Будь ласка, використовуйте цей ідентифікатор, щоб цитувати або посилатися на цей матеріал: http://ds.knu.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/9301
Повний запис метаданих
Поле DCЗначенняМова
dc.contributor.authorSemerikov, Serhiy O.-
dc.contributor.authorVakaliuk, Tetiana A.-
dc.contributor.authorMintii, Iryna S.-
dc.contributor.authorBondarenko, Olha V.-
dc.contributor.authorKanevska, Olga B.-
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-12T07:26:56Z-
dc.date.available2026-07-12T07:26:56Z-
dc.date.issued2026-01-16-
dc.identifier.citationMapping the Emergence: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Convergence Gap in GeoAI Teacher Education Research / Serhiy O. Semerikov, Tetiana A. Vakaliuk, Iryna S. Mintii, Olha V. Bondarenko, Olga B. Kanevska // SN Computer Science. – 2026. – Vol. 7. – Iss. 1. – Article 114. – DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s42979-026-04731-0uk_UA
dc.identifier.issn2661-8907-
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.doi.org/10.1007/s42979-026-04731-0-
dc.identifier.urihttp://ds.knu.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/9301-
dc.descriptionJanowicz K, Gao S, McKenzie G, Hu Y, Bhaduri B. GeoAI: spatially explicit artificial intelligence techniques for geographic knowledge discovery and beyond. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2020;34(4):625–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2019.1684500. Li S, Dragicevic S, Castro FA, Sester M, Winter S, Coltekin A, et al. Geospatial big data handling theory and methods: a review and research challenges. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens. 2016;115:119–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2015.10.012. National Research Council. Learning to think spatially. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006. https://doi.org/10.17226/11019. Kerski JJ. The implementation and effectiveness of geographic information systems technology and methods in secondary education. J Geogr. 2003;102(3):128–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221340308978534. Holmes W, Bialik M, Fadel C. Artificial intelligence in education: promises and implications for teaching and learning. Boston: Center for Curriculum Redesign; 2019. Li W. Chapter 17: GeoAI in social science. In: Rey SJ, Franklin R, editors. Handbook of spatial analysis in the social sciences. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2022. p. 291–304. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789903942.00025. Mishra P, Koehler MJ. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teach Coll Rec. 2006;108(6):1017–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x. An X, Bai J, Li Y, Zhou Y, Chai CS, Hong JC. Development of an artificial intelligence technology pedagogical content knowledge (AI-TPACK) scale for human and AI concurrently as teachers. Asia-Pac Educ Res. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-025-01045-2. Mimoudi A, Mokhtari K. ‘AIA-PCEK’: a new framework for teaching with AI. Cogent Educ. 2025;12(1):2563171. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2563171. Xu G, Yu A, Gao A, Trainin G. Developing an AI-TPACK framework: exploring the mediating role of AI attitudes in pre-service TCSL teachers’ self-efficacy and AI-TPACK. Educ Inf Technol. 2025;30(15):22471–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13630-5. Wang L, Xing S. A study on the influencing factors model of ai-e-tpack for preservice teachers. In: Proceedings of the 2024 International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence for Education. ISAIE ’24. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2024. p. 470–472. https://doi.org/10.1145/3700297.3700377. Fan YC, Kuo BC, Wu PC, Liao CH. A model for developing AI pedagogical and content knowledge in inservice and preservice non-STEM elementary teachers. Educ Inf Technol. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13813-0. Bautista A, Estrada C, Jaravata AM, Mangaser LM, Narag F, Soquila R, et al. Preservice teachers’ readiness towards integrating AI-based tools in education: a TPACK approach. Educ Process Int J. 2024;13(3):40–68. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2024.133.3. Lee J. Beyond geospatial inquiry-how can we integrate the latest technological advances into geography education? Educ Sci. 2023;13(11):1128. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111128. Demirci A. The effectiveness of geospatial practices in education. In: Muñiz Solari O, Demirci A, Schee J, editors. Geospatial technologies and geography education in a changing world. Tokyo: Springer Japan; 2015. p. 141–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55519-3_12. Shook E, Bowlick FJ, Kemp KK, Ahlqvist O, Carbajeles-Dale P, DiBiase D, et al. Cyber literacy for GIScience: toward formalizing geospatial computing education. Prof Geogr. 2019;71(2):221–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2018.1518720. Spurná M, Knecht P, Bendl T. Geographical concepts chessboard: a framework for developing geographical thinking in teacher education. Geography. 2025;110(3):128–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167487.2025.2558438. Handoyo B, Purwanto RS, Tan GCI. Effect of the spatial based learning using quantum geographic information system on students’ critical thinking skills. J Soc Stud Educ Res. 2024;15(5):328–79. Jo I, Bednarz SW. Evaluating geography textbook questions from a spatial perspective: using concepts of space, tools of representation, and cognitive processes to evaluate spatiality. J Geogr. 2009;108(1):4–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221340902758401. Huynh NT, Sharpe B. An assessment instrument to measure geospatial thinking expertise. J Geogr. 2013;112(1):3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2012.682227. Fargher M. Webgis for geography education: towards a GeoCapabilities approach. ISPRS Int J Geo Inf. 2018;7(3):111. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7030111. Mathews AJ, Wikle TA. GIS &T pedagogies and instructional challenges in higher education: a survey of educators. Trans GIS. 2019;23(5):892–907. https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.12534. Abdimanapov B, Kumarbekuly S, Gaisin I. Technology for achieving learning objectives through a system-activity approach and the development of critical thinking in geography studies. J Eco Hum. 2024;3(8):11989–2003. https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i8.5797. Long D, Magerko B. What is AI literacy? competencies and design considerations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI ’20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020. p. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727. Ng DTK, Leung JKL, Chu SKW, Qiao MS. Conceptualizing AI literacy: an exploratory review. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2021;2:100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041. Allen LK, Kendeou P. ED-AI Lit: an interdisciplinary framework for AI literacy in education. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci. 2024;11(1):3–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/23727322231220339. Sattelmaier L, Pawlowski J. Be AIware! an AI competency model for K-12 education. Soc Sci Humanit Open. 2025;12:101838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101838. Eyal L. Rethinking artificial-intelligence literacy through the lens of teacher educators: the adaptive AI model. Comput Edu Open. 2025;9:100291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100291. Chiu TKF, Chai CS, Williams PJ, Lin TJ. Teacher agency for integrating AI in education: a framework for analyzing K-12 curriculum documents. Edu Technol Soc. 2024;27(1):116–31. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202401_27(1).SP01. Kohnke L, Zou D, Xie H. Microlearning and generative AI for pre-service teacher education: a qualitative case study. Educ Inf Technol. 2025;30(15):21221–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13606-5. Su J, Guo K, Chen X, Chu SKW. Teaching artificial intelligence in K–12 classrooms: a scoping review. Interact Learn Environ. 2024;32(9):5207–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2212706. Dai Y, Lin Z, Liu A, Dai D, Wang W. Effect of an analogy-based approach of artificial intelligence pedagogy in upper primary schools. J Educ Comput Res. 2024;61(8):159–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231201342. Kim WJ, Rachmatullah A. Science teachers’ approaches to artificial intelligence integrated science teaching. Res Sci Educ. 2025;55(6):1625–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10233-5. Petersen AM, Ahmed ME, Pavlidis I. Grand challenges and emergent modes of convergence science. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2021;8(1):194. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00869-9. Li X, Cai F, Bao J, Jian Y, Sun Z, Xie X. Navigating interdisciplinary research: historical progression and contemporary challenges. J Data Inf Sci. 2024;9(3):14–28. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2024-0025. Pennington DD. Cross-disciplinary collaboration and learning. Ecol Soc. 2008;13(2):8. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02520-130208. Pennington DD. Bridging the disciplinary divide: co-creating research ideas in eScience teams. Comput Support Coop Work. 2011;20(3):165–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-011-9134-2. Aagaard-Hansen J. The challenges of cross-disciplinary research. Soc Epistemol. 2007;21(4):425–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691720701746540. Hao ZH, Liu Z, Chen Y, Wang PS. Brokerage power and knowledge integration: research on the mechanism of academic social capital. Stud Sci Sci. 2024;42(11):2355–64. Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3. Hook DW, Porter SJ, Herzog C. Dimensions: building context for search and evaluation. Front Res Metr Anal. 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2018.00023. Abramo G, D’Angelo CA, Zhang L. A comparison of two approaches for measuring interdisciplinary research output: the disciplinary diversity of authors vs the disciplinary diversity of the reference list. J Informet. 2018;12(4):1182–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.001. Chakraborty T. Role of interdisciplinarity in computer sciences: quantification, impact and life trajectory. Scientometrics. 2018;114(3):1011–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2628-z. Wang M, Chai L. Three new bibliometric indicators/approaches derived from keyword analysis. Scientometrics. 2018;116(2):721–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2768-9. Glänzel W, Thijs B. Using ‘core documents’ for detecting and labelling new emerging topics. Scientometrics. 2012;91(2):399–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0591-7. Ranaei S, Suominen A. Using machine learning approaches to identify emergence: Case of vehicle related patent data. In: Anderson TR, Niwa K, Kocaoglu DF, Daim TU, Kozanoglu DC, Perman G, et al., editors. PICMET 2017—Portland International Conference on management of engineering and technology: technology management for the interconnected world, proceedings. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.; 2017. p. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.23919/PICMET.2017.8125290. Singh VK, Singh P, Karmakar M, Leta J, Mayr P. The journal coverage of web of science, scopus and dimensions: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. 2021;126(6):5113–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5. Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. 2016;106(1):213–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5. Kumpulainen M, Seppänen M. Combining web of science and scopus datasets in citation-based literature study. Scientometrics. 2022;127:5613–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04475-7. Chansanam W, Li C. KKU-BiblioMerge: a novel tool for multi-database integration in bibliometric analysis. Iberoam J Sci Meas Commun. 2025;5(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.47909/ijsmc.157. Ghosh J, Kshitij A. An integrated examination of collaboration coauthorship networks through structural cohesion, holes, hierarchy, and percolating clusters. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 2014;65(8):1639–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23058. Cruz-Ramírez M, Díaz-Ferrer Y, Rúa-Vásquez JA, Rojas-Velázquez OJ. Scientometric study of a co-authorship network on mathematics education. An analysis of the research fields based on Delphi method [Estudio cienciométrico de una red de coautoría en educación matemática. Un análisis de sus campos de investigación basado en el método Delphi]. Revista Espanola de Documentacion Cientifica. 2020;43(4):1–18. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2020.4.1727. Uddin S, Khan A. The impact of author-selected keywords on citation counts. J Informet. 2016;10(4):1166–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.004. Resta P, Laferrière T. Digital equity and intercultural education. Educ Inf Technol. 2015;20(4):743–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9419-z. Warschauer M, Tate T. Digital divides and social inclusion. In: Mills KA, Stornaiuolo A, Smith A, Pandya JZ, editors. Handbook of writing, literacies, and education in digital cultures. New York: Routledge; 2017. p. 63–75. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315465258-8. Herrera-Seda C, Walton E. Teacher education for inclusive education: a scoping review of Global South scholarship. J Educ Teach. 2025;51(4):651–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2025.2520792. Shakhislam L, Yerlan I, Duman A, Ussenov N, Zhu K, Dávid LD. Opportunities and challenges of using geospatial technologies in teaching school geography in Kazakhstan. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2024.2380173. Bernhäuserová V, Krajňáková L, Řezníčková D, Hanus M. Teachers’ perceived limits to GIS use in schools and implications for teacher training. J Geogr. 2025;124(5):127–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2025.2558718. Tsai CC, Chai CS. The “third’’-order barrier for technology-integration instruction: implications for teacher education. Australas J Educ Technol. 2012;28(6):1057–60. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.810. Al-Barakat AA, Al-Hassan OM, Alali RM, Al-Saud KM. The role of e-professional development programs in developing digital technology skills among primary geography teachers. Geojournal of Tourism and Geosites. 2025;59(2):661–73. https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.59213-1445. Akpan IJ, Offodile OF, Akpanobong AC, Kobara YM. A Comparative analysis of virtual education technology, E-learning systems research advances, and digital divide in the global south. Informatics. 2024;11(3):53. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11030053. Bingimlas KA. Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: a review of the literature. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Educ. 2009;5(3):235–45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75275. Doering A, Koseoglu S, Scharber C, Henrickson J, Lanegran D. Technology integration in K–12 geography education using TPACK as a conceptual model. J Geogr. 2014;113(6):223–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2014.896393. Okada A, Sherborne T, Panselinas G, Kolionis G. Fostering transversal skills through open schooling supported by the CARE-KNOW-DO pedagogical model and the UNESCO AI competencies framework. Int J Artif Intell Educ. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-025-00458-w.uk_UA
dc.description.abstractThe integration of Geospatial Artificial Intelligence (GeoAI) into geography education represents a critical frontier for twenty-first-century pedagogy, yet teacher preparation in this domain remains severely underexplored. This study employs bibliometric analysis to examine the convergence gap between established research fields and the emerging area of GeoAI teacher education. Through systematic analysis of 1471 publications from the Dimensions database spanning January 2010 through March 2025, we investigated five interconnected datasets using advanced network analysis techniques. Drawing on convergence science theory and adapting interdisciplinary measurement approaches, our findings reveal an extreme convergence gap (Gap Index = 0.941, where values approaching 1.0 indicate greater disconnection between fields) between well-established foundational domains—geography teacher education (470 papers), AI teacher education (382 papers), and spatial thinking education (312 papers)—and their intersection. Only 25 papers directly address AI integration in geography education, representing 1.7% of the total corpus. The research exhibits pronounced temporal concentration with a Field Emergence Score of 70.6 (indicating that over 70% of publications appeared within the most recent three years), significant geographic bias toward the Global North (Herfindahl Index = 0.208), and limited theoretical framework development. Co-authorship and keyword co-occurrence networks demonstrate fragmented research communities with structural holes representing opportunities for knowledge brokerage across domains. We propose a prioritized research agenda addressing theoretical development, empirical validation, and geographic equity, documenting the real-time emergence of a critical educational research domain while identifying strategic intervention points for accelerating field convergence.uk_UA
dc.language.isoenuk_UA
dc.subjectGeoAIuk_UA
dc.subjectGeography teacher educationuk_UA
dc.subjectBibliometric analysisuk_UA
dc.subjectConvergence gapuk_UA
dc.subjectSpatial thinkinguk_UA
dc.subjectArtificial intelligence literacyuk_UA
dc.subjectAI-TPACKuk_UA
dc.subjectInterdisciplinary researchuk_UA
dc.titleMapping the Emergence: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Convergence Gap in GeoAI Teacher Education Researchuk_UA
dc.typeArticleuk_UA
dc.identifier.doihttps://www.doi.org/10.1007/s42979-026-04731-0-
local.submitter.emailsemerikov@ccjourn...uk_UA
Розташовується у зібраннях:Кафедра професійної та соціально-гуманітарної освіти

Файли цього матеріалу:
Файл Опис РозмірФормат 
paper_geoai_rev3_accepted.pdf975.4 kBAdobe PDFПереглянути/Відкрити


Усі матеріали в архіві електронних ресурсів захищені авторським правом, всі права збережені.