A Study on Special Education Research Trends Related to Textbooks

Abstract

In order to provide basic data for the future development of special education-related textbooks, 187 papers were selected as search words for “special education” and “textbook” by the RISS(services operated by the Korean Educational Research and Information Service) to find out the frequency of works by period, disability area, textbook, and research method, while looking at language network analysis for three languages, groups, and so on. Research shows that the number of studies by period of curriculum in frequency analysis has gradually increased, but has decreased again since the revised 2015 curriculum period. The intellectual disabilities categories were the most common in the areas of disability, while content analysis was the most common in the Korean language and in music and research methods. In the case of language network analysis using keyword density, basic education courses, special schools, and primary schools were more central, and the study group, high schools, the blind students were relatively inactive. Based on this conclusion, the need for expanding the scope of textbook research from the perspective of guaranteeing the right to study by special education subjects, interest in the area of research alienation, and a re-discussion of the form of textbook use and method of provision were proposed.

Trend Analysis of Individualized Learning -Using the Keyword Network-

“…"Education" appeared the most at 27. It was followed by "Class" (25), "Individualized Learning" (24), "Learning" (22), "Curriculum" (21), "Research" (19), "Utilization" (16), "Individualization" (16), "Flipped Learning" (14), "Analysis" (14), "e-Learning" (14) were next in order. By calculating TF-IDF, the top 10 keywords were "Class" (45.67), "Curriculum" (43.43), "Education" (42.54), "Individualized Learning" (42.…”

“…By calculating TF-IDF, the top 10 keywords were "Class" (45.67), "Curriculum" (43.43), "Education" (42.54), "Individualized Learning" (42. 19), "Flipped Learning" (39.99), "Learning" (38.67), "Science" (37.13), "e-Learning" (33.41), "Program" (32.09), and "Individualization" (31.70). Of these, "Curriculum", "Flipped Learning", "Science", and "Program" had a higher ranking on the TF-IDF compared to the TF ranking.…”

“…Degree centrality refers to the degree to which one keyword is connected to others, and the greater the value of the centrality, the greater the influence of the word on other words [18]. Closeness centrality is an index that indicates how much the keyword depends on other keywords, and the larger the closeness centrality value, the closer the distance from other keywords, and the more information about the keyword is transmitted through other keywords [19]. A high degree of betweenness centrality means that it is located between different keywords and acts as a mediator between adjacent concepts and keywords [20].…”