International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE)

Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024, pp. 4030~4045

ISSN: 2252-8822, DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v13i6.29272  4030

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education:

a bibliometric exploration

Jeena Joseph1, Jobin Jose2, Anat Suman Jose3, Gilu G. Ettaniyil4, Joby Cyriac5, Shaiju K. Sebastian5,
Ajesh P. Joseph6
1
Department of Computer Applications, Marian College Kuttikkanam Autonomous, Kerala, India
2
Department of Library Science, Marian College Kuttikkanam Autonomous, Kerala, India
3
Department of Library Science, St. Peter’s College Kolenchery, Kerala, India
4
Department of Library Science, St. Thomas College of Teacher Education, Kottayam, India
5
Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Marian College Kuttikkanam Autonomous, Kerala, India
6
School of Social Work, Marian College Kuttikkanam Autonomous, Kerala, India

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: Outcome-based education (OBE) is a method of educational approach that
focuses on defining specific learning outcomes or objectives that students
Received Nov 16, 2023 should achieve by the end of a course, program, or educational experience
Revised Jun 27, 2024 Instead of merely following a predetermined curriculum, OBE places focus
Accepted Jul 25, 2024 on what learners should be able to accomplish or display as a result of their
learning. A thorough bibliometric analysis utilizing biblioshiny and
VOSviewer is used in this work to dive into the world of outcome-based
Keywords: education. This investigation attempts to offer quantitative insights into the
development, trends, and significant contributors in the area of OBE by
Bibliometric analysis carefully examining a wide range of academic articles. The study
Biblioshiny encompasses a broad temporal range, capturing developments in the field
Educational research from its inception in 1978 to 2023, thereby offering a comprehensive
Outcome-based education overview of its evolution over time. Patterns in research production,
VOSviewer significant works, prolific authors, and collaboration networks appear via the
prism of bibliometric approaches, illuminating the complex OBE landscape.
This study not only contributes to the understanding of OBE’s scholarly
landscape but also underscores the significance of bibliometric approaches
in illuminating trends and shaping future research directions.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Jeena Joseph
Department of Computer Applications, Marian College Kuttikkanam Autonomous
Idukki, Kerala, India
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
Performance criteria of students and identification of results are highly relevant to quality
management in educational systems [1]. The quality of an educational system can be judged normally
through three perspectives: the inputs to the system, what happens within the system, and the outputs from
the system. Those who are interested in the first perspective make their judgment based on economic
rationalism by giving preference to finance, resources, and infrastructure. Those interested in the second
perspective may focus their attention on various processes such as organization, control, and delivery of
education. About the last perspective, the most important factors that affect judgment are the products or
results of education. The last perspective is the key to the outcome-based education (OBE) system. However,
in recent years, western society has been paying greater attention to the outcomes of education for the
evaluation of an education system [2]. Thus, it is directly applicable to outcome-based education. In the

Journal homepage: http://ijere.iaescore.com

Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4031

modern era, a transition from textbook-based learning is essential. Transformational education is the twilight
zone between traditional curriculum and OBE [3].
Outcome-based education is more student-centric. OBE is an educational system that focuses on
enabling all students to apply what they have learned in the classrooms to their lives. In this system, teachers
act as facilitators. They are helping the students to realize and understand why and how the students can learn
content. Moreover, teachers help the students to understand how much they have been able to extract and
understand all these facts [4]. Conventional methods are totally teacher-centric and textbook-bound. There,
the students are passive learners not active. Teachers are rushed to finish their syllabus because in this system
they have more responsibility for their students’ failure and success. The new educational system enhances
the student’s critical thinking and reasoning as it provides freedom to the learners to learn and practice in a
flexible time. Here, the assessment of students will be done daily, using more discussions and other methods
than tests. Students are also evaluated through quiz competitions, projects, internships, seminar group and
discussions [5].
A curriculum focused on student learning outcomes constitutes a paradigm shift in educational
philosophy and practice [6]. The curriculum of OBE has been developed in such a way that the ability and
excellence of the students can be measured. After measuring the ability of each student through various
methods, the curriculum should be revised again to include more subjects in the syllabus as needed to
increase their skill. Unfortunately, many countries including India have started their initial implementation of
the OBE system only after the syllabus revision.
Students in this digital age must survive in a rapidly changing society driven by technology and the
economy. Educational institutions are beginning to understand the fact that the production of professionals is
much more important than just an educational qualification. Employers require university graduates to have
not only the knowledge but also the appropriate skills to be effective and productive in the workplace. To
meet these challenges, universities around the world are considering how to redesign their academic models
[7]. Although many universities have attempted to implement quality assurance systems for their students,
the underlying principles of these systems vary significantly [8]. Various types of quality assurance learning
methods have been tried to be included in the higher education field from time to time all over the world, it is
necessary to reconsider how effectively they bring sustainable quality improvement [9]. Thus, in the present
situation, the modification of curriculum based on OBE in colleges is very difficult. In the case of colleges,
this can be easily implemented only if they get autonomous status. Most of the accreditation councils such as
such as NBA and ABET. focus more on OBE [10]. The learning outcomes are used at all stages of the
student’s academic life.
The limitation of an OBE system is that the current system is unable to evaluate student's social
commitment. There is no system in this new education policy to measure many of the non-educational factors
such as attitude skills and humanism. The Traditional curriculum is revised in the national education policy
with outcome based educational system. Educational institutions are conducting many programs on this topic
to raise awareness among teachers and educationalists. Most of the students have very limited knowledge
about this. Before the implementation of the national education policy, every student must be aware of its
advantages and disadvantages. The higher education department and the government should take the
necessary steps to educate the students about this OBE.
Bibliometric analysis is a quantitative research method that looks for connections, patterns, and
trends in a body of academic literature [11]–[15]. It necessitates looking at bibliographic information,
including citations, publication dates, author affiliations, and keywords, in order to comprehend the make-up
and importance of study fields [16]–[21]. Bibliometric analysis is commonly used to determine the influence
of certain researchers, journals, or organizations, track the evolution of research fields through time, and
identify emerging trends [17], [22]–[24]. With this method, readers may also acquire comprehensive details
on the intellectual, conceptual, and social structures of a particular field as well as information about how
those structures have changed over time [25], [26]. Even if the number of academic publications keeps
increasing, bibliometrics is still an essential tool for understanding the scientific environment and enhancing
the efficacy of information dissemination.
For bibliometric analysis and visualizing bibliographic data, a well-known piece of software called
VOSviewer is utilized [24], [27]. The term “Visualization of Similarities” viewer, or VOSviewer, emphasizes
its capacity to reveal connections and patterns within massive data sets [28]–[31]. To learn more about
research networks, partnerships, and trends, researchers frequently utilize it in cooperation with
bibliometricians and information specialists [28], [32], [33]. The Integrated Development Environment (IDE)
for the prevalent R programming language is called the “RStudio” which provides a simple graphical user
interface for writing, executing, and updating R code [34]–[36]. Researchers frequently use RStudio for data
analysis, data visualization, statistical modeling, and analysis of literature [32], [35]. Interactive web apps
may be created in R directly by using the Shiny package [37]. Employing R code, it enables the development
of interactive and dynamic web-based dashboards, visualizations, and applications [37], [38]. In order to
Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)
4032  ISSN: 2252-8822

create a web application that allows users to dynamically explore the data, discover visualizations, and even
customize analyses, the Shiny program utilizes bibliometric data [15], [39]–[41].
The research objectives of this bibliometric analysis on OBE includes:
− Identifying key contributors: Identify the most prominent authors, organizations, and nations in the OBE
domain.
− Mapping research trends: Examine how OBE-related research topics and trends have changed over time.
− Assessing collaboration networks: Examining co-authorship and cooperation patterns may help you better
understand how organizations and scholars collaborate in the subject of OBE.
− Evaluating impactful publications: Evaluate significant papers in the OBE field. Find the foundational
works that have influenced the field.
− Geographical distribution: Analyze the distribution of OBE research geographically to ascertain where it
is concentrated and whether there are regional differences.
− Emerging concepts and keywords: Examine new terminology and ideas in OBE research.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The outcome-based education (OBE) is recognized for its potential to bridge the gap between
educational institutions and industry demands by focusing on specific learning outcomes and student
performance. A range of research articles are analyzed, each demonstrating how OBE enhances curriculum
design, faculty readiness, and student outcomes. By examining case studies across disciplines such as
technical education, software engineering, healthcare, and computing studies, this review provides valuable
insights into the multifaceted benefits and challenges of OBE.
The Washington accord's OBE aims to enhance technical education by setting clear student
expectations and emphasizing specific learning outcomes for more accurate assessment of achievements.
Bhatt et al. [42] conducts a meta-analysis of Indian engineering institutes' OBE implementation, highlighting
a research gap in empirical validation of results and a lack of consistent comprehension regarding CO-PO
mapping, underscoring the need for statistically validated pre- and post-implementation data to address these
issues. Yang et al. [43] presented an OBE approach to enhance the foundation and application of
microcontroller course for automation students. This approach, involving revised objectives, modular
teaching, and practical projects, resulted in superior student performance in creating a temperature
measurement system through software tools, ultimately advancing student-centered curriculum objectives
and practical problem-solving skills.
Jie [44] proposes using OBE model to enhance software talent training, addressing the challenges of
low-quality engineers and the gap between education and industry demands. The study demonstrates that
implementing OBE improves satisfaction, team quality through research funding, and achieves high testing
accuracy (94.23%) with the OBE talent training approach. Katawazai [45] investigated Afghan lecturers'
attitudes towards outcome-based education, revealing their positive attitude and readiness to adopt the
approach despite challenges. The findings offer insights to the Ministry of Higher Education for policy
development and highlight the need to address key obstacles for effective implementation.
Tungpalan and Antalan [46] examine the implementation of OBE at Isabela State University-
College of Computing Studies, focusing on the expertise and experience of faculty members during the
second semester of the 2018-2019 academic year. Utilizing a mixed-method approach, the findings reveal
that faculty members at the College of Computing and Information Communication Technology possess
substantial proficiency and practical experience in OBE implementation, positioning them to effectively
contribute to the advancement of OBE objectives. Wu et al. [47] address the challenges in teaching the data
structure course and present an approach focused on student-centered education, integrating OBE and
heuristic teaching methods. By emphasizing industry requirements and utilizing a blend of autonomous
learning, teacher guidance, and practical programming, the study underscores the effectiveness of this
approach, highlighting its implications and potential for the field.
Phuc et al. [48] investigate the factors influencing the implementation of OBE in the economic
management master's program. The research reveals that professional knowledge, problem-solving ability,
teamwork and communication skills, and work attitude directly impact students' perceived value, subsequently
affecting their practical application ability in the field. Sasiprabha et al. [10] introduce a novel assessment
method for evaluating capstone projects addressing complex engineering challenges, tailoring criteria to
distinct project categories and their respective program outcomes. This approach utilizes rubrics to align
problem definition, literature review, and other criteria with specific outcomes, enhancing precise evaluation,
identifying shortcomings, and guiding improvements in student projects and overall quality. Esmail et al.
[49] introduces an outcome-based educational intervention targeting general physicians in primary care (GPs)

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024: 4030-4045
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4033

to enhance rational prescribing practices in Iran. Results highlight that the intervention positively impacted
GPs’ knowledge, skills, and practices, leading to improved rational prescribing and suggesting the potential
for broader implementation of outcome-based approaches in medical education.

3. METHOD
The methodology employed for this study involved a systematic search strategy executed within the
Scopus database to procure scholarly literature concerning outcome-based education [50], [51]. Conducted
on August 11th, 2023, the search utilized specific keywords such as 'outcome-based education' or 'outcome-
based education' and was tailored to include articles solely from journals and conference papers spanning all
languages. Inclusion criteria focused on articles directly addressing OBE within the timeframe of 1978 to
2023, encompassing diverse disciplines and geographical regions. Rigorous screening was implemented to
eliminate any duplicate records, ensuring the integrity of the dataset. Following the extraction of relevant
articles, bibliographic information including publication titles, authors, abstracts, keywords, and citation
counts was compiled into a structured dataset saved in 'CSV' format for further analysis. The dataset
underwent comprehensive bibliometric analysis utilizing VOSviewer version 1.6.19 and the Biblioshiny
software, enabling the calculation of key bibliometric indicators and the visualization of collaboration
networks and citation patterns. The visual representation of our methodology is presented in Figure 1, while
Table 1 furnishes intricate details concerning the pivotal constituents and facets of our inquiry.

Search the Scopus Analysis and Conclusions

Select 996 articles using Biblioshiny and
Database VOSviewer

Figure 1. The methodology phases

Table 1. Key aspects of the investigation

Description Results
Search Query (TITLE-ABS-KEY ("outcome-based education") OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ("outcome-based
education")) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, "ar") OR LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, "cp"))
Timespan 1978:2023
Sources (Journals, books) 527
Documents 996
Annual growth rate % 9.27
Document average age 7.58
Average citations per doc 7.719
References 19374
Keywords plus (ID) 3034
Author's keywords (DE) 2216
Authors 2622
Authors of single-authored docs 185
Single-authored docs 202
Co-authors per doc 3.09
International co-authorships % 10.14
Article 620
conference paper 376

4. RESULTS
4.1. Annual scientific production
Between 1978 and 2023, the volume of publications concerning outcome-based education has
displayed fluctuations, characterized by both increases and decreases. However, a significant upsurge in
published materials was evident from 1998 to 1999, succeeded by a subsequent decline. Subsequently, a
revival in growth was observed. This cyclic pattern of alternating upward and downward trends is discernible
throughout the years. Commencing from 2006, there is a substantial rise in publication numbers, interspersed
with periods of decline. The pinnacle was reached in the year 2020, recording a remarkable count of 109
documents. Figure 2 visually portrays this correlation between publication counts and their respective years
using the Biblioshiny tool. Additionally, Figure 3 elucidates the distribution of the chosen 996 articles across
various subject domains. The largest segment, constituting 33.1%, falls within the realm of social sciences.
Engineering closely follows at 20.8%, with computer science representing 16.8% of the articles.

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)

4034  ISSN: 2252-8822

Figure 2. The annual scientific production from 1978 to 2023 visualized using Biblioshiny

Figure 3. Documents by subject area

4.2. Most significant authors

In the realm of OBE, the collective efforts of 2,622 authors have been channeled through their
written contributions. To gauge author significance, the count of published works was employed as a metric.
Notably, Chandna and Harden shine as preeminent contributors, each credited with 7 published articles. In
close pursuit, Hashim, Rajak, and Shrivastava each boast 6 articles. As illustrated in Figure 4, these
distinguished authors exhibit consistent publication patterns over time, affirming their authoritative status in
their respective domains. Their substantial expertise and extensive experience have firmly established their
prominence.

Figure 4. Most relevant authors

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024: 4030-4045
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4035

4.3. Most relevant sources

The analysis of 996 gathered publications sourced from 527 unique journals unveiled that the
Journal of Engineering Education Transformations exhibited remarkable productivity, being responsible for
85 articles. The second position was claimed by the journal medical teacher, publishing 20 papers. Following
closely was the ACM International Conference Proceeding Series and the ASEE Annual Conference and
Exposition Conference, each contributing 16 articles. Figure 5 showcases the leading 10 sources that stood
out in generating a significant quantity of research papers on outcome-based education.

4.4. Most relevant affiliations

Figure 6 illustrates the primary institutions engaged in generating research publications related to
OBE using the Biblioshiny platform. Universiti Teknologi Mara leads the list with the highest volume of
publications, reaching a peak of 59. Following closely is Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, contributing 40
publications. Significant research in this domain has also been conducted at Universiti Malaysia Sabah,
University of Malaya, Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Rajarambapu
Institute of Technology, Taylor's University, and Multimedia University. The analysis of affiliations' output
over time involves examining the frequency and number of affiliations associated with academic publications
within specific periods.

Figure 5. The top 10 relevant sources

Figure 6. Most relevant affiliations

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)

4036  ISSN: 2252-8822

4.5. Trend topics

Furthermore, the study examined the subject that was gaining traction by scrutinizing the keywords
chosen by the authors from the dataset. During this analysis, specific criteria were established: the study
period ranged from 2010 to 2023, words had to appear at least five times, three words were selected per year,
and a word label size of five was employed. Typically, the keywords provided by the authors are closely
related to the content of their publications and offer sufficient information to identify the key aspects of a
particular field. This examination provides additional insights into the prevalent themes associated with the
occurrence of keywords in the literature on OBE over the years. Figure 7 visually represents the hierarchical
organization of authors' keywords, showcasing annual discussions on various facets of OBE explored by
scholars. These topics can be linked to OBE in various ways. For instance, in 2020, "outcome-based
education" emerged as the most frequently discussed topic, while in 2021, the focus shifted to "attainment,"
and in 2022, "machine learning" and "experiential learning" took center stage within the context of OBE.

Figure 7. Trend topics identified using Biblioshiny from 2010 to 2023

4.6. Three field plot of keyword, author and source

A Sankey diagram, also referred to as a three-field plot, is a visualization method utilized to depict
the movement of data or information. It represents different elements as rectangles or text, connected by
arrows or arcs to signify relationships between them. The thickness of these arrows or arcs corresponds to the
significance of the connection. In Figure 8, there is an illustration that explores the correlation among
keywords (located on the left), authors (in the center), and sources (on the right) in the context of OBE
literature. The purpose of this analysis was to identify commonly used keywords in the literature across
various authors and published journals. Through the examination of the top keywords, authors, and sources,
several notable phrases emerged, including "outcome-based education," "outcome based education," "OBE,"
“course outcomes,” and "program outcomes." It was noted that authors such as Rajak, Chandna, and
Shrivastava frequently employed these keywords and published their work in outlets such as the ASEE
Annual Conference and Exposition Conference proceedings, Journal of Engineering Education
Transformations, and the Journal Medical Teacher.

4.7. Top 10 most cited papers

Table 2 presents a compilation of the ten most frequently cited papers in the field of outcome-based
education. These articles, spanning from 1998 to 2017, have received significant attention in the academic
community. Notably, the paper titled "The CanMEDS Initiative: Implementation of an Outcomes-Based
Framework for Physician Competencies," authored by Frank, Jason, and Danoff in 2007, stands out as the
most cited, boasting 619 citations. Following closely is "AMEE Guide No. 14: Outcome-Based Education:
Part 1 - An Introduction to Outcome-Based Education," written by Harden, Crosby, and Davis in 1999,
which has accumulated 481 citations.

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024: 4030-4045
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4037

Figure 8. Three field plot representing the relationship between author keyword (DE), author (AU), and
source (SO) using Biblioshiny

Table 2. The top 10 cited papers

Authors Title Year Cited by
Frank and Danoff The CanMEDS initiative: Implementing an outcomes-based framework of 2007 619
physician competencies
Harden et al. AMEE Guide No. 14: Outcome-based education: Part 1 - An introduction to 1999 481
outcome-based education
Shumway and Harden AMEE guide no. 25: The assessment of learning outcomes for the competent and 2003 269
reflective physician
Harden Learning outcomes and instructional objectives: Is there a difference? 2002 157
Elliott Making evidence-based practice educational 2001 146
Morcke et al. Outcome (competency) based education: An exploration of its origins, theoretical 2013 140
basis, and empirical evidence
Cate Competency-based postgraduate medical education: Past, present and future; 2017 138
Jansen Curriculum reform in South Africa: A critical analysis of outcomes-based 1998 131
education
Harden International medical education and future directions: A global perspective 2006 116
Smith and Dollase AMEE guide No. 14: Outcome-based education: Part 2 - Planning, implementing 1999 105
and evaluating a competency-based curriculum

4.8. Co-citation analysis of cited references

A co-citation analysis was carried out to explore the associations among cited sources. We set a
minimum requirement of 7 cited references, resulting in 14 references that met this criterion out of the 19,126
citation references generated. In Figure 9, the most robust connection (with a link strength of 12) was
observed for the publication titled "Beyond Traditional Outcome-Based Education," authored by Spady,
William, and Marshall, in 1991. This was followed by the publication titled "Outcome-Based Education:
Critical Issues and Answers," written by Spady and William in 1994, which had a link strength of 11.

Figure 9. Network visualization of co-citation analysis of references produced using VOSviewer

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)

4038  ISSN: 2252-8822

4.9. Country co-authorship analysis

Analyzing country co-authorship entails examining how countries impact and interact within a
specific field of study. In the context of OBE, Figure 10 provides a visual representation of a network that
depicts country co-authorship. The size of the nodes signifies the countries with the most significant
influence, while the connections represent collaborative partnerships between institutions across different
countries. The thickness and distance between nodes convey the extent of cooperation between countries.
The map also showcases the diversity of research areas through various colors. In terms of publication
output, India (239), Malaysia (162), and China (125) have the highest number of publications. Additionally,
when it comes to citations, the United Kingdom (1638), South Africa (1216), and the United States (1182)
stand out, indicating their substantial impact. Furthermore, the United States (27) and Malaysia (25) possess
the highest total link strength value, underscoring their prominent position within the co-authorship network.

4.10. Co-occurrence of keywords

The VOSviewer software was employed to generate a visual representation of clusters of keywords
that co-occur in the context of Outcome-based education. To do this, we selected a subset of 300 keywords
that appeared at least 5 times out of a total of 4549 keywords. The results of this analysis are depicted in
Figure 11. In this figure, the size and font of each node are determined by the keyword's weight value, which
indicates its frequency of appearance. Consequently, larger nodes and fonts represent keywords that occur
more frequently. The connections between nodes in the figure denote common occurrences between keywords,
with the thickness of these lines indicating the strength of their co-occurrence. A thicker line signifies a
higher frequency of co-occurrence. The analysis presented in Figure 11 revealed the presence of five distinct
clusters. The first cluster contains 126 items, the second cluster comprises 86 items, the third cluster includes
46 items, the fourth cluster consists of 41 items, and the fifth cluster contains just 1 item. The most prominent
keyword in the network, appearing a total of 407 times, is identified as "outcome-based education".

Figure 10. The network visualization of country co-authorship analysis generated using VOSviewer

Figure 11. The network visualization of the co-occurrence of all keywords using VOSviewer

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024: 4030-4045
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4039

4.11. Countries’ collaboration world map

Figure 12 illustrates the worldwide collaborative network within the realm of outcome-based
education. The visualization uses the color blue to represent research partnerships between different
countries, while the pink border indicates the degree of collaboration between individual authors. It is worth
noting that the United States stands out as a leader in global collaborations, particularly with Canada, with a
frequency of 5. Malaysia and South Africa also engage in substantial collaborations, having a frequency of 4
with Australia, and Spain maintains a strong collaborative link with Austria at a frequency of 4. Furthermore,
India has noteworthy collaborative ties with Saudi Arabia, with a frequency of 3. In summary, the field of
OBE exhibits extensive research collaboration among scientists across the globe.

Figure 12. Countries’ collaboration world map generated using Biblioshiny

5. DISCUSSION
A total of 996 articles were gathered from 527 different sources, covering the time frame from 1978
to 2023. These articles were collected by including the terms 'outcome-based education' or 'outcome-based
education' in the query. The data indicates that there has been a cyclic pattern of fluctuation in publications
related to outcome-based education, with a recent increase in research activity. Additionally, it highlights the
multidisciplinary nature of this field, with a significant portion of research falling within social sciences,
engineering, and computer science. There are well-known authors who have made substantial contributions
to the field of outcome-based education. The quantity of works that have been published is the metric used to
evaluate their relevance. With seven published articles apiece, Chandna and Harden stand out as the two most
significant contributors. Hashim, Rajak, and Shrivastava are close behind with six each. According to the
evidence, these writers have contributed to the field in significant and enduring ways, and their work has
remained consistently worthwhile and pertinent throughout time.
The study has determined the top 10 sites that have made a substantial contribution to the creation of
outcome-based education research articles. The most frequent source of research papers on OBE is the
Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, which is followed by Medical Teacher, the ACM
International Conference Proceeding Series, and the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Conference.
Other sources also make significant contributions to the field. The top two universities producing research
papers in the area of OBE are Universiti Teknologi MARA and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, with 59 and
40 articles, respectively. This shows that they are very present and strongly focused on this field of study.
A wide group of universities are engaged in research on outcome-based education, so it is not simply one or
two institutions that are making a substantial contribution. Significant contributions to this subject have also
been made by Taylor’s University, Multimedia University, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, University of Malaya,
Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Rajarambapu Institute of Technology,
and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
This research showed how the field of OBE has evolved over time, with distinct themes and areas of
concentration emerging in different years, such as "outcome-based education," "attainment," "machine
learning," and "experiential learning." This shows that the field has changed and broadened its emphasis

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)

4040  ISSN: 2252-8822

throughout the time under consideration. Authors like Rajak, Chandna, and Shrivastava frequently use
keywords like "outcome-based education," "outcome-based education," "OBE," "course outcomes," and
"program outcomes" in their writing. This is evident from the Sankey Diagram analysis of keywords, authors,
and sources in the context of the literature on outcome-based education. Additionally, these academics
frequently publish their work in specialized journals including Journal of Engineering Education
Transformations, Medical Teacher, and the proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.
This demonstrates a close relationship between the authors, sources, and keywords in the literature on
outcome-based education, pointing to recurring themes and areas of study.
We may infer from the data in Table 2 that the academic community is very interested in and
focused on outcome-based education. This conclusion is backed by the fact that the 10 publications in the
field with the highest number of citations, which cover the years 1998 to 2017, have attracted a lot of
attention, with the top two studies alone amassing a sizable amount of citations (619 and 481, respectively).
Furthermore, the fact that Frank and Danoff's 2007 paper, "The CanMEDS Initiative: Implementation of an
Outcomes-Based Framework for Physician Competencies," is the most frequently cited paper in the field
suggests that the approach to OBE they describe has had a particularly significant influence on the field. This
suggests that OBE is a significant field of study and practice within education, in addition to being a topic of
interest. The academic community has conducted much research on outcome-based education, and important
publications and frameworks have had a significant impact on the discourse and practices in this area.
The analysis of country co-authorship reveals the influence and interaction of nations within the
selected subject of study. This implies that an important component of international academic endeavors in
this field is research collaboration. Some nations stand out for having a substantial impact in this area. In
terms of publication production, China, Malaysia, and India stand out, demonstrating their active
involvement in this field's research efforts. High citation counts for the United Kingdom, South Africa, and
the United States are remarkable indicators of the significant effect of their research contributions in this
area. The greatest overall link strength value is shared by Malaysia and the United States, highlighting their
significant roles in the co-authorship network. This shows that these nations are crucial in promoting
cooperation and the transfer of knowledge in the industry. In addition to highlighting the importance of the
phrase "outcome-based education" within the network of related terms, the VOSviewer study of keywords
linked to OBE indicated the presence of five different thematic clusters. The structure and important subjects
in the area of OBE may be better understood with the help of this information.
There is a strong and wide-ranging global network of research collaborations in the area of OBE.
Participating nations in this field of study include the United States, Canada, Malaysia, South Africa,
Australia, Spain, Austria, India, and Saudi Arabia. With a frequency of 5, the United States is a notable
leader in international partnerships, especially with Canada. This shows that these two nations often and
intensively exchange ideas and research in the area of outcome-based education. With Australia, each of
Malaysia and South Africa collaborates extensively, with a frequency of 4. This suggests that scholars from
these nations commonly work together with their Australian colleagues. With Austria, Spain continues to
collaborate with them four times each year, indicating a solid research collaboration between the two
countries in the area of outcome-based education. With a frequency of 3, India and Saudi Arabia have
notable cooperative connections. This shows that scholars from Saudi Arabia and India collaborate on
projects, but sporadically compared to those from the other nations.
The comprehensive analysis of outcome-based education research presents a nuanced understanding
of the field's evolution, contributors, and global dynamics. While the cyclic pattern of research activity
indicates fluctuations in interest over time, the recent surge in publications suggests a renewed focus on
outcome-based education, possibly driven by emerging educational paradigms or policy shifts. The
multidisciplinary nature of the field underscores its relevance across diverse domains, reflecting the complex
interplay between educational theory, technological advancements, and societal needs. However, while
certain authors and institutions stand out for their prolific contributions, the emphasis on quantity as a metric
for relevance may overlook the depth and impact of individual studies. Furthermore, the concentration of
research outputs in specific journals and conferences may inadvertently limit the dissemination of alternative
perspectives or marginalized voices within the field. Additionally, while international collaborations are
celebrated for promoting knowledge exchange and diversity of viewpoints, the unequal distribution of
research partnerships among nations raises questions about power dynamics and the accessibility of resources
for scholarly engagement. Overall, while the findings provide valuable insights into the landscape of OBE
research, critical analysis prompts reflection on underlying assumptions, biases, and opportunities for
fostering inclusivity and innovation within the field.
There are numerous studies that justify the discussion of outcome-based education and its immense
contributions, covering a wide range of impacts from different disciplines. Even at a very insignificant level,
the practice of OBE has been promising in various fields of education, especially in medical training.

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024: 4030-4045
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4041

In 2010, Mukhopadhyay and Smith [52] applied OBE principles to the Labour Ward Advanced Training
Skills Module of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. This means that tenet for a balanced
integration with knowledge, skills, and attitudes remained central in this application. Their study brought on
board the application of OBE in effectively improving training and assessment for medical trainees if it had
pragmatic benefits to create competent professionals. Harden et al. [53] also emphasized the potential for
OBE to change medical education with their call for a performance-based approach to shift emphasis from
traditional didactic methods to well-defined educational outcomes. Their proposal, therefore, brought out the
need for relevance and accountability in the curriculum in medical education and furnished a robust
framework for planning and evaluating a curriculum. In the University of Dundee, Davis [54] demonstrated
in a practical case study in 2003 that the implementation of OBE in the medical school curriculum was
successful. In this study, it was shown that there were many practical problems and advantages from adopting
OBE, including increased relevance of the curriculum and student accountability. The result of this well-
implemented framework for OBE reforms at this institution is an interesting experience brought to other
institutions considering similar educational reforms. Anala et al. [55] supported the empirical approach for
OBE by focusing on measuring students' performance to validate and adjust curricula. Their study
proclaimed the flexibility of OBE that allows an institution to define outcomes and assessment methods on its
own, thus enabling continuous improvement in quality of education.
Buddi et al. [56] worked on the detailed working of OBE by presenting a case study showing clearly
the correlation of CO to PO. They evaluated student performance based on both direct and indirect
assessments for pinpointing problems and facilitating continuous improvement in educational programs.
Singh and Ramya [57], undertook a literature review on the benefits derived from OBE in nursing education.
This paper focuses on the model that aligns curriculum content to achievement of expected outcomes in order
to meet emerging health care needs. Their paper makes a clear case for having defined educational outcomes
within the preparation of nurses to have effective new expectations regarding patients and the public. Study
by Rao [58] contributed an all-comprehensive framework of defining and measuring outcomes in higher
education, applying Bloom’s taxonomy so that the outcomes are observable and measurable. Much emphasis
was given in this study to the aspect of alignment between the program outcomes and course outcomes in
order to achieve effective educational programs as a whole. This structured approach shall certainly permit
the achievement of goals one after another, which is very methodical in nature.
Japee and Oza [59] explained critical aspects of curriculum development and evaluation in the
framework of OBE. They emphasized the need to balance a multidisciplinary approach with structured
progress and accountability in education on the other. Kurukwar [60], presented an overview of OBE in
engineering education, explaining how POs and graduate attributes can guide curriculum design. This paper
identifies the role of OBE in making sure that engineering graduates have the skills and competencies
required for professional success and merges educational outcomes with the requirements of industry.
According to McNeir [61], a number of viewpoints regarding OBE were reviewed critically, putting forward
its potential for reorganizing education around measurable outcomes. The author picked up on the general
criticisms and limitations of OBE, thus giving a fair viewpoint about its implementation and also pointing out
the requirement for flexibility in educational approaches. These studies provide collectively a firm base for
understanding different dimensions of OBE, from theoretical principles to practical implementation
challenges and benefits across different educational contexts.
Despite the valuable insights provided by existing literature on outcome-based education, notable
gaps persist. The literature predominantly comprises qualitative analyses, case studies, and surveys, with
limited quantitative bibliometric analysis conducted to comprehensively understand the landscape of OBE
research. This absence of quantitative bibliometric analysis hinders the identification of key contributors,
mapping of research trends, and assessment of collaboration networks within the OBE domain. Additionally,
there is a lack of comprehensive studies that explore the evolution of OBE research over time and its impact
on educational practices. Addressing these gaps through rigorous quantitative analysis and empirical research
is essential for advancing the understanding of OBE and informing evidence-based educational practices.
In presenting the findings on outcome-based education research, it is essential to acknowledge
certain limitations inherent in our methodology. Firstly, the reliance on the Scopus database for procuring
scientific literature may have resulted in the exclusion of relevant articles not indexed within this database.
Furthermore, the search was limited to articles from journals and conference papers, potentially excluding
other valuable sources of information such as books, dissertations, and reports. Despite the efforts to ensure
precision by screening for duplications in the Scopus records, there remains a possibility of some articles
being inadvertently overlooked or excluded.

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)

4042  ISSN: 2252-8822

6. CONCLUSION
The bibliometric analysis of outcome-based education provides robust quantitative insights into its
evolution and impact, offering a wealth of data to guide future research endeavors. This study illuminates the
expanding interest in and influence of OBE within the educational landscape through a comprehensive
examination of scholarly articles. The findings underscore the sustained interest in OBE over time, evident in
the increasing volume of research publications, conference papers, and citations. Such trends highlight the
enduring relevance and significance of OBE in shaping contemporary educational practices. Moreover, the
analysis reveals the collaborative networks and key stakeholders driving advancements in OBE, offering
valuable insights for educators, decision-makers, and researchers alike. By exploring shifting keyword trends,
this study also identifies emerging areas of focus and research trajectories within OBE. Moving forward,
researchers are encouraged to delve into various aspects of OBE implementation, including the efficacy of
different strategies across diverse educational contexts and the long-term effects on student performance and
engagement. Additionally, investigations into the integration of technology and innovative teaching
methodologies within OBE settings hold promise for enhancing student learning experiences. Addressing
issues of equity and inclusivity in education through OBE presents another compelling avenue for future
research, particularly in marginalized student populations. Lastly, longitudinal studies tracking the evolution
of OBE practices over time and across different regions will provide invaluable insights into its adaptability
and sustainability in response to evolving educational landscapes. By embracing these research directions,
stakeholders can continue to advance our understanding of OBE and its potential to improve educational
practices and outcomes.

REFERENCES
[1] H. J. De Jager and F. J. Nieuwenhuis, “Linkages between total quality management and the outcomes-based approach in an
education environment,” Quality in Higher Education, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 251–260, Jan. 2005, doi: 10.1080/13538320500354150.
[2] R. Killen, “Outcomes-based education: Principles and possibilities,” Unpublished manuscript, University of Newcastle, Faculty of
Education, pp. 1–24, 2000.
[3] W. G. Spady and K. J. Marshall, “Beyond traditional outcome-based education.,” Educational Leadership, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 67–
72, 1991.
[4] S. Mitra and S. Gupta, “Mobile learning under personal cloud with a virtualization framework for outcome based education,”
Education and Information Technologies, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 2129–2156, May 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-10043-z.
[5] W. Spady, Outcome-Based Education: Critical Issues and Answers. American Association of School Administrators, Arlington,
Va., 1994.
[6] M. Tam, “Outcomes-based approach to quality assessment and curriculum improvement in higher education,” Quality Assurance
in Education, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 158–168, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1108/QAE-09-2011-0059.
[7] F. Bouslama, A. Lansari, A. Mahmoud Al-Rawi, and A. A. Abonamah, “A Novel Outcome-Based Educational Model and its
Effect on Student Learning, Curriculum Development, and Assessment,” Journal of Information Technology Education:
Research, vol. 2, pp. 203–214, 2003, doi: 10.28945/323.
[8] E. Martens and M. Prosser, “What constitutes high quality teaching and learning and how to assure it,” Quality Assurance in
Education, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 28–36, Mar. 1998, doi: 10.1108/09684889810200368.
[9] D. Gosling and V. M. D’Andrea, “Quality development: A new concept for higher education,” Quality in Higher Education,
vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 7–17, Apr. 2001, doi: 10.1080/13538320120045049.
[10] T. Sasipraba et al., “Assessment tools and rubrics for evaluating the capstone projects in outcome based education,” Procedia
Computer Science, vol. 172, pp. 296–301, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.047.
[11] C. Chen, R. Dubin, and M. C. Kim, “Emerging trends and new developments in regenerative medicine: A scientometric update
(2000-2014),” Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 1295–1317, Sep. 2014, doi:
10.1517/14712598.2014.920813.
[12] B. Mukherjee, “Analysis of global research trends in coronaviruses: A bibliometric investigation,” Journal of Scientometric
Research, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 185–194, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.5530/JSCIRES.9.2.22.
[13] S. Singh, A. Solkhe, and P. Gautam, “What do we know about Employee Productivity?: Insights from Bibliometric Analysis,”
Journal of Scientometric Research, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 183–198, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.5530/jscires.11.2.20.
[14] M. E. Bales, D. N. Wright, P. R. Oxley, and T. R. Wheeler, “Bibliometric Visualization and Analysis Software: State of the Art,
Workflows, and Best Practices,” 2020.
[15] R. Tomaszewski, “Visibility, impact, and applications of bibliometric software tools through citation analysis,” Scientometrics,
vol. 128, no. 7, pp. 4007–4028, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11192-023-04725-2.
[16] N. Donthu, S. Kumar, D. Mukherjee, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim, “How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and
guidelines,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 133, pp. 285–296, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.
[17] B. Godin, “On the origins of bibliometrics,” Scientometrics, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 109–133, Jul. 2006, doi: 10.1007/s11192-006-
0086-0.
[18] W. Chansanam, K. Poonpon, Y. Jaroenruen, and N. Kaewboonma, “Global Research Trend of Korean Popular Music: A
Bibliometric Analysis,” Journal of Scientometric Research, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 419–426, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.5530/jscires.11.3.48.
[19] M. Pinto, R. Fernández-Pascual, D. Caballero-Mariscal, D. Sales, D. Guerrero, and A. Uribe, “Scientific production on mobile
information literacy in higher education: a bibliometric analysis (2006–2017),” Scientometrics, vol. 120, no. 1, pp. 57–85, Jul.
2019, doi: 10.1007/s11192-019-03115-x.
[20] M. A. Al Mamun, M. A. K. Azad, M. A. Al Mamun, and M. Boyle, “Review of flipped learning in engineering education:
Scientific mapping and research horizon,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1261–1286, Jan. 2022, doi:
10.1007/s10639-021-10630-z.

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024: 4030-4045
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4043

[21] M. A. Rojas-Sánchez, P. R. Palos-Sánchez, and J. A. Folgado-Fernández, “Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis
on virtual reality and education,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 155–192, Jan. 2023, doi:
10.1007/s10639-022-11167-5.
[22] O. Ellegaard and J. A. Wallin, “The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?” Scientometrics,
vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 1809–1831, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z.
[23] A. K. Khakimova, O. V. Zolotarev, and M. A. Berberova, “Coronavirus infection study: Bibliometric analysis of publications on
COVID-19 using PubMed and Dimensions databases,” Scientific Visualization, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 112–129, 2021, doi:
10.26583/SV.12.5.10.
[24] N. J. van Eck and L. Waltman, “Visualizing Bibliometric Networks,” in Measuring Scholarly Impact, Cham: Springer
International Publishing, 2014, pp. 285–320. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13.
[25] L. T. Dao, T. Tran, H. Van Le, G. N. Nguyen, and T. P. T. Trinh, “A bibliometric analysis of Research on Education 4.0 during
the 2017–2021 period,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 2437–2453, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10639-
022-11211-4.
[26] J. S. Barrot, “Trends in automated writing evaluation systems research for teaching, learning, and assessment: A bibliometric
analysis,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 7155–7179, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-12083-y.
[27] N. J. van Eck and L. Waltman, “Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping,” Scientometrics,
vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 523–538, Aug. 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.
[28] A. F. Abbas, A. Jusoh, A. Masod, J. Ali, A. H. Alsharif, and E. A. Rami Hashem, “A Bibliometric Analysis of Publications on
Social Media Influencers Using Vosviewer,” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, vol. 99, no. 24,
pp. 5662–5676, 2021.
[29] A. B. D. Nandiyanto, D. N. Al Husaeni, and D. F. Al Husaeni, “A bibliometric analysis of chemical engineering research using
vosviewer and its correlation with Covid-19 pandemic condition,” Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, vol. 16, no. 6,
pp. 4414–4422, 2021.
[30] Y. Yu et al., “A bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer of publications on COVID-19,” Annals of Translational Medicine, vol. 8,
no. 13, pp. 816–816, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.21037/atm-20-4235.
[31] R. Thomson, R. Mosier, and M. Worosz, “COVID research across the social sciences in 2020: a bibliometric approach,”
Scientometrics, vol. 128, no. 6, pp. 3377–3399, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11192-023-04714-5.
[32] D. Guleria and G. Kaur, “Bibliometric analysis of ecopreneurship using VOSviewer and RStudio Bibliometrix, 1989–2019,”
Library Hi Tech, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 1001–1024, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1108/LHT-09-2020-0218.
[33] A. H. Fitria and A. B. Dani Nandiyanto, “Bibliometric Computational Mapping Analysis of Publications on Mechanical
Engineering Education Using Vosviewer,” Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, vol. 17, pp. 1135–1149, 2022.
[34] J. S. Racine, “RSTUDIO: A platform-independent IDE for R and Sweave,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 27, no. 1,
pp. 167–172, 2012, doi: 10.1002/jae.1278.
[35] N. R. Salim, K. Gopal, and A. F. M. Ayub, “Effects of using RStudio on Statistics Performance of Malaysian Undergraduates,”
Malaysian Journal of Mathematical Sciences, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 419–437, 2019.
[36] E. Souza de Cursi, “Some Tips to Use R and RStudio,” in International Series in Operations Research and Management Science,
vol. 335, pp. 1–108, 2023, doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-17785-9_1.
[37] M. Aria and C. Cuccurullo, “bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis,” Journal of Informetrics,
vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 959–975, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.
[38] S. K. Shekhar and M. A. Shah, “Sports Marketing and Conceptual Evolution: A Bibliometric Analysis,” SAGE Open, vol. 13,
no. 3, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1177/21582440231192915.
[39] F. J. Agbo, S. S. Oyelere, J. Suhonen, and M. Tukiainen, “Scientific production and thematic breakthroughs in smart learning
environments: a bibliometric analysis,” Smart Learning Environments, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 1, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1186/s40561-020-
00145-4.
[40] B. Epstein, “Two decades of e-government diffusion among local governments in the United States,” Government Information
Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 2, p. 101665, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2021.101665.
[41] P. Thangavel and B. Chandra, “Two Decades of M-Commerce Consumer Research: A Bibliometric Analysis Using R
Biblioshiny,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 15, no. 15, p. 11835, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su151511835.
[42] R. Bhat, C. R. Kamath, K. A. Mathias, and P. Mulimani, “Practical Implementation of Outcome-Based Education Practices in the
Indian Engineering Institutes – An Objective Approach Based Investigation,” Journal of Engineering Education Transformations,
vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 26–32, 2022, doi: 10.16920/jeet/2022/v36i1/22133.
[43] P. Yang, S. Lai, H. Guan, and J. Wang, “Teaching Reform and Practice Using the Concept of Outcome-Based Education – A
Case Study on Curriculum Design for a Microcontroller Unit Course,” International Journal of Emerging Technologies in
Learning, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 68–82, 2022, doi: 10.3991/ijet.v17i03.29041.
[44] Z. Jie, “Analysis and Construction of Software Engineering OBE Talent Training System Structure Based on Big Data,” Security
and Communication Networks, vol. 2022, pp. 1–10, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1155/2022/3208318.
[45] R. Katawazai, “Implementing outcome-based education and student-centered learning in Afghan public universities: the current
practices and challenges,” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 5, p. e07076, May 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07076.
[46] K. A. Tungpalan and M. F. Antalan, “Teachers’ perception and experience on outcomes-based education implementation in
Isabela State University,” International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1213–1220,
2021, doi: 10.11591/ijere.v10i4.21548.
[47] D. Wu, P. Guo, C. Zhang, C. Hou, Q. Wang, and Z. Yang, “Research and practice of data structure curriculum reform based on
outcome-based education and Chaoxing platform,” International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 11,
no. 8, pp. 375–380, 2021, doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2021.11.8.1537.
[48] P. T. Phuc, N. Q. Vinh, and Q. H. Do, “The implementation of outcome-based education: Evidence from master program in
economic management at Hanoi universities,” Management Science Letters, vol. 10, no. 14, pp. 3299–3306, 2020, doi:
10.5267/j.msl.2020.6.008.
[49] H. M. Esmaily, R. Vahidi, N. M. Fathi, and R. Wahlström, “How do physicians and trainers experience outcome-based education
in ‘Rational prescribing’?,” BMC Research Notes, vol. 7, no. 1, 2014, doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-944.
[50] É. Archambault, D. Campbell, Y. Gingras, and V. Larivière, “Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the web of science
and Scopus,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 1320–1326, 2009, doi:
10.1002/asi.21062.
[51] Y. Gavel and L. Iselid, “Web of Science and Scopus: A journal title overlap study,” Online Information Review, vol. 32, no. 1,
pp. 8–21, 2008, doi: 10.1108/14684520810865958.

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)

4044  ISSN: 2252-8822

[52] S. Mukhopadhyay and S. Smith, “Outcome-based education: Principles and practice,” Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,
vol. 30, pp. 790–794, 2010, doi: 10.3109/01443615.2010.505305.
[53] R. Harden, J. Crosby, and M. Davis, “AMEE Guide No. 14: Outcome-based education: Part 1-An introduction to outcome-based
education,” Medical Teacher, vol. 21, pp. 7–14, 1999, doi: 10.1080/01421599979969.
[54] M. Davis, “Outcome-based education.,” Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, vol. 30 3, pp. 258–63, 2003, doi:
10.3138/JVME.30.3.258.
[55] M. R. Anala, R. Hemavathy, and G. Shobha, “Outcome Based Education: An Empirical Approach,” Journal of Engineering
Education Transformations, vol. 28, no. 2-3, pp. 92–97, 2015, doi: 10.16920/jeet/2015/v28i2&3/56662.
[56] T. Buddi, A. Akkireddy, and U. S. Jyothi, “Implementation of Outcome-Based Education for a Course: A Case Study,” in
Methodologies and Outcomes of Engineering and Technological Pedagogy, Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2020, pp. 272–294, doi:
10.4018/978-1-7998-2245-5.ch013.
[57] M. Singh and K. Ramya, “Outcome Based Education,” International Journal of Nursing Education, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 87–91,
2011.
[58] N. J. Rao, “Outcome-based Education: An Outline,” Higher Education for the Future, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 21–25, 2020, doi:
10.1177/2347631119886418.
[59] G. P. Japee and P. Oza, “Curriculum and Evaluation in Outcome-Based Education,” Psychology and Education Journal, vol. 58,
no. 2, pp. 5620–5625, 2021, doi: 10.17762/PAE.V58I2.2982.
[60] A. Kurukwar, An overview of Outcome Based Education, Graduates Attributes and Program Outcomes. Tamil Nadu: Royal Book
Publishing, 2022, doi: 10.26524/royal.135.
[61] G. McNeir, “Outcomes-based education,” Research Roundup, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–5, 1993, doi:
10.1007/springerreference_70047.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Jeena Joseph is an accomplished Assistant Professor in Computer Science,

recognized for her expertise in artificial intelligence and machine learning. With an MCA
from a renowned institution, her academic background focuses on developing innovative data
analysis and pattern recognition algorithms. Driven by a passion for teaching, she mentors
aspiring computer scientists, fostering critical thinking and problem-solving skills. As an
enthusiastic educator, she is committed to nurturing the next generation of computer
scientists by fostering a dynamic and inclusive learning environment. With a passion for
innovation and a drive to excel, she is poised to make a lasting impact on the realm of
Computer Science. She can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Jobin Jose is a dedicated librarian with a passion for fostering a love of reading
and knowledge in others. With a Master’s in Library Science and extensive experience in
managing library resources, he has played a vital role in curating diverse collections that cater
to the diverse interests of patrons. His commitment to promoting information literacy and
creating an inclusive learning environment has earned him recognition within the library
community. This author's commitment to empowering individuals through the written word
makes his contribution invaluable. He can be contacted at: [email protected].

Anat Suman Jose is a distinguished scholar with a Ph.D. in Library Science,

possessing a passion for advancing the field’s knowledge and innovation. Throughout her
illustrious career, she has been an ardent advocate for promoting information accessibility
and digital literacy. Her research focuses on the impact of emerging technologies on library
services, user behavior, and information organization. She has published extensively in
prestigious academic journals and has received numerous accolades for her groundbreaking
contributions. Her expertise and dedication make her an invaluable asset to the scholarly
community, inspiring new generations of library science professionals and shaping the future
of this vital discipline. She can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 2024: 4030-4045
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  4045

Gilu G. Ettaniyil holds a distinguished Ph.D. in the field of Library Science,

embodying a profound passion for scholarly pursuits and academic excellence. Throughout
her illustrious career, she has conducted pioneering research in information organization,
digital archiving, and user-centric library services. Her innovative contributions have
significantly advanced the understanding and implementation of modern library practices.
Driven by a fervent commitment to promoting knowledge dissemination, she has authored
numerous peer-reviewed publications and mentored aspiring researchers. With an
unwavering dedication to the advancement of Library Science, her work continues to shape
the landscape of information management, leaving an indelible mark in the realm of scholarly
inquiry. She can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Joby Cyriac Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics from the University of Kerala (2020),
is a distinguished scholar in the field. His research offers valuable insights for educators and
policymakers. With a wealth of publications and active involvement in professional
associations, Dr. Cyriac is a respected authority, shaping the future of linguistics and
language education. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Shaiju K. Sebastian holder in Sociology from MG University, Kottayam

(2019), is a dedicated scholar with a profound interest in unraveling the complexities of
society. Dr. Sebastian’s publications and ongoing research focus on various sociological
topics, reflecting his commitment to advancing the understanding of society. With a passion
for both research and education, he continues to inspire and mentor the next generation of
sociologists while actively engaging in academic discourse. Dr. Sebastian's future endeavors
promise to further enrich the field of Sociology. He can be contacted at email:
[email protected].

Ajesh P. Joseph holding an MSW degree from Mahatma Gandhi University,

Kottayam, since 2002, is a dedicated assistant professor, social worker, and accomplished
author. With extensive experience in addressing social issues and working with marginalized
communities, his passion for social justice and welfare shines through. Ajesh’s commitment
extends to the classroom, where he imparts his practical wisdom to the next generation of
social workers. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Quantitative insights into outcome-based education: a bibliometric exploration (Jeena Joseph)