Practical assessment, research & evaluation
About
In The Last Decade
Practical assessment, research & evaluation
293 papers receiving 20.3k citations
Fields of papers published in Practical assessment, research & evaluation
This network shows the impact of papers published in Practical assessment, research & evaluation. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Practical assessment, research & evaluation.
Countries where authors publish in Practical assessment, research & evaluation
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Practical assessment, research & evaluation. 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 papers published in Practical assessment, research & evaluation with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Practical assessment, research & evaluation more than expected).
- Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis (2020)
- Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2000-2001. (2001)
- The Delphi Technique: Making Sense of Consensus (2020)
- An overview of content analysis (2020)
- A Comparison of Consensus, Consistency, and Measurement Approaches to Estimating Interrater Reliability (2020)
- A Critical Review of Research on Formative Assessments: The Limited Scientific Evidence of the Impact of Formative Assessments in Education (2020)
- A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review (2020)
- Mixing interview and questionnaire methods: Practical problems in aligning data (2020)
- Defining Authentic Classroom Assessment (2020)
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.