# Fictional source cards for the Week 2 inquiry

These are **original simulations of source types**, not real documents, contracts, people or reviews. Their dates and names are invented. Use the cards to practise source questions; they give no authority for a purchase. No current market price, consumer-rights statement or accessibility certification appears here. Provide selectable text or print; do not ask learners to search their family contracts.

## Card P · invented provider-style summary

**Fictional StudyHire summary, dated 12 August 2026.** “Plan A: $240 setup and $80 for each complete month. Plan B: $480 setup and $50 for each complete month. Both are described here as month-to-month with no exit charge. This summary does not include the full contract, repair schedule, device specification or tested accessibility features.”

**What it can support:** the invented price rules and what this particular summary claims about an exit charge. **What it cannot verify:** an actual provider's terms, equivalent service or real-world accessibility. It is a simulated provider voice with an interest in enrolment.

## Card U · unattributed comment

**Fictional anonymous comment, undated.** “B always works out cheaper. I wouldn't bother reading the rest.” The writer gives no month count, payment record, method or identity.

**What it can support:** that someone in the fiction expresses a view. **What it cannot support:** a universal cost comparison; at four months the invented Plan A total is lower. No reader should treat this as a verified testimonial.

## Card T · limited access tryout note

**Fictional two-person tryout note, dated 13 August 2026.** “Two adult volunteers used a sample device to type a short document. Both completed that task. The note does not say which plan supplied the device, whether assistive technology was tested, or what instructions and support were provided.”

**What it can support:** only that two fictional adults completed one described task. **What it cannot support:** a claim that either plan is accessible for every user or equivalent in service. A valid local access review would need suitable people, consent, methods and equipment for the actual context.

## Teacher use

Ask: “Which card helps answer **what are the stated fees?**” P, with the classroom-fiction limit. “Which card establishes **that B is always cheaper?**” None; calculate at a named horizon. “Which card establishes **equivalent access?**” None. “What is a next source?” A real adult would need current full written terms and a suitable access/service check, assessed under local policy. Do not present these invented cards as independent verification. Record whether a learner distinguishes a source's content, origin, purpose and limit.

**Reuse:** Original SubjectNest fictional source cards © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Credit source/licence and mark changes.