This study examines the thinking of college students who read conflicting accounts of the Tonkin Gulf Incident during the Vietnam Conflict as part of their class assignments, in addition to receiving instruction in disciplinary strategies and the ways in which historians read. Thirteen students responded to questionnaires and participated in two interviews, one before and one after a history unit focusing on the Vietnam Conflict as part of a Learning to Learn class. These interviews were analyzed to discover the changes in students' thinking about history and strategy use. We found that 12 of the 13 students went through epistemological shifts towards viewing historians as constructivists and history texts as arguments rather than truth. We also found that students were more likely to believe, after the unit was completed, that they were capable of and responsible for engaging in the same kind of thinking and strategy use employed by historians. Students' learning strategies changed from task completion and memorization to those that elicited critical thinking.