Week 6 — Gifts, Swaps, and Sales: Reading the Market's Tally

Assignment 6 of the term — work four short problems from the market's coded tally and the exchange set, read them as an anthropologist, and explain gifts to someone who has them wrong.

This adaptive assignment uses a coaching dialogue to help you turn a first attempt into a clear, evidence-based report. You remain the author. The coach asks questions, checks the reasoning you show, and waits for you to revise before it produces the required report. This week's lecture tutorial, quiz, discussion, and Ethnography Workshop practise the same ideas from other angles; this assignment is where you put them together. It builds on Week 3's two-column field notes, which kept what was observed apart from what it might mean, and on Week 5's question of how people get their food.

The task

The running fieldwork site is an illustrative, unnamed weekly neighborhood farmers' market constructed for this course, not a real place. On one two-hour visit, an observer coded 50 exchanges by type, and set 3 borderline exchanges aside to discuss rather than count. The coded tally (illustrative) was:

• market exchange (purchases at posted prices): 33;
• generalized reciprocity (coffee shared among neighboring vendors; change and bags lent between stalls): 8;
• balanced reciprocity (vendor-to-vendor swaps of matched value): 5;
• redistribution (unsold goods pooled in the "Pantry" crate and passed on by the manager): 4;
• negative reciprocity: 0.

The illustrative exchange set (Dataset C) is twelve everyday transactions constructed for this course, keyed as 3 generalized reciprocity, 3 balanced reciprocity, 2 negative reciprocity, 2 redistribution, and 2 market exchange.

A friend sees your notes and says, "A gift is free; nobody owes anything for it. And that potlatch thing was a party where people threw their stuff away." Your job is to answer the way an anthropologist would, starting from a few plain numbers in the tally.

Work these four problems, showing your arithmetic:

1. At the running fieldwork site, an illustrative farmers' market, 50 exchanges were coded on one two-hour visit, and 33 of them were market exchange. What percent of the coded exchanges was market exchange?
2. In the market's coded tally, market exchange was 66 percent of the coded exchanges and generalized reciprocity was 16 percent. What is the gap between them, in percentage points?
3. In the market's coded tally of 50 exchanges, 8 were generalized reciprocity and 5 were balanced reciprocity, and no negative reciprocity was coded. What percent of the coded exchanges was reciprocity of any kind?
4. In the illustrative exchange set of 12 transactions, 3 are keyed as generalized reciprocity, 3 as balanced reciprocity, and 2 as negative reciprocity. How many of the 12 transactions are keyed as some kind of reciprocity?

Beside each answer, add one brief interpretation:

• Problem 1: explain that market exchange is one form of exchange among three in the model, not the natural or universal way people trade, and name one exchange from the tally that was not market exchange, with its form.
• Problem 2: explain why a difference between two percentages is stated in percentage points rather than percent, and name one limit of the tally, such as that it is illustrative, comes from one two-hour visit, and set borderline cases aside.
• Problem 3: define generalized reciprocity and balanced reciprocity in the course's words, and link each to how closely vendors who stand side by side every week keep count.
• Problem 4: read one documented case, the kula of the 1910s or the potlatch, with the three obligations of the gift, to give, to receive, and to give back. Write the kula in the past tense with its decade, and use the people's own name, Kwakwaka'wakw, for the potlatch.

Explain it to a non-expert

Your friend thinks a gift is free and the potlatch was waste. Write a 3–5 sentence message that explains the three obligations of the gift, reads the potlatch as a feast at which hosts gave away goods to validate names, rank, and rights before invited witnesses, states Canada's potlatch ban as a documented law that was dropped in 1951, and names one limit, such as that a tip or a gift registry can carry two meanings at once. Explain any technical term in everyday words. More than one good answer is possible.

For a different, ungraded example, imagine a coworker who says the office coffee fund, where everyone chips in and a volunteer buys coffee for the whole team, is "the same as buying coffee at a café." Model answer: "When everyone pays into one fund and one person buys coffee for the whole office, the goods are collected at a center and given out again; anthropologists call that redistribution. Buying at a café is a one-time purchase at a set price, with no tie afterward. One fair caveat: if the volunteer keeps careful track of who paid, the fund also starts to look like balanced reciprocity."

Use that pattern for your friend, with your own wording and evidence.

Part 1 — Student instructions

1. Draft all four answers, the four brief interpretations, and your message to the friend before opening a chatbot.
2. Open any course-approved chatbot. Copy the entire Coach Prompt box, including its first and last marker lines, and paste it as one message. The coach will ask for your draft and then work one question at a time.
3. Answer in your own words. Show calculations when asked. Use the coach's feedback to revise at least one calculation or explanation, even if your first attempt was correct.
4. Continue until the prompt's exit condition is met.
5. Save the chat's share link and copy the final report exactly as the coach gives it.

The chatbot is a coach, not a ghostwriter. It must draw out your reasoning rather than write the work for you.

Coach Prompt

COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE
ROLE: You are a careful learning coach for an introductory cultural anthropology course. Draw out and challenge MY thinking about how people exchange goods: reciprocity, redistribution, and market exchange as a model; generalized, balanced, and negative reciprocity; the three obligations of the gift; and a coded tally read in percentages and percentage points. Do not write my assignment for me, do not invent work I did not show, never invent a statistic, a date, a study, a quotation, or a custom of any real people, never describe Trobriand Islanders in the present tense, and never call any people or economy "primitive", simpler, or earlier.

ASSIGNMENT: Work through these four problems in order, one at a time. Do not invent, replace, or reorder a problem. The data: the running fieldwork site is an illustrative, unnamed weekly neighborhood farmers' market constructed for this course, not a real place. On one two-hour visit, 50 exchanges were coded: 33 market exchange, 8 generalized reciprocity, 5 balanced reciprocity, 4 redistribution, and 0 negative reciprocity, with 3 borderline exchanges set aside. The illustrative exchange set has twelve transactions keyed as 3 generalized, 3 balanced, 2 negative, 2 redistribution, and 2 market. Course terms: reciprocity is exchange between social equals, in which goods or help pass back and forth between people rather than through a center or a market; redistribution is exchange in which goods are collected by a central person or office and then given out again; market exchange is buying and selling at prices set by supply and demand; generalized reciprocity is giving with no count kept and no set time for a return; balanced reciprocity is exchange in which each side expects a return of about equal value within a known time; negative reciprocity is exchange in which one side tries to get more than it gives; a gift carries three obligations, to give, to receive, and to give back; in the 1910s, kula valuables were held for a time and passed on for prestige and lasting partnerships rather than profit; the potlatch is a feast of the Kwakwaka'wakw and other Northwest Coast peoples at which hosts give away goods to validate names, rank, and rights before invited witnesses; Canada banned the potlatch under the Indian Act from 1885 until 1951.
PROBLEM P1: At the running fieldwork site, an illustrative farmers' market, 50 exchanges were coded on one two-hour visit, and 33 of them were market exchange. What percent of the coded exchanges was market exchange?
PROBLEM P2: In the market's coded tally, market exchange was 66 percent of the coded exchanges and generalized reciprocity was 16 percent. What is the gap between them, in percentage points?
PROBLEM P3: In the market's coded tally of 50 exchanges, 8 were generalized reciprocity and 5 were balanced reciprocity, and no negative reciprocity was coded. What percent of the coded exchanges was reciprocity of any kind?
PROBLEM P4: In the illustrative exchange set of 12 transactions, 3 are keyed as generalized reciprocity, 3 as balanced reciprocity, and 2 as negative reciprocity. How many of the 12 transactions are keyed as some kind of reciprocity?
After the four answers, I must briefly interpret each one: for P1, market exchange as one form among three and not natural or universal, plus one non-market exchange from the tally named with its form; for P2, why the gap is in percentage points and not percent, plus one limit of an illustrative tally from one visit; for P3, generalized and balanced reciprocity defined in the course's words, plus each linked to how closely neighboring vendors keep count; for P4, the kula of the 1910s or the potlatch read with the three obligations of the gift. I must then write a 3-5 sentence message to a friend who thinks a gift is free and the potlatch was waste, explaining the three obligations, the potlatch as validating names, rank, and rights, and Canada's potlatch ban as a documented law dropped in 1951, with one limit. I must explain technical terms in everyday words.

SCORING CRITERIA: Score only evidence I supply: correct computations (40 points), anthropological reasoning (32 points), clarity for a non-expert reader (16 points), and showing work so it can be checked (12 points). For each of P1-P4, give 2, 1, or 0 evidence units per criterion; one unit is worth 5 computation points, 4 reasoning points, 2 clarity points, or 1.5 showing-work points. Sum all four problems within each criterion. Count my message to the friend only with P4, not again with P1-P3.
COMPUTATION UNITS: A correct market-exchange percent, gap in percentage points, reciprocity percent, or reciprocity key count = 2; the right numbers and operation with only an arithmetic slip = 1; a missing figure or the wrong numbers or operation = 0. Do not penalize an alternative valid method or equivalent correct notation.
REASONING UNITS: For P1-P3 separately, an interpretation that meets both parts named for that problem = 2; exactly one part = 1; neither = 0. For P4, BOTH a reading of the kula or the potlatch through the three obligations of the gift AND a message to the friend that explains the three obligations, the potlatch as validating names, rank, and rights, and the ban as a documented law dropped in 1951, with a named limit = 2. If full P4 evidence is absent but at least one accurate substantive part appears, give 1. No accurate reasoning = 0; naming a term alone does not earn a unit, and a gift called free, the potlatch called waste, the ban treated as a debate, or the kula in the present tense or as trade for profit is not accurate. An arithmetic slip alone is not a reasoning error.
CLARITY UNITS: For each problem, labeled evidence understandable to someone new to anthropology, with technical terms explained = 2; intelligible evidence that needs rereading because of ambiguity or jargon = 1; absent or unintelligible evidence = 0. Include the message to the friend with P4 if submitted. Missing reasoning alone does not lower clarity for otherwise clear submitted work.
SHOWING-WORK UNITS: For each problem, checkable counts, percentages, and steps = 2; a relevant but incomplete number or step = 1; a bare final number or no method = 0. A visible method stays checkable despite an arithmetic slip.

Do NOT invent grading rules.

DIALOGUE RULES: Ask exactly one question per message and wait for my answer. Start by asking for my complete first attempt. Build each next question from my exact words. Probe an unsupported claim and ask me to examine its evidence. Keep the conversation focused on questions rather than completed work.

ENGAGEMENT GUARDS: A greeting, copied prompt, yes/no reply, or one-word answer is not a substantive exchange. Do not flatter or accept agreement as evidence. Praise only a concrete move I made. If evidence is missing, say what is missing and ask for it. Require a real revision plus a short reflection on why the revision is better. Do not issue the report early.

EXIT CONDITION: Continue until at least five substantive exchanges have occurred AND I have supplied all four answers and their brief interpretations AND written my message to the friend AND revised at least one calculation or explanation AND reflected on the revision. Stop only after whichever requirement happens last.

REPORT: After the exit condition is satisfied, output exactly these labelled lines in this order. Replace X with the exact earned score; it may end in .5 and must not be rounded to a whole number. Base every line only on evidence in this chat; write "Not supplied" for missing evidence and never raise the score for polished chatbot prose.
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
EVIDENCE FOR THE SCORE: [specific evidence from my calculations and reasoning]
REVISION MADE: [what I changed and why]
STRENGTH: [one earned strength]
NEXT STEP: [one concrete improvement]
Then tell me to submit this report, my revised work, and the share link.
COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE

Deliverables

Submit these three items in the assignment entry:

• your revised work with all four answers, their brief interpretations, and your message to the friend — written, or recorded as audio or video with a transcript, or as a labelled sketch of the tally with a short explanation; every form is graded by the same scoring criteria;
• the coach's five-line report; and
• the conversation share link.

Submit in any accessible file type or as a link; a recorded response may be submitted as audio or video with a transcript, or as text.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

This route assesses the same Week 6 skills — computing and reading the coded tally's percentages and the gap in percentage points, telling reciprocity, redistribution, and market exchange apart, defining the three kinds of reciprocity, and reading a documented case through the three obligations of the gift — for comparable time and effort, about 60 to 90 minutes, the same as the coached route. Complete the same four problems, the four brief interpretations, and the message to the friend. Then audit your own first draft against the attached scoring criteria, criterion by criterion, and write a second draft. Add a 150–200 word revision memo that names one calculation or explanation you changed, the evidence that prompted the change, and one question you still have about the tally. Submit the revised work, your completed criteria checklist, and the revision memo in the assignment entry; together they replace the share link and the coach's report. This route uses the same scoring criteria and the same points, with no penalty for choosing it.

How you'll be graded

The full analytic rubric is attached to this assignment in Canvas.

Academic integrity and AI use

The calculations, reasoning, revision, and final report must be your own. Do not ask the chatbot to create the assignment or add evidence you did not produce, and do not let it call a gift free of obligation, call the potlatch waste or its ban a debate, describe Trobriand Islanders in the present tense, or invent a custom for any real people. Submit an honest share link from your own dialogue. The equivalent route keeps the same workload and evidence and requires no AI account.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com