Mapping Global Trends and Emerging Themes in Learning Evaluation for Quality Education (SDG 4): A Bibliometric Analysis

The worldwide pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): especially on provisioning for quality education under SDG 4, calls for the systematic restructuring of education. It is argued that if pertinent learning outcomes are not articulated, then there is an inherent risk of monitoring and evaluation being pointless [1]. It has been noted that relevance in evaluation rests on the participant’s role and context, hence the need to factor engagement and diversity of context has been stressed [2]. Competency-based education that combines both soft and technical skill components is responsive to the evolving educational demands [3]. Assessments need to be more expansive and evaluative so that knowledge in its acquisition is confronted and critical reasoning, cooperation, and creative problem-solving are integrated [4].

The design of inclusive and supportive pedagogical frameworks requires careful attention and nurturing. Professional learning opportunities, for instance, influence teacher practice and, therefore, enhance student engagement and achievement across a wide range of classrooms [5]. Moreover, technology enhances personalized instruction [6] and provides more access to information, enabling students to collaborate [7]. Environmental integration within pedagogy is vital for equipping learners to cope with numerous challenges of the twenty-first century [8]. Thus, institutions are urged to develop sustainable values and behaviors that shape learners as active citizens of the world [9].

Assessment continues to be important in establishing the equity and efficiency of any given intervention. Self-assessments, for example, allow learners to think about and recognize their learning gaps, which enhances their performance [9]. Focused assessments have been shown to effectively measure retention and transfer, providing valuable data for curricular enhancement [10]. The use of inclusive practices helps to foster equity in education and responds to the UNESCO call for quality [11]. The evidence-based approaches proposed in the student-centered quality frameworks have their merits [12]. Education for sustainability warrants appreciation for more sophisticated evaluative frameworks that enhance the quality of education [13]. Effectiveness also depends on social and cultural dimensions, which have been shown to be vital through the use of culturally relevant pedagogy [14-16].

Sustainability’s effective integration within educational frameworks is still obstructed by institutional inertia [17]. There is a growing recognition that putting effective pedagogical frameworks in place that facilitate active engagement with sustainability by educators is critical [18]. There is a particular call directed at higher education institutions to advance more holistic approaches to align with the outcomes of SDG 4 [19]. Transformative learning approaches, in particular, enable personal development and active engagement with sustainability challenges [20]. There is also a positive relationship between the integration of sustainability within the curriculum and student attitudes and self-efficacy, suggesting that students will embrace the role of change agents [21].

E-learning platforms promoting sustainability are considered to be adaptive culture fostering environments [22]. Assessment and evaluative frameworks in secondary schooling are important to align curriculum and assess education frameworks to sustainability on a global level [23]. Alongside curriculum refinement, there is a demand for relevant professional development for teachers [2, 4]. Moreover, the social responsibility of a professional is fostered through sustainability in the curriculum of higher education [12]. Alongside this, the equity and quality of education is achieved through inclusive teacher-student dynamics with collaborative learning [24] and experiential learning that addresses gender equity in STEM [25]. New evaluative mechanisms are on the rise, including automated feedback [26] and AI-driven feedback frameworks [27-30]. These tools are promising with regard to advancing the SDG 4 goals of equity, inclusion, and the transformation of evaluative frameworks and education.

This review aimed to: (1) Examine how scholarly publications on Learning Evaluation and the SDGs have evolved in their distribution over time. (2) Identify the areas of Learning Evaluation and the SDGs that are gaining the most interest and analyze how interest in these areas has changed over time. (3) Determine the most impactful and highly active contributors, etc of Learning Evaluation and the SDGs. (4) Map the primary knowledge domains within Learning Evaluation and the SDGs. (5) Highlight the most notable newly emerging expectations in Learning Evaluation and the SDGs.

To address the conceptual fluidity present in the literature, this study raises a fundamental question: What precisely is meant by "learning evaluation" in the context of education and sustainable development? The terms "learning evaluation", "assessment", and "education evaluation" are often used interchangeably in educational research, yet they carry distinct connotations depending on theoretical framing and practical application. For this study, "learning evaluation" is operationally defined as the systematic process of collecting, analyzing, and interpreting evidence to determine the effectiveness, equity, and sustainability of learning processes and outcomes, particularly as aligned with the objectives of SDG 4 (Quality Education). This definition encompasses both formative and summative approaches, integrates learner-centered and system-level perspectives, and emphasizes the importance of contextual and cultural responsiveness. This operational definition informs the search strategy, keyword selection, data coding, and thematic analysis throughout the study. Consistency in terminology is maintained to ensure analytical coherence and to align with bibliometric conventions while addressing the interdisciplinary scope of the field.

3.1 Publication trends

As depicted in Figure 2, research advancement in this area can be classified into three distinct phases. The first phase, covering the years 2001 to 2007, was marked by an annual research output of no more than three publications. In the development phase 2008 to 2017, there was a marked increase to more than 5 publications per year, effectively doubling output of the preceding phase. Since 2018, the output of studies in this area has remained consistently above 5 publications per year, with a notable increase in 2024 when the total reached 39 publications. Considering the 2025 data collection deadline, a projection of 24 publications places this field poised for rapid advancement. The data indicate that the use of evaluations for learning, as well as the SDGs, has emerged within the scholarly discourse in education, signifying its potential as a fresh and vibrant area of investigation.

2.png

Figure 2. Distribution of paper publications

In Figure 3, a detailed bibliometric analysis on the evaluation of learning against the SDGs is presented alongside the temporal distribution of publications. Based on the data, a relevant article appeared in the Scopus database for the first time in 2001, and it is projected that by 2025 there will be a total of 198 documents published. This data signifies that there is a 14.16% increase in research output for every year, which showcases the importance of learning evaluation in relation to SDGs. Additionally, there were 877 authors for the documents, which on average means 4.52 co-authors per document. This showcases strong collaborative research networks. Further, the data signifies that there were 825 distinct keywords from the documents highlighting the broad and diverse research topics. This emphasizes that the research conducted on the learning evaluation in relation to SDGs is a growing field featuring diverse, rapidly advancing international collaboration.

3.png

Figure 3. Main information about data

Figure 4 shows the connectivity between countries with keywords and authors. Based on the analysis using the Three-Field Plot, it is clear that Spain is the most active research performer on this topic, with major input from China, the UK, Australia, and the USA. The term “higher education” is the most prevalent as a keyword, suggesting that research activity on the SDGs is primarily centered on higher education. Moreover, “medical education” also appears as a keyword which suggests the relevant research is important within the context of SDGs. Other education related keywords, “education for sustainable development,” “curriculum development,” and “evaluation” also dominate the results which suggests that the focus of research on learning and evaluation pertaining to SDGs is overwhelming.

4.png

Figure 4. Three-field plot

3.2 Trending topics and evolution

The outcomes of the word cloud analysis of Keywords Plus are presented in Figure 5, where the font size indicates the rate of keyword usage. The terms “sustainable development,” “learning,” “education,” and “sustainable development goal” are acknowledged as the most frequently utilized keywords. Also notable are “teaching,” “curriculum,” “student,” and words pertaining to “higher education” and “medical education,” which also rank as frequently occurring keywords.

5.png

Figure 5. Word cloud (by keywords plus)

Figure 6 presents and showing how research hotspots and directions in learning evaluation and the SDGs have evolved over time. Early research (before 2015) was dominated by terms such as professional development, total quality management, program development, and interinstitutional relations, reflecting a focus on institutional capacity building, quality assurance, and program evaluation frameworks. Following the 2015 launch of the SDGs, a transition occurred with keywords such as sustainable development, education program, capacity building, and curricula signaling a shift toward embedding sustainability principles into educational practices. Between 2018 and 2023, pedagogical and learner-centered terms such as teaching, learning, students, and sustainable development goal became increasingly prominent, alongside domain-specific themes like medical education, training, and clinical competence, indicating the integration of sustainability-oriented evaluation across disciplines. Most notably, the rise of artificial intelligence as a high-frequency keyword highlights a new frontier, reflecting the technological turn in evaluation practices with implications for personalization, scalability, and real-time feedback. Overall, the trend analysis illustrates a thematic evolution from foundational institutional concerns, to sustainability-centered reforms, and most recently to technology-driven innovations, underscoring the field’s responsiveness to global policy agendas and technological advancements while stressing the importance of ensuring equity, cultural sensitivity, and alignment with the transformative goals of SDG 4.

6.png

Figure 6. Trend topics (by author’s keywords)

Figure 7 depicts the changing conceptual emphasis regarding the growth of research keywords from 2001-2012 to 2013-2025 in learning evaluation vis-a-vis the SDGs. In the earlier period of 2001-2012, the prevailing thematic focus centered on training, sustainable development, as well as curriculum and students, which indicated a primary focus on instructional capacity building, curricular development, and student participation in the sustainability paradigm. In the subsequent period (2013–2025), these themes evolved into more specialized and diversified strands, with training and students strongly converging into the broader concept of learning, while curriculum and students also branched into medical education, indicating a disciplinary expansion of evaluation practices into professional and clinical contexts. Sustainable development persisted as a central theme, demonstrating continuity and consolidation as a core intellectual anchor while also expanding its connections with learning-oriented and sector-specific domains. This thematic trajectory suggests a field that has moved from foundational educational concerns toward applied and interdisciplinary frameworks, where sustainability remains a stable core but is increasingly articulated through learning-centered paradigms and domain-specific applications such a medical education. The results highlight the dynamic capacity of the field to adapt to global priorities and evolving educational demands, while reinforcing the centrality of sustainability as the guiding principle of research and practice in educational evaluation.

7.png

Figure 7. Thematic evolution

3.3 Productive sources of publication

The 10 most productive contributors in the field of Learning Evaluation and the SDGs are listed in Figure 8. The most productive was “Sustainability (Switzerland)”, which published 52 works. “International Review of Education” published 5 related works and is in second place. “BMC Medical Education”, “IEEE Access”, “International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health”, “International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education”, and “Medical Teacher” contributed 4 articles each and shared third place. “Frontiers in Education” contributed 3 articles, while “Annals of Global Health” and “Buildings” contributed 2 and 3 articles, respectively.

8.png

Figure 8. Top ten productive sources of publication

Reveal some trends which are summarized in Table 2. “Sustainability (Switzerland)” clearly stands out as the most influential journal in the field, leading the h-index with 20, g-index with 35, and m-index = 1,538. “International Review of Education” also remains notable as the second most influential journal with h-index 4, g-index 5, and a total of 153 citations.

Table 2. Top ten most influential sources’ local impact in the field

3.4 Most influential documents

The citation analysis of the most influential documents in the field highlights a small set of highly cited works that have shaped the theoretical and methodological development of learning evaluation in relation to the SDGs [17], with 374 citations, emerges as the most impactful publication, offering a comprehensive framework for integrating sustainable development into educational evaluation, and serving as a foundational reference for subsequent scholarship [35], cited 356 times, has advanced critical pedagogy and transformative learning perspectives, emphasizing the need for education systems to foster not only knowledge acquisition but also values and competencies aligned with sustainability. Giangrande et al. [4], with 141 citations, further reinforced the importance of embedding sustainability into competency-based education, thereby bridging curricular design with evaluative practices. Other highly cited works [21, 36, 37] extend the field by situating evaluation within medical education, teacher training, and environmental pedagogy, reflecting the diversification of contexts where sustainability-oriented evaluation is applied. These influential documents underscore the intellectual anchors of the field, providing theoretical clarity, practical models, and empirical validation for aligning evaluation practices with SDG 4. Their prominence also illustrates how scholarly impact is concentrated in works that combine conceptual innovation with direct implications for pedagogy, curriculum, and institutional reform. The enduring influence of these documents signals their pivotal role in guiding research agendas and in shaping policy-oriented discussions on inclusive and sustainability-driven education.

As displayed in Figure 9, the most cited countries concerning the evaluation of learning in relation to the SDGs are illustrative of citation influence and scholarly impact in global and transnational contexts.  The United Kingdom is in the lead with 695 citations, followed by Spain (428), the Netherlands (367), and the United States (343). These countries demonstrate strong leadership in shaping relevant policy scholarship and intellectual discourse. China (300) and Brazil (156) emerged as contributors, showcasing the impact of research from emerging economies. On the other hand, Australia (108), Canada (94), Austria (77), and Mexico (74) demonstrate persistent citation influence, albeit to a lesser degree than other countries. All in all, the figure shows advanced economies are the primary drivers of citation influence, with emerging economies from the Global South becoming more visible. This highlights the slowly widening structure of research leadership in educational evaluation and sustainability.

9.png

Figure 9. Most cited countries

3.5 Productive authors and affiliations

Figure 10 illustrates the production trends of the most influential and productive authors in the field of learning evaluation and the SDGs, highlighting both temporal activity and scholarly impact. Authors such as Sánchez-Martín J. (3 documents), Baena-Morales S. (2 documents), and Blanco-Salas J. (2 documents) demonstrate consistent productivity since 2020, with multiple contributions that have gained growing recognition. Dieck-Assad G. (2 documents) and González-Gómez D. (2 documents) appear as emerging contributors, with publications concentrated in the early 2020s. Including Lee H.-C. (2 documents) and Liu W.-H. (2 documents): show sustained engagement since 2016, while Wang Y. (3 documents) and Acosta-Vargas P. (2 documents) extend the field’s global reach through their recent works.

10.png

Figure 10. Top ten productive authors

Table 3, the ranking of the top ten published authors is displayed. Sánchez-Martín J heads the list with h-index and g-index of 3. In the total citations, González-Gómez D and Jeong JS are the leaders with 52 citations, followed by Sánchez-Martín J with (TC = 43) and then Blanco-Salas J with (TC = 40).

Table 3. Top ten most authors’ local impact

Figure 11 demonstrates that Queens University Belfast is the foremost institution contributing to the evaluation of the learning process and the SDGs, having published (N = 13). The University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU comes next with 11 publications. The remaining positions in the top seven are held by Universidad De Extremadura with (N = 10): Bond University (N = 9): University of Rwanda (N = 9): University of Wollongong (N = 9): the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research with (N = 8): Maynooth University (N = 8): Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (N = 7): and Office of Public Health Scientific Services (N = 7).

11.png

Figure 11. Top ten most productive affiliations

The identification and analysis of the most impactful journal articles systematically provide researchers with substantial information on the foundational works which have contributed to the evolution of research in the domain, aiding in grasping the key ideas, concepts, theories, methods, and the socio-intellectual history of the research. This comprehension is fundamental in addressing emerging challenges for advancing new innovations and strategies.

Table 4 highlights the ten most globally cited papers in the field of learning evaluation within the context of the SDGs: underscoring the intellectual anchors that have shaped the trajectory of research. Kioupi and Voulvoulis [17], with 374 citations, provide one of the most influential frameworks for embedding sustainability in education, while Kopnina [35], cited 356 times, advances critical and transformative pedagogical approaches. Giangrande et al. [4], with 141 citations, emphasize competency-based education as a pathway to integrate sustainability skills into curricula, whereas De Carvalho-Filho et al. [36] contribute 136 citations by bridging sustainability with medical education and professional training. Lameiras-Fernández et al. [21] (88 citations) and El-Adaway et al. [38] (62 citations) extend these debates into specific disciplinary contexts such as teacher education and engineering. Saxena et al. [39] (62 citations) and Finnveden  et al. [40] (55 citations) enrich the discussion by linking sustainable practices with organizational and institutional strategies, while Yan and Chiou [41] (55 citations) and Foster and Stagl [37] (50 citations) strengthen the evidence base on curriculum innovation and environmental education.

Table 4. Top ten most globally cited papers

3.6 Network analysis

Figure 12 presents the co-citation analysis of references concerning learning evaluation within the context of SDGs as a clustered network. The red cluster, with the most prominent words sustainable development, student, learning, higher education, and sustainability, reveals the focus of the framework evaluation research which captures the relation between sustainability oriented reform and curriculum integration. The green cluster with human, procedures, adult, child, and female as its nodes reflect the studies which have been concerned with the demographic, social, and human development aspects of evaluation, showing the various populations within the learning evaluation. The blue cluster which has as its keywords program evaluation, systematic review, organization and management, global health, focuses on the methodological and policy oriented strands of the field, which have integrated educational evaluation at the institutional and cross-sectoral levels. The yellow cluster associates motivation, surveys, questionnaires, and medical students as applied evaluation in a professional and discipline-centered context. The red cluster is anchored by Kioupi and Voulvoulis [17] and Kopnina [35], who framed sustainable education and developed techniques for accelerated learning. Giangrande et al. [4] add to the red cluster with curriculum integration which contributes to competency-based education and sustainability. de Carvalho-Filho et al. [36] associate the yellow cluster with linking evaluation to medical education.

12.png

Figure 12. Network visualization

Table 5 presents the top ten countries with the highest number of corresponding authors contributing to research in this field. The distribution reflects both the geographical concentration of scholarly productivity and the global research capacity on the topic. As shown, certain countries consistently dominate in terms of publication output, indicating established research infrastructures, robust international collaboration networks, and sustained investment in the field. This overview highlights not only the global reach of the field but also the disparities across regions.

Table 5. Top ten most productive corresponding authors’ countries in the field

The thematic network reveals four major clusters: the red cluster focuses on integrating sustainable development within higher education; the green cluster highlights human-centered empirical research in medical and psychological learning; the blue cluster emphasizes evidence-based program evaluation in health and education; and the yellow cluster centers on experiential learning and curriculum development aimed at fostering learner motivation and engagement (see Figure 7).

Red cluster keywords: This cluster highlights the intersection of sustainable development and higher education. Prominent terms include sustainable development, learning, students, critical thinking, problem solving, and higher education. The cluster reflects an emphasis on embedding sustainability and cognitive skill development within university-level curricula and pedagogy.

Green cluster keywords: This cluster centers on empirical research involving human subjects, particularly in medical and psychological educational contexts. Terms such as human, female, child, young adult, and medical student suggest a focus on learning processes shaped by demographic and behavioral variables. The cluster is closely tied to clinical trials and educational psychology.

Blue cluster keywords: This cluster is concerned with the design and assessment of educational programs, especially within healthcare and public health. Key terms include program evaluation, systematic review, nursing education, and developing countries. It emphasizes the integration of evidence-based evaluations to inform effective training and health education initiatives.

Yellow cluster keywords: This smaller cluster focuses on learner-centered approaches such as experiential learning, curriculum development, motivation, and awareness. It reflects educational research centered on active learning methodologies in early education and professional training.