Bibliometric Analysis of The Literature on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematic-Pedagogical Content Knowledge (STEM-PCK) for The Years 2011-202
Article Sidebar
Published:
Apr 11, 2022
Main Article Content
Abstract
Analysis of bibliometric literature on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Pedagogical Content Knowledge spanning 2011-2022. STEM learning is being developed and researched recently. The teacher's role in implementing this learning is very important. Given the importance of the teacher's role in this learning, it is important to analyze research articles to find the relationship between Pedagogical Content Knowledge PCK and STEM, as well as look for opportunities for effective teacher training to improve STEM PCK, science teachers. This research uses the text analysis method, and the data is presented using bibliometric analysis. Searching using the keyword “STEM pedagogical content knowledge†using publish or perish software, obtained 999 kinds of literature published from 2011 to 2022. From the results of the analysis of PCK and STEM components in the title and abstract using bibliometric analysis, further research opportunities can be obtained by linking the keywords PCK, pedagogical practice, STEM integration, PBL, and student achievement in developing 21st-century skills.
Article Details
How to Cite
Hasanah, S., Riandi, Kaniawati , I., & Permanasari , A. (2022). Bibliometric Analysis of The Literature on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematic-Pedagogical Content Knowledge (STEM-PCK) for The Years 2011-202. Jurnal Inspirasi Pendidikan, 12(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.21067/jip.v12i1.6604
Section
Articles
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.Â
References
Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J., & de Miranda, M. A. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9341-0
Belter, C. W. (2015). Bibliometric indicators: Opportunities and limits. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(4), 219–221. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.014
Chval, K., Abell, S., Pareja, E., Musikul, K., & Ritzka, G. (2008). Science and mathematics teachers’ experiences, needs, and expectations regarding professional development. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 4(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75304
Cochran, K. F., Deruiter, J. A., & & King, R. A. (1990). Teachers’ Knowledge and Learning to Teach. Handbook of Research on Teacher Education, 291–310.
DeJarnette, N. K. (2012). America’s children: Providing early exposure to STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) initiatives. Education, 133(March), 77–84. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/prin/ed/2012/00000133/00000001/art00008
Dugger, W. E. (2010). Evolution of STEM in the United States. 6Th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education Research, March, 1–8. http://www.iteea.org/Resources/PressRoom/AustraliaPaper.pdf
Duschl, R. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Planning and carrying out investigations: an entry to learning and to teacher professional development around NGSS science and engineering practices. International Journal of STEM Education, 1(12), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-014-0012-6
Fore, G. A., Feldhaus, C. R., Sorge, B. H., Agarwal, M., & Varahramyan, K. (2015). Learning at the nano-level: Accounting for complexity in the internalization of secondary STEM teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.008
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., & Birman, B. F. (2001). What Makes Professional Development Effective? Results From a National Sample of Teachers of Teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00028312038004915
Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., MartÃÂnez, M. ÃÂ., Moral-Munoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Cobo, M. J. (2018). Some bibliometric procedures for analyzing and evaluating research fields. Applied Intelligence, 48(5), 1275–1287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-017-1105-y
Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., & Harwell, M. (2016). Building up stem: An analysis of teacher-developed engineering design-based stem integration curricular materials. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 6(1), 10–29. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1129
Kloser, M. (2014). Identifying a core set of science teaching practices: A Delphi expert panel approach. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(9), 1185–1217. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21171
Kokol, P., Saranto, K., & Blažun Vošner, H. (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
Kovács, A., Van Looy, B., & Cassiman, B. (2015). Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research. Scientometrics, 104(3), 951–983. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1628-0
LaForce, M., Noble, E., King, H., Century, J., Blackwell, C., Holt, S., Ibrahim, A., & Loo, S. (2016). The eight essential elements of inclusive STEM high schools. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0054-z
Lavi, R., Tal, M., & Dori, Y. J. (2021). Perceptions of STEM alumni and students on developing 21st century skills through methods of teaching and learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101002
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (2006). Nature, Sources, and Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Science Teaching. Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge, 95–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47217-1_4
MartÃÂn-Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales-Palacios, F. J., & VÃÂlchez-González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522
Pittsburgh. (2009). Southwest Pennsylvania STEM Network Long Range Plan (2009 – 2018): Plan Summary. In Southwest Regional STEM Network. http://business-leadershipcoaching.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/SWP-STEM-STRATEGY-Final-Report-Summary-July-2009.pdf
Sarkodie, S. A., & Strezov, V. (2019). A review on Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis using bibliometric and meta-analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 649, 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.276
Shah, S. H. H., Lei, S., Ali, M., Doronin, D., & Hussain, S. T. (2020). Prosumption: bibliometric analysis using HistCite and VOSviewer. Kybernetes, 49(3), 1020–1045. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2018-0696
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Understand: A Conception of Teacher Knowledge. American Educator, 10(1), 4–14. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=EJ333816%5Cnpapers3://publication/uuid/E77F7FFC-98B3-40B5-90D2-50050B024672
Srikoom, W., Faikhamta, C., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2018). Dimensions of Effective STEM Integrated Teaching Practice. K-12 STEM Education, 4(2), 313–330. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f70e/61c9196d3af8ae6990753d12ecbc4c0ea758.pdf?_ga=2.194362734.2132636689.1570570157-155469691.1570570157
Sutaphan, S., & Yuenyong, C. (2019). STEM Education Teaching approach: Inquiry from the Context Based. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1340(1), 0–18. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1340/1/012003
Wahono, B., Lin, P. L., & Chang, C. Y. (2020). Evidence of STEM enactment effectiveness in Asian student learning outcomes. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00236-1
Yuan, S. T. D., Chou, S. Y., Yang, W. C., Wu, C. A., & Huang, C. T. (2017). Customer engagement within multiple new media and broader business ecosystem – a holistic perspective. Kybernetes, 46(6), 1000–1020. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-01-2017-0042
Belter, C. W. (2015). Bibliometric indicators: Opportunities and limits. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(4), 219–221. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.014
Chval, K., Abell, S., Pareja, E., Musikul, K., & Ritzka, G. (2008). Science and mathematics teachers’ experiences, needs, and expectations regarding professional development. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 4(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75304
Cochran, K. F., Deruiter, J. A., & & King, R. A. (1990). Teachers’ Knowledge and Learning to Teach. Handbook of Research on Teacher Education, 291–310.
DeJarnette, N. K. (2012). America’s children: Providing early exposure to STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) initiatives. Education, 133(March), 77–84. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/prin/ed/2012/00000133/00000001/art00008
Dugger, W. E. (2010). Evolution of STEM in the United States. 6Th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education Research, March, 1–8. http://www.iteea.org/Resources/PressRoom/AustraliaPaper.pdf
Duschl, R. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Planning and carrying out investigations: an entry to learning and to teacher professional development around NGSS science and engineering practices. International Journal of STEM Education, 1(12), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-014-0012-6
Fore, G. A., Feldhaus, C. R., Sorge, B. H., Agarwal, M., & Varahramyan, K. (2015). Learning at the nano-level: Accounting for complexity in the internalization of secondary STEM teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.008
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., & Birman, B. F. (2001). What Makes Professional Development Effective? Results From a National Sample of Teachers of Teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00028312038004915
Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., MartÃÂnez, M. ÃÂ., Moral-Munoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Cobo, M. J. (2018). Some bibliometric procedures for analyzing and evaluating research fields. Applied Intelligence, 48(5), 1275–1287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-017-1105-y
Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., & Harwell, M. (2016). Building up stem: An analysis of teacher-developed engineering design-based stem integration curricular materials. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 6(1), 10–29. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1129
Kloser, M. (2014). Identifying a core set of science teaching practices: A Delphi expert panel approach. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(9), 1185–1217. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21171
Kokol, P., Saranto, K., & Blažun Vošner, H. (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
Kovács, A., Van Looy, B., & Cassiman, B. (2015). Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research. Scientometrics, 104(3), 951–983. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1628-0
LaForce, M., Noble, E., King, H., Century, J., Blackwell, C., Holt, S., Ibrahim, A., & Loo, S. (2016). The eight essential elements of inclusive STEM high schools. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0054-z
Lavi, R., Tal, M., & Dori, Y. J. (2021). Perceptions of STEM alumni and students on developing 21st century skills through methods of teaching and learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101002
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (2006). Nature, Sources, and Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Science Teaching. Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge, 95–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47217-1_4
MartÃÂn-Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales-Palacios, F. J., & VÃÂlchez-González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522
Pittsburgh. (2009). Southwest Pennsylvania STEM Network Long Range Plan (2009 – 2018): Plan Summary. In Southwest Regional STEM Network. http://business-leadershipcoaching.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/SWP-STEM-STRATEGY-Final-Report-Summary-July-2009.pdf
Sarkodie, S. A., & Strezov, V. (2019). A review on Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis using bibliometric and meta-analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 649, 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.276
Shah, S. H. H., Lei, S., Ali, M., Doronin, D., & Hussain, S. T. (2020). Prosumption: bibliometric analysis using HistCite and VOSviewer. Kybernetes, 49(3), 1020–1045. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2018-0696
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Understand: A Conception of Teacher Knowledge. American Educator, 10(1), 4–14. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=EJ333816%5Cnpapers3://publication/uuid/E77F7FFC-98B3-40B5-90D2-50050B024672
Srikoom, W., Faikhamta, C., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2018). Dimensions of Effective STEM Integrated Teaching Practice. K-12 STEM Education, 4(2), 313–330. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f70e/61c9196d3af8ae6990753d12ecbc4c0ea758.pdf?_ga=2.194362734.2132636689.1570570157-155469691.1570570157
Sutaphan, S., & Yuenyong, C. (2019). STEM Education Teaching approach: Inquiry from the Context Based. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1340(1), 0–18. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1340/1/012003
Wahono, B., Lin, P. L., & Chang, C. Y. (2020). Evidence of STEM enactment effectiveness in Asian student learning outcomes. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00236-1
Yuan, S. T. D., Chou, S. Y., Yang, W. C., Wu, C. A., & Huang, C. T. (2017). Customer engagement within multiple new media and broader business ecosystem – a holistic perspective. Kybernetes, 46(6), 1000–1020. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-01-2017-0042