# Ten teacher-ready Business starter scripts · 25 minutes each

Each session uses **2 + 4 + 5 + 7 + 4 + 3 = 25 minutes**. Prepare the original [practice cases](CASE-CARDS.md), [clean learner pages](LEARNER.md), [daily switchable routes](DAILY-CHOICES.md), [four A4 aids](print/TEXT-ALTERNATIVES.md) and [public teacher key](teacher/ANSWER-AND-NEXT.md). All case businesses, figures, stakeholder comments and forecasts are fictional. Seven minutes is an initial response window; extend time locally. The syllabus's authentic case-study requirement remains open for school work.

### Day 1 · What can this case actually show?

**Target:** separate stated case evidence, interpretation and an unsupported claim. **Prepare:** Cards A/B/C and [evidence ladder](print/evidence-ladder.svg).

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Read Card C's one commuter comment. Ask whether it proves most commuters have the same concern.
2. **Model · 4 min.** Put “one fictional commuter reported hard-to-read text” on the *stated* rung; “some users may have difficulty” on the *possible interpretation* rung; “everyone dislikes the noticeboard” on the *unsupported* rung.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Compare Cards A and B: one community-based idea and one profit-based service. Name an actual card fact and a missing datum for each; distinguish purpose from proof of impact or profitability.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 1 route and make three claim/evidence/limit triples across two different cards.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Partner removes an invented population, profit or impact claim and identifies the evidence that would be needed.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “Does a single comment establish stakeholder satisfaction?” Key: no; it is one reported view in an invented case.

### Day 2 · Locate the business life-cycle stage

**Target:** use *case evidence* to distinguish seed and start-up while leaving unclear stages unresolved. **Prepare:** Cards A/B/C/E and [life-cycle/goals map](print/lifecycle-goals.svg).

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Ask whether age alone determines a life-cycle stage.
2. **Model · 4 min.** Card A explicitly labels seed: plan tested internally, no public opening. Card B labels start-up: taking paid orders for three months. Name what operations have begun, not simply calendar time.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Card E is seed and Card C an established service, but C alone does not give enough data to determine the exact later stage. Point to the QCAA life-cycle order without pretending all stages have been taught.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 2 route; position A/B/E and write a bounded note for C with cited evidence.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Partner claims “twelve staff means maturity”; learner explains why staff count by itself cannot settle stage.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “What suggests B has moved beyond the seed idea?” Key: paid orders and active operation, as stated in this fictional case.

### Day 3 · From purpose to measurable action

**Target:** distinguish purpose/mission, goal, measurable objective, strategy and tactic in a case. **Prepare:** Cards A/B and life-cycle/goals map.

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Show Card B's “dependable fulfilment” and “at least 36 of 40 on time.” Ask which is directly checkable.
2. **Model · 4 min.** Treat “dependable fulfilment” as broad goal and 36/40 in a comparable week as objective; 34/40 is baseline, so the gap is two additional on-time orders. A booking-process improvement is a possible strategy; a particular checklist is a tactic, not a proven fix.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Card A's purpose makes a possible mission; “two trial sessions” needs timeframe/resources to become a robust objective. Ask what its one-Saturday-per-month availability means for planning.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 3 route; build a purpose→goal→objective→strategy→tactic chain for B, with one evidence gap.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Partner marks a forecast as achieved; learner restores “proposed/unproven.”
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “How many additional B orders on time would reach 36/40 from 34/40?” Key: two; no claim that the checklist will do it.

### Day 4 · Inside, close outside and wider outside

**Target:** classify internal, external operating and macro environmental factors from stated evidence, and flag when a macro claim is only hypothetical. **Prepare:** Cards B/C/D and [environment/SWOT mat](print/environment-swot.svg).

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Put StageKit's limited maintenance hours and venue enquiry side by side. Ask which is within its own operation.
2. **Model · 4 min.** Limited maintenance capacity is internal; the particular venue enquiry is external operating. A broad economy-wide shift would be macro **if supported by evidence**; these cards do not report one.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Sort B's one printer (internal), named competitor advert (external operating), C's one comment (external stakeholder evidence). Don't promote a single comment to a macro trend.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 4 route; sort four cited facts across B/C/D and write one missing macro-data question.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Partner changes a local competitor into a general legal factor; learner repairs scope and names the information that could support a macro claim.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “Is StageKit's one maintenance person internal or macro?” Key: internal, with a capacity implication to investigate.

### Day 5 · Public fresh check A: Borrow Bench

**Target:** transfer evidence limits, stage, goal and environment classification to [new File G](STUDENT-CHECKS.md#day-5-check-a--borrow-bench-file-g). Prompt and key are public, not secure. **Prepare:** blank evidence and life-cycle mats; record access support.

1. **Launch · 2 min.** State the task: decide only from the new fictional file and propose one bounded next action.
2. **Source access · 4 min.** Release File G without worked answers; log reading, scribing or AAC support.
3. **Independent plan · 5 min.** Learner marks stage facts, an internal capacity factor, a specific external offer and the proposed objective.
4. **Independent response · 7 min.** Choose Day 5 route and retain the first response before any content prompt.
5. **Self-audit · 4 min.** Learner checks whether their recommendation assumed a venue, staffing or demand not in the file.
6. **Submit · 3 min.** Collect work/support log; use the public key to choose the next instruction.

### Day 6 · A SWOT needs sources, not adjectives

**Target:** place one cited internal strength/weakness and one external opportunity/threat in a modest SWOT, then interpret one relationship. **Prepare:** Cards A/D and environment/SWOT mat.

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Ask whether “we are wonderful” is enough evidence for a strength.
2. **Model · 4 min.** From Card D: two trained staff → possible internal strength; one person carrying maintenance and changes → possible internal weakness; venue enquiry → external opportunity to investigate; competitor weekend collection → external threat to consider. Keep each linked to source wording.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Interpret a relationship: more event enquiries may strain one-person maintenance capacity. That is a risk inference, not a measured missed booking.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 6 route; complete a four-box SWOT for D and one “because…may…” implication, then test a second box with A.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Partner tries to put an internal toolkit under opportunity; learner corrects to internal strength/resource, with the limited quantity perhaps a weakness.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “Why can a venue enquiry be an opportunity without being confirmed sales?” Key: external possibility; actual conversion is unknown.

### Day 7 · Four functions, one business goal

**Target:** explain how finance, human resources, marketing/communication and operations contribute differently to a given goal. **Prepare:** Cards B/C and [functions/criteria board](print/functions-criteria.svg).

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Ask whether fixing B's late orders is only a marketing task.
2. **Model · 4 min.** For B, operations schedules/produces; HR coordinates staff; finance tests a proposed spend against its fictional budget; marketing communicates service promises. None alone proves 36/40 will be achieved.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Trace C's accessibility goal across its four *given* fictional roles. The single comment identifies a concern, not a measured outcome for any function.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 7 route; make a four-function action grid for B or C and identify one dependency between functions.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Peer calls advertising an operations fix; learner explains what would actually change the work process and what communication can truthfully say.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “Which function tracks a proposed budget?” Key: finance, but approval/return require more facts.

### Day 8 · Stakeholders may want different things

**Target:** name stakeholders, distinguish a stated preference from an assumed one, and propose a consented way to learn more. **Prepare:** Cards C/E and evidence ladder.

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Ask whether two Raincheck volunteers know what all listeners prefer without asking them.
2. **Model · 4 min.** E's volunteers, potential listeners and library venue have different roles and possible needs. No listener survey has been run, so format preference is unknown. A text/audio sample with consented feedback is a plan, not a success claim.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Compare C's one commuter comment with E's no-listener-data situation. Discuss what each supports and what would make a recommendation stronger.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 8 route; build a stakeholder-evidence-question table for C or E, with no personal disclosure from the class.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Partner says “everyone needs audio”; learner narrows the claim and asks an ethical, nonidentifying question.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “Can we score stakeholder satisfaction for E yet?” Key: no; relevant feedback is absent.

### Day 9 · A decision needs a criterion and a limit

**Target:** compare two fictional options by effectiveness and a narrow resource-use ratio, while withholding broader efficiency, competitiveness and satisfaction claims. **Prepare:** Card F and functions/criteria board.

1. **Launch · 2 min.** Read F's baseline 12 positive/20 and objective 18/20. Ask whether either forecast actually meets 18.
2. **Model · 4 min.** A forecasts 16/20, B 15/20; neither meets the objective. A has the larger projected improvement (four vs three). Fictional cost per additional projected positive slip: A $80÷4=$20, B $30÷3=$10. This narrow ratio is not total business efficiency.
3. **Guided reading · 5 min.** Compare the tradeoff: A more effective against this target; B cheaper per projected additional positive slip. No causes, revenue, competitor or population satisfaction data is given.
4. **Practice route · 7 min.** Choose Day 9 route; recommend a bounded next step for F with one criterion, both calculations and one explicit uncertainty.
5. **Audit · 4 min.** Partner turns forecast into actual success or 20 slips into “all visitors”; learner repairs both claims.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** “Which option meets 18/20 in its forecast?” Key: neither, so a prudent recommendation should include a test or better evidence.

### Day 10 · Public fresh check B: Page Pop

**Target:** transfer SWOT, business functions and criteria-based decision making to [new File H](STUDENT-CHECKS.md#day-10-check-b--page-pop-file-h). Both check and key are public. **Prepare:** blank SWOT/functions mats and support log.

1. **Launch · 2 min.** State task: use the new case's stated figures, make a bounded decision and identify missing evidence.
2. **Source access · 4 min.** Release File H alone; log access mode and avoid revealing its worked key.
3. **Independent plan · 5 min.** Mark baseline/objective/options, one internal and one external factor, and the functions relevant to action.
4. **Independent response · 7 min.** Choose Day 10 route; retain first arithmetic, reasoning and recommendation before feedback.
5. **Self-audit · 4 min.** Check added on-time counts, projected cost per additional on-time order, and whether any forecast was called proven.
6. **Submit · 3 min.** Collect first response/support log and use public worked key for teaching. No QCAA unit result follows.

SubjectNest original teacher scripts © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).