The child who disputes a rule may understand it more clearly than the child who repeats it.

Repeating a rule requires only memory. Arguing with it requires understanding what it is for, where it applies, and where it seems to fail, which is a considerably deeper engagement even when the conclusion is wrong. The compliant answer and the comprehending one look opposite from the front of a room.

When a child or a colleague challenges a rule, ask them to explain their objection before responding to it. Often you will find they have understood it well. And it is worth being able to say why a rule exists rather than only that it does.