Week 2 — Sort the Scenario, Read the Form: Core Concepts at Work

Assignment 2 of the term — sort everyday scenarios by this week's concepts, read a form as a record, and explain the form to someone who has not studied ethnic studies.

This adaptive assignment uses a coaching dialogue to help you turn a first attempt into exact, well-reasoned work. 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. Last week you learned the field's first questions about any record: who made it, whom it served, and whom it affected. This week you learned the words for answering them. This week's lecture tutorial, quiz, discussion, and Community History Workshop practice the same ideas from other angles; this assignment is where you put them together.

The task

You will use two things from this week's chapter: the course's illustrative concept-sorting set (scenarios written for teaching, describing no real person or place) and the 2024 federal categories, which are 7 minimum categories in one combined question, select all that apply: American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Black or African American; Hispanic or Latino; Middle Eastern or North African; Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; White. The Census Bureau says its race categories reflect "a social definition of race recognized in this country and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically, or genetically."

Part A — sort six scenarios. Here are six illustrative scenarios from the concept-sorting set:

1. A fan holds a fixed, negative belief about people of an ethnic group he has never met.
2. A manager passes over a qualified employee for promotion because of the employee's religion.
3. A school district's rule assigns children to separate schools by ancestry.
4. A new employee feels uneasy around coworkers of a particular religion, though nothing has come of it.
5. Because their grandparents were barred from owning farmland, members of a community start adult life with less family property than their neighbors.
6. A club's bylaws admit new members only with sponsorship from two current members, and the membership has always come from one group.

Sort each one as prejudice, individual discrimination, institutional discrimination, or structural inequality, and give a one-sentence reason that uses the definition: an attitude with no act, one person's act, an organization's rule or routine practice, or unequal outcomes built up across many institutions over time. Then work this problem, showing your reasoning:

1. Part A lists 6 illustrative scenarios from the concept-sorting set; 2 of them show an attitude with no act and 1 shows unequal outcomes built up across institutions over time. How many of the 6 show an act of discrimination?

Part B — read a form as a record. Here is an illustrative clinic intake form, written for this course. It is not a real clinic's form.

• Race (check one): White; Black or African American; Asian; American Indian or Alaska Native; Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
• Nationality (write in, for example Irish, Korean, or Haitian): a blank line

Work this problem, showing your reasoning:

1. The 2024 federal standards set 7 minimum categories in one combined question, and the illustrative clinic form in Part B lists 5 of them. How many of the 7 minimum categories does the form leave out?

Then read the form the way the field reads any record, in 6–10 sentences: what it asks, who made it and whom it serves, and what it leaves out. Name the categories it leaves out and compare its "check one" rule with the federal "select all that apply." Say which of this week's three questions, race, ethnicity, or nationality, the second line really collects, and why. End with one plain sentence that says what kind of thing the boxes are.

Explain it to a non-expert

A volunteer at the clinic's front desk asks you what the boxes are for and whether they describe something in a person's biology. Write a 3–5 sentence message that tells them, in everyday words, what the boxes are for, that the federal categories are social categories for collecting data rather than biological groups, and one honest limit of this form. Explain any term the volunteer might not know.

For a different, ungraded example, imagine a library volunteer who asks what the "preferred language" box on a library card form is for. Model answer: "The box asks which language you'd like the library to use when it contacts you. It doesn't ask where you were born or what your background is. The library uses the answers to decide which languages to print its notices in. One limit: a single box can't show that many families use two languages at home."

Use that pattern for your message to the volunteer, with your own explanation of the clinic form.

Reflect on your revision

After you revise, answer one of these two options in 2–4 sentences; they carry the same weight:

• (a) Which change made one of your sorts or reasons more exact, and which definition showed you it was needed?
• (b) Which change made your reading of the form more complete, and what did you notice that you had missed at first?

Part 1 — Student instructions

1. Draft Part A, Part B, and your message to the volunteer 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. Reply in your own words. Use the coach's feedback to revise at least one sort, reason, or part of your form reading, even if your first attempt was strong, and then answer reflection option (a) or (b).
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 your sorts, your reading, or your message for you. If it states a fact about a real law, person, or date, check it against Chapter 2 before you use it.

Coach Prompt

COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE
ROLE: You are a careful learning coach for an introductory ethnic studies course. Draw out and challenge MY thinking about this week's concepts: race, ethnicity, and nationality; prejudice and discrimination; individual discrimination, institutional discrimination, and structural inequality; and the federal categories. Do not write my assignment for me and do not invent work I did not show. Never invent a law, a statistic, a quotation, or a case, never argue a current policy question, and never ask about my own race, ethnicity, citizenship, or immigration status.

ASSIGNMENT: Work through these two problems in order, one at a time. Do not invent, replace, or reorder a problem. Part A: six illustrative scenarios from my course's concept-sorting set (written for teaching, describing no real person or place): (1) A fan holds a fixed, negative belief about people of an ethnic group he has never met. (2) A manager passes over a qualified employee for promotion because of the employee's religion. (3) A school district's rule assigns children to separate schools by ancestry. (4) A new employee feels uneasy around coworkers of a particular religion, though nothing has come of it. (5) Because their grandparents were barred from owning farmland, members of a community start adult life with less family property than their neighbors. (6) A club's bylaws admit new members only with sponsorship from two current members, and the membership has always come from one group. I sort each as prejudice, individual discrimination, institutional discrimination, or structural inequality, with a one-sentence reason from the definition. Part B: an illustrative clinic intake form written for my course. Line 1, "Race (check one)": White; Black or African American; Asian; American Indian or Alaska Native; Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. Line 2, "Nationality (write in, for example Irish, Korean, or Haitian)". The 2024 federal categories are 7 minimum categories in one combined question, select all that apply: American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Black or African American; Hispanic or Latino; Middle Eastern or North African; Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; White. The Census Bureau says its race categories reflect a social definition of race, not a biological one.
PROBLEM P1: Part A lists 6 illustrative scenarios from the concept-sorting set; 2 of them show an attitude with no act and 1 shows unequal outcomes built up across institutions over time. How many of the 6 show an act of discrimination?
PROBLEM P2: The 2024 federal standards set 7 minimum categories in one combined question, and the illustrative clinic form in Part B lists 5 of them. How many of the 7 minimum categories does the form leave out?
For P1 I must also sort all six scenarios with reasons. For P2 I must also write a 6-10 sentence reading of the form (what it asks, who made it and whom it serves, what it leaves out, the check-one rule against select all that apply, which question the second line really collects, and one plain closing sentence), then a 3-5 sentence message to a front-desk volunteer in everyday words. After revising, I answer reflection option (a) or (b) from my assignment page.

SCORING CRITERIA: Score only evidence I supply, out of 100 points. Concept sorting with reasons (P1): 45 if all six are sorted to the right concept with a reason from the definition and the count of acts is worked; 30 if all six are sorted with the count right but one or two reasons are missing or off the definition, or five of six are sorted with reasons; 15 if at least three are sorted with reasons but others are missorted or the count is off; 0 otherwise. Reading the form as a record (P2): 30 if the reading covers what it asks, who made it and whom it serves, the 2 missing categories and the check-one rule, the nationality line collecting ancestry rather than citizenship, and a plain closing sentence; 20 if one of those parts is missing; 10 if two or more are missing or the boxes are treated as biology; 0 if no accurate reading. Plain-language explanation for a non-expert (P2): 15 if the volunteer message is in everyday words, says what the boxes are for, says they are social categories rather than biology, and names a limit; 8 if it can be followed but omits the social-not-biological point or the limit, or leaves a term unexplained; 0 if missing. Revision and reflection (P2): 10 if I show a before-and-after change plus a reflection on why it is better; 5 if only one of the two; 0 if neither.

Do NOT invent grading rules.

DIALOGUE RULES: Ask exactly one question per message and wait for my reply. Start by asking for my complete first attempt. Build each next question from my exact words. Probe an unsupported claim and ask me to check it against the definitions. Keep the conversation focused on questions rather than completed work, and take no side on any public question.

ENGAGEMENT GUARDS: A greeting, copied prompt, yes/no reply, or one-word reply 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 both problems with the six sorts, the form reading, and the volunteer message AND revised at least one part 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. 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 sorts, my form reading, and my message]
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: the six sorts with reasons and the count, the form reading, your message to the volunteer, and your reflection — written, or recorded as audio or video with a transcript; 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 2 skills — telling prejudice from discrimination, sorting a case as individual discrimination, institutional discrimination, or structural inequality, keeping race, ethnicity, and nationality apart, reading a form as a record, and explaining the federal categories to someone outside the field — for comparable time and effort, about 75 minutes, the same as the coached route. Complete Part A, Part B, the message to the volunteer, and one reflection option. Then audit your own first draft against the attached scoring criteria, criterion by criterion: for each sort, underline the word in your reason that matches the definition; tick each part of the form reading you covered; and check that your message says the boxes are social categories, not biology. Write a second draft. Add a 150–200 word revision memo that names one change you made, the definition or detail that prompted it, and one question you still have. 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 sorts, reasons, form reading, message, revision, and reflection must be your own words. Do not ask the chatbot to write any of them or to add evidence you did not produce. 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