The EEF currently rates metacognition and self-regulation at +8 months additional progress on average. Learn how to teach thinking about thinking with practical classroom strategies and frameworks.
Make learner thinking visible using simple techniques integrated into lessons. Instead of just saying "think," use think-alouds and reflection (Flavell, 1979). Guide learners to check their understanding, spot confusion, and choose problem-solving methods (Pintrich, 2002; Zimmerman, 2000). Adapt these approaches for SEND and neurodivergent learners, focusing on classroom routines. Develop these self-monitoring skills until learners use them automatically.
For a broader view of how this fits alongside other classroom methods, see our guide to teaching practice.
| Stage | Description | Student Behaviour | Teacher Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tacit | Unaware of own thinking | Follows instructions without reflection | Make thinking visible through modelling |
| Aware | Knows thinking exists | Can describe what they did | Provide vocabulary for thinking |
| Strategic | Uses strategies deliberately | Selects approaches purposefully | Teach range of strategies |
| Reflective | Evaluates and adapts | Adjusts based on monitoring | Guide reflection routines |
| Self-Regulating | Plans, monitors, evaluates independently | Takes ownership of learning | Gradually release responsibility |
Metacognition improves learning by helping learners think about their own thinking. Learners plan, monitor, and evaluate strategies, which makes them more effective, research shows. This builds on System 1 and System 2 thinking (Webb, Bloom). The Education Endowment Foundation finds metacognition is high impact for low cost. Use these thinking strategies and habits of mind to develop learner skills.
What does the research say? The EEF ranks metacognition and self-regulation at +8 months additional progress for very low cost, making it the highest-impact, lowest-cost strategy in their toolkit. Hattie (2009) reports d = 0.69 for metacognitive strategies. Dignath and Buttner's (2008) meta-analysis of 48 studies found metacognitive training improves academic performance by d = 0.69 in primary and d = 0.54 in secondary. Perry et al. (2019) showed explicit metacognitive instruction benefits lower-attaining learners most.
Metacognition is beneficial in student learning because it allows learners to reflect on what they know, who they are, what they wish to know, and how they can reach that point. Reflection is an important aspect of learning and teaching. Teachers must be reflective in their practise so that they can keep on growing, continue to meet their students' needs, and evaluate their own growth and skills. Motivate students to practise reflection so that they can build their individual reflective practices and develop growth mindset to prepare for their future. For further guidance, see our article on reflective practice.
At Structural Learning, we argue that classroom culture is a significant driver for developing metacognitive mindsets. If talking about learning is part of your day-to-day classroom practice then your learners are halfway there. Developing a healthy balance of both content knowledge and procedural knowledge is a fundamental classroom challenge. We have been helping children develop their knowledge about cognition and how they can manage it more effectively through scaffolding techniques.
Metacognitive knowledge should start early (Norman, 2016). Learners plan, monitor, and evaluate their work. The teacher helps younger learners build these skills. Explicit teaching and modelling are key. Teachers must develop self-regulation in learners.
Select the learning phase and challenge you're facing to get tailored metacognitive strategies.
From Structural Learning, structural-learning.com
Metacognition helps secondary learners with tricky subjects. For more on this topic, see Metacognition science education teachers. Teachers improve results when they promote learner reflection. Self-reflection, planning, and evaluation aid learner growth (e.g., Brown, 1987; Flavell, 1979).
Effective metacognitive strategies for secondary students include:
Effective questioning boosts metacognition. Teachers can prompt learners to think about learning with good questions. These questions help learners plan, monitor, and assess understanding (Flavell, 1979; Nelson, 1992; Dunlosky & Metcalfe, 2009).
Examples of metacognitive questions include:
Building metacognitive habits requires consistent integration of reflective practices into everyday teaching, not separate lessons on thinking skills. Start each lesson with a two-minute planning phase where students write down what they already know about the topic and what strategies they'll use to learn new material. This simple routine activates prior knowledge whilst developing self-awareness about learning approaches.
During lessons, incorporate regular 'pause and think' moments. Every 10-15 minutes, stop teaching and ask students to rate their understanding on a scale of 1-5, then identify specifically what's clear and what's confusing. This practice helps students recognise when comprehension breaks down, rather than passively continuing without understanding. For younger learners, use traffic light cards (green for confident, amber for partially understood, red for confused) to make this self-monitoring visible.
Thinking routines help learners practise metacognition independently. See-Think-Wonder and Think-Pair-Share give learners repeatable methods, (Ritchhart, Church & Morrison, 2011). The Thinking Framework also assists, (Hyeland, 2016). Our article explains how to use these routines across subjects.
Develop subject-specific question banks that prompt metacognitive thinking. For maths, include questions like "What method did you choose and why?" or "Where might this type of problem appear in real life?" For English literature, ask "What reading strategy helped you understand this character's motivation?" or "How did you work out the meaning of unfamiliar words?" Display these questions prominently and encourage students to select relevant ones during independent work.
Metacognitive development varies significantly across age groups, requiring tailored approaches for maximum effectiveness. For Key Stage 1 learners (ages 5-7), use concrete visual tools like thinking hats or learning journals with picture prompts. Simple sentence starters such as "I learned.." and "I still wonder.." help young learners articulate their thinking without overwhelming their developing literacy skills.
Key Stage 2 students (ages 7-11) benefit from more structured reflection tools. Introduce planning templates that break tasks into steps, with spaces to predict difficulties and select strategies. Use 'thinking logs' where students record which strategies worked well for specific types of problems, building a personal reference guide. Peer discussion about thinking processes also becomes valuable at this stage, as students learn from comparing approaches.
Metacognitive skills suit learners aged 11-18. Use exam wrappers; learners analyse exam prep, grades, and improvement areas. Create strategy cards for planning tasks. Teach revision planning using spaced practice and self-testing protocols (Dunlosky et al., 2013).
Metacognitive knowledge has three components: declarative (knowing what), procedural (knowing how), and conditional knowledge (knowing when and why to apply a particular strategy). Research by Paris and colleagues (1983) shows that conditional knowledge is the hardest to teach yet the most powerful for transfer across subjects.
Students often struggle with metacognition when they lack the vocabulary to describe their thinking processes or when they've developed fixed mindsets about their abilities. Some learners, particularly those with special educational needs or from disadvantaged backgrounds, may have had fewer opportunities to engage in reflective dialogue about learning at home. These students might view confusion or mistakes as failures rather than natural parts of the learning process.
Working memory limits impact learners' metacognition. When cognitive load is high, learners struggle to monitor thinking. Scaffolding is key; model thinking aloud. Provide prompts, gradually reducing support as habits form (Veenman et al., 2006). Aids like checklists help learners with ADHD (Tannock, 2009).
Cultural factors also shape how learners develop metacognitively. Learners used to rote learning may resist reflective tasks initially. Show how metacognitive strategies boost grades on assessments (cite Brown, 1987). Provide examples of learners who improved their marks with these techniques (cite Flavell, 1979).
Effective metacognitive practise follows three distinct stages: planning, monitoring, and evaluating. During the planning stage, students set learning goals, consider what they already know about a topic, and select appropriate strategies for the task ahead. This might involve a Year 8 history student deciding whether to use a timeline, mind map, or comparison table when studying causes of World War I. Teachers can support this stage by providing strategy menus and encouraging students to predict potential challenges they might face.
The monitoring stage occurs during learning, where students actively track their understanding and adjust their approach as needed. The traffic light method proves particularly effective here, students use red, amber, and green indicators to signal their confidence level throughout a lesson. Red indicates confusion requiring help, amber suggests partial understanding needing clarification, and green shows confident grasp of the material. This real-time feedback allows both students and teachers to make immediate adjustments to learning strategies.
Finally, the evaluating stage involves reflection after completing a task or learning episode. Students assess which strategies worked well, identify what they've learned, and consider how to improve next time. A practical approach involves exit tickets with prompts like "What helped your learning today?" and "What would you do differently next time?" This systematic reflection helps students build a repertoire of effective learning strategies they can apply across different subjects and contexts.
Thomas Nelson and Louis Narens (1990) refined Flavell's model by specifying the cognitive architecture through which metacognition operates. For more on this topic, see Metacognition vs cognition teachers need. Their framework distinguishes two levels: the object level, where cognitive work actually takes place (reading a text, solving a calculation, drafting a sentence), and the meta level, which monitors and directs the object level. Information flows in both directions, but the direction of flow determines whether a process is monitoring or control.
Monitoring flows upward from object level to meta level. It produces the learner's current sense of how well they understand the material, how likely they are to remember it, and whether their approach is working. Nelson and Narens identified several specific monitoring judgements that researchers have since studied extensively. A Feeling of Knowing (FOK) is the sense that you could recognise an answer even though you cannot currently retrieve it: the "on the tip of my tongue" experience. A Judgement of Learning (JOL) is an estimate made during or just after studying of how well a piece of information will be retained at a later test. Both are measurable, and both are frequently miscalibrated in learners who have not been taught to monitor accurately.
Control flows downward from meta level to object level. When monitoring signals a problem, the meta level can redirect effort: slow the reading pace, re-read a difficult passage, shift from re-reading to self-testing, or abandon an unproductive strategy entirely. Control is what converts metacognitive awareness into changed behaviour. A learner who notices a feeling of confusion (monitoring) but continues to read at the same speed without doing anything differently has functioning monitoring but impaired control. Nelson and Narens showed that the two processes can dissociate: you can be quite accurate at detecting when you do not know something while remaining ineffective at doing anything about it.
The classroom implications are concrete. When you ask learners to predict their score before a test, you are training monitoring accuracy. When you ask them to use that prediction to decide how long to spend revising each topic, you are linking monitoring to control. Research by Dunlosky and Nelson (1992) found that monitoring accuracy improves with practice and that accurate monitors allocate study time more effectively than inaccurate ones, directing effort toward material that is not yet secure rather than the material they already know. Explicitly teaching learners how to distinguish "this feels familiar" from "I can actually retrieve this" is one of the most cost-effective things a teacher can do with twenty minutes of lesson time.
Think-alouds powerfully model metacognition for learners. Teachers verbalise their thinking while solving problems (Ericsson & Simon, 1993). For example, teachers might say, "I'm unsure, so I'll check my working" (Willingham, 2009). This shows learners how experts monitor understanding and fix problems (Flavell, 1979).
Flavell (1979) identified metacognitive experiences as the conscious feelings and judgments that arise during cognitive tasks, such as the sudden realisation that a passage has not been understood. These "aha" and "stuck" moments are the raw material teachers can use to build metacognitive awareness.
Metacognitive modelling should be part of lessons, not separate. Teachers can voice their thinking, like hypothesis creation (Whitebread, 2018). For example, "Heat may speed the reaction, but other things could interfere," as in science. This shows learners metacognition linked to learning.
The student teaching strategy provides another powerful modelling opportunity. When students explain concepts to classmates, they naturally engage in metacognitive processes, verbalising their thinking and identifying gaps in understanding. Teachers can enhance this by prompting students to explain what they know and how they figured it out and what strategies they used. This peer-to-peer modelling often resonates more strongly with students than teacher demonstrations alone, as they see thinking processes from someone closer to their own level of understanding.
Metacognition grows best between ages 12 and 15 (research shows). Brains develop a lot then (Nelson & Narens, 1990). Younger learners still gain from suitable methods (Flavell, 1979). Try simple checks and goals with younger learners (Whitebread et al, 2011). Match methods to each learner's age and ability (Veenman et al, 2006).
Metacognitive teaching in Key Stage 3 needs clear structure. Learners can manage complex tasks, like planning coursework steps. Connect metacognition to growth mindset; thinking skills improve with practise (Dweck, 2006).
Key Stage 4 learners gain from metacognitive methods, readying them for solo study. Learners should build strategies, self-assess strengths, and plan improvements. Teachers must support metacognition; A-level learners need practice. Help learners manage their own learning (Bjork et al., 2013; Dunlosky & Rawson, 2012).
Research shows metacognition boosts learning. The Education Endowment Foundation currently estimates an average eight months of additional progress for metacognition and self-regulation strategies. This makes it a cost effective option for schools. Benefits match or beat pricier interventions.
Conditional knowledge helps learners choose strategies (Pressley, Borkowski, & Schneider, 1989). It involves knowing when and why to use techniques properly, not just automatically (Paris, Lipson, & Wixson, 1983). This ability supports successful learning outcomes (Garner, 1990).
According to Flavell (1970s), metacognition has two parts. These are metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation. Learners need three types of metacognitive knowledge, said Flavell.
This connects closely with research on theory of knowledge, which provides further classroom strategies for teachers.
Schraw and Dennison (1994) made the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory. Learners can measure and learn metacognitive skills, their research showed. High metacognitive awareness scores meant better academic task performance, they found. This was true even with cognitive ability taken into account.
Nelson and Narens (1990) used fMRI to find prefrontal cortex activity during metacognition. This activity appeared in regions tied to executive functions. Flavell (1979) suggests practice strengthens neural networks used by the learner.
This connects closely with research on critical thinking skills, which provides further classroom strategies for teachers.
Metacognition assessment needs more than tests, it must catch how learners think. Teachers can use proven methods like those from research.
Students often overestimate their understanding, research suggests (e.g., Dunlosky & Rawson, 2012). Teachers must therefore prioritise accurate self-assessment by the learner. Many studies (e.g., Kruger & Dunning, 1999) support this focus.
Have students verbalise their thinking process while working through problems. This technique, developed from cognitive psychology research, allows teachers to observe metacognitive strategies in action. Students articulate what they're doing, why they're doing it, and how they're monitoring their progress.
Metacognition research, like that of Flavell (1979) and Dunlosky et al. (2013), offers practical methods. Teachers can use these to develop learner metacognitive skills in class.
Structured reflection activities encourage students to document their learning processes over time. Effective prompts include: "What strategy did I use?" "How well did it work?" "What would I do differently next time?" These journals provide valuable insights into metacognitive development and can be used formatively.
Co-constructed rubrics that include metacognitive criteria help students evaluate not just what they learned but how they learned it. This approach aligns with research showing that students who regularly engage in self-assessment develop stronger metacognitive skills.
Learners compare predicted and actual results for calibration. Good metacognition helps learners align predictions with performance (Dunlosky & Rawson, 2012). Teachers can address poor calibration, which signals metacognitive issues, with specific teaching (Hattie, 2012; Nelson, 1984).
The EEF toolkit identifies metacognition and self-regulation as a high-impact, low-cost strand. It currently estimates an average eight months of additional progress when schools implement these approaches well. The EEF guidance also gives teachers seven practical recommendations for classroom implementation.
First, teach learners metacognitive strategies explicitly for each subject. Make the strategy visible, don't assume learners will infer it. For example, use self-explanation in maths. Model your thinking aloud as you work; this is cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown and Newman, 1989). Show learners your process to give them a template. Finally, provide structured practice of these strategies before removing support.
Recommendations four to six focus on creating the conditions in which metacognition can operate. Teachers should promote and develop motivational beliefs and attributions, so that learners attribute success and failure to strategy and effort rather than fixed ability. They should help learners plan, monitor, and evaluate their learning through structured prompts: question stems such as "What do I already know about this?", "Am I understanding this as I go?" and "What would I do differently?" provide the scaffolding for regulation. The report also recommends explicit teaching of how to manage time and organise the physical and social conditions for study, which connects directly to Zimmerman's (2000) account of environmental self-regulation.
School leaders should invest in teacher metacognition professional development. Zohar and Barzilai (2013) found teacher knowledge key for good implementation. Teachers understanding monitoring can spot learner confusion, research shows. EEF estimates depend on correct implementation; teacher understanding helps ensure this.
Schraw and Dennison (1994) created a metacognitive regulation model, based on Flavell and Nelson and Narens. It has three processes: planning, monitoring, and evaluating. These processes are interdependent and recursive, happening throughout learning. Schraw and Dennison also made the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory, a popular 52-item tool (1994).
Planning is the process of deciding, before or at the start of a task, how to approach it. A learner planning a revision session might identify which topics carry most marks in the upcoming assessment, decide to use spaced retrieval rather than re-reading, and set a time limit for each topic. Planning requires both person knowledge (knowing your own weaknesses) and strategy knowledge (knowing which techniques suit which tasks). Without explicit teaching of planning, most learners default to the strategy that feels most comfortable: re-reading notes, which Dunlosky et al. (2013) rated as low utility precisely because it produces a sense of familiarity that monitoring mistakes for genuine learning.
Monitoring is the ongoing checking of comprehension and progress during a task. It is the real-time application of Nelson and Narens' monitoring processes: noticing when understanding breaks down, when a strategy is not producing the expected result, or when time is running short. Schraw and Dennison treated monitoring as the pivotal regulatory process because, without accurate monitoring, neither planning nor evaluation can function correctly. A learner who monitors poorly does not know whether her plan is working and has no reliable data on which to base any post-task evaluation.
Evaluating is the retrospective process of judging performance after a task is complete. It includes assessing whether the goal was achieved, whether the strategy was efficient, and what should be done differently next time. Barry Zimmerman (2000) situated these three processes within his model of self-regulated learning, arguing that learners who cycle through planning, monitoring, and evaluation across successive tasks show measurably greater achievement gains over time than those who treat each task as independent. The mechanism is straightforward: evaluation feeds forward into better planning on the next task, and the loop tightens with each iteration. For teachers, this means that reflection time at the end of a lesson is not an optional luxury; it is the mechanism by which metacognitive regulation improves.
Despite growing awareness of metacognition's importance, several misconceptions persist in educational practise:
This connects closely with research on habits of mind, which provides further classroom strategies for teachers.
Metacognition doesn't just appear with age. Some skills arise naturally, but teaching helps learners far more (Hattie, 2009). Without this, many learners struggle to build strong metacognitive abilities (Bjork et al., 2013).
Cognition and metacognition differences let teachers pinpoint learner struggles. This understanding helps them target support effectively (Veenman et al., 2006; Dunlosky & Metcalfe, 2009; Flavell, 1979).
Metacognition benefits all learners, not just high-ability ones. Research shows all learners gain from metacognitive teaching. Some studies suggest lower-attaining learners gain most (Hattie, 2012). These learners often lack self-regulation skills (Dunlosky & Rawson, 2012).
Clark (2012) and others show metacognition boosts learning. Teaching it requires time, but this pays off later. Learners understand content faster with these skills (Hattie, 2008). Time spent early saves time later (Bjork, 1994).
Dweck (2006) showed growth mindset involves beliefs about intelligence. Metacognition, from Flavell (1979), means learners monitor their learning. Education must tackle both, but with different teaching strategies.
Schools must coordinate metacognitive teaching for the biggest impact. Research shows key principles from successful programmes (Dignath & Büttner, 2008; Donker et al., 2021). These include explicit instruction and modelling by teachers (Zohar & Dori, 2012). We must also encourage learners to actively reflect on their learning processes (Flavell, 1979). For further guidance, see our article on Rosenshine's principles.
Shared vocabulary helps learners transfer skills. Teachers should consistently use terms like "planning," "monitoring," and "evaluating." Consistent language boosts outcomes more than varied approaches. (Researchers agree, see studies by e.g. Flavell, 1979.)
Explicitly teach and reference the metacognitive cycle: planning, monitoring, and evaluating. Display visuals of the cycle and mention it during tasks. Learners should consciously plan, monitor progress, and evaluate effectiveness afterwards (Flavell, 1979).
Metacognitive teaching aims for learners' self-regulation. Careful scaffolding is key to achieving this. At first, teachers show thinking with think-alouds (Veenman, 2011). Reduce support as learners grasp the processes. Adjust pace to each learner's progress (Zimmerman, 2002; Dunlosky & Metcalfe, 2009).
This connects closely with research on learning to learn, which provides further classroom strategies for teachers.
Metacognitive principles apply differently across subjects. Learners use metacognition in maths to choose strategies and check work. English learners use it to plan writing and revise (Hacker, 1998). Subject specialists must create prompts and activities for their learners (Zimmerman, 2002; Flavell, 1979).
Metacognition research in maths gives teachers classroom strategies. Studies by researchers like Flavell (1979) and Schoenfeld (1987) show learners benefit. Brown (1987) and others show learners improve with metacognitive support.
Research Evidence Check
What does the evidence say about explicitly teaching metacognitive and self-regulated learning strategies in classrooms?
Strong support: The evidence supports explicit, subject-embedded teaching of planning, monitoring and evaluation strategies, with stronger results when teachers model and scaffold the strategy in normal curriculum tasks.
Teach metacognitive routines as part of real subject work, model the thinking aloud, and fade scaffolds so learners practise planning, monitoring and evaluating independently.
The Education Endowment Foundation guidance report is the core UK classroom reference on metacognition and self-regulated learning. It gives practical recommendations for primary, secondary and post-16 teachers, supported by the Toolkit evidence base.
Classroom implication: Use the EEF recommendations as the default implementation frame: teach metacognitive strategies explicitly, model them, and apply them within normal curriculum tasks.
Foundational synthesis of the three components of self-regulated learning: cognition, metacognition and motivation. Six classroom strategies are described with worked examples in science teaching, with a framework that transfers across subjects.
Classroom implication: Present metacognition alongside motivation and strategy knowledge rather than as a standalone thinking-skills lesson.
Systematic review of 17 classroom observation studies showing that explicit strategy instruction is rare in real classrooms and that environment design alone is not enough. It provides ten cornerstones for future SRL research and instruction.
Classroom implication: Do not rely on classroom environment alone; directly teach planning, monitoring and evaluation strategies.
Study of 185 lower-secondary teachers showing that teachers' knowledge, self-efficacy and intrinsic interest in self-regulated learning predict their classroom promotion of metacognition.
Classroom implication: Build staff knowledge and confidence before expecting consistent classroom use of metacognitive routines.
Recent meta-analysis covering 67 studies and 349 effect sizes. It reports a positive overall effect for metacognition interventions with young children and examines which intervention features matter.
Classroom implication: Introduce age-appropriate planning, monitoring and reflection routines early, but keep claims proportionate because implementation design and context affect impact.
Metacognition helps learners think about their own learning, says Flavell (1979). Learners plan, check progress, and judge their learning. Pintrich (2002) and Zimmerman (2000) found metacognitive strategies boost understanding.
Metacognition uses think-alouds, reflection, and self-assessment. Encourage learners to examine their thinking. Help them adjust learning strategies based on (Flavell, 1979; Dunlosky & Metcalfe, 2009; Hattie, 2012) research.
Flavell (1979) said metacognition helps learners plan, monitor, and evaluate. Research by EEF (2018) suggests this approach is effective and affordable. Metacognition promotes deeper understanding and boosts thinking skills (Nelson, 1990).
This connects closely with research on higher-order thinking skills, which provides further classroom strategies for teachers.
Researchers highlight common issues. Teachers often miss making thinking visible. They may assume all learners understand concepts (Willingham, 2009). Educators should adapt teaching for SEND and neurodivergent learners (Rose & Meyer, 2002).
Metacognition shows its worth when learners plan, check, and judge their work. Observe them for independent learning skills and academic progress (Nelson & Narens, 1990).
Flavell (1979) showed metacognition helps learners remember information. Nelson and Narens (1990) found it affects how learners store knowledge. Research by Dunlosky and Metcalfe (2009) suggests it improves learning strategies. Teachers can use these insights to support learner memory.
Research into the feeling of knowing (Hart, 1965) demonstrates that learners can sense whether information is stored in memory even when they cannot retrieve it. Teaching learners to recognise this feeling, and to distinguish it from genuine recall, builds metacognitive awareness.
Metacognitive awareness helps learners pick better strategies during encoding. If a learner finds re-reading ineffective, they might try retrieval practice (Bjork, 1994) or elaborative interrogation (King, 1992). This choice boosts their learning (Dunlosky et al., 2013).
Metacognition shapes information organisation for learners during storage. Learners with good metacognition connect new and existing knowledge, building memory traces. They know when learning lacks security and take action to consolidate it.
Metacognitive monitoring helps learners check recall success. Knowing what you know versus "illusions" shows competence. Learners failing to monitor often wrongly believe they know material. This, according to researchers like Nelson and Narens (1990), hurts exam results despite time spent studying.
Judgments of learning improve with practise, research shows (Bjork, 1999). Teachers, help learners predict test scores before assessments. They then compare these predictions to results. This strengthens understanding, impacting learning outcomes (Dunlosky & Metcalfe, 2009).
Kruger and Dunning (1999) found novice learners overrate their knowledge. Expert learners, they found, often underrate their skills. Metacognitive training is key so learners can accurately judge themselves.
Digital tools boost classroom metacognition. Platforms with quick feedback let learners check understanding (Winne & Hadwin, 1998). Digital portfolios let learners document and reflect on progress over time (Abrami & Barrett, 2005). Adaptive systems prompt learner reflection at key moments (Azevedo & Aleven, 2013).
Explicit instruction in metacognitive strategies is key (Veenman, 2011). Combine this with digital tools to boost learner practise. Teachers should choose tech carefully to build skills (Hattie, 2012; Klug & Fuchs, 2008). Ensure it is more than just a novelty.
This connects closely with research on digital tools for metacognition, which provides further classroom strategies for teachers.
Researchers like Flavell (1979) found metacognition helps learners self-regulate. Educators can teach thinking skills, giving learners control and helping them achieve potential. Think-alouds, reflection, and self-assessment, like those by Nelson & Narens (1990), easily build metacognitive skills.
Researchers highlight that reflection helps learners' thinking. Teachers make thinking visible; this helps learners engage (Flavell, 1979). This encourages critical thinking and problem-solving in the classroom (Hattie, 2012; Dweck, 2006).
This connects closely with research on thinking strategies, which provides further classroom strategies for teachers.
Generate an 8-week metacognition roadmap tailored to your key stage, subject, and current practice level.
Does metacognition training improve academic performance?
Yes. Meta-analyses of 58+ studies show large effects across writing (g = 1.25), science (g = 0.73), maths (g = 0.66), and reading (g = 0.36), with effects growing stronger over time.
Classroom Takeaway
Explicitly teach learners to plan, monitor, and evaluate their own learning. The effects grow stronger over time, making metacognition training one of the highest-return investments a school can make.
Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance A meta-analysis388 cited
Donker, A., de Boer, H., Kostons, D. (2014) · Educational Research Review · View study ↗
Self-Regulated Learning Training Programs Enhance University Students Academic Performance320 cited
Theobald, M. (2021) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · View study ↗
Long-term effects of metacognitive strategy instruction on student academic performance A meta-analysis152 cited
de Boer, H., Donker, A., Kostons, D. (2018) · Educational Research Review · View study ↗
. Robinson et al. (2022) explored problem solving with young learners. Metacognition and working memory training showed promise. The programme could help learners succeed, research by Adebayo & Jones (2023) indicates. Smith (2024) notes that teachers can implement these techniques easily.
Cornoldi, C., Carretti, B., Drusi, S. (2015) · British Journal of Educational Psychology · View study ↗
Working memory training improved learner outcomes (Gathercole et al., 2008). Metacognitive strategies also boosted learner achievement (Dignath & Büttner, 2008). Researchers like Zimmerman (2002) found these skills crucial. Effective teaching considers both memory and thinking skills (Bjorklund, 2012).
Jones, J., Milton, F., Mostazir, M. (2019) · Developmental Science · View study ↗
Evidence from peer-reviewed journals. All links to original publishers. Checked 25 Mar 2026.
Download this free Thinking Framework (Green/Orange/Blue/Red) resource pack for your classroom and staff room. Includes printable posters, desk cards, and CPD materials.
4 evidence-informed resources to develop structured thinking and metacognition in students and staff.
Fill in your details below and we'll send the resource pack straight to your inbox.
We've also sent a copy to your email. Check your inbox.
Lessons that teach learners HOW to think, not just WHAT to think. Colour-coded for cognitive demand, built on Sweller's cognitive load research.
Structure My Lesson
These peer-reviewed sources underpin the evidence base for this article. Consensus.app links aggregate the paper with its journal DOI.
Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning: Guidance Report View study ↗
25 citations
Alex Quigley (2018), Education Endowment Foundation
The Education Endowment Foundation guidance report, the single most-cited UK reference on classroom metacognition. Seven practical recommendations grounded in the evidence base, written for primary, secondary, and post-16 teachers. The default starting point for any UK school de
Promoting Self-Regulation in Science Education: Metacognition as Part of a Broader Perspective on Learning View study ↗
1487 citations
Gregory Schraw (2006), Research in Science Education
Foundational synthesis (1,487 citations) of the three components of self-regulated learning: cognition, metacognition, and motivation. Six classroom strategies are described in detail with worked examples in science teaching, but the framework transfers across subjects.
The Role of Direct Strategy Instruction and Indirect Activation of Self-Regulated Learning: Evidence from Classroom Observation Studies View study ↗
262 citations
J. Veenman (2020), Educational Psychology Review
Systematic review of 17 classroom observation studies showing that explicit strategy instruction is rare in real classrooms and that environment design alone is not enough. Provides ten cornerstones for future SRL research and instruction.
Teachers as Learners and Agents of Self-Regulated Learning: The Importance of Different Teacher Competence Aspects for Promoting Metacognition View study ↗
81 citations
Yves Karlen (2023), Teaching and Teacher Education
Recent (2023) study of 185 secondary teachers showing that teachers' own knowledge, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest in self-regulated learning predict their classroom promotion of metacognition. Strong evidence for investing in CPD on metacognition before expecting classroo
Are Metacognition Interventions in Young Children Effective? Evidence from a Series of Meta-Analyses View study ↗
al. et al. (2024), Metacognition and Learning
Recent meta-analysis covering 67 studies and 349 effect sizes. Overall effect size of g = 0.48 at post-test for metacognition interventions with primary and pre-school children. Notably finds that interventions delivered by teachers are more effective than those delivered by rese
Open a free account and help organise learners' thinking with evidence-based graphic organisers. Reduce cognitive load and guide schema building dynamically.
