Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)
Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

1.6519

Impact

GScholar

16

H-Index

Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

Evaluating Research Trends and Scholarly Impact in Blended Learning and Learning Management Systems: A Bibliometric Study (2003–2025)

Ishaq Ishaq ORCID
Muhammadiyah University of Makassar ROR
Indonesia
Syamsidar Saleng ORCID
Muhammadiyah University of Makassar ROR
Indonesia
syamsidars@unismuh.ac.id
Hartono Bancong ORCID
Muhammadiyah University of Makassar ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aims to identify global research trends, thematic evolution, and collaboration patterns in blended learning and learning management systems (LMS) from 2003 to 2025 using a bibliometric approach.

    Methodology:.A total of 890 peer-reviewed documents indexed in Scopus were analyzed using VOSviewer (v1.6.19) and Biblioshiny (R-based). Bibliometric mapping, keyword co-occurrence, and network visualization techniques were employed following systematic review procedures.

    Main Findings: The study identified three distinct research phases: initiation (2003–2008), rapid growth (2009–2019), and stabilization (2020–2025). Research focus shifted from technical implementation to learner-centered pedagogy emphasizing engagement, curriculum integration, and learning analytics. Emerging themes include artificial intelligence and adult learning, while Computers & Education remains the most influential source.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study provides a two-decade bibliometric mapping highlighting thematic evolution and collaboration networks in blended learning and LMS research. It advances understanding by identifying emerging areas such as AI and lifelong learning that inform future directions in digital education research.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “Evaluating Research Trends and Scholarly Impact in Blended Learning and Learning Management Systems: A Bibliometric Study (2003–2025)”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1324–1340, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i4.2099.

    More Citation Formats

  • 273
    Abstract views
    172
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. U. Rahmi, B. R. Fajri, and A. Azrul, “Effectiveness of interactive content with H5P for Moodle-Learning management system in blended learning,” Journal of Learning for Development, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 66–81, 2024, doi: 10.56059/jl4d.v11i1.1135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v11i1.1135
    2. H. Nasution, M. T. Sembiring, G. Putra, I. Pamungkas, and H. T. Irawan, “A competence of graduate colleges to meet the industry 4.0: Literature review,” In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2482, No. 1, p. 090011). AIP Publishing LLC, 2023. doi: 10.1063/5.0110947. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0110947
    3. N. H. Zakaria, N. S. Mansor, H. Husni, and F. Mohammed, Computing and Informatics, vol. 2002. Springer Singapore, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9589-9
    4. W. Gunawan, S. Suharnomo, A. Praptapa, and T. Rusdarti, “The effectiveness of hybrid learning using a learning management system,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 121–136, 2023.
    5. A. Wibowo and Y. A. Nurohman, “Bibliometric analysis of learning management system trends during COVID-19 pandemic,” Jurnal Ilmiah Sekolah Dasar, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 617–623, 2023.
    6. S. Munawaroh and J. B. Kristiadi, “Bibliometric analysis of the learning management system in education using VOSviewer and Biblioshiny,” International Journal of Education and Learning (IJoL), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 165–174, 2023.
    7. D. A. Kurniawan, A. Astalini, D. Darmaji, T. Tanti, and S. Maryani, “Innovative learning: Gender perception of e-module linear equations in mathematics and physics,” Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), vol. 4, no. 2, pp, 92-106, 2022, doi: 10.23917/ijolae.v4i2.16610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v4i2.16610
    8. T. Tanti, W. Utami, D. Deliza, and M. Jahanifar, “Investigation in vocation high school for attitude and motivation students in learning physics subject”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 479-490, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452
    9. T. Tanti, D. Darmaji, A. Astalini, D. A. Kurniawan, and M. Iqbal, “Analysis of user responses to the application of web-based assessment on character assessment,” Journal of education technology, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 356-364, 2021, doi: 10.23887/jet.v5i3.33590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/jet.v5i3.33590
    10. A. Segura-Robles, M. E. Parra-González, and M. Á. Gallardo-Vigil, “Bibliometric and collaborative network analysis on active methodologies in education,” Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 259–274, 2020, doi: 10.7821/naer.2020.7.575. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2020.7.575
    11. T. Tanti, D. Deliza, and S. Hartina, “The effectiveness of using smartphones as mobile-mini labs in improving students’ beliefs in physics,” JIPF (Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Fisika), vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 387-394, 2024, doi: 10.26737/jipf.v9i3.5185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26737/jipf.v9i3.5185
    12. M. Aria and C. Cuccurullo, “bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis,” J Informetr, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 959–975, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
    13. M. Aria, C. Cuccurullo, D’Aniello, M. Misuraca, and M. Spano, “Comparative Science Mapping: A Novel Conceptual Structure Analysis with Metadata,” Scientometrics, vol. 129, pp. 7055–7081, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s11192-024-05161-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05161-6
    14. U. Terton, I. Visser, C. Davis, K. Sutherland, A. Stubbs, and M. O’Neil, “Student’s perspectives concerning the use of social media as communication and educational tools in a tertiary environment,” in CSEDU 2018 - Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, B. M. McLaren, R. Reilly, S. Zvacek, and J. Uhomoibhi, Eds., SciTePress, 2018, pp. 347–352. doi: 10.5220/0006530403470352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5220/0006530403470352
    15. N. J. V Eck and L. Waltman, “Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer,” Scientometrics, vol. 111, pp. 1053–1070, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7
    16. A. R. Nanda, Nurnawaty, A. Mansida, and H. Bancong, “A bibliometric analysis of trends in rainfall-runoff modeling techniques for urban flood mitigation (2005–2024),” Results in Engineering, vol. 26, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2025.104927
    17. H. Bancong, “The past and present of thought experiments’ research at glancy: Bibliometric review and analysis,” Discover Education, vol. 3, no. 142, Aug. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00246-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00246-z
    18. M. Visser, N. J. van Eck, and L. Waltman, “ Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic,” Quantitative Science Studies (QSS), vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 20–41, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00112
    19. Z. Osiński, “The usefulness of data from web of science and scopus databases for analyzing the state of a scientific discipline: The case of library and information science,” Zagadnienia Informacji Naukowej – Studia Informacyjne, vol. 56, no. 2 (112), pp. 30–51, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36702/zin.469
    20. M. Kumpulainen and M. Seppänen, “Combining Web of Science and Scopus datasets in citation-based literature study,” Scientometrics, vol. 127, no. 10, pp. 5613–5631, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11192-022-04475-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04475-7
    21. E. I. Wilder and W. H. Walters, “Using conventional bibliographic databases for social science research: Web of science and scopus are not the only options,” Scholarly Assessment Reports, vol. 3, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.29024/SAR.36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29024/sar.36
    22. N. K. Ibrahim et al., “Medical students’ acceptance and perceptions of e-learning during the Covid-19 closure time in King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah,” J Infect Public Health, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 17–23, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jiph.2020.11.007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2020.11.007
    23. A.-N. Diep, C. Zhu, K. Struyven, and Y. Blieck, “Who or what contributes to student satisfaction in different blended learning modalities?,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 473–489, 2017, doi: 10.1111/bjet.12431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12431
    24. M. Saqr and A. Alamro, “The role of social network analysis as a learning analytics tool in online problem based learning,” BMC Med Educ, vol. 19, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1599-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1599-6
    25. R. A. Green, L. Y. Whitburn, A. Zacharias, G. Byrne, and D. L. Hughes, “The relationship between student engagement with online content and achievement in a blended learning anatomy course,” Anat Sci Educ, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 471–477, 2018, doi: 10.1002/ase.1761. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1761
    26. S. Ghazal, H. Al-Samarraie, and H. Aldowah, “‘i am Still Learning’: Modeling LMS Critical Success Factors for Promoting Students’ Experience and Satisfaction in a Blended Learning Environment,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 77179–77201, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2879677. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2879677
    27. M. C. S. Manzanares, M. C. E. Llamazares, and Á. A. González, “Effectiveness of blended learning in nursing education,” Int J Environ Res Public Health, vol. 17, no. 5, 2020, doi: 10.3390/ijerph17051589. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051589
    28. A. E. Sadik and W. A. Abdulmonem, “Improvement in Student Performance and Perceptions through a Flipped Anatomy Classroom: Shifting from Passive Traditional to Active Blended Learning,” Anat Sci Educ, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 482–490, 2021, doi: 10.1002/ase.2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.2015
    29. J. G. Ruiz, M. J. Mintzer, and S. B. Issenberg, “Learning objects in medical education,” Med Teach, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 599–605, 2006, doi: 10.1080/01421590601039893. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590601039893
    30. M. Saqr, U. Fors, and M. Tedre, “How the study of online collaborative learning can guide teachers and predict students’ performance in a medical course,” BMC Med Educ, vol. 18, no. 1, 2018, doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1126-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1126-1
    31. K. M. Scott, L. Baur, and J. Barrett, “Evidence-Based principles for using technology-enhanced learning in the continuing professional development of health professionals,” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 61–66, 2017, doi: 10.1097/CEH.0000000000000146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000146
    32. L. Price, and A. Kirkwood, “Informed design of educational technology for teaching and learning? Towards an evidence-informed model of good practice,” Technology, Pedagogy and Education, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 325-347, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2014.942749
    33. X. Xie, Y. Li, Z. Ning, E. Purwanto, N. Li, and K. H. Wong, “SwiftQuiz - An interactive module to help teachers swiftly create questions and get rich feedback,” in 2023 3rd International Conference on Educational Technology, ICET 2023, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2023, pp. 76–80. doi: 10.1109/ICET59358.2023.10424127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICET59358.2023.10424127
    34. L. J. Hadjileontiadis and C. Skianis, “Intelligent LMS design and student performance: A machine learning approach,” Educ Inf Technol (Dordr), vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 4019–4037, 2023.
    35. B. Bervell, I. N. Umar, M. Masood, J. A. Kumar, J. K. Armah, and B. A. Somuah, “Promoting voluntary use behavior of learning management systems among tutors for blended learning in distance higher education,” Contemp Educ Technol, vol. 14, no. 4, 2022, doi: 10.30935/cedtech/12193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12193
    36. C. M. Tang and L. Y. Chaw, “Digital literacy and effective learning in a blended learning environment,” in Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Learning, ECEL, M. Cubric and A. Jefferies, Eds., Academic Conferences Limited, 2015, pp. 601–610. [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84977151316&partnerID=40&md5=8b12c83ab9607a55596b8c0a050fa6bf
    37. A. Pardo, F. Han, and R. A. Ellis, “Combining University student self-regulated learning indicators and engagement with online learning events to Predict Academic Performance,” IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 82–92, 2017, doi: 10.1109/TLT.2016.2639508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2016.2639508
    38. A. Pardo and C. D. Kloos, “Combining Web 2.0 technology and problem-based learning in a blended learning environment,” Int J Contin Eng Educ Life Long Learn, vol. 19, no. 2–3, pp. 222–231, 2009, doi: 10.1504/IJCEELL.2009.025029. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCEELL.2009.025029
    39. F. Han and R. Ellis, “Explaining learning achievement in student experience of blended learning: What can a sociomaterial perspective contribute?,” in ASCILITE 2017 - Conference Proceedings - 34th International Conference of Innovation, Practice and Research in the Use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary Education, H. Partridge, K. Davis, and J. Thomas, Eds., Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), 2019, pp. 89–94. [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85072046453&partnerID=40&md5=be6de8f0398a726e776b4e540f99ec19
    40. H. Al-Samarraie and N. Saeed, “A systematic review of cloud computing tools for collaborative learning: Opportunities and challenges to the blended-learning environment,” Comput Educ, vol. 124, pp. 77–91, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.016
    41. B. Bervell, I. N. Umar, J. A. Kumar, B. Asante Somuah, and V. Arkorful, “Blended learning acceptance scale (BLAS) in distance higher education: Toward an initial development and validation,” Sage Open, vol. 11, no. 3, 2021, doi: 10.1177/21582440211040073. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211040073
    42. M. Castro, A. Colmenar, and J. Peire, “Future of distance education through EHEA,” in Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, 2008, p. F4D1-F4D6. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2008.4720339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2008.4720339
    43. D. Foung and J. Chen, “Discovering disciplinary differences: blending data sources to explore the student online behaviors in a University English course,” Inf Discov Deliv, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 106–114, 2019, doi: 10.1108/IDD-10-2018-0053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-10-2018-0053
    44. X. M. Vo, C. Do-Hong, T. H. L. Do, T. M. T. Ha, and C. T. Vu, “An examination of blended learning in higher education over a two-decade period (2003–2022): Insights derived from Scopus database,” European Journal of Educational Research, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1821–1840, 2024, doi: 10.12973/eu-jer.13.4.1821. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.13.4.1821
    45. N. S. Alotaibi, “The Impact of AI and LMS integration on the future of higher education: Opportunities, challenges, and strategies for transformation,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 16, no. 23, 2024, doi: 10.3390/su162310357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su162310357
    46. A. A. Ruiz-Cuadrado, M. G. López, and S. Caballero-González, “Twenty-five years of Education and Information Technologies: Insights from a topic modeling-based bibliometric analysis,” Educ Inf Technol (Dordr), vol. 27, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11071-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11071-y
    47. N. Bergdahl, M. Bond, J. Sjöberg, M. Dougherty, and E. Oxley, “Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: A systematic review,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 21, p. 63, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s41239-024-00493-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00493-y
    48. B. Amarathunga, “Blended learning trends and future directions: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis,” International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 147–165, 2024, doi: 10.1108/IJILT-04-2024-0072. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-04-2024-0072
    49. C. Guzmán-Valenzuela, C. Gómez-González, A. Rojas-Murphy Tagle, and A. Lorca-Vyhmeister, “Learning analytics in higher education: A preponderance of analytics but very little learning?,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 18, p. 23, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s41239-021-00258-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00258-x
    50. A. Panday, T. Ray, A. S. Jalandharachari, and G. Gopinath, “Insights into blended learning research: A thorough bibliometric study,” Discover Education, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1-17, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s44217-025-00439-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00439-0