The study of knowledge, learning, happiness, and teaching raises fundamental questions within the academic field. Ghoreifi and Djaladat (2022) highlight that knowledge concealment is a recurring practice in higher education. In this context, it is pertinent to analyze various methodological approaches that enable the evaluation, planning, analysis, interpretation, and exploration of knowledge in its different manifestations. Freire (2002) introduces the concept of the emancipatory educator, while Zhang et al., (2022) emphasize that individual differences influence knowledge concealment. In this regard, the educator plays a central role in the process of unlearning and perceiving structured academic realities. However, this endeavor faces several limitations, including the dichotomy between education aimed at professional training and that focused on comprehensive education. Consequently, questions arise regarding the validity and applicability of the knowledge imparted. Quiceno (2018) argues that academic thought has been shaped by structured cognitive development, resulting in a mechanical learning process. Zhao and Luo (2024) examine the effects of knowledge concealment on student creativity and performance.

From this perspective, the relationship between knowledge and hope is in a state of constant tension. Freire (2010) defines hopelessness as a mechanism of silencing and denial of reality, which affects the transmission of knowledge. Finkielkraut (1987) warns against the disregard for universality in intellectual activity and the glorification of particularisms. In this regard, the teaching profession must remain focused on knowledge construction and student development. Xing (2022) indicates that the absence of shared ethical priorities generates conflicts in education, reinforcing the need for a more structured approach to knowledge transmission.

The analysis of the educator’s capacity for learning and their ontological position in the object-subject relationship is crucial. Hessen (2007) addresses this issue from an epistemological perspective. Additionally, the educator as a researcher, acting as a knowledge generator, faces challenges in terms of objectivity in their investigations. Maturana (1997) describes the educator as a generator of reality through their operations in the praxis of living, raising questions about the nature of hidden knowledge within learning. Liu et al., (2020) warn that the lack of a conducive environment for knowledge exchange can lead to interpersonal distrust within the academic community.

This study examines the support that artificial intelligence can provide in guiding the scientific community, with a specific focus on the role of the educator as a researcher. The methodology is based on a literature review of indexed databases such as Scopus and Web of Science (WoS), whose results have been analyzed using the algorithm implemented by Core of Science, allowing for a tree-structured organization (Zuluagaet al., 2022). This approach facilitates coherent information management and enhances traceability in research. Additionally, contributions from classical authors have been considered, whose work has significantly impacted the understanding of education and knowledge.

The analysis of recent academic contributions enables a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by educators and learners in their formative process. Marina (2010) states that Franz Kafka perceived himself as a failure, not due to his literary performance but because of the difficulty of living, raising questions about the purpose of education: Should it be directed towards life preparation or scientific training? Various limitations exist in knowledge access and transmission, generating uncertainty within educational processes. Joly (1979) warns about the alteration of a nation’s character and its impact on social structure. Nevertheless, contemporary education is in constant transformation, with researchers continuously contributing to the development of both educators and students. This study aims to synthesize academic contributions from the last two decades regarding knowledge generation, learning, research, and educational training.

Based on these elements, a theoretical framework is proposed, grounded in a qualitative methodology supported by a scientometric analysis of authors and countries. The organization of knowledge follows a tree structure, where classical authors from the roots, contemporary researchers constitute the trunk, and recent scientific advancements shape the branches. Thus, the concept of the Tree of Science (ToS), proposed by Valencia-Hernández et al. (2020), is adopted, providing an analytical structure that allows for an understanding of the evolution of academic knowledge.

This study employs a qualitative methodology with an applied purpose, aimed at interpreting the factors that affect educational quality. The research is based on a scientometric approach, allowing for a detailed analysis of the evolution of academic discourse on teacher-researchers. Using bibliometric tools, we identify patterns, trends, and key contributions in this field.

Data collection was conducted using the WoS and Scopus databases. The search strategy included the phrase “research teach” in titles, abstracts, and keywords, yielding 267 records in WoS and 439 in Scopus. Although Scopus produced a larger volume of results, WoS contained 166 additional documents (30.64%) not present in Scopus, highlighting the importance of combining both sources. To consolidate and analyze these data, the Bibliometrics and ToS packages were used (Boteroet al., 2023). See Table 1 for a summary of the main parameters used in data selection and analysis.

Subsequently, text mining and web scraping techniques were applied to extract relevant metadata. This process allowed us to structure a dataset with 568 documents, enabling a detailed analysis of the academic landscape regarding teacher-researchers.

Scientometric analysis enables the mapping of scientific production and its trajectories within the field of education. This approach facilitates the identification of emerging trends and thematic developments in educational research (Aguirre & Paredes Cuervo, 2023; Robledoet al., 2023a).

Scientometric Production – Evaluation of the volume and evolution of academic publications.

Country-Specific Contributions – Identification of the leading regions producing knowledge in education.

Journal Analysis – Review of publication venues and their impact within the field.

Author Collaboration Analysis – Study of co-authorship networks and academic partnerships.

This process follows a structured approach, beginning with a general analysis of annual scientific production and progressing toward a detailed examination of author collaboration networks. Through this analysis, we gain insights into research dynamics and knowledge dissemination in the field (Robledoet al., 2023b).

To complement the scientometric analysis, the ToS algorithm was applied, which organizes scientific production into a hierarchical structure resembling a tree. This model distinguishes three levels within academic knowledge (Robledoet al., 2022):

Roots – Fundamental articles that establish the theoretical foundations of the field.

Trunk – Studies linking foundational concepts with recent research.

Branches– Emerging contributions that expand existing knowledge and open new lines of inquiry.

The ToS methodology has been applied across multiple disciplines, including mathematics (Zuluagaet al., 2022), management (Erazo-Muñozet al., 2022), and natural sciences (Durán-Arangurenet al., 2021), demonstrating its effectiveness in knowledge classification and analysis. Eggers et al., (2022) provide a detailed description of the initial diffusion process of this methodology.

In the context of this study, the ToS was used to examine the fragmentation of knowledge in education (Geboerset al., 2015). According to these authors, teacher training must consider four key aspects: social interest, prosocial ability, reflective thinking, and assertiveness. However, beyond these factors, the structural analysis of ToS enables the identification of the most influential works and their relationship to the development of knowledge in the educational field.

Thus, the combination of scientometric mapping and ToS analysis provides a comprehensive view of the state of the art on teacher-researchers, establishing a solid foundation for future research and developments in education.

The findings of this research indicate a lack of information regarding hidden knowledge, suggesting that academic and scientific training does not always provide comprehensive access to information. Instead, knowledge is presented in a fragmented manner within the academic community.

Furthermore, various studies have identified the use of symbolism, anagrams, and puzzles in scientific production, which can lead to subjective and biased interpretations (Geboerset al., 2015). This complexity may hinder the interpretation of findings and the identification of the researcher’s intent. To address this issue, a scientometric analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between teacher-researchers and knowledge generation. Below, the scientometric mapping analysis is presented.

Figure 1 provides an overview of the article production related to the role of the teacher-researcher over the past 24 years. A progressive increase in research is observed in the Scopus database, consistently surpassing the number of publications in WoS.

Figure 1:
Total production annual vs. total citations. Source: Construction of the authors based on RStudio, Gephi y EDA.

The literature production can be classified into three significant stages or milestones. The initial growth phase, spanning from 2000 to 2012, is marked by the influential article by Griffiths (2004), which has had a substantial impact on the academic community, receiving 325 citations. Another notable contribution comes from Loughran (2007), with 205 citations. Additionally, Newell et al., (2011) emphasize the importance of argumentative reading and writing in learning and teaching, accumulating 180 citations.

The thematic growth and consolidation phase (2013-2019) highlights the work of Tight (2016), who examines the interconnection between teaching and research. However, the most cited article during this phase is by Cadez et al., (2017), which evaluates academia and the quality of knowledge management, with a total of 123 citations. Key stakeholders have been extensively studied in the literature, with notable contributions from Mitchell and Freeman. Nevertheless, Spanierman & Smith (2017) provide a practical approach to understanding roles and responsibilities. Exploring the realm of digital knowledge transmission and online courses, McDaniels et al., (2016) introduce their work on creating communities centered on dynamic learning.

In the United States, 151 publications in high-impact scientific journals have been recorded by 1,445 researchers. Of these publications, 31% (48) were published in Q1 quartile journals, 13% (20) in the Q2 quartile, 6.6% (10) in the Q3 quartile, and 6.6% (10) in the Q4 quartile. The most cited article, with 180 citations, focuses on demonstrating the importance of inquiry-based techniques in the process of teaching university-level research (Griffiths, 2004).

Regarding the United Kingdom, with 71 publications, it ranks second behind the United States. Among these publications, 33% (24) are in the Q1 quartile, and their citations reach 22.84%. The most cited article, with 325 citations, studies the nature and significance of research, highlighting key factors in knowledge production modes (Griffiths, 2004).

On the other hand, Australia accounts for 6.04% of the publications, with a notable 46% in the Q1 quartile. It ranks third with a total of 385 citations. The most cited article in Australia explores the need for documenting learning through self-directed learning (Loughran, 2007).

In fourth place, both Canada and South Africa have 21 publications. However, South Africa stands out with 7.01% of citations, in contrast to Canada’s 1.33%. Regarding journal distribution, Canada reaches 38% in Q1, while South Africa barely reaches 9.5%. The most cited article in Canada, with 30 citations, highlights the advantages of translingual pedagogy in English for academic purposes. On the other hand, in South Africa, the most cited article, with 42 citations, focuses on studying conceptual understanding and analyzing the nature of expert knowledge (Anderson & Schönborn, 2008).

Finally, noteworthy publications from countries such as China, Germany, and Spain can be highlighted, with 20, 20, and 16 publications respectively. Among this group, Spain stands out with 25% of these publications in the Q1 quartile, while Germany does not have any in this quartile. Notably, the article with the highest number of citations in China investigates teaching and learning in relation to ethics (Alburyet al., 2011).

Table 2 summarizes the information on the 10 most productive countries in this field, consolidating key analyzed data. Additionally, Figure 2 illustrates the collaboration network between countries, complementing the previous analysis. It is observed that the countries with the highest collaborations are primarily the United Kingdom and the United States, with diverse collaboration networks across different areas and small research communities. A total of six interconnected research communities were identified, reflecting the diversity in research approaches within the teacher-researcher field.

Figure 2:
Collaboration network among countries. Source: Construction of the authors based on RStudio, Gephi y EDA.

The analysis of journals facilitates the recognition of the most prolific publications and their correlation with a specific research topic. This section is bifurcated into two parts: the first part scrutinizes the top 10 most productive journals, while the second part investigates the clustering of journals around a particular topic. As depicted in Table 3, six out of the top 10 journals are ranked in the first quartile (Q1). Intriguingly, the journal with the highest productivity does not necessarily correlate with the highest quality, and it primarily focuses on biochemistry education. This anomaly can be attributed to the fact that this journal published a series of papers in 2010 that explored the intersection of research and teaching (Anderson & Rogan, 2010; Parraet al., 2010; Schönborn & Anderson, 2010).

The Journal of Higher Education, boasting the second-highest h-index, has published papers exploring the role of the teacher and the relational nature of research (Kaasilaet al., 2021; Mathieson, 2019). Another journal, the International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, which specializes in health, has also published papers on the research-teacher paradigm, specifically within the context of oncology (Wallneret al., 2014). In essence, the table underscores the broad and dynamic range of research pertaining to the research-teacher topic.

Figure 3 presents a citation network of journals, delineating three principal thematic clusters. The first cluster (depicted in orange) encompasses journals that focus on education within specific disciplines, such as mathematics or biology. The second cluster (illustrated in green) comprises medical journals, reflecting the academic literature’s emphasis on the research-teaching paradigm from a caregiving perspective (Merrilees, 2016). The third cluster (represented in purple) pertains more to the field of education sciences, signifying studies that explore the intersection of research and teaching (Reid & Gardner, 2020).

Figure 3:
Journal citation network with three clusters. Source: Construction of the authors based on RStudio, Gephi y EDA.

This section presents the most significant researchers according to their academic production on the topic of research-teacher, along with the scientific collaboration network of each individual’s personal networks (ego-network). Table 4 displays significant productivity from authors affiliated with the United States, including Professor Trevor Anders, who is widely recognized for his proposed models to bridge the gap between research and teaching (Schönborn & Anderson, 2010).

Figure 4 presents the scientific collaboration network of authors with the most research. It is observed that there is a community around Professors Anscher and Barker, possibly due to their thematic affinity around health topics (Wallneret al., 2014), which also causes it to be a community that clearly differentiates itself from others. Additionally, only Professors Gauthier and Griffin appear with scientific collaborations due to their thematic affinity to animal research (Griffin & Gauthier, 2004) and geographical proximity.

Figure 4:
Collaboration network of the top 10 researchers. Source: Construction of the authors based on RStudio, Gephi y EDA.

Figure 5 provides a visual depiction of the ToS for the research-teacher domain. The ToS metaphor commences with seminal or classic studies, which lay the foundation for the field. This is followed by the trunk, comprising papers that structurally underpin the research topic. The leaves represent the most recent studies in the field. However, the primary focus of this paper lies in the branches rather than the leaves, signifying the evolution and diversification of the research-teacher domain over time.

Figure 5:
xxx

The first article identified within the roots was Professor Neumann’s work regarding academic perceptions of the relationship between research and teaching as components of their profession (Neumann, 1992). The findings revealed a strong belief in the symbiotic relationship between these two aspects. However, the second study posits that this relationship may not always be fruitful. Although both components contain the element of learning, they are applied differently depending on the context. For this reason, Professors Hattie and Marsh conducted a review of this relationship, concluding that there is no inherent connection between research and teaching (Hattie & Marsh, 1996). Nonetheless, Hattie and Marsh (1996) propose that these relationships can be either positive or negative. While the majority of researchers may perceive these relationships as positive, a wide array of factors can influence this relationship and create a divide. In this initial stage, proposals emerge that highlight both the positive and negative aspects of the research-teaching relationship, without reaching a consolidated understanding of the topic.

When discussing the trunk in research, we are facing a structure that stems from the knowledge of a scientific community that explores the paths of the researcher and teaches daily. It is timely to mention in this case the study of Kaasila et al., (2021), referring to the role of the researcher and teaching. It is an approach to the fragmented identities of the professional, which puts tensions of equivalence that hinders the role of the teacher. Hence the importance of the pedagogical processes of teaching, learning, and production of knowledge remains uncertain. For this, we have analyzed Griffiths (2004), resorting to the nexus between research and teaching and the disciplines of the environment. Despite investigating the forms of knowledge production, the teacher returns to the crossroads of life, where he receives validated knowledge but in doubt of its truthfulness.

This is how another actor becomes part of knowledge, and it is the consciousness, experiences, and perceptions of the student and the teacher. For Healey et al., (2010), the fact of having teachers recognized by the scientific community enthuses and redirects teaching. But we consider that it can be an inflexible point that prevents curiosity to investigate or teach in another sense, and we can come to take for granted what is imparted, without room for discussion. This is what we call directed research, and it is what we are exposed to in science, a reduction of the teacher’s and learner’s spectrum in relation to the consciousness of knowledge. This is when the doubt of performance evaluation in academia comes in, as noted by Cadez et al., (2017). That is, the risks in creativity and innovation in teaching and learning, which is timely to mention, given the model to follow or implemented in school.

This process could be defined as alienating, both in the teacher and the learner. In the words of Freire, it is easy to dominate consciences. It arises like the bird of satisfaction, the educator of vocation, that creative one that in a significant way originates new didactic and pedagogical techniques. The one who has to compete even with Mephistopheles, a character in the book Faust, who satirically says:

“I will tell you, as for this other science, because I do not want to cause errors, that it is very difficult to escape false paths: that in it much poison is hidden and of the triaca it is barely distinguished” (Goethe, 1808/2012, p. 136,139).

The two actors are already in a paradigm and uncertainties, but it is not easy to remove that veil from the eyes, it is not easy to go to the awakening of consciousness to achieve emancipation. As described by Freire, this is achieved through techniques supported by advanced pedagogical theories and extensive research, seeking to remove a man from his ignorance, not through the direct action of a teacher, but from the very exercise of the faculties that he is interested in developing, such as awareness, self-reflection, and full freedom. It is worth clarifying that this freedom is nourished by free will, which in turn strengthens knowledge and exercises that force called will, that which few nourish.

The thematic characteristic of this subarea revolves around student learning when there is a relationship between teaching and research. For instance, Bouatouch et al., (2022) elucidates the principal components of a class with a research-teaching focus through data visualization. Additionally, Howell (2021) conducted an experiment with medical students, identifying the primary positive and negative impacts of this type of teaching. Gros et al., (2020) validate that when learning connects with research, it enables students to develop broader competencies. In this vein, Mathieson (2019) utilized a social approach to comprehend the integration of research and teaching. The authors conducted a qualitative study to understand how researchers construct narratives and integrate them into teaching.

It is imperative to discuss the ethics of the teacher and the learner in a knowledge community, where education takes on significant importance. In this context, Aristóteles (1984) alludes to the virtue of dignity. He majestically displays this dignity amidst self-sufficiency and servile courtesy, simultaneously highlighting the dignified individual. Meanwhile, Hulpke (2022) analyzes the ethical teacher and related research, teaching, and practical life, emphasizing the characteristics or qualities of the conscious teacher: to research, to teach, and to serve. However, we must not lose sight of what Nietzsche (2020) pointed out, how we have allowed our senses to freely rest on all that is superficial, and that our thinking has a divine longing to leap and to make false reasoning as a prank.

In the case of Clark & Hordosy (2019), they delve a bit further into the connection between teacher and learner and the findings in the context of a post-truth society. Thus, uncertainties increase in learning and knowledge, which is projected into life with obstacles. Particularly, Chen (2018) denotes the need for objectivity in business academia. They highlight the need to have a respected teacher and to train students in ethics, making teaching and research a balance in pedagogical conception. It is here where the concern for the truthfulness of what is researched plays with what is taught, and the ethics of the teacher is at stake, given the responsibility in the search for knowledge. In this sense, we find works that highlight the concern for the gaps between research and teaching, as shown by Burke-Smalley et al., (2017), emphasizing the value of systematic scientific research for understanding.

We are going through a critical moment in research, and it is related to social influence, perhaps fragmented and distorted information at the service of an educational structure that, undoubtedly, the teacher and the learner ignore. It is complex to talk about evaluation in academia in fields of research and education, especially when knowledge or what is allowed to be known is generally imparted to a school population like a recipe. It is no longer about banking education but an education directed according to what is needed, which has mutilated the interest in research. Cadez et al., (2017) consider that the academic load is one of those obstacles that reduce the researcher’s time. They also describe the danger that this load represents in reducing creativity and innovation and how it separates quality in education from productivity in teaching.

We cannot assume that excellent researchers are good for teaching, according to Giangreco et al., (2013). Teaching experience is very important considering the ability to inquire, ask, and reach a reliable source. Perhaps we are talking about the knowledge of knowledge and the self-management of growth described by Ho et al., (2013). That filigree between intellectual capital is accompanied by research and teaching. We must appreciate that, apparently, intellectuality is given by knowledge and will as well, to reach free will, but what makes us think of the achievement of intellectuality? We give recognition to that emancipating teacher, to that restless learner, but we lack appreciation for the capacity of that being to reach a good living, a quality of life, and an awakening of consciousness. A great confusion exists between intellectuality, knowledge, and skill—the ability to remove the veil from the eyes and know reality.

For this reason, some authors speak of dialogue as a means of relating to knowledge, to reach a truthful investigation, not simply one accepted and supported in scientific communities. Griffiths (2004) argues that research and teaching should be seen with respect to the environment and the modes of knowledge production in practice-oriented fields. We need to ask ourselves about the type of knowledge and tools for investigating the learner and their qualities. In this sense, Lindsay et al., (2002) analyze what postgraduate students ask themselves about the topic. They show how postgraduate students highlight the interest, relevance, and usefulness of that research teacher, who feeds their learning and generates teaching models.

The inaugural article of this branch illustrates how theory and analytical approaches have engendered an interactive digital narrative, proposing a model for researchers to engage students through diverse narratives, as discussed by Koenitz & Eladhari (2022). Additionally, Caron et al., (2020) proposed a social engagement approach, which was substantiated by Lambert & Penney (2020), demonstrating that educators interpret and enhance classes through adaptive and pluralistic development when linked to political aspects.

Another intriguing aspect of the gap between teaching and research is the implications and responsibilities towards minorities, as analyzed by Lewis et al., (2018), who critique the lack of integration in the classroom. Finally, Torino et al., (2019) consolidates in his chapter the needs and advantages of a research-focused education.

The academic programs offered in institutions are shaped by public policies, Many times as democratization of access to education and the right to knowledge. The information has been hidden and for this purpose technology has been implemented over the centuries. The school has maintained curricular programs modeled and projected to societies. Hence, the importance of the role of the teacher-research developing a teacher´s research capacity, the essential role of teacher education.

In conclusion, this study sheds light on the critical role of teacher-researchers in navigating the uncertainties and complexities of knowledge and learning. This is the case of reflections on a field of questioned conceptions. As education continues to evolve, it is essential for educators to approach their work with objectivity, “critical thinking” (not possible), and a willingness to adapt to new ideas and approaches. The ToS platform provides a valuable tool for analyzing outstanding publications in Scopus and Web of Science, enabling researchers to stay up-to-date on the latest developments in their field.

Ultimately, the success of education depends on the harmonious relationships between teachers, researchers, and students, as they work together to find pertinent solutions to the problems of current education and life. By embracing uncertainty and seeking out new knowledge, teacher-researchers can help shape the future of education for generations to come.

This is why, in the midst of beliefs and attitudes, it is necessary to develop a technical framework for perceiving and understanding the investigated world, supported by didactics. In the face of crossroads and uncertainties, the teacher should firmly embrace sensitivity, emotion, understanding, and knowledge, but above all, they should know how to explore hidden knowledge to help the learner comprehend a world of joy rather than uncertainties. Likewise, it is necessary to reject flattery from the ignorant. They argue that praise binds and controls the students instead of liberating them, and value the advice of the wise. It is striking how much trust is placed in those who impart knowledge, and this is frightening because they are given the title of integrity, which is validated by the learner, someone who does not strive to seek scientific reason to achieve certainty but rather engages in the game of flattery.

Finally, it is necessary to understand that, if knowledge is hidden in symbols, anagrams, enigmas and training is directed by suggestion, hermeticism, rhetoric and vanity, we will continue to think as others think and we will continue repeating what others say, whether true or false. This is why science validates what it wants to validate.