Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Disciplinary Literacies and Learning to Read for Understanding: A Conceptual Framework for Disciplinary Literacy
2016242 citationsSusan R. Goldman, M. Anne Britt et al.Educational Psychologistprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Cynthia Greenleaf
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Cynthia Greenleaf's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Cynthia Greenleaf with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Cynthia Greenleaf more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Cynthia Greenleaf
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Cynthia Greenleaf. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Cynthia Greenleaf. The network helps show where Cynthia Greenleaf may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Cynthia Greenleaf
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Cynthia Greenleaf.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Cynthia Greenleaf based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Cynthia Greenleaf. Cynthia Greenleaf is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Schoenbach, Ruth & Cynthia Greenleaf. (2017). Leading for literacy. Phi Delta Kappan. 99(3). 59–64.6 indexed citations
5.
Goldman, Susan R., M. Anne Britt, Willard Brown, et al.. (2016). Disciplinary Literacies and Learning to Read for Understanding: A Conceptual Framework of Core Processes and Constructs.. Grantee Submission.3 indexed citations
6.
Goldman, Susan R., M. Anne Britt, Willard Brown, et al.. (2016). Disciplinary Literacies and Learning to Read for Understanding: A Conceptual Framework for Disciplinary Literacy. Educational Psychologist. 51(2). 219–246.242 indexed citations breakdown →
7.
Schoenbach, Ruth, Cynthia Greenleaf, & Lynn Murphy. (2012). Reading for Understanding: How Reading Apprenticeship Improves Disciplinary Learning in Secondary and College Classrooms. Second Edition..13 indexed citations
8.
Greenleaf, Cynthia, Cindy Litman, Thomas Hanson, et al.. (2010). Integrating Literacy and Science in Biology. American Educational Research Journal. 48(3). 647–717.114 indexed citations
9.
Schoenbach, Ruth, et al.. (2010). Framework Fuels the Need to Read: Strategies Boost Literacy of Students in Content-Area Classes.. The Journal of staff development. 31(5). 38–42.1 indexed citations
Schoenbach, Ruth & Cynthia Greenleaf. (2000). Tapping Teachers' Reading Expertise: Generative Professional Development with Middle and High School Content-Area Teachers..6 indexed citations
14.
Schoenbach, Ruth, et al.. (1999). Reading for Understanding: A Guide to Improving Reading in Middle and High School Classrooms. The Jossey-Bass Education Series..24 indexed citations
Greenleaf, Cynthia. (1992). Technological Indeterminacy: The Role of Classroom Writing Practices in Shaping Computer Use. Technical Report No. 57..1 indexed citations
20.
Greenleaf, Cynthia. (1985). Academic Institutions in the Light and Shadow of the Law.. Journal of college and university law. 12(1). 1–40.2 indexed citations
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.