BENZ GAME: teach the same rule at the depth your friend actually needs

BENZ GAME readers can adapt one explanation for a beginner and an experienced learner by testing prior understanding before choosing the lesson depth.

One friend has never seen the exercise; another has used a similar one and wants only to know what is different. Reading the whole instruction aloud twice may bore one without helping the other. BENZ GAME readers can adapt a lesson by first checking what the learner already understands. We keep the actual rule constant in this example. Only the route through the explanation changes, so familiarity does not quietly become permission to invent a different rule.

Start with one diagnostic action

Our invented paper exercise uses shape trays. Each object must go into the tray matching its shape; its arrow must face upward; the placement is complete only when the learner says confirmed. A circle with a sideways arrow is the diagnostic object. Ask both friends what they would do and why, without demonstrating first. This shows which part they already recognise: matching the shape, setting orientation or marking the completion of a placement.

The beginner says, “I would put it in whichever tray has room.” That answer reveals that shape matching itself needs teaching. Start with the purpose of the trays, then compare a circle tray and a square tray using the same object. The empty space is not the deciding condition. Demonstrate one match and ask the beginner to do another. There is no benefit in beginning with a complex exception before the main classification rule has become meaningful.

The experienced friend says, “Circle tray, turn the arrow up, then move on.” They have already supplied the shape and orientation conditions, but missed the confirmation step. Begin with that difference. Explain that placement remains incomplete until confirmed, then let them narrate a full example. Repeating the basic explanation of what a circle is would not address the gap their answer actually exposed. Prior experience helps locate the starting point; it does not prove the whole rule is known.

Give each learner the missing layer

For the beginner, use three short passes. First place objects by shape, without introducing movement speed. Then rotate the arrow on a correctly placed object. Finally add the spoken confirmation. Keep each condition visible while the next is introduced. At the end, combine them into one complete placement. This is an explanation sequence, not a relaxation of the exercise's real completion condition. A partially taught practice step should be labelled as practice rather than presented as a valid finished attempt.

For the experienced friend, use a contrast pair. In case one, the circle is in its matching tray with the arrow upward but no confirmation. In case two, the same arrangement is confirmed. Ask what changed and which is complete. The physical layout is identical; the declared completion state differs under our rule. The contrast concentrates attention on the unfamiliar requirement and avoids wasting the lesson on distinctions the learner already explained accurately.

Test transfer rather than repetition

Give both friends a triangle whose arrow points down. The beginner must now combine all three conditions with a different shape; the experienced friend must include the previously omitted confirmation. A successful explanation says triangle tray, arrow turned upward, then confirmed. If someone merely repeats the circle demonstration without changing trays, the new example reveals imitation rather than transfer. The final task should be fresh enough to test the rule while remaining simple enough to inspect clearly.

Do not equate confidence with understanding. A fluent experienced learner can miss a condition, while a hesitant beginner may produce a correct explanation slowly. In a BENZ GAME teaching conversation, ask for the reason behind the chosen action instead of rating speed or familiarity. A correct result reached by guessing may not survive the next example. A reason tied to the stated condition gives the teacher better evidence about what can be shortened and what still needs careful explanation.

We adjust the next explanation to the observed error. If the tray is wrong, revisit classification. If the tray is right but the arrow is sideways, revisit orientation. If both are right without confirmation, revisit completion. There is no need to restart every learner from the first sentence whenever one part goes wrong. Equally, a missing basic condition should not be covered with specialist vocabulary simply because the learner describes themselves as experienced.

The lesson ends with both friends completing the same triangle task under the same three conditions. One arrived through staged demonstrations; the other through a targeted contrast. Neither received a weaker version of the rule. That is the BENZ GAME teaching principle: ask what is already understood, teach the missing relationship and check the combined result. The useful measure of explanation depth is whether it enables a fresh correct account, rather than how long the teacher spoke.