Feeling of Knowing: Teaching Pupils to Judge Their Own Learning
Learn what the feeling of knowing is, why it misleads pupils during revision, and how to use retrieval practice and calibration to improve metacognitive accuracy.
What Is the Feeling of Knowing?
Feeling of knowing predicts if a learner can recognise information later (Hart, 1965). Learners predict recall success even without immediate retrieval. People can often judge if information is stored in memory accurately (Hart, 1965). Learners might say "I know this" regarding a trivia question.
In the classroom, FOK judgements happen constantly. A Year 10 learner reads through a page of history notes and thinks, "Yes, I know this." A GCSE student flicks through a revision guide and ticks off topics as familiar. A sixth-former skims lecture slides the night before an exam and feels broadly confident. In each case, the learner is making an FOK judgement: assessing whether their memory holds the relevant material.
Familiarity triggers Feelings of Knowing (FOK), not recall. Learners mistake recognition for actual knowing. Nelson and Narens (1990) showed memory monitoring differs from memory itself. Learners misjudge readiness when they mix them up.
Key Takeaways
- Learners' feeling of knowing is often a misleading indicator of actual learning, requiring explicit metacognitive training. The "feeling of knowing" (FOK) is a subjective judgement that frequently overestimates what learners truly comprehend, especially when material feels familiar (Koriat, 1993). Teachers must guide learners to recognise this inherent fallibility and develop more accurate self-assessment strategies.
- Familiarity with learning materials can create a powerful "illusion of knowing," hindering effective revision and deep learning. When learners repeatedly re-read notes or passively review content, the material becomes familiar, leading to a false sense of mastery that does not reflect actual recall ability (Metcalfe, 1998). This illusion prevents learners from identifying genuine knowledge gaps and focusing their study efforts where needed most.
- Teaching learners to calibrate their confidence with their actual performance is a critical skill for improving self-regulated learning. Regular opportunities for learners to predict their test scores before attempting a retrieval task, followed by immediate feedback, helps narrow the gap between their perceived and actual knowledge (Dunlosky & Rawson, 2012). This calibration process empowers learners to make more informed decisions about their study strategies.
- Retrieval practice is an indispensable tool for exposing the "illusion of knowing" and fostering accurate self-assessment in learners. Low-stakes quizzes and self-testing force learners to actively recall information, revealing what they genuinely know versus what merely feels familiar, thereby correcting miscalibrated FOK judgements (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006). Integrating frequent retrieval practice helps learners develop a more realistic understanding of their own learning.
Your learners have all been there. They revise a topic, read through their notes, nod along as each point seems familiar, then walk into the exam and find they cannot recall anything clearly. They felt prepared. The test said otherwise.
That gap between feeling ready and actually being ready has a name in cognitive psychology: the feeling of knowing. Understanding what it is, why it misleads learners, and how to correct it is one of the most useful things a teacher can do for learner revision habits. This guide covers the research and gives you concrete strategies to use straight away.
FOK is a metacognitive judgement. Judgements of learning (JOLs) and confidence ratings assess self-assessment differently. Ease-of-learning ratings also tap into this, as shown below (Nelson & Narens, 1990; Rhodes, 2016).
| Judgement Type | Definition | When Learners Use It | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feeling of Knowing (FOK) | Sense that information is stored in memory even when not currently recalled | During retrieval failure ("I know this but can't say it right now") | Moderate; often inflated by mere familiarity |
| Judgement of Learning (JOL) | Prediction of how well a just-studied item will be remembered later | Immediately after studying a note or worked example | Often overconfident; delayed JOLs are more accurate |
| Confidence Rating | Assessment of how certain a learner is about an answer they have just given | After answering a question, in exams or quizzes | Variable; high performers tend to be better calibrated |
| Ease of Learning (EOL) | Prediction of how quickly new material will be learned before study begins | Before starting a revision session ("This topic will be easy") | Low; highly subjective and prior-knowledge dependent |
Why FOK Judgements Often Mislead Learners
The core issue is that FOK draws on the wrong signal. Koriat (1993) proposed the accessibility model of FOK: learners base their sense of knowing on how easily related information comes to mind. If a few partial details surface quickly, the brain interprets that ease of access as evidence of stored knowledge. But partial recall is not the same as full recall, and ease of retrieval at one moment does not predict retrieval under exam conditions.
A Year 9 learner revises the water cycle. They read the diagram and recognise terms. Their feelings-of-knowing (FOK) are high. In exams, sequencing the process causes trouble. They struggle, despite recognising individual terms (Hart, 1965; Nelson & Narens, 1990).
Re-reading worsens the issue. Learners find familiar sentences when re-reading, creating high feelings of knowing (FOK). Dunlosky and Metcalfe (2009) call this the fluency illusion. Ease of processing tricks learners into thinking they've learned more. They feel revised, but only see what they already knew.
There is also a timing effect. Judgements made immediately after study are consistently overconfident. Jacoby and Kelley (1987) demonstrated that the brain conflates current processing fluency with long-term retention. A learner who reads a worked maths example and then immediately tries to recall the steps will perform better than if asked two days later, yet their FOK at both points might feel equally high. They do not register the decay.
Working memory matters, according to research. Retrieval feels easy just after learners study material (Nelson & Dunlosky, 2011). This ease fades quickly once revision stops. Learners who check retention immediately may overestimate their knowledge (Kornell & Bjork, 2007).
The Illusion of Knowing in the Classroom
Bjork, Dunlosky, and Kornell (2013) named the 'illusion of knowing', where learners think they know more than they do. Their review showed all learners overestimate knowledge (Bjork, Dunlosky, & Kornell, 2013). This illusion isn't due to low ability; it reflects how memory functions.
In practice, you will see this in several recognisable patterns. Learners copy from the board and tick the learning objective without checking whether they could reproduce the content from scratch. They highlight text during reading, which creates the sensation of active engagement but produces minimal memory encoding. They answer practice questions with their notes open, get most of them right, and conclude they are ready, without realising the notes were doing the cognitive work.
The illusion becomes particularly pronounced with cognitive load. When material is challenging, learners spend working memory capacity on parsing the content. By the time they reach the end of a paragraph or explanation, the effort of processing feels like the effort of learning. High effort during study creates a strong FOK, even when the material has not been durably encoded. This is one reason why difficult topics in science and maths can generate misplaced confidence: the hard work of understanding feels like the same thing as remembering.
There is a classroom-specific wrinkle worth noting. Learners who respond correctly during teacher-led questioning in class often take that as evidence that they know the material. But whole-class questioning rarely tests individual retrieval under genuine conditions. A learner who half-recalls an answer, hears a neighbour provide it first, and nods along has not retrieved anything. Their FOK will still rise. Structuring questioning to require every learner to commit to an answer before any are shared is a simple way to give more honest feedback to learners about what they actually know.
Calibration: Matching Confidence to Competence
Calibration describes how closely a learner's confidence in their knowledge matches their actual performance. A well-calibrated learner who rates themselves eight out of ten on a topic will score roughly eight out of ten on a test. A poorly calibrated learner might rate themselves eight out of ten and score four. Improving calibration is one of the most concrete goals you can set for self-regulation in your learners.
Research consistently shows that weaker learners are more poorly calibrated than stronger ones. This is sometimes called the Dunning-Kruger effect in popular accounts, but the underlying cognitive explanation is more precise: learners with limited knowledge also lack the reference points needed to judge the limits of their knowledge. They do not know what they do not know, so their FOK fills the gap with false confidence.
The good news is that calibration is trainable. Kornell and Bjork (2008) showed that learners who regularly engage in retrieval practice improve their calibration over time. Each retrieval attempt provides feedback: either the answer comes to mind or it does not. That feedback corrects FOK judgements more effectively than re-reading because it directly tests the prediction. When a learner predicts they know something and then fails to recall it, the mismatch is visceral and memorable. It updates their metacognitive model in a way that passive review does not.
Learners should rate topic confidence pre-quiz, then compare with scores. Repeat this over a half-term for pattern recognition. Some, according to (Bjork & Bjork, 2011) may be overconfident in familiar topics. Others, (Kruger & Dunning, 1999) might be underconfident despite good knowledge. This data gives you and learners useful formative insights.
Teaching Learners to Monitor Their Own Learning
Effective monitoring means learners actively check their understanding while they study. This differs from FOK, which is more passive. Teaching deliberate monitoring habits helps learners develop metacognition (Nelson & Narens, 1990). Learners need practice to build these habits (Bjork, Dunlosky & Kornell, 2013).
The most reliable monitoring technique is self-testing. Rather than asking "Does this feel familiar?", learners ask "Can I recall this without looking?" The difference seems small but has a large effect on accuracy. A Year 11 learner revising chemistry can read through her notes on electrolysis and feel confident, or she can close the notes, try to write out the full explanation from scratch, then check. The second approach gives accurate information. The first gives FOK.
Help learners understand recognition versus recall. Recognition is identifying answers when shown (Tulving, 1972); multiple choice tests this. Recall is retrieving information independently (Anderson, 1983); essays require this. Learners revising through re-reading will have good recognition, but poor recall. Recognition-based FOK won't aid recall (Hart, 1965).
Spacing aids metacognitive monitoring. Immediate self-testing relies on working memory, making retrieval too easy. Testing learners after 24 hours yields more accurate results (Bjork, 1994). Regular, low-stakes tests offer frequent, useful feedback on learner retention. This spaced practice addresses timing issues in Feeling of Knowing (FOK) (Hart, 1965).
FOK and Retrieval Practice
Retrieval practice works best for fixing faulty knowledge perceptions. Learners get feedback on what they know when trying to recall facts (Bjork, 1994). This recall strengthens memory, making future recall easier. Retrieval is harder than rereading but creates lasting learning.
Koriat's (1993) accessibility model explains FOK correction. A learner failing to recall information notes its inaccessibility. This updates the FOK. Next revision encounter shows lower FOK, prompting extra study.
Low-stakes quizzes are the most accessible form of retrieval practice in the classroom. Start the lesson with five questions on last week's topic. End the lesson with a brief written brain-dump of the key points covered. Set homework as a closed-book question rather than a read-through task. Each of these creates a retrieval event that gives learners honest feedback on their FOK. A Science teacher who begins every lesson with a five-question retrieval quiz on the previous lesson's content will find, within a few weeks, that learners' confidence ratings before the quiz begin to match their actual scores far more closely.
Retrieval practice corrects feeling-of-knowing (FOK) when learners try hard. Looking at notes hinders FOK correction. Notes-away, phone-free, individual retrieval gives accurate self-assessment. Group work or open-book retrieval does not. Genuine retrieval conditions are key for effective practice (Metcalfe & Finn, 2008; Rhodes & Tauber, 2011; Serra & Ariel, 2024).
Practical Classroom Strategies
1. Confidence-Before-Quiz Routines
Before any low-stakes quiz, ask learners to rate their confidence for each topic on a simple 1–5 scale. This takes under two minutes. After the quiz, learners compare their pre-quiz rating to their actual score. Repeat this across several weeks and ask learners to identify patterns: "Are you consistently overconfident on anything?" A Maths teacher might do this before a retrieval quiz on algebraic manipulation. Learners who rated themselves four or five but scored two or three have a concrete, personal demonstration of miscalibrated FOK.
2. Closed-Book Brain Dumps
At the end of a lesson or topic, give learners five minutes to write everything they can remember about the content, without notes or prompts. Then show them the key points and ask them to tick off what they got right and note what they missed. This is more cognitively demanding than a recognition exercise and gives far more accurate FOK feedback. An English teacher finishing a unit on 'An Inspector Calls' might ask learners to brain-dump the themes, key quotes, and character arcs before revealing a checklist. Learners are frequently surprised by how much they missed despite feeling confident.
3. Two-Column Revision Audit
Give learners a list of the key topics in a unit and ask them to sort each into two columns: "Can recall fully" and "Feels familiar but gaps." The second column is where FOK is at work. Any topic that 'feels familiar' but cannot be fully recalled from memory belongs in that column, regardless of how confident it feels. Learners then use the second column as their priority revision list. This is a direct application of conditional knowledge: knowing when to apply further study versus when to move on. A History teacher preparing learners for a paper on World War One might use this before a mock, with learners producing a personalised revision priority list from their two-column audit.
4. Delayed Testing for Calibration
Immediate self-testing inflates FOK, as working memory still holds content. Wait 24–48 hours for a more accurate picture. Assign retrieval homework: learners study a topic, then answer recall questions at home. This removes working-memory support and better shows retention. Compare results to confidence ratings made in class. For vocabulary, have learners rate confidence, then test themselves the next evening. This comparison gives feedback on their FOK accuracy.
5. Teach the Concept Directly
Learners correct FOK when they grasp what it is. Explain recognition vs recall in ten minutes, using examples. Use "feels familiar vs can recall" as shorthand. Refer to this when you see the illusion. The EEF supports this; metacognition has high impact. Link this to growth mindset, showing FOK as a target to improve.
6. Interleaved Practice to Disrupt False Confidence
Blocked revision inflates feeling of knowing (FOK), research shows. Success feels easier when practice problems are similar (Kornell et al, 2009). Interleaving topics disrupts this feeling (Rohrer, 2012). Learners find it harder, but FOK becomes more accurate (Bjork, 1994). Difficulty signals lasting learning.
7. Memory Technique Audits
Revision strategies like highlighting feel useful, but don't boost long-term memory. Bjork et al.'s (2013) work shows that learners often misjudge what works. Teach learners to check revision habits against memory research. Effective memorisation asks learners to actively produce information, not just passively read it.
Further Reading: Key Papers on Metacognitive Monitoring
- Hart, J.T. (1965). "Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience." Journal of Educational Psychology, 56(4). The paper that named and defined the FOK phenomenon, using recognition tests to show that people can accurately judge stored but currently unrecallable information.
- Koriat, A. (1993). "How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing." Psychological Review, 100(4). Proposes that FOK is driven by the ease with which related information comes to mind, not by direct access to stored knowledge.
- Dunlosky, J. & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. SAGE Publications. A thorough overview of metacognitive monitoring research, covering JOLs, FOK, confidence ratings, and their implications for education.
- Nelson, T.O. & Narens, L. (1990). "Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings." Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26. Introduces the object-level/meta-level distinction that remains the dominant framework for understanding monitoring and control in memory research.
- Bjork, R.A., Dunlosky, J. & Kornell, N. (2013). "Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions." Annual Review of Psychology, 64. Reviews why popular revision strategies create illusions of knowing and identifies which techniques produce durable learning instead.
Cognitive Science Platform
Make Thinking Visible
Open a free account and help organise learners' thinking with evidence-based graphic organisers. Reduce cognitive load and guide schema building dynamically.
