Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 118, Issue 2, pp 479–498 | Cite as

Digital competences, computer skills and information literacy in secondary education: mapping and visualization of trends and concepts

  • Karmen Stopar
  • Tomaž BartolEmail author
Article
  • 118 Downloads

Abstract

Digital competences, computer skills, information literacy and related abilities represent a crucial element in ICT education (Information and Communication Technologies). They are less frequently investigated in the frame of secondary education than in higher education. We assess these contexts in secondary education through science mapping and visualizing techniques, examining publishing patterns and trends. Databases Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus are used. Publishing exhibits logarithmic inverse relationship between rank and frequency (power laws). Only a few chief publications among hundreds account for an important share of all published research. WOS-based visualizations (VOSviewer software) of concepts used in titles, abstracts and keywords show several clusters of research: computer-, information-, as well as digital-related. Further analysis reveals that the major terms which define these clusters predominate in different periods. Computer-related are earlier terms, followed by information-related, and now digital-related. As some concepts mature terminology embraces more trendy novel concepts. Clusters of co-citing and co-cited sources shows differences among publications. Proceedings play an important role as sources of co-citations but are cited more weakly. Both co-citing and co-cited sources exhibit well defined clusters with little convergence between Library and Information Science on one side and Education and Educational Research, and Computer Science on the other even though the respective publications employ similar terminological concepts. The lack of exchange between these research domains calls for more co-operation in order to boost synergy in these critical twenty-first century skills.

Keywords

Secondary education Digital competences Information literacy Bibliometrics Science mapping Publishing patterns 

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by the Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS) (Grant Nos. J5-8230, P4-0085).

References

  1. Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping digital competence: Towards a conceptual understanding (JRC Technical Notes (JRC 67075)). Luxembourg: European Commission (JRC-IPTS).Google Scholar
  2. Alzafari, K. (2017). Mapping the literature structure of ‘quality in higher education’ using co-word analysis. Quality in Higher Education, 23(3), 264–282.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2017.1418607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartol, T., & Stopar, K. (2015). Nano language and distribution of article title terms according to power laws. Scientometrics, 103(2), 435–451.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1546-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bawden, D. (2001). Information and digital literacies: A review of concepts. Journal of Documentation, 57(2), 218–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Black, P. E. (2004). Bradford’s law. Dictionary of algorithms and data structures [online]. https://xlinux.nist.gov/dads/HTML/bradfordsLaw.html. Accessed 23 March 2018.
  6. Bradford, S. C. (1934). Sources of information on specific subject. Engineering, 137, 85–86.Google Scholar
  7. Bušelić, V., & Zorica, M. B. (2018). Information literacy quest. In search of graduate employability. Communications in Computer and Information Science (CCIS), 810, 98–108.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9_11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Garfield, E. (1980). Bradford law and related statistical patterns. Current Contents, 19, 5–12.Google Scholar
  9. Guenther, J. T. (2006). Mapping the literature of nursing informatics. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 94(2 Suppl.), E92–E98.Google Scholar
  10. Halász, G., & Michel, A. (2011). Key Competences in Europe: Interpretation, policy formulation and implementation. European Journal of Education, 46(3), 289–306.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2011.01491.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heradio, R., de la Torre, L., Galan, D., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Dormido, S. (2016). Virtual and remote labs in education: A bibliometric analysis. Computers & Education, 98, 14–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Janssen, J., Stoyanov, S., Ferrari, A., Punie, Y., Pannekeet, K., & Sloep, P. (2013). Experts’ views on digital competence: Commonalities and differences. Computers & Education, 68, 473–481.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 14(1), 10–25.Google Scholar
  14. Kokol, P., Saranto, K., & Vošner, H. B. (2018). eHealth and health informatics competences: A systemic analysis of literature production based on bibliometrics. Kybernetes, 47(5), 1018–1030.  https://doi.org/10.1108/K-09-2017-0338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kolle, S. R. (2017). Global research on information literacy: A bibliometric analysis from 2005 to 2014. Electronic Library, 35(2), 283–298.  https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-08-2015-0160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kumar, K. (2014). A scientometric study of digital literacy in online library information science and technology abstracts (LISTA). Library Philosophy and Practice, Paper 1044.Google Scholar
  17. Kurbanoğlu, S., Boustany, J., Špiranec, S., Grassian, E., Mizrachi, D., & Roy, L. (2018). In Information literacy in the workplace (5th European conference, ECIL) (CCIS/communications in computer and information science, vol. 810). Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9.
  18. Li, F., Li, M., Guan, P., Ma, S., & Cui, L. (2015). Mapping publication trends and identifying hot spots of research on Internet health information seeking behavior: A quantitative and co-word biclustering analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research.  https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3326.Google Scholar
  19. Majid, S., Yun-Ke, C., Aye, H. N., Khine, M. M. W., & Wai, S. Y. (2015). Analyzing publishing trends in information literacy literature: A bibliometric study. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 20(2), 51–66.Google Scholar
  20. Milojević, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2011). The cognitive structure of library and information science: Analysis of article title words. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1933–1953.  https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21602.Google Scholar
  21. Murray, M., & Perez, J. (2014). Unraveling the digital literacy paradox: How higher education fails at the fourth literacy. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology.  https://doi.org/10.28945/1982.Google Scholar
  22. Olmeda-Gómez, C., Ovalle-Perandones, M.-A., & Perianes-Rodríguez, A. (2017). Co-word analysis and thematic landscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985–2014. Scientometrics, 113(1), 195–217.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2486-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pegrum, M. (2010). ‘I link, therefore I am’: Network literacy as a core digital literacy. E-Learning and Digital Media, 7(4), 346–354.  https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2010.7.4.346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pilerot, O. (2014). Connections between research and practice in the information literacy narrative: A mapping of the literature and some propositions. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(4), 313–321.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000614559140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pinto, M., Escalona, M. I., Pulgarín, A., & Uribe-Tirado, A. (2014). The scientific production of Ibero-American authors on information literacy (1985–2013). Scientometrics, 102(2), 1555–1576.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1498-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Price, D. J. D. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shenton, A. K., & Hay-Gibson, N. V. (2009). Bradford’s Law and its relevance to researchers. Education for Information, 27(4), 217–230.  https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2009-0882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Siddiq, F., Hatlevik, O. E., Olsen, R. V., Throndsen, I., & Scherer, R. (2016). Taking a future perspective by learning from the past—A systematic review of assessment instruments that aim to measure primary and secondary school students’ ICT literacy. Educational Research Review, 19, 58–84.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269.  https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Steinhardt, I., Schneijderberg, C., Götze, N., Baumann, J., & Krücken, G. (2017). Mapping the quality assurance of teaching and learning in higher education: The emergence of a specialty? Higher Education, 74(2), 221–237.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0045-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stopar, K., Drobne, D., Eler, K., & Bartol, T. (2016). Citation analysis and mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Identifying the scope and interdisciplinarity of research. Scientometrics, 106(2), 563–581.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1797-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Taşkin, Z., Doǧan, G., & Şencan, I. (2013). Analyzing the intellectual structure of world information literacy literature through citations and co-citations. Communications in Computer and Information Science (CCIS), 397, 54–60.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03919-0_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tibaná-Herrera, G., Fernández-Bajón, M. T., & de Moya-Anegón, F. (2018). Global analysis of the E-learning scientific domain: a declining category? Scientometrics, 114(2), 675–685.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2592-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2011). Text mining and visualization using VOSviewer. ISSI Newsletter, 7(3), 50–54.Google Scholar
  36. Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 577–588.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629–635.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang, Q. (2018). Distribution features and intellectual structures of digital humanities: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Documentation, 74(1), 223–246.  https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-05-2017-0076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weinerth, K., Koenig, V., Brunner, M., & Martin, R. (2014). Concept maps: A useful and usable tool for computer-based knowledge assessment? A literature review with a focus on usability. Computers & Education, 78, 201–209.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zydney, J. M., & Warner, Z. (2016). Mobile apps for science learning: Review of research. Computers & Education, 94, 1–17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations