This teacher-targeted guide is publicly accessible by URL. The two learner checks are new relative to the lesson cases but not secure exams. Do not treat a key as a QCAA marking scheme, grade, IA instrument, or evidence that a particular learner saw it. Record exact source access, numerical help, response route and elapsed time. For each small response use three independent observations: source wording/positioning, model and units, bounded revision/unknown. Mark each as clear in this response, partial / content-hinted, or not yet evidenced; do not sum across subjects or infer a unit result. A route difference is not an attainment difference.
Daily model results
| Day | Worked model and language boundary | If the response stalls, teach next |
|---|---|---|
| 11 | S $20÷25=$0.80/card, L $35÷50=$0.70/card. At 20 cards: S $20, L $35; at 40: two S $40, one L $35. “For a 40-card wall, L has the lower stated set outlay by $5; for a 20-card trial, S has the lower stated outlay by $15, before unknown delivery.” Any is unsupported. |
Lay out whole-set rectangles if a learner buys 0.8 of a pack. Ask which audience the editor addresses. |
| 12 | $58,240 gross/year ÷ 52 weeks/year = $1,120 gross/week under the model. “Gross equivalent is $1,120 per week if divided evenly over 52 weeks; take-home pay is not supplied.” The recruitment line's in your pocket overstates what is known. |
Contrast gross and net labels, not a tax calculation. Revisit who benefits from the inviting phrase without alleging intent as fact. |
| 13 | A at 40: $12+$0.40×40=$28; B $0.65×40=$26. A at 60: $12+$0.40×60=$36; B $0.65×60=$39. B is $2 lower at 40, A $3 lower at 60 for stated printing charges. The no-setup question is not a quantity-independent proof. |
Start with fixed + per-card × number; compare matched quantities and keep postage/quality unknown. |
| 14 | Fixed $140+$90=$230; before optional materials $380−$230=$150 uncommitted; after $80 proposal $70. A truthful invitation welcomes ideas within the remaining $150 before the proposal and notes that the proposed materials would leave $70. Whole is false. |
Colour or name categories independently of colour; ask whether a proposal is already spent or optional. |
| 15 | Simple interest $1,200×0.03/year×2 years=$72; model balance $1,272. The rate is annual, not monthly; equipment price/fees are missing. Do not infer any upgrade is affordable or compound growth. |
Put two $36 annual interest cards beside the unchanged principal; align rate per year with years. |
| 16 | A discount $120×0.15=$18, A total $102; B $99+$8=$107. A is $5 lower on listed terms only. Delivery and print quality may change a real choice; clearly cheapest is too broad. |
Put discount and mandatory charge on separate lines. Ask what the $99 headline omitted. |
| 17 | H $24/hour×4 hours=$96 gross; P $11/accepted sleeve×8=$88 gross. H is $8 higher in this single invented shift. The accepted count and actual employment entitlements are unknown outside it. Do not endorse a pay model. |
Match units; distinguish made from accepted sleeves; avoid net-pay inference. |
| 18 | Fully taxable A GST $75×0.10=$7.50, A total $82.50; B already $86 inclusive, so A is $3.50 lower on supplied totals. “Assuming this fictional part is fully taxable and before unknown delivery, A's listed total is $82.50.” Product tax treatment is assumed, not researched. |
Draw separate exclusive/GST/inclusive boxes; do not add another 10% to B. |
| 19 | Week $210−$120−$55=$35. Under the same stated amounts for four weeks, remaining balances sum to $140. No fifth week or stable future prices are evidenced; forever is unsupported. |
Make four labelled week rows and point to the conditional unchanged-amount assumption. |
| 20 | Markup $40×0.25=$10; marked $50; discount $50×0.10=$5; final $45. Percent bases are $40 and $50, so they do not cancel. “Under the no-other-charge model the final price is $45, $5 above making cost.” |
Put the base below each percentage before computing. Ask what the verb cancel invites readers to overlook. |
Check A worked response · origami display sheets
The fictional Fold Gallery coordinator addresses workshop visitors; always and every extend one claim to different needs. S: $15.60÷12=$1.30/sheet; L: $27.60÷24=$1.15/sheet. For 10 sheets, one S costs $15.60 and one L $27.60, so S is $12.00 lower stated outlay. For 22 sheets, two S cost $31.20 and one L $27.60, so L is $3.60 lower stated outlay. The lower L unit price does not make it the lower outlay for 10. A bounded revision: “For 22 sheets, one 24-sheet pack costs $27.60, $3.60 less than two 12-sheet packs on stated set prices; for 10 sheets, one 12-sheet pack costs $15.60, $12 less than a 24-sheet pack. Delivery and paper quality are not supplied.”
Next move: If only the unit rate appears, ask for whole-pack cash outlay at 10. If the wording still says everyone, place the two customers beside it. If the source is read aloud, record access and assess the text analysis without inferring independent reading.
Check B worked response · ceramic-pattern paper cards
The fictional Paper Kiln editor addresses adult makers; cheapest total, everyone and no need to read press for immediate acceptance. A known total is $90 + $7 = $97. B's discount is 8% of $100 = $8, so B's known total is $92. B is $5 lower on the stated charges. One bounded revision: “For these identical-count paper-card offers, B has the lower stated total at $92 versus A's $97, before unknown delivery or print quality. We still need those terms to decide an actual order.” There is no claim about real ceramic work or every buyer.
Next move: If a learner takes 8% off $90, ask which offer supplies the discount and have them annotate the base. If they say A is cheaper because the sticker reads $90, highlight the mandatory $7. If they infer equal delivery or quality from silence, return both to UNKNOWN.
Original resource rights: © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, SubjectNest, CC BY 4.0. Credit author, source, licence and changes.