Ten teacher scripts · 25… | Year 11 Economics · T1 W1–2 · Lessons

Every session uses 2 + 4 + 5 + 7 + 4 + 3 = 25 minutes. Prepare the named fictional practice cards, learner task, switchable routes and linked A4 aids. Say at first use that a production model is useful for asking questions but does not describe real prices, demand or preferences. On Days 5 and 10, give the new public check without the separate worked key; record content prompting. Seven minutes is an initial response window, so adjust locally without changing the reasoning target.

Day 1 · A choice needs a constraint

Target: distinguish relative scarcity from an absolute absence and identify who chooses and what is forgone. Prepare: Cards B/D and scarcity ledger aid.

Launch · 2 min. Read B's two Saturday tasks. Ask whether eight staff-hours can be assigned to both tasks in full.
Model · 4 min. Write available: 8 staff-hours; possible uses: catalogue or help; constraint: same hours cannot do both at once. Relative scarcity means limited resources against competing uses, not that there are zero books or zero helpers.
Guided reading · 5 min. In D, identify the council as chooser, one project of crew capacity and the alternative project. Check that learners do not infer which project users prefer.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 1 route. Produce two constraint/chooser/alternative triples, one from B and one from D.
Audit · 4 min. Partner claims “the council has no resources.” Repair to “enough crew time for one small project; choosing one forgoes the other.”
Exit · 3 min. “Does scarcity mean nothing exists?” Key: no; the available inputs are insufficient for all competing uses at once.

Day 2 · Count the next-best alternative

Target: state opportunity cost precisely and avoid treating every possible alternative as an additive cost. Prepare: Card B and scarcity ledger.

Launch · 2 min. Ask what using B's final two hours for digital help prevents in the stated case.
Model · 4 min. The stated next-best feasible alternative is cataloguing 24 books. So the opportunity cost, expressed in that output, is 24 returned books catalogued. The card does not tell whether digital help is worth more.
Guided reading · 5 min. Invite a second imagined alternative, such as shelf labels. Explain that it cannot replace the stated next-best alternative without new ranking evidence.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 2 route; write the decision, feasible alternative, opportunity cost and one value limit for B. Compare D without inventing a numeric cost.
Audit · 4 min. Partner adds both 24 books and an invented shelf-label count. Learner removes the unsupported addition and names the next-best alternative criterion.
Exit · 3 min. “Is the 24-book cost the same as a $24 expense?” Key: no, it is the forgone output in this model.

Day 3 · What, how and for whom?

Target: ask the three basic allocation questions and keep efficiency separate from equity. Prepare: Card D and decision lens aid.

Launch · 2 min. Show D's two projects; ask whether completing one tells us who gets access.
Model · 4 min. Record: what/how much: one shade project or seat refurbishment; how: crew method and inputs, not specified beyond weekend capacity; for whom: which users/neighbourhoods, unknown. A fully used crew can be technically efficient while resource ownership/control and distribution of benefits remain untested.
Guided reading · 5 min. Learners identify one missing fact about who owns/controls the inputs or has access to the benefits, and explain why “more projects” alone cannot answer it.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 3 route; make a three-question decision note for D with one efficiency statement and one equity question.
Audit · 4 min. Partner says “the shade project is equitable.” Learner marks it unproven and names the required access evidence.
Exit · 3 min. “What question asks who benefits?” Key: for whom to produce; this is not determined by total output.

Day 4 · Four inputs, four income categories

Target: classify land, labour, produced capital and entrepreneurial ability, and associate their model income categories without asserting payments. Prepare: Card C and factors mat.

Launch · 2 min. Ask whether a reusable printer is a natural resource simply because it contains metal.
Model · 4 min. Sort site space as land, typesetters as labour, produced printer as capital, coordinator's combination/risk role as entrepreneurial ability. Paper stock is manufactured, so it is not the land example. Pair the textbook income words rent, wages, interest and profit in that order; C reports no actual amounts.
Guided reading · 5 min. Discuss why capital here means produced productive equipment, not a household cash balance. Separate the coordinator's labour time from the distinct organising/risk role.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 4 route; classify the four C examples and write one “category does not prove payment” sentence.
Audit · 4 min. Partner claims “the printer earned interest.” Learner corrects: interest is the abstract income category associated with capital; no financing arrangement is reported.
Exit · 3 min. “Which factor is the produced printer?” Key: capital in this production classification.

Day 5 · Public fresh check A: Festival Repair Tent

Target: independently transfer scarcity, next-best cost, factors and basic questions to new File G. Prepare: blank scarcity ledger and factors mat; log access support.

Launch · 2 min. State that a fresh fictional case, not personal finances, is the whole evidence base.
Source access · 4 min. Give File G alone and read its exact units if needed without explaining the answer.
Independent plan · 5 min. Learner marks the chooser, scarce input, next-best alternative, factor examples and one unknown distribution issue.
Independent response · 7 min. Choose Day 5 route; retain the first answer before content prompts.
Self-audit · 4 min. Learner checks that the opportunity cost is the forgone 15 signs, not 15 dollars, and flags any unsupported impact claim.
Submit · 3 min. Collect response/support log. Teacher uses the separate public key to pick the next instruction.

Day 6 · Draw a frontier with assumptions attached

Target: construct and read Card A's discrete PPF; identify both axes and its fixed-input assumption. Prepare: Card A and frontier aid. Use words/raised strips if graph access is difficult.

Launch · 2 min. Ask whether a table of maximum feasible pairs is a record of what people demand.
Model · 4 min. Horizontal axis = repair workshops (0–4); vertical axis = reading circles (0–12). Plot (0,12), (1,11), (2,9), (3,6), (4,0) and join for a classroom sketch. Name ceteris paribus: other relevant inputs and the technique are held constant in this model. Say the smooth line between discrete pairs is illustrative, not observed in-between output.
Guided reading · 5 min. At 2 workshops, maximum circles = 9. Ask why (2,6) can occur but is not on the maximum frontier; discuss underused modeled capacity, not an observed cause.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 6 route; graph or order all five coordinate pairs and attach an assumption label.
Audit · 4 min. Partner labels circles on the horizontal axis or calls (3,9) feasible. Learner repairs axes and points to the maximum 6 circles at 3 workshops.
Exit · 3 min. “What does a point on this frontier mean?” Key: maximum combination given stated fixed inputs/technique, not a value judgement.

Day 7 · Move, underuse or exceed?

Target: distinguish movement along, inside and beyond a fixed PPF and quantify one trade-off. Prepare: Cards A/F and frontier aid.

Launch · 2 min. Compare F1 (2,9) with F2 (3,6). Ask if the move creates capacity.
Model · 4 min. Both are on the old frontier. Moving F1→F2 gains one workshop and forgoes three circles. It is a choice along, not an outward shift. (2,6) is inside; (3,9) exceeds the model's current maximum.
Guided reading · 5 min. Compare 0→1 workshop (one circle forgone) with 2→3 (three circles forgone). Ask why a single constant opportunity cost would misread this table.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 7 route; classify F's three proposals and annotate one computed cost with units.
Audit · 4 min. Partner calls inside point “unemployment proven.” Learner narrows to underuse in the model; a specific cause cannot be inferred.
Exit · 3 min. “From 3 workshops to 4, how many circles are forgone?” Key: 6−0=6 circles, conditional on Card A.

Day 8 · A new possibility is not a whole new economy

Target: explain a possible productivity-driven outward opportunity in one direction, while separating model evidence from an economy-wide claim. Prepare: Cards A/E and frontier aid.

Launch · 2 min. Ask if old Card A allows (4,6).
Model · 4 min. Old maximum at 4 workshops is 0 circles, so (4,6) is beyond old frontier. E's hypothetical technique offers that one new point with same stated inputs. The evidence does not define every new frontier point; training cost/reproducibility remain unknown.
Guided reading · 5 min. Contrast E's new possible point with Day 7's movement (2,9)→(3,6) and inside point (2,6). Name what is unchanged and what is claimed to change.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 8 route; draw old point (3,6), proposed new point (4,6) and a cautious annotation: possible workshop-side expansion if the trial generalises.
Audit · 4 min. Partner announces national economic growth or zero unemployment. Learner explains why a single fictional studio point cannot establish either.
Exit · 3 min. “What must be checked before claiming the new method works reliably?” Key: repeated result under comparable inputs and costs, among other evidence.

Day 9 · Efficient output is not a distribution decision

Target: compare F1/F2 by a declared criterion and distinguish efficiency from equity. Prepare: Cards D/F, decision lens and the current-source slot.

Launch · 2 min. Ask whether both F1 and F2 can be technically efficient despite different mixes.
Model · 4 min. Both are on Card A's frontier, so both are efficient in that production model. F1 has three more circles and one fewer workshop than F2. Neither is automatically fairer or better: beneficiary, accessibility and preference evidence is absent.
Guided reading · 5 min. Ask learners to state a criterion (“prioritise workshop access”) and a counter-criterion (“prioritise reading circles”), each marked as a choice rather than an established preference. Ask what is known about who owns/controls the inputs (nothing here). Show one rechecked dated Australian source capsule or a newer verified original source; ask what it reports and what Card A cannot establish. Never transfer Card A numbers to it.
Practice route · 7 min. Choose Day 9 route; compare F1/F2 with one criterion, one trade-off and one evidence request about distribution.
Audit · 4 min. Partner says “on frontier means equitable.” Learner distinguishes resource use from who benefits.
Exit · 3 min. “What remains unknown before selecting the fairer option?” Key: distribution/access priorities and relevant stakeholder evidence.

Day 10 · Public fresh check B: Creekside Mobile Library

Target: independently use a new PPF and criterion to explain opportunity cost, feasibility, technical efficiency and an equity limit in File H. Prepare: blank frontier and decision aids; support log.

Launch · 2 min. Explain the new fictional table is only a model under stated assumptions.
Source access · 4 min. Give File H alone and permit neutral reading of its coordinates.
Independent plan · 5 min. Learner marks axes, old frontier pairs, an inside point and missing distribution information.
Independent response · 7 min. Choose Day 10 route; preserve the first graph/calculation and reasoned choice before feedback.
Self-audit · 4 min. Learner checks 2→3 pop-ups forgoes three repair sets, and that no option is declared fairer without evidence.
Submit · 3 min. Collect work and log access/content support. Use public key for next learning step, not a QCAA result.