Week 15 Community History Workshop: A Library Exhibit on Working Together

Part 1 — The Big Picture

A library exhibit is a small public record of what a community chose to remember, and every caption makes a claim. This week you learned that a cross-group coalition joins groups with different histories while each keeps its own name: Filipino farmworkers began the Delano grape strike in 1965 and Mexican American farmworkers voted to join, students of four communities struck at San Francisco State in 1968, and people from many Native nations held Alcatraz from 1969. You compared the Civil Liberties Act of 1988, the 1990 graves law, and the 1993 apology to Native Hawaiians for what each does and does not do, and you traced the 14th Amendment across groups. In this workshop you code an illustrative ten-panel exhibit, link each panel to a dated event, catch the captions that misread the record, count and compare, set the three laws side by side, catch a chatbot's slips, and reflect on what your own position lets you see.

Time budget: Plan for about 90 minutes.

Part 2 — The Task

Guiding question: Which coalitions, laws of apology and return, and uses of one amendment appear on one exhibit wall, how are they shared across the ten panels, which captions misread the record, and what can one exhibit not tell you?

Workshop data: An illustrative library exhibit of ten panels on movements, apologies, and one amendment

Source: A ten-panel library exhibit on coalitions, apologies, and the 14th Amendment, written for this workshop as an illustrative example; it is printed in full in Part 4, describes no real library, family, or person, and names nobody.

• Rows: 10 panels, one row each in the data table
• Columns: panel number, object type, what the panel shows, and three blank columns for your code, your dated link, and the caption check
• Scope: one exhibit wall at one illustrative public library

Part 3 — Materials & Procedure

Tools and materials

• A notebook or any free note-taking app for reading a record and for oral-history notes (identified by role and decade, never by name); a free spreadsheet for the lending table's rates and gaps and for any year-stamped figure; any free timeline tool, or a hand-drawn timeline, for the law-and-case timeline; and one approved chatbot used as a sparring partner whose claims about real people, laws, and dates the student checks against an issuing-body or primary source before trusting them
• a free spreadsheet
• any free timeline tool, or a hand-drawn timeline
• a notebook or any free note-taking app
• one approved chatbot

Ways of working

• read-the-record
• oral-history
• compare-and-connect

Procedure

1. Read the ten panels in the data table in Part 4. They are an illustrative library exhibit, built for this workshop; no real library, family, or person is described, and people appear only by role or by a coalition's own name. Tool: a notebook or any free note-taking app. Check: You can say in one sentence what the exhibit shows and that it is illustrative.
2. Give each panel one code: C for a cross-group coalition or movement, A for a law of apology, payment, or return, or L for one law used across groups. Write the code in the code column, and in the next column write the dated event or law the panel connects to. Tool: a notebook or any free note-taking app. Check: Every one of the ten rows carries one code and one dated link.
3. In the caption-check column, write yes when a panel's caption misreads the dated record the course gives, and no when it matches. Read each caption against the chapter's dated record. Tool: a notebook or any free note-taking app. Check: Every row has yes or no in the caption-check column.
4. Open a blank sheet. Type Panel, Code, and Caption check in cells A1 to C1, enter your ten rows in rows 2 to 11, then count each code with =COUNTIF(B2:B11,"C") and the same formula for A and L, and count the yes answers with =COUNTIF(C2:C11,"yes"). Tool: a free spreadsheet. Check: The three code counts add up to 10, the number of panels.
5. Turn each count into a percent of all panels: divide the count by 10 and multiply by 100. Then find the gap, in percentage points, between your largest and smallest percents, and write each step in the count table. Tool: a free spreadsheet. Check: The three percents add up to 100, and the gap is written in percentage points.
6. Draw the law-and-case timeline from 1868 to 1993 and mark 1868, 1898, 1954, 1965, 1968, 1969, 1988, 1990, and 1993. Place each panel beside the year it connects to. Tool: any free timeline tool, or a hand-drawn timeline. Check: Every panel sits beside its year on the timeline.
7. Complete the comparison table: set the Civil Liberties Act of 1988, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990, and the 1993 joint resolution side by side on the course's apology, redress, and return thread, using only the dated facts the course gives. Tool: a notebook or any free note-taking app. Check: Every row of the comparison table is filled for all three laws.
8. Paste your coding table into one approved chatbot, then paste the Part 6 prompt. Check every claim it makes about a real person, law, or date against the chapter's dated record before trusting it, or take the equivalent route instead. Tool: one approved chatbot. Check: You have quoted at least three chatbot claims and corrected at least three by hand.

Fallback route

When to use it: Use this route if no spreadsheet or timeline tool is available.

Code and count the panels by hand from the data table: mark one code and one caption check beside each panel, count each mark, divide each count by 10, and multiply by 100. Draw the timeline by hand on paper, complete every scaffold table, 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 ten-panel library exhibit on movements, apologies, and one amendment, with three columns for your work.

Student scaffold table 1

Panel	Object	What the panel shows	Your code (C, A, or L)	Dated event or law it connects to	Caption misreads the record (yes or no)
1	Photograph	Grape pickers walk out of a vineyard near Delano, California, in September 1965; the caption reads: Filipino farmworkers of the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee begin the strike.
2	Union notice	A notice from the same month announcing a strike vote; the caption reads: Mexican American farmworkers begin the Delano strike, and Filipino workers join them later.
3	Leaflet	A strike leaflet from San Francisco State in November 1968; the caption reads: students of four communities demand four departments within one college.
4	Photograph	People from many Native nations land on Alcatraz Island in November 1969; the caption reads: Indians of All Tribes begin a 19-month occupation.
5	Letter	A letter of apology sent under the 1988 law, shown beside a receipt for the payment; the caption reads: the government apologizes and pays each surviving person.
6	Museum notice	A notice that a museum is returning ancestors' remains and sacred items to a tribe after consulting with it; the caption reads: a return made under the 1990 law.
7	Printed resolution	A printed copy of the 1993 joint resolution; the caption reads: Congress pays Native Hawaiians for the overthrow of their kingdom.
8	Newspaper clipping	A clipping on the 1898 Supreme Court decision about a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents; the caption reads: the 14th Amendment makes him a citizen by birth.
9	Court notice	A 1954 court notice on Mexican Americans kept off juries; the caption reads: the 14th Amendment reaches beyond Black and white.
10	School photograph	A 1954 classroom photograph labelled with the decision on separate schools; the caption reads: the 14th Amendment and separate schools for Black children.

Count each code, turn each count into a percent of the ten panels, and name the years each code connects to.

Student scaffold table 2

Code	Count	Percent of all panels	Years it connects to
C — a cross-group coalition or movement
A — a law of apology, payment, or return
L — one law used across groups
All panels	10	100

Compare three laws on the course's apology, redress, and return thread, using only the dated facts the course gives.

Student scaffold table 3

Question	Civil Liberties Act of 1988	Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990	1993 joint resolution
Whom it covers
Does it apologize?
Does it pay or return anything?
One thing it leaves undone

Part 5 — Analysis Questions

1. Using your sheet or a hand count, how many panels carry each code, what percent of all panels is each, and what is the gap between your largest and smallest percents, in percentage points? Then give the share of panels you marked yes in the caption check as a percent. Show each count, each division, and the subtraction.
2. Compare panel 1 with panel 2. Which group does each caption say began the Delano grape strike, which caption matches the dated record, and how many days passed between the strike and the vote to join?
3. In 3–4 sentences, rewrite the captions of panels 2 and 7 so they match the dated record, and explain why an apology is not the same as redress, using the 1993 joint resolution as your example.
4. Using your comparison table, set the three laws side by side. In 3–4 sentences, say what they share, one difference, and what the comparison shows about apology, payment, and return across groups. Then name the two groups panels 8 and 9 show using the same amendment.
5. Positionality memo — choose one and answer it in 4–6 sentences. (a) What about your own background (the groups you belong to, the places you have lived, the stories your family tells) shaped which panels seemed familiar to you and which stood out? (b) What can an illustrative exhibit not tell you about the people and coalitions it shows, and which dated record or consenting interview would you need to check it?

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 my completed coding table above. It codes ten panels from an illustrative library exhibit on movements and apologies, built for a class activity; it describes no real library, family, or person. In about 200 words, please do six things. First, summarize what the exhibit shows about how minority groups all came together as one movement. Second, say who began the Delano grape strike and give the year of the 1993 apology to Native Hawaiians. Third, say whether the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii had good and bad sides, staying neutral, and say whether Alcatraz belonged to the Indians who once lived there. Fourth, explain whether the federal category Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander is a biological race and whether Filipino farmworkers were a nationality or an ethnicity. Fifth, give one quotation from a Delano striker and the exact number of strikers. Sixth, tell me whether reparations should be paid today.

Test the response for these likely failures:

• Chatbots often summarize the exhibit as all minority groups merging into one movement with one story, erasing the different groups each coalition joined.
• A chatbot may describe one group in the exhibit as naturally hardworking or quiet farmworkers, or praise one group as a model for the others.
• Asked for a quotation and an exact count, a chatbot will often invent a line for a Delano striker and a precise number of strikers.
• Writing about Alcatraz, a chatbot may refer to the Indians who once lived there, as if Native nations belonged only to the past.
• Asked whether the overthrow had good and bad sides, a chatbot often weighs supposed benefits against harms.
• Asked whether reparations should be paid today, a chatbot may give a verdict for one side.
• Chatbots commonly say Mexican American farmworkers began the Delano grape strike, or that the 1993 resolution paid Native Hawaiians.
• A chatbot may write "the Indians" or an older term for a group in its own voice, with no comment.
• Chatbots often call Filipino American farmworkers a nationality, as if ancestry and citizenship were the same thing.
• A chatbot may describe Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander as a biological race that science measured.
• A "balanced" chatbot summary may say the governments involved eventually made everything right with apologies.

In 3–5 sentences, quote at least three things the chatbot wrote, say what it got right, and correct at least three of its errors by hand, naming for each the dated record or course definition you checked it against.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

No AI account is required for this workshop. This route assesses the same objective (Objective 9 — apply intersectionality across gender, class, language, religion, and multiracial identity, compare movements and coalitions across groups, and synthesize the course through a community history that sets oral accounts beside the documented record) for comparable effort, about 30 of the 90 minutes, under the same scoring criteria and the same credit. Instead of the chatbot, critique this flawed analysis, printed here in full: "This exhibit shows how all the minority groups came together as one movement with one story, and the quiet, hardworking farmworkers were a model for everyone else. As one Delano striker famously said, 'We will march until every grape is ours,' and exactly 1,500 workers struck. Mexican American farmworkers began the strike, and the 1993 resolution paid Native Hawaiians for the overthrow. Alcatraz belonged to the Indians who once lived in the Bay Area. The overthrow had good and bad sides, since it brought the islands into a growing economy. Reparations must be paid today, and anyone who disagrees is wrong. The Filipino strikers were a nationality, and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander is a biological race. To stay neutral: the governments involved eventually made everything right with their apologies." Mark it up: quote each flawed sentence, name what is wrong (many groups read as one uniform experience, a stereotype stated as fact, an invented quotation and figure, Native nations described as gone, a documented injustice framed as both sides, a current proposal declared settled, a law and a group's role misstated, an outdated term used without comment, ethnicity read as nationality, a federal category read as biology, and a neutral-sounding summary that quietly takes a side), and correct at least three errors by hand, naming the dated record or course definition behind each correction. Submit the marked-up analysis in place of the chatbot report and share link; it earns the same credit.

Part 7 — What to Submit

• The completed data table with your codes, dated links, and caption checks
• The completed count table and comparison table
• Your hand-drawn or tool-made timeline with every panel placed
• Written answers to all five analysis questions, including your positionality memo
• The chatbot critique report with its share link, or the equivalent route's marked-up flawed analysis

Deliverable:

A short Community History Workshop report on an illustrative library exhibit of ten panels on movements, apologies, and one amendment: the completed data table with your codes, dated links, and caption checks, the count and comparison tables, a timeline with every panel placed, written answers to five analysis questions including a positionality memo, and a critique of a chatbot's reading of the same exhibit, 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 exhibit and counting the codes	Every panel carries a defensible code and caption check, the three counts add to ten, each percent is correct with its division shown, and the gap is given in percentage points.	The codes or counts are attempted but one count or percent is wrong or unshown, the gap is missing or given in percent, or several panels lack a code.	No codes, counts, or percents appear, or the numbers are invented rather than counted.
Placing the panels in time and reading them in the field's terms	Each panel is tied to its correct dated event or law on the timeline, panels 1 and 2 are read for who began the strike and who joined, and panels 2 and 7 are rewritten to match the record.	The timeline or readings are attempted, but a date is wrong, a reading is thin, or a rewritten caption still credits one group alone or calls the 1993 apology a payment.	No timeline or reading of the panels appears.
A documented comparison across groups	The comparison table is complete with dated facts for all three laws, and the answer names what they share, one difference, what the comparison shows, and the two groups that used the same amendment.	The table or answer is attempted but a column is empty, a fact is undated, or the comparison stops at listing.	No comparison appears.
The AI slip caught and corrected	Through the chatbot report with its share link or the equivalent route's marked-up flawed analysis, equally, at least three quoted errors are each named and corrected by hand against the dated record or a course definition.	Through either route, equally, one or two errors are corrected, or corrections lack the record or definition behind them.	Through either route, equally, no critique appears, or model output is pasted without any checking.
An honest reflection on positionality	The memo answers one of the two options in specific terms, naming what the student's own position let them see or miss, or naming the record or consenting interview that would check the exhibit.	The memo answers an option in general terms without a specific example.	No memo appears.

Quality Gate

• Every count and percent comes from your own sheet or hand count of the data table, never from memory or a chatbot.
• Each count divided by 10 and multiplied by 100 equals the percent you report for it, and the gap between two percents is reported in percentage points.
• The Delano grape strike is credited to Filipino farmworkers who began it and the farmworkers' association that voted to join, the 1993 resolution is described as an apology that pays nothing, and every date matches the chapter's dated record.
• No law, date, quotation, statistic, or detail about any real person, family, or community is invented anywhere in the submission, and any current redress or reparations proposal appears only as a debate with each side's case.
• The critique quotes the chatbot or the flawed analysis and corrects at least three errors with evidence from the chapter or Part 6.