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.
Countries citing papers authored by F. Michael Connelly
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of F. Michael Connelly'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 F. Michael Connelly with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites F. Michael Connelly more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by F. Michael Connelly
This network shows the impact of papers produced by F. Michael Connelly. 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 F. Michael Connelly. The network helps show where F. Michael Connelly may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of F. Michael Connelly
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of F. Michael Connelly.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of F. Michael Connelly 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 F. Michael Connelly. F. Michael Connelly is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Connelly, F. Michael & D. Jean Clandinin. (1994). Telling Teaching Stories.. Teacher education quarterly (Claremont, Calif.). 21(1).112 indexed citations
Connelly, F. Michael, et al.. (1989). Achievement and its correlates.1 indexed citations
11.
Clandinin, D. Jean & F. Michael Connelly. (1989). Narrative and Story in Practice and Research..187 indexed citations
12.
Connelly, F. Michael & D. Jean Clandinin. (1988). Teachers as Curriculum Planners. Narratives of Experience.. Medical Entomology and Zoology. 69(10). 2681–9.832 indexed citations breakdown →
Clandinin, D. Jean & F. Michael Connelly. (1987). Inquiry into Schooling: Diverse Perspectives.. Journal of curriculum and supervision. 2(4). 295–313.2 indexed citations
15.
Connelly, F. Michael & D. Jean Clandinin. (1985). Personal Practical Knowledge and the Modes of Knowing: Relevance for Teaching and Learning. Teachers College Record The Voice of Scholarship in Education. 86(6). 174–198.146 indexed citations
16.
Connelly, F. Michael & D. Jean Clandinin. (1984). The Role of Teachers' Personal Practical Knowledge in Effecting Board Policy. Volume III: Teachers' Personal Practical Knowledge..4 indexed citations
17.
Connelly, F. Michael & D. Jean Clandinin. (1982). Personal Practical Knowledge at Bay Street School.4 indexed citations
18.
Connelly, F. Michael, et al.. (1981). Facing Ourselves: Student Journals.. 40(3). 17–20.1 indexed citations
19.
Connelly, F. Michael. (1978). The York University Biology Achievement Test. A Case Study of the Relationship Between Curriculum Policy, School Program, and External Testing..1 indexed citations
20.
Connelly, F. Michael. (1977). TOTSI Matches Teacher to Curriculum.. The Science Teacher.
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.