STEAM in education: a bibliometric analysis of performance and co-words in Web of Science

Abstract

Background: Emerging methodologies that apply and integrate science, technology, engineering, art, and math (STEAM) in education have appeared in recent years as a pedagogical alternative providing more holistic and attractive education.

Method: The research methodology used in this work is of a bibliometric nature. Specifically, an academic performance analysis and a co-word analysis has been carried out. The term STEAM was analyzed in the Web of Science (WoS) database. The WoS programs Analyze Results, Creation Citation Report, and SciMAT were used. A total of 1116 manuscripts were analyzed.

Results: The results show that studies in the field education of STEAM began in 2006 and have continued uninterruptedly up to the present day, although interest generated in the scientific community has been irregular.

Conclusions: It can be concluded that STEAM studies have not had an established and robust line of research over time, although it can be observed that the trends in this aspect are focused on the scientific branch of education. In addition, the topics of study on STEAM include points related to gender differences, the influence of STEAM on people of different races, the skills developed by students, and training teachers to implement teaching and learning processes with STEAM.

Keywords: Bibliometrics; Education; STEAM; SciMAT.

Fig. 1

Flowchart according to the PRISMA declaration

Fig. 2

Structure and data of co-word analysis with SciMAT. Note. Strategic diagram (a). Thematic network (b). Thematic evolution (c)

Fig. 3

Evolution of scientific production

Fig. 4

Keyword continuity between contiguous intervals

Fig. 5

Strategic diagram of the 2006 to 2015 period. Note. a Strategic diagram (h-index) and performance from 2006 to 2015. Themes include b “women,” c “technology,” d “students,” e “STEM,” f “Anethole,” g “webquest,” h “engineering-teaching-kits,” i “interest,” j “impact,” k “physics,” and l “interest”

Fig. 6

Strategic diagram of the 2016 to 2018 period. Note. a Strategic diagram (h-index) and performance from 2016 to 2018. Themes include b “library,” c “hands-on-learning/manipulatives,” d “gender,” e “race,” f “creativity,” g “science,” h “STEAM,” i “STEM-Education,” j “Science-education,” k “3d-printing,” l “pedagogy,” m “Lithuania,” n “distance-learning,” o “faculty,” p “transdisciplinary,” q “mental-rotation,” and r “gender-differences”

Fig. 7

Strategic diagram of the 2019 to 2020 period. Note: a Strategic diagram (h-index) and performance from 2019 to 2020. Themes include b “students,” c “science,” d “computational-thinking,” e “STEM,” f “STEM-Education,” g “makerspace,” h “segregation,” i “broadening-participation,” j “attitudes,” k “creativity,” l “laboratory-instruction,” m “STEM-Teachers-training,” and n “arts”

Fig. 8

Thematic evolution by h-index

Fig. 9

Strategic diagram by h-index of authors of all scientific output