Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis

Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review

Volume: 7 Number: 1 January 13, 2022
EN

Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review

Abstract

This research aims to reveal the trend in peer instruction that many researchers around the world have been working on for over 20 years. In this context, 58 papers published in journals indexed in SSCI were examined in terms of different variables (e.g., research methods, courses, and response technologies). The bibliometric results showed that the most used keyword and the most used word in the abstract sections of the studies was peer instruction. Systematic review results revealed that the continent and country with the most studies among 17 countries in four continents is North America and the USA, respectively. Moreover, the majority of studies were published in 2016. It was also found that studies are generally carried out with numerical courses such as physics, chemistry, and computer science. Other findings provided from the researches were discussed in detail, and various suggestions were made for teachers and researchers in line with the findings obtained from the study.

Keywords

peer instruction, PI, systematic review, bibliometric mapping analysis, clicker, classroom response system

References

  1. Abowitz, D. A., & Toole, T. M. (2010). Mixed method research: Fundamental issues of design, validity, and reliability in construction research. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(1), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000026
  2. Adawi, T., Burden, H., Olsson, D., & Mattiasson, R. (2016). Characterizing software engineering students’ discussions during peer instruction: Opportunities for learning and implications for teaching. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(2), 927–936.
  3. Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2016). Research trends in social network sites’ educational use: A review of publications in all SSCI journals to 2015. Review of Education, 4(3), 293–319.
  4. Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334–345. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021
  5. Aricò, F. R., & Lancaster, S. J. (2018). Facilitating active learning and enhancing student self-assessment skills. International Review of Economics Education, 29, 6–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2018.06.002
  6. Balta, N., Michinov, N., Balyimez, S., & Ayaz, M. F. (2017). A meta-analysis of the effect of peer instruction on learning gain: Identification of informational and cultural moderators. International Journal of Educational Research, 86, 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.08.009
  7. Brown, M. (2020). Seeing students at scale: How faculty in large lecture courses act upon learning analytics dashboard data. Teaching in Higher Education, 25(4), 384–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1698540
  8. Chien, Y.-T., Chang, Y.-H., & Chang, C.-Y. (2016). Do we click in the right way? A meta-analytic review of clicker-integrated instruction. Educational Research Review, 17, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.10.003
  9. Chien, Y.-T., Lee, Y.-H., Li, T.-Y., & Chang, C.-Y. (2015). Examining the effects of displaying clicker voting results on high school students’ voting behaviors, discussion processes, and learning outcomes. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(5), 1089–1104.
  10. Chou, C. Y., & Lin, P. H. (2015). Promoting discussion in peer instruction: Discussion partner assignment and accountability scoring mechanisms. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(4), 839–847.
APA
Olpak, Y. Z., & Yılmaz, R. (2022). Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 7(1), 42-50. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.978824
AMA
1.Olpak YZ, Yılmaz R. Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. JOLTIDA. 2022;7(1):42-50. doi:10.53850/joltida.978824
Chicago
Olpak, Yusuf Ziya, and Ramazan Yılmaz. 2022. “Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review”. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age 7 (1): 42-50. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.978824.
EndNote
Olpak YZ, Yılmaz R (January 1, 2022) Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age 7 1 42–50.
IEEE
[1]Y. Z. Olpak and R. Yılmaz, “Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review”, JOLTIDA, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 42–50, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.53850/joltida.978824.
ISNAD
Olpak, Yusuf Ziya - Yılmaz, Ramazan. “Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review”. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age 7/1 (January 1, 2022): 42-50. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.978824.
JAMA
1.Olpak YZ, Yılmaz R. Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. JOLTIDA. 2022;7:42–50.
MLA
Olpak, Yusuf Ziya, and Ramazan Yılmaz. “Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review”. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, vol. 7, no. 1, Jan. 2022, pp. 42-50, doi:10.53850/joltida.978824.
Vancouver
1.Yusuf Ziya Olpak, Ramazan Yılmaz. Review of Trends in Peer Instruction: Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. JOLTIDA. 2022 Jan. 1;7(1):42-50. doi:10.53850/joltida.978824