Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 5 / 5 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
5 / 5 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 5 selected publications.
5 / 5 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 5 selected publications.
5 / 5 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 5 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 9 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 5 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 11 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 4 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 5 / 5 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T00:14:30.766614+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:23:08.257744+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 3 | 5 | 5/5 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 9 | 5 | 5/5 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2017 | 1 |
| 2023 | 1 |
| 2024 | 1 |
| 2025 | 1 |
| 2026 | 1 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 4 | 14 | 16 | 4/4 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 50.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The constantly evolving technology landscape inevitably calls for technological integration in learning and education. It is essential in the world we live in today for every learning method to include the use of new technologies. The study's primary goal is to examine strategies to integrate modern technologies into teaching in South Africa. The paper strives to understand the state of education in South Africa; the government’s contribution to education so far; teachers’ attitudes and competencies; as well as, and the benefits that new technologies can offer the education system in South Africa. A systematic review of literature that relates to the infusion of conventional technologies into educational settings has been adopted. The research conducted in this paper demonstrated that integrating technology into the teaching-learning process can be a useful strategy for training educators and learners for improved learning and educational outcomes in South Africa. Furthermore, the study's findings revealed that many South African instructors have a negative attitude regarding the usage of modern technologies for teaching. The paper recommended that the government should prioritizes funding for education; and concluded that blended learning is best used as the instructional strategy in South African classes.
The integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in education has the potential to enhance teaching and learning; however, several barriers hinder its effective adoption in South African schools. The paper reports on the study that examined the barrier to sustainable integration of ICT in Pietermaritzburg public secondary schools. The study used qualitative interview technique to collect data from 20 teachers. The Technology Organisation Environment (TOE) framework was used as a theoretical framework. The findings reveal that a lack of technological pedagogical content knowledge among teachers, high ICT infrastructure support costs, resource constraints, resistance to change, and theft and vandalization of ICT equipment significantly impact ICT adoption. Many teachers lack essential ICT skills, which affects their confidence in integrating technology into their teaching practices. Financial constraints further limit schools from maintaining ICT infrastructure, and resistance from experienced educators impedes change. Additionally, frequent theft and vandalization of ICT resources pose a serious risk, further hampering implementation. To address these challenges, the study recommends capacity-building initiatives to enhance teacher training, increased financial and technical support for schools, leadership-driven encouragement of ICT adoption, targeted awareness campaigns to mitigate resistance, strengthened security measures to protect ICT infrastructure, and equitable distribution of ICT resources to bridge the digital divide. A strategic and collaborative approach is essential to overcoming these barriers and ensuring effective ICT integration in South African schools.
Learner engagement in English First Additional Language classrooms is a pressing concern in many rural South African schools, characterised by overcrowding and limited digital infrastructure. This study explored how teachers integrate low-tech digital tools to enhance listening and speaking skills in such contexts. Guided by a qualitative interpretive approach, data were collected from eight English First Additional Language teachers across rural primary schools through semi-structured interviews and were analysed thematically. The findings revealed that teachers use low-tech digital tools primarily to support storytelling, manage overcrowded classrooms, and sustain learner interest despite connectivity challenges. While low-tech digital tools improved learner participation and attentiveness, infrastructural constraints and inconsistent internet access limited their full potential. The study recommends targeted teacher development, improved school-level digital support and context-sensitive integration strategies to strengthen English First Additional Language engagement. By foregrounding teachers’ lived experiences, the article contributes to ongoing debates on equitable and pedagogically sound technology integration in resource-constrained settings
A new technology’s acceptance also gets shaped according to users’ features, expectations and perceptions. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) that developed by Davis (1989), defends that there are perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use variables to determinants of a new technology’s usage by user. These perceptions predict the user’s behavior and explain it. The smart board that has common usage in modern classrooms provides effectiveness at education and learning activities. Teachers who use smart boards can present more effectively. This situation increases the teacher’s productivity and student’s learning success and improvement the class’s education quality. Existence of the smart board in the classroom motivates all by self. Thanks to this technological device, it is easy to access internet based study materials. This study’s purpose is testing the user features explanation power effects to usage of smart board, which is a new education tool, based on TAM variables. For performing of the research, surveys have actualized with 24 teachers at Bartin High School with smart boards. Survey data have been interpreted based on correlation, factor and regression analyses in WarpPLS 5.0. Results have been concluded from analyse strongly supports research model.
In South Africa, there is a pressing need to produce teachers who can integrate technology in teaching and learning. Therefore, this qualitative study explores business studies student teachers’ experiences of integrating technology during teaching practice. This study is located within the interpretive paradigm and an exploratory case study is adopted as its research design. TPACK framework serves as the lens used to understand the experiences of six student teachers who were sampled purposefully. Data collected through focus group interviews were analysed thematically. The study revealed that student teachers found technology integration to be useful in their instructional practices. However, the study revealed that there was a lack of support from mentor teachers when student teachers were integrating technology. Despite this, they showed determination towards technology integration in their classrooms. Based on the findings, it is concluded that student teachers were determined to integrate technology during teaching practice.
Learner engagement in English First Additional Language classrooms is a pressing concern in many rural South African schools, characterised by overcrowding and limited digital infrastructure. This study explored how teachers integrate low-tech digital tools to enhance listening and speaking skills in such contexts. Guided by a qualitative interpretive approach, data were collected from eight English First Additional Language teachers across rural primary schools through semi-structured interviews and were analysed thematically. The findings revealed that teachers use low-tech digital tools primarily to support storytelling, manage overcrowded classrooms, and sustain learner interest despite connectivity challenges. While low-tech digital tools improved learner participation and attentiveness, infrastructural constraints and inconsistent internet access limited their full potential. The study recommends targeted teacher development, improved school-level digital support and context-sensitive integration strategies to strengthen English First Additional Language engagement. By foregrounding teachers’ lived experiences, the article contributes to ongoing debates on equitable and pedagogically sound technology integration in resource-constrained settings
The integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in education has the potential to enhance teaching and learning; however, several barriers hinder its effective adoption in South African schools. The paper reports on the study that examined the barrier to sustainable integration of ICT in Pietermaritzburg public secondary schools. The study used qualitative interview technique to collect data from 20 teachers. The Technology Organisation Environment (TOE) framework was used as a theoretical framework. The findings reveal that a lack of technological pedagogical content knowledge among teachers, high ICT infrastructure support costs, resource constraints, resistance to change, and theft and vandalization of ICT equipment significantly impact ICT adoption. Many teachers lack essential ICT skills, which affects their confidence in integrating technology into their teaching practices. Financial constraints further limit schools from maintaining ICT infrastructure, and resistance from experienced educators impedes change. Additionally, frequent theft and vandalization of ICT resources pose a serious risk, further hampering implementation. To address these challenges, the study recommends capacity-building initiatives to enhance teacher training, increased financial and technical support for schools, leadership-driven encouragement of ICT adoption, targeted awareness campaigns to mitigate resistance, strengthened security measures to protect ICT infrastructure, and equitable distribution of ICT resources to bridge the digital divide. A strategic and collaborative approach is essential to overcoming these barriers and ensuring effective ICT integration in South African schools.
In South Africa, there is a pressing need to produce teachers who can integrate technology in teaching and learning. Therefore, this qualitative study explores business studies student teachers’ experiences of integrating technology during teaching practice. This study is located within the interpretive paradigm and an exploratory case study is adopted as its research design. TPACK framework serves as the lens used to understand the experiences of six student teachers who were sampled purposefully. Data collected through focus group interviews were analysed thematically. The study revealed that student teachers found technology integration to be useful in their instructional practices. However, the study revealed that there was a lack of support from mentor teachers when student teachers were integrating technology. Despite this, they showed determination towards technology integration in their classrooms. Based on the findings, it is concluded that student teachers were determined to integrate technology during teaching practice.
The constantly evolving technology landscape inevitably calls for technological integration in learning and education. It is essential in the world we live in today for every learning method to include the use of new technologies. The study's primary goal is to examine strategies to integrate modern technologies into teaching in South Africa. The paper strives to understand the state of education in South Africa; the government’s contribution to education so far; teachers’ attitudes and competencies; as well as, and the benefits that new technologies can offer the education system in South Africa. A systematic review of literature that relates to the infusion of conventional technologies into educational settings has been adopted. The research conducted in this paper demonstrated that integrating technology into the teaching-learning process can be a useful strategy for training educators and learners for improved learning and educational outcomes in South Africa. Furthermore, the study's findings revealed that many South African instructors have a negative attitude regarding the usage of modern technologies for teaching. The paper recommended that the government should prioritizes funding for education; and concluded that blended learning is best used as the instructional strategy in South African classes.
A new technology’s acceptance also gets shaped according to users’ features, expectations and perceptions. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) that developed by Davis (1989), defends that there are perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use variables to determinants of a new technology’s usage by user. These perceptions predict the user’s behavior and explain it. The smart board that has common usage in modern classrooms provides effectiveness at education and learning activities. Teachers who use smart boards can present more effectively. This situation increases the teacher’s productivity and student’s learning success and improvement the class’s education quality. Existence of the smart board in the classroom motivates all by self. Thanks to this technological device, it is easy to access internet based study materials. This study’s purpose is testing the user features explanation power effects to usage of smart board, which is a new education tool, based on TAM variables. For performing of the research, surveys have actualized with 24 teachers at Bartin High School with smart boards. Survey data have been interpreted based on correlation, factor and regression analyses in WarpPLS 5.0. Results have been concluded from analyse strongly supports research model.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |