This paper conceptualizes metacognitive archaeology as a theory of archaeological knowledge management and simultaneously as a technological framework for cultural heritage management. The proposed approach focuses on the accumulation of existing research, its theoretical and epistemological structuring, the initiation of new knowledge, and the integration of independently produced research into a coherent scientific and educational system. Metacognitive archaeology is defined as a meta-theoretical framework whose internal operational mechanism is the syncretic model, enabling the systematic coexistence and comparative analysis of categorically different archaeological theories without reducing their internal logic.
A central theoretical pillar of the paper is the STI–ECA model, which positions scientific research and education within a six-phase system: (1) scientific research and novelty, (2) technology, (3) innovation, (4) education, (5) culture, and (6) administration. This model is applied as a metacognitive tool for understanding the cyclical movement, translation, and institutionalization of archaeological knowledge.
Using the archaeological site of Gonio–Apsaros as a case study, the paper demonstrates how systematic theoretical knowledge and multi-theoretical analysis directly improve the quality of fieldwork, research decision-making, and the legitimacy of archaeological interpretations. The proposed framework is integrated across all three levels of higher education—Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctoral—establishing a stable connection between theory, practice, education, and cultural heritage management.
The paper argues that the integration of metacognitive archaeology and the STI–ECA model enhances research quality, strengthens field methodologies, and contributes to the positive transformation of theoretical conflicts within archaeology.

First Author: Alexander Rusetsky

Keywords:
Metacognitive archaeology
Archaeological knowledge management;
Inclusive design
Teaching theoretical archaeology
Cultural heritage management technology
Quality of archaeological fieldwork