Cited by 66Student Assessment and FeedbackEvaluation of Teaching PracticesEducational Assessment and Improvement

Nested contexts that shape assessment "for" learning: School-based professional learning community and classroom culture

Birenbaum, Menucha, Kimron, Helena, Shilton, Hany·2011·Studies in Educational Evaluation

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.04.001

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Birenbaum, M., Kimron, H., & Shilton, H.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Corresponding author
Birenbaum, Menucha
Venue
Studies in Educational Evaluation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-03
Volume
37
Issue
1
Pages
35-48
ISSN
0191-491X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2016609950
Cited by
66
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
13.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Studies In Educational Evaluation (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
Keywords
assessment for learning, classroom culture, in-service teachers, primary school teachers, inquiry practices, teacher learning, school context

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review