Learn

Explain a concept at multiple levels

Vary vocabulary and depth while preserving the same core definition, conditions, and limits

5 min setupTested with:ChatGPTReviewed: 2026-08-28

Add your context

Your text stays in this browser. AILesson Prompts does not send it to a model or server.

Concept and sourceLearner levelsExplanation rules

Your prompt

Unfilled fields remain visible as placeholders, so you can still copy and edit the prompt

Explain the concept at the specified levels using the supplied source.

Concept and authoritative material:
[concept]

Each audience's prior knowledge, language, and purpose:
[levels]

Fixed terms, depth, misconceptions, analogy limits, notation, and exclusions:
[rules]

Identify a core meaning that must remain invariant across levels. For each level adjust vocabulary, abstraction, examples, notation, and causal depth—not truth or certainty. Return prerequisite assumptions, explanation, one source-grounded example, optional analogy with where it breaks, common misconception, one quick understanding check, and bridge to the next level. Do not say a simpler explanation is the whole truth when it omits a condition. Do not invent facts, anthropomorphize mechanisms misleadingly, or use an analogy as proof. Finish with an invariant audit comparing definitions, scope, conditions, and exceptions across levels.

Private by defaultPrompt assembly happens locally in your browser. Avoid placing confidential information into any AI service unless your organization allows it.

From input to outcome

A worked example

See how concrete context turns this recipe into a usable result

Actual input

Concept and source: Opportunity cost. Course definition: value of the next best alternative forgone when a choice is made. It can include non-monetary alternatives. Tutorial example: a train with a lower ticket price may have higher opportunity cost if it causes two hours of lost paid work.
Learner levels: Level 1: 12-year-old familiar with choosing between weekend activities. Level 2: first-year economics student preparing short exam explanations. Level 3: new manager comparing employee time allocations and needing to avoid double counting accounting cost and forgone work.
Explanation rules: Use 'next best alternative' at every level. Do not say opportunity cost equals all rejected alternatives or always equals money. At Level 2 distinguish it from sunk cost only briefly; at Level 3 mention perspective and scarce resource. No equations required.

Example output

Invariant: opportunity cost is the value of the next best alternative forgone because a choice uses a scarce opportunity. It is not the sum of every rejected option and need not be money.

Level 1: If you spend Saturday afternoon at football, you cannot use the same afternoon for your next best choice—perhaps a friend's party. The value that party had to you is the opportunity cost of football. Analogy: one seat can hold one person; useful for exclusivity, but choices can use several scarce resources, not just one “seat.” Check: if you reject three activities, which one determines opportunity cost? The next best, not all three.

Level 2: Use the invariant definition and identify the actual next-best feasible alternative. In the train example, ticket price is only one part; two hours of forgone paid work may make the cheaper ticket's opportunity cost higher. A sunk cost is past and unrecoverable, while opportunity cost concerns the alternative forgone by the current choice. Check: name the alternative, its value, and why it is forgone.

Level 3: Specify decision-maker perspective, scarce resource and feasible alternatives. Allocating an analyst to Project A for a day forgoes the value of their next best feasible use. Avoid adding the same salary both as an accounting cost and again inside the valued forgone output without a consistent framework. Bridge: compare incremental alternatives and state whose value is measured. All levels preserve the same definition and non-monetary scope.

Why this works

1
A shared invariant prevents beginner explanations from contradicting advanced ones.
2
Explicit analogy limits reduce the chance that a helpful metaphor becomes a learned misconception.