Is this becoming a buyer’s market?
Use dated evidence to compare housing markets, distinguish percentages from percentage points, and explain uncertainty.
Materials: the housing tracker, a calculator and paper or the response boxes below. No accounts or student information needed.
Open the housing investigation →
Typed responses stay in this tab. Save a PDF to keep your work. Do not enter real household or student financial information.
Warm-up · 5 minutes
A seller lowers a house price. Give two possible explanations. Does one reduction tell you what is happening across a city?
Investigate · 25–40 minutes
Step 1
Open the housing tracker. Choose two different metro areas and select View market. Record the source, retrieval date and shared reporting month. If a market is flagged or has missing data, choose another or explain why you cannot compare it confidently.
Step 2
Make a table with each market’s price-cut share, active listings, median days on market and median asking price. Which measures allow fairer comparisons across cities of different sizes? Explain why raw listing counts alone can mislead.
Step 3
For one market, compare the latest month with the same month a year earlier in the history table. Subtract the price-cut percentages to find the change in percentage points. Calculate inventory percent change: (current ÷ previous − 1) × 100. A zero or missing previous value means this percentage comparison is unavailable.
Step 4
Write a claim about whether buyers may have more negotiating room than a year ago. Cite all three signals: price-cut share, inventory and selling time. If they disagree, report mixed evidence. Name a limitation and one additional fact you would want before making a decision.
Discuss & reflect · 10 minutes
Can more price cuts occur without falling sale prices? Explain the difference between an asking price, a completed sale price and a prediction.
Extension
Use the tracker’s mortgage link. Keep all financing assumptions fixed and compare each market’s median asking price. Explain why this illustrates a payment difference without proving affordability or loan eligibility. Use only fictional households.
Teacher guide and assessment
Expected reasoning
Answers depend on the selected markets and date. Check that learners compare the same month across cities and the same calendar month across years. A higher cut share, rising inventory and longer selling time together can support a cautious claim of more buyer negotiating room. Mixed signals call for a qualified conclusion. Metro averages do not establish the value of one house.
Fictional worked check
Price-cut share rises from 20% to 25%: +5 percentage points, a 25% relative increase. Inventory rises from 1,000 to 1,200: +20%. Median selling time rises from 40 to 50 days: +10 days. Together, these support a cautious claim of more negotiating room, not proof of a crash.
Use this fixed example to check the math; use the tracker for the real-data investigation. Live answers change with releases.
Quick assessment · 6 points
- 2 points: accurate calculations with units and labeled scenarios.
- 2 points: explains how changing one assumption changes the result.
- 2 points: supports a conclusion with evidence and names a limitation.
Support: work through one scenario together and use a simple table. Challenge: ask the learner to find a counterexample or solve a target by hand. These are flexible suggested grade bands, not a standards-alignment claim.