Learning from Mistakes

Investigating why something was wrong grows from the earlier habit of checking whether an answer seems right

Error analysis requires the habit of trying different approaches — you need to have tried something before you can analyse what went wrong

Critiquing others' mathematical reasoning and explaining errors applies the universal error-analysis habit to peer arguments

Evaluating the strength of evidence and refuting arguments draws on the universal error-analysis habit — asking why a claim might be wrong

Revising and editing requires analysing what is wrong with the current draft — the writing form of the universal error-analysis habit

Monitoring vocabulary gaps is a form of error and gap analysis — the same habit of investigating what you don't fully know applied to word knowledge

Distinguishing evidence from interpretation requires analysing where claims come from and what might be wrong with them — the universal error-analysis habit applied to historical argument

Changing your mind when evidence contradicts your prediction is the science form of the universal error-analysis habit — treating surprises as information rather than failures

Evaluating whether a strategy helped requires being able to analyse what went wrong when it didn't

Evaluating reasonableness using estimation and inverse operations applies the universal error-analysis habit to maths

Reflecting on the learning process requires the ability to analyse errors — reflection without error analysis stays superficial