This study aims to characterize teachers’ levels of metacognitive awareness and examine how these levels vary according to socio-professional variables, with a particular focus on professional experience. Understanding teachers’ metacognitive competencies is essential, as teaching is a cognitively demanding profession that requires constant decision-making, monitoring of instructional strategies, and reflective practice. Since Flavell’s seminal work, which introduced the concept of metacognition as the capacity to think about one’s own thinking, the construct has become central in educational psychology and continues to be a key element in the study of both learning and teaching processes.

Metacognition is commonly conceptualized as comprising two major dimensions: metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation. According to Schraw and Dennison (1994), metacognitive knowledge refers to the awareness individuals hold about themselves as learners, the tasks they engage in, and the strategies available to them. This knowledge includes declarative knowledge (knowing what), procedural knowledge (knowing how), and conditional knowledge (knowing when and why). Metacognitive regulation, on the other hand, encompasses the processes through which individuals plan, monitor, and evaluate their cognitive activities. These regulatory skills allow learners—and, crucially, teachers—to flexibly adapt strategies to meet the demands of various tasks and contexts.

While metacognition has been extensively studied in relation to students’ academic performance, comparatively fewer studies have examined its role in professional learning, particularly within the teaching profession (Karlen et al., 2023; Karlen et al., 2024). Yet, the emerging evidence consistently highlights metacognition as a core component of effective teaching. Teachers with higher levels of metacognitive awareness tend to engage more systematically in reflective practice, adjust instructional strategies to support diverse learners, and explicitly model metacognitive processes to their students (Gutierrez de Blume et al., 2024; Mbato & Triprihatmin, 2022). These competencies not only enhance teacher effectiveness but also contribute to creating classroom environments that foster self-regulated learning.

A growing body of research has also explored the relationship between teaching experience and metacognitive functioning. Prior studies suggest that professional experience may contribute to metacognitive differentiation among teachers, with experienced teachers often demonstrating greater proficiency in applying problem-solving strategies and supporting student autonomy. For example, research by Cihanoglu (2012) and Metallidou (2009) indicates that in-service teachers more frequently employ sophisticated strategies such as analogy, systematic task breakdown, and flexible adaptation to context. Pre-service teachers, in contrast, tend to use these strategies less spontaneously and with less confidence, likely due to their limited exposure to real instructional challenges.

However, experience alone does not guarantee mastery of metacognitive strategies. Recent findings show that even experienced teachers may lack awareness of empirically supported learning strategies, such as spacing and interleaving, which have been consistently demonstrated to improve long-term retention (Halamish, 2018). This gap suggests that some metacognitive skills may not naturally develop through classroom experience and may require targeted professional development. The persistence of misconceptions or limited strategic repertoires highlights the need for ongoing training that integrates evidence-based learning principles into teaching practice.

Given this context, investigating teachers’ levels of metacognitive awareness and understanding how these levels relate to socio-professional variables is of particular relevance. Such knowledge can inform the design of professional development programs that better align with teachers’ needs, promote reflective and evidence-based pedagogical practices, and ultimately contribute to improved teaching quality. By examining how metacognition varies across professional experience and other characteristics, this study seeks to deepen the understanding of how teachers develop as reflective practitioners and how educational systems can better support them.

This study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional design to examine levels of metacognitive awareness among teachers and to analyze how these levels vary according to professional experience. The methodological approach was structured to allow the comparison between pre-service and in-service teachers while ensuring the reliability and validity of the measurements used. A total of approximately 180 teachers participated in the study. The sample included two main groups: pre-service teachers enrolled in the first year of their initial teacher education program and completing their supervised professional internship, and in-service teachers with diverse lengths of teaching experience. The inclusion of both novice and experienced teachers allowed for an analysis of developmental patterns in metacognitive awareness across different stages of the teaching career. Participation was voluntary, and all individuals provided informed consent prior to completing the instruments. Ethical guidelines for educational research were followed, ensuring anonymity and confidentiality of responses. Metacognitive awareness was assessed using the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teachers (MAIT) (Balcikanli, 2011), an adapted version of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) developed by Schraw and Dennison (1994). The adaptation involved rephrasing items to reflect the specific context of teaching. The instrument consists of items distributed across two main dimensions: metacognitive knowledge, including declarative, procedural, and conditional understanding of pedagogical strategies, and metacognitive regulation, which assesses planning, monitoring, and evaluation of instructional actions. Previous studies have confirmed the validity, reliability, and internal consistency of the MAIT when applied to teaching populations (α de Cronbach entre .79 e .85) (Balcikanli, 2011). Data were collected using an online survey platform to facilitate access for participants across different institutions and school levels. Pre-service teachers completed the inventory during their training sessions, while in-service teachers were invited through institutional mailing lists and professional networks. Additionally, demographic information was gathered, including age, gender, field of teaching, and, for in-service teachers, years of professional experience. This information was crucial for analyzing potential interactions between metacognitive awareness and socio-professional characteristics. The data analysis involved reliability analyses to evaluate the internal consistency of the MAIT in the present sample. The results revealed high internal consistency, confirming the instrument’s suitability for assessing teachers’ metacognitive awareness in this context. Descriptive and inferential analyses were also carried out to examine whether differences between pre-service and in-service teachers were statistically significant. Additional analyses explored the influence of variables such as years of experience on specific sub-dimensions of metacognition.

Preliminary results indicate that teachers generally presented moderate levels of metacognitive awareness. No significant differences were found between pre-service and in-service teachers, a finding that diverges from previous research reporting higher metacognitive competence among experienced teachers (e.g., Cihanoglu, 2012; Metallidou, 2009). As also highlighted by Halamish (2018), teaching experience does not necessarily translate into increased awareness or use of empirically validated learning strategies. This alignment with the current study suggests that professional experience alone may not be sufficient for the development or consolidation of complex metacognitive strategies within teaching practice. Furthermore, certain psychological constructs, such as self-efficacy beliefs, may influence teachers’ metacognitive judgments and strategic behavior. Research indicates that self-efficacy can bias individuals' perceptions of their cognitive processes, potentially inflating confidence without corresponding increases in metacognitive precision or strategy use (Bandura, 1977; Luna-Cortes, 2024). Such effects could partially explain why experienced teachers do not consistently demonstrate higher metacognitive awareness, despite accumulated practice. Overall, these findings reinforce the importance of implementing targeted interventions and professional development opportunities aimed at enhancing teachers’ metacognitive awareness. They also highlight the need for further research to better understand the complex relationship between metacognition, professional experience, and psychological factors that may shape reflective practice. Continued investigation is essential to inform evidence-based approaches that support teachers in effectively monitoring, regulating, and optimizing their pedagogical strategies.

Balcikanli, C. (2011). Metacognitive awareness inventory for teachers (MAIT). Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9(25), 1309–1332. Bandura, A (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review. 84 (2): 191–215 Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, Executive Control, Self-Regulation, and Other More Mysterious Mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert, & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding (pp. 65-116). Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates. Cihanoglu, M. O. (2012). Metacognitive awareness of teacher candidates. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 4529-4533. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Gutierrez de Blume, A.P., Montoya Londoño, D.M., Jiménez Rodríguez, V. et al. Psychometric properties of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI): standardization to an international Spanish with 12 countries. (2024). Metacognition Learning . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09388-9 Halamish, V. (2018). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ metacognitive knowledge of learning strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2152. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02152 Karlen,Y.; Hirt, C. N.; Jud, J.; Rosenthal, A.; Eberli, T. D. (2023). Teachers as learners and agents of self-regulated learning: The importance of different teachers competence aspects for promoting metacognition. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104055 Karlen, Y., Bäuerlein, K. & Brunner, S. (2024. Teachers’ assessment of self-regulated learning: Linking professional competences, assessment practices, and judgment accuracy. Social Psychology of Education, 27, 461–491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-023-09845-4 Luna-Cortes, G. (2024). Managing students’ illusion of control in higher education: effect on unrealistic optimism and expectancy disconfirmation. Higher Education https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01212-2 Mbato, C. L., & Triprihatmini, V. (2022). Empowering pre-service English teachers' metacognitive awareness in teaching through reflections. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(4), 2497-2512. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.4.2497 Metallidou, P. (2009). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ metacognitive knowledge about problem-solving strategies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 76-82. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033