@article {, title = {Evidence syntheses in educational technology research: What is not published in English is not visible? A tertiary mapping review}, journal = {Review of Education }, volume = {13}, year = {2025}, abstract = {

Evidence syntheses, such as systematic reviews, aimto summarise the current state of research in a field,often using the publication language of a study as acriterion for inclusion or exclusion. However, this hasserious implications for capturing evidence from awider range of geographical areas, and the potentialfor linguistic bias. In order to explore this issue, atrilingual tertiary mapping review of 446 evidencesyntheses within the field of educational technology(EdTech) and published in English, Spanish andGerman was undertaken, analysing the frequencyof multi- and monolingual evidence syntheses,reasons for language choice by research teams,and the composition of research teams in multi-and monolingual evidence syntheses. Items wereincluded if they were a form of evidence synthesiswith an explicit method section, indexed within ERIC,Scopus, Web of Science, Dialnet, FIS- Bildung, orGoogle Scholar, education-related, and publishedbetween 1983 and May 2022. The results showed thatonly eight languages were considered in publishedsyntheses, only five languages were used to constructsearch strings, most evidence syntheses includedresearch published in English without explaining why,and multilingual research team composition did notpredict multilingual evidence syntheses. The findingssuggest the need to address publication languagesnot only as a formal criterion but as an integral aspect\ of methodological approach, influencing the contentand scope of syntheses in educational research.

}, keywords = {educational technology; linguistic bias; meta review; publication language; research methods; research synthesis; review overviews: systematic review}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rev3.70022}, author = {Bedenlier, Svenja and Buntins, Katja and Bond, Melissa and H{\"a}ndel, Marion and Mar{\'\i}n, Victoria I.} } @article {, title = {Invisible borders in educational technology research? A comparative analysis}, journal = {Educational technology. Research and Development}, year = {2023}, month = {2023/02/07}, abstract = {

Educational research is reflective of the nature and structure of national and regional education systems and their historical evolution. Educational technology research, as an area within educational research, reflects this case particularly prominently. Although individual countries and regions have varying research traditions, the publication of research in English as the scientific lingua franca can lead to missing nuances in terminology, which is often not reflected upon. Despite this, the exploration of research from different countries can still uncover diverse topical clusters. This study aims to identify the research topics in educational technology research in three countries (Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom), each with their own research traditions, through the terms used. To this end, a bibliometric analysis of 3034 article abstracts and keywords from 29 English-language Web of Science journals in the field of education and educational research was conducted, with a focus on educational technology. In addition, the quantitative findings are comparatively analysed by considering the corresponding cultural clusters. Main findings include diverse research foci in the three countries, also showing that distinct research traditions are still present, despite using English as lingua franca. Therefore, research articles written in English by non-English authors often do not reflect the same meanings in each country, despite using the same words. The conclusions reflect upon the need to establish ways of understanding the traditions behind those\ research articles and build collaborative systems to illustrate nuances in this research.

}, isbn = {1556-6501}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10195-3}, author = {Mar{\'\i}n, Victoria I. and Buntins, Katja and Bedenlier, Svenja and Melissa Bond} } @article {, title = {Methodological Approaches to Evidence Synthesis in Educational Technology: A Tertiary Systematic Mapping Review}, journal = {Medienp{\"a}dagogik. Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung}, year = {2023}, abstract = {

Methoden der Evidenzsynthese werden in den Sozialwissenschaften immer beliebter, auch im Bereich der Bildungstechnologie, wo die Menge der durchgef\ührten Sekund\ärforschung exponentiell zugenommen hat. W\ährend \Übersichten einen wertvollen Einblick in den Stand des Feldes geben k\önnen, wurden Fragen zur methodischen Strenge und Transparenz aufgeworfen. In dieser terti\ären \Übersichtsarbeit wird daher untersucht, wie transparent und reproduzierbar die Berichterstattung \über die Methoden der Evidenzsynthese im Bereich der Bildungstechnologie in den verschiedenen Arten von \Übersichtsarbeiten ist. Zu diesem Zweck wurde eine kritische Analyse einer Stichprobe von Evidenzsynthesen in drei Sprachen (Englisch, Deutsch und Spanisch) durchgef\ührt. Systematic Review, Meta-Analyse und Literaturreview als die am h\äufigsten verwendeten Review-Typen wurden f\ür die weitere Analyse. In der Stichprobe wurden Indikatoren f\ür die Replizierbarkeit in kritischen Phasen der \Überpr\üfung identifiziert und nach \Überpr\üfungstyp (Forschungsfrage, Suchstrategie, Datenextraktion und Synthese) analysiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die methodische Transparenz bei der Datenextraktion und -synthese erheblich verbessert werden kann, wobei bestimmte Arten von \Übersichten bei den Indikatoren schlechter abschneiden als andere. Es werden Empfehlungen zur Verbesserung der methodischen Transparenz und Strenge der Evidenzsynthese im Bereich der Bildungstechnologie gegeben.

}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/54/2023.12.20.X}, author = {Buntins, Katja and Bedenlier, Svenja and Mar{\'\i}n, Victoria I. and H{\"a}ndel, Marion and Melissa Bond} }