In today's fast changing and interconnected global world, researchers in a variety of areas have come to see identity as an important analytic tool for understanding schools and society. A focus on the contextually specific ways in which people act out and recognize identities allows a more dynamic approach than the sometimes overly general and…
Review of Research in Education Template
Write in a clean editor, then format for Review of Research in Education in one click — DocuGuru applies the official SAGE template with author–year references and exports a submission-ready PDF plus the editable LaTeX source. Free to start.
About the Review of Research in Education format
Review of Research in Education is a peer-reviewed journal published by SAGE, covering Teacher Education and Leadership Studies, School Choice and Performance, Early Childhood Education and Development.
| Publisher | SAGE |
|---|---|
| Reference style | Author–year (Harvard) Author–year — (Smith, 2023) in the text Smith, A., Jones, B. and Lee, C. (2023) 'A representative article title', Review of Research in Education, 12(3), pp. 45–58.
Formats any DOI in Review of Research in Education style. No sign-up. |
| Publishes research in | Teacher Education and Leadership Studies School Choice and Performance Early Childhood Education and Development Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy Critical Race Theory in Education |
| ISSN | 0091-732X |
| Citation impact (2-yr) | 5.6 |
| h-index | 133 |
| i10-index | 552 |
| Total citations | 72,391 |
| Top institutions publishing here | University of California, Berkeley |
| Journal website | www.sagepub.com |
| You get | A submission-ready PDF and the editable LaTeX source — ready to submit. |
Papers published in Review of Research in Education per year
Citation impact of Review of Research in Education by publication year
Citations each year’s papers have accumulated so far — the most recent years are still building up.
Most-cited papers in Review of Research in Education
9720384). We greatly appreciate their support but emphasize that the views expressed herein are those of the authors and not of the granting agency. We are very grateful to Carl Bereiter, Asghar (Ali) Iran-Nejad, and David Pearson for excellent comments and suggestions. In addition, we thank our colleagues Kay Burgess, Xiadong Lin, and Sean Brophy…