers participated in reviewing and screening articles over the 19-month study period. The median number of reviewers for each cycle was 6 (IQR 5–8, min = 5, max = 9). The median number of cycles for each reviewer was 6 (IQR 2–9, min = 1, max = 19).

Screening stage

From March 2021 to September 2022, 7487 articles from 856 journals were screened. There were 3976 articles (53.1%) that did not receive a positive vote from any reviewer, 3177 (42.4%) that received votes from at least one but fewer than half of the reviewers, and 334 (4.5%) that received votes from a majority of the reviewers. Four articles (0.05%) received votes from all reviewers. The median percentage of articles with no votes each month was 53.3% (IQR 49.7–57.4%, min = 40.3%, max = 66.5%). Reviewers who completed at least the median number of cycles (six cycles or more) voted to include a median of 14.2% of articles in the full-text review (IQR 13.0-19.3%, min = 7.4%, max = 20.6%).

The median title length was 14 words (IQR 11–17, min = 1, max = 42), and the median abstract length was 259 words (IQR 208–305, min = 7, max = 924). There were minimal correlations between the percentage of votes received during screening and shorter titles ( r = -0.11, p  < 0.001) and longer abstracts ( r  = 0.04, p  < 0.001).

The percentages of each journal’s articles under review at each stage of the Must Read process are presented in Fig.  1 . BMC Medical Education had the greatest number of screened articles ( n  = 1181, 15.8%), followed by Academic Medicine ( n  = 740, 9.9%) and Journal of Surgical Education ( n  = 706, 9.4%). The journals with the greatest percentage of articles with at least one vote were Perspectives on Medical Education ( n  = 41/47, 87.2%), Medical Education ( n  = 283/326, 86.8%), and Teaching and Learning in Medicine (154/199, 77.4%).

Numbers of articles from journals at each stage of the Must Read process

The “Others” group encompasses articles from journals not specifically listed in the Figure. The number of journals in the “Others” group in the screening stage, full text review stage, and among Must Reads was 850, 38, and 12, respectively

Full text review stage

The full texts of 207 (2.8%) articles were evaluated, and 62 (0.8%) were chosen as Must Reads. The percentage of reviewers’ votes during the screening stage did not differ between the articles chosen as Must Reads (median 66.7% of reviewers [IQR 62–80%, min = 50%, max = 100%]) and those not selected (median 66.7% of reviewers [IQR 60–75%, min = 42.9%, max = 100%]) ( p  = 0.18).

The characteristics of articles included in the full-text review are shown in Table  1 . Most first authors were located in the US ( n  = 113, 54.6%), followed by Canada ( n  = 27, 13%), the UK ( n  = 21, 10.1%), and the Netherlands ( n  = 13, 6.3%). Comparing Must Read articles to other full texts, there was a significantly greater number of authors (median 6 (IQR 3–7) vs. median 4 (IQR 3–6)) ( p  = 0.04). Comparisons for title length, abstract length, number of references, first author’s h-index, and percentage of authors from two or more countries showed no statistically significant associations ( p  > 0.05).

Academic Medicine had the highest percentage of Must Read articles ( n  = 22, 35.5%). There was a positive correlation between the nine medical education journals’ cite scores and their percentage of Must Reads ( r  = 0.709, p  = 0.03).

Must Read articles had significantly higher ratings across all criteria used for assessing articles in the full-text review stage in both the unadjusted and adjusted regressions ( p  < 0.05, Table  2 ). In the multivariate model that adjusted for reviewer effects, statistically significant independent associations with selection as a Must Read article were found for all criteria (Table  2 ).

In this study, we analyzed a unique database to explore variables that may make medical education articles appealing to readers. Notably, many published articles did not interest any of the reviewers. Methodology and relevance to a broad audience were found to be the variables that were most strongly associated with an article being selected as a Must Read in medical education.

Despite including a diverse pool of reviewers, all of whom had significant curiosity and interest in medical education, approximately half of the articles retrieved in our search each month did not receive any votes in the screening stage. A study of top medical education journals reported that approximately 15% of articles published between 2000 and 2019 went uncited [ 6 ]. Studies from outside medical education have found that citation rates correlate with article downloads and reads from websites and reference managers [ 19 ]. Such metrics, however, fail to capture or quantify the articles that are being overlooked by potential readers. The monthly process in our study, which began with a search, followed by a rapid review of titles and abstracts, and ended in reading full texts, likely simulated a common approach by which both casual readers and educational scholars navigate the vast body of literature to find the articles that may inform their practices. Our methods are unique in that we were able to determine not only what was to be selected for reading, but also what was not.

The relatively high proportion of published medical education articles that were not judged to be interesting along with evidence that many articles go uncited may suggest that there is waste in the medical education scholarly enterprise. The factors responsible for the increasing quantity of published scholarship include promotion incentives, elevated status in academia afforded to those who publish more, and the greater array of outlets to publish with the advent of electronic-only journals [ 20 , 21 ]. There are also prevalent factors that may lower the quality of medical education publications, such as limited funding and few opportunities for faculty development related to research [ 22 , 23 , 24 ]. The investment of time and resources devoted to publishing in medical education may need to be reconsidered; shifting incentives to support other educational activities, such as teaching and curricular enhancements, may promote greater value across the medical education system.

We found that journal practices may impact one’s ability to find an article they would like to read. For example, BMC Medical Education had the highest number of articles in the screening stage, but only one selected as a Must Read. BMC Medical Education is an open-access and online-only journal that makes its published articles widely available [ 25 ]. Academic Medicine had the greatest proportion of Must Read articles but rejects more than 90% of submitted articles [ 26 ], and much of its content may not be available without a journal subscription. Journals and editorial teams must make trade-offs when seeking to serve their readers and society. There may be a tension between creating a platform that is inclusive of diverse voices and perspectives while also excluding publications that do not adhere to the highest academic standards. Journals collectively appear to be struggling in meeting these goals, as evidence suggests an ongoing need to ensure greater representation among global voices [ 27 , 28 ], while the volume of articles remains a major barrier for medical educators to stay up-to-date [ 29 , 30 ]. Academic publishing, in general, is drawing scrutiny as profit motives have the potential to supersede scholarly values [ 31 , 32 ]. As a community, we may need to look to improve the balance between ensuring equitable opportunity for all scholars without contributing to the unsustainable rise in article quantity.

Methodological rigor in medical education scholarship is discussed frequently; this includes debates about the value of different types of research [ 33 ], and the development and use of instruments designed to rate the quality of medical education studies [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Nearly 10 years ago, Sullivan and colleagues pointed out that the users of educational scholarship are rarely asked what they value [ 37 ]. There has been little additional work since, but the existing evidence suggests that readers may find the relevance and accessibility of an article to be more important than methodological rigor when seeking to apply findings to their own educational practices [ 29 ,  30 ]. In our study, we found significant heterogeneity in reviewers’ interests; few articles received votes from a majority of reviewers, and only a small fraction of all articles received votes from all reviewers. At the full text stage, nearly all criteria were deemed to be important to an article’s selection as a Must Read and the decision to recommend it to a broad audience. Our results emphasize the need to view quality in medical education scholarship through a multidimensional lens in order to enhance a publication’s reach and accessibility.

Several limitations of this study should be considered. First, while the search strategy was developed with an informationist and refined during piloting, we may not have retrieved all medical education articles. Our decision to include only articles with abstracts might also have excluded some noteworthy articles. Second, during the development process, we decided only 3–4 Must Read articles would be highlighted each cycle, a number we felt appropriate when recommending articles for busy educators. However, it was not always easy for our team to decide which articles were Must Reads, and many were worth reading. Third, while each review considered only one-month’s worth of publications, final selection of Must Reads was not completely independent of previous months; in selecting the Must Read articles, the team was mindful of articles or content areas that were recently shared in an effort to keep the growing Must Read collection diverse. Lastly, our findings reflect the opinions and priorities of the Must Reads reviewer team, and reviewers were not the same for each month. While we had representation across learners, educators, and researchers from three countries, and two reviewers participated every month to improve consistency across months, another group of individuals with different disciplines, experiences in medical education, and cultural backgrounds might have arrived at different selections. Particularly, we did not have a surgical or procedural specialist on our reviewing team, which may have limited interest in surgically-focused articles.

Our study suggests that many medical education articles may not be capturing the attention or be appealing to those interested in medical education. This may serve as a call to action to enhance value in the production and dissemination of medical education scholarship.

Availability of data and materials

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, ANA, upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Institutional Review Board

Interquartile range

Journal Citation Reports

Variance Inflation Factor

Omasta M. Research for Impact: audience, Method, and dissemination. Perform Matters. 2019;5(2):156–62.

Google Scholar  

Tenopir C, Dalton E, Fish A, Christian L, Jones M, Smith M. What motivates authors of scholarly articles? The importance of journal attributes and potential audience on publication choice. Publications. 2016;4(3):22.

Article   Google Scholar  

Solomon DJ, Laakso M, Björk B-C. A longitudinal comparison of citation rates and growth among open access journals. J Informetrics. 2013;7(3):642–50.

Katchanov YL, Markova YV, Shmatko NA. Uncited papers in the structure of scientific communication. J Informetrics. 2023;17(2):101391.

Kamat PV. Most cited versus uncited papers. What do they tell us?. ACS Energy letters; 2018;3(9):2134–5.

Maggio LA, Costello JA, Ninkov AB, Frank JR, Artino AR Jr. The voices of medical education scholarship: describing the published landscape. Med Educ. 2023;57(3):280–9.

Horsley T, Steinert Y, Leslie K, Oswald A, Friesen F, Ellaway RH. The use of BEME reviews in the medical education literature. Med Teach. 2020;42(10):1171–8.

Norman G. May: a month of myths. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 2018;23:449–53.

Sethi A, Ajjawi R, McAleer S, Schofield S. Exploring the tensions of being and becoming a medical educator. BMC Med Educ. 2017;17(1):1–10.

Vela K. NEJM Journal Watch. J Electron Resour Med Libr. 2023;20(1):33–6.

EvidenceAlerts 2023 [Available from: https://www.evidencealerts.com/ .

Nicholas D, Huntington P, Jamali HR, Rowlands I, Dobrowolski T, Tenopir C. Viewing and reading behaviour in a virtual environment: The full‐text download and what can be read into it. Aslib Proceedings. 2008;60(3):185–98.

Must Reads 2023. Available from: https://hopkinsbayviewinternalmedicine.org/must-reads/ .

Surowiecki J. The wisdom of Crowds/James Surowiecki. NY: Anchor; 2005.

Clarivate. Journal Citation Reports. 2021. Available from: https://clarivate.com/products/scientific-and-academic-research/research-analytics-evaluation-and-management-solutions/journal-citation-reports/ .

Fang H. Analysis of the new scopus CiteScore. Scientometrics. 2021;126(6):5321–31.

Salisbury L. Scopus CiteScore and Clarivate Journal Citation reports. Charlest Advisor. 2020;21(4):5–15.

Dormann CF, Elith J, Bacher S, Buchmann C, Carl G, Carré G, et al. Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography. 2013;36(1):27–46.

García-Villar C. A critical review on altmetrics: can we measure the social impact factor? Insights into Imaging. 2021;12(1):1–10.

Rawat S, Meena S. Publish or perish: where are we heading? J Res Med Sciences: Official J Isfahan Univ Med Sci. 2014;19(2):87.

Guraya SY, Norman RI, Khoshhal KI, Guraya SS, Forgione A. Publish or perish mantra in the medical field: a systematic review of the reasons, consequences and remedies. Pakistan J Med Sci. 2016;32(6):1562.

McKechnie DG, Al-Shakarchi N, Tackett SA, Young TM, Rashid MA. Sources of funding for research articles in medical education journals from 1999 to 2019. Med Teach. 2023;45(10):1123–8.

Ahmed R, Farooq A, Storie D, Hartling L, Oswald A. Building capacity for education research among clinical educators in the health professions: a BEME (Best Evidence Medical Education) systematic review of the outcomes of interventions: BEME Guide 34. Med Teach. 2016;38(2):123–36.

Cameron MW, Crowther LN, Huang GC. Faculty development and infrastructure to support educational scholarship: a scoping review on author development. Acad Med. 2022;98(1):112–22.

Asai S. Changes in revenue structure of a leading open access journal publisher: the case of BMC. Scientometrics. 2019;121(1):53–63.

Roberts LW, Coverdale J. Editorial decision making for academic medicine, 2021. Acad Med. 2021;96(1):1–4.

Maggio LA, Costello JA, Ninkov AB, Frank JR, Artino AR Jr. The voices of medical education scholarship: Describing the published landscape. Medical education. 2023;57(3):280–9.

Wondimagegn D, Whitehead CR, Cartmill C, Rodrigues E, Correia A, Lins TS, et al. Faster, higher, stronger–together? A bibliometric analysis of author distribution in top medical education journals. BMJ Glob Health. 2023;8(6):e011656.

Thomas A, Gruppen LD, van der Vleuten C, Chilingaryan G, Amari F, Steinert Y. Use of evidence in health professions education: attitudes, practices, barriers and supports. Med Teach. 2019;41(9):1012–22.

Doja A, Lavin Venegas C, Cowley L, Wiesenfeld L, Writer H, Clarkin C. Barriers and facilitators to program directors’ use of the medical education literature: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):45.

Agate N, Kennison R, Konkiel S, Long CP, Rhody J, Sacchi S, et al. The transformative power of values-enacted scholarship. Humanit Social Sci Commun. 2020;7(1):1–12.

da Silva JAT, Moradzadeh M, Adjei KOK, Owusu-Ansah CM, Balehegn M, Faúndez EI, et al. An integrated paradigm shift to deal with ‘predatory publishing’. J Acad Librariansh. 2022;48(1):102481.

Tolsgaard MG, Mahan Kulasegaram K, Woods NN, Brydges R, Ringsted C, Dyre L. The myth of ivory tower versus practice-oriented research: a systematic review of randomised studies in medical education. Med Educ. 2021;55(3):328–35.

Reed DA, Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Levine RB, Kern DE, Wright SM. Association between funding and quality of published medical education research. JAMA. 2007;298(9):1002–9.

Al Asmri M, Haque MS, Parle J. A Modified Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MMERSQI) developed by Delphi consensus. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):1–8.

Cook DA, Reed DA. Appraising the quality of medical education research methods: the medical education research study quality instrument and the Newcastle–Ottawa scale-education. Acad Med. 2015;90(8):1067–76.

Sullivan GM, Simpson D, Cook DA, DeIorio NM, Andolsek K, Opas L, et al. Redefining quality in medical education research: a consumer’s view. J Graduate Med Educ. 2014;6(3):424–9.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to share their appreciation for Christine Caufield-Noll, the informationist who helped develop the search strategy, and all reviewers who participated in selecting Must Read articles.

Dr. Wright is the Anne Gaines and G. Thomas Miller Professor of Medicine and is supported through the Johns Hopkins Center for Innovative Medicine and he is the Mary & David Gallo Scholar for Hopkins’ Initiative to Humanize Medicine.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Sports Medicine Research Center, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Amin Nakhostin-Ansari

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

Susan C. Mirabal, Yuxing Emily Ma, Scott M. Wright & Sean Tackett

University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Thiago Bosco Mendes

School of Medicine of University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

Carolina Saldanha Neves Horta Lima

Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA

Kavita Chapla

Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA

Stasia Reynolds, Scott M. Wright & Sean Tackett

Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine, Spartanburg, SC, USA

Hannah Oswalt

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

ST and SMW conceptualized and designed the study. ANA analyzed the data. ANA and ST prepared the initial draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed to data collection and interpretation and revising the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amin Nakhostin-Ansari .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was considered not human subjects research by a Johns Hopkins Medicine IRB on April 20, 2023(IRB00384814).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Nakhostin-Ansari, A., Mirabal, S.C., Mendes, T.B. et al. What makes an article a must read in medical education?. BMC Med Educ 24 , 582 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05564-2

Download citation

Received : 03 April 2024

Accepted : 16 May 2024

Published : 28 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05564-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Information dissemination
• Journal article

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]