Typifying educational research in Singapore and Sweden: a comparative bibliometric approach based on topics 2000–2020

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Erik Nylander, J. Tan
{"title":"Typifying educational research in Singapore and Sweden: a comparative bibliometric approach based on topics 2000–2020","authors":"Erik Nylander, J. Tan","doi":"10.1108/ijced-12-2021-0128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeWith the advancement of novel forms of text mining techniques, new possibilities have opened up to conduct large-scale content analysis of educational research from an international and comparative perspective. Since educational research tends to convey great variation based on country-specific circumstances it constitutes a good testbed for context-rich depictions of the knowledge formation within a given research field.Design/methodology/approachIn this article, the authors compare the educational research that has been produced by scholars in Singapore and Sweden. The article begins by providing a rich overview of what has characterised the formation and institutionalization of educational research in public policy. After this background they map the knowledge formation of education by means of a comparative bibliometric approach using words from abstracts, titles and keywords published in 9017 peer-reviewed articles between 2000 and 2020. First, the authors describe the dominant topics in each country using topic modelling techniques. Secondly, the authors identify the most distinguishing discourses when comparing the two countries.FindingsThe findings illustrate two ideal-types for conducting educational research: Singapore being more centralised, practically-oriented, quantitative and uncritical, whereas Sweden is decentralised, pluralistic, qualitative and critical in orientation. After having mapped out the prevailing topics among researchers working in these locations, the authors connect these findings to larger debates on rivalling knowledge traditions in educational scholarship, the role of the state and the degree of autonomy within higher education.Originality/valueThrough large scale text mining techniques, researchers have begun to explore the semantic composition of various research fields such as higher education research, research on lifelong learning, or social science studies. However, the bibliometric method has also been criticised for creating “mega-national comparisons” that suffer from a lack of understanding of the national ramifications of various research pursuits. The authors’ study addresses these shortcomings and provides a rich depiction of educational research in Singapore and Sweden. It zooms in on the relationship between each country's institutional histories, research priorities and semantic output.","PeriodicalId":51967,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Education and Development","volume":"430 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Education and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijced-12-2021-0128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

PurposeWith the advancement of novel forms of text mining techniques, new possibilities have opened up to conduct large-scale content analysis of educational research from an international and comparative perspective. Since educational research tends to convey great variation based on country-specific circumstances it constitutes a good testbed for context-rich depictions of the knowledge formation within a given research field.Design/methodology/approachIn this article, the authors compare the educational research that has been produced by scholars in Singapore and Sweden. The article begins by providing a rich overview of what has characterised the formation and institutionalization of educational research in public policy. After this background they map the knowledge formation of education by means of a comparative bibliometric approach using words from abstracts, titles and keywords published in 9017 peer-reviewed articles between 2000 and 2020. First, the authors describe the dominant topics in each country using topic modelling techniques. Secondly, the authors identify the most distinguishing discourses when comparing the two countries.FindingsThe findings illustrate two ideal-types for conducting educational research: Singapore being more centralised, practically-oriented, quantitative and uncritical, whereas Sweden is decentralised, pluralistic, qualitative and critical in orientation. After having mapped out the prevailing topics among researchers working in these locations, the authors connect these findings to larger debates on rivalling knowledge traditions in educational scholarship, the role of the state and the degree of autonomy within higher education.Originality/valueThrough large scale text mining techniques, researchers have begun to explore the semantic composition of various research fields such as higher education research, research on lifelong learning, or social science studies. However, the bibliometric method has also been criticised for creating “mega-national comparisons” that suffer from a lack of understanding of the national ramifications of various research pursuits. The authors’ study addresses these shortcomings and provides a rich depiction of educational research in Singapore and Sweden. It zooms in on the relationship between each country's institutional histories, research priorities and semantic output.
新加坡和瑞典教育研究的典型化:基于主题2000-2020的比较文献计量方法
随着新型文本挖掘技术的发展,从国际和比较的角度对教育研究进行大规模的内容分析开辟了新的可能性。由于教育研究倾向于传达基于国家具体情况的巨大差异,因此它构成了在给定研究领域内对知识形成进行上下文丰富描述的良好测试平台。在这篇文章中,作者比较了新加坡和瑞典学者的教育研究成果。本文首先对公共政策教育研究的形成和制度化的特征进行了丰富的概述。在此背景下,他们利用2000年至2020年间9017篇同行评议文章的摘要、标题和关键词,通过比较文献计量学方法绘制了教育知识形成的地图。首先,作者使用主题建模技术描述了每个国家的主导主题。其次,作者在比较两国时找出了最具区别的话语。研究结果说明了进行教育研究的两种理想类型:新加坡更集中,以实际为导向,定量和不批判,而瑞典则是分散,多元化,定性和批判。在绘制出在这些地方工作的研究人员的流行主题之后,作者将这些发现与更大的辩论联系起来,这些辩论涉及教育学术中相互竞争的知识传统、国家的角色和高等教育中的自治程度。原创性/价值通过大规模的文本挖掘技术,研究者已经开始探索各个研究领域的语义组成,如高等教育研究、终身学习研究或社会科学研究。然而,文献计量学方法也受到批评,因为它造成了“大型国家比较”,缺乏对各种研究追求的国家后果的理解。作者的研究弥补了这些不足,并对新加坡和瑞典的教育研究提供了丰富的描述。它聚焦于每个国家的制度历史、研究重点和语义输出之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信