global research in higher education

Global Research in Higher Education

• Other Journals
• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

Announcements

• Editorial Team

Journal Publishing Flowchart

Vol 8, No 1 (2025)

Table of contents.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 19 December 2024

Current trend and future research agenda for technological innovation in higher education institutions

• Muhammad Rifqi Arviansyah 1 ,
• Yudi Azis 1 ,
• Mery Citra Sondari 1 &
• Budi Harsanto   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0732-0993 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1686 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Business and management
• Information systems and information technology

Technological innovation is significantly impacting Higher Education Institutions (HEI). In the Google Scholar database, over 3 million literature are available, but only a few articles discuss the review of technological innovation, especially in the HEI context. Therefore, this research aims to determine current trends and future opportunities using a planning-search-data organisation and analysis procedure. Descriptive and bibliometric analyses are conducted with a scoping review of 662 documents from the Scopus electronic database. The result shows that the research trend in this area is uptrend. Most of the literature discusses engineering education, e-learning, and educational innovation. Future research should be conducted in the areas of learning, technology development, intellectual capital, and technological innovation impact.

Similar content being viewed by others

Education reform and change driven by digital technology: a bibliometric study from a global perspective

A conceptual review of the higher education system based on open innovation (OI) perspectives

Social innovation and higher education: evolution and future promise

Introduction.

Innovation is significantly impacting higher education institutions (HEI), and digital transformation has enabled the adaptation of new technologies (Abad-Segura et al., 2020 ). Due to the rise of digital transformation and the increasing demand for more accessible and efficient learning, educational institutions use technology to enhance academic programs and services.

HEI developed and implemented various technologies (Alenezi, 2023 ), such as learning management systems and online courses, e-learning (Harsanto, 2017 ), virtual reality (VR) simulations (Kovtoniuk et al., 2022 ) and artificial intelligence (AI)-driven assessments (Hernandez-de-Menendez & Morales-Menendez, 2019 ). Other technologies implemented in the area of HEI are augmented reality (Gurevych et al., 2021 ) and the use of AI to offer significant opportunities in the digital age (Rawas, 2024 ).

HEI faces new challenges and opportunities in navigating the intersection of technology and pedagogy. An online business program has been developed due to the opportunities offered (Echambadi et al., 2022 ). In contrast, technological innovation promises to improve the quality and accessibility of education, enabling students to learn. This raises questions about the role of traditional education, the impact of automation on the workforce, and the ethics of using data-driven technologies in education. The challenge for HEI is obtaining different methods to use technological innovation to improve academic and learning experiences (Hernandez-de-Menendez & Morales-Menendez, 2019 ).

Various technological innovations in HEI literature have been widely available. Google Scholar electronic database identified over 3 million documents using the keyword “technological innovation in higher education institutions.” However, only a few articles discuss the mapping or literature review. Due to the wide variety of articles available, the mainstream of research and the topic providing a high literature contribution in technological innovation are unclear. Therefore, this research explores the current state of technological innovation in HEI and future opportunities in the area.

The question for this research is:

How has the publication trend in technological innovation in HEI over the years?

Where are the publications in the area of technological innovation in HEI published?

What are the most cited articles and most prominent authors in technological innovation in HEI?

What is current mainstream research on technological innovation in HEI?

What are future research opportunities in HEI for technological innovation?

Literature review

Technological innovation is a new or significantly modified product or process (OECD, 2002 ). Others define the concept as successfully implementing a new technical idea (Branscomb, 2011 ). Technological innovation covers invention, innovation, and diffusion fields (Diaconu, 2011 ). The process constitutes basic and applied research, as well as technological development (Diaconu, 2011 ). The increase in technological innovation is due to the increasing number of modifications needed by different business sectors (Ritchi et al., 2020 ). The diffusion process is related to using an invention over time by social system members (Xiao & Su, 2022 ).

Different research showed a literature review related to invention and innovation (Archibugi, 1992 ). Garcia and Calantone ( 2002 ) conducted a literature review of technological innovation typology and terminology. The study shows the terminology of technological innovation across the literature, factors related to the concept, and the measurement (R. Garcia & Calantone, 2002 ). Other research reviewed technological innovation in the context of small-medium enterprise survival (N. A. Rahman et al., 2016 ), developing countries (Crane, 1977 ), and technology strategy and factors (Dasgupta et al., 2011 ).

Technological innovation in HEI could be developed for learning, teaching, analysis, and assessment tools (Hernandez-de-Menendez & Morales-Menendez, 2019 ). Learning tools include virtual environments, digital games, web-based learning platforms, robots, virtual labs/simulations, and mobile devices. Meanwhile, teaching tools are technologies that support lecturer activities to create a more practical education. These include social networks, web-based platforms, and the Internet of Things (IoT). Examples of analysis and assessment tools are text or content analysis, learning analytics, and assessment and feedback (Hernandez-de-Menendez & Morales-Menendez, 2019 ). AI, such as ChatGPT, could also help students learn (Rawas, 2024 ). Another technological innovation is creating and updating educational websites to give stakeholders the necessary information (M. S. Rahman & Ahmed, 2013 ) and the use of big data analytics (Alam & Mohanty, 2023 ). Table 1 shows the technology and usage of technological innovation in HEI.

Some research conducted a literature review related to technological innovation. In the learning context, a review discussed the implementation of e-learning in HEI (O’neill et al., 2004 ), the trend (R. Castro, 2019 ), and the fourth industrial revolution tools used for teaching (Nwosu et al., 2023 ). Other research conducted a literature review on digital transformation in HEI (Castro Benavides et al., 2020 ). Therefore, a general literature review of technological innovation in HEI needs to be performed.

This research adopts the method from Campos-Teixeira & Tello-Gamarra ( 2022 ) to execute three procedures, namely (a) planning, (b) Searching, as well as (c) data organisation and analysis field. Figure 1 shown the method summary adopted from Campos-Teixeira & Tello-Gamarra, 2022 ).

Method summary adopted from Campos-Teixeira & Tello-Gamarra ( 2022 ).

Various electronic databases, such as Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science, have been available. However, the Scopus electronic database has the slightest inconsistencies compared to Google Scholar and Web of Science databases (Adriaanse & Rensleigh, 2013 ). The database covers more journals (Joshi, 2016 ) and has been used to review articles (Afjal, 2023 ; Lee, 2023 ; Mauludina et al., 2023 ). Therefore, this research uses the Scopus electronic database to obtain a set of literature to be analysed.

The data collection was conducted in August 2024. The search keyword was performed in Scopus using “technological innovation” AND “in” AND “higher education institution.” After using the keywords “technological innovation” AND “higher education institution”, 763 articles were obtained with inclusion criteria. The first criterion was that the articles were limited to the final publication stage, resulting in 754. The second criterion was limited to only English, obtaining only 662 articles for analysis. Table 2 shows the search process since more than 100 articles were obtained, bibliometric analysis was used to analyse current trends and explore future research opportunities. Bibliometric analysis is reliable for analysing hundreds of articles and can visually map the research mainstream related to the topic (Geng et al., 2020 ; Viana-Lora & Nel-lo-Andreu, 2022 ).

Data organization and analysis

Data from the Scopus electronic database were exported to CSV format. The exported data were author name, document title, published year, source title, volume, issue, citation number, DOI, link, affiliations, abstract, author keywords, index keywords, document type, and publication stage.

A descriptive analysis presents the recorded literature available and gives insights into technological innovation in HEI research. The process was carried out by analysing the amount of literature in the years (Kuc-Czarnecka & Olczyk, 2020 ), the type of publications, and the co-authorship network of countries (Saif et al., 2022 ). Other types of descriptive analysis are the most cited and sourced articles and titles, respectively (Campos-Teixeira & Tello-Gamarra, 2022 ; de Lima et al., 2023 ).

Bibliometric analysis is a computer-assisted review tool used to analyse the bibliographic information of a scientific discipline (Lazarides et al., 2023 ). This summarises the structure of the research field and analyses the bibliometric data (de Lima et al., 2023 ). The analysis has also been used to generalise the research topic of the field (Billsberry & Alony, 2023 ; Bruhn et al., 2016 ; Campos-Teixeira & Tello-Gamarra, 2022 ; M. B. Garcia, 2023 ; Harsanto & Firmansyah, 2023 ; Marsicano & Nichols, 2022 ; Sarango-Lalangui et al., 2023 ).

VOSViewer application was used to perform bibliometric analysis, topic mapping (Holand et al., 2019 ), and visualise data (Khademi et al., 2021 ). A keyword analysis is performed through the application to generate heatmap visualisation and understand the area of technological innovation (Geng et al., 2020 ). In this context, the analysis needs to keep 200–500 keywords (Fernandez-Alles, 2013 ).

In heatmap visualisation, two categories will be shown in warm (red and yellow) and cold (green and blue) colours. The keywords in the warm colour area show the widely researched keywords. In contrast, the keywords in the cold colour area are the keywords that offer more literature contribution since they have yet to be widely studied. Therefore, research should focus on the keywords in the warm and cold colours to determine current trends and future opportunities, respectively (Geng et al., 2020 ).

A scoping review is conducted to explain the keywords identified from heatmap visualisation and determine the depth of the literature (M. B. Garcia, 2023 ). The identified keywords are explored in the data source obtained from 662 articles generated in the search process.

Results and discussions

Publication trends.

The literature analysed for publication trends was from 1989 to 2024. Figure 2 shows an upward trend in the literature on technological innovation in HEI. The research growth began in 2004, significantly increasing from 2017 to 2021. Figure 2 also shows that research in this area is still growing in 2023 despite a slight decrease in 2022. In 2024, 65 articles were generated even though the data were obtained in August.

Figure 2 describes an upward trend in the literature on technological innovation in HEI.

Article type

Figure 3 shows the number of articles based on the type. A total of 324 journal articles, 185 conference papers, 98 book chapters, 22 reviews, 20 books, six conference reviews, and seven other documents were obtained. This result was similar to Saif et al. ( 2022 ), where research was shared in journals and presented at conferences to receive feedback and suggestions.

Number of documents based on article type.

Most cited documents

Table 3 shows the most cited articles for innovation technology in HEI research. A total of six of the top 10 most cited articles come from 2015, and the topics discussed varied. The citation differences between the articles were minor. Therefore, it shows no article can be the primary reference for innovation technology in HEI research. However, the researcher could use these references according to their discussed topic. The article by Abad-Segura et al. ( 2020 ) should be considered before conducting a study about digital transformation in HEI. An article from García-Morales V.J., Garrido-Moreno A., and Martín-Rojas R. ( 2021 ) should be considered if the study discusses online learning.

Co-authorship network of countries

Figure 4 shows the network between the author’s country and technological innovation in HEI. Each node represents a country, and connection thickness shows the collaboration (Saif et al., 2022 ). The thickness of the connection between countries was similar to each other. However, the connection between Spain and Mexico and between Spain and Colombia is relatively thicker than the others. This showed there were more collaborations between the countries than others. The United States is the most central collaboration because a slightly larger node represents the country than others.

Figure 4 describes the author connection of countries.

Prominent authors

Four authors published more than three articles on technological innovation in HEI. Ramírez-Montoya, M.S., Caratozzolo P., as well as Ololube, N.P. and Camacho-Zuñiga, C. generated 6, 5, and 4 articles, respectively Table 4 .

Heatmap analysis

Figure 5 shows heatmap visualisation generated from 662 documents. Most of the keywords are in green and blue areas, which means there is a high opportunity for future technological innovation research. Several keywords were in the red and yellow regions, showing research trends in technological innovation.

Heatmap visualisation for technological innovation in HEI research.

Current trends of research

Most current literature discusses innovation, engineering education, information technology, educational innovation, e-learning, and societies and institutions. Other keywords such as knowledge management, VR, decision-making, academic institutions, learning systems, online teaching, technology forecasting, and ChatGPT were in the yellow area categorised as the mainstream.

Engineering education

A primary trend identified is engineering education, designed to train individuals to understand principles, theories, and practices. Most of the research on technological innovation in HEI discusses engineering education. Current literature discusses adopting new digital platforms such as virtual classrooms, online labs, and collaborative tools (Diogo et al., 2023 ). The implementation of technological innovation, such as e-learning (Benchicou et al., 2010 ), research processes (Fomunyam, 2020 ), game simulators (Vakaliuk et al., 2020 ), and the benefit of technological tools (Hernandez-de-Menendez & Morales-Menendez, 2019 ), has also been discussed. Other research proposes a new flexible learning method for students in the field of engineering education (Roe & Bartelt, 2015 ). However, there are challenges in adapting to technological innovations, namely ensuring access to technology, maintaining student engagement, and providing adequate training for faculty members on digital tools (Robles et al., 2023 ). Most of the research in the engineering field relies on physical experiments. In this context, hybrid learning using virtual instructions can be used to overcome challenges. VR and AR have also been adopted as solutions for engineering education (Dede et al., 2018 ). By using AR and VR, students can understand better than by using 3D diagrams or written explanations.

Another primary trend is e-learning, which is fundamentally used to deliver education. Castro & Zermeño ( 2021 ) proposed a practical learning environment framework. The models should be student-centred, emphasising engagement and enhancing interaction through e-learning platforms (M. P. Castro & Zermeño, 2021 ). The pedagogical models are shifting towards a more learner-driven environment. Therefore, e-learning should begin to ensure active participation and collaboration among students. Developing a student-centred design is needed to ensure engagement in e-learning (Phuthi & Molwane, 2008 ). AI, such as ChatGPT, could provide automated learning experiences and real-time student support (Gundu, 2023 ). In this context, e-learning could be focused on students and possibly enhance engagement in e-learning.

Some available literature discusses e-learning adoption in HEI (Dutta et al., 2021 ; Dwayi, 2011 ; Prodanova et al., 2021 ; Tom et al., 2019 ). The critical factors are institutional support, infrastructure, perceived ease of use (AlAjmi, 2022 ), user experience and accessibility (Dutta et al., 2021 ). Moreover, all stakeholders must enhance the learning process of students (Roushan et al., 2016 ).

Educational innovation

The other prominent trend is educational innovation, which refers to introducing new methods, ideas, tools, or technologies into the education system to improve teaching, learning, and administrative processes. The use of new technologies such as e-learning, cloud-based learning environments, and AI is an educational innovation (Bakar et al., 2024 ). Moreover, there was also a trend to discuss sustainable development in the academic innovation topic.

The research used content analysis from Twitter and semi-structured interviews to determine the aspects of HEI that need to be improved to promote sustainable development (Pu et al., 2022 ). Pu et al. ( 2022 ) argued that HEI should improve digitalised teaching and education quality through innovation, technology development, resource use, and a better digital platform or environment. Meanwhile, Abdulwahed ( 2017 ) proposed Technology Innovation and Engineering Education and Entrepreneurship (TIEE) model for schools. The proposed TIEE is expected to elevate the role of sustainable engineering and sustainable socio-economic development (Abdulwahed, 2017 ).

Other research was conducted to determine the perceptions of sustainable development goals (SDGs) (Zamora-Polo et al., 2019 ). In this context, an open social innovation laboratory is recognised for creating links between society, academia, business, and government in sustainable development (Zermeño et al., 2020 ). HEI has the potential to be an integrated actor in driving regional sustainable development by establishing a strategy to integrate stakeholders in the development of sustainable skills and competencies (de Matos Pedro et al., ( 2021 )). Table 5 shows the current trends of innovation technology in HEI research.

Future research agenda

Research should focus on the keywords in green and blue areas to contribute more to the literature (Geng et al., 2020 ). The first identified keyword is learning in the form of distance, online, mobile, collaborative, and m-learning. The other keywords are teaching-learning, knowledge, educational technology, technological forecasting, technology transfer, computer-aided instruction, cloud computing, intellectual capital, patents and inventions, commerce, and competitiveness, categorised into four categories. The first category is learning, which consists of distance, online, mobile, teaching, knowledge, collaborative, and m-learning keywords. The second category is technology development, which comprises educational technology, technological forecasting, technology transfer, computer-aided instruction, and cloud computing. The third category is intellectual capital, which consists of several keywords such as intellectual capital, patents, and inventions. The fourth category is the technological innovation impact category, comprising commerce and competitiveness keywords.

Several keywords in the learning category are distance, online, mobile, teaching, knowledge, collaborative, and m-learning. Several studies have been conducted in the learning category to discuss the trend in distance learning (Traxler, 2018 ). Traxler ( 2018 ) argued that distance learning could fit with other pedagogies and the use of flipped classrooms. The other form of distance learning is online learning, implemented due to COVID-19 in 2020 (Sarmah, 2022 ). The implementation was followed by several policies by the government and HEI to ensure effective online learning.

Meanwhile, mobile learning is a method carried out through a mobile device such as a smartphone. The adoption in developing countries still needs to be clarified (Belle, 2019 ). Mobile learning has several advantages, such as time flexibility and more accessible groups (Willemse et al., 2019 ).

Another type of learning discussed is a collaborative method in an online environment. This learning includes sharing audio and video content and record-keeping features (Gupta et al., 2021 ). Collaborative learning can improve critical thinking using high-quality resources (Juneja, 2021 ).

Technological innovation offers an advantage for HEI but has different challenges and barriers. IT infrastructure, low bandwidth connection, boredom, and lack of self-organising capability are technical problems experienced (García-Morales et al., 2021 ). From the teachers’ perspective, not all faculty members are comfortable teaching online due to the absence of computer skills, communication ability in an online setting (García-Morales et al., 2021 ), course design, and student engagement (Gerken & Grohnert, 2015 ).

Future research could examine the optimisation of flipped classroom learning activities in facing challenges and barriers. Developing a policy brief related to online learning could also be conducted. Research to measure mobile learning adoption in developing countries and evaluation tools for learning in the online environment could also be undertaken.

The effect of distance and traditional learning methods should be compared towards academic performance, student engagement, and retention. The second option is to examine the long-term impact of distance learning on skill development, employability, and career advancement. Meanwhile, the third option is to explore the role of communication tools in enhancing the interaction between teachers and students in a distance learning environment.

Research in the mobile learning area could provide insightful results for HEI. The first option is to investigate the role of gamification in increasing engagement and retention in mobile learning environments. The second option is designing user-friendly, adaptive, and effective mobile learning applications or websites across diverse educational contexts. The third option is to examine the potential of wearable devices such as smartwatches to support mobile learning activities.

Technology development

Technology development refers to the advancements and integration of new technologies into HEI’s teaching, learning, and administrative process. The latest technology development reported is IoT in 5 G technologies. In the medical area, this is beneficial for students to communicate faster, decide on diagnostics, and assess patient data in actual time (Ever & Rajan, 2018 ). However, the security and privacy aspects still need to be considered. HEI has also adopted cloud computing for learning (Tashkandi & Al-Jabri, 2015 ). Similar to IoT in 5 G technologies, the security aspects are the primary concern of technology (Tashkandi & Al-Jabri, 2015 ). E-learning (Benchicou et al., 2010 ), game simulators (Vakaliuk et al., 2020 ), VR and AR (Dede et al., 2018 ), Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) (Kintu et al., 2020 ), blockchain and digital credentials (Turlacu et al., 2019 ), and AI conversational interface to automate administrative processes were discussed (Turlacu et al., 2019 ).

Another research reports the vital role of HEI in technology transfer (Silva et al., 2018 ), which describes the process of transmitting ideas from research institutions (Castillo et al., 2018 ). HEI adopted the model due to changes in the legal and economic environment (Castillo et al., 2018 ). However, HEI must increase partnerships with society and companies to transfer technology (Silva et al., 2018 ).

Future research should discuss the effectiveness of technology implementation in HEI, such as e-learning, game simulators, VR, AR, MOOCs, blockchain and digital credentials, and AI conversational interfaces. Another option is to investigate the creation of highly adaptive learning environments. A significant barrier to effective technology adoption is the lack of faculty training and support. Therefore, research to obtain the most effective development programs for faculty members in integrating new technologies should provide insightful results for HEI.

Intellectual capital

Intellectual capital is intangible value or assets derived from knowledge, experience, property, and innovations. This variable is measured using surveys and qualitative assessments to capture data on human (faculty expertise and experience), structural (research infrastructure and digital platform), and relational capital (Mercado-Salgado et al., 2014 ). Since HEI is a knowledge-based organisation, managing intellectual capital is crucial (Vivas, Sequeira ( 2014 )). HEI should utilise intellectual capital to maintain competitiveness and sustainability (Jayabalan et al., 2024 ). The main aim is to enhance faculty expertise, institutional knowledge, and external relationships such as alumni and industry to thrive (Jayabalan et al., 2024 ). Moreover, intellectual capital with information technology capability is critical to increasing open innovation in HEI (Jayabalan et al., 2021 ).

Future research should examine the improved measurement and valuation of intellectual capital. This includes using new digital tools and technologies (AI and big data analytics) in real time to provide actionable insights. Research to measure the effects of digital transformation towards intellectual capital offers further insights into HEI. Another option is to determine the most effective method towards knowledge transfer to ensure the quality of human capital. The leveraging of alumni networks and the impact of university-industry partnerships towards intellectual capital should also be conducted. This is because regional variations in intellectual capital strategies provide insightful results.

Technological innovation impact

Research shows a recent trend for HEI to commercialise different analyses (Crespo & Dridi, 2007 ). Therefore, future research should be carried out to examine the effect of research commercialisation for HEI. Table 6 shows the future research agenda of innovation technology in HEI.

Technological innovation tools

Various technological innovation tools implemented by HEI have been identified to improve the learning and support process. Examples of technological tools implemented by HEI to enhance the learning process are e-learning platforms (Benchicou et al., 2010 ), game simulators (Vakaliuk et al., 2020 ), VR (Dede et al., 2018 ), AR (Gurevych et al., 2021 ), generative AI (Gundu, 2023 ; Rawas, 2024 ), MOOCs (Kintu et al., 2020 ), mobile learning (Irwanto et al., 2023 ), cloud computing (Tashkandi & Al-Jabri, 2015 ), and IoT in 5 G technologies (Ever & Rajan, 2018 ). Table 7 shows the usage of each technological tool used to improve the learning process.

Examples of technological tools implemented by HEI to improve HEI process support are blockchain and digital credentials (Turlacu et al., 2019 ), AI to automate administrative processes (Turlacu et al., 2019 ), and big data analysis to provide necessary information (Alam & Mohanty, 2023 ) Table 8 shows the usage of each technological tool used to improve HEI process support.

In conclusion, this research explored current and future trends regarding technological innovation in HEI. The literature showed an uptrend, and most publications were from journal articles. The most cited article was from García-Morales V.J., Garrido-Moreno A., and Martín-Rojas R. titled “The Transformation of Higher Education After the COVID Disruption: Emerging Challenges in an Online Learning Scenario”. This article had 354 citations. The most prominent author was Ramírez-Montoya, M.S., with six research papers. Most current literature discusses engineering education, e-learning, and educational innovation. Future research could be conducted in the areas of learning (distance, online, mobile, teaching, knowledge, collaborative, and m-learning), technology development, intellectual capital, and technological innovation impact to provide more literature contribution. Concerning the limitation, this research only used literature from the Scopus electronic database. Future research could also adopt other electronic databases such as Web of Science or Google Scholar.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available but will be made available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abad-Segura E, González-Zamar MD, Infante-Moro JC, García GR (2020) Sustainable management of digital transformation in higher education: Global research trends. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052107

Abdulwahed M (2017) Technology Innovation and Engineering’ Education and Entrepreneurship (TIEE) in engineering schools: Novel model for elevating national knowledge based economy and socio-economic sustainable development. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020171

Adriaanse LS, Rensleigh C (2013) Web of science, scopus and google scholar a content comprehensiveness comparison. Electron Libr 31:727–744

Article   Google Scholar  

Afjal M (2023) Bridging the financial divide: a bibliometric analysis on the role of digital financial services within FinTech in enhancing financial inclusion and economic development. Humanities Social Sci Commun, 10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02086-y

AlAjmi Q (2022) Adoption Model for Cloud-Based E-Learning in Higher Education. The International Conference of Advanced Computing and Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36258-3_51

Alam A, Mohanty A (2023) From Bricks to Clicks: The Potential of Big Data Analytics for Revolutionizing the Information Landscape in Higher Education Sector. In International Conference on Data Management, Analytics & Innovation (pp. 721–732). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore

Alenezi M (2023) Digital Learning and Digital Institution in Higher Education. Education Sci 13(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010088

Altbach PG (2007) Globalization and the university: Realities in an unequal world. In Tradition and Transition (pp. 23-48). Brill

Archibugi D (1992) Patenting as an indicator of technological innovation: A review. Sci Public Policy 19:357–368. https://doi.org/10.1093/spp/19.6.357

Bakar NAA, Mahmood NMN, Nasrul MA, Ibrahim R, Yaa’cob S (2024) The Digital Transformation for UTMSPACE Educational Sustainability and Technology Innovation: An Enterprise Architecture Approach. In Information and Communication Technology in Technical and Vocational Education and Training for Sustainable and Equal Opportunity: Education, Sustainability and Women Empowerment (pp. 3–17). Springer Nature Singapore

Belle LJ (2019) An Evaluation of a Key Innovation: Mobile Learning. Academic J Interdiscip Stud 8:39–45

Benchicou S, Aichouni M, Nehari D (2010) E-learning in engineering education: A theoretical and empirical study of the Algerian higher education institution. Eur J Eng Educ 35:325–343

Billsberry J, Alony I (2023) The MOOC post-mortem: Bibliometric and systematic analyses of research on massive open online courses (MOOCs), 2009 to 2022. J Management Education 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/10525629231190840

Botella C, Rueda S, López-Iñesta E, Marzal P (2019) Gender diversity in STEM disciplines: A multiple factor problem. Entropy 21(1):30

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Branscomb LM (2011) Technological Innovation. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 15498–15502)

Bruhn NCP, de Alcântara JN, Tonelli DF, Reis RP, Antonialli LM (2016) Why Firms Invest Abroad? A Bibliometric Study on OFDI Determinants from Developing Countries. Glob Bus Rev 17:271–302

Campos-Teixeira D, Tello-Gamarra J (2022) Fintechs: a global bibliometric analysis and research trends. J Technol Manag Innov 17:71–86. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-27242022000200071

Castillo F, Gilless JK, Heiman A, Zilberman D (2018) Time of adoption and intensity of technology transfer: an institutional analysis of offices of technology transfer in the United States. J Technol Transf 43:120–138

Castro Benavides LM, Tamayo Arias JA, Arango Serna MD, Branch Bedoya JW, Burgos D (2020) Digital Transformation in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Literature Review. Sens (Basel, Switz) 20:1–22

Google Scholar  

Castro MP, Zermeño MGG (2021) Back to basics: e-learning pedagogical model for identifying entrepreneurship skills in undergraduate students. Int J Technol Learn 29:57

Castro R (2019) Blended learning in higher education: Trends and capabilities. Educ Inf Technol 24:2523–2546

Chen K, Kenney M (2007) Universities/research institutes and regional innovation systems: the cases of Beijing and Shenzhen. World Dev 35(6):1056–1074

Crane D (1977) Technological Innovation in Developing Countries: A Review of The Literature. Res Policy 6:374–395

Crespo M, Dridi H (2007) Intensification of university-industry relationships and its impact on academic research. High Educ 54:61–84

Dasgupta M, Gupta RK, Sahay A (2011) Linking technological innovation, technology strategy and organizational factors: A review. Glob Bus Rev 12:257–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/097215091101200206

de Lima BBM, de Oliveira Lacerda RT, Becker M (2023) Academic spin-off management: a bibliometric study. J Technol Manag Innovation 18(2):69–80

de Matos Pedro E, Leitao J, Alves H (2021) Can Higher Education Institutions’ Stakeholders Drive Regional Sustainable Development? Yes, They Can?!. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag 70(10):3421–3433

Dede, Abdullah AG, Mulyanti B, Rohendi D (2018) Virtual gasoline engine based on augment reality for mechanical engineering education. MATEC Web Conf 197:1–6

Diaconu M (2011) Technological Innovation : Concept, Process, Typology and Implications in the Economy. Theor Appl Econ 563:127–144

Diogo RA, dos, Santos N, Loures EF (2023) 13 - Digital Transformation of Engineering Education for Smart Education: A systematic literature review. Reliab Modeling Ind 4.0:407–438

Dutta B, Peng MH, Chen CC, Sun SL (2021) Interpreting usability factors predicting sustainable adoption of cloud-based e-learning environment during covid-19 pandemic. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169329

Dwayi V (2011) ELearning strategy implementation in a selected comprehensive University. a systems perspective. Proceedings of the International Conference on E-Learning, ICEL, July, 95–102

Echambadi R, Saiyed A, Scagnoli NI, Viswanathan M (2022) Launching an Online Business Program at Scale: A Retrospective Case Study of Disruptive Innovation Before the Pandemic. J Manag Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/10525629211067229

Ever YK, Rajan AV (2018) The role of 5G networks in the field of medical sciences education. Proc 43rd Annu IEEE Conf Local Comput Netw, LCN Workshops 2018:59–63

Fernandez-Alles M (2013) Intellectual Structure of Human Resource Management Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Journal Human Resource Management, 1985-2005. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 64:1852–1863

Fomunyam KG (2020) Pure and Applied Research as the Epicenter of Research in Engineering Education. Int J Eng Res Technol 13(9):2402–2408

García-Morales VJ, Garrido-Moreno A, Martín-Rojas R (2021) The Transformation of Higher Education After the COVID Disruption: Emerging Challenges in an Online Learning Scenario. Front Psychol 12:1–6

Garcia MB (2023) Fostering an Innovation Culture in the Education Sector: A Scoping Review and Bibliometric Analysis of Hackathon Research. Innovative High Educ 48(4):739–762

Garcia R, Calantone R (2002) A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. J Prod Innov Manag 19:110–132. https://doi.org/10.1553/kioesop_006s1

Geng D, Feng Y, Zhu Q (2020) Sustainable design for users: a literature review and bibliometric analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:29824–29836

Gerken M, Grohnert T (2015) Recommendations from Instructors for Adopting Successful Online Learning. In Transformative Perspectives and Processes in Higher Education (pp. 1–253). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09247-8

Gleason NW (2018) Higher education in the era of the fourth industrial revolution (p. 229). Springer Nature

Gundu T (2023) ChatGPT-Proofing: Redesigning Assessment Practices for E-Learning. Proceedings of the European Conference on E-Learning, ECEL , 2023 - Octob , 121–130. https://doi.org/10.34190/ecel.22.1.1888

Gupta Y, Khan FM, Agarwal S (2021) Exploring Factors Influencing Mobile Learning in Higher Education - A Systematic Review. Int J Interact Mob Technol 15:140–157. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i12.22503

Gurevych R, Silveistr A, Mokliuk M, Shaposhnikova I, Gordiichuk G, Saiapina S (2021) Using Augmented Reality Technology in Higher Education Institutions. Postmod Open 12(2):109–132

Harsanto B (2017) Inovasi Pembelajaran Di Era Digital: Menggunakan Google Sites dan Media Sosial (S. Sonjaya (ed.); 1st ed.). Unpad Press

Harsanto B, Firmansyah EA (2023) A twenty years bibliometric analysis (2002–2021) of business economics research in ASEAN. Cogent Bus. Manag. 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2194467

Hernandez-de-Menendez M, Morales-Menendez R (2019) Technological innovations and practices in engineering education: a review. Int J Interact Des Manuf 13:713–728

Holand A, Svadberg S, Breunig KJ (2019) Beyond the hype: A bibliometric analysis deconstructing research on digitalization. Technol Innov Manag Rev 9:38–50. https://doi.org/10.22215/TIMREVIEW/1274

Irwanto I, Saputro AD, Widiyanti W, Laksana SD (2023) Global Trends on Mobile Learning in Higher Education: A Bibliometric Analysis (2002–2022). Int J Inf Educ Technol 13:373–383

Jayabalan J, Dorasamy M, Kaliannan M (2024) Thriving in scarcity: Harnessing intellectual capital for open frugal innovation. J Open Innov: Technol, Mark, Complex 10:100300

Jayabalan J, Dorasamy M, Raman M (2021). Reshaping higher educational institutions through frugal open innovation. J Open Innovation: Technol Mark Complex, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7020145

Joshi A (2016) Comparison Between Scopus ;. ISI Web Sci J Glob Values VII(1):976–9447

Juneja KK (2021) Innovative pedagogy with computer-supported collaborative learning in teaching english language. J Teach Engl Specif Academic Purp 9:551–556. https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP2103551J

Khademi B, Lampela H, Smyrnios KX (2021) A roadmap for systematically identifying opportunities in ecosystems using scientific publications data. Technol Innov Manag Rev 11(1):34–55. https://doi.org/10.22215/TIMREVIEW/1415

Kintu MJ, Aslan A, Zhu C (2020) Educational Innovation in Higher Education. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education (pp. 1–16). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.675

Kovtoniuk M, Kosovets O, Soia O, Tyutyun L (2022) Virtual learning environments: major trends in the use of modern digital technologies in higher education institutions. Educ Technol Q 2022(3):183–202

Kruss G, McGrath S, Petersen IH, Gastrow M (2015) Higher education and economic development: The importance of building technological capabilities Int J Educ Dev 43:22–31

Kuc-Czarnecka M, Olczyk M (2020) How ethics combine with big data: a bibliometric analysis. Humanities Soc Sci Commun 7:1–9

Lazarides MK, Lazaridou I-Z, Papanas N (2023) Bibliometric Analysis: Bridging Informatics With Science. The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds, 153473462311535. https://doi.org/10.1177/15347346231153538

Lee D (2023) Bibliometric analysis of Asian ‘language and linguistics’ research: A case of 13 countries. Humanities Soc Sci Commun 10:1–23

CAS   Google Scholar  

Marsicano CR, Nichols ARK (2022) In Search of an Academic “Greatest Hits” Album: An Examination of Bibliometrics and Bibliometric Web Platforms. Innovative High Educ 47:1007–1023

Mauludina MA, Azis Y, Sukmadilaga C, Susanto H (2023) Determinants of SOE’s performance: A systematic literature review. Cogent Business Management, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234138

Mercado-Salgado P, Gil-Monte P, Del Rosario Demuner-Flores M (2014) Development and initial validation of a survey for intellectual capital in universities. Proceedings of the European Conference on Knowledge Management, ECKM , 650–666

Nwosu LI, Bereng MC, Segotso T, Enebe NB (2023) Fourth Industrial Revolution Tools to Enhance the Growth and Development of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Literature Review in South Africa. Res Soc Sci Technol 8(1):51–62

O’neill K, Singh G, O’donoghue J (2004) Implementing eLearning Programmes for Higher Education: A Review of the Literature. J Inf Technol Educ: Res 3:313–323. https://doi.org/10.28945/304

OECD (2002) Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797708903248

Phuthi N, Molwane OB (2008) The student factor in building an e-learning culture: Experiences at the University of Botswana. Proceedings of the International Conference on E-Learning, ICEL, 2008-Janua(February), 363–370

Porter WW, Graham CR (2016) Institutional drivers and barriers to faculty adoption of blended learning in higher education. Br J Educ Technol 47(4):748–762

Prodanova J, San-Martín S, de Burgos U, Estefanía, Jerónimo Sánchez-Beato S, Europea Miguel de Cervantes U, Prodanova J, San-Martín S, Jerónimo Sánchez-Beato E (2021) Quality Requirements for Continuous Use of E-learning Systems at Public vs. Private Universities in Spain Keywords E-learning; public and private higher education; quality; institutional support; continuous use 33 Quality Requirements for Continuous Use o. Digital Educ Rev 40:33–47

Pu R, Tanamee D, Jiang S (2022) Digitalization and higher education for sustainable development in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic: A content analysis approach. Probl Perspect Manag 20:27–40

Rahman MS, Ahmed SMZ (2013) Exploring the factors influencing the usability of academic websites: A case study in a university setting. Bus Inf Rev 30:40–47

Rahman NA, Yaacob Z, Radzi RM (2016) An Overview of Technological Innovation on SME Survival: A Conceptual Paper. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci 224:508–515

Rawas S (2024) ChatGPT: Empowering lifelong learning in the digital age of higher education. Educ Inf Technol 29:6895–6908

Ritchi H, Azis Y, Adrianto Z, Setiono K, Sanjaya S (2020) In-app controls for small business accounting information system: a study of domain understanding. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 27(1):31–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-12-2018-0372

Robles LER, Larrondo-Petrie MM, Texier JD, Sosa MA, Valdez-Cervantes LC, Lara-Prieto V (2023) Facing post-pandemic challenges in engineering education: Promoting global collaborations in Latin America. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 1–8

Roe EA, Bartelt T (2015) Converting a traditional engineering technology program to a competency-based, self-paced, open-entry/open-exit format. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 122nd ASEE(122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition: Making Value for Society). https://doi.org/10.18260/p.23747

Roushan G, Holley D, Biggins D (2016) The kaleidoscope of voices: An action research approach to informing institutional e-learning policy. Electron J E-Learn 14(5):293–300

Saif ANM, Islam KMA, Haque A, Akhter H, Rahman SMM, Jafrin N, Rupa RA, Mostafa R (2022) Blockchain Implementation Challenges in Developing Countries: An evidence-based systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Technol Innovation Management Rev 12(1–2). https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1479

Sarango-Lalangui P, Rodríguez J, Carreño KT, Galarza B (2023) Evolution and Trends in SME Digitization Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. J Technol Manag Innov 18(1):53–66. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-27242023000100053

Sarmah B (2022) Covid-19 and Its Effects on Higher Education: Is Online Learning the Saviour? In Virtual Learning Insights and Perspectives (pp. 75–84). http://journal.um-surabaya.ac.id/index.php/JKM/article/view/2203

Silva MDC, Gomes CFS, Da Costa Junior CL (2018) A hybrid multicriteria methodology topsis-macbeth-2n applied in the ordering of technology transfer offices. Pesqui Operacional 38(3):413–439. https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-7438.2018.038.03.0413

Tashkandi AA, Al-Jabri I (2015) Cloud Computing Adoption by Higher Education Institutions in Saudi Arabia: Analysis Based on TOE. 2015 International Conference on Cloud Computing, ICCC 2015. https://doi.org/10.1109/CLOUDCOMP.2015.7149634

Tom AM, Virgiyanti W, Rozaini W (2019) Understanding the determinants of infrastructure-as-a service-based E-learning adoption using an integrated TOE-DOI model: A nigerian perspective. International Conference on Research and Innovation in Information Systems, ICRIIS, December-2. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRIIS48246.2019.9073418

Traxler J (2018) Distance learning—Predictions and possibilities. Educ Sci 8(1):35. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010035

Turlacu L-M, Orzan G, Chivu R-G (2019) Strategic Technologies: Innovation in Higher Education in Romania. The 15th International Scientific Conference ELearning and Software for Education Bucharest, 12753

Vakaliuk TA, Kontsedailo VV, Antoniuk DS, Korotun OV, Mintii IS, Pikilnyak AV (2020) Using game simulator Software Inc in the Software Engineering education. CEUR Workshop Proc 2547:66–80. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3719840

Varsakelis NC (2006) Education, political institutions and innovative activity: A cross-country empirical investigation. Res Policy 35(7):1083–1090

Viana-Lora A, Nel-lo-Andreu MG (2022) Bibliometric analysis of trends in COVID-19 and tourism. Humanities Soc Sci Commun 9:1–8

Vivas C, Sequeira P (ed.) (2014) Management Dimensions Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Knowledge Management Pol technic Institute Polytechnic Instit te of Santarém Portugal 4-5 September 2014 Edited by. The Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Knowledge Management Pol Technic Instit Te of Polytechnic Institute of Santarém Portugal, SEPTEMBER 2014. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lisete-Monico/publication/273337332_Influence_of_knowledge_management_practices_on_municipalities%27_image_among_their_users/links/54fee0d40cf2672e2240961e/Influence-of-knowledge-management-practices-on-municipalities-

Willemse JJ, Jooste K, Bozalek V (2019) Experiences of undergraduate nursing students on an authentic mobile learning enactment at a higher education institution in South Africa. Nurse Educ Today 74:69–75

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Xiao D, Su J (2022) Role of Technological Innovation in Achieving Social and Environmental Sustainability : Mediating Roles of Organizational Innovation and Digital Entrepreneurship. Front Public Health 10:1–13

Zamora-Polo F, Sánchez-Martín J, Corrales-Serrano M, Espejo-Antúnez L (2019) What do university students know about sustainable development goals? A realistic approach to the reception of this UN program amongst the youth population. Sustainability (Switz) 11:1–19

Zermeño G, Georgina M, Alemán de la Garza LY (2020) Open laboratories for social innovation: a strategy for research and innovation in education for peace and sustainable development Sustainable development is an issue of high relevance for all countries, and universities play a fundamental role in promotin. Int J Sustainability High Educ 22:344–362

Zhu C (2015) Organisational culture and technology-enhanced innovation in higher education. Technol, Pedagog Educ 24:65–79

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Indonesia through the PMDSU Program.

Open access funding provided by University of Padjadjaran.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia

Muhammad Rifqi Arviansyah, Yudi Azis, Mery Citra Sondari & Budi Harsanto

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

MRA: conceptualised the research ideas and research objectives, conducted data collection, conducted visualisation, analysed the data, wrote the original paper, and contributed to review and editing; YA: conceptualised the research ideas, supervision of the research process, writing the original paper, contribute to review and editing; MCS: development of methodology, writing the original paper, contribute to review and editing; BH: provided supervision, writing the original paper, contribute to review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Rifqi Arviansyah .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article contains no studies with human participants performed by any authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Arviansyah, M.R., Azis, Y., Sondari, M.C. et al. Current trend and future research agenda for technological innovation in higher education institutions. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1686 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-04150-7

Download citation

Received : 01 February 2024

Accepted : 20 November 2024

Published : 19 December 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-04150-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Home > M3 Center > JGER

Journal Information

Journal of Global Education and Research (JGER) is an international non-profit, open access, double-blind peer-reviewed journal. JGER, as an interdisciplinary journal, aims to bring together researchers, scientists, scholars, and graduate students to exchange and share their experiences, new ideas, and research results about all aspects of global education and research and to discuss the practical challenges encountered and the solutions adopted.

JGER is published bi-annually by the University of South Florida (USF) M3 Publishing. USF M3 Publishing is a service of the USF M3 Center for Hospitality Technology and Innovation (M3 Center). We encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research relating to global education in as much detail as possible to promote scientific predictions and impact assessments of global change and development in the field of education. Full experimental and methodical details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. The coverage of JGER includes the following areas as they apply to global education and research.

• Adult and Continuing Education
• Curriculum and Instruction Development
• Education in Other Specialties
• Educational Technology
• English as a Second Language (ESL)
• Global Competence
• Higher Education & Educational Leadership
• Human Resource Development
• Inclusive Education
• International Education
• Research Methods in Education

Benefits of publishing with JGER

• Open access: Completely free for readers and authors. There are no fees charged for submission, subscription, and article processing. All costs are absorbed by the University of South Florida M3 Center and USF Library.
• Fair Turnaround: JGER is committed to getting the manuscripts double-blind peer-reviewed, and a first decision is provided to authors approximately 6-8 weeks after submission.
• Recognition of reviewers: Reviewers who provide timely, thorough peer-review reports shall receive credits.
• Cabell's Journal Whitelist (Sign-in-required)
• Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
• Directory of Research Journal Indexing (DRJI)
• Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)
• Google Scholar
• Index Copernicus International (ICI)
• Open Academic Journals Index (OAJI)
• Research Bib, Academic Resource Index
• Scientific Indexing Services (SIS)
• Sherpa/Romeo
• Under Review for multiple indexes and databases.

Browse past issues of JGER from the sidebar or at the following links:

• Issue 1 | Issue 2 |
• Issue 1 | Issue 2 | Issue 3
• Issue 1 | Issue 2

Current Issue

Volume 8 - issue 1.

• Katherine A. Curry, Jentre Olsen, Ed Harris, Candy Garnett, and Dian Danderson
• Colin Beer, Kate Ames, Noal Atkinson, Damien Clark, and Peter Hosie
• Greer C. Burroughs and Marissa E. Bellino
• Ayse Collins, Ayse S. Dulger, Muharrem Tuna, and Muzaffer Uysal
• Cengiz Aglar and Tuncay Dilci
• Suzan Canli and Hasan Demirtas

Refereed Articles

Using the Intercultural Development Inventory to measure intercultural development for a high-impact global community engagement program Jennifer Crystle, Megan W. Moran, and Diana G. Venskus

Incorporating domestic students returning from international educational experiences into internationalization at home: Challenges and opportunities Andrew M. Robinson

Intentional unlearning practices in postmassified university systems: Reformation for the metamodern era Mihaela A. Lynn

Artificial intelligence as a policy response to teaching and learning issues in education in Ghana Joshua Osondu, Emmanuel Jean Francois, and Jesse Strycker

• Journal Home
• About This Journal
• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• Author Guidelines
• Submit Article
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Special Issues:

Advanced Search

ISSN: 2577-5081 (Print) ISSN: 2577-509X (Online)

Scholar Commons | About This IR | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Advertisement

Mapping Global Research on International Higher Education

• Published: 22 April 2015
• Volume 56 , pages 861–882, ( 2015 )

Cite this article

• Aliya Kuzhabekova   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9719-0220 1 ,
• Darwin D. Hendel 2 &
• David W. Chapman 2  

2838 Accesses

55 Citations

5 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The purpose of the study is to map global research in international higher education. Specifically, the study uses bibliometric and social network analysis methods to identify key individuals, institutions, countries, and disciplines contributing to research in international higher education and to investigate patterns of connectivity among authors, journals, disciplines, and topics. The dataset representing research covers 2302 publications from the Web of Science for the period 2002–2011. Unlike prior attempts to draw a representative sample of articles capturing key research in international higher education by choosing articles from key journals, this study sampled articles more broadly by applying a keywords search to all journals included in the bibliographic database. To address the ambiguity in defining the boundaries of the field, the keywords used in constructing the dataset were generated from an explicit definition of “research in international higher education” with the definition being U.S.-centric, i.e. defining the field from the perspective of a U.S.-based researcher. Results indicated that although the number of research studies on international higher education has grown from 68 in 2002 to 472 in 2012, networks among researchers of higher education continue to operate largely within national borders and are still dominated by a few Western countries. While the 3362 researchers in international higher education came from 1164 different institutions/organizations around the world, only 11.3 % of articles were authored by researchers from at least two countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The post-Soviet publication landscape for higher education research

An evolving international research collaboration network: spatial and thematic developments in co-authored higher education research, 1998–2018

Celebrating Higher Education ’s 50 years: trends, absences, and opportunities

The process of data cleaning in Vantage Point is largely automated. A fuzzy-matching approach is used to determine whether slight differences in spelling of names of institutions or authors represent different names or the same organization or individual. When applying the fuzzy matching capability of the software, we compared names of individuals with organizations that they represented. One of the drawbacks of this approach is that the same individual who has transitioned from one institution to another would be treated as two different individuals. The researchers’ expectation was that within a ten-year period not many such transitions would have taken place, so the effect of the drawback is not likely to change the results.

Altbach, P. G. (2009). Higher education: An emerging field of research and policy. In R. M. Bassett & A. Maldonado (Eds.), International organizations and higher education policy: Thinking globally, acting locally? (pp. 9–25). New York, NY: Routledge.

Google Scholar  

Budd, J. M. (1990). Higher education literature: Characteristics of citation patterns. The Journal of Higher Education, 61 (1), 84–97.

Article   Google Scholar  

Budd, J. M., & Magnuson, L. (2010). Higher education literature revisited: Citation patterns examined. Research in Higher Education, 51 (3), 294–304.

Clark, B. R. (1986). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective . Barkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Horn, A. S., Hendel, D. D., & Fry, G. W. (2007). Ranking the international dimension of top research universities in the United States. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11 (3–4), 330–358.    

Horta, H., & Jung, J. (2013). Higher education research in Asia: A scientometric perspective. Higher Education Quarterly, 67 (4), 398–419.

Hutchinson, S. R., & Lovell, C. D. (2004). A review of methodological characteristics of research published in key journals in higher education: Implications for graduate research training. Research in Higher Education, 45 (4), 383–403.

Jung, J., & Horta, H. (2013). Higher education research in Asia: A publication and co-publication analysis. Higher Education Quarterly, 67 (4), 398–419.

Kuh, G. D., Bean, J. P., Bradley, R. K., Coomes, M. D., & Hunter, D. E. (1986). Changes in research on college students published in selected journals between 1969 and 1983. The Review of Higher Education, 9 (2), 177–192.

Kuh, G. D., & Bursky, M. (1980). Knowledge dissemination by publication in student affairs: Who publishes what where? Journal of College Student Personnel, 21 (5), 387–393.

Kuzhabekova, A. (2011). Impact of co-authorship strategies on research productivity: A social-network analysis of publications in Russian cardiology. ProQuest, UMI Dissertation Publishing . (UMI No. 873550952), Retrieved September 2, 2013, from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

Kuzma, J., & Kuzhabekova, A. (2011, September). A window into the field of biotechnology risk analysis: A bibliometric approach . Paper presented at the Atlanta conference on science and innovation policy 2011, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved September 26–28, 2011 from https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/42455 .

Milam, J. H, Jr. (1991). The presence of paradigms in the core higher education journal literature. Research in Higher Education, 32 (6), 651–668.

Observatoire des Sciences et de Techniques (2009). Methodological note: Bibliometrics as a tool for the analysis of the scientific production of a country. ESTIME. Retrieved April 20th, 2015 from http://www.estime.ird.fr/article268.html .

Sakamoto, R., & Chapman, D. W. (Eds.). (2010). Cross-border partnerships in higher education: Strategies and issues . New York, NY: Routledge.

Silverman, R. J. (1985). Higher education as a maturing field? Evidence from referencing practices. Research in Higher Education, 23 (2), 150–183.

Thomson Reuters (2012.). Web of science . Retrieved from http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/web_of_science/ .

Tight, M. (1999). Writing in British higher education journals 1993–1998: Concerns and omissions. Higher Education Review, 31 (3), 27–44.

Tight, M. (2003). Researching higher education . Maidenhead, England: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Tight, M. (2008). Higher education research as tribe, territory and/or community: A co-citation analysis. Higher Education, 55 (5), 593–605.

Tight, M. (2012a). Higher education research 2000–2010: Changing journal publication patterns. Higher Education Research & Development, 31 (5), 723–740.

Tight, M. (2012b). Levels of analysis in higher education research. Tertiary Education and Management, 18 (3), 271–288.

Tight, M. (2013). Discipline and methodology in higher education research. Higher Education Research & Development, 32 (1), 136–151.

Tight, M. (2014). Working in separate silos? What citation patterns reveal about higher education research internationally. Higher Education, 68 (3), 379–395.

Volkwein, J. F., Carbone, D. A., & Volkwein, E. A. (1988). Research in higher education: Fifteen years of scholarship. Research in Higher Education, 28 (3), 271–280.

Walsh, W. B., Passons, W. R., & Pritchard, M. C. (1969). Publishing patterns in the journal of college student personnel. Journal of College Student Personnel, 11 (6), 403–407.

Weiler, H. N. (2008). Keyword: International research on higher education scholarship between policy and science. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 11 (4), 516–541.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University, 53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave., Astana, 010000, Republic of Kazakhstan

Aliya Kuzhabekova

Department of Organizational Leadership Policy, and Development, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, USA

Darwin D. Hendel & David W. Chapman

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aliya Kuzhabekova .

(TS = (((“higher education” or “post-secondary education” or “university education” or “college education” or “tertiary education”) near (“in transition” or reform)) not (America* or US orUSA) not (“secondary education” or “primary education” or “basic education” or “elementary education” or “early childhood education” or “preschool education” or “school” or “teacher”))).

(TS = (((comparative or international* or “cross* border*” or global* or world or comparative) near (“higher education” or “post-secondary education” or “university education” or “college education” or “tertiary education”)) not (“secondary education” or “primary education” or “basic education” or “elementary education” or “early childhood education” or “preschool education” or “school” or “teacher”)))

(TS = (((“higher education” or “post-secondary education” or “university education” or “college education” or “tertiary education”) and ((*AFRICA* not African-American) or Algeria* or Angola* or Benin* or Botswana* or Burkina* or Burundi* or Cameroon* or “Cape Verde*” or Chad* or Comoros* or Congo* or Djibouti* or Egypt* or “Equatorial Guinea*” or Eritrea* or Ethiopia* or Gabon* or Gambia* or Ghana* or Guinea* or Guinea-Bissau* or “Ivory Coast*” or Kenya* or Lesotho or Liberia* or Libya* or Madagascar* or Malawi* or Mali* or Mauritania* or Mauritius* or Morocco* or Mozambique* or Namibia* or Niger* or Rwanda* or “Sao Tome and Principe*” or Senegal* or Seychelles* or “Sierra Leone*” or Somalia* or *Sudan* or Swaziland* or Tanzania* or Togo* or Tunisia* or Uganda* or Zambia* or Zimbabwe* or (*ASIA* not Asian-American) or Afghan* or Bahrain* or Bangladesh* or Bhutan* or Brunei* or Burma* or Myanmar* or Cambodia* or China* or Chinese or “East Timor*” or India* or Indonesia* or Iran* or Iraq* or Israel* or Japan* or Jordan* or Kazakhstan* or Korea* or Kuwait* or Kyrgyz* or Laos* or Lebanon* or Malaysia* or Maldives or Mongolia* or Nepal* or Oman* or Pakistan* or Philippine* or Qatar* or Russia* or “Saudi Arabia*” or Arab* or “Middle East*” or Singapore* or “Sri Lanka*” or Syria* or Tajik* or *Soviet or Thailand or Thai* or Turkey or Turkish or Turkmen* or “United Arab Emirates” or UAE or CIS or “Newly independent” or Uzbek* or Baltic or Vietnam* or Yemen* or *EUROPE* or EU or Bologna or Albania* or Andorra* or Armenia* or Austria* or Azerbaijan* or Belarus* or Belgium* or Bosnia* or Herzegovina or Bulgaria* or Croatia* or Cyprus or Czech* or Denmark or Danish or Estonia* or Finland or Finnish or France or French or Georgia* or German* or Greece or Greek or Hungary or Hungarian or Iceland* or Ireland* or Irish or Italy* or Italian or Latvia* or Liechtenstein* or Lithuania* or Luxembourg or Macedonia* or Malta* or Moldova* or Monaco* or Montenegro* or Netherlands* or Holland* or Dutch or Norway or Norwegian or Poland* or Polish or Portugal* or Portuguese or Romania* or “San Marino*” or Serbia* or Slovak* or Slovenia* or Spain or Spanish or Sweden* or Swedish or Switzerland* or Swiss or Ukraine* or “United Kingdom” or UK or Britain or British or Vatican* or “North America*” or Antigua* or Barbuda* or Bahamas* or Barbados* or Belize* or Canada* or Canadian or “Costa Rica*” or Cuba* or Dominica* or “El Salvador*” or Grenada* or Guatemala* or Haiti* or Honduras or Jamaica* or Mexico or Mexican or Nicaragua* or Panama* or “Saint Kitts and Nevis” or “Trinidad and Tobago” or OCEANIA* or Australia* or Fiji* or Kiribati* or “Marshall Islands” or Micronesia* or Nauru* or “New Zealand*” or Palau* or “Papua New Guinea*” or Samoa* or “Solomon Islands” or Tonga* or Tuvalu* or Vanuatu* or ((“South AMERICA*” or “Latin America*”) not Hispanic) or Argentina* or Bolivia* or Brazil* or Chile* or Chilean or Colombia* or Ecuador* or Guyana* or Paraguay* or Peru* or Surinam* or Uruguay* or Venezuela* or “developing country*” or “developing world” or “third world”)) not (“secondary education” or “primary education” or “basic education” or “elementary education” or “early childhood education” or “preschool education” or “school” or “teacher”)))

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kuzhabekova, A., Hendel, D.D. & Chapman, D.W. Mapping Global Research on International Higher Education. Res High Educ 56 , 861–882 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9371-1

Download citation

Received : 28 July 2014

Published : 22 April 2015

Issue Date : December 2015

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9371-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• International higher education
• International research collaboration
• Bibliometric
• Social network analysis
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research