This study examined the evolution of teaching innovation in Information Studies through a systematic patent analytics approach. Using 3,379 granted patent records published between 1980 and 2024, the research mapped technological and pedagogical trends by analyzing annual growth patterns, jurisdictional distribution, ownership structures, inventor activity, citation impact, patent families, and Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) codes. The findings revealed a clear transition from foundational information processing technologies in the 1980s to multimedia and network-based learning systems in the 1990s, followed by the consolidation of digital libraries and instructional platforms in the 2000s. From the 2010s onward, pedagogical innovation increasingly reflected data-driven, platform oriented, and analytics-supported teaching systems, while the 2020s demonstrated the growing dominance of artificial intelligence enabled pedagogical technologies, including intelligent information retrieval and natural language processing. Jurisdictional and ownership analyses showed strong geographical concentration, with technologically advanced economies and multinational corporations leading innovation activity. Citation and patent family analyses indicated substantial technological diffusion and academic relevance, highlighting the cumulative nature of pedagogical innovation. Overall, the study demonstrated that patents serve as valuable indicators for tracing the evolution of teaching innovation and provided empirical insights into how pedagogical practices in Information Studies have been shaped by technological advancement and intellectual property dynamics.
AfiaN.PurnomoA.MaulanaF. I.PrasetyoY. T.GumasingM. J. J.RosyidahE.PersadaS. F. (2024). Innovations in social informatic: A patent landscape review. Procedia Computer Science, 234, 1228–1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2024.02.117
2.
AithalP. S.AithalS. (2023). Introducing systematic patent analysis as an innovative pedagogy tool/experiential learning project in HE institutes and universities to boost awareness of patent-based IPR. International Journal of Management, Technology, and Social Sciences (IJMTS), 8(3), 395–413. https://doi.org/10.47992/IJMTS.2581.6012.0300
3.
AmiruddinM. Z. B.AgustinM.SamsudinA.SuhandiA.CostuB. (2024). A decade of TPACK in science education: Trends and insights from bibliometric analysis. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 8(4), 466–488. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202426201
4.
AngeliC.ValanidesN. (2013). Technology mapping: An approach for developing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), 199–221. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.2.e
5.
BoninoD.CiaramellaA.CornoF. (2010). Review of the state-of-the-art in patent information and forthcoming evolutions in intelligent patent informatics. World Patent Information, 32(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2009.05.008
6.
CarvalhoA.TeixeiraS. J.OlimL.CampanellaS. D.CostaT. (2021). Pedagogical innovation in higher education and active learning methodologies–a case study. Education & Training, 63(2), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-05-2020-0144
7.
ChangH. J.WangS. W. (2025). Advancements in tokamak technology for fusion energy: A bibliometric and patent trend analysis (2014–2024). Energies, 18(16), 4450. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18164450
8.
ChinA. (2016). Teaching patents as real options. North Carolina Law Review, 95(5), 1433–1458.
9.
FernandesS.AbelhaM.AlvesA. C.Ferreira OliveiraA. T. (2024). Pedagogic innovation and student learning in higher education: Perceptions, practices and challenges. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1336214. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1336214
10.
FraserS. (2019). Understanding innovative teaching practice in higher education: A framework for reflection. Higher Education Research and Development, 38(7), 1371–1385. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1654439
11.
FriedmanR. S.DeekF. P. (2004). Innovation and education in the digital age: Reconciling the roles of pedagogy, technology, and the business of learning. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(4), 403–412. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2003.819657
12.
HalderI. (2023). Innovation pedagogy of 21st century: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 5(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i03.3339
13.
HoidnS.KärkkäinenK. (2014). Promoting skills for innovation in higher education: A literature review on the effectiveness of problem-based learning and of teaching behaviours. In: OECD Education Working Papers, OECD Publishing, 100. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3tsj67l226-en
14.
KemberD. (2003). To control or not to control: The question of whether experimental designs are appropriate for evaluating teaching innovations in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(1), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930301684
15.
KettunenJ.Kairisto‐MertanenL.PenttiläT. (2013). Innovation pedagogy and desired learning outcomes in higher education. On the Horizon, 21(4), 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1108/oth-08-2011-0024
16.
KhamitovaA. (2023). Innovative learning spaces of higher education: A systematic mapping review of themes. TechTrends, 67(5), 830–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00887-1
LeeK.LeeS. (2013). Patterns of technological innovation and evolution in the energy sector: A patent-based approach. Energy Policy, 59, 415–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.005
19.
LinaresI. M. P.De PauloA. F.PortoG. S. (2019). Patent-based network analysis to understand technological innovation pathways and trends. Technology in Society, 59, Article 101134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101134
MacMillanD.ThunaM. (2010). Patents under the microscope: Teaching patent searching to graduate and undergraduate students in the life sciences. Reference Services Review, 38(3), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907321011070918
22.
MajorJ.Tait-McCutcheonS. L.AverillR.GilbertA.KnewstubbB.MortlockA.JonesL. (2020). Pedagogical innovation in higher education: Defining what we mean. International Journal of Innovative Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (IJITLHE), 1(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJITLHE.20200701.oa1
23.
MesquitaC.LopesR. P.GarcíaJ. Á.RamaM. D. L. C. D. R. (2014). Pedagogical innovation in higher education: Teachers’ perceptions. In Innovation and teaching technologies: New directions in research, practice and policy (pp. 51–60). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04825-3_5
24.
MohammadiN.MaghsoudiM.SabetM.SoghiM. (2025). Unveiling the evolution of educational technologies: A patent-based clustering and life cycle analysis. IEEE Access, 13, 55740–55768. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3528998
25.
NicolaidesA. (2012). Innovative teaching and learning methodologies for higher education institutions. Educational Research, 3(8), 620–626.
26.
PaladiniF.D’UrsoF.BroccoloF.PolliniM. (2025). Innovation in indoor disinfection technologies during COVID-19: A comprehensive patent and market analysis (2020–2025). Air, 3(4), 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/air3040028
27.
PalmerM. S.GieringJ. A. (2024). Characterizing pedagogical innovation in higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 49(3), 453–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09717-5
28.
Pejić BachM.PivarJ.FabacR. (2024). Emerging trends in generative artificial intelligence: Insights from patent analysis using lens.org toolkit. In ITIS 2024 book of proceedings: Harnessing the power of big data for green and digital transition. Springer, pp. 151–160.
29.
RamadhanM. A.SutartoS.WidodoS.AnisahA. (2024). Bibliometric analysis to reveal research evolution and educational technology trends in civil engineering education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(3), 87–110. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.3.5
30.
Ramirez-HernandezL. F.Isaza-CastroJ. G. (2019). When size matters: Trends in innovation and patents in Latin American universities. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 14(3), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242019000300044
31.
SharmaP.TripathiR. C. (2017). Patent citation: A technique for measuring the knowledge flow of information and innovation. World Patent Information, 51, 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2017.11.003
32.
SickN.MerigóJ. M.KrätzigO.ListJ. (2021). Forty years of world patent information: A bibliometric overview. World Patent Information, 64, Article 102011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2020.102011
33.
TamtamS.LaguidiA.ElkalayA. (2025). Data integration systems: A comprehensive bibliometric and patent landscape (2015–2024). In International conference on connected objects and artificial intelligence (pp. 897–902): Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66055-4_89
34.
Van RaanA. (2017). Patent citations analysis and its value in research evaluation: A review and a new approach to map technology-relevant research. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(1), 13–50. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0002
WongT. M. (2019). Teaching innovations in Asian higher education: Perspectives of educators. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 13(2), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOJU-05-2019-0022
38.
YanezM.KhalilT. M.WalshS. T. (2010). IAMOT and education: Defining a technology and innovation management (TIM) body-of-knowledge (BoK) for graduate education (TIM BoK). Technovation, 30(7–8), 389–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2010.04.002
39.
ZhaiY.LiuZ.ZhaoR.ZhangX.ZhengG. (2025). A patent-based technology roadmap for AI-Powered manipulators: An evolutionary analysis of the B25J classification. Informatics, 12(3), 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics12030069
