Researchers and instructors have only recently embraced the role of errors as vehicles for learning in the algebra classroom. Studying a mixture of correct and incorrect worked examples has been shown to be beneficial relative to correct worked examples alone. This study examines the effectiveness of having students generate, or anticipate, errors another student might make. Five Algebra 1 sections at a suburban mid-Atlantic public high school participated amid an early equation-solving unit. During teacher-led instruction, all five sections examined 2-3 correct worked examples. The final example varied across conditions. One section received an additional correct worked example. Two sections examined an incorrect worked example. The remaining two sections engaged in an error anticipation exercise where the teacher wrote an equation on the board and asked the students to predict errors another student might make in solving. The study measured conceptual and procedural knowledge, encoding ability, and student-generated errors. Although no meaningful significant differences were found, students in the error anticipation condition saw no difference in performance in conceptual and procedural items versus those who examined incorrect worked examples. Analysis that combined the error anticipation and incorrect worked examples conditions showed that those students trended toward outperforming those who examined correct examples only on procedural items. These results support further examination of error anticipation as a worthwhile instructional activity. / Math & Science Education