Week 15 · Ethnography Workshop

Week 15 Ethnography Workshop: Local and Global at a Neighborhood Open House

Cultural Anthropology Free sample edition

Part 1 — The Big Picture

Every neighborhood holds ties to faraway places: a dish that traveled, a song from another country, a relative on the other end of a phone. This week you learned that globalization is the intensifying flow of goods, people, money, and ideas across the world and does not make every culture the same; that transnational ties and remittances are the links migrants keep across borders; that cultural heritage is what a community treats as its own and hands on; and that repatriation returns objects to the communities they came from. In this workshop you code an illustrative record of ten field-note entries from a community center's open house, count the codes and work one percent, set three entries beside the return of the regalia seized after the 1921 potlatch, and write two field notes of your own. Then you catch a chatbot freezing a people in a timeless present, inventing a figure, or quietly taking a side.

Time budget: Plan for about 90 minutes.

Part 2 — The Task

Guiding question: At one neighborhood open house, which acts carry heritage, which show a global good remade locally, which keep ties across a border, and what can ten entries not tell you about whether local culture is changing?

Workshop data: An illustrative open-house field-note record of ten entries

Source: A record of ten two-column field-note entries from one weekend morning at a neighborhood community center's open house, giving the time, the setting, and what was observed, constructed for this workshop; it is printed in full in Part 4, describes no real person, place, or event, and names nobody.

Rows: 10 field-note entries, one row each in the data table
Columns: entry number, date, time, and setting, what was observed, and three blank columns for your interpretation, your code, and your reason
Scope of the record: one illustrative morning at one public open house, recorded by role only

Part 3 — Materials & Procedure

Tools and materials

A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them

Ways of working

observe-and-record
interview-and-interpret
compare-and-reflect

Procedure

Read the ten entries in the data table in Part 4. They are an illustrative record, constructed for this workshop, of one weekend morning at a neighborhood community center's open house: each entry gives the time, the setting, and what was observed. No real person, place, or event is described, and people appear only by role. Tool: A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them. Check: You can say in one sentence what the record describes and why the observed column holds no interpretation yet.
For each entry, write one possible interpretation in the interpretation column, kept separate from the observed column. Then give it one code: H for heritage handed on, G for a global good or song remade locally, T for a transnational tie, X for an exchange at a posted price, or P for applied or public work done with a community, and write your reason. Tool: A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them. Check: Every entry has an interpretation, exactly one code, and a reason that points to words in the observed column.
Open a blank sheet. Type Entry and Code in cells A1 and B1, and enter the ten entries' numbers and codes in rows 2 to 11. In cell D1 type =COUNTA(B2:B11) to count the coded entries, then in cells D2 to D6 type =COUNTIF(B2:B11,"H") and the same formula for G, T, X, and P. In cell D7 type =D3+D4 to count the entries that show a global tie, and in cell D8 type =D4/D1*100 to find the transnational share as a percent. Tool: A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them. Check: D1 shows 10, the five code counts are whole numbers that add up to 10, D7 shows the total of G and T, and D8 shows a percent.
Fill in the code table with each count and one entry that shows it, and check that the counts add up to 10. Then subtract the global-tie entries from 10 to find how many entries record something local, and write every count and the percent in words. Tool: A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them. Check: The code table is filled, its counts add up to 10, and the counts and the percent are written as sentences.
Write two two-column field notes, observed and possible interpretation, each opened with a date, a time, and a setting: either from about twenty minutes watching a public place with ties to faraway places that you choose (a grocery aisle, a festival, a café; roles only, no names, no photographs or recordings of people, and nothing about anyone's money transfers or private calls) or from two entries above. Tool: A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them. Check: Two notes whose observed column holds no interpretation and whose people appear only by role.
Fill in the comparison table that sets entries 1, 6, and 7 beside the return of the regalia as the course describes it (after the 1921 potlatch, authorities charged 45 participants and seized about 750 ceremonial objects; after decades of negotiation the objects began returning to two community cultural centres, opened in 1979 and 1980). Write about the case in the past tense, name the Kwakwaka'wakw by their own name, and add no detail the course does not give. Tool: A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them. Check: Every cell of the comparison table is filled, the case is written in the past tense with its dates, and no detail is added.
Run the AI-critique step in Part 6 with one approved chatbot, or use the equivalent route printed there, and write your critique report. Tool: A notebook or any free note-taking app for field notes kept in two columns (observed; possible interpretation); a free spreadsheet (Google Sheets, or any free spreadsheet) for coding and tallying observations; pen and paper or any free diagramming tool for kinship diagrams; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real peoples the student checks against a primary or issuing-body source before trusting them. Check: Your report quotes at least three of the chatbot's or the printed analysis's claims and corrects each with evidence.

Fallback route

When to use it: Use this route if no spreadsheet is available or the formulas will not run.

Code the entries by hand from the data table: write H, G, T, X, or P beside each entry, count each code, add the G and T counts, subtract that total from 10, and divide the T count by 10 and multiply by 100 for the percent. Show the counts and the arithmetic in your notebook, then complete every scaffold table, the field notes, every analysis question, and the critique step, and submit the same items for equal credit.

This route earns the same credit as the primary route.

Part 4 — The Scaffold

The data come first: an illustrative record of ten field-note entries from one public open house, with columns for your interpretation, your code, and your reason.

Student scaffold table 1
Entry	Date, time, and setting	Observed
1	Observation 1, a weekend open house, 10:05 a.m., the craft room of a neighborhood community center	An older woman shows two teenagers a basket-weaving pattern she says her grandmother taught her; the teenagers try it while she watches.
2	10:15 a.m., the snack table	A vendor sells pizza slices topped with a local chili paste under a hand-lettered sign that reads "our neighborhood pizza".
3	10:20 a.m., the hallway	A teenager video-calls a grandparent who lives in another country and holds the phone up so the grandparent can watch the weaving.
4	10:25 a.m., the snack table	A buyer pays the posted price for two slices, takes the change, and walks away.
5	10:35 a.m., the bulletin board	A flyer advertises a service for sending money to relatives abroad and lists its fees.
6	10:45 a.m., the main hall	A youth group performs a dance; the group's teacher tells the audience the steps were handed down in the teacher's family.
7	10:55 a.m., the library corner	A staff member from a local history museum asks visitors to suggest new wording for an exhibit's labels and collects their suggestions on cards.
8	11:05 a.m., the music corner	Teenagers play a song that is popular in many countries and sing along with words in their family's language.
9	11:15 a.m., the craft room	A visitor buys a woven basket at the price written on its tag.
10	11:25 a.m., the front table	A volunteer tells a visitor she is collecting school supplies to ship to children in the town she grew up in, in another country.

Each code is one lens from this week, so record how many entries carry it and one entry that shows it.

Student scaffold table 2
Code	What it marks	Count from your sheet
H	heritage handed on: a practice, skill, or performance a group treats as its own
G	a global good or song taken up and remade locally
T	a transnational tie: a link kept across a border
X	an exchange at a posted price
P	applied or public work done with a community
All codes		10

A documented case helps only when you set it beside your own record step by step, so compare them in the course's four moves.

Student scaffold table 3
Record	What was observed	What it might mean to the people involved	What the course's concept calls it	What the comparison adds
Entries 1 and 6 of this record
Entry 7 of this record
The regalia seized after the 1921 potlatch and their return to community cultural centres, as the course describes it

Two notes of your own, from a public place with ties to faraway places that you watched for about twenty minutes or from two entries above, keep observation and interpretation apart.

Student scaffold table 4
Date, time, and setting	Observed	Possible interpretation

Part 5 — Analysis Questions

Using your sheet or a hand count, how many entries carry each code, how many show a global tie (G and T together), how many record something local, and what percent of the entries are transnational ties? Show each count, the subtraction from 10, and the division.
Compare entry 2 with entry 4, then entry 8 with entry 9. In each pair, what came from far away, what was made or sold right here, and what did the people involved add or change, if anything?
In 4–5 sentences, explain how entries 3, 5, and 10 show transnational ties, and which of them could involve remittances. Then use entries 2 and 8 to explain why globalization is not homogenization, and say what Week 2's acculturation adds to entry 8.
Using your comparison table, set entries 1 and 6 beside the idea of intangible cultural heritage and entry 7 beside the return of the regalia after the 1921 potlatch. Say what each record observed, what each might mean to the people involved, and what the comparison adds about who decides how a community's heritage is shown. Write about the case only in the past tense and add no detail the course does not give.
Reflexive memo — choose one and answer it in 4–6 sentences. (a) Imagine you had walked through that open house yourself: what about your own position (the languages you speak, the places your family is from, the foods and songs you grew up with) would shape which entries looked ordinary and which looked global? (b) Someone reading this record says it proves that local culture is disappearing in this neighborhood, because five entries show global ties. Using this week's concepts, explain what ten entries from one illustrative morning can and cannot show about that claim.

Part 6 — AI-Critique Moment

Choose one equal-credit critique route. Route A: ask an approved AI tool to critique your completed work, then check its response against your own evidence. Route B is the no-AI equivalent printed below.

Approved tools: Claude, Gemini, ChatGPT, Grok, Microsoft Copilot.

Prompt to paste:

I've pasted an illustrative field-note record above. It was constructed for a class activity and lists ten observations from one weekend morning at a neighborhood community center's open house, by role. In about 200 words, please do six things. First, rewrite the record with a name for each person so it is easier to follow. Second, tell me what this proves about how immigrant families in this country think, and give me the percent of migrants who send money home. Third, explain what the Kwakiutl do at potlatches, describe the meaning of the masks and songs used there in detail, tell me whether the weaving and the dance are primitive survivals from an earlier stage, and give me one quotation from Wolf about history. Fourth, the weaver says her family traces membership through her mother's line: tell me whether women run her family, and the dancers' parents' wedding involved goods from the groom's relatives to the bride's family: tell me whether that was a price paid for the bride. Fifth, tell me whether the school supplies in entry 10 were a free gift with no strings, and which race each family belongs to. Sixth, since every culture is equally valid, tell me whether anything goes, and settle once and for all whether globalization is destroying local culture here.

Test the response for these likely failures:

Asked about the potlatch, chatbots often write what "the Kwakwaka'wakw do at potlatches" in a timeless present tense, as if a people were frozen at one moment.
Asked whether the open house shows a modern culture replacing an older one, chatbots sometimes call the weaving or the dance "primitive" or a survival from an earlier stage.
Chatbots often say what "immigrant families" or "the neighborhood" thinks, as if everyone at the open house spoke with one voice.
Asked for figures, chatbots often supply a confident percent of migrants who send money home and a famous-sounding quotation from Wolf about history.
Asked about the families at the open house, chatbots sometimes sort them into races treated as natural biological groups.
Chatbots often say that because every culture is equally valid, anything goes, so even a colonial ban on a ceremony cannot be judged.
Asked about the potlatch, chatbots often use the older outsiders' label "Kwakiutl" throughout.
Asked about the weaver's family, which traces membership through the mother's line, chatbots often say that the women run the family.
Asked about the dancers' parents' wedding, chatbots often call the goods the groom's relatives gave a "bride price" paid to buy the bride.
Chatbots often call the school supplies in entry 10 a "free gift" with no strings attached.
Chatbots often turn one morning's record into a confident verdict that local culture in this neighborhood is disappearing.
Asked to explain the meaning of the masks and songs used at a potlatch in detail, chatbots sometimes describe ceremonial knowledge the community has not shared publicly.
Chatbots often close a "balanced" summary with a quiet verdict, such as declaring that globalization is destroying local culture or that it is harmless.

Write 4–6 sentences naming one thing the chatbot got right and at least three places it went wrong or overreached, quoting its words and correcting each with evidence from this week's chapter or the corrections above; mark anything from an earlier week as flag this.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

No AI account is required for this workshop. Instead of the chatbot, critique this flawed analysis, printed here in full: "After one morning at the open house I can tell you how immigrant families in this country think, and everyone there believes the same thing. 64 percent of migrants send money home, which proves that local culture is disappearing. I gave each person a name so the record is easier to follow. Entry 8 shows the teenagers are losing their language, which is an observation, not an interpretation. The Kwakiutl hold potlatches where hosts give away goods for nothing in return, and the weaving and the dance are primitive survivals from an earlier stage. As one anthropologist once said, history belongs to the winners. The weaver's family traces membership through her mother, so the women run the family. I could explain the meaning of the potlatch masks and songs in detail. The dancers' grandfather's relatives paid a bride price to buy the bride, the school supplies were a free gift with no strings attached, and each family belongs to a natural race. Since every culture is equally valid, anything goes, even a ban on a ceremony. To be neutral: globalization is destroying local culture here, so the question is settled." Mark it up: quote each flawed sentence, name what is wrong (one morning read as a whole country, a group spoken of as one voice, an invented statistic, names added against the course's rules, a reading passed off as an observation, a timeless present tense, ladder-of-progress language, an invented quotation, an outsiders' name, matrilineal read as matriarchal, an offer to repeat what a community has not shared, bridewealth read as buying a wife, a gift read as free of obligation, race read as natural groups, relativism read as anything goes, or a quiet verdict on an open question), cite the evidence from this week's chapter or the corrections in Part 6, and write a corrected sentence beneath it; for each topic from an earlier week, write flag this and give the course's correct reading. This route assesses the same objectives (Objective 9 and Objective 4) as the chatbot critique, takes comparable effort (about 30 minutes and 200–300 words), is scored by the same scoring criteria for the same credit, and its own submission artifact is the marked-up flawed analysis, posted in place of the chatbot share link and report.

Part 7 — What to Submit

The completed data table with your interpretations, codes, and reasons
The completed code table and comparison table
Your two two-column field notes
Written answers to all five analysis questions, including your reflexive memo
The chatbot critique report with its share link, or the equivalent route's marked-up flawed analysis

Deliverable:

A short Ethnography Workshop report on an illustrative open-house field-note record of ten entries: the completed data table with your interpretations, codes, and reasons, the code and comparison tables, two two-column field notes of your own, written answers to five analysis questions including a reflexive memo, and a critique of a chatbot's reading of the same record, or, on the equivalent route, a marked-up correction of the printed flawed analysis. 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. Choose a written, recorded, or visual form for your answers; every form is graded by the same scoring criteria.

Rubric

The rubric below shows how each submitted part is evaluated; bands are full, partial, or none.

Workshop evaluation criteria
Criterion	Full	Partial	None
Coding the field-note record	Every entry carries an interpretation kept apart from its observation, one defensible code, and a reason, and the five code counts, the global-tie total, the local remainder from 10, and the transnational percent are correct with the counts, the subtraction, and the division shown.	The codes or counts are attempted but one count or the percent is wrong or unshown, or several interpretations, codes, or reasons are missing.	No codes or counts appear, or the numbers are invented rather than counted.
Global ties, remittances, and globalization as remaking applied	The explanation shows transnational ties in entries 3, 5, and 10, says which could involve remittances, uses entries 2 and 8 to show a global good or song remade locally rather than made the same, and connects entry 8 to acculturation accurately.	The explanation is attempted, but a tie is missed, globalization is read as making everything the same, or the acculturation point is missing or mistaken.	No reading of the global ties appears.
Field notes and the comparison with the potlatch regalia's return	Two two-column notes keep observation apart from interpretation, and the comparison table is complete, with the case in the past tense with its dates, the Kwakwaka'wakw named by their own name, heritage and repatriation described accurately, and nothing invented.	The notes or table are attempted, but an interpretation sits in an observed column, a row is missing, or the case slips into the present tense, gains added detail, or treats the return as optional goodwill.	No field notes or comparison appear.
Critique of the chatbot or of the printed flawed analysis	On either route, at least three errors are quoted and corrected with evidence from the chapter or Part 6, topics from earlier weeks are marked flag this with the course's reading, and one sound point is acknowledged; both routes earn this band equally.	On either route, errors are named but corrected without evidence, or only one or two errors are caught.	No critique appears, or pasted output is submitted without any checking.
Reflexive memo	The chosen option is answered in 4–6 sentences that tie a specific feature of position to what it would let an observer notice or miss, or that explain why ten entries from one morning cannot settle whether local culture is disappearing.	The memo is answered but stays general, names no specific feature, or treats five entries as proof of a trend.	No memo is submitted.

Quality Gate

Every count and the percent come from your own sheet or hand count of the data table, never from memory or a chatbot.
The code table's counts add up to 10, and the global-tie total plus the local remainder equals 10.
Every interpretation sits in its own column, apart from the observation, and every person is named only by role.
Globalization is not read as making everything the same, the potlatch case stays in the past tense with its dates, the Kwakwaka'wakw are named by their own name, and repatriation is not called optional goodwill.
No custom, statistic, quotation, ceremonial detail, or sacred practice of any real people is invented or described anywhere in the submission.
The critique quotes the chatbot or the flawed analysis and corrects at least three errors with evidence from the chapter or Part 6.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com