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.
Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics
2010709 citationsSharon J. Derry, Roy Pea et al.Journal of the Learning Sciencesprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Rogers Hall'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 Rogers Hall with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Rogers Hall more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Rogers Hall. 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 Rogers Hall. The network helps show where Rogers Hall may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Rogers Hall
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Rogers Hall.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Rogers Hall 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 Rogers Hall. Rogers Hall is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Steier, Rolf, et al.. (2019). Tools and Methods for ‘4E Analysis’: New lenses for analyzing interaction in CSCL. VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet). 759–766.1 indexed citations
Shapiro, Ben Rydal & Rogers Hall. (2018). Personal Curation in a Museum. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction. 2(CSCW). 1–22.7 indexed citations
6.
Shapiro, Ben Rydal & Rogers Hall. (2017). Making Engagement Visible: The Use of Mondrian Transcripts in a Museum.. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning.5 indexed citations
7.
Jurow, A. Susan, et al.. (2014). Theorizing Learning in the Context of Social Movements.. ICLS.2 indexed citations
8.
Jasmine, Y., Charles Munter, Einat Heyd‐Metzuyanim, et al.. (2014). Disrupting learning: Changing local practice for good. International Conference of Learning Sciences. 3. 1396–1405.2 indexed citations
9.
Derry, Sharon J., Roy Pea, Brigid Barron, et al.. (2010). Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 19(1). 3–53.709 indexed citations breakdown →
10.
Hall, Rogers, et al.. (2010). Scaling practices of spatial analysis and modeling. International Conference of Learning Sciences. 157–163.3 indexed citations
Hall, Rogers, et al.. (2004). Of grids and jars: a comparative analysis of representational infrastructure and learning opportunities in middle school and professional science. International Conference of Learning Sciences. 238–245.3 indexed citations
Hall, Rogers. (2000). Work at the Interface between Representing and Represented Worlds in Middle School Mathematics Design Projects. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 22(22).2 indexed citations
Greeno, James G. & Rogers Hall. (1997). Practicing Representation: Learning with and about Representational Forms. Phi Delta Kappan. 78(5). 361.178 indexed citations
Hall, Rogers & Dennis Kibler. (1990). Making mathematics on paper : constructing representations of stories about related linear functions. eScholarship (California Digital Library).12 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.