Although I am interested in the topic and enjoyed the diagrams that resulted, this article offers more evidence that the quality of an analysis crucially depends on the data being studies. In this case, the authors use the Web of Science database to research the literature on open education. "The keyword 'Open Education' was exclusively employed in the 'TOPIC' search field, a deliberate decision to hone the process on publications directly relevant to this field." So 'open learning' is ruled out? And 'open educational resources' is ruled out? The authors write of their analysis: "The 402 articles show that open education research is gaining popularity. There were no publications prior to 2015, but significant contributions started to appear in 2016." But surely that's wrong! And I have to wonder about the range and breadth of the articles selected. We see the 'top' article with only 46 citations. How is that possibly reflective of the literature?
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
