A Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Curriculum Literacy

Year 2025, Volume: 15 Issue: 2, 155 - 182, 31.12.2025

Okan Dede , Hüseyin Ataseven

https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.1790213

Abstract

The aim of this study is to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of curriculum literacy literature through a holistic perspective. Adopting a descriptive research design, the study utilizes the bibliometric analysis method. The data were obtained from the Web of Science (WoS) database through an extensive search conducted using the keyword “curriculum literacy” on May 27, 2025. The resulting dataset, consisting of 208 articles, was analyzed using Microsoft Excel, R software, and the Biblioshiny application. Covering publications between 1988 and 2025, this analysis reveals key trends in the field, prominent academic contributors, influential institutions, and the temporal evolution of research on curriculum literacy. The findings indicate a notable increase in academic output on this topic in recent years. Countries such as the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom have emerged as leading actors shaping the field, both theoretically and practically. Higher education institutions, particularly in Australia and China, stand out due to their high levels of scholarly productivity and significant contributions to international research collaborations. Thematic analyses reveal that the concepts of “education,” “information,” and “curriculum” are among the most frequently addressed themes in the literature. In light of these findings, it is recommended that future research expand the scope of analysis by incorporating publications from additional databases to enable comparative assessments. Furthermore, enhancing international and interdisciplinary collaborations is likely to contribute to more comprehensive and impactful outcomes in the field of curriculum literacy.

Keywords

Bibliometric analysis , Curriculum , Curriculum literacy

Ethical Statement

There are no human subjects in this article and informed consent is not applicable. Ethical approval is not applicable to this study.

References

• Apple, M. W. (2004). Ideology and curriculum. Routledge.
• Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
• Ariav, T. (1991). Growth in teachers' curriculum knowledge through the process of curriculum analysis. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 6(3), 183-200. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED299234
• Aslan, S. (2018). Ortaokul öğretmenlerinin program okuryazarlık düzeyleri (The curriculum literacy level of secondary school teachers). (Thesis No: 516831) [Master Dissertation, Hacettepe University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
• Aslan, S. (2019). An analysis of prospective teachers' curriculum literacy levels in terms of reading and writing. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(4), 973–979. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070408
• Au, W. (2011). Teaching under the new Taylorism: High‐stakes testing and the standardization of the 21st century curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43(1), 25-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2010.521261
• Aygün, H. E. (2019). The prediction of the teaching readiness level of pre-service teachers in terms of curriculum literacy. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 9(2), 203-220. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2019.009
• Aykaç, N., & Ulubey, Ö. (2012). Pre-service teachers’ opinions about the application level of elementary school program. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 45(1), 63-82. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000001236
• Barrett, A. M., Crossley, M., & Dachi, H. A. (2011). International collaboration and research capacity building: Learning from the EdQual experience. Comparative Education, 47(1), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2011.541674
• Beck, J. (2013). Powerful knowledge, esoteric knowledge, curriculum knowledge. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(2), 177-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2013.767880
• Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of texts. State University of New York Press.
• Birkle, C., Pendlebury, D. A., Schnell, J., & Adams, J. (2020). Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 363-376. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00018
• Bolat, Y. (2017). Eğitim programı okuryazarlığı kavramı ve eğitim programı okuryazarlığı ölçeği [Concept of curriculum literacy and curriculum literacy scale]. International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 12(18), 121-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.12103
• Bümen, N. T., Çakar, E., & Yıldız, D. G. (2014). Türkiye’de öğretim programına bağlılık ve bağlılığı etkileyen etkenler [Curriculum fidelity and factors affecting fidelity in the Turkish context]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri: 14(1), 203-228. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.2020
• Büyükkaragöz, S. (1997). Program geliştirme – kaynak ve metinler. Kuzucalar Ofset.
• Bybee, R., & McCrae, B. (2011). Scientific literacy and student attitudes: Perspectives from PISA 2006 science. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 7-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518644
• Cervantes-Soon, C. G., Dorner, L., Palmer, D., Heiman, D., Schwerdtfeger, R., & Choi, J. (2017). Combating inequalities in two-way language immersion programs: Toward critical consciousness in bilingual education spaces. Review of Research in Education, 41(1), 403-427. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X17690120
• Çobanoğlu, R. (2011). Teacher self-efficacy and teaching beliefs as predictors of curriculum implementation in early childhood education (Thesis No: 300702) [Master Dissertation, Middle East Technical University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
• Deng, Z. (2018). Pedagogical content knowledge reconceived: Bringing curriculum thinking into the conversation on teachers' content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 72, 155-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.021
• Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
• Fellowes, J., & Oakley, G. (2020). Language, literacy and early childhood education. Oxford University Press.
• Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (2005). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Routledge.
• Freshwater, D., Sherwood, G., & Drury, V. (2006). International research collaboration: Issues, benefits and challenges of the global network. Journal of Research in Nursing, 11(4), 295-303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987106066304
• Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content‐based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247-273. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588504
• Goodson, I. F. (2014). Curriculum, personal narrative and the social future. Routledge.
• Giroux, H. A. (2007). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education. Routledge.
• Gümüş, S., Bellibaş, M. S., Gümüş, E. & Hallinger, P. (2019). Science mapping research on educational leadership and management in Turkey: A bibliometric review of international publications. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1578737
• Gündoğan, G. (2019). Öğretmenlerin program okuryazarlıkları hakkında nitel bir değerlendirme (A qualitative evaluation on teachers' curriculum literacy). (Thesis No: 579025) [Master Dissertation, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
• Horton, F. W. (2008). Understanding information literacy: a primer. UNESCO.
• Jansen, J., & Taylor, N. (2003). Educational change in South Africa 1994-2003: Case studies in large-scale education reform. World Bank.
• Kahramanoğlu, R. (2019). Öğretmenlerin öğretim programı okuryazarlığına yönelik yeterlik düzeyleri üzerine bir inceleme. [A study on teachers' levels of curriculum literacy]. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 12(65), 827-840. http://dx.doi.org/10.17719/jisr.2019.3495
• Karaman, P., & Bakaç, E. (2018). Investigating the teachers’ curriculum orientations in terms of various variables. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 304-320. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018..-364651
• Karseth, B., & Sivesind, K. (2010). Conceptualising curriculum knowledge within and beyond the national context. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 103-120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2009.01418.x
• Keskin, A., & Korkmaz, H. (2021). Öğretmenlerin öğretim programı okuryazarlığı algı ölçeği’nin geliştirilmesi [Development of teachers’ curriculum literacy perception scale]. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(2), 857-884. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.917130
• Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. Routledge.
• Kurudayıoğlu, M., & Tüzel, S. (2010). 21. yüzyıl okuryazarlık türleri, değişen metin algısı ve Türkçe eğitimi [The types of literacy of the 21st century, changing text comprehension and Turkish teaching]. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları, 28, 283-298. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/157039
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement., PLoS Medicine 6(7), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
• Mongeon, P., Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106, 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
• O’Connor, K. (2022). Constructivism, curriculum and the knowledge question: tensions and challenges for higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(2), 412-422. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1750585
• The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2000). Literacy in the information age: Final report of the international adult literacy survey. OECD Publishing.
• Ogar, O. E., & Awhen, F. (2015). Teachers perceived problems of curriculum implementation in tertiary institutions in cross river state of Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(19), 145-151. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1079530.pdf
• Oreck, B. (2004). The artistic and professional development of teachers: A study of teachers’ attitudes toward and use of the arts in teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(1), 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487103260072
• Özkan, H. H. (2016). An analysis of teachers’ opinions about their knowledge of curriculum terms awareness. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(7), 1601-1613. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040713
• Pinar, W. F. (2012). What is curriculum theory? (2nd ed.). Routledge.
• Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. M. (1995). Understanding curriculum: An introduction to the study of historical and contemporary curriculum discourses. Peter Lang.
• Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
• Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An ecological approach. Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474219426
• Schwab, J. J. (1969). The practical: A language for curriculum. The School Review, 78(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1086/442881
• Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
• Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. Heinemann.
• Sünbül, A. M. (1996). Öğretmen niteliği ve öğretimdeki rolleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, (8), 597-607. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/108646
• Wiles, J., & Bondi, J. (2007). Curriculum development: a guide to practice. Pearson.
• Yoshida, M. (2012). Mathematics lesson study in the United States: Current status and ideas for conducting high quality and effective lesson study. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 1(2), 140-152. https://doi.org/10.1108/20468251211224181
• Young, M. (2013). Powerful knowledge: An analytically useful concept or just a ‘sexy sounding term’? A response to John Beck’s ‘Powerful knowledge, esoteric knowledge, curriculum knowledge’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(2), 195-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2013.776356
• Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629