A wrong answer gives you something to investigate. Ask how it was reached, compare the reasoning with a sound explanation and provide an opportunity to use the correction. The useful sequence includes feedback and another attempt.
In a 2009 study, Kornell, Hays and Bjork found that unsuccessful retrieval attempts could improve subsequent learning in the experimental tasks they examined. Participants attempted answers before receiving the target information. The result supports a more specific claim than the idea that every mistake helps.
Keep the reasoning visible
Before reading an explanation, try a short question and record your confidence. Afterwards, correct the answer in another colour and explain what changed. Keep the first attempt so you can see the assumption or missing idea that needed attention.
For arithmetic, identify the faulty step. If 7 × 8 became 54, replacing the number with 56 does not explain the error. Rebuild the quantity using a method the learner understands, then test that method with another example.
Return to a related problem later without the worked answer in view. Can the learner explain it independently? If the same difficulty remains, choose a different explanation or investigate a prerequisite skill.
Use this routine in an appropriate, low-stakes setting. It is not a reason to withhold necessary instruction or make someone repeatedly fail. Practice involving real safety consequences needs suitable supervision and boundaries.
The aim is to make a correction usable. A learner should leave with a clearer method and a way to check the next answer, rather than merely a mark showing that the first one was wrong.