Economics Capstone: A Feasible Plan with Evidence & Risk — Practice · Grade 12 Social Studies

Payments may be due before savings accumulate, and income or costs may vary. Annual totals identify a resource gap under assumptions, while timing and certainty require additional records. Label missing terms instead of assuming costless bridging funds.

The obligation occurs over its own dates and conditions. Income, spending, and education timing may differ then. A plan’s prior annual saving margin does not prove each later installment can be met.

Under the specified twelve-month assumptions, modeled saving falls from $1,800 to $600 and both gaps increase by $1,200. It exposes vulnerability in the plan; it does not prove the shock will occur or identify a universally best response.

It states accurate calculations, goals, assumptions, a serious alternative, timing constraints, risk, and the evidence that could change the judgment. It can reach a decision while acknowledging limits, rather than promising a certain outcome or refusing to compare options.

Net prices are $3,000 and $2,500; each plan generates $1,800 modeled annual saving; gaps are $1,200 for A and $700 for B. B’s smaller gap is one advantage under the assumptions, not proof of identical outcomes or universal superiority. Tuition dates, income certainty, excluded costs, and financing terms remain essential. Annual saving cannot automatically pay an earlier obligation.

Subtract grants.

Multiply each $150 monthly margin by twelve.

Compare gaps and missing payment dates.

Response criteria

• Explain the relevant institution or economic concept accurately; show correct calculations where needed.
• Connect supplied evidence and stated assumptions to an explained conclusion.
• Compare feasible options and their effects on different people without stereotypes.
• Identify a limitation, tradeoff, uncertainty, or condition that qualifies the conclusion.

Yes. Use accurate evidence, comparable units, explicit priorities, a serious alternative, and a limitation. A different supported judgment is acceptable; invented terms, arithmetic errors, or guaranteed forecasts are not.

Response criteria

• Explain the relevant institution or economic concept accurately; show correct calculations where needed.
• Connect supplied evidence and stated assumptions to an explained conclusion.
• Compare feasible options and their effects on different people without stereotypes.
• Identify a limitation, tradeoff, uncertainty, or condition that qualifies the conclusion.

Each margin becomes $50 monthly and $600 annually. A’s $3,000 net price leaves $2,400; B’s $2,500 leaves $1,900. Each gap rises $1,200. The scenario is conditional and leaves timing and financing unanswered.

Response criteria

• Explain the relevant institution or economic concept accurately; show correct calculations where needed.
• Connect supplied evidence and stated assumptions to an explained conclusion.
• Compare feasible options and their effects on different people without stereotypes.
• Identify a limitation, tradeoff, uncertainty, or condition that qualifies the conclusion.

L1 total repayment is $1,320 and charge $120; L2 is $1,440 and charge $240. The smaller L2 installment has higher total cost. Affordability, repayment-period resources, and timing remain different criteria; these are not formal APR calculations.

Response criteria

• Explain the relevant institution or economic concept accurately; show correct calculations where needed.
• Connect supplied evidence and stated assumptions to an explained conclusion.
• Compare feasible options and their effects on different people without stereotypes.
• Identify a limitation, tradeoff, uncertainty, or condition that qualifies the conclusion.