In this talk, we will look at the two recent studies we conducted on the graduate teaching assistants’ (TAs’) use of students’ work in teaching. In the first study, we examined the types of the errors that the TAs identified from students’ written work, their plans to address them, and implementation of their plans in class. Our results show that TAs often did not identify the most frequent errors students made, which reflected well-documented difficulties from the literature; the errors TAs identified were mainly procedural in nature; specific details of students’ work were mainly included in procedural errors, and the level of specificity of students’ work was generally consistent but showed some drops when going from identifying to planning, then to teaching. In the second study, with a different group of TAs, we investigated how they interpret students’ work and plan to address them in teaching based on approaches to address students’ misconceptions discussed in the literature: viewing them as simply incorrect thus to be retaught regardless of students’ thinking behind them, viewing them as a reflection of students’ flawed ideas to be confronted and replaced, and viewing them as resources for future learning to be refined and reorganized. Our analysis shows that while TAs’ interpretations were often sufficiently rich to support using student misconceptions as resources for future learning, none of their plans used them in this way. Rather, most TAs’ plans were aligned with asking students to revisit their work without further planning afterwards, or confronting and replacing. Our results suggest that professional development could be designed to help TAs use students’ errors in teaching to promote students’ learning in general and convert TAs’ rich interpretations into plans for using student misconceptions as resources for future learning in particular.