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.
Teacher preparation for inclusive education: increasing knowledge but raising concerns
2011350 citationsChris Forlin, Dianne ChambersAsia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Educationprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Dianne Chambers
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Dianne Chambers'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 Dianne Chambers with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Dianne Chambers more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Dianne Chambers. 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 Dianne Chambers. The network helps show where Dianne Chambers may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Dianne Chambers
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Dianne Chambers.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Dianne Chambers 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 Dianne Chambers. Dianne Chambers is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Banks, Joanne, Chris Forlin, & Dianne Chambers. (2023). Home‐schooling in the Republic of Ireland. British Journal of Special Education. 50(3). 394–402.3 indexed citations
Chambers, Dianne, Phyllis Jones, & Michael W. Riley. (2017). Belonging and the relationship to whole schooling: Introduction to themed issue. ResearchOnline@ND (The University of Notre Dame). 13(1). 1.1 indexed citations
10.
Reynolds, Nicholas & Dianne Chambers. (2015). Digital Technologies: A new curriculum implementation. Minerva Access (University of Melbourne). 2015(1). 2541–2549.3 indexed citations
11.
Deppeler, Joanne, et al.. (2015). Égalité et qualité en éducation inclusive en Australie: le cas des élèves en situation de handicap [Equality and quality in inclusive education in Australia: The case of students with disabilities]. 14(2). 49–63.1 indexed citations
Chambers, Dianne. (2011). Designing assistive technology training for paraprofessionals. ResearchOnline - ND (The University of Notre Dame Australia).1 indexed citations
17.
Chambers, Dianne. (2009). Making the most of the multiplier effect: Teacher education as a key to sustainability.
Stacey, Kaye, Vicki Steinle, & Dianne Chambers. (2003). Making Educational Research Findings Accessible for Teacher Education: From Research Project to Multimedia Resource. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. 2003(1). 2865–2872.
20.
Chambers, Dianne, et al.. (2000). Doing IT Down Under: Uses of Information Technologies in an Australian Degree for K-6 Teachers. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. 2000(1). 1232–1239.1 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.