Kathleen Scalise

1.3k total citations
38 papers, 795 citations indexed

About

Kathleen Scalise is a scholar working on Education, Developmental and Educational Psychology and Computer Science Applications. According to data from OpenAlex, Kathleen Scalise has authored 38 papers receiving a total of 795 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 24 papers in Education, 20 papers in Developmental and Educational Psychology and 11 papers in Computer Science Applications. Recurrent topics in Kathleen Scalise's work include Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods (16 papers), Online and Blended Learning (9 papers) and Science Education and Pedagogy (8 papers). Kathleen Scalise is often cited by papers focused on Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods (16 papers), Online and Blended Learning (9 papers) and Science Education and Pedagogy (8 papers). Kathleen Scalise collaborates with scholars based in United States, Switzerland and Russia. Kathleen Scalise's co-authors include Mark Wilson, Bernard R. Gifford, Perman Gochyyev, Angelica M. Stacy, Michael Timms, Diane D. Allen, Paul De Boeck, Jody Clarke‐Midura, Jim Minstrell and Tara Madhyastha and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Frontiers in Psychology and Journal of Research in Science Teaching.

In The Last Decade

Kathleen Scalise

36 papers receiving 672 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Kathleen Scalise United States 14 500 240 132 127 82 38 795
Naomi Chudowsky United States 12 980 2.0× 393 1.6× 98 0.7× 66 0.5× 82 1.0× 29 1.3k
Elwin Savelsbergh Netherlands 12 565 1.1× 492 2.0× 133 1.0× 76 0.6× 74 0.9× 29 919
Drew H. Gitomer United States 22 1.3k 2.6× 408 1.7× 102 0.8× 123 1.0× 175 2.1× 67 1.7k
Christian Fischer Germany 17 541 1.1× 212 0.9× 335 2.5× 154 1.2× 164 2.0× 55 1.1k
Roland Hübscher United States 10 416 0.8× 530 2.2× 190 1.4× 125 1.0× 120 1.5× 28 932
Johann Engelbrecht South Africa 19 934 1.9× 257 1.1× 141 1.1× 205 1.6× 32 0.4× 68 1.2k
Sarah Hofer Germany 13 463 0.9× 180 0.8× 121 0.9× 187 1.5× 65 0.8× 29 802
Monica G. M. Ferguson‐Hessler Netherlands 7 526 1.1× 357 1.5× 62 0.5× 40 0.3× 69 0.8× 16 801
Douglas Huffman United States 17 676 1.4× 269 1.1× 60 0.5× 69 0.5× 16 0.2× 45 980
Iris R. Weiss Germany 14 1.2k 2.4× 384 1.6× 39 0.3× 54 0.4× 29 0.4× 40 1.5k

Countries citing papers authored by Kathleen Scalise

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Kathleen Scalise'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 Kathleen Scalise with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Kathleen Scalise more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Kathleen Scalise

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Kathleen Scalise. 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 Kathleen Scalise. The network helps show where Kathleen Scalise may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Kathleen Scalise

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Kathleen Scalise. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Kathleen Scalise 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 Kathleen Scalise. Kathleen Scalise is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Thalmayer, Amber Gayle, Julie Marshall, & Kathleen Scalise. (2023). The International Mental Health Assessment: Validation of an Efficient Screening Inventory. Collabra Psychology. 9(1). 2 indexed citations
2.
Harn, Beth, et al.. (2023). Implementation Factors and Their Influence on Student Mathematics Outcomes. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice. 38(1). 5–14.
3.
Boeck, Paul De & Kathleen Scalise. (2019). Collaborative Problem Solving: Processing Actions, Time, and Performance. Frontiers in Psychology. 10. 1280–1280. 20 indexed citations
4.
Scalise, Kathleen, et al.. (2018). Accommodations in Digital Interactive STEM Assessment Tasks. Journal of Special Education Technology. 33(4). 219–236. 9 indexed citations
5.
Scalise, Kathleen & Jody Clarke‐Midura. (2018). The many faces of scientific inquiry: Effectively measuring what students do and not only what they say. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 55(10). 1469–1496. 20 indexed citations
6.
Wilson, Mark, Kathleen Scalise, & Perman Gochyyev. (2018). Domain modelling for advanced learning environments: the BEAR Assessment System Software. Educational Psychology. 39(10). 1199–1217. 13 indexed citations
7.
Scalise, Kathleen. (2017). Hybrid Measurement Models for Technology-Enhanced Assessments Through mIRT-bayes. International Journal of Statistics and Probability. 6(3). 168–168. 2 indexed citations
8.
Scalise, Kathleen & Diane D. Allen. (2015). Use of open‐source software for adaptive measurement: Concerto as an R‐based computer adaptive development and delivery platform. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology. 68(3). 478–496. 29 indexed citations
9.
Scalise, Kathleen, et al.. (2014). What Does a Student Know Who Earns a Top Score on the Advanced Placement Chemistry Exam?. Journal of Chemical Education. 91(4). 472–479. 6 indexed citations
10.
Scalise, Kathleen. (2012). Science learning and instruction: Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. Science Education. 96(6). 1136–1138. 37 indexed citations
11.
Scalise, Kathleen, Tara Madhyastha, Jim Minstrell, & Mark Wilson. (2010). Improving assessment evidence in e-learning products: some solutions for reliability. International Journal of Learning Technology. 5(2). 191–191. 12 indexed citations
12.
Scalise, Kathleen. (2009). New Electronic Technologies For Facilitating Differentiated Instruction. i-manager s Journal on School Educational Technology. 4(4). 24–38. 1 indexed citations
13.
Scalise, Kathleen, et al.. (2009). Student Learning in Science Simulations. What Makes a Difference. 2 indexed citations
14.
Scalise, Kathleen, et al.. (2008). Assessing Student Understanding in and between Courses in Chemistry.. Assessment Update. 20(5). 6–8. 2 indexed citations
15.
Scalise, Kathleen. (2007). Differentiated E-Learning: What It Is And Five Approaches. i-manager’s Journal on Educational Psychology. 4(1). 24–28. 2 indexed citations
16.
Timms, Michael, et al.. (2007). A Framework for Designing and Evaluating Interactive E-Learning Products. 2 indexed citations
17.
Scalise, Kathleen, et al.. (2007). “Chemistry for all, instead of chemistry just for the elite”: Lessons learned from detracked chemistry classrooms. Science Education. 91(5). 683–709. 16 indexed citations
18.
Scalise, Kathleen, et al.. (2004). BEAR CAT: A New Approach to Data Driven Content in Computer-Mediated Environments with the UC Berkeley BEAR Assessment System. EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology. 2004(1). 4185–4190.
19.
Scalise, Kathleen & Mark Wilson. (2004). Bear cat: toward a theoretical basis for dynamically driven content in computer-mediated environments. 5 indexed citations
20.
Scalise, Kathleen, et al.. (2002). Perspective of a Chemist: A Framework to Promote Conceptual Understanding of Chemistry.. 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Naomi Chudowsky Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Elwin Savelsbergh Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Drew H. Gitomer Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Christian Fischer Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Roland Hübscher Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Johann Engelbrecht Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Sarah Hofer Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Monica G. M. Ferguson‐Hessler Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Douglas Huffman Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Iris R. Weiss
Rankless by CCL
2026