Metacognition is an invaluable part of instruction of higher order thinking (HOT). The goal of this article is to review previous studies about teachers’ knowledge and professional development (PD) in the area of metacognitive instruction in the context of teaching HOT. Part A of the article reviews 25 empirical studies assembled through a scoping review. Although each individual study consists of significant findings, our analysis indicates that, as a field, the study of teachers’ and pre-service teachers’ knowledge in this area is still rather preliminary and exploratory. The review draws several conclusions regarding the nature of the research in this area. However, lack of a common conceptual framework and research instruments precludes the possibility of drawing meaningful general conclusions from the findings of the 25 studies. Part B centers on 8 empirical and theoretical studies addressing the same conceptual framework centering on meta-strategic knowledge (MSK). The findings demonstrate the significance of metacognition in general, and MSK in particular for teachers’ ability to teach HOT, showing that it can be developed in both pre-service and in-service teachers’ education and PD. The findings highlight several specific characteristics of teachers’ knowledge and learning processes in this area. Yet, the findings also show that metacognition is rarely addressed in a satisfactory manner in large-scale efforts to teach HOT and that MSK is mostly neglected in PD programs for teaching inquiry learning. The implications for research and practice of HOT and metacognition are discussed.

Metacognition is an invaluable part of instruction of higher order thinking (HOT). The goal of this article is to review previous studies about teachers’ knowledge and professional development (PD) in the area of metacognitive instruction in the context of teaching HOT. Part A of the article reviews 25 empirical studies assembled through a scoping review. Although each individual study consists of significant findings, our analysis indicates that, as a field, the study of teachers’ and pre-service teachers’ knowledge in this area is still rather preliminary and exploratory. The review draws several conclusions regarding the nature of the research in this area. However, lack of a common conceptual framework and research instruments precludes the possibility of drawing meaningful general conclusions from the findings of the 25 studies. Part B centers on 8 empirical and theoretical studies addressing the same conceptual framework centering on meta-strategic knowledge (MSK). The findings demonstrate the significance of metacognition in general, and MSK in particular for teachers’ ability to teach HOT, showing that it can be developed in both pre-service and in-service teachers’ education and PD. The findings highlight several specific characteristics of teachers’ knowledge and learning processes in this area. Yet, the findings also show that metacognition is rarely addressed in a satisfactory manner in large-scale efforts to teach HOT and that MSK is mostly neglected in PD programs for teaching inquiry learning. The implications for research and practice of HOT and metacognition are discussed.

This study compares the argumentative writing characteristics of students from different sociocultural backgrounds. We focused on Jewish ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) students, educated in a segregated religious school for boys (yeshiva), who are now attempting to integrate in secular higher education in Israel. To better understand the unique characteristics of this population, we reviewed 92 essays written by Haredi students, and compared them with 76 essays by public education (PE) graduates. Our analysis was based on the cognitive and sociocultural perspectives of argumentation. Both bottom-up and top-down criteria were used to elicit the argumentative writing characteristics either emerging from the data or based on existing theories. Our primary findings indicate that Haredi students have distinct argumentative characteristics, including the use of more complex and dialectic arguments and unique persuasive tactics. These findings are discussed in light of previous research on yeshiva learning methods and recommendations are provided for adjusting the existing higher education curricula to suit both PE and Haredi students.

This study compares the argumentative writing characteristics of students from different sociocultural backgrounds. We focused on Jewish ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) students, educated in a segregated religious school for boys (yeshiva), who are now attempting to integrate in secular higher education in Israel. To better understand the unique characteristics of this population, we reviewed 92 essays written by Haredi students, and compared them with 76 essays by public education (PE) graduates. Our analysis was based on the cognitive and sociocultural perspectives of argumentation. Both bottom-up and top-down criteria were used to elicit the argumentative writing characteristics either emerging from the data or based on existing theories. Our primary findings indicate that Haredi students have distinct argumentative characteristics, including the use of more complex and dialectic arguments and unique persuasive tactics. These findings are discussed in light of previous research on yeshiva learning methods and recommendations are provided for adjusting the existing higher education curricula to suit both PE and Haredi students.

This chapter focuses on bridging the gap between policy and practice in Israeli schools, in the context of implementing a national innovative policy in the area of teaching higher-order thinking (HOT) across the curriculum. The chapter elaborates on capacity building of senior instructional leaders who were national subject superintendents (NSSs), responsible for the quality of teaching, learning and assessment in specific school subjects. The model of implementation had three main features: (a) deep and long-term (3 years long) capacity building and the formation of a community of learners; (b) a balanced blend of tightness (in terms of defining the overall goal—developing students’ HOT) and looseness (in terms of autonomy as to whether and how to engage in the change process); and (c) tailoring the change process to multiple, specific educational contexts. The workshop was part of a detailed plan of a top-down implementation process addressing changes in assessment, curriculum and learning materials and professional development. It made prominent contributions to the web of interactive changes that took place in learning and instruction of many school subjects, matching an ecological model of change. The analysis shows how a top-down implementation, together with a substantial degree of autonomy, can result in rich and diverse bottom-up initiatives. The NSS workshop thus demonstrated how long-term capacity building of a group of senior educational leaders can be used as a leverage for implementing an innovative instructional change on a large, national scale.

This study investigates challenges in addressing metacognition in professional development (PD) programs addressing instruction of higher-order thinking (HOT). A set of semi-structured interviews was conducted with 18 instructional leaders who had prominent roles in large-scale implementation programs designed to teach HOT. Most participants (n = 15) expressed the opinion that metacognition is valuable in teaching HOT yet, reported that metacognitive teaching is rare in wide-scale efforts to implement HOT. They explained that the major reason for this gap is teachers’ fragile knowledge of metacognition. The analysis shows a deficiency in teachers’ general metacognitive knowledge, deficiency in the more specific metastrategic knowledge (MSK) regarding individual thinking strategies, and deficiencies in relevant pedagogical knowledge. Implications are discussed.

AbstractPurposeThis study investigates how senior science teachers viewed the effects of a Raising Test Scores policy and its implementation on instruction of higher order thinking (HOT), and on teaching thinking to students with low academic achievements.BackgroundThe study was conducted in the context of three concurrent policies advocating: (a) improving test scores; (b) developing students’ thinking and inquiry skills; and (c) narrowing achievement gaps.MethodologyData collection was based on 20 interviews with senior science teachers.ResultsThe findings show that the senior teachers? expectations regarding a ?new spirit? calling for instruction of inquiry and HOT throughout the system did not materialize under the high stakes testing regime. Test preparation did involve intense engagement with HOT tasks. However, under the regime of high stakes testing, instruction of HOT seemed to take the form of ?mechanical instruction?, implying rote learning and drilling students in answering HOT items, rather than teaching for thinking in a meaningful way.ConclusionIn the presence of the aggressive policy addressing the need to raise test scores, the goal of teaching students to think, as well as the more specific goal of teaching low-achieving students to think was compromised in a considerable way.

AbstractPurposeThis study investigates how senior science teachers viewed the effects of a Raising Test Scores policy and its implementation on instruction of higher order thinking (HOT), and on teaching thinking to students with low academic achievements.BackgroundThe study was conducted in the context of three concurrent policies advocating: (a) improving test scores; (b) developing students' thinking and inquiry skills; and (c) narrowing achievement gaps.MethodologyData collection was based on 20 interviews with senior science teachers.ResultsThe findings show that the senior teachers? expectations regarding a ?new spirit? calling for instruction of inquiry and HOT throughout the system did not materialize under the high stakes testing regime. Test preparation did involve intense engagement with HOT tasks. However, under the regime of high stakes testing, instruction of HOT seemed to take the form of ?mechanical instruction?, implying rote learning and drilling students in answering HOT items, rather than teaching for thinking in a meaningful way.ConclusionIn the presence of the aggressive policy addressing the need to raise test scores, the goal of teaching students to think, as well as the more specific goal of teaching low-achieving students to think was compromised in a considerable way.

One of the primary concerns of epistemic thinking research is understanding how people think about matters such as knowledge, truth, and justification. Understanding how people think about epistemic matters is highly important in current knowledge societies in which information has become more abundant and accessible, yet also increasingly diverse. This chapter focuses on the processes and resources that people employ in order to deal with epistemic challenges and explores how epistemic thinking is situated with regards to the distinction between cognition and metacognition.

Educational policy documents from around the globe currently highlight the goal of teaching higher order thinking (HOT). Yet, most classrooms worldwide are still predominately characterized by a pedagogy of knowledge transmission, focusing on lower-order cognitive levels. This discrepancy points to the need to study issues of large scale implementation of HOT. The goal of this paper is to address this issue by examining two decades of implementing HOT in civic education in Israel, adopting a dual approach: first, the paper provides a historical analysis of relevant policies and political transformations, showing what happens to a policy decision to foster HOT over the years. The analysis shows that the way from a policy paper to what actually had taken place in classrooms is long and bumpy. The policy did cause several practical changes, but for more than 10 years, impacts were slim, sometimes causing unexpected (and undesirable) consequences. Then, the paper zooms-in on one specific period in which more elaborate implementation efforts took place. Significant hallmarks of the process were an emphasis on developing instructional leadership, detailed pedagogical planning, a blend of tight “top down” processes with “bottom up” processes characterized by growing freedom and autonomy, and modelling the culture of thinking.

Educational policy documents from around the globe currently highlight the goal of teaching higher order thinking (HOT). Yet, most classrooms worldwide are still predominately characterized by a pedagogy of knowledge transmission, focusing on lower-order cognitive levels. This discrepancy points to the need to study issues of large scale implementation of HOT. The goal of this paper is to address this issue by examining two decades of implementing HOT in civic education in Israel, adopting a dual approach: first, the paper provides a historical analysis of relevant policies and political transformations, showing what happens to a policy decision to foster HOT over the years. The analysis shows that the way from a policy paper to what actually had taken place in classrooms is long and bumpy. The policy did cause several practical changes, but for more than 10 years, impacts were slim, sometimes causing unexpected (and undesirable) consequences. Then, the paper zooms-in on one specific period in which more elaborate implementation efforts took place. Significant hallmarks of the process were an emphasis on developing instructional leadership, detailed pedagogical planning, a blend of tight “top down” processes with “bottom up” processes characterized by growing freedom and autonomy, and modelling the culture of thinking.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze two parallel processes in the Israeli educational system: first, the idea of school autonomy, exploring its origins and its pedagogical implications and effectiveness; and second, the development of the progressive education evident mainly in the cognitive domain of twenty-first century skills (21st CS), focussing on fostering “deep knowledge” and children’s thinking skills. The manuscript explores the various “waves” of progressive pedagogies that have taken place in the Israeli school system over the years, describing and analyzing the processes that characterize them. Design/methodology/approach Based on a historical perspective, the paper describes chronologically the main developments related to school autonomy and 21st CS policy initiatives, based on a literature review and analysis of policy documents. Findings The review indicates that the Israeli educational system is still caught in the “centralization trap,” inhibiting major changes in the patterns of central control and degrees of freedom granted to school-level educators. As for school pedagogy, it is evident that most of the changes in pedagogy suggested by the numerous policy documents over the years have not resulted in sustainable, system-wide change. In both issues a large disparity is evident between declarations about innovative pedagogies and school autonomy and their actual implementation. Originality/value The review reflects the idiosyncratic articulation of policy plans conducted by the Ministry of Education, producing discrepancies and incongruences at the school level. Some implications of the “declarative culture” created are further discussed.