Context Inquiry Evidence

Overview

This is lesson 3 of 20 in the unit Strategic Business Responses. Students build on prior learning about external factors by investigating evidence from local, cultural and global business contexts, then connecting reliable evidence to a specific business and its possible strategic response.

Learning intentions

• WALT select relevant evidence about external factors.
• WALT assess whether a source is reliable and useful for business decision-making.
• WALT connect evidence to a business operating in a global context.
• WALT communicate findings clearly using appropriate business language.

Success criteria

• I can distinguish relevant from irrelevant evidence.
• I can identify and cite the source of evidence.
• I can explain how evidence connects to a specific business.
• I can suggest why the evidence might require a strategic business response.

Curriculum links

• Demonstrate understanding of strategic response to external factors by a business that operates in a global context.
• Apply business knowledge to address complex problems in a given global business context.
• Connect local, cultural and global contexts when interpreting business evidence.
• Develop the refreshed New Zealand Curriculum competencies of thinking; using language, symbols and texts; and relating to others through collaborative inquiry and evidence-based discussion.

Lesson structure (45 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook and retrieval. Teacher displays the opening question and context images: “Which external factor could most quickly change the future of a New Zealand business?” and briefly revisits factors such as environmental, technological, social, legal, political and economic change. Students individually nominate one factor, then share a reason with a partner, using an example from a business they know.

2. 5–12 min · Model relevance and reliability. Teacher models a short evidence extract about climate impacts on primary production, thinking aloud while highlighting the claim, date, source, affected business and missing information on the evidence modelling slides. Use the distinction: relevant evidence helps explain the factor’s effect on this business; reliable evidence is sufficiently trustworthy, current, attributable and supported. Introduce the source checklist: author or organisation, purpose, date, evidence or data, corroboration and relevance. Students classify two model statements as relevant, irrelevant or needing more information, and justify one decision.

3. 12–15 min · Form inquiry groups. Teacher forms three groups of three and distributes the evidence inquiry organiser and one curated source set per group. Allocate or allow groups to choose a focus: climate impacts on primary production, changing consumer expectations, tourism disruption, or digital commerce. Students assign roles—facilitator, evidence checker and reporter—and read the inquiry question: “What external factor is affecting this business, and what evidence proves it?”

4. 15–29 min · Source investigation. Teacher circulates, prompting students to use the checklist rather than simply copy information: “What is the exact evidence?”, “Why is it relevant to this business?”, and “What could make the source less reliable?” Provide explicit support with the investigation instructions and sentence stems. Students examine two or three sources, record the source name and date, select two relevant pieces of evidence, explain their reliability, and connect each piece to a named New Zealand or international business. They should note whether the evidence affects functions, people, management or the wider business environment.

5. 29–39 min · Group share and challenge. Teacher gives each group two minutes to present its strongest evidence and business connection, followed by one minute for questions. Students present using the frame: “The external factor is… Evidence from… shows… This is relevant because… The business may need to respond by…”. Listening groups record one strength and one question on their worksheet, then ask whether the evidence would apply in the same way to another business. Where appropriate, groups connect their findings to kaitiakitanga or whanaungatanga, considering environmental guardianship, relationships and responsibilities alongside commercial outcomes.

6. 39–45 min · Synthesis and exit check. Teacher returns to the opening question on the plenary and exit prompt and asks students to rank the most decision-useful evidence heard. Students complete the final section of the evidence inquiry organiser: cite one source, explain why its evidence is relevant, and state one possible strategic implication. Invite two students to read responses aloud; collect worksheets to identify next-step teaching needs.

Resources

• the context inquiry slide deck
• the evidence inquiry organiser
• Curated source sets at varied reading levels
• Printed or digital source reliability checklist
• Highlighters in two colours
• Devices or printed articles
• Timer
• Board or shared display
• Audio versions of selected articles and simplified summaries

Assessment

• During modelling, check whether students can distinguish relevance from reliability and explain their classification.
• During group work, conference with each group and check that evidence is cited, source reliability is considered, and the business connection is explicit.
• Use the completed worksheet exit response to identify whether students can move from evidence to a justified strategic implication.

Differentiation

• Support learners with a completed example, colour-coded evidence lines, a graphic organiser, a reduced two-source choice and sentence starters: “This is relevant because…” and “The source is reliable because…”.
• Offer curated sources at varied reading levels, audio articles, simplified summaries alongside originals, dyslexia-friendly sans-serif formatting, increased spacing and highlighted evidence lines.
• Allow speech-to-text, audio recording of the group presentation, paired reading and additional processing time for students with dyslexia, literacy needs or other learning support requirements.
• Extend advanced learners by asking them to compare how the same external factor affects two businesses differently, evaluate which source is most useful for a strategic decision, and identify a limitation or bias in the evidence.

Extension

• Students write a brief comparison explaining why the same factor may create an opportunity for one business but a threat for another.
• Students locate a further source independently and explain whether it strengthens, challenges or complicates their group’s conclusion.