This is a simulation of the authored files by the pack maker, not a real teacher/student/funder trial, classroom pilot, authentic-case study, specialist accessibility evaluation or measured learning impact. All businesses and figures are fictional. The school's actual teacher must choose verified real case studies, check local law and run its own assessment process.
Teacher planning pass
I opened the start page, prepared Card D and Day 6, and walked through its 2 + 4 + 5 + 7 + 4 + 3 minute sequence. Strength/weakness are internal and opportunity/threat external, with each box tied to a stated fictional line. The “may strain capacity” conclusion correctly stays tentative; a venue enquiry is not a sale. I then desk-taught Day 3: B's target 36/40 versus baseline 34/40 needs two more on-time orders, and the proposed checklist has not been tested. Every day has a target, preparation, initial learner output and exit/submission plus a worked teaching next move. Timings are allocations, not observed class durations; discussion and access support may need longer.
Learner and access pass
I completed Day 1 using Route A and Route B: the one commuter comment went on “stated,” possible readability concern on “inference,” and a claim about most commuters remained unsupported. I then answered fresh File G before reading the key: three proposed sessions exceed the volunteers' two Saturday availability by one and the single venue offer by two; no safety or permission can be assumed. For File H I placed shared-printer/single-scheduler capacity internally and the venue enquiry externally. Baseline 23/30, A 28/30 and B 26/30 imply +5/+3, with narrow $200/5 = $40 and $90/3 = $30. A meets 27/30 in its forecast; B does not. Dictation/AAC can show the case-reasoning target with reading ability considered separately; content hints are logged.
Supporter and potential funder pass
The optional extras work without purchases, logins, real business records or disclosure of family finances. Examples span repair, print, public notices, events, community audio, gallery and borrowing services. The source/rights ledger separates original freely reusable stories/diagrams from QCAA and DejaVu rights. The pack does not pretend to deliver the syllabus's two authentic business case studies, legal ownership instruction, full Topic 1, a unit instrument or proven benefit. A supporter can run the fictional questions for practice but must not use the option numbers as personal investment or business advice.
Visual, source and arithmetic checks
- Rendered all four SVG aids as one-page A4 PDFs, then viewed a four-page contact image. Numbered reading order, full labels, bottom rights line and edges were legible without observed clipping. Tints add grouping but no essential meaning. PDFs are selectable-text yet untagged; the full-text/tactile guide supplies reading order.
verify_pack.pychecks page size, SVG title/description, embedded DejaVu, PDF text, links and hashes. - Verified current QCAA Business 2025 v1.3 from its live official landing and PDF: printed pp.7–9 life-cycle/SWOT/criteria, pp.13–15 Unit 1 Topic 1 and authentic-case requirement, p.5 assessment and p.12 reporting. No real market, legal, tax or profit facts are built into the learner cases.
- Recomputed every printed number for B, F, G and H; the verifier encodes independent arithmetic formulas and compares them with source facts and worked answers. A forecast remains a case assumption even when its arithmetic is correct.
Open school and community review: Senior Business teachers must choose and verify authentic local cases, source current laws/market facts when teaching them, complete other required content, and design school assessments. Actual learners and access specialists should trial the pages with their tools. Cultural and First Nations material or translations require genuine collaboration/verification; none is invented here. No student data or customer data was collected.