An Overview of Reviews as a Trend Maker in the Field

The authors consider the methodology basics of reviews as a prospective type of scholarly publications, their taxonomy and most popular review types (narrative reviews, bibliometric reviews, systematic reviews, reviews of reviews, scoping reviews, meta-analysis), as well as specific features of procedures and algorithms for conducting reviews. Top 100 of highly cited reviews on higher education from 2010 to 2019 published in high-ranking peer-reviewed journals and indexed in the international database Scopus is based on the traditional methodology that aims to sample the most essential and influential publications of the kind in a well-represented and unbiased way and to subject the sampled reviews to content, bibliometric, and linguistic analyses. based on the inclusion criteria, keywords and methods of objective selection and sampling of the publications to be reviewed and analyzed, the authors singled out the essential thematic clusters in Top-100 list (educational technologies, university, student, teaching, learning, assessment, etc.) and determined the key directions in the review field of study. Each cluster contains a brief description of the most important aspects and approaches to various topics related to higher education, an analysis of their novelty and existing gaps in the field. According to the rhetoric theory of scholarly text by John Swales named ‘Moves and steps’, the authors offer a uniform rhetoric schema of reviews, commenting on the text components and their contents. Such a schema may serve as a guideline for authors of reviews made up for international peer-reviewed journals. The most popular publications by citations and number of publications entail reviews devoted to the culture of higher education; educational technologies and peculiarities of their application in the new educational landscape; online education as a new dimension of education requiring a special ecosystem; academic ethics of university teachers; soft skills development necessary for successful professional development; academic and scientific libraries as new centers for scientific and academic communication.

review, systematic review, scoping review, bibliometric review, theoretical review, descriptive review, narrative review, higher education, university, learning, technologies

1. Gregory, A.T. & Denniss, A.R. (2018). An Introduction to Writing Narrative and Systematic Reviews – Tasks, Tips and Traps for Aspiring Authors. Heart, Lungs and Circulation. No. 27, pp. 893–898. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2018.03.027

2. Grant, M. & Booth, A. (2009). A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal. vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848

3. Pare, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing Information Systems Knowledge: A Typology of Literature Reviews. Information & Management. No. 52, pp. 183–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008

4. Biondi-Zoccai, G. (2016). Umbrella Reviews: Evidence Synthesis with Overviews of Reviews and Meta-Epidemiologic Studies. Springer. 391 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-25655-9

5. Arksey, H. & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice. vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

6. Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press, 274 p.

7. Wiek, A., Withycombe, L., Redman, C.L. (2011). Key Competencies in Sustainability: A Reference Framework for Academic Program Development. Sustainability Science. vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 203–218. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11625011-0132-6

8. Manca, S., Ranieri, M. (2016). Is Facebook Still a Suitable Technology-Enhanced Learning Environment? An Updated Critical Review of the Literature from 2012 to 2015. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 503–528. http://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12154

9. Andraos, J., Dicks, A.P. (2012). Green Chemistry Teaching in Higher Education: A Review of Effective Practices. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 69–79. http://doi.org/10.1039/c1rp90065j

10. Hew, K.F., Cheung, W.S. (2013). Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in K-12 and Higher Education: The Search for Evidence-based Practice. Educational Research Review. No. 9, pp. 47-64. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edureV.2012.08.001

11. Kirkwood, A., Price, L. (2013). Examining Some Assumptions and Limitations of Research on the Effects of Emerging Technologies for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. British Journal of Educational Technology. vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 536–543. http://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12049

12. Sim, J.W.S., Hew, K.F. (2010). The Use of Weblogs in Higher Education Settings: A Review of Empirical Research. Educational Research Review. Vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 151–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edureV.2010.01.001

13. Knox, J. (2013). Five Critiques of the Open Educational Resources Movement. Teaching in Higher Education. vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 821–832. http://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.774354

14. Bekele, T.A. (2010). Motivation and Satisfaction in Internet-Supported Learning Environments: A Review. Educational Technology and Society. vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 116–127.

15. Thoms, B. (2011). A Dynamic Social Feedback System to Support Learning and Social Interaction in Higher Education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 340–352. http://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2011.9

16. Abrahams, D.A. (2010). Technology Adoption in Higher Education: A Framework for Identifying and Prioritising Issues and barriers to Adoption of Instructional Technology. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 34–49. http://doi.org/10.1108/17581184201000012

17. Reid, P. (2014). Categories for barriers to Adoption of Instructional Technologies. Education and Information Technologies. vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 383–407. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-012-9222-z

18. Hwang, G., Tsai, C. (2011). Research Trends in Mobile and Ubiquitous Learning: A Review of Publications in Selected Journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology. vol. 42, no. 4, pp. E65–E70. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01183.x

19. Lynch, K. (2010). Carelessness: A Hidden Doxa of Higher Education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 54–67. http://doi.org/10.1177/1474022209350104

20. Rubin, M., Denson, N., Kilpatrick, S., Matthews, K.E., Stehlik, T., Zyngier, D. (2014). “I Am Working-Class”: Subjective Self-Definition as a Missing Measure of Social Class and Socioeconomic Status in Higher Education Research. Educational Researcher. vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 196–200. http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14528373

21. Reimer, D., Pollak, R. (2010). Educational Expansion and Its Consequences for vertical and Horizontal Inequalities in Access to Higher Education in West Germany. European Sociological Review. vol. 26, no.4, pp. 415–430. http://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp029

22. Bowman, N.A., Brandenberger, J.W. (2012). Experiencing the Unexpected: Toward a Model of College Diversity Experiences and Attitude Change. Review of Higher Education. vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 179–205. http://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2012.0016

23. Hemelt, S.W., Marcotte, D.E. (2011). The Impact of Tuition Increases on Enrollment at Public Colleges and Universities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 435–457. http://doi.org/10.3102/0162373711415261

24. Oreopoulos, P., Petronijevic, U. (2013). Making College Worth It: A Review of the Returns to Higher Education. Future of Children. vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 41–65. http://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2013.0001

25. Mok, K.H., Cheung, A.B.L. (2011). Global Aspirations and Strategising for World-Class Status: New Form of Politics in Higher Education Governance in Hong Kong. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 231–251. http://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2011.564998

26. Bernstein, J.H. (2015). Transdisciplinarity: A Review of Its Origins, Development, and Current Issues. Journal of Research Practice. vol. 11, no. 1. Article R1. Available at: http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/510/436

27. Macfarlane, B., Zhang, J., Pun, A. (2014). Academic Integrity: A Review of the Literature. Studies in Higher Education. vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 339–358. http://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2012.709495

28. Fonseca, A., Macdonald, A., Dandy, E., Valenti, P. (2011). The State of Sustainability Reporting at Сanadian Universities. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 22–40. http:// doi.org/10.1108/14676371111098285

29. Vaughter, P., Wright, T., McKenzie, M., Lidstone, L. (2013). Greening the Ivory Tower: A Review of Educational Research on Sustainability in Post-Secondary Education. Sustainability (Switzerland). vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 2252–2271. http://doi.org/10.3390/su5052252

30. Mehta, N.B., Hull, A.L., young, J.B., Stoller, J.K. (2013). Just Imagine: New Paradigms for Medical Education. Academic Medicine. vol. 88, no. 10, pp. 1418–1423. http://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a36a07

31. Lahtinen, P., Leino-Kilpi, H., Salminen, L. (2014). Nursing Education in the European Higher Education Area – variations in Implementation. Nurse Education Today. vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 1040–1047. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.09.011

32. Satu, K., Leena, S., Mikko, S., Riitta, S., Helena, L. (2013). Competence Areas of Nursing Students in Europe. Nurse Education Today. vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 625–632. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.01.017

33. Popkess, A.M., McDaniel, A. (2011). Are Nursing Students Engaged in Learning? A Secondary Analysis of Data from the National Survey of Student Engagement. Nursing Education Perspectives. vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 89–94. http://doi.org/10.5480/1536-5026-32.2.89

34. Smith, R.A., Khawaja, N.G. (2011). A Review of the Acculturation Experiences of International Students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 699–713. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.08.004

35. Contreras, F. (2009). Sin Papeles y Rompiendo barreras: Latino Students and the Challenges of Persisting in College. Harvard Educational Review. vol. 79, no. 4, pp. 610–631. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17763/haer.79.4.02671846902gl33w

36. van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., Segers, M. (2011). Factors Affecting Students’ Self-Efficacy in Higher Education. Educational Research Review. vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 95–108. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edureV.2010.10.003

37. Aquilina, D., Henry, I. (2010). Elite Athletes and University Education in Europe: A Review of Policy and Practice in Higher Education in the European Union Member States. International Journal of Sport Policy. vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 25–47. http://doi.org/10.1080/19406941003634024

38. Barry, A.E., Whiteman, S.D., Wadsworth, S.M. (2014). Student Service Members/veterans in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice. vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 30–42. http://doi.org/10.1515/jsarp-2014-0003

39. Hopkins, L. (2011). The Path of Least Resistance: A voice-Relational Analysis of Disabled Students’ Experiences of Discrimination in English Universities. International Journal of Inclusive Education. vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 711–727. http://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903317684

40. Pino, M., Mortari, L. (2014). The Inclusion of Students with Dyslexia in Higher Education: A Systematic Review Using Narrative Synthesis. Dyslexia. vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 346–369. http://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1484

41. baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., Dochy, F. (2010). Using Student-Centred Learning Environments to Stimulate Deep Approaches to Learning: Factors Encouraging or Discouraging Their Effectiveness. Educational Research Review. vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 243–260. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edureV.2010.06.001

42. Seery, M.K. (2015). Flipped Learning in Higher Education Chemistry: Emerging Trends and Potential Directions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 758–768. DOI: 10.1039/c5rp00136f

43. De Rijdt, C., Stes, A., van der vleuten, C., Dochy, F. (2013). Influencing variables and Moderators of Transfer of Learning to the Workplace within the Area of Staff Development in Higher Education: Research Review. Educational Research Review. No. 8, pp. 48–74. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edureV.2012.05.007

44. Broadbent, J., Poon, W.L. (2015). Self-Regulated Learning Strategies & Academic Achievement in Online Higher Education Learning Environments: A Systematic Review. Internet and Higher Education. No. 27, pp. 1-13. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007

45. Baran, E., Correia, A.-P., Thompson, A. (2011). Transforming Online Teaching Practice: Critical Analysis of the Literature on the Roles and Competencies of Online Teachers. Distance Education. vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 421–439. DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2011.610293

46. Evans, C. (2013). Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. Review of Educational Research. vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 70–120. http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312474350

47. Kaufman, J.H., Schunn, C.D. (2011). Students’ Perceptions about Peer Assessment for Writing: Their Origin and Impact on Revision Work. Instructional Science. vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 387–406. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-0109133-6

48. Torrance, H. (2012). Formative Assessment at the Crossroads: Conformative, Deformative and Transformative Assessment. Oxford Review of Education. vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 323–342. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2012.689693

49. Nulty, D.D. (2011). Peer and Self-Assessment in the First year of University. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 493–507. http://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903540983

50. Joughin, G. (2010). The Hidden Curriculum Revisited: A Critical Review of Research into the Influence of Summative Assessment on Learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 335–345. http://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903221493

51. van Lankveld, T., Schoonenboom, J., volman, M., Croiset, G., beishuizen, J. (2017). Developing a Teacher Identity in the University Context: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Higher Education Research and Development. vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 325–342. http://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1208154

52. Brew, A. (2010). Transforming Academic Practice through Scholarship. International Journal for Academic Development. vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 105–116. http://doi.org/10.1080/13601441003737618

53. Evans, M.P. (2013). Educating Preservice Teachers for Family, School, and Community Engagement. Teaching Education. vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 123–133. http://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2013.786897

54. bennett, D. (2009). Academy and the Real World: Developing Realistic Notions of Career in the Performing Arts. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 309–327. http://doi.org/10.1177/1474022209339953

55. Spooren, P., brockx, B., Mortelmans, D. (2013). On the validity of Student Evaluation of Teaching: The State of the Art. Review of Educational Research. vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 598–642. http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870

56. Smit, U., Dafouz, E. (2012). Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education: An Introduction to English-Medium Policies, Conceptual Issues and Research Practices Across Europe. AILA Review. vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1–12. http://doi.org/10.1075/aila.25.01smi

57. Jonsson, A. (2013). Facilitating Productive Use of Feedback in Higher Education. Active Learning in Higher Education. vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 63–76. http://doi.org/10.1177/1469787412467125

58. Gabelica, C., den bossche, P.V., Segers, M., Gijselaers, W. (2012). Feedback, a Powerful Lever in Teams: A Review. Educational Research Review. vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 123–144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edureV.2011.11.003

59. Alderman, L., Towers, S., bannah, S. (2012). Student Feedback Systems in Higher Education: A Focused Literature Review and Environmental Scan. Quality in Higher Education. vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 261–280. http://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2012.730714

60. Tomlinson, M. (2012). Graduate Employability: A Review of Conceptual and Empirical Themes. Higher Education Policy. vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 407–431. http://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2011.26

61. Helyer, R. (2011). Aligning Higher Education with the World of Work. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning. vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 95–105. http://doi.org/10.1108/20423891111128872

62. Persson, M. (2015). Education and Political Participation. British Journal of Political Science. vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 689–703. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123413000409

63. Connaway, L.S., Lewis, J.S., Alexander, S., Du, y. Eden, B., Petersohn, B., Proffitt, M. & Salisbury, L. (2012). 2012 Top Ten Trends in Academic Libraries: A Review of the Trends and Issues Affecting Academic Libraries in Higher Education. College and Research Libraries News. vol. 73, no. 6, pp. 311–320. http://doi.org/10.5860/crln.73.6.8773

64. Kezar, A. (2011). What is the best Way to Achieve broader Reach of Improved Practices in Higher Education? Innovative Higher Education. vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 235–247. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9174-z

65. Knight, J. (2011). Education Hubs: A Fad, a brand, an Innovation? Journal of Studies in International Education. vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 221–240. http://doi.org/10.1177/1028315311398046

66. Bearman, M., Smith, C. D., Carbone, A., Slade, S., baik, C., Hughes-Warrington, M., Neumann, D. L. (2012). Systematic Review Methodology in Higher Education. Higher Education Research and Development. vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 625–640. http://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.702735