Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 66, 3675 - 3697, 29.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1537686

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Abdoli-Sejzi, A., Aris, B., Ahmad, M. H., & Rosli, M. S. (2015). The relationship between web 2.0 technologies and students achievement in virtual university. International Education Studies, 8(13), 67-72.
  • Aghaei, S., Nematbakhsh, M. A., & Farsani, H. K. (2012). Evolution of the world wide web: From Web 1.0 to Web 4.0. International Journal of Web & Semantic Technology, 3(1), 1-10.
  • Ajjan, H. & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002.
  • Alkan, F., & Mustafaoğlu, F. M. (2023). Using Web Tools in Lecture: Example of Micro Teaching Lesson. In Fostering Pedagogy Through Micro and Adaptive Learning in Higher Education: Trends, Tools, and Applications (pp. 261-286). IGI Global.
  • Altunışık, M., & Aktürk, A. O. (2021). Türkiye’de Web 2.0 Araçlarının Eğitim-Öğretim Ortamlarında Kullanımına Bir Bakış: 2010-2020 Dönemi Tezlerinin İncelenmesi. Bilim Eğitim Sanat ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 5(2), 205-227.
  • Bao, Z., & Shang, B. (2021). Self-efficacy and continuance intention of Web 2.0 platforms: a meta-analysis. Data Technologies and Applications, 55(4), 511-526.
  • Bhardwaj, R. K. (2014). Growth and development of Web 2.0 literature: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Knowledge & Communication Management, 4(2), 136-152. https://doi.org/10.5958/2277-7946.2014.00011.4
  • Bolatlı, Z., & Korucu, A. T. (2018). Secondary school students' feedback on course processing and collaborative learning with web 2.0 tools-supported STEM activities. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(2), 456-478.
  • Boudry, C. (2015). Web 2.0 applications in medicine: trends and topics in the literature. Medicine 2.0, 4(1). Bozkurt, A. (2013). Açık ve uzaktan öğretim: Web 2.0 ve sosyal ağların etkileri. Akademik Bilişim, 13(23-25), 689-694.
  • Chen, X., Zou, D., Cheng, G., & Xie, H. (2020). Detecting latent topics and trends in educational technologies over four decades using structural topic modeling: A retrospective of all volumes of Computers & Education. Computers & Education, 151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103855.
  • Choudhury N. 2014. World wide web and its journey from web 1.0 to web 4.0. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 5(6), 8096–8100.
  • Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy.
  • Cumhur, F., & Çam, S. S. (2021). Digital Transformation in Assessment and Evaluation Course: The Effects of Web 2.0 Tools. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(3), 15-39.
  • Dede, E., & Özdemir, E. (2022). Matematik eğitiminde fark etme becerisi üzerine yapılan araştırmaların bibliyometrik analizi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(36), 1547-1571.
  • Deperlioğlu, Ö., & Köse, U. (2010). Web 2.0 teknolojilerinin eğitim üzerindeki etkileri ve örnek bir öğrenme yaşantısı. Akademik Bilişim, 10, 10-12.
  • Dhawan, S. M., Gupta, B. M., Gupta, R., Kumar, A., & Bansal, J. (2016). Quantitative Assessment of Global Literature on'Web 2.0 and Libraries' during 2006-15. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 36(5).
  • Donmuş Kaya, V. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of using Web 2.0s in educational research area. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 9(1). 194-216.
  • Gedik, Y. (2020). Pazarlamada yeni bir çerçeve: Sosyal medya ve web 2.0. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 3(1), 252-269. https://doi.org/10.33712/mana.706162
  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B. & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age: Web 2.0 and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take Now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259 https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X0933667.
  • Gürlen, E., Özdiyar, Ö., & Şen, Z. (2018). Social Network Analysis of Academic Studies on Gifted People. Education and Science, 44(197), 185-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7735.
  • Hancıoğlu, Y., & Atay, Ö. (2019). İngiltere, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Türkiye’nin Ulusal İnovasyon Sistemlerinin İncelenmesi: Türkiye İçin Öneriler. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 74(2), 511-547. https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.536916.
  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational research review, 9, 47-64.
  • Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P and Venkatesh, A. (2004). Has the Internet Become Indispensable? Communications of the ACM, July, 47(7), 37-42.
  • Huang, WHD, Hood, DW ve Yoo, SJ (2013). Web 2.0 öğrenme ortamlarında motivasyonel destek: motivasyon, istek ve performansın bütünleştirici teorisine dayalı bir regresyon analizi. Eğitim ve Öğretimde Yenilikler Uluslararası , 51(6), 631–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796718.
  • Kapan, K., & Üncel, R. (2020). Gelişen Web Teknolojilerinin (Web 1.0- Web 2.0- Web 3.0) Türkiye Turizmine Etkisi. Safran Kültür ve Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(3), 276-289.
  • Kaya, D., & Dinçer, B. (2023). Web of Science Veri Tabanına Dayalı Bibliyometrik Analiz: Uzamsal Düşünme, Uzamsal Görselleştirme ve Uzamsal Yetenek. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(1), 174-201. https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1168901.
  • Khanzode, C. A., & Sarode, R. D. (2016). Evolution of the world wide web: from web 1.0 to 6.0. International journal of Digital Library services, 6(2), 1-11.
  • Koza-Çiftçi, Ş., Danişman, Ş., Yalçın, M., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Ay, Y., Sölpük, N. … ve Karadağ, E. (2016). Map of scientific publication in the field of educational sciences and teacher education in Turkey: A bibliometric study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1097-1123. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.4.0009.
  • Król, K. (2020). Evolution of online mapping: from Web 1.0 to Web 6.0. Geomatics, Landmanagement and Landscape, (1), 33-51.
  • Langset, I. D., Jacobsen, D. Y., & Haugsbakken, H. (2018). Digital professional development: towards a collaborative learning approach for taking higher education into the digitalized age. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 13(01), 24-39. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2018-01-03.
  • Liu, C.-C., Wang, P.-C., & Tai, S.-J. D. (2016). An analysis of student engagement patterns in language learning facilitated by Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 28(2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401600001X
  • Liu, M., Kalk, D., Kinney, L., & Orr, G. (2010, October). How Web 2.0 technologies are used in higher education: An updated review of literature. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2604-2615). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  • Lopez-Robles, J. R., Casas-Valadez, M. A., Guzmán-Fernández, A., Monjaraz-Frausto, C., Castorena-Robles, A., & Gamboa-Rosales, N. K. (2020, December). Understanding the relationship between e-learning and web 2.0: A bibliometric and thematic analysis from 2006 to 2020. In 2020 Sixth International Conference on e-Learning (econf) (pp. 290-295). IEEE.
  • Mata, L., Panisoara, G., Fat, S., Panisoara, I. O., & Lazar, I. (2019). Exploring the Adoptions by Students of Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education: Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education. In Advanced Web Applications and Progressing E-Learning 2.0 Technologies in Higher Education (pp. 128-149). IGI Global.
  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting ıtems for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
  • Noyons, E.C.M., Moed, H.F. & Van Raan, A.F.J. (1999). Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientometrics, 46(3),591–604 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02459614
  • Qassrawi, R. M., & Al Karasneh, S. M. (2023). Benefits of facebook usage (as a web 2.0 application) in foreign language instruction in higher education: A meta-analysis study. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1), 2185447.
  • Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College teaching, 59(2), 56-59.
  • Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. International Society for Technology in Education.
  • Sönmez, E. E., & Çakir, H. (2021). Effect of Web 2.0 technologies on academic performance: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 108-127.
  • Şeref, İ. & Karagöz, B. (2019). Okuma alanındaki araştırmaların bibliyometrik özellikler açısından incelenmesi. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(3), 781-799.
  • Topuz, A. C., Yıldırım, Ö., Topu, F. B. & Göktaş, Y. (2015). Öğrenme teorileri üzerine inşa edilen web 2.0 uygulamaları: Science Direct veri tabanı incelenmesi. Bilişim Tekmolojileri Dergisi 8(2), 59-69.
  • Üsdiken, B., & Pasadeos, Y. (1995). Organizational Analysis in North America and Europe: A Comparison of Co-citation Networks. Organization Studies, 16(3), 503–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600306
  • Van Nunen, K., Li, J., Reniers, G., & Ponnet, K. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of safety culture research. Safety science, 108, 248-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.08.011
  • Yazıcı, S., Ocak, İ. & Bozkurt, M. (2021). Web 2.0 araçları ile ilgili eğitim çalışmalarının incelenmesi. JRES, 8(2), 474-487. https://doi.org/10.51725/etad.1009299
  • Yılmaz, K. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde ve eğitim bilimlerinde sistematik derleme, meta değerlendirme ve bibliyometrik analizler. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(2), 1457-1490.
  • Zupic, I. & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.
  • Zan, B. U. (2012). Türkiye’ de bilim dallarında karşılaştırmalı bibliyometrik analiz çalışması [Yayınlanmamış doktara tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
  • Zan, B. U. (2019). Doğrudan Atıf, Ortak Atıf ve Bibliyografik Eşleşme Yaklaşımlarına Dayalı Olarak Araştırma Alanlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(2), 501-516.

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 66, 3675 - 3697, 29.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1537686

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Abdoli-Sejzi, A., Aris, B., Ahmad, M. H., & Rosli, M. S. (2015). The relationship between web 2.0 technologies and students achievement in virtual university. International Education Studies, 8(13), 67-72.
  • Aghaei, S., Nematbakhsh, M. A., & Farsani, H. K. (2012). Evolution of the world wide web: From Web 1.0 to Web 4.0. International Journal of Web & Semantic Technology, 3(1), 1-10.
  • Ajjan, H. & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002.
  • Alkan, F., & Mustafaoğlu, F. M. (2023). Using Web Tools in Lecture: Example of Micro Teaching Lesson. In Fostering Pedagogy Through Micro and Adaptive Learning in Higher Education: Trends, Tools, and Applications (pp. 261-286). IGI Global.
  • Altunışık, M., & Aktürk, A. O. (2021). Türkiye’de Web 2.0 Araçlarının Eğitim-Öğretim Ortamlarında Kullanımına Bir Bakış: 2010-2020 Dönemi Tezlerinin İncelenmesi. Bilim Eğitim Sanat ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 5(2), 205-227.
  • Bao, Z., & Shang, B. (2021). Self-efficacy and continuance intention of Web 2.0 platforms: a meta-analysis. Data Technologies and Applications, 55(4), 511-526.
  • Bhardwaj, R. K. (2014). Growth and development of Web 2.0 literature: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Knowledge & Communication Management, 4(2), 136-152. https://doi.org/10.5958/2277-7946.2014.00011.4
  • Bolatlı, Z., & Korucu, A. T. (2018). Secondary school students' feedback on course processing and collaborative learning with web 2.0 tools-supported STEM activities. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(2), 456-478.
  • Boudry, C. (2015). Web 2.0 applications in medicine: trends and topics in the literature. Medicine 2.0, 4(1). Bozkurt, A. (2013). Açık ve uzaktan öğretim: Web 2.0 ve sosyal ağların etkileri. Akademik Bilişim, 13(23-25), 689-694.
  • Chen, X., Zou, D., Cheng, G., & Xie, H. (2020). Detecting latent topics and trends in educational technologies over four decades using structural topic modeling: A retrospective of all volumes of Computers & Education. Computers & Education, 151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103855.
  • Choudhury N. 2014. World wide web and its journey from web 1.0 to web 4.0. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 5(6), 8096–8100.
  • Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy.
  • Cumhur, F., & Çam, S. S. (2021). Digital Transformation in Assessment and Evaluation Course: The Effects of Web 2.0 Tools. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(3), 15-39.
  • Dede, E., & Özdemir, E. (2022). Matematik eğitiminde fark etme becerisi üzerine yapılan araştırmaların bibliyometrik analizi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(36), 1547-1571.
  • Deperlioğlu, Ö., & Köse, U. (2010). Web 2.0 teknolojilerinin eğitim üzerindeki etkileri ve örnek bir öğrenme yaşantısı. Akademik Bilişim, 10, 10-12.
  • Dhawan, S. M., Gupta, B. M., Gupta, R., Kumar, A., & Bansal, J. (2016). Quantitative Assessment of Global Literature on'Web 2.0 and Libraries' during 2006-15. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 36(5).
  • Donmuş Kaya, V. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of using Web 2.0s in educational research area. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 9(1). 194-216.
  • Gedik, Y. (2020). Pazarlamada yeni bir çerçeve: Sosyal medya ve web 2.0. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 3(1), 252-269. https://doi.org/10.33712/mana.706162
  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B. & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age: Web 2.0 and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take Now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259 https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X0933667.
  • Gürlen, E., Özdiyar, Ö., & Şen, Z. (2018). Social Network Analysis of Academic Studies on Gifted People. Education and Science, 44(197), 185-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7735.
  • Hancıoğlu, Y., & Atay, Ö. (2019). İngiltere, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Türkiye’nin Ulusal İnovasyon Sistemlerinin İncelenmesi: Türkiye İçin Öneriler. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 74(2), 511-547. https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.536916.
  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational research review, 9, 47-64.
  • Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P and Venkatesh, A. (2004). Has the Internet Become Indispensable? Communications of the ACM, July, 47(7), 37-42.
  • Huang, WHD, Hood, DW ve Yoo, SJ (2013). Web 2.0 öğrenme ortamlarında motivasyonel destek: motivasyon, istek ve performansın bütünleştirici teorisine dayalı bir regresyon analizi. Eğitim ve Öğretimde Yenilikler Uluslararası , 51(6), 631–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796718.
  • Kapan, K., & Üncel, R. (2020). Gelişen Web Teknolojilerinin (Web 1.0- Web 2.0- Web 3.0) Türkiye Turizmine Etkisi. Safran Kültür ve Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(3), 276-289.
  • Kaya, D., & Dinçer, B. (2023). Web of Science Veri Tabanına Dayalı Bibliyometrik Analiz: Uzamsal Düşünme, Uzamsal Görselleştirme ve Uzamsal Yetenek. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(1), 174-201. https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1168901.
  • Khanzode, C. A., & Sarode, R. D. (2016). Evolution of the world wide web: from web 1.0 to 6.0. International journal of Digital Library services, 6(2), 1-11.
  • Koza-Çiftçi, Ş., Danişman, Ş., Yalçın, M., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Ay, Y., Sölpük, N. … ve Karadağ, E. (2016). Map of scientific publication in the field of educational sciences and teacher education in Turkey: A bibliometric study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1097-1123. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.4.0009.
  • Król, K. (2020). Evolution of online mapping: from Web 1.0 to Web 6.0. Geomatics, Landmanagement and Landscape, (1), 33-51.
  • Langset, I. D., Jacobsen, D. Y., & Haugsbakken, H. (2018). Digital professional development: towards a collaborative learning approach for taking higher education into the digitalized age. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 13(01), 24-39. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2018-01-03.
  • Liu, C.-C., Wang, P.-C., & Tai, S.-J. D. (2016). An analysis of student engagement patterns in language learning facilitated by Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 28(2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401600001X
  • Liu, M., Kalk, D., Kinney, L., & Orr, G. (2010, October). How Web 2.0 technologies are used in higher education: An updated review of literature. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2604-2615). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  • Lopez-Robles, J. R., Casas-Valadez, M. A., Guzmán-Fernández, A., Monjaraz-Frausto, C., Castorena-Robles, A., & Gamboa-Rosales, N. K. (2020, December). Understanding the relationship between e-learning and web 2.0: A bibliometric and thematic analysis from 2006 to 2020. In 2020 Sixth International Conference on e-Learning (econf) (pp. 290-295). IEEE.
  • Mata, L., Panisoara, G., Fat, S., Panisoara, I. O., & Lazar, I. (2019). Exploring the Adoptions by Students of Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education: Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education. In Advanced Web Applications and Progressing E-Learning 2.0 Technologies in Higher Education (pp. 128-149). IGI Global.
  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting ıtems for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
  • Noyons, E.C.M., Moed, H.F. & Van Raan, A.F.J. (1999). Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientometrics, 46(3),591–604 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02459614
  • Qassrawi, R. M., & Al Karasneh, S. M. (2023). Benefits of facebook usage (as a web 2.0 application) in foreign language instruction in higher education: A meta-analysis study. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1), 2185447.
  • Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College teaching, 59(2), 56-59.
  • Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. International Society for Technology in Education.
  • Sönmez, E. E., & Çakir, H. (2021). Effect of Web 2.0 technologies on academic performance: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 108-127.
  • Şeref, İ. & Karagöz, B. (2019). Okuma alanındaki araştırmaların bibliyometrik özellikler açısından incelenmesi. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(3), 781-799.
  • Topuz, A. C., Yıldırım, Ö., Topu, F. B. & Göktaş, Y. (2015). Öğrenme teorileri üzerine inşa edilen web 2.0 uygulamaları: Science Direct veri tabanı incelenmesi. Bilişim Tekmolojileri Dergisi 8(2), 59-69.
  • Üsdiken, B., & Pasadeos, Y. (1995). Organizational Analysis in North America and Europe: A Comparison of Co-citation Networks. Organization Studies, 16(3), 503–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600306
  • Van Nunen, K., Li, J., Reniers, G., & Ponnet, K. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of safety culture research. Safety science, 108, 248-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.08.011
  • Yazıcı, S., Ocak, İ. & Bozkurt, M. (2021). Web 2.0 araçları ile ilgili eğitim çalışmalarının incelenmesi. JRES, 8(2), 474-487. https://doi.org/10.51725/etad.1009299
  • Yılmaz, K. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde ve eğitim bilimlerinde sistematik derleme, meta değerlendirme ve bibliyometrik analizler. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(2), 1457-1490.
  • Zupic, I. & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.
  • Zan, B. U. (2012). Türkiye’ de bilim dallarında karşılaştırmalı bibliyometrik analiz çalışması [Yayınlanmamış doktara tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
  • Zan, B. U. (2019). Doğrudan Atıf, Ortak Atıf ve Bibliyografik Eşleşme Yaklaşımlarına Dayalı Olarak Araştırma Alanlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(2), 501-516.

Eğitimde Web 2.0 ve Web 2.0 Araçları Üzerine Yapılan Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Analizi

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 66, 3675 - 3697, 29.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1537686

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Web of Science (WoS) veri tabanı kullanılarak eğitimde web 2.0 ve web 2.0 araçları konusunda yayımlanan makaleleri bibliyometrik açıdan incelemektir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda eğitimde web 2.0 ve web 2.0 araçları konusunda yapılan çalışmalar, bibliyometrik analiz yöntemi kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında Web of Science (WoS) veri tabanı üzerinden toplam 1871 çalışmaya ulaşılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde betimsel analiz ve bibliyometrik analiz kullanılmıştır. Betimsel analizler WoS veri tabanının kendi sistemi üzerinden; bibliyometrik analizler ise VOSviewer programı kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Eğitimde web 2.0 ve web 2.0 araçları konusunda yayımlanan makalelerin; yıl, dil, ülke, yazar, kurum, dergi, yazarlar bağlamında ortak yazar, ülkeler bağlamında ortak yazar, ortak anahtar kelime, alıntılanan kaynaklar bağlamında ortak atıf ve alıntılanan yazarlar bağlamında ortak atıf gibi bilgilerin analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmanın, konunun eğilimlerini istatistiksel verilere dayalı olarak inceleyerek, konunun eksik veya henüz çalışılmamış yönlerini ortaya koyup gelecekteki araştırmalar için potansiyel alanlar hakkında bilgiler sunacağı düşünülmektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Abdoli-Sejzi, A., Aris, B., Ahmad, M. H., & Rosli, M. S. (2015). The relationship between web 2.0 technologies and students achievement in virtual university. International Education Studies, 8(13), 67-72.
  • Aghaei, S., Nematbakhsh, M. A., & Farsani, H. K. (2012). Evolution of the world wide web: From Web 1.0 to Web 4.0. International Journal of Web & Semantic Technology, 3(1), 1-10.
  • Ajjan, H. & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002.
  • Alkan, F., & Mustafaoğlu, F. M. (2023). Using Web Tools in Lecture: Example of Micro Teaching Lesson. In Fostering Pedagogy Through Micro and Adaptive Learning in Higher Education: Trends, Tools, and Applications (pp. 261-286). IGI Global.
  • Altunışık, M., & Aktürk, A. O. (2021). Türkiye’de Web 2.0 Araçlarının Eğitim-Öğretim Ortamlarında Kullanımına Bir Bakış: 2010-2020 Dönemi Tezlerinin İncelenmesi. Bilim Eğitim Sanat ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 5(2), 205-227.
  • Bao, Z., & Shang, B. (2021). Self-efficacy and continuance intention of Web 2.0 platforms: a meta-analysis. Data Technologies and Applications, 55(4), 511-526.
  • Bhardwaj, R. K. (2014). Growth and development of Web 2.0 literature: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Knowledge & Communication Management, 4(2), 136-152. https://doi.org/10.5958/2277-7946.2014.00011.4
  • Bolatlı, Z., & Korucu, A. T. (2018). Secondary school students' feedback on course processing and collaborative learning with web 2.0 tools-supported STEM activities. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(2), 456-478.
  • Boudry, C. (2015). Web 2.0 applications in medicine: trends and topics in the literature. Medicine 2.0, 4(1). Bozkurt, A. (2013). Açık ve uzaktan öğretim: Web 2.0 ve sosyal ağların etkileri. Akademik Bilişim, 13(23-25), 689-694.
  • Chen, X., Zou, D., Cheng, G., & Xie, H. (2020). Detecting latent topics and trends in educational technologies over four decades using structural topic modeling: A retrospective of all volumes of Computers & Education. Computers & Education, 151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103855.
  • Choudhury N. 2014. World wide web and its journey from web 1.0 to web 4.0. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 5(6), 8096–8100.
  • Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy.
  • Cumhur, F., & Çam, S. S. (2021). Digital Transformation in Assessment and Evaluation Course: The Effects of Web 2.0 Tools. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(3), 15-39.
  • Dede, E., & Özdemir, E. (2022). Matematik eğitiminde fark etme becerisi üzerine yapılan araştırmaların bibliyometrik analizi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(36), 1547-1571.
  • Deperlioğlu, Ö., & Köse, U. (2010). Web 2.0 teknolojilerinin eğitim üzerindeki etkileri ve örnek bir öğrenme yaşantısı. Akademik Bilişim, 10, 10-12.
  • Dhawan, S. M., Gupta, B. M., Gupta, R., Kumar, A., & Bansal, J. (2016). Quantitative Assessment of Global Literature on'Web 2.0 and Libraries' during 2006-15. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 36(5).
  • Donmuş Kaya, V. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of using Web 2.0s in educational research area. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 9(1). 194-216.
  • Gedik, Y. (2020). Pazarlamada yeni bir çerçeve: Sosyal medya ve web 2.0. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 3(1), 252-269. https://doi.org/10.33712/mana.706162
  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B. & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age: Web 2.0 and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take Now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259 https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X0933667.
  • Gürlen, E., Özdiyar, Ö., & Şen, Z. (2018). Social Network Analysis of Academic Studies on Gifted People. Education and Science, 44(197), 185-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7735.
  • Hancıoğlu, Y., & Atay, Ö. (2019). İngiltere, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Türkiye’nin Ulusal İnovasyon Sistemlerinin İncelenmesi: Türkiye İçin Öneriler. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 74(2), 511-547. https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.536916.
  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational research review, 9, 47-64.
  • Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P and Venkatesh, A. (2004). Has the Internet Become Indispensable? Communications of the ACM, July, 47(7), 37-42.
  • Huang, WHD, Hood, DW ve Yoo, SJ (2013). Web 2.0 öğrenme ortamlarında motivasyonel destek: motivasyon, istek ve performansın bütünleştirici teorisine dayalı bir regresyon analizi. Eğitim ve Öğretimde Yenilikler Uluslararası , 51(6), 631–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796718.
  • Kapan, K., & Üncel, R. (2020). Gelişen Web Teknolojilerinin (Web 1.0- Web 2.0- Web 3.0) Türkiye Turizmine Etkisi. Safran Kültür ve Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(3), 276-289.
  • Kaya, D., & Dinçer, B. (2023). Web of Science Veri Tabanına Dayalı Bibliyometrik Analiz: Uzamsal Düşünme, Uzamsal Görselleştirme ve Uzamsal Yetenek. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(1), 174-201. https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1168901.
  • Khanzode, C. A., & Sarode, R. D. (2016). Evolution of the world wide web: from web 1.0 to 6.0. International journal of Digital Library services, 6(2), 1-11.
  • Koza-Çiftçi, Ş., Danişman, Ş., Yalçın, M., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Ay, Y., Sölpük, N. … ve Karadağ, E. (2016). Map of scientific publication in the field of educational sciences and teacher education in Turkey: A bibliometric study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1097-1123. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.4.0009.
  • Król, K. (2020). Evolution of online mapping: from Web 1.0 to Web 6.0. Geomatics, Landmanagement and Landscape, (1), 33-51.
  • Langset, I. D., Jacobsen, D. Y., & Haugsbakken, H. (2018). Digital professional development: towards a collaborative learning approach for taking higher education into the digitalized age. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 13(01), 24-39. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2018-01-03.
  • Liu, C.-C., Wang, P.-C., & Tai, S.-J. D. (2016). An analysis of student engagement patterns in language learning facilitated by Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 28(2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401600001X
  • Liu, M., Kalk, D., Kinney, L., & Orr, G. (2010, October). How Web 2.0 technologies are used in higher education: An updated review of literature. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2604-2615). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  • Lopez-Robles, J. R., Casas-Valadez, M. A., Guzmán-Fernández, A., Monjaraz-Frausto, C., Castorena-Robles, A., & Gamboa-Rosales, N. K. (2020, December). Understanding the relationship between e-learning and web 2.0: A bibliometric and thematic analysis from 2006 to 2020. In 2020 Sixth International Conference on e-Learning (econf) (pp. 290-295). IEEE.
  • Mata, L., Panisoara, G., Fat, S., Panisoara, I. O., & Lazar, I. (2019). Exploring the Adoptions by Students of Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education: Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education. In Advanced Web Applications and Progressing E-Learning 2.0 Technologies in Higher Education (pp. 128-149). IGI Global.
  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting ıtems for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
  • Noyons, E.C.M., Moed, H.F. & Van Raan, A.F.J. (1999). Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientometrics, 46(3),591–604 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02459614
  • Qassrawi, R. M., & Al Karasneh, S. M. (2023). Benefits of facebook usage (as a web 2.0 application) in foreign language instruction in higher education: A meta-analysis study. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1), 2185447.
  • Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College teaching, 59(2), 56-59.
  • Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. International Society for Technology in Education.
  • Sönmez, E. E., & Çakir, H. (2021). Effect of Web 2.0 technologies on academic performance: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 108-127.
  • Şeref, İ. & Karagöz, B. (2019). Okuma alanındaki araştırmaların bibliyometrik özellikler açısından incelenmesi. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(3), 781-799.
  • Topuz, A. C., Yıldırım, Ö., Topu, F. B. & Göktaş, Y. (2015). Öğrenme teorileri üzerine inşa edilen web 2.0 uygulamaları: Science Direct veri tabanı incelenmesi. Bilişim Tekmolojileri Dergisi 8(2), 59-69.
  • Üsdiken, B., & Pasadeos, Y. (1995). Organizational Analysis in North America and Europe: A Comparison of Co-citation Networks. Organization Studies, 16(3), 503–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600306
  • Van Nunen, K., Li, J., Reniers, G., & Ponnet, K. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of safety culture research. Safety science, 108, 248-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.08.011
  • Yazıcı, S., Ocak, İ. & Bozkurt, M. (2021). Web 2.0 araçları ile ilgili eğitim çalışmalarının incelenmesi. JRES, 8(2), 474-487. https://doi.org/10.51725/etad.1009299
  • Yılmaz, K. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde ve eğitim bilimlerinde sistematik derleme, meta değerlendirme ve bibliyometrik analizler. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(2), 1457-1490.
  • Zupic, I. & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.
  • Zan, B. U. (2012). Türkiye’ de bilim dallarında karşılaştırmalı bibliyometrik analiz çalışması [Yayınlanmamış doktara tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
  • Zan, B. U. (2019). Doğrudan Atıf, Ortak Atıf ve Bibliyografik Eşleşme Yaklaşımlarına Dayalı Olarak Araştırma Alanlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(2), 501-516.

Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Web 2.0 and Web 2.0 Tools in Education

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 66, 3675 - 3697, 29.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1537686

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine the articles published on web 2.0 and web 2.0 tools in education using Web of Science (WoS) database from a bibliometric perspective. For this purpose, studies on web 2.0 and web 2.0 tools were analyzed using bibliometric analysis method. Within the scope of the research, a total of 1871 studies were reached through the WoS database. Descriptive analysis and bibliometric analysis were used to analyze the data. Descriptive analyses were conducted through the WoS database's own system; bibliometric analyses were conducted using the VOSviewer program. The articles published on web 2.0 and web 2.0 tools in education were analyzed in terms of year, language, country, author, institution, journal, co-authorship in terms of authors, co-authorship in terms of countries, co-occurence keyword, co-citation in terms of cited sources, and co-citation in terms of cited authors. This study is expected to examine trends in the subject based on statistical data, reveal its gaps or unexplored aspects, and provide information about potential areas for future research.

Kaynakça

  • Abdoli-Sejzi, A., Aris, B., Ahmad, M. H., & Rosli, M. S. (2015). The relationship between web 2.0 technologies and students achievement in virtual university. International Education Studies, 8(13), 67-72.
  • Aghaei, S., Nematbakhsh, M. A., & Farsani, H. K. (2012). Evolution of the world wide web: From Web 1.0 to Web 4.0. International Journal of Web & Semantic Technology, 3(1), 1-10.
  • Ajjan, H. & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002.
  • Alkan, F., & Mustafaoğlu, F. M. (2023). Using Web Tools in Lecture: Example of Micro Teaching Lesson. In Fostering Pedagogy Through Micro and Adaptive Learning in Higher Education: Trends, Tools, and Applications (pp. 261-286). IGI Global.
  • Altunışık, M., & Aktürk, A. O. (2021). Türkiye’de Web 2.0 Araçlarının Eğitim-Öğretim Ortamlarında Kullanımına Bir Bakış: 2010-2020 Dönemi Tezlerinin İncelenmesi. Bilim Eğitim Sanat ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 5(2), 205-227.
  • Bao, Z., & Shang, B. (2021). Self-efficacy and continuance intention of Web 2.0 platforms: a meta-analysis. Data Technologies and Applications, 55(4), 511-526.
  • Bhardwaj, R. K. (2014). Growth and development of Web 2.0 literature: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Knowledge & Communication Management, 4(2), 136-152. https://doi.org/10.5958/2277-7946.2014.00011.4
  • Bolatlı, Z., & Korucu, A. T. (2018). Secondary school students' feedback on course processing and collaborative learning with web 2.0 tools-supported STEM activities. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(2), 456-478.
  • Boudry, C. (2015). Web 2.0 applications in medicine: trends and topics in the literature. Medicine 2.0, 4(1). Bozkurt, A. (2013). Açık ve uzaktan öğretim: Web 2.0 ve sosyal ağların etkileri. Akademik Bilişim, 13(23-25), 689-694.
  • Chen, X., Zou, D., Cheng, G., & Xie, H. (2020). Detecting latent topics and trends in educational technologies over four decades using structural topic modeling: A retrospective of all volumes of Computers & Education. Computers & Education, 151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103855.
  • Choudhury N. 2014. World wide web and its journey from web 1.0 to web 4.0. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 5(6), 8096–8100.
  • Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy.
  • Cumhur, F., & Çam, S. S. (2021). Digital Transformation in Assessment and Evaluation Course: The Effects of Web 2.0 Tools. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(3), 15-39.
  • Dede, E., & Özdemir, E. (2022). Matematik eğitiminde fark etme becerisi üzerine yapılan araştırmaların bibliyometrik analizi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(36), 1547-1571.
  • Deperlioğlu, Ö., & Köse, U. (2010). Web 2.0 teknolojilerinin eğitim üzerindeki etkileri ve örnek bir öğrenme yaşantısı. Akademik Bilişim, 10, 10-12.
  • Dhawan, S. M., Gupta, B. M., Gupta, R., Kumar, A., & Bansal, J. (2016). Quantitative Assessment of Global Literature on'Web 2.0 and Libraries' during 2006-15. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 36(5).
  • Donmuş Kaya, V. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of using Web 2.0s in educational research area. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 9(1). 194-216.
  • Gedik, Y. (2020). Pazarlamada yeni bir çerçeve: Sosyal medya ve web 2.0. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 3(1), 252-269. https://doi.org/10.33712/mana.706162
  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B. & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age: Web 2.0 and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take Now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259 https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X0933667.
  • Gürlen, E., Özdiyar, Ö., & Şen, Z. (2018). Social Network Analysis of Academic Studies on Gifted People. Education and Science, 44(197), 185-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7735.
  • Hancıoğlu, Y., & Atay, Ö. (2019). İngiltere, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Türkiye’nin Ulusal İnovasyon Sistemlerinin İncelenmesi: Türkiye İçin Öneriler. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 74(2), 511-547. https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.536916.
  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational research review, 9, 47-64.
  • Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P and Venkatesh, A. (2004). Has the Internet Become Indispensable? Communications of the ACM, July, 47(7), 37-42.
  • Huang, WHD, Hood, DW ve Yoo, SJ (2013). Web 2.0 öğrenme ortamlarında motivasyonel destek: motivasyon, istek ve performansın bütünleştirici teorisine dayalı bir regresyon analizi. Eğitim ve Öğretimde Yenilikler Uluslararası , 51(6), 631–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796718.
  • Kapan, K., & Üncel, R. (2020). Gelişen Web Teknolojilerinin (Web 1.0- Web 2.0- Web 3.0) Türkiye Turizmine Etkisi. Safran Kültür ve Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(3), 276-289.
  • Kaya, D., & Dinçer, B. (2023). Web of Science Veri Tabanına Dayalı Bibliyometrik Analiz: Uzamsal Düşünme, Uzamsal Görselleştirme ve Uzamsal Yetenek. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(1), 174-201. https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1168901.
  • Khanzode, C. A., & Sarode, R. D. (2016). Evolution of the world wide web: from web 1.0 to 6.0. International journal of Digital Library services, 6(2), 1-11.
  • Koza-Çiftçi, Ş., Danişman, Ş., Yalçın, M., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Ay, Y., Sölpük, N. … ve Karadağ, E. (2016). Map of scientific publication in the field of educational sciences and teacher education in Turkey: A bibliometric study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1097-1123. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.4.0009.
  • Król, K. (2020). Evolution of online mapping: from Web 1.0 to Web 6.0. Geomatics, Landmanagement and Landscape, (1), 33-51.
  • Langset, I. D., Jacobsen, D. Y., & Haugsbakken, H. (2018). Digital professional development: towards a collaborative learning approach for taking higher education into the digitalized age. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 13(01), 24-39. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2018-01-03.
  • Liu, C.-C., Wang, P.-C., & Tai, S.-J. D. (2016). An analysis of student engagement patterns in language learning facilitated by Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 28(2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401600001X
  • Liu, M., Kalk, D., Kinney, L., & Orr, G. (2010, October). How Web 2.0 technologies are used in higher education: An updated review of literature. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2604-2615). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  • Lopez-Robles, J. R., Casas-Valadez, M. A., Guzmán-Fernández, A., Monjaraz-Frausto, C., Castorena-Robles, A., & Gamboa-Rosales, N. K. (2020, December). Understanding the relationship between e-learning and web 2.0: A bibliometric and thematic analysis from 2006 to 2020. In 2020 Sixth International Conference on e-Learning (econf) (pp. 290-295). IEEE.
  • Mata, L., Panisoara, G., Fat, S., Panisoara, I. O., & Lazar, I. (2019). Exploring the Adoptions by Students of Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education: Web 2.0 Tools for E-Learning in Higher Education. In Advanced Web Applications and Progressing E-Learning 2.0 Technologies in Higher Education (pp. 128-149). IGI Global.
  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting ıtems for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
  • Noyons, E.C.M., Moed, H.F. & Van Raan, A.F.J. (1999). Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientometrics, 46(3),591–604 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02459614
  • Qassrawi, R. M., & Al Karasneh, S. M. (2023). Benefits of facebook usage (as a web 2.0 application) in foreign language instruction in higher education: A meta-analysis study. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1), 2185447.
  • Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College teaching, 59(2), 56-59.
  • Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. International Society for Technology in Education.
  • Sönmez, E. E., & Çakir, H. (2021). Effect of Web 2.0 technologies on academic performance: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 108-127.
  • Şeref, İ. & Karagöz, B. (2019). Okuma alanındaki araştırmaların bibliyometrik özellikler açısından incelenmesi. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(3), 781-799.
  • Topuz, A. C., Yıldırım, Ö., Topu, F. B. & Göktaş, Y. (2015). Öğrenme teorileri üzerine inşa edilen web 2.0 uygulamaları: Science Direct veri tabanı incelenmesi. Bilişim Tekmolojileri Dergisi 8(2), 59-69.
  • Üsdiken, B., & Pasadeos, Y. (1995). Organizational Analysis in North America and Europe: A Comparison of Co-citation Networks. Organization Studies, 16(3), 503–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600306
  • Van Nunen, K., Li, J., Reniers, G., & Ponnet, K. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of safety culture research. Safety science, 108, 248-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.08.011
  • Yazıcı, S., Ocak, İ. & Bozkurt, M. (2021). Web 2.0 araçları ile ilgili eğitim çalışmalarının incelenmesi. JRES, 8(2), 474-487. https://doi.org/10.51725/etad.1009299
  • Yılmaz, K. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde ve eğitim bilimlerinde sistematik derleme, meta değerlendirme ve bibliyometrik analizler. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(2), 1457-1490.
  • Zupic, I. & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.
  • Zan, B. U. (2012). Türkiye’ de bilim dallarında karşılaştırmalı bibliyometrik analiz çalışması [Yayınlanmamış doktara tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
  • Zan, B. U. (2019). Doğrudan Atıf, Ortak Atıf ve Bibliyografik Eşleşme Yaklaşımlarına Dayalı Olarak Araştırma Alanlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(2), 501-516.
Toplam 49 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Eğitim Teknolojisi ve Bilgi İşlem
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Selva Büşra Turan 0000-0001-8110-022X

Ahmet Erdoğan 0000-0003-2024-4515

Gönderilme Tarihi 23 Ağustos 2024
Kabul Tarihi 25 Kasım 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Aralık 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Sayı: 66

Kaynak Göster

APA Turan, S. B., & Erdoğan, A. (2025). Eğitimde Web 2.0 ve Web 2.0 Araçları Üzerine Yapılan Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Analizi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi(66), 3675-3697. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1537686