Analysis of Bibliographic Systems Thinking: A Review in the Science Education


In the last decade research background in science, technology, and social formal education has enlarged our knowledge about complex systems. A study informing conceptual framework across disciplines which is inclusive in system thinking (ST). Its usage in science education has increased rapidly and has also been adapted and elaborated by research networks all over the world. Mix method was used in this review to illustrate ST development in science education. Tabulation of literature inquiry resulted from Scopus database was used to conduct bibliometric and literature review. The number of publications used were within the last decade, namely from 2012 up to 2022. Annotated scores were used to analyze the trend and identify popular and potential publications. Annotated network and diagram of researchers’ network together to be analyzed and identified as a group of articles and researchers in various networking roles. Infiltering relevance resulted in about 1867 publications. Bibliographic analysis identified five groups of annotated and distinctive common authors/writers according to general geography, research focus, institutional inspiration, or affiliation. As a set of loosely related science, many researchers in systems thinking have developed various system thinking aspects based on underlying perspectives. A preliminary study was inspired by education-related literature, meanwhile another group adopted the largely inclusive comprehension which combined/integrated knowledge and related system approach. System thinking is concluded as a discussion topic that was getting popular in system thinking comprehension and its approaches in science are openly probable to be studied. In depth recognizing and developing these ideas and groups of authors/writers in system thinking literature can give clarification and possibility or instruction, research, and further developments.

Keywords: bibliographic, systems thinking, science education

[1] Checkland P. Systems thinking, systems practice. Wiley; 1999.

[2] Muhammadi BS. Erman Aminullah, Systems analysis dynamic; social environment, economics, management. Jakarta: UMJ Press; 2001.

[3] Hung W. Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modelling. Br J Educ Technol. 2008;39(6):1099–120.

[4] Martin S, Brannigan J, Hall A. Sustainability, systems thinking and professional practice. J Geogr High Educ. 2005;29(1):79–89.

[5] Goekler J. Teaching for the future: systems thinking and sustainability. Green Teach (Tor). 2003;70:8–14.

[6] K. Warburton, “Deep learning and education for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in.,” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. vol. 4, no. 1, p. 2003.

[7] Wang C, Si L. A bibliometric analysis of digital literacy research from 1990 to 2022 and research on emerging themes during the Covid-19 pandemic. Sustainability (Basel). 2023;15(7):5769.

[8] Devos P. Research and bibliometrics: a long history…. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2011 May;35(5):336–7.

[9] Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines. J Bus Res. 2021;133(March):285–96.

[10] Grosseck G, ?îru LG, Bran RA. Education for sustainable development: evolution and perspectives: A bibliometric review of research, 1992–2018. Sustainability (Basel). 2019;11(21):6136.

[11] Vázquez ÁD, Vázquez-Cano E, Montoro MR, Meneses EL. Bibliometric analysis of the impact of educational research on functional diversity and digital competence: web of Science and scopus. Aula Abierta. 2019;48(2):147–55.

[12] Moral-mu noz JA, Herrera-viedma E, Santisteban-espejo A, Cobo MJ. Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: an up-to-date review. Prof Inf. 2020;29(1):1–20.

[13] van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010 Aug;84(2):523–38.

[14] Öllerer K. Environmental education – the bumpy road from childhood foraging to literacy and active responsibility. J Integr Environ Sci. 2015;12(3):205–16.

[15] P.G. Mahaffy, A. Krief, H. Hopf, G. Mehta, and S.A. Matlin, “Reorienting chemistry education through systems thinking.,” Nature Reviews Chemistry. vol. 2, no. 4, p. 0126, 2018.

[16] Mu’minah IH, Suryaningsih Y. Implementasi STEAM (Science, Technology, Arts and Matematics) dalam pembelajaran abad 21. J Biol Educ. 2020;5(1):65–73.

[17] van Laar E, van Deursen AJ, van Dijk JA, de Haan J. Determinants of 21st-century skills and 21st-century digital skills for workers: a systematic literature review. SAGE Open. 2020;10(1):215824401990017.

[18] Supovitz JA, Turner HM. The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. J Res Sci Teach. 2000;37(9):963–80.

[19] Rafie S, Hildebrand M, Hurst S, Economou N, Stadnick NA, Mody SK. Barriers and facilitators for pharmacists prescribing emergency contraception under statewide protocol. J Am Coll Clin Pharm. 2022;5(1):26–33.

[20] Clark S, Petersen JE, Frantz CM, Roose D, Ginn J, Rosenberg Daneri D. Teaching systems thinking to 4th and 5th graders using Environmental Dashboard display technology. PLoS One. 2017 Apr;12(4):e0176322.

[21] Grant DM. Toward sustainable literacies: From representational to recreational rhetorics. Rhetorics, Literacies, and Narratives of Sustainability. United States: Taylor and Francis, University of Northern Iowa; 2011. pp. 202–16.