Authority: Geography General senior syllabus 2025 v1.3, January 2026. QCAA's Geography syllabus page lists v1.3 for students completing 2026 or beyond. Both checked 29 September 2026. Printed page numbers below are the syllabus's own page numbers, not the PDF viewer's page index. SubjectNest has no QCAA endorsement and claims no invented national Year 11 code.
| Official location | Where the starter makes a small contribution | Clear remaining work |
|---|---|---|
| Course structure, printed p.4 | Ten sessions total 250 minutes / 4 hours 10 minutes. | Unit 1 is notionally 55 hours, including assessment. The syllabus gives no Topic 1 hour allocation. Both Unit 1 topics matter equally. |
| Geographic inquiry, printed pp.7–8 | Ask where/why, represent source-card cells, infer carefully, propose an action with a stated uncertainty. | Invented cards are an introduction, not evidence about a real place; authentic research, GIS and source appraisal are still needed. |
| Unit 1 Responding to risk and vulnerability in hazard zones, printed p.14, objectives 1–6 | Days 1–10 practise process explanation, spatial patterns, data interpretation, bounded generalisation, action and geographic communication. | This sequence does not complete all objectives or the two case studies. |
| Topic 1 Natural hazard zones, printed p.15, opening text and first two bullets | Days 1–4 distinguish geological, geomorphic and atmospheric process examples; draw/read a keyed fictional grid and analyse its pattern. | No actual hazard-zone delineation, real map projection or authoritative local hazard layer. Use current spatial data in the school course. |
| Topic 1, printed pp.15–16, severity factors and risk/vulnerability | Days 4–9 separate hazard, exposure, vulnerability and capacity; compare onset/duration and choose a conditional response. | Full magnitude/frequency/seasonality analysis, climate-change evidence and validated risk estimation remain. No invented score is called a real probability. |
| Topic 1, printed p.16, two-location natural-hazard case study | Day 9 rehearses how to compare two invented profiles without attaching country labels or pretending development status from a single statistic. | Official requirement: one natural hazard that has affected two actual places, one in a less developed country and one in a more developed country. School must research and select both, transform data with spatial technology, investigate density, settlement, topography, development, preparedness, emergency response and technology, then propose defensible action. This pack does not satisfy it. |
| Unit 1 Topic 2 Ecological hazard zones, printed pp.16–17 | Not taught. | A separate ecological-hazard case study and equal-topic coverage remain. |
| Fieldwork section, printed p.8 | No fieldwork claimed. | Mandatory minimum five hours in the field in Unit 3 Topic 2; Unit 2 Topic 1 field study is recommended. This fortnight does not replace either. |
| Assessment overview, printed p.5 | Two openly available checks give feedback on the taught opening skills. | Schools devise 2–4 assessments across Units 1–2, at least one per unit and each unit objective assessed at least once. These checks are not school instruments and cannot determine a QCAA unit result. |
Concept sourcing: Geoscience Australia on flood supports the basic heavy-rainfall/catchment/topography explanation; Geoscience Australia on earthquakes supports rupture on faults and more frequent/larger events near plate boundaries; Bureau of Meteorology's flood knowledge distinguishes flash and riverine timing; UNDRR terminology separates hazardous event and disaster impacts. Source ideas are paraphrased; no official map, image, warning or dataset is reproduced. Classroom numbers are inventions, not borrowed observations.