Publication: Science mapping the knowledge base in educational leadership and management: A longitudinal bibliometric analysis, 1960 to 2018
Issued Date
2019-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
17411440
17411432
17411432
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85073937803
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Educational Management Administration and Leadership. (2019)
Suggested Citation
Philip Hallinger, Jasna Kovačević Science mapping the knowledge base in educational leadership and management: A longitudinal bibliometric analysis, 1960 to 2018. Educational Management Administration and Leadership. (2019). doi:10.1177/1741143219859002 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/50483
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Science mapping the knowledge base in educational leadership and management: A longitudinal bibliometric analysis, 1960 to 2018
Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© The Author(s) 2019. This review employed science mapping methods to analyze the evolution of the knowledge base in educational leadership and management from 1960 to 2018. Descriptive trend analysis, citation analysis, co-citation analysis, and visualization of similarities were used to document growth and change in the ‘intellectual structure’ of the educational leadership and management knowledge base as it evolved through the decades. The review analyzed a database comprised of 22,492 articles published in 21 Scopus-indexed journals over six decades. The authors found that contributions to the knowledge base have evolved from primarily Anglo-American male scholars up until 2000 to increasing gender and geographic diversity in the past 20 years. The review identified several ‘schools of thought’ that emerged across four generations of EDLM scholarship. These include: Leadership for Learning, Leading Change, Leading Teachers, and School Effectiveness and School Improvement. The review also documented a broader evolution in the field’s intellectual structure from a focus on ‘administration’ during the 1960s and 1970s to the embrace of ‘leadership for learning’ as the dominant theme during recent generations. This paradigm shift has not only reshaped the focus of research but also the identity of educational leadership and management as a field of study.