Desk run-through… | Year 11 Economics · T1 W1–2 · Qa Run Through

29 September 2026; internal simulation, not a classroom pilot. This pack was read against the live QCAA 2025 v1.4 syllabus, its link/print/hash checks and an invented student response. A teacher should still trial it in their own timetable and review accommodations with learners. No measured learning impact, translation validation or specialist accessibility review is claimed.

Teacher's first fortnight

Prepare one card and the matching A4 aid per day; keep the learner task available independently. Ten sessions × 25 minutes = 250 minutes = 4 hours 10 minutes. The whole unit's QCAA 55 hours includes assessment; no Topic 1 hour count was invented.
For Day 2, try the exact desk question: “The final two hours go to digital help. What next-best output is forgone?” Expected: 24 books catalogued. If someone says “$24”, ask where dollars appear in Card B. They do not.
For Day 6, read Card A aloud and trace ordered pairs (0,12), (1,11), (2,9), (3,6), (4,0). At two workshops, maximum is nine circles. The inside point (2,6) has three fewer circles at the same workshop number. Avoid saying the cause is necessarily unemployment; the model does not report staff employment.
For Day 7, check F1 (2,9)→F2 (3,6): gain one workshop, forgo three circles. At 3→4 workshops, forgo six circles. This catches a mistaken constant-cost claim.
For Day 8, compare old (3,6) and E's trial (4,6). E supplies one proposed outside-old point, not a full new curve or real GDP statistic. Ask whether training cost and repeatability were established; they were not.
On Days 5/10, distribute the new public file alone. The separate key supports feedback, but learners could reach it online. Keep content-prompt notes; do not call these secure tests or assign a unit result.
Before Day 9, recheck one of the two dated official Australian source capsules or enter a newer original publication. The ABS 24 September 2026 release's trend unemployment rate was 4.6% for August; the Productivity Commission's 3 September 2026 update reported June-quarter output and hours each +0.4% and flat measured labour productivity. Their numbers do not describe Card A's fictional studio. These brief capsules do not fulfil sustained current-context or real-system-comparison work. If no source can be verified for the class date, record the gap and continue with model practice only.

Simulated learner paths

Learner A, strong prose, premature inference: “F2 is best because three workshops is more than two, and it is more equitable.” Feedback: F2 adds a workshop while losing three circles; both F1/F2 are on the modeled frontier. The case lacks access and preference evidence. Ask learner to choose a criterion and phrase the judgement conditionally. This checks analysis, not agreement with a preferred mix.

Learner B, limited handwriting, solid oral reasoning: Direct a partner to place full-word strips for G. “Six hours exist; final two hours for demo cost fifteen signs; the tool kit is produced capital. We do not know who needs the signs.” This meets the concept target if independently reasoned. Give enough time for AAC/recording. Reading ability considered separately: a read-aloud of G supports access but is not independent reading evidence; log it without discounting demonstrated economics.

Learner C, graph access barrier: Order the five full-word coordinate strips and identify at two workshops, nine circles is frontier and six circles is inside. The adult places strips under direction, not by supplying positions. The equivalent explanation should be accepted for the model-reading target. A large-print/braille adaptation of the full text can be prepared locally; no specialist tactile pilot is claimed.

Learner D, correct arithmetic but overclaim: For H, 7−4=3 repair sets, but “Y is definitely fairer” is unsupported. Ask which groups use pop-ups or repairs and whether the file provides that information. It does not. Avoid soliciting classmates' disability or household circumstances to repair the evidence gap.

Supporter or parent view

The learner can explain a fictional trade-off using a library, studio or community service example without bringing home a worksheet about family spending. The daily tasks have a beginning, a seven-minute first response and a next step. A supporter may read instructions, prepare full-word strips or let the learner record an answer, but should not supply the economic inference. The public keys are learning feedback, not secret exam answers.

Potential funder view and honest limit

There are 10 timed scripts, 10 learner tasks, 30 switchable same-target routes, 10 optional teacher-read prompts, 20 worked optional domain swaps, six practice cards, two fresh public formative cases, four original A4 SVG/PDF aids and full-text/tactile routes. The pack has source mapping, rights notes and deterministic checks. It does not demonstrate a full year, complete Topic 1, complete real-system comparison, classroom effectiveness, equitable impact, verified translations, listening-tested recorded audio or specialist access outcomes. Claims about uptake or outcomes require future field evidence.

Quality findings and next iteration

Fresh-case separation: G and H appear only in the checks and key, never as solved practice cards. Key is public, so classroom security remains local.
Mathematics: Card A's progression yields costs 1, 2, 3, then 6 reading circles per extra workshop. H's X→Y cost is 7−4=3 repair sets. The extra examples' arithmetic is checked within the source text.
Concept risk: “Inside frontier” does not itself identify unemployment or inefficiency in a measured economy; the teacher script now says modeled underuse and requests causes separately.
Factor correction: Manufactured paper stock is an intermediate input, not land. Card C and the factors aid now use the occupied site space as the land example.
Source risk: A fixed fictional frontier is useful for practicing the QCAA terms, but not a real economy. Two dated ABS/Commission capsules supply a short verified encounter. Rechecking later releases, studying more current contexts and comparing real systems remain a school handoff.
Access risk: PDFs are one-page A4 print derivatives, not tagged files; full-text and tactile descriptions are supplied. Real learner access testing remains open.