High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared
Impact in
- Education 593
Classified as
- Journal
- Basic Books
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w9264604 →Countries where authors are citing High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared
This map shows the geographic impact of High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared. 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 High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared more than expected).
Fields of papers citing High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared
This network shows the impact of High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared.
About High school achievement : public, Catholic, and private schools compared
This paper, published in 1982, received 711 indexed citations . Written by James Samuel Coleman, Thomas B. Hoffer and Sally B. Kilgore covering the research area of Education. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Education (593 citations), Sociology and Political Science (217 citations), Demography (104 citations), Political Science and International Relations (63 citations) and Safety Research (57 citations). Published in Basic Books.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w9264604.