This map shows the geographic impact of Kelly Shapley'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 Kelly Shapley with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Kelly Shapley more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Kelly Shapley. 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 Kelly Shapley. The network helps show where Kelly Shapley may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Kelly Shapley
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Kelly Shapley.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Kelly Shapley 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 Kelly Shapley. Kelly Shapley is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Shapley, Kelly, Daniel Sheehan, Catherine Maloney, & Fanny Caranikas-Walker. (2010). Evaluating the Implementation Fidelity of Technology Immersion and Its Relationship with Student Achievement. Open Access Journals at BC (Boston College). 9(4).89 indexed citations
Shapley, Kelly, Catherine Maloney, Fanny Caranikas-Walker, & Daniel Sheehan. (2008). Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: Third-Year (2006-07) Traits of Higher Technology Immersion Schools and Teachers..4 indexed citations
6.
Shapley, Kelly, Daniel Sheehan, Catherine Maloney, & Fanny Caranikas-Walker. (2008). Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: Outcomes for the Third Year (2006-07)..15 indexed citations
7.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (2007). Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: An Analysis of Second-Year (2005-06) Implementation..1 indexed citations
8.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (2007). Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: Findings from the Second Year..9 indexed citations
9.
Caranikas-Walker, Fanny, et al.. (2006). Texas Study of Personnel Needs in Special Education. Executive Summary..3 indexed citations
10.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (2006). Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: An Analysis of the Baseline Conditions and First-Year Implementation of Technology Immersion in Middle School..4 indexed citations
11.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (2006). Effects of Technology Immersion on Teaching and Learning: Evidence from Observations of Sixth-Grade Classrooms..2 indexed citations
12.
Caranikas-Walker, Fanny, et al.. (2006). Texas Study of Personnel Needs in Special Education..3 indexed citations
13.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (2006). Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: First-Year Results..10 indexed citations
14.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (2006). Texas Open-Enrollment Charter School Revenue. Supplement to the 2003-04 Evaluation..1 indexed citations
15.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (2003). Integrating Technology into Teacher Education: Navigating the Complexity of Institutional Change.3 indexed citations
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (1999). Challenges for Literacy Instruction: The Role of Teacher Capacity Building in the Dallas Reading Plan..1 indexed citations
18.
Shapley, Kelly, et al.. (1997). Implementing Portfolio Assessment in the Primary Grades: Teachers' Perspectives.. 15(2). 41–47.2 indexed citations
19.
Shapley, Kelly. (1993). Metacognition, Motivation, and Learning: A Study of Sixth-Grade Middle School Students' Use and Development of Self-Regulated Learning Strategies. University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas).3 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.