You've helped them one at a time. The real understanding is how the ideas CONNECT — teach that next.
Rulewright (guess-the-rule induction (form a hypothesis, then test it)) ×Vary (controlling variables (change ONE thing at a time))
You guess "it turns green when the number is even". How do you test it WITHOUT fooling yourself?
Rulewright then says: “To test it fast, I'll change the number AND the color AND the size all at once.” — is that right?
The link: Vary is what makes Rulewright's test valid — one change at a time turns a guess into evidence.
Now they see it: a hypothesis is only as good as the controlled test behind it.
Tablo (logic-grid deduction (eliminate possibilities in a grid)) ×Whittle (code-narrowing (never hunt — narrow TOWARD the answer))
What do logic-grid puzzles and code-narrowing have in common about HOW you find the answer?
Tablo then says: “In a logic grid you just guess the whole solution and see if it fits.” — is that right?
The link: Tablo and Whittle are the same move — narrowing by elimination until one possibility remains.
Now they see it: deduction isn't finding the answer — it's removing everything that isn't it.
Cogent (deductive vs inductive reasoning) ×Contra (proof by contradiction (assume the opposite, watch it break))
Is "assume the opposite and show it's impossible" a deductive proof or an inductive guess?
Cogent then says: “Proof by contradiction is inductive — it's just noticing the opposite usually fails.” — is that right?
The link: Contra is a member of Cogent's deductive family — certainty by ruling the opposite impossible.
Now they see it: contradiction isn't a trick — it's deduction turned inside-out.
Capstone — crack the mystery
A locked-room mystery lands on your desk. Each part below needs ONE of the cast's ideas — bring in the right reasoner for each.
Sort the solid clues from the mere hunches.
Who do you bring in?
Cross-check each witness's clue against the others.
Who do you bring in?
Cross out suspect–room–time combos the clues rule out.
Who do you bring in?
Form a theory of the culprit, then test it against a new clue.
Who do you bring in?
Prove one suspect can't be guilty by showing their story forces an impossibility.
Who do you bring in?
Notice what you just did: no single move cracked the case — you PICKED the right reasoning for each step and connected them. That's what real deduction means.
The whole cast, working together — because you taught each one and saw how they fit.
Each idea is a person you teach. A filled circle is one you can teach; a solid line is a connection you've taught. Fill the map by teaching the cast + their connections.
