Target: analyse the limits of a historic institutional source on Aboriginal customary law and make a defensible next-source choice. Prepare: Card G; source ladder and fairness lens.
- Launch · 2 min. Ask whether a 1986 government report can speak for every First Nations community today. Key: no.
- Model · 4 min. Paraphrase Card G accurately: many distinct, living Aboriginal customary laws; uneven legal recognition; community authority in consultation. Name what the report is (historic ALRC analysis) and what it is not (a living local voice). Do not invent a cultural practice or ask students to represent a community.
- Guided reading · 5 min. Split a claim into “the report stated”, “current legal recognition to verify” and “community perspective absent”. Identify possible consequences of treating the first as if it answered all three.
- Practice route · 7 min. Select Day 9 route. Write two viewpoints with who holds authority to speak, one consequence and a next source: contemporary community-approved material plus current legislation/judgment for a specific legal question.
- Audit · 4 min. Reject both “there is one Aboriginal customary law” and “Australian courts always apply it”. Preserve nuance and date.
- Exit · 3 min. “Who should decide whether a particular community's law may be taught in detail?” Key: the appropriate people/community with informed partnership and protocol, not this card.