Publications

2012
Sarit Barzilai and Zohar, Anat . 2012. “Epistemic Thinking In Action: Evaluating And Integrating Online Sources”. Cognition And Instructioncognition And Instruction, 30, 1, Pp. 39 - 85. . Publisher's Version Abstract
This study examines epistemic thinking in action in order to shed light on the relation between students? personal epistemologies and their online learning practices. The study is based on observations of the learning behaviors of 6th-grade students (n = 38) during two online inquiry tasks. Data were collected through think-aloud protocols and retrospective epistemic interviews. The study examines how absolutist and evaluativist epistemic perspectives come into play in two key online inquiry strategies?evaluation of website trustworthiness and critical integration of multiple online sources. The study explores students? epistemic thinking on the cognitive and metacognitive levels and examines epistemic metacognitive knowledge about both persons and strategies. The findings demonstrate that epistemic thinking plays an important role in online inquiry learning. Participants? epistemic metacognitive knowledge regarding online learning strategies correlated with their epistemic cognition. Evaluativists significantly outperformed absolutists in the integration strategy but no significant differences were found in the evaluation strategy. Furthermore, there was evidence for considerable variability in students? epistemic thinking. The complex role of students? epistemic thinking in online learning is analyzed and discussed.
Zohar A. 2012. “Explicit Teaching Of Meta-Strategic Knowledge: Definitions, Student&Rsquo;S Learning, And Teachers&Rsquo; Professional Development”. In Metacognition In Science Education: Trends In Current Research, 40:Pp. 197-224. NY: Springer. . Publisher's Version Abstract

This chapter describes a comprehensive research program addressing metastrategic knowledge (MSK), i.e., general conscious awareness of the thinking strategies applied during instruction and knowledge of their general characteristics. A series of three consecutive studies investigated the effects of explicit instruction of MSK. The findings of all three studies showed dramatic developments in students’ strategic and metastrategic thinking following instruction. The effect of the treatment was preserved in delayed transfer tests. Explicit teaching of MSK had a particularly strong effect on low-achieving students. The findings show the significance of explicit teaching of MSK for teaching higher-order thinking to all students and in particular to LA students. The final sections of this chapter report two additional studies concerning teachers’ knowledge in the context of teaching MSK. These studies showed that teachers’ initial metastrategic knowledge was lacking and insufficient for teaching purposes. Following professional development, considerable progress was made in teachers’ knowledge of MSK and in their pedagogical abilities to use this knowledge in the classroom. These findings show that a professional development course can indeed help teachers make considerable progress with respect to the knowledge that is required for applying MSK in the classroom. MSK, which is the metacognitive component applied in this chapter, consists of knowledge about tasks (referring to task characteristics that call for the use of a strategy or “when” to use a strategy) and knowledge about strategies (referring to “why” and “how” to use a strategy).

Zohar A. and J., Dori Y. . 2012. Metacognition In Science Education: Trends In Current Research. Ny. NY: Springer.
Carmel Gallagher, Hipkins, Rosemary , and Zohar, Anat . 2012. “Positioning Thinking Within National Curriculum And Assessment Systems: Perspectives From Israel, New Zealand And Northern Ireland”. New Perspectives On Developing And Assessing Thinking: Selected Papers From The 15Th International Conference On Thinking, 7, 2, Pp. 134 - 143. . Publisher's Version Abstract
Over the past decade there has been a major move to position ‘thinking’ (however thinking is defined and enacted) as a more explicit outcome within the curriculum of many nations, with implications for teachers’ professional development, assessment, and examination requirements. This paper analyses approaches to this challenge taken by Israel, New Zealand and Northern Ireland. Each short case study considers: the political context in which the developments emerged; the ways in which thinking has been framed within the national curriculum, assessment and examination system; and the successes and challenges of the approaches taken to embedding change. Comparing and contrasting three different national systems provides important insights into the priorities, commitments and resources allocated to supporting a focus on thinking as a valued curriculum goal and outcome. In particular, it highlights the need for greater coherence between curriculum, professional development, pedagogy and assessment policies generally. Given the increasing international emphasis on the importance of developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills as a response to 21st century learning challenges, the paper reflects on what more may need to be done to leverage and sustain change.
2011
Barzilai S. and Zohar A., . 2011. “&Ldquo;How Do You Know?&Rdquo; Epistemology And Individual Learning From On- Line Information Sources”. In On-Line Learning And Instruction, Pp. 77-100. Or Yehuda: The Center for Academic Studies.
2009
Adi Ben-David and Zohar, Anat . 2009. “Contribution Of Meta-Strategic Knowledge To Scientific Inquiry Learning”. International Journal Of Science Educationinternational Journal Of Science Education, 31, 12, Pp. 1657 - 1682. . Publisher's Version Abstract
The aim of the present study is to explore the effects of Meta?strategic Knowledge (MSK) on scientific inquiry learning. MSK is a subcomponent of metacognition defined as general, explicit knowledge about thinking strategies. Following earlier studies that showed considerable effects of explicit instruction of MSK regarding the strategy of variables control, the present study explores whether similar effects are found in two additional scientific thinking strategies: Define Research Questions and Formulate Research Hypotheses. Participants were 119 eighth?grade students from six classes of a heterogeneous school. Equal numbers of low?achieving and high?achieving students were randomly assigned into experimental and control groups. The findings showed dramatic developments in students? performance following instruction. The effect of the treatment was preserved in a delayed transfer test. Our findings show that explicit teaching of MSK had a stronger effect for low?achieving students than for high?achieving students. The implications of the findings for teaching and learning in the context of scientific inquiry are discussed.
The concept of metacognition refers to one’s knowledge and control of one’s own cognitive system. However, despite being widely used, this concept is confusing because of several reasons. First, sometimes it is not at all clear what is cognitive and what is metacognitive. Second, researchers often use the same term, namely, “metacognition” even when they refer to very different aspects of this complex concept. Alternatively, researchers may use different terms to indicate the same metacognitive elements. Another foggy matter is the interrelationships among the various components of metacognition discussed in the literature. This conceptual confusion regarding the concept of metacognition and its sub-components calls for in-depth theoretical and conceptual clarifications. The goal of this article is to portray a detailed example of a conceptual analysis of meta-strategic knowledge (MSK) which is one specific component of metacognition. This specific example is used to draw a general model for conceptual analyses of additional metacognitive components. The approach suggested here is to begin with a clear definition of the target sub component of metacognition, followed by a systematic examination of this sub component according to several dimensions that are relevant to metacognition in general and to that sub component in particular. The examination should include an analysis of how the details of the definition of the target sub-component refer to: (a) general theoretical metacognitive issues raised by prominent scholars; (b) definitions formulated and issues raised by other researchers who have investigated the same (or a similar) sub-component and, (c) empirical findings pertaining to that sub-component. Finally, it should be noted that since metacognition is a relational rather than a definite concept it is important to situate the context within which the conceptual analysis takes place.
Barzilai S. and Zohar A., . 2009. “The Role Of Epistemic Thinking In Online Learning”. In Learning In The Technological Era: Proceedings Of The 4Th Chais Conference On Instructional Technologies Research , Pp. 29-33. Ra'anana: The Open University of Israel. . Publisher's Version Abstract

Recent studies have begun to show that epistemic thinking, thinking about knowledge and knowing, may play an important role in online learning processes such as searching, evaluating, and integrating multiple online sources. The purpose of this study is to characterize the epistemic thinking of elementary school students as they study online. This goal is achieved by using the Epistemic Understanding Questionnaire (Kuhn et al., 2000), and thinking aloud during two open-ended online tasks, followed by retrospective interviews (Hofer, 2004). The participants of this study are 42 Israeli sixth graders. Preliminary results show that epistemic thinking is related to performance of key online learning strategies such as evaluation, integration, and construction and justification of arguments based on multiple online sources. The study analyzes the interplay between epistemic metacognition and strategic performance. 

2008
This study assessed the effects of explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge (MSK) on gains of low-achieving (LA) and high-achieving (HA) 5th grade students (N=41). Gains in reasoning scores of students from the Experimental group (compared to students from the control group) were obtained on the strategic and on the metastrategic level. Gains were preserved in near and far transfer tasks immediately after the end of instruction and 3 months later. Explicit teaching of MSK affected both LA and HA students, but it was extremely valuable for LA students who required a longer period than HA students to reach their top score.
Meta-strategic Knowledge (MSK) is a sub-component of metacognition that is defined in the present study as general, explicit knowledge about thinking strategies. In the present study we shall focus on the control of variables thinking strategy. Following an earlier study (Zohar & Peled 2007) that showed considerable effects of explicit instruction of MSK in laboratory setting, this study explores whether these effects are preserved in authentic classroom situations. Participants were 119 8th grade students from 6 classes of a heterogeneous school. Equal numbers of low-achieving and high-achieving students were randomly assigned into experimental and control groups. The findings showed dramatic developments in students’ strategic and meta-strategic thinking following instruction. The effect of the treatment was preserved in delayed transfer tests. Our findings show that explicit teaching of MSK had a strong effect on low achieving students. The implications of the findings for learning and instruction are discussed.
This study investigates how the context of mathematical tasks affects the performance of young children (ages 5–11). Subjects were 523 children from age 5 to 11. Three contexts of mathematical tasks (stereotypically boys’ contexts, stereotypically girls’ contexts and neutral contexts) are examined in three age groups (young, medium, and old). Boys’ and girls’ mean scores were compared for each age group in each of the three contexts. The data show that girls’ performance is affected by the context of the task while boys’ performance is not. The comparison between boys and girls in the three different contexts showed that in neutral contexts, the scores of boys and girls are similar. In (stereotypically) boys’ contexts, however, boys score significantly higher than girls. In (stereotypically) girls’ contexts, a significant interaction is found between age and gender, showing that the way girls are affected by such contexts depends on their age. The implications of these findings for gender-fair mathematics learning are discussed.
How should the information age affect teaching goals and methods? One of the claims voiced by educators is that computerized information tools make systematic study and acquisition of information redundant. Put bluntly this claim states that students should no longer ‘waste’ their time learning or memorizing texts and facts that can be retrieved in a keystroke. We attempted to examine the current role of information acquisition in learning processes by interviewing 24 expert academic researchers who work regularly with computerized information tools. Analysis of the researchers’ descriptions of their learning and thinking processes revealed that, according to the majority of the researchers, computerized information tools have not reduced the importance learning and acquiring information. These exploratory findings suggest that information acquisition should still be an important part of the curriculum in the age of information.
Zohar A. 2008. “Science Teacher Education And Professional Development In Argumentation”. In Argumentation In Science Education: Perspectives From Classroom-Based Research, 35:Pp. 245-268. Springer. . Publisher's Version Abstract
What do teachers (pre-service teachers as well as in-service teachers) need to know in order to be able to implement argumentation processes proficiently in their classrooms? What implications does that body of knowledge have for teacher education (TE) and professional development (PD) programs? Let us take a look at the reflections of a teacher who had taught (what she considered to be) a successful argumentation lesson in a ninth grade biology class. The teacher provided guidance to a group of four students who engaged in an argumentation activity about moral dilemmas in human genetics (Zohar & Nemet, 2000). A typical problem with students’ initial reasoning in this unit is that they tend to form unwarranted opinions, ignoring alternative points of view. When they do justify their opinions, they tend to avoid cardinal justifications that involve the ethical sides of the issue, and thus to circumvent the focus of the dilemma. In her analysis of part of a lesson in which she provided guidance to her students, the teacher reported that before her intervention, students expressed their opinions in a loud voice, did not justify their opinions and did not listen to each other. A dramatic change took place following her intervention: students started to phrase the dilemma in terms of principled bio-ethical considerations, justify their opinions, refute each other’s arguments, and explain why other people’s opinions may be wrong. The guidance that has been successful in bringing about such a high-level discussion may seem an easy thing to do. Therefore, we should pay attention to the teacher’s report of what she had felt during the process of guiding her students (Zohar, 2004a, p. 146)
Like other countries, Israel had its share of projects that see the implementation of inquiry and higher order thinking in schools as their main goal. However, although many of these projects were quite successful, they did not succeed in changing the bulk of teaching and learning in Israeli schools. This article describes a new national educational policy called “Pedagogical Horizons for Learning”. The goal of this policy is to move the whole educational system towards a focus on higher order thinking and deep understanding. Such a move must consider the knowledge gained from previous projects but it must also lean on strategies for implementing systemic educational change. Implementing the goals of the “Pedagogical Horizons for Learning” on a national scale requires simultaneous work on three-dimensions: (a) curriculum, learning materials and standards; (b) professional development; and (c) assessment. The article outlines the plan for each of these three-dimensions and provides some accounts of the first stages of the implementation process.
Zohar A. 2008. “Science Teacher Education And Professional Development In Argumentation”. In Argumentation In Science Education: Perspectives From Classroom-Based Research, 35:Pp. 245-268. Springer. . Publisher's Version Abstract

What do teachers (pre-service teachers as well as in-service teachers) need to know in order to be able to implement argumentation processes proficiently in their classrooms? What implications does that body of knowledge have for teacher education (TE) and professional development (PD) programs? Let us take a look at the reflections of a teacher who had taught (what she considered to be) a successful argumentation lesson in a ninth grade biology class. The teacher provided guidance to a group of four students who engaged in an argumentation activity about moral dilemmas in human genetics (Zohar & Nemet, 2000). A typical problem with students' initial reasoning in this unit is that they tend to form unwarranted opinions, ignoring alternative points of view. When they do justify their opinions, they tend to avoid cardinal justifications that involve the ethical sides of the issue, and thus to circumvent the focus of the dilemma. In her analysis of part of a lesson in which she provided guidance to her students, the teacher reported that before her intervention, students expressed their opinions in a loud voice, did not justify their opinions and did not listen to each other. A dramatic change took place following her intervention: students started to phrase the dilemma in terms of principled bio-ethical considerations, justify their opinions, refute each other's arguments, and explain why other people's opinions may be wrong. The guidance that has been successful in bringing about such a high-level discussion may seem an easy thing to do. Therefore, we should pay attention to the teacher's report of what she had felt during the process of guiding her students (Zohar, 2004a, p. 146)

2007
Anat Zohar. 2007. “Science Teacher Education And Professional Development In Argumentation”. In Argumentation In Science Education: Perspectives From Classroom-Based Research, Pp. 245 - 268. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. . Publisher's Version Abstract
What do teachers (pre-service teachers as well as in-service teachers) need to know in order to be able to implement argumentation processes proficiently in their classrooms? What implications does that body of knowledge have for teacher education (TE) and professional development (PD) programs? Let us take a look at the reflections of a teacher who had taught (what she considered to be) a successful argumentation lesson in a ninth grade biology class. The teacher provided guidance to a group of four students who engaged in an argumentation activity about moral dilemmas in human genetics (Zohar & Nemet, 2000). A typical problem with students’ initial reasoning in this unit is that they tend to form unwarranted opinions, ignoring alternative points of view. When they do justify their opinions, they tend to avoid cardinal justifications that involve the ethical sides of the issue, and thus to circumvent the focus of the dilemma. In her analysis of part of a lesson in which she provided guidance to her students, the teacher reported that before her intervention, students expressed their opinions in a loud voice, did not justify their opinions and did not listen to each other. A dramatic change took place following her intervention: students started to phrase the dilemma in terms of principled bio-ethical considerations, justify their opinions, refute each other’s arguments, and explain why other people’s opinions may be wrong. The guidance that has been successful in bringing about such a high-level discussion may seem an easy thing to do. Therefore, we should pay attention to the teacher’s report of what she had felt during the process of guiding her students (Zohar, 2004a, p. 146)
2006
Zohar A. 2006. “Connected Knowledge In Science And Mathematics Education”. International Journal Of Science Education, 23, 13, Pp. 1579-1600. . Publisher's Version Abstract
While the traditional meaning of connected knowledge is valuable in some school subjects, it does not address the main activities of knowledge acquisition in subjects such as physics and mathematics. The goal of this article is to analyze the relationships between the concepts “learning for understanding” and “connected knowledge”, a central theme in feminist epistemology. In learning for understanding, the learner forms multiple, intricate connections among the concepts she is studying in school, between school concepts and her everyday concepts, and between school concepts and their wider context. Viewing connected knowledge as tightly related to understanding has several important implications. It brings connected knowledge into the central learning activities that take place in school science and mathematics, and gives it a high status. It contributes to our understanding of gender-related patterns in thinking; and it may form a unifying theoretical framework for many studies and projects in the field of gender fair education.
Zohar A. 2006. “Higher Order Thinking In Science Classrooms: Goals, Means And Research Findings”. Ensecanza De Las Ciencias, 24, Pp. 157-172.
Barzilai S. and Zohar A., . 2006. “How Does Information Technology Shape Thinking?”. Thinking Skills And Creativity, 1, 2, Pp. 130-145. . Publisher's Version Abstract
This study revisits a classic yet still intriguing question regarding information technology (IT): what difference does IT “really” make, in terms of people’s thinking? In order to explore this question, the effects of IT in authentic research settings were studied through retrospective interviews with 24 academic researchers. Analysis of the researchers’ descriptions of their learning and thinking processes shows that the effects of IT on higher order thinking strategies can be classified, following Perkins [Perkins, D. N. (1985). The fingertip effect: How information processing technology changes thinking. Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11–17], into first order effects and second order effects. First order effects of IT amplify or improve existing thinking strategies, without changing their nature, while second order effects of IT cause significant changes in the researchers’ thinking strategies. The results demonstrate that both types of effects take place in authentic research settings, often existing side by side. This article explores several examples of the ways in which IT affects higher order thinking strategies (such as forming research questions, constructing models and evaluating information), examines the types of effects created by IT, the conditions required for these effects to take place, and the role of distributed cognition.
Zohar A. 2006. “Inquiry Learning, Higher Order Thinking Skills And Metacognition”. In Teaching And Learning By Inquiry: An Ongoing Challenge, Pp. 57-84. Jerusalem: Magnes.