Metacognition is defined as “thinking about thinking”. Metacognition is composed of two components: knowledge and regulation. Metacognitive learning includes knowledge about oneself as a learner and the factors that might influence performance, knowledge of strategies, and knowledge about when and why to use strategies. Metacognitive regulation is the monitoring of one's cognition and includes planning activities, awareness of task understanding and execution, and evaluation of the effectiveness of monitoring processes and strategies. Metacognition also improves with appropriate instruction, with experimental evidence supporting the idea that students can be taught to reflect on their own thinking. Assessing metacognition is challenging for a number of reasons: (a) metacognition is a complex construct; it is not directly observable; can be confused with both verbal ability and working memory capacity; and existing measures tend to be narrowly focused and decontextualized from school learning. She identified self-directed learning as one of the life and career skills needed to prepare students for post-secondary education and the workforce. However, educators may be unaware of methods for teaching and assessing metacognition, especially among elementary-aged children. Educational psychologists have long promoted the importance of metacognition for regulating and supporting student learning, but the question arises; How does understanding metacognition improve how students learn? There are numerous strategies through which they can improve their learning; First, the student teachers used the self-regulated learning (SRL) method to improve students' learning. SRL promotes metacognition and a deeper understanding of teachers and how they help students through self-regulated learning. They use the quasi-experiment because they want to see the action of retrospective learning in teachers to examine how this learning is useful for student teachers and are able to teach self-regulated learning (SRL) to their students. . Those preservice teachers who analyze both problematic and effective experiences develop their SRL teaching strategies the most. On the other hand, those who focus only on problematic experiences do not adapt SRL strategies. Combining two other factors; by learning from problems (LFP) and learning from successes (LFS) in the SRL model, pre-service teachers can increase their confidence and experiences, and more importantly, how they can assist students in learning SRL strategies in class and promote the ideology of the SRL.