The First 25 Years of Digital Marketing Education Research: A Thematic Exploration and an Agenda for Future Inquiry

Abstract

The internet has changed marketing education and disrupted the traditional approach to teaching marketing. Digital marketing as a field of study is a dynamic discipline that requires educators to evaluate their curricula and teaching methods constantly. This research reviews the digital marketing education research over the past 25 years to gauge the current standing of the extant literature. A multi-step process with specific research goals was implemented to assess the current state. First, a thematic review of the literature based on the modules of capabilities developed by the Digital Marketing Institute and the American Marketing Association contributed to identifying four eras of digital marketing education research. Next, the authors assess areas of research coinciding with the topical review to assess relevant research in each area. We conclude with recommendations for research to fill the gaps, including calls for work in search engine optimization, analytics, and email marketing, as well as greater attention when submitting article keywords, as finding papers when searching EBSCO or Web of Science depends on relevant keywords.

Keywords

thematic review digital marketing education digital marketing eras marketing keywords

The world has changed drastically since the internet was made public, including how people purchase products, communicate with others, and receive an education. Chief among the disruption and reshaping of business and education is the ability to market products using digital technologies (Danneels, 2004). This research reviews the digital marketing education research over the past 25 years to gauge the current standing of the extant literature. A multi-step process with specific research goals was implemented, and based on the results, research gaps were identified to create an agenda for future research.

Defining Digital Marketing

The field of digital marketing encompasses a wide variety of internet tools with evolving terminology that is inconsistent and frequently changes. When conducting their thematic review of the digital, social media, and mobile literature (DSMM), Lamberton and Stephen (2016) did not define digital marketing. However, they did address this problem regarding terminology and the changing landscape. Since then, various thought leaders in the industry have proposed multiple definitions of digital marketing. The American Marketing Association (AMA) is the premier marketing organization in the United States, providing education and support to practitioners and academics through channels such as on-demand training, research, certifications, and conferences. In addition, the AMA publishes a trade magazine, Marketing News, and five academic journals: Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Journal of International Marketing, and Journal of Interactive Marketing. Due to the acceptance of the AMA by academics as a premier leader in research and education, we chose to use the AMA definition to guide this research:

Digital marketing refers to any marketing methods conducted through electronic devices which utilize some form of a computer, including online marketing efforts conducted on the Internet. In the process of conducting digital marketing, a business might leverage websites, search engines, blogs, social media, video, email, and similar channels to reach customers (Eisenberg, n.d.).

Internet and Digital Marketing Education Background

For more than three decades, the internet has been available to the public for personal and business use. In the early days, websites were primarily static information displays, and search engines were directories rather than algorithm-based. However, search engine marketing (SEM) changed in 1993 when Hotwire bought the first clickable banner ad, and the era of digital advertising began (Monnappa, 2021). Over the years, the utilization of the internet for business purposes has gained more prominence in the global economy, and by 2023, retail e-commerce sales were projected to be 6.31 trillion worldwide (Chevalier, 2022). By 2023, digital ad spending was $679.8 billion, projected to be $855 billion by 2026 (Statista Research Department, 2022)

As more marketers utilized the internet as a tool for marketing and a platform for e-commerce, marketing educators soon recognized the importance of incorporating digital marketing into the curriculum. The publication of digital marketing education research began shortly after the call by Lamb et al. (1995) to integrate the teaching of more business skills into the marketing curriculum. In 1996, the first articles focused on digital marketing education were published. The Journal of Advertising Education (JAE) debuted in 1996 with one issue published in May, which included an article that addressed the importance of demonstrating how to search the World Wide Web for advertising students (Barnes, 1996). Later that year, the Journal of Marketing Education (JME) published the first article (Siegel, 1996) that emphasized the necessity of incorporating the World Wide Web into marketing courses. Siegel included sample assignments with quantitative feedback and provided guidance to marketing educators lacking an industry background in digital marketing.

The research focused on digital marketing was sporadic for the next several years. It was limited to JME and JAE until Williamson et al. (2002) proposed the creation of a Bachelor of Science in E-Business in Marketing Education Review (MER). However, between 1996 and 2010, the published research remained sparse, and some years yielded not even one publication related to this emerging and dynamic discipline.

Eventually, in 2011, a paradigm shift occurred when Wymbs (2011) suggested that marketing graduates lacked preparation for entry into the workforce and that educators should incorporate hard skills in digital marketing into the curriculum. Concurrently, Harrigan and Hulbert (2011) proposed that a “New Marketing DNA” existed. They advocated for educators and universities to bring additional focus and allocate more resources to digital marketing to prepare students for their careers. By 2015, JME had published two special issues focused on digital marketing. In 2015, Victoria Crittenden and William Crittenden served as Co-Editors for two special issues: “Digital and Social Media Marketing in Business Education: Implications for the Marketing Curriculum” (2015b) and “Digital and Social Media Marketing in Business Education: Implications for Student Engagement” (2015a). In 2019, JME revisited the need for more digital marketing research and published two special issues focused on digital marketing education and the importance of using technology in the classroom to teach digital natives. Victoria Crittenden and Robert A. Peterson served as co-editors for “Digital Disruption: The Transdisciplinary Future of Marketing Education” (2019a) and “Keeping the Marketing Curriculum Current in an Era of Digital Disruption” (2019b).

By 2019, most marketing programs heeded these calls to update their curriculum by adding digital marketing courses. Langan et al. (2019) found evidence that most marketing programs offered at least one course related to digital marketing by reviewing the curriculum of 477 AACSB-accredited business schools. They discovered that 73% of schools with a marketing program had at least one digital marketing course. The findings of Langan et al. (2019) suggest that the discipline has matured, as most AACSB-accredited universities offer courses in digital marketing. Some programs have gone so far as to integrate digital into all their marketing curricula (Rohm et al., 2019). The growing body of research provides further support for this assumption.

By conducting a semantic thematic review of the extant research, it is possible to understand a discipline’s evolution and advance an agenda for future research. In a thematic review of the DSMM literature, Lamberton and Stephen (2016) performed keyword searches in EBSCO of the DSMM literature published between 2000 and 2015. They started with several of the premier marketing journals (Journal of Marketing, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science, and the Marketing section of Management Science). Still, they left out the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. Also included in their search were the most highly cited DSMM articles in the specialized premier marketing journals (Journal of Interactive Marketing, Journal of Retailing, and International Journal of Research in Marketing). By performing a macro-level keyword analysis of DSMM research and comparing the results to keywords used in the business press, they identified three eras of DSMM research and themes within each era:

Era 1-Digital Media Shapes and Facilitates Buyer Behavior (2000-2004)

Era 2- Consumers Shape DSMM: WOM and Networks (2005-2010)

Era 3- The Age of Social Media (2011-2015).

This method can be helpful because it compares academic research to what industry emphasizes as critical. One problem with this approach is that the author-submitted keywords are not always descriptive of digital marketing topics.

An additional approach for assessing a body of work is to conduct a bibliometric review of a topic. Krishen et al. (2021) utilized a Social Network Analysis (SNA) methodology to identify the top producers of digital marketing research by country and academic institution. To find the published research, they used Boolean operators derived from common keywords in digital marketing that ranged from broad topics (e.g., “internet marketing,” “social media marketing,” and “digital advertising”) to more specific topics (e.g., “blog marketing,” “Facebook advertising,” and “Pay-per-click advertising”). They evaluated authorship networks and topics, identifying five stages of digital marketing research encompassing 1990-2019. Their findings did not address digital marketing education research; however, their identified stages provided additional guidance for this research:

Stage 1—Startup (up to 2000)

Stage 2—Customer satisfaction and analysis stage (2000-2005)

Stage 3—Social network and multichannel (2006-2010)

Stage 4—Customer engagement (2011-2015)

Stage 5—AI, IoT, and virtual reality (2016-2019)

Classifying Articles With Industry Terminology

We implemented the semantic thematic analysis methodology outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006) and adapted by Lamberton and Stephen (2016) for digital, social media, and mobile marketing (DSMM) articles. They compared their themes to industry terminology by searching industry publications, white papers, and other sources for layman’s language. Since the publication of Lamberton and Stephen’s thematic review, the DMI collaborated with the AMA to identify nine categories of digital marketing skill sets and competencies to create their ten modules of capabilities for the dual certification in the DMI+AMA Professional Certificate in Digital Marketing (Digital Marketing Institute [DMI], n.d.). These modules are an accepted categorization by industry, and practitioners complete the DMI+AMA certification to indicate an understanding of the discipline. In addition to using the AMA definition for digital marketing, this research used these categories to classify articles focused on teaching digital marketing. Only the first DMI+AMA module did not contribute a category for the analysis as it only served as an introduction to digital marketing. Our justification for selecting this categorization is that it supports the calls by academics to prepare students as practitioners (e.g., Harrigan & Hulbert, 2011; Wymbs, 2011) and is more transparent due to our clear outline versus stating that we found terms in various business press articles as in Lamberton and Stephen (2016).

Within each of the nine categories of digital marketing skills and competencies, the certification is broken down into main topics:

Content Marketing: Concepts and Strategy, Developing a Content Marketing Plan, Publishing and Distributing Content, Using Content Research to Find Opportunities, Creating and Curating Content, Metrics and Performance, and Enhancing Your Creativity

Social Media Marketing: Key Social Platforms, Growing and Engaging an Audience, Developing Data-Driven Audience and Campaign Insights, Setting up a Social Media Experience for a Business, and Creating and Optimizing Social Media Campaigns

Search Engine Optimization: SEO Fundamentals (Paid and Organic Search), Keywords and SEO Content Plan, Measuring SEO Performance, Aligning SEO and Business Objectives, and Optimize Organic Search Ranking

Paid Search (PPC) with Google Ads: Fundamentals of Paid Search, Search Campaign Management, Paid Search Campaign Creation with Google Ads, and Paid Search Campaign Measurement

YouTube and Display Advertising: Fundamentals of Display and Video Advertising, Google Display Network and Video Ad Formats, Targeting Display and Video Campaigns, Creating and Managing a YouTube Channel, Creating Display and Video Campaigns, and Measurement and Optimization

Email Marketing: Email Marketing Fundamentals, Email Design, Testing and Optimizing an Email Campaign, Tools and Strategy, Marketing Automation, and Creating an Effective Email Campaign

Website Optimization: Web Design and Website Optimization, Design Principles and Website Copy, Website Metrics and Developing Insight, Publishing a Basic Website, User-Centered Design and Website Optimization

Analytics and Analytics with Google: Web Analytics Fundamentals, Creating and Configuring a Google Analytics Account, Monitoring Campaigns with Google Analytics Reports, Setting Goals with Google Analytics, and Analyzing and Recording Google Analytics Data

Digital Marketing Strategy: Digital Strategy Fundamentals, Digital Strategy Research, Executing a Digital Marketing Strategy, Setting Strategy Objectives and KPIs, Developing a Creative Strategy, and Becoming a Strategic Thinker

Combining the AMA definition, which includes all electronic devices used for business purposes on the internet, with the module titles and main topics, our schema allowed us to identify digital marketing articles. Thus, when classifying an article for specific education content or digital marketing curriculum development, the authors used the AMA definition and the DMI+AMA modules to identify the appropriate category. This guided our review of the abstracts in each journal issue and the articles selected for the study.

It is important to note that the brochure with the DMI+AMA modules provided more detailed information than the Module names and main topics, which is all we included due to the brochure being copyrighted marketing material. For example, six main topics are further broken down into subtopics in the YouTube and Display Advertising module. Within Creating and Managing a YouTube Channel, there are four additional subtopics: YouTube Channel Setup, Video Best Practices, Content Management Best Practices, and YouTube Analytics and Reporting. While the module uses the term advertising, the subtopics include organic content since YouTube Channels allow brands to upload organic content without payment and utilize SEO best practices.

Research Goals

The overarching research objective is to provide marketing educators with a systematic review of digital marketing education literature, starting with the first articles published in 1996. Therefore, this research used a qualitative approach to analyze the literature to determine the practical skill sets delivered to students and the corresponding industry alignment or misalignment between education and industry.

In addition, this work examined the number of articles published in marketing education journals on topics related to the competencies dictated by the DMI and the AMA. The goals that guide this research are:

The first goal of this research was to provide a semantic thematic review of digital marketing education research and compare the findings with the skill sets and competencies published by the DMI in partnership with the AMA (DMI, n.d.).

The second goal was to evaluate digital marketing education’s evolution by synthesizing the relevant articles’ topics into themes and identifying eras when research priorities shifted.

The third goal was to determine whether the pedagogical approach included teaching hard skills related to employment (e.g., industry or tech-based, platform relevance, certification-related).

The final goal was to compare whether the keywords submitted by the authors were appropriately chosen and conducive to finding the research through searches in Google Scholar and academic databases.

A systematic approach was implemented to accomplish these goals and is described in the following section. Next, we present the results in the order of the goals listed above. Finally, we offer recommendations for future research areas in digital marketing education.

Method

Journal Selection

The marketing discipline has three respected journals focused on education, and we included all three in this thematic review that utilizes a systematic approach: Journal of Marketing Education (JME), Marketing Education Review (MER), and Journal for the Advancement of Marketing Education (JAME). In addition, the Journal of Advertising Education (JAE) was included as many articles related to digital advertising and social media appear in this specialized journal, and marketing educators contribute. Finally, the Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing (JRIM), which focuses on managerial research in interactive and digital marketing, published a special issue on teaching digital marketing in 2015 and is in the analysis.

Data Collection

While the research is a semantic thematic review, we implemented a systematic approach to find relevant articles. Using keyword searches was not feasible because some journals did not use author-supplied keywords. We initially attempted to use a keyword search and discovered that digital marketing articles that we were familiar with were not appearing in Google Scholar or EBSCO. Thus, we implemented a systematic approach like that of Bacon and Stewart (2022), starting with 2020 and working backward. An issue-by-issue search of the relevant journals was conducted going back to the first issue released after the internet was made available to the public in April 1993. To find the first article for each journal, we searched:

JME, to Volume 15, Issue 2, Summer 1993, with the first digital article published in 1996.

MER, to Volume 3, Issue 2, Summer 1993, but the first digital marketing article did not appear until Volume 12, Issue 1, Spring 2002

JAE debuted in 1996, and as noted in the introduction, the first issue had the first digital marketing education article (Barnes, 1996).

JAME was published in 2001, with its first digital article in 2004, Volume 1.

For all journals, we excluded articles that served as the editors’ introductions to special issues (i.e., V. L. Crittenden & Crittenden, 2015a, 2015b; V. L. Crittenden & Peterson, 2019a, 2019b).

After identifying the relevant journals, we utilized the qualitative approach outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006) for this thematic review, which includes using a systematic approach to identify common themes based on semantic thematic analysis. This requires familiarity with the topic and researcher judgment (Braun & Clarke, 2006, pp. 79–84). Two authors who teach digital marketing and are familiar with the terminology and its etymology since the internet was introduced reviewed each journal. These authors read every abstract in each selected journal issue to identify articles covering digital marketing topics, curriculum development, and the teaching of digital marketing tools and platforms. This qualitative approach has been used in the marketing literature to identify themes within a subdiscipline such as DSMM (Lamberton & Stephen, 2016), social media use within business-to-business (B2B) marketing (Cartwright et al., 2021), and multichannel marketing (Vaishnav & Ray, 2023).

Continuing with the approach of Bacon and Stewart (2022), an Excel data file was created with separate sheets for each journal. We collected publication information and mapped each article to the DMI+AMA topics covered or categorized as focused on a call for digital marketing curriculum development or a curriculum review. Eleven articles fell into the miscellaneous category as the research focused on an aspect of digital marketing, per the AMA definition of digital marketing, but fell outside the established categorization schema. Additional columns were created for keywords supplied by authors, the number of non-digital keywords, the number of digital keywords, and the number of citations in Google Scholar for each article. Next, the authors combined the spreadsheets, and disagreements regarding initial classification were rare as an agreed-upon schema was used. As this was a semantic thematic review (e.g., Braun & Clarke, 2006; Lamberton & Stephen, 2016) and not a content analysis, interrater reliability was not calculated as classification was determined by author agreement.

While categorizing the articles, many fell into more than one of the modules. Research into the benefits of using certifications frequently covered more than one category as multiple certifications were evaluated by the authors (e.g., Laverie et al., 2020; Spiller & Tuten, 2019).

However, simply mentioning a topic did not result in a classification. For example, Clarke and Clarke (2014) shared an assignment for teaching SEO tactics and creating an SEO strategy that required students to create a website with a blog and landing pages (website optimization). They suggested that students be directed to the Google Analytics certification if interested in learning more independently. For this categorization, the article was counted as covering SEO, digital strategy, and website optimization but not Google Analytics.

For an additional check on our findings, we utilized the search feature in Adobe. After identifying the digital marketing articles and classifying each article, we searched each PDF using keywords similar to those used by Lamberton and Stephen (2016) and Krishen et al. (2021) and additional keywords frequently associated with digital marketing. We did use shortened versions since “social media” would locate “social media marketing” or “social media plan.” In addition, as we read the PDFs, we looked for terms used in the early days that have changed over time, so we looked for “website,” “website,” “webpage,” and “blog.” For digital marketing, we also searched “internet marketing,” “online marketing,” and “E-commerce.” The complete list is in the Appendix. Merely finding the word was not sufficient for adding the topic. Instead, seeing the keyword triggered an additional review. The article was reviewed again to determine whether the topic was one of the main elements of the research. Adding this next level of study reinforced the initial review findings and discovered potential mistakes in classification.

Results

After reviewing 1,937 article abstracts, we identified 134 digital marketing education articles in JME (n= 43), JAE (n= 43), MER (n= 36), JAME (n= 7), and JRIM (n= 5). While mapping the existing research to the industry categorization by DMI+AMA was the first goal, the overall purpose of this research was to review digital marketing education research. Thus, it was necessary to include articles that did not precisely fit the industry categorization. In these cases, the focus was on a relevant topic, such as advocating for teaching digital concepts and skills to ensure students are job-ready (e.g., Harrigan & Hulbert, 2011; Wymbs, 2011), evaluating the curricula (e.g., Langan et al., 2019; Muñoz & Wood, 2015), incorporating mobile marketing (Schiele & Chen, 2018; Zarzosa, 2018), the need to teach data privacy in digital marketing (Walker & Moran, 2019), and new topics such as blockchain and artificial intelligence (Ferrell & Ferrell, 2020) are why the numbers in Table 1 are slightly different from the total counts. We found 35 articles focused either on the need for digital marketing curriculum development or the state of the curriculum and 11 articles that covered a digital marketing topic that did not fit within the DMI+AMA modules or curriculum development.

Table 1.

Article Count and Major Themes by DMI + AMA Module of Capabilities.

Topic area	JME	MER	JAME	JAE	JRIM	Sum of modules
Social Media Marketing	21	17	2	28	3	71
Digital Marketing Strategy	15	17	2	15	1	50
Website Optimization	11	9	3	12	0	35
Content Marketing	4	10	1	11	1	27
Paid Search (Google)	4	4	0	1	0	9
YouTube and Display Ads	1	4	0	4	0	9
Email Marketing	4	4	0	1	0	9
Search Engine Optimization	1	6	0	0	0	7
Analytics (using Google Analytics)	1	4	0	1	0	6
Sum of digital themes by Journal	62	75	8	73	5
Number of articles by DMI + AMA integrated modules
Count of articles with integration of two or more modules	JME	MER	JAME	JAE	JRIM
Integration of 2 Modules	11	7	2	9	0
Integration of 3 Modules	2	8	1	9	1
Integration of 4 Modules	2	3	0	4	0
Integration of 5 Modules	1	3	0	1	0
Integration of 6 Modules	0	1	0	0	0
Sum of articles with at least two Integrated Modules by journal	16	22	3	23	1

Note. DMI = Digital Marketing Institute; AMA = American Marketing Association; JME = Journal of Marketing Education; MER = Marketing Education Review; JAME = Journal for the Advancement of Marketing Education; JAE = Journal of Advertising Education; JRIM = Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing.

In support of the first goal of this review, Table 1 presents the count by DMI+AMA modules of capabilities in each journal. The results indicate that social media marketing, digital marketing strategy, website optimization, and content marketing are the most researched. Social media marketing is the most studied area and was found in all reviewed journals. This may be due to more universities offering social media than any other digital marketing course, according to a review of digital marketing curriculum conducted by Langan et al. (2019, p. 35) They found that 76 of the AACSB-accredited universities in the United States offered a social media class making it the most offered class followed closely by other courses such as general digital marketing course (75), internet Marketing (41), and electronic or e-marketing (35). When they combined the courses into topic areas, 31% of all courses fell into the Digital, internet, and E-Marketing category. It is logical to expect that some general courses cover social media since these courses often use textbooks such as Digital Marketing Foundations and Strategy (Zahay et al., 2023), which include chapters on social media.

As the organic use of social media is free for students, there are no financial barriers to integrating research on this topic from student assignments. It is important to note that the discipline revolves around constantly changing platforms; thus, we are not suggesting that the research is complete in any area. Digital marketing strategy is the second most researched area and appeared in all journals, followed by website optimization and content creation. Under-researched topics include Google Analytics, search engine optimization, paid search (Google Ads), YouTube and Display ads, and email marketing, which present opportunities for marketing researchers and editors. As the discipline matured, more articles integrating multiple topics and taking a holistic approach were found (Table 1).

The second goal was to evaluate the evolution of digital marketing education by categorizing articles into eras. These articles added themes within each era/stage as the research covered many topics. As a result, different categorizations can be seen, such as when each identified social media (networks) as having a predominant period. However, the classifications helped form the four eras and associated themes identified in this research, as shown in Table 2. In addition, as the articles were evaluated, specific themes and trends emerged as the industry adopted platforms and created certificate programs. However, as with the research by Lamberton and Stephen (2016) and Krishen et al. (2021), the eras we suggest are based on the trends and are not exhaustive, nor were the eras mutually exclusive to include every article published during the period. In addition, while we found little research related to Stage 5 (Krishen et al., 2021) in the 25-year review, we list several more recent articles that fit within this stage in the final discussion.

Table 2.

The Evolution of Digital Marketing Education by Era.

	Era 1	Era 2	Era 3	Era 4
Time period	1996–2005	2006–2010	2011–2015	2016–2020
Period Theme	Satisfaction with an electronic integration. Focus on Curriculum Development	The customer as a sharer and communicator of opinions and information. Continued Focus on Curriculum	The customer as a content creator. Cocreation of value, viral marketing, and electronic strategy. User-generated content emerges. Certifications begin to be integrated. Special Issues focus on digital marketing.	Customer engagement via SMM. Teaching hard skills via industry platforms and integrating certifications into the curriculum becomes the standard.
Curriculum	Siegel (1996)	Teer et al. (2007)	Wymbs (2011)	V. L. Crittenden & Crittenden (2016)
	Barnes (1996)	Spiller & Scovotti (2008)	Granitz & Koernig (2011)	Levanthal & Swanson (2016)
	Atwong & Hugstad (1997)	Robbs (2010)	Buzzard et al. (2011)	Zahay et al. (2019)
	Lamont & Friedman (1997)	Schlee & Harich (2010)	Harrigan & Hulbert (2011)	Fang et al. (2019)
	Kaynama & Keesling (2000)		H. Kim (2012)	Lee (2019)
	Benbunan-Fich et al. (2001)		Miller et al. (2013)	Rohm et al. (2019)
			Habib (2015)	Langan et al. (2019)
	Mitchell & Strauss (2001)		Duffy & Ney (2015)	Ferrell & Ferrell (2020)
	Williamson et al. (2002)		Muñoz & Wood (2015)
	Hannaford et al. (2002)		Brocato et al. (2015)
	Granitz & Hugstad (2004)
	Gould (2004)
	Linrud & Wilson (2004)
	Hannaford et al. (2005)
Platform/Certification		Wiki (Workman, 2008)	LinkedIn and other social medias (Pentina, 2011)	AdWords (Canhoto & Murphy, 2016)
		AdWords(Neale et al., 2009)	YouTube (Payne et al., 2011)	Review of Certificates (Staton, 2016)
		Wiki (Cronin, 2009)	Twitter (Rinaldo et al., 2011)	LinkedIn (Hutchins, 2016)
		AdWords (Lavin et al., 2009)	Twitter (Lowe & Laffey, 2011)	YouTube (Edmiston, 2016)
		Facebook (Muñoz & Towner, 2010)	WordPress and YouTube (Hettche & Clayton, 2012)	Twitter (Merle & Freberg, 2016)
		Ning (Eckman, 2010)	LinkedIn (McCorkle & McCorkle, 2012)	Google+, Twitter, Chrome, Buffer and Klout (McCorkle & Payan, 2017)
		Facebook (Johnson & Jones, 2010)	Klout (Bacile, 2013)	Twitter (Lou, 2017)
		Blogger (Kaplan et al., 2010)	Zazzle (Ashley, 2013)	BuzzFeed (Cowley, 2017)
			Google Analytics (Schlee & Harich, 2013)	AdWords (Clarke et al., 2018)
			Twitter (Rinaldo et al., 2013)	Review of Certificates (Spiller & Tuten, 2019)
			Pinterest (Cronin, 2013)	AdWords (Key et al., 2019)
			Google+ (Clayton et al., 2014)	HubSpot (D.-H. Kim et al., 2019)
			WordPress (Quesenberry et al., 2014)	Instagram (Kemp et al., 2019)
			LinkedIn (R. M. Peterson & Dover, 2014)	Slack (Ross, 2019)
			Facebook (Bal et al., 2015)	Twitter (Abney et al., 2019)
			Facebook (Northey et al., 2015)	Feedly (McCorkle & Alexander, 2019)
			Twitter (West et al., 2015)	YouTube (M. Peterson, 2018)
			Twitter, Tumblr, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Vine (Kinsky, 2015)	Guide to Certifications (Laverie et al., 2020)
				YouTube (Cowley, 2020)
Emergent Theme in Literature	Emergent Theme: Need for Integration of Digital (Internet) into Curriculum	Emergent Theme: Need for Student Skills	Emergent Theme: Teaching Hard Skills and Platforms	Emergent Theme: Integrating Multiple Platforms Skills

Note.SMM = social media marketing.

Era 1

An examination of Table 2 shows the evolution of teaching digital marketing from the inception of the internet to the end of the review period. Up to the mid-2000s, the predominant theme for digital educators was stressing the need to teach digital marketing. For example, Williamson et al. (2002) called for business educators to integrate e-commerce into the business curriculum by creating a BS in E-Business. In contrast, others called for simply creating a course (e.g., Hannaford et al., 2005; Kaynama & Keesling, 2000).

Era 2

The second era began in 2006 and ended in 2010. This era coincides with consumers becoming more engrossed in social media and businesses following suit (see Lamberton & Stephen, 2016). The theme for this era can be summarized as articles describing platforms learners must be familiar with to be successful in the business world. Coinciding with this era, we see a plethora of social media education research emerging and customers people sharing information electronically rapidly (See Krishen et al., 2021).

This era in the teaching space produced many articles (e.g., Johnson & Jones, 2010; Lavin et al., 2009; Wood et al., 2009) describing emerging social media and illustrating why it is essential to teach the platforms. Others give initial guidance or ideas about incorporating the platform in an educational environment. Emerging platforms include Facebook, Ning, Blogger, and LinkedIn.

Era 3

The third era begins around 2011 and continues through 2015. Here, we see content creation via social media as the predominant theme from the customer’s side and the co-creation of value emerging. Lamberton and Stephen (2016) and Krishen et al. (2021) call this era the age of social media and consumer engagement, respectively.

Teaching digital marketing at this time can best be summarized by articles illustrating how to use social media networks to create content or interact with customers. Table 2 illustrates multiple articles focused on platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, demonstrating how each can be used as a teaching tool. Similarly, website creation platforms such as WordPress (Hettche & Clayton, 2012; Quesenberry et al., 2014) emerged as a popular platform for teaching website development with the introduction of Google Analytics (Schlee & Harich, 2013) to measure effectiveness.

Era 4

The final era runs from 2016 to 2020. This era coincides with Krishen et al. (2021) rise of virtual reality and the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI), but other than calls to update the curriculum to include new technology such as Blockchain (Ferrell & Ferrell, 2020), the literature on teaching it is sparse. Digital marketing education literature continued to focus on teaching hard skills and industry knowledge through certifications (Table 2). Incorporating available certificate programs emerged as a dominant topic (e.g., Laverie et al., 2020; Spiller & Tuten, 2019; Staton, 2016). We also found research that focused on a platform such as YouTube or BuzzFeed but required students to use digital technology to create content to post (e.g., Cowley, 2017, 2020; M. Peterson, 2018). Finally, using AdWords in the classroom fills the void regarding paid search and search via algorithms (e.g., Canhoto & Murphy, 2016; Clarke et al., 2018; Key et al., 2019).

A final conclusion regarding the convergence or divergence of industry and business school education can be inferred from examining Krishen et al.’s (2021) industry findings and our findings. Specifically, they identify Stage 5 (2016-2019) as the AI, IoT, and virtual reality stage. However, we find little evidence that marketing education in content creation, social media, or tactical tools in digital marketing is employing the tools relevant to Stage 5. Therefore, we can conclude that a gap exists between industry and marketing education.

The third goal was to determine if the pedagogical approach included teaching hard skills related to employment (e.g., platform relevance, certification-related). Again, this overlapped with our identification of eras, and we found many articles listed in Table 2 and already discussed with Goal 2.

For illustration purposes to find assignments and platforms, we provide Table 3 for more information. We can see that MER, JAE, and JME have the most available resources for teaching and pedagogy, while MER and JME provide most articles that advocate including certificates. We also list the most recent and relevant citations for the MER, JAE, and JME to illustrate the type of work that qualifies for each journal.

Table 3.

Platforms and Certificates by Journal.

MER platforms

HubSpot (D.-H. Kim et al., 2019)

AdWords (Clarke et al., 2018)

BuzzFeed (Cowley, 2017)

YouTube (Edmiston, 2016)

LinkedIn (R. M. Peterson & Dover, 2014)

Google Analytics (Schlee & Harich, 2013)

Zazzle (Ashley, 2013)

Klout (Bacile, 2013)

LinkedIn (McCorkle & McCorkle, 2012)

Wiki (Workman, 2008)

JAE platforms

Feedly (McCorkle & Alexander, 2019)

Twitter (Lou, 2017)

Multiple Google+, Feedly, Twitter, Chrome, Buffer, and Klout (McCorkle & Payan, 2017)

Twitter, Tumblr, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Vine (Kinsky, 2015)

WordPress (Quesenberry et al., 2014)

Google + (Clayton et al., 2014)

Pinterest (Cronin, 2013)

WordPress and YouTube (Hettche & Clayton, 2012)

Facebook (Johnson & Jones, 2010)

Ning (Eckman, 2010)

Facebook (Muñoz & Towner, 2010)

AdWords (Lavin et al., 2009)

JAME platforms

Twitter (Rinaldo et al., 2013)

LinkedIn and other social medias (Pentina, 2011)

JRIM platforms

LinkedIn (Hutchins, 2016)

JME platforms

Twitter (Abney et al., 2019)

Slack (Ross, 2019)

Instagram (Kemp et al., 2019)

AdWords (Canhoto & Murphy, 2016)

Twitter (West et al., 2015)

Facebook (Northey et al., 2015)

Facebook (Bal et al., 2015)

WordPress and YouTube (Clayton & Hettche, 2012)

Twitter (Lowe & Laffey, 2011)

Twitter (Rinaldo et al., 2011)

YouTube (Payne et al., 2011)

Blogger (Kaplan et al., 2010)

Wiki (Cronin, 2009)

AdWords (Neale et al., 2009)

MER certificates

HubSpot (D.-H. Kim et al., 2019)

AdWords (Key et al., 2019)

AdWords(Clarke et al., 2018)

JME certificates

Review of Certificates (Staton, 2016)

Review of Certificates (Spiller & Tuten, 2019)

AdWords (Canhoto & Murphy, 2016)

AdWords (Neale et al., 2009)

Note. MER = Marketing Education Review; JAE = Journal of Advertising Education; JAME = Journal for the Advancement of Marketing Education; JRIM = Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing; JME = Journal of Marketing Education.

As researchers began to focus on integrating digital platforms, most focused on just one (e.g., Bacile, 2013; Cronin, 2009; Payne et al., 2011). While some of the research does continue with this method (e.g., Abney et al., 2019; Ross, 2019), we also see articles appear that incorporate using multiple platforms and integrating digital marketing topics (e.g., McCorkle & Payan, 2017; Mishra & Mishra, 2020). A similar pattern emerges with compilation articles demonstrating incorporating certificates in the classroom (e.g., D.-H. Kim et al., 2019; Laverie et al., 2020; Spiller & Tuten, 2019).

To follow-up and provide the reader with example platforms by journal, we provide Table 3. Here, we list a short citation along with the platform of study. A simple analysis of the most studied platforms includes Google-related platforms, including AdWords and Google Analytics, with ten articles, followed by Twitter, with eight, followed by Facebook and YouTube, with five, respectively. In 2018, Google changed AdWords to Google Ads, but all the articles reviewed were focused on the AdWords program, which is not surprising for academic research. Other platforms with multiple articles include HubSpot, Klout, and Instagram. Articles with a single reference include Pinterest and Ning. Table 4 summarizes the journals and the emphasis on assignments, platforms, and certifications.

Table 4

Digital Pedagogy Articles by Journal Number of Articles.

Journal	Assignment specific	Platform specific	Certification related
JME	14	14	3
MER	13	11	4
JAE	15	15	0
JAME	2	3	0
JRIM	2	1	0

Note. JME = Journal of Marketing Education; MER = Marketing Education Review; JAE = Journal of Advertising Education; JAME = Journal for the Advancement of Marketing Education; JRIM = Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing.

Macro-Level Keyword Analysis

The final goal was to compare whether the keywords submitted by the authors were appropriately chosen and conducive to finding the research through searches in Google Scholar and academic databases. For our analysis, we checked each article in the review for author-submitted keywords. JME had no digital articles in 2005-06; the first author-provided keywords appeared in a 2007 article. MER does not include author-provided keywords on the publisher’s website or in downloadable PDFs. JAE did not start including keywords until 2018. JAME began to include keywords in 2013. JRIM only had one issue with digital marketing education articles, and it had keywords.

In their keyword analysis, Lamberton and Stephen (2016) examined the keywords provided to the journals for the articles and combined them into keyword sets for the same concepts. They found approximately 200 distinct keywords, but 167 appeared only once. While reviewing each issue and identifying digital marketing education articles, we collected the keywords submitted by the authors for each article. Then, we combined keywords for the same concepts, resulting in 146 unique keywords. We found that 108 keywords were used only once. We identified fifty-nine different author-provided keywords related to digital marketing. Social media was the top keyword and corresponded with the topic areas in Table 1. As we tracked the keywords, we found that in JME, of the thirty-nine articles with author-submitted keywords, five had zero keywords related to digital marketing. One example is Abney et al. (2019), “Intercollegiate Social Media Education Ecosystem,” of the six author-submitted keywords, “experiential learning techniques, innovative teaching methods, measuring teaching effectiveness, skills/traits development in marketing education, written communication, surveys,” none were related to digital marketing. An additional twenty-one articles had less than half of the keywords related to digital marketing.

After finding the articles through our systematic issue-by-issue search, we used the EBSCO database and looked up the articles from MER that were included in our analysis. In the EBSCO database that supplies the keywords, we found that the majority had at least some digital keywords; however, most were unspecific to the main topics of the articles. For example, for Cowley’s (2017) article on creating content for the BuzzFeed Marketing Challenge, EBSCO provided the following keywords: marketing strategy, consumer behavior, new product development, business students, social media in education, campaign management, and undergraduates.

Discussion

The state of digital marketing education has evolved with a focus on preparing work-ready students who are ready to engage with customers. In addition, marketing educators use assignments and teaching techniques based on industry tools and platforms. Hence, students understand how to apply these techniques when entering industry, thus answering the call to teach hard skills and incorporate technology (e.g., V. L. Crittenden & Crittenden, 2016; Harrigan & Hulbert, 2011; Wymbs, 2011). This transition is welcomed as the focus turns to actual digital marketing efforts rather than teaching about the customer as a spreading agent or simple platform satisfaction. This evolution is a positive step in meeting industry needs with talent prepared for digital marketing.

In a recently published article in the Journal of Marketing Education (Ye et al., 2023), the researchers conducted a bibliometric review of the digital marketing literature. They found far fewer articles on all digital marketing topics than our issue-by-issue search revealed. This represents an interesting finding as to the relevance of a bibliometric review. The combination of keywords being either unavailable or an afterthought for authors contributes to a problem with the bibliometric design as a tool to synthesize work on a topic. A simple examination of the quantity of research on a given subject in the Ye et al. (2023) article, and this research will quickly demonstrate that an issue-by-issue search will yield far more articles of topical relevance than a bibliometric review, which is why we chose the method utilized by Bacon and Stewart (2022). We do recognize that our approach limits the overall scope of the search. Researchers must decide which approach best addresses their research questions.

Another reason for the problem of missed articles in bibliometric analysis could be that some topics have multiple descriptive terms that are inherently unsuitable for computer search algorithms. An example of this is content creation. Many articles discussed students learning and creating content in either class projects or through innovative social media or website development projects. However, an algorithm search would incorrectly classify it as it would be confused with the platform. Therefore, we believe the interested reader can assess these two approaches in data collection methods to judge which method is appropriate for their research based on the desired richness of results versus timely algorithm-based results.

One of the main differences in the findings between Ye et al. (2023) and this research is the breakdown of digital marketing. Ye et al. (2023) offer a broad overview of the state of digital, social media, and analytics using an emerging technology for data collection. The authors examine the nature of digital articles in terms of empirical, conceptual, or review. This research breaks digital marketing down into the AMA+DMI categories, offering a different perspective away from purely if the article is about digital marketing to examining the category under investigation (see Table 1 for a list of AMA+DMI Categories). Thus, given the literature state, we explore digital marketing education from the perspective of which aspect of digital marketing is under investigation in terms of AMA+DMI categories and the subsequent knowledge accumulation or gaps that are on display.

Research Gaps

Additional gaps exist across all modules of capabilities. While social media is the module of capability with the most articles, there is still a need to continue to research. For example, due to the dynamic nature of social media platforms, articles that focus on using a specific tool may no longer be relevant. Examples include research based on Klout and Google + (e.g., Bacile, 2013; McCorkle & Payan, 2017) and AdWords (e.g., Canhoto & Murphy, 2016; Clarke et al., 2018).

The next module with the most research is digital marketing strategy, and we found that many authors addressed the importance of having clear objectives. Unfortunately, most of the research focused on teaching digital strategy covered the creation of the strategy but not the evaluation of its effectiveness by selecting key performance indicators from available metrics. We teach students to use SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and time period) goals. Google Analytics is one of the premier platforms used by the industry to assess the achievement of objectives. Incorporating Google Analytics or AdWords into digital marketing strategy is crucial for students to understand the interconnectedness of the digital world. The review results in Tables 1 and 2 indicate that AdWords (now Google Ads) received more attention than Google Analytics. The AdWords research was conducted on classroom assignments using the Google Online Marketing Challenge, a free program with a competition offered to college instructors for use in their classes, which is now defunct. As Google has made significant changes to its Google Ads and its Google Analytics platform (now GA4 and not Universal Analytics), much of the existing research is no longer applicable. Google Ads and Google Analytics offer opportunities for research into teaching strategy as the Google platforms provide metrics (and even sample data using the Google Merchandise Store) that can be used as key performance indicators (KPIs) essential to teaching digital strategy.

While website optimization had significant research (Table 1), there was a lack of focus on website design. User Experience (UX) and User Interface (UI) are two approaches to website design. While marketing students do not typically take jobs that involve coding websites, they are concerned with how the user experience impacts business performance. Thus, exposure to design concepts is crucial. UX design focuses on the website’s ease of use and navigation. UI design considers the emotional connection with the user and is part of the website’s branding, so marketing students must understand UI design.

Topics lacking research are paid search, YouTube and display advertising, email marketing, SEO, and analytics using Google Analytics. The research that covered display advertising did not address teaching students how ad serving worked using online behavioral targeting or the ethical issues involved with this practice. Any research in ad serving would now be outdated, but we still suggest that the broader topics be investigated. Email marketing only appeared as a topic when researching website optimization, digital strategy, or the use of certifications. We did not discover a single article solely focused on email.

The selection of keywords does not appear to match the topics of the papers. Not only did many digital articles not have any digital marketing keywords provided for publication. We found several overly complicated keyword combinations, such as teamwork/projects/issues. In the author guidelines for the Journal of Marketing Education, there is a link to the Sage Journals webpage, https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/help-readers-find-your-article, that guides on selecting keywords and titles that will make the article easier to find on Google Scholar and other search engines. We recommend editors and reviewers suggest titles and keywords during the review process if those submitted do not fit guidelines or adequately describe the research. For example, the keyword(s) “students,” “experiential learning,” and “marketing education” are so vague that none of these will contribute to an article’s discovery via search inquiry. Our Google Search of “students” resulted in over 6 million pages.

Through our review, we discovered that keywords are a problem. We compared our results of an issue-by-issue search to those of Ye et al. (2023) and found discrepancies in article counts. For example, they used keywords to search Web of Science for digital marketing, social media, and marketing analytics articles in education journals. They found one article in the Journal of Advertising Education using this method, and we found 42 for the same period by looking at the actual issues. We found similar discrepancies with the other journals we reviewed.

Emerging Trends Since 2020

As we moved through the eras, we saw a trend from calling for digital curriculum to implementing new assignments and integrating industry-needed knowledge in the classroom. In addition, the maturity of literature is now seeing a trend in evaluating pedagogy. For example, answers can be found online for many of the certifications. Cowley et al. (2021) surveyed educators to determine how they use industry certifications, motivations and barriers to adopting certifications, and their perceived effectiveness.

Keeping up with trends and industry changes is difficult for teaching and challenging when conducting educational research. As companies make platform or policy changes, an academic’s research can quickly become obsolete. We noted earlier that some of the articles are no longer applicable due to these changes, but even the newest research can fall victim to this dynamic discipline. For example, data privacy is a topic in the daily news as consumers become more aware of how their data is collected, used, and sold. Labreque et al. (2021) authored an article that addressed a research gap, and they included an assignment to help students understand the ethical, legal, and fiscal considerations of managing consumer data when utilizing online behavioral advertising. However, the assignment the authors shared is already obsolete due to Firefox/Mozilla changing its platform due to privacy concerns, and it no longer supports the use of Lightbeam due to its policy on third-party cookies. One potential problem is that academics may choose to avoid conducting rigorous research on industry-related topics as there is the possibility that before a manuscript is even published, the work may no longer be relevant.

With all the free resources available, teaching digital marketing is no longer a niche area for faculty. As academics become technology experts, we found research on the newest trends, such as a primer for blockchain (Menon & Mady, 2022), that, based on our review, shows that faculty are learning more industry skills to share.

We suggest that editors and reviewers examine manuscripts that focus on assignments carefully. For example, we found that Miaskiewicz (2022), in the Annual MER Teaching Innovation Special Issue, had students create websites to teach about driving website traffic. We carefully read the article on requiring students to develop a website, and the assignment presented did not contribute anything new to the discipline. In our review, using website creation as a teaching tool goes back to 2001 when Daly required students to build an e-commerce website, and Clarke et al. required students to create a basic personal website. Tables 2 and 3 provide multiple examples of website assignments. The discipline has established best practices such as using client projects and building websites. When submitted manuscripts cover these topics, an updated assignment should not be considered an innovation.

Contributions

By reviewing the first 25 years of digital marketing education literature, this research resulted in numerous contributions to digital marketing education research. We implemented a multi-stage process to ensure that we achieved all of the stated goals of the research. First, using the modules of capabilities for the dual certification DMI+AMA Professional Certificate in Digital Marketing to classify articles, we mapped the individual articles to the modules. We identified topics with significant research and those with gaps. The second contribution is that this review found that digital marketing professors are incorporating the hard skills sought by industry into their course materials, thus answering the multiple calls over the years to prepare students for industry (e.g., V. L. Crittenden & Crittenden, 2016; Harrigan & Hulbert, 2011; Wymbs, 2011). By identifying research on specific platforms and certifications, we show that educators use various industry tools to teach complex skills and concepts in digital marketing. We do conclude that a gap exists between academic teaching and industry needs. Third, this semantic thematic review contributes to understanding the evolution of digital marketing education by creating a classification of eras of digital marketing research. Our keyword analysis revealed that authors need to be mindful when selecting keywords for searchability. We identified a lack of keyword relevance to the article topic and some with too broad keywords that do not help convey the topic. Bibliometrics and algorithm-based research are becoming standard methods for generating review-based research, often utilizing keywords. When keywords are incorrectly classified, as our findings suggest, authors using algorithm-based approaches can generate results that do not include the relevant topical literature (Ye et al., 2023). Table 5 provides an overview of our research goals, outcomes, and recommendations for future research.

Table 5.

Summary of Research and Identification of Gaps and Opportunities.

Research goals	Research outcomes	Research gaps and opportunities
1. Provide a thematic review of digital marketing education research and compare the findings with the skill sets and competencies published by the DMI in partnership with the AMA	1. Abundant research in top marketing education journals studying social media marketing, digital marketing strategy, and website optimization. Identified relevant research for educators looking for guidance.	1. Search Engine Optimization2. Analytics3. Email Marketing4. Generative AI
2. Evaluate digital marketing education’s evolution by synthesizing the relevant articles’ topics and identifying eras when research priorities shifted	2. Identified 4 Eras beginning from calling for digital integration into the classroom to integrating topics and synthesis.	1. Build out synthesis approach for existing technologies2. Explore emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and Blockchain
3. Determine whether the pedagogical approach included teaching hard skills related to employment	3. Identified:(A) Journals that provide more specific teaching assignment examples(B) Journals that provide more examples about teaching platforms(C) Journals that publish more reviews and evaluations about available certificate programs.	1. Special issue topics include AI, Analytics, and SEO.2. Evaluate effectiveness of assignments and platforms.
4. Compare whether the keywords submitted by the authors were appropriately chosen and conducive to finding the research through searches in Google Scholar and academic databases.	4. Keyword analysis revealed that authors need to be mindful when selecting keywords for searchability. We identified a lack of keyword relevance to the article topic and some with too broad of keywords that do not help convey the topic.	Keyword gap is crucial to developing a sound nomological net. Methods that rely on keywords for summary articles (like keyword analysis) rely on sound keywords or risk misleading researchers.

Note. DMI = Digital Marketing Institute; AMA = American Marketing Association; AI = artificial intelligence; SEO = search engine optimization.

Future Research

This review indicates that there are many under-researched areas in digital marketing education. Specifically, there is an apparent lack of research in paid search, display advertising and YouTube, email marketing, search engine optimization, and Google Analytics. Considering that the most recent era focuses on customer engagement, these shortfalls represent a tremendous opportunity for marketing educators.

Determining the relevance of research topics based on industry investment is a straightforward way to meet the responsibilities of graduating students prepared for the workforce. Recent data indicates that U.S. firms are investing heavily in search advertising. U.S. businesses spent $99 billion in 2022, with a projected spending of $136 billion by 2026 (Statista Research Department, 2023). Display advertising is another category that warrants continued exploration. With $63.5 billion spent in the United States in 2022 (PwC & Interactive Advertising Bureau, 2023), global projections for 2023 estimate upward of $176 billion (Gitnux, 2023). YouTube represents a substantial digital marketing channel boasting over 2 billion daily users, and its “Shorts” platform collects 30 billion daily views (Davies, 2023; Southern, 2022). Future research should focus on the unique aspects of YouTube marketing, user engagement strategies, and its integration into digital marketing coursework.

Despite being one of the oldest digital marketing techniques, email marketing maintains relevancy with a remarkable ROI of $36 to $1 (Litmus, 2022) and a user base of 4 billion daily users (Kirsch, 2023). SEO remains paramount for driving website traffic, with 68% of web traffic originating from organic and paid searches (BrightEdge, 2019). Widely utilized by 55.49% of websites (Yaqub, 2023), Google Analytics is a cornerstone of digital marketing analytics. With global analytics as a service market expecting to reach $59 million by 2027 (Sheppard, 2023), researchers should examine innovative approaches to teaching Google Analytics and incorporating other advanced analytics tools.

In addition, many marketing certification programs, such as HubSpot and Hootsuite, have education partner programs and would be valued partners for digital marketing education researchers. Much of the research available to marketing educators pertains to teaching social media, digital marketing strategy, and creating assignments/projects to help students create content. However, teaching email marketing or data analytics requires access to company databases or access to email servers for an actual organization. Developing industry partnerships could provide critical resources for marketing educators to bridge this gap and create opportunities for digital marketing students. We encourage the continued development of collaboration between universities and industry partners. Future research should investigate successful collaboration models and their impacts on digital marketing education.

An important finding emerged in research question 2 regarding the evolution of marketing education. When comparing Krishen et al.’s (2021) industry findings and our findings, we found stark evidence of the inclusion of topics such as AI, virtual reality, and blockchain as content creation, social media, or tactical tools in digital marketing courses. It was not until 2020 that Ferrell and Ferrell issued their call for teaching these new technologies. However, the digital marketing literature has not yet addressed this meaningfully, especially regarding Generative AI and its use by digital marketers. This lag effect creates a gap between what the university curriculum teaches and what industry demands. Future research should address this gap effect and find ways to bring cutting-edge industry trends into the classroom sooner.

Finally, to promote focused research efforts in digital marketing education, we recommend that journal editors continue to facilitate special issues that concentrate on the highlighted areas within digital marketing. These special issues can be outlets for sharing innovative teaching methods and best practices.

Limitations

While this research contributes to the digital marketing education field, we acknowledge certain limitations in the process and outcomes of this study. First, this review focused on the digital marketing education literature of the past 25 years utilizing the modules of capabilities from the dual certification DMI+AMA Professional Certificate in Digital Marketing as a classification framework. While the DMI+AMA certification program serves as a valuable framework, it might not fully represent the entirety of the digital marketing education landscape. For example, Amazon sellers pay for their products to be featured when a search is conducted on the platform, and Bing is a search engine competitor of Google Chrome. While we focused on aligning literature with the certification modules, we attempted to find all relevant articles using the Bacon and Stewart (2022) approach of conducting an issue-by-issue review of the relevant journals. Then, we used the researcher’s judgment to identify all digital marketing articles by reading the abstracts of every article on the issues. Despite our systematic approach, we acknowledge that we may have missed or misclassified an article.

Thus, while not all articles fit this framework, we reviewed all articles related to digital marketing and included those within our counts. When conducting a semantic thematic analysis review of the literature, sometimes an article fits the overall topic but does not fit within the classification schema. Braun and Clarke (2006) suggest that researchers may even find it necessary to use a miscellaneous category for those articles. For this research, we added our category of curriculum development per the methodology of Braun and Clarke and counted the miscellaneous articles on topics such as new technology such as AI (W. F. Crittenden et al., 2019; Ferrell & Ferrell, 2020) and data privacy (Walker & Moran, 2019). However, the unique topics and competencies falling outside this framework were categorized using the miscellaneous category, resulting in the articles being counted but not synthesized meaningfully.

Second, the categorization of the articles relied heavily on the accuracy and completeness of the titles, abstracts, and author-submitted keywords. Evaluation of abstracts that do not capture the full context and nuances of the articles could result in some valuable articles not being included. Potentially, articles that would have added to the richness and depth of this study might not have been included if their abstracts and keywords did not explicitly state their relevancy to those categories. Although the research team identified some mismatched or overly broad keywords (students, marketing, education), others could have been missed. Third, classifying eras based on thematic shifts may not accurately capture all the nuances of ever-changing research trends. Indeed, the fluidity of research streams is witnessed across the different eras of digital marketing research.

Researchers and educators should consider these limitations when interpreting the findings and incorporating the insights into their contexts. Future research should address these limitations by expanding the scope of review, improving keyword relevance, and continuing refinement of the classification framework for a more comprehensive understanding of digital marketing education.

Footnotes

Appendix

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Janna M. Parker

References

Abney

A. K.

Cook

L. A.

Fox

A. K.

Stevens

(2019). Intercollegiate social media education ecosystem. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(3), 254–269.

Ashley

(2013). E-tailing on Zazzle.com. Marketing Education Review, 23(1), 73–80.

Atwong

C. T.

Hugstad

P. S.

(1997). Internet technology and the future of marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 19(3), 44–55.

Bacile

T. J.

(2013). The Klout challenge: Preparing your students for social media marketing. Marketing Education Review, 23(1), 87–92.

Bacon

D. R.

Stewart

K. A.

(2022). What works best: A systematic review of actual learning in marketing and management education research. Journal of Marketing Education, 44(1), 6–24.

Bal

A. S.

Grewal

Mills

Ottley

(2015). Engaging students with social media. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3), 190–203.

Barnes

B. E.

(1996). Introducing introductory advertising students to the World Wide Web. Journal of Advertising Education, 1(1), 5–12.

Benbunan-Fich

Lozada

H. R.

Pirog

Priluck

Wisenblit

(2001). Integrating information technology into the marketing curriculum: A pragmatic paradigm. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(1), 5–15.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

10.

BrightEdge. (2019). Organic search improves the ability to map to consumer intent. https://videos.brightedge.com/research-report/BrightEdge_ChannelReport2019_FINAL.pdf

11.

Brocato

E. D.

White

N. J.

Bartkus

Brocato

A. A.

(2015). Social media and marketing education: A review of current practices in curriculum development. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(2), 76–87.

12.

Buzzard

Crittenden

V. L.

Crittenden

W. F.

McCarty

(2011). The use of digital technologies in the classroom: A teaching and learning perspective. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(2), 131–139.

13.

Canhoto

A. I.

Murphy

(2016). Learning from simulation design to develop better experiential learning initiatives: An integrative approach. Journal of Marketing Education, 38(2), 98–106.

14.

Cartwright

Liu

Raddats

(2021). Strategic use of social media within business-to-business (B2B) marketing: A systematic literature review. Industrial Marketing Management, 97, 35–58.

15.

Chevalier

(2022, July 26). Retail e-commerce sales worldwide from 2014 to 2025. https://www.statista.com/statistics/379046/worldwide-retail-e-commerce-sales/

16.

Clarke

T. B.

Clarke

(2014). A competitive and experiential assignment in search engine optimization strategy. Marketing Education Review, 24 (1), 25–30.

17.

Clarke

T. B.

Murphy

Wetsch

L. R.

Boeck

(2018). Teaching search engine marketing through the Google ad grants program. Marketing Education Review, 28(2), 136–147.

18.

Clayton

M. J.

Hettche

Kim

D.-H.

(2014). Moving participation beyond the classroom: Who benefits from online social communities? Journal of Advertising Education, 18(1), 5–13.

19.

Cowley

S. W.

(2017). The BuzzFeed marketing challenge: An integrative social media experience. Marketing Education Review, 27(2), 109–114.

20.

Cowley

S. W.

(2020). The YouTube SEO project: Teaching search engine optimization through video. Marketing Education Review, 30(2), 125–131.

21.

Cowley

S. W.

Humphrey

Muñoz

Jr. (2021). Industry certifications in digital marketing and media education: An examination of perceptions and use among educators. Journal of Marketing Education, 43(2), 189–203.

22.

Crittenden

V. L.

Crittenden

W. F.

(2015a). Digital and social media marketing in business education: Implications for student engagement. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3), 131–132.

23.

Crittenden

V. L.

Crittenden

W. F.

(2015b). Digital and social media marketing in business education: Implications for the marketing curriculum. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(2), 71–75.

24.

Crittenden

V. L.

Crittenden

W. F.

(2016). Teaching and learning disrupted: Isomorphic change. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10(2), 112–123.

25.

Crittenden

V. L.

Peterson

R. A.

(2019a). Digital disruption: The transdisciplinary future of marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(1), 3–4.

26.

Crittenden

V. L.

Peterson

R. A.

(2019b). Keeping the marketing curriculum current in an era of digital disruption. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(2), 75–76.

27.

Crittenden

W. F.

Biel

I. K.

Lovely

W. A.

III . (2019). Embracing digitalization: Student learning and new technologies. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(1), 5–14.

28.

Cronin

J. J.

(2009). Upgrading to web 2.0: An experiential project to build a marketing wiki. Journal of Marketing Education, 31(1), 66–75.

29.

Cronin

J. J.

(2013). Get students pinterested in marketing and advertising. Journal of Advertising Education, 17(1), 36–45.

30.

Danneels

(2004). Disruptive technology reconsidered: A critique and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(4), 246–258.

31.

Davies

(2023, April 11). Meet the 7 most popular search engines in the world. Search Engine Journal. https://www.searchenginejournal.com/seo/meet-search-engines/#close

32.

Digital Marketing Institute. (n.d.). Professional digital marketing course+ PCM from American marketing association. https://digitalmarketinginstitute.com/students/courses/professional-certificate-in-digital-marketing-usa?campaignid=11800971286&keyword=digital%20marketing%20institute&device=c&matchtype=e&adposition=&gclid=Cj0KCQjwkt6aBhDKARIsAAyeLJ1wKg08oELQOAc0ZXLWau2n

33.

Duffy

Ney

(2015). Exploring the divides among students, educators, and practitioners in the use of digital media as a pedagogical tool. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(2), 104–113.

34.

Eckman

(2010). It’s not new to them: Using Ning.com to enhance student engagement in the study of social Web marketing and Web 2.0 direct response methods. Journal of Advertising Education, 14(1), 15–19.

35.

Edmiston

(2016). Developing the perfect pitch: Creating a positive first impression through social media. Marketing Education Review, 26(1), 3–7.

36.

Eisenberg

(n.d.). What is digital marketing? Learn how digital marketing efforts drive business success in the modern world. American Marketing Association. https://www.ama.org/what-is-digital-marketing/

37.

Fang

Wei

Huang

(2019). Keeping up with fast-paced industry changes—Digital media education in US advertising and PR programs. Journal of Advertising Education, 23(2), 80–99.

38.

Ferrell

(2020). Technology challenges and opportunities facing marketing education. Marketing Education Review, 30(1), 3–14.

39.

Gitnux. (2023, September 5). Ads statistics and trends in 2023. https://blog.gitnux.com/ads-statistics/#:~:text=By%202023%2C%20the%20global%20display,to%20reach%20their%20target%20audiences

40.

Gould

(2004). Shall we converge? The embedding of new media into advertising curricula. Journal of Advertising Education, 8(2), 33–42.

41.

Granitz

Hugstad

(2004). Creating and diffusing a technology champion course. Journal of Marketing Education, 26(3), 208–225.

42.

Granitz

Koernig

S. K.

(2011). Web 2.0 and marketing education: Explanations and experiential applications. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(1), 57–72.

43.

Habib

(2015). Teaching approaches in advertising: Creativity and technology. Journal of Advertising Education, 19(1), 17–25.

44.

Hannaford

Erffmeyer

Tomkovick

(2002). Championing technology in marketing education: Assessing the value of a discipline-specific technology course. Marketing Education Review, 12(3), 47–57.

45.

Hannaford

Erffmeyer

Tomkovick

(2005). Assessing the value of an undergraduate marketing technology course: What do educators think? Marketing Education Review, 15(1), 67–76.

46.

Harrigan

Hulbert

(2011). How can marketing academics serve marketing practice? The new marketing DNA as a model for marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(3), 253–272.

47.

Hettche

Clayton

M. J.

(2012). Using social media to teach social media advertising: How to leverage student prior knowledge and word press blogs. Journal of Advertising Education, 16(1), 45–55.

48.

Hutchins

(2016). Beyond resumes: LinkedIn for marketing educators. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10(2), 137–147.

49.

Johnson

P. M.

Jones

S. K.

(2010). Beyond the banner: Teaching powerful creative techniques in digital marketing. Journal of Advertising Education, 14(1), 7–14.

50.

Kaplan

M. D.

Piskin

Bol

(2010). Educational blogging: Integrating technology into marketing experience. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(1), 50–63.

51.

Kaynama

S. A.

Keesling

(2000). Development of a web-based internet marketing course. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(2), 84–89.

52.

Kemp

McDougal

E. R.

Syrdal

(2019). The matchmaking activity: An experiential learning exercise on influencer marketing for the digital marketing classroom. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(2), 141–153.

53.

Key

T. M.

Czaplewski

A. J.

Ferguson

J. M.

(2019). Preparing workplace-ready students with digital marketing skills. Marketing Education Review, 29(2), 131–135.

54.

Kim

D.-H.

Hettche

Spiller

(2019). Incorporating third-party online certifications into a marketing course: The effects of learning style. Marketing Education Review, 29(3), 193–206.

55.

Kim

(2012). The current status of digital media education in advertising and other communication disciplines. Journal of Advertising Education, 16(2), 27–36.

56.

Kinsky

E. S.

(2015). This means war: Using an advertising war room simulation to teach social media skills. Journal of Advertising Education, 19(1), 29–41.

57.

Kirsch

(2023, May 12). The ultimate list of email marketing stats for 2023. HubSpot Blog. https://blog.HubSpot.com/marketing/email-marketing-stats

58.

Krishen

A. S.

Dwivedi

Y. K.

Bindu

Kumar

K. S.

(2021). A broad review of interactive digital marketing: A bibliometric network analysis. Journal of Business Research, 131, 183–195.

59.

Labreque

L. I.

Markos

Darmody

(2021). Addressing online behavioral advertising and privacy implications: A comparison of passive versus active learning approaches. Journal of Marketing Education, 43(1), 43–58.

60.

Lamb

J. C.

Shipp

S. H.

Moncrief

W. C.

(1995). Integrating skills and content knowledge in the marketing curriculum. Journal of Marketing Education, 17(2), 10–19.

61.

Lamberton

Stephen

A. T.

(2016). A thematic exploration of digital, social media, and mobile marketing: Research evolution from 2000 to 2015 and an agenda for future inquiry. Journal of Marketing, 80, 146–172.

62.

Lamont

L. M.

Friedman

(1997). Meeting the challenges to undergraduate marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 19(3), 17–30.

63.

Langan

Cowley

Nguyen

(2019). The state of digital marketing in academia: An examination of marketing curriculum’s response to digital disruption. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(1), 32–46.

64.

Laverie

Humphrey

Manis

K. T.

Freberg

(2020). The digital era has changed marketing: A guide to using industry certifications and exploration of student perceptions of effectiveness. Marketing Education Review, 30(1), 57–80.

65.

Lavin

Van Alstine

Scott

Oliver

Murphy

(2009). The Google online marketing challenge: Fostering student learning of search advertising. Journal of Advertising Education, 13(1), 38–43.

66.

Lee

S. Y.

(2019). Advertising education at a crossroad. Journal of Advertising Education, 23(2), 155–163.

67.

Leventhal

R. C.

Swanson

(2016). Technological applications to the marketing classroom. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10(2), 102–111.

68.

Linrud

J. K.

Wilson

J. H.

(2004). Marketing education: Perspectives of highly involved E-business practitioners. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 4, 1–8.

69.

Litmus. (2022, August 16). Litmus resource center: Email marketing guide on email ROI. https://www.litmus.com/blog/infographic-the-roi-of-email-marketing

70.

Lou

(2017). Applying data analytics to social media advertising: A twitter advertising campaign case study. Journal of Advertising Education, 21(1), 26–32.

71.

Lowe

Laffey

(2011). Is twitter for the birds? Using twitter to enhance student learning in a marketing course. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(2), 183–192222.

72.

McCorkle

D. E.

Alexander

J. F.

(2019). Using a digital personal learning network assignment to teach social curation and lifelong learning in marketing. Journal of Advertising Education, 23(2), 109–120.

73.

McCorkle

D. E.

McCorkle

Y. L.

(2012). Using LinkedIn in the marketing classroom: Exploratory insights and recommendations for teaching social media/networking. Marketing Education Review, 22(2), 157–166.

74.

McCorkle

D. E.

Payan

(2017). Using twitter in the marketing and advertising classroom to develop skills for social media marketing and personal branding. Journal of Advertising Education, 21(1), 33–43.

75.

Menon

Mady

(2022). Blockchain: A non-technical primer for marketing academics. Marketing Education Review, 32(3), 186–204.

76.

Merle

Freberg

(2016). All about that tweet: Student perceptions of professors’ social media use in the classroom. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10(2), 124–136.

77.

Miaskiewicz

(2022). The website traffic project: Facilitating engagement and learning in an introductory digital marketing class. Marketing Education Review, 32(2), 150–154.

78.

Mishra

K. E.

Mishra

A. K.

(2020). Innovations in teaching advertising: Teaching digital on a shoestring budget. Journal of Advertising Education, 24(1), 8–20.

79.

Mitchell

Strauss

(2001). Practitioner and academic recommendations for internet marketing and E-commerce curricula. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(2), 91–102.

80.

Monnappa

(2021, October 28). The history and evolution of digital marketing. https://www.simplilearn.com/history-and-evolution-of-digital-marketing-article

81.

Muñoz

C. L.

Towner

T. L.

(2010). Social networks: Facebook’s role in the advertising classroom. Journal of Advertising Education, 14(1), 20–27.

82.

Muñoz

C. L.

Wood

(2015). Update status: The state of social media marketing curriculum. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(2), 88–103.

83.

Neale

Treiblmaier

Henderson

Hunter

Hudson

Murphy

(2009). The Google online marketing challenge and research opportunities. Journal of Marketing Education, 31(1), 76–85.

84.

Northey

Bucic

Chylinski

Govind

(2015). Increasing student engagement using asynchronous learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3), 171–180.

85.

Payne

N. J.

Campbell

Bal

A. S.

Piercy

(2011). Placing a hand in the fire: Assessing the impact of a YouTube experiential learning project on viral marketing knowledge acquisition. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(2), 204–216.

86.

Pentina

(2011). Using social media to address curriculum objectives in integrated marketing communications course. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 18(1), 24–31.

87.

Peterson

(2018). Experiential learning in the age of web 2.0: The rap video project. Marketing Education Review, 28(2), 109–114.

88.

Peterson

R. M.

Dover

H. F.

(2014). Building student networks with LinkedIn: The potential for connections, internships, and jobs. Marketing Education Review, 24(1), 15–20.

89.

PwC & Interactive Advertising Bureau. (2023). Internet advertising revenue report. www.iab.com

90.

Quesenberry

K. A.

Saewitz

Kantrowitz

(2014). Blogging in the classroom: Using WordPress blogs with BuddyPress plugin as a learning tool. Journal of Advertising Education, 18(2), 5–17.

91.

Rinaldo

S. B.

Laverie

D. A.

Tapp

S. F.

Humphrey

Jr. (2013). The benefits of social media in marketing education: Evaluating twitter as a form of cognitive flexibility hypertext. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 21(1), 16–26.

92.

Rinaldo

S. B.

Tapp

Laverie

D. A.

(2011). Learning by tweeting: Using twitter as a pedagogical tool. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(2), 193–203.

93.

Robbs

(2010). Preparing young creatives for an interactive world: How possible is it? Journal of Advertising Education, 14(2), 7–14.

94.

Rohm

A. J.

Matthew

Saint Clair

(2019). Time for a marketing curriculum overhaul: Developing a digital-first approach. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(1), 47–59.

95.

Ross

(2019). Slack it to me: Complementing LMS with student-centric communications for the millennial/post-millennial student. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(2), 91–108.

96.

Schiele

Chen

(2018). Design thinking and digital marketing skills in marketing education: A module on building mobile applications. Marketing Education Review, 28(3), 150–154.

97.

Schlee

R. P.

Harich

K. R.

(2010). Knowledge and skill requirements for marketing jobs in the 21st century. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(3), 341–352.

98.

Schlee

R. P.

Harich

K. R.

(2013). Teaching students how to integrate and assess social networking tools in marketing communications. Marketing Education Review, 23(3), 209–224.

99.

Sheppard

(2023, June 24). 15 essential Google analytics statistics you need to know in 2023. The Social Shepherd. https://thesocialshepherd.com/blog/google-analytics-statistics

100.

Siegel

C. F.

(1996). Using computer networks (intranet and internet) to enhance your students’ marketing skills. Journal of Marketing Education, 18(3), 14–24.

101.

Southern

(2022, April 27). YouTube shorts hits 30 billion views per day. Search Engine Journal. https://www.searchenginejournal.com/youtube-shorts-hits-30-billion-views-per-day/447785/#close

102.

Spiller

L. D.

Scovotti

(2008). Curriculum currency: Integrating direct and interactive marketing content in introductory marketing courses. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(1), 66–81.

103.

Spiller

L. D.

Tuten

(2019). Assessing the pedagogical value of branded digital marketing certification programs. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(2), 77–90.

104.

Statista Research Department. (2022, July 27). Digital advertising-worldwide. https://www.statista.com/outlook/dmo/digital-advertising/worldwide

105.

Statista Research Department. (2023, August 31). Topic: Search advertising in the U.S. statista. https://www.statista.com/topics/4312/search-advertising/#topicOverview

106.

Staton

M. G.

(2016). Improving student job placement and assessment through the use of digital marketing certification programs. Marketing Education Review, 26(1), 20–24.

107.

Teer

H. B.

Teer

F. P.

Kruck

(2007). A study of the database marketing course in AACSB–accredited business schools. Journal of Marketing Education, 29(3), 245–253.

108.

Vaishnav

Ray

(2023). A thematic exploration of the evolution of research in multichannel marketing. Journal of Business Research, 157, 113564.

109.

Walker

K. L.

Moran

(2019). Consumer information for data-driven decision making: Teaching socially responsible use of data. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(2), 109–126.

110.

West

Moore

Barry

(2015). Beyond the tweet: Using twitter to enhance engagement, learning, and success among first-year students. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3), 160–170.

111.

Williamson

Brookshire

R. G.

Wright

N. D.

(2002). Building a BS. Program in E-business. Marketing Education Review, 12(1), 1–10.

112.

Wood

N. T.

Wetsch

L. R.

Solomon

M. R.

Hudson

(2009). From interactive to immersive: Advertising education takes a virtual leap of faith. Journal of Advertising Education, 13(1), 64–72.

113.

Workman

J. J.

(2008). Wikis in the classroom: Opportunities and challenges. Marketing Education Review, 18(1), 19–24.

114.

Wymbs

(2011). Digital marketing: The time for a new “academic major” has arrived. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(1), 93–106.

115.

Yaqub

(2023, June 9). How many websites use Google analytics 2023: Google analytics usage statistics. BusinessDIT. https://www.businessdit.com/google-analytics-statistics/

116.

Kim

Cho

(2023). Digital marketing and analytics education: A systematic review. Journal of Marketing Education.

117.

Zahay

Altounian

Politte

James

(2019). Effective resource deployment in digital marketing. Marketing Education Review, 29(3), 182–192.

118.

Zahay

Labrecque

Reavey

Roberts

M. L.

(2023). Digital marketing foundations and strategy (5th ed.). Cengage.

119.

Zarzosa

(2018). Adopting a design-thinking multidisciplinary learning approach: Integrating mobile applications into a marketing research course. Marketing Education Review, 28(2), 120–125.