Ainsworth, M. (1962). The effects of maternal deprivation: A review of findings and controversy in the context of research strategy. In Deprivation of maternal care: A reassessment of its effects (pp. 97–163). World Health Organization.Google Scholar

Aizikovitsh-Udi, E. (February, 2019). Construction of Critical Thinking Skills by the infusion approach in “Probability and Statistics in Daily Life”. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Netherlands. Downloaded on September 23, 2022 from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02421215/documentGoogle Scholar

Alexandrova, E. I. (1998). Matematika: uchebnik dlia pervogo klassa [Mathematics: Textbook for the first grade]. Dom Pedagogiki.Google Scholar

Andrade, H. L., Bennett, R. E., & Cizek, G. J. (Eds.). (2019). Handbook of formative assessment in the disciplines. Routledge.Google Scholar

Ardila, A. (2021). Cross-cultural differences in cognition and learning. In Shackleford, T. K. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of evolutionary psychology: Foundations of evolutionary psychology (pp. 420–435). Sage Reference. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529739442.n23.Google Scholar

Bannert, S. (2013). A day in the life of a wheelchair user: Navigating Lincoln. Business Insider. www.businessinsider.com/what-its-like-to-be-in-a-wheelchair-2013-5.Google Scholar

Barnham, L. (2013). From hand to handle. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Berk, L., & Winsler, A. (1997). Scaffolding children’s learning. National Association for the Education of Young Children.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Dylan, W. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5. S2CID 55955635.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Inside the Black Box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171009200119.Google Scholar

Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. (2007). Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early childhood education. Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. (2015). Vygotskian and post-Vygotskian views on children’s play. American Journal of Play, 7, 371–388.Google Scholar

Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. (2019). Making play smarter, stronger, and kinder: Lessons from Tools of the Mind. American Journal of Play, 12, 37–53.Google Scholar

Brown, A., & Ferrara, R. (1985). Diagnosing zones of proximal development. In Wertsch, J. (Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition (pp. 273–305). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Buchanan, R. A. (2018). History of technology. Encyclopedia Britannica. www.britannica.com/technology/history-of-technology.Google Scholar

Budoff, M. (1987). The validity of learning potential assessment. In Lidz, C. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment (pp. 52–81). Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Chaiklin, S. (2003). The Zone of Proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V., & Miller, S. (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 39–64). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Chipman, S., & Sigal, J. W. (1985). Higher cognitive goals for education: An introduction. In Chipman, S., Sigal, J. W., & Glaser, R. (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills (vol. 1, pp. 1–19). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar

Costa, A. (Ed.) (2001). Developing minds. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Cummings, V., Jordan, P., & Zvelebil, M. (2018). The Oxford handbook of the archeology and anthropology of hunter-gatherers. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Davydov, V. V. (2008). Problems of developmental instruction: A theoretical and experimental psychological study. Nova Science.Google Scholar

Dehaene, S., Pegado, F., Braga, L. W. et al. (2010). How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language. Science, 330(6009), 359–364.Google Scholar

Diamond, A., Barnett, S. W., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318, 1387–1388.Google Scholar

Dolya, G. (2007). Keys to learning: The Vygotskian approach to early education. GDH Publishing.Google Scholar

Elkonin, D. (1972). Toward the problem of stages in the mental development of the child. Soviet Psychology, 10, 225–251.Google Scholar

Erikson, E. (1962). Childhood and society. Norton.Google Scholar

Feng, M., Heffernan, N. T., & Koedinger, K. R. (2009). Addressing the assessment challenge in an online system that tutors as it assesses. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction: The Journal of Personalization Research (UMUAI Journal), 19(3), 243–266.Google Scholar

Ferrara, R., Brown, A., & Campione, J. (1986). Children’s learning and transfer of inductive reasoning rules: Studies of proximal development. Child Development, 57, 1087–1099.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R. (1968a). The Learning Potential Assessment Device. In Richards, B. W. (Ed.), Proceedings of the First Congress of the International Association for the Scientific Study of Mental Deficiency. Michael Jackson.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R. (1968b). The Learning Potential Assessment Device: A new method for assessing modifiability of the cognitive functioning in socio-culturally disadvantaged adolescents. Proposal presented to the Israel Foundation Trustees. The Youth Aliyah Department of the Jewish Agency.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R. (1991). Cultural difference and cultural deprivation. In Bleichrodt, N., & Drench, P. (Eds.), Contemporary issues in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 21–33). Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R., & Hoffman, M. (1982). Intergenerational conflict of rights: Cultural imposition and self-realization. Viewpoints in Teaching and Learning, 58, 44–63.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y. (1974). Mediated Learning Experience: An outline of proximal etiology for differential development of cognitive functions. Journal of International Council of Psychology, 9–10, 7–37.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Falik, L., & Feuerstein, R. S. (2015). Changing minds and brains. Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performer. University Park Press.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental Enrichment: An intervention program for cognitive modifiability. University Park Press.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Feuerstein, R. S., Rand, Y. et al. (2006). Creating and enhancing cognitive modifiability: The Feuerstein Instrumental Enrichment program. International Center for the Enhancement of Leaning Potential.Google Scholar

Feuerstein, R. S., Tzuriel, D., Cohen, S. et al. (2019). Integration of Israeli students of Ethiopian origin in Israeli universities. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 18(1), 18–34.Google Scholar

Gellert, A. S., & Arnbak, E. (2020). Predicting response to vocabulary intervention using dynamic assessment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 51, 1112–1123.Google Scholar

Gillam, S., Holbrook, S., Mecham, J., & Weller, D. (2018). Pull the Andon Rope on working memory capacity interventions until we know more. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 49, 434–448.Google Scholar

Greenstein, L. (2010). What teachers really need to know about formative assessment. ASCD.Google Scholar

Grigorenko, E. (2009). Dynamic assessment and response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 111–132.Google Scholar

Guthke, J., Beckman, J. F., & Stein, H. (1995). Recent research evidence on the validity of learning tests. In Carlson, J. S. (Ed.), Advances in cognition and educational practice: European contributions to dynamic assessment (pp. 117–143). JAI Press.Google Scholar

Guttman, L. (1959) Introduction to facet design and analysis. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Congress of Psychology, Brussels 1957 (pp. 130–132). North Holland.Google Scholar

Haeussermann, E. (1958). Developmental potential of preschool children. Groune & Stratton.Google Scholar

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Paul H Brookes.Google Scholar

Hasson, N. (2018). The dynamic assessment of language learning. Routledge.Google Scholar

Hessels-Schlatter, C., & Hessels, M. (2009). Clarifying some issues in dynamic assessment. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 8(3), 246–251.Google Scholar

Higgins, E. T. (2016). Shared-reality development in childhood. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 466–495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hirsh-Pasek, K., Adamson, L. B., Bakeman, R. et al. (2015). The contribution of early communication quality to low-income children’s language success. Psychological Science, 26(7), 1071–1083. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615581493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hoskins, B., & Fredriksson, U. (2008). Learning to Learn: What is it and can it be measured? European Commission, Center for Research on Lifelong Learning.Google Scholar

Infante, P., & Poehner, M. (2021). Alex, the toolmaker: Tool-and-result activity in the L2 learning context. Linguistics and Education, 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2020.100862.Google Scholar

Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. Basic Books.Google Scholar

Kamii, C. (1985). Leading primary education toward excellence: Beyond worksheets and drill. Young Children, 40(6), 3–9.Google Scholar

Kaniel, S., Tzuriel, D., Feuerstein, R., Ben-Schachar, N., & Eitan, T. (1991). Dynamic assessment: Learning and transfer abilities of Ethiopian immigrants to Israel. In Feuerstein, R., Klein, P., & Tannenbaum, A. (Eds.), Mediated learning experience: Theoretical, psychosocial, and learning implications (pp. 179–209). Freund.Google Scholar

Karpov, Y. (2003). Vygotsky’s doctrine of scientific concepts: Its role for contemporary education. In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V., & Miller, S. (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 65–82). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Karpov, Y. (2005). The Neo-Vygotskian approach to child development. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Karpov, Y., & Tzuriel, D. (2009). Dynamic assessment: Progress, problems, and prospects. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 8(3), 228–237.Google Scholar

Kern, S. (2003). The culture of time and space. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kinard, J., & Kozulin, A. (2008). Rigorous mathematical thinking: Conceptual formation in the mathematics classroom. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kingsbury, G. G., Freeman, E. H., & Nesterak, M. (2014). The potential of adaptive assessment. Educational Leadership, 71(6), 12–18.Google Scholar

Klein, P. (2000). A mediational approach to early intervention. In Kozulin, A. & Rand, Y. (Eds.), Experience of mediated learning (pp. 240–256). Pergamon.Google Scholar

Klein, P. S., Wieder, S., & Greenspan, S. I. (1987). A theoretical overview and empirical study of mediated learning experience: Prediction of preschool performance from mother‐infant interaction patterns. Infant Mental Health Journal, 8, 110–129.Google Scholar

Kozulin, A. (1990). Vygotsky’s psychology: A biography of ideas. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools: A sociocultural approach to education. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kozulin, A. (2005). Learning potential score as a predictor of sensitivity to cognitive intervention. Educational and Child Psychology, 22, 29–39Google Scholar

Kozulin, A. (2008). Evidence of culture-dependency and modifiability of spatial memory of young adults. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 7(1), 70–80.Google Scholar

Kozulin, A. (2010). Same cognitive performance, different learning potential: Dynamic assessment of young adults with identical cognitive performance. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 9(3), 273–284.Google Scholar

Kozulin, A. (2011) Learning potential and cognitive modifiability. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(2), 169–181.Google Scholar

Kozulin, A. (2021). Why teachers need metacognition training? Cultural-Historical Psychology, 17(2), 59–64. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2021170206.Google Scholar

Kozulin, A., & Garb, E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of literacy: English as a third language. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19, 65–77.Google Scholar

Kuhn, D. (2009). Do students need to be taught how to reason? Educational Research Review, 4, 1–6.Google Scholar

Lachman, R., Lachman, J., & Butterfield, E. (2015). Cognitive psychology and information processing. Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Leclerc, S. (1637–1714). [Louis XIV Visiting the Royal Academy of Sciences], engraved frontispiece in Claude Perrault (1613–1688), Memoires pour servir a l’Histoire Naturelle des Animaux (Paris: Sébastien Mabre-Cramoisy for the Imprimerie royale, 1671–1676).Google Scholar

Lee, J.-E., & Lee, M.-Y. (2018). Tinkering with number line. Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 1–13.Google Scholar

Lidz, C., & Pena, E. (2009). Response to intervention and dynamic assessment: Do we just appear to be speaking the same language? Seminars in Speech & Language, 30(2), 121–133.Google Scholar

Lobato, J., & Ellis, A. (2010). Developing essential understanding of ratios, proportions, and proportional reasoning for teaching mathematics: Grades 6–8. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar

Luria, A. R. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Luria, A. R. (1979). The making of mind. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Marmelshtine, R. (2017). Parent–child learning interactions: A review of the literature on scaffolding. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 241–254.Google Scholar

Marti, E., & Mayordomo, R. (2003). How to use a cell phone: Children’s and adults’ written instructions. Paper presented at the Conference of the European Association for the Research in Learning and Instruction, Padua, Italy.Google Scholar

Marti, E., Garcia-Mila, M., Gabucio, F., & Konstantinidou, K. (2011). The construction of a double-entry table: A study of primary and secondary school students’ difficulties. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 26, 215–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Martin, M. O., Mullis, I., Gonzalez, E. et al. (1999). TIMSS 1999 international science report. Boston College.Google Scholar

Michnick Golinkoff, R., Hoff, E., Rowe, M. L., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2019). Language matters: Denying the existence of the 30-Million-Word Gap has serious consequences. Child Development, 90(3), 985–992.Google Scholar

Murphy, R., Roschelle, J., Feng, M., & Mason, C. A. (2020). Investigating efficacy, moderators, and mediators for an online mathematics homework intervention. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(2), 235–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2019.1710885.Google Scholar

Northrup, J., & Iverson, J. (2020). The development of mother–infant coordination across the first year of life. Developmental Psychology, 56(2), 221–236.Google Scholar

Ogle, V. (2015). The global transformation of time. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Olson, D. (1994). The world on paper: The conceptual and cognitive implications of writing and reading. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Osiurak, F., Navarro, J., & Reynaud, E. (2018). How our cognition shapes and is shaped by technology. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 293. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00293.Google Scholar

Otto, B., & Kistner, S. (2017). Is there a Matthew effect in self-regulated learning and mathematical strategy application? – Assessing the effects of a training program with standardized learning diaries. Learning and Individual Differences, 55, 75–86.Google Scholar

Pace, A., Alper, R., Burchinal, M. R., Michnick Golinkoff, R., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2019). Measuring success: Within and cross-domain predictors of academic and social trajectories in elementary school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 46, 112–125.Google Scholar

Packiam Alloway, T. (Ed.) (2018). Working memory and clinical developmental disorders. Routledge.Google Scholar

Perret-Clermont, A.-N., Perret, J.-F., & Bell, N. (1999). The social construction of meaning and cognitive activity in elementary school children. In Lloyd, P. & Fernyhough, C., (Eds.), Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments (vol. 4, pp. 51–73). Routledge.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

PISA. (2000). Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. www.oecd.org/education/school/programmeforinternationalstudentassessmentpisa/publications-pisa2000.htm.Google Scholar

Raven, J. C. (1958). Standard progressive matrices. H. K. Lewis.Google Scholar

Rey, A., Feuerstein, R., Jeannet, M., & Richelle, M. (1955). Quelques aspects de l’état psychologique des enfants juifs marocains. Rapport (pp. 30–31). Institut des Sciences de l’Education, Université de Genève. [Some aspects of the psychological state of Jewish Moroccan children. Report (pp. 30–31). Institute of the Sciences of Education, University of Geneva.]Google Scholar

Rimskaja, R., & Rimskij, S. (Eds.) (1999). Practichekaja psychologija v testah [Practical psychology in tests]. Act-Press.Google Scholar

Rubtsova, O. (2021). Experimenting with roles in adolescence: Applying drama for constructing the zone of proximal development. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 17(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2021170210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmittau, J. (2004). Vygotskian theory and mathematics education: Resolving the conceptual-procedural dichotomy. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(1), 19–43.Google Scholar

Schur, Y., & Kozulin, A. (2008). Cognitive aspects of science problem solving: Two mediated learning experience-based programs. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 7(2), 266–287.Google Scholar

Segall, M. H., Campbell, D. T., & Herskovits, M. J. (1966). Influence of culture on visual perception. Bobbs-Merill.Google Scholar

Sergi, M., Kern, R., Mintz, J., & Green, M. (2005). Learning potential and the prediction of work skill acquisition in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 31(1), 67–72.Google Scholar

SK-12 Foundation. (2018). Utah 4th grade science standards. www.ck12.org.Google Scholar

Spitz, R. (1945). Hospitalism – An Inquiry into the genesis of psychiatric conditions in early childhood. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 1, 53–74.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R., & Grigorenko, E. (2002). Dynamic testing. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Swartz, R., & McGuinness, C. (2014). Developing and assessing thinking skills: Final Report Part 1. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4917.6163.Google Scholar

Swartz, R. J., Costa, A., Kallick, B., Beyer, B., & Reagan, R. (2007). Thinking-based learning: Activating students’ potential. Christopher-Gordon Publishers.Google Scholar

Thompson, C., Mielicki, M., Rivera, F. et al. (2022). Leveraging math cognition to combat health innumeracy. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 20, 1–26.Google Scholar

Tulsky, D. S., Carlozzi, N. E., Chevalier, N., Espy, K., Beaumont, J., & Mungas, D. (2013). NIH Toolbox Cognitive Function Battery (CFB): Measuring Working Memory. Society for Research in Child Development, Monograph, 78(4), 70–87.Google Scholar

Tzuriel, D. (1996). Mediated learning experience in free-play versus structured situations among preschool children of low-, medium-, and high-SES. Child Development and Care, 126, 57–82.Google Scholar

Tzuriel, D. (1997). The relation between parent-child MLE interactions and children’s cognitive modifiability. In Kozulin, A. (Ed.), The Ontogeny of cognitive modifiability (pp. 157–180). International Center for the Enhancement of Leaning Potential.Google Scholar

Tzuriel, D., & Shamir, A. (2007). The effects of peer-mediation with younger children on children’s cognitive modifiability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 143–165.Google Scholar

van der Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (1991). Understanding Vygotsky. Blackwell.Google Scholar

van Garderen, D., & Montague, M. (2003). Visual–spatial representation, mathematical problem solving, and students of varying abilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 246–254.Google Scholar

Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Denton, C. A. (2014). Teaching elementary students with learning difficulties. In Florian, L. (Ed.), Handbook of special education (2nd edn., Vol. 2, pp. 633–657). Sage.Google Scholar

Vosniadou, S. (Ed.) (2008). International textbook of research on conceptual change. Routledge.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. (1930/1984). Tool and symbol in child behavior. In van der Veer, R. & Valsiner, J. (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99–174). Blackwell.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. (1934/2012). Thought and language. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. (1935/2011). The dynamics of the schoolchild’s mental development in relation to teaching and learning. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 10(2), 198–211.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L., & Luria, A. R. (1930/1993). Studies on the history of behavior: Ape, primitive, and child. Laurence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Vysotskaya, E., Lobanova, A., Rekhtman, I., & Yanishevskaya, M. (2021). The challenge of proportion: Does it require rethinking of the measurement paradigm? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 106, 429–446.Google Scholar

Wang, T.-H. (2011). Implementation of Web-based dynamic assessment in facilitating junior high school students to learn mathematics. Computers & Education, 56, 1062–1071.Google Scholar

Weinstein, E., & James, C. (2022). Behind their screens: What teens are facing (and adults are missing). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Wentzel, K., & Watkins, D. (2002). Peer relationships and collaborative learning as contexts for academic enablers. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 366–377.Google Scholar

Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100.Google Scholar

Wu, H. M., Kuo, B. C., & Wang, S. C. (2017). Computerized dynamic adaptive tests with immediately individualized feedback for primary school mathematics learning. Educational Technology & Society, 20(1), 61–72.Google Scholar

Zohar, A., & Lustov, E. (2018). Challenges in addressing metacognition in professional development programs in the context of instruction of higher-order thinking. In Weinberger, Y. & Libman, Z. (Eds.), Contemporary pedagogies in teacher education and development (pp. 87–100). IntechOpen.Google Scholar

Zuckerman, G. (2004). Development of reflection through learning activity. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(1), 9–18.Google Scholar

Zuckerman, G. (2007). Child-adult interaction that creates a zone of proximal development. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 45(3), 43–69.Google Scholar

Zuckerman, G. (2014). Developmental education. In Yanitsky, A., van der Veer, R., & Ferrari, M. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of cultural-historical psychology (pp. 177–202). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Zuckerman, G., & Venger, A. (2010). Razvitie uchebnoj samostojatel’nosti [Development of learning independence]. Open Institute for Developing Education.Google Scholar

Zuzovsky, R. (2001). Achievement of Israeli 8th-grade students in TIMSS 1999. (in Hebrew). Ramot Press.Google Scholar

Zuzovsky, R., & Tamir, P. (1999). Growth patterns in students’ ability to supply scientific explanations: Findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study in Israel. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1101–1121.Google Scholar