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.
Understanding the implementation of personalized learning: A research synthesis
Countries citing papers authored by James D. Basham
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of James D. Basham'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 James D. Basham with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites James D. Basham more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by James D. Basham. 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 James D. Basham. The network helps show where James D. Basham may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of James D. Basham
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of James D. Basham.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of James D. Basham 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 James D. Basham. James D. Basham is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Basham, James D., José Blackorby, & Matthew T. Marino. (2020). Opportunity in crisis: The role of universal design for learning in educational redesign. 18(1). 71–91.39 indexed citations
Smith, Sean J., et al.. (2016). Case in Point: A Statewide Blended Learning Initiative for Students with Disabilities: What Makes It Work? A Director's Perspective.. 29(2). 113–116.1 indexed citations
6.
Basham, James D., et al.. (2016). Emerging State Policy in Online Special Education.. 29(2). 70–78.9 indexed citations
7.
Basham, James D., et al.. (2016). Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Special Education Technology. 31(3). 147–155.21 indexed citations
8.
Basham, James D., et al.. (2015). Mobile Learning for Students With and Without Disabilities in K-12 Educational Setting. E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. 2015(1). 1647–1664.1 indexed citations
Basham, James D., et al.. (2011). It's in the Bag: Digital Backpacks for Project-Based Learning.. Learning and leading with technology. 39(2). 24–27.2 indexed citations
16.
Marino, Matthew T., et al.. (2011). Selecting Software for Students with Learning and Other Disabilities.. The Science Teacher. 78(3). 70–72.4 indexed citations
Basham, James D., et al.. (2006). Making Use of the Net: Internet Based Videoconferencing and Online Conferencing Tools in Teacher Preparation.. Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy. 2006(1). 1440–1444.3 indexed citations
19.
Basham, James D. & Melissa Jones. (2005). The Design and Integration of an Online and On-Campus Hybrid Course Model.. Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy. 2005(1). 1884–1889.1 indexed citations
20.
Basham, James D., et al.. (1997). An Integrated Framework Used to Increase Preservice Teacher NETS-T Ability. The Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 13(2). 257–276.17 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.