Latinx Geographies: The Crossroads of Race and Place across Los Angeles Environmental Movements

Term: Fall 2026
Location: BH (Broad Hall) Room 214 
Days & Time: Thursdays 7:00pm – 9:50pm 
Instructor: Guillermo Douglass-Jaimes, PhD

Prerequisites: None. 

Contact Information:

Office Hours: Drop in Thursdays 4:00pm – 6:00pm
Fletcher Hall 212
Virtual: by appointment via
https://calendly.com/guillermo_douglass-jaimes/15

Email Address: guillermo_douglass-jaimes@pitzer.edu

Course Description

This seminar utilizes the field of Latinx Geographies to investigate the complex spatialization of Latinidades in the United States, analyzing how identity is contested, represented, and inextricably linked to environmental vulnerability. The course builds on Race and the Environment scholarship by focusing on the multi-racial, multi-faceted nature of Latinx identity across Los Angeles—a site of both intense cultural placemaking and profound environmental injustice.

In this course, we examine the friction between top-down and bottom-up articulations of people and place. To do so we will examine state enumeration via the U.S. Census, environmental regulation and bottom-up community placemaking, environmental stewardship, and self-identification of Latinx peoples

Centering on a multi-scalar analysis of Los Angeles environmental movements, students will engage with frameworks of Critical GIS, Urban Political Ecology, Disability Justice, and Latinx Geographies. The seminar addresses fundamental questions: How do official designations of “Hispanic/Latino” compare to the spatial reality of grassroots organizing? How do we account for the diverse abilities and intersecting identities within these movements? And how does the friction between state-defined populations and community-defined places reveal both environmental injustices and possibilities for liberation?

Course Readings

All readings will be available on course class Zotero Group. Please see attached bibliography in the appendix.

By the end of this course, we will have moved beyond the “vacuum” of traditional spatial analysis to investigate the crossroads of race and place. Students will be able to:

• Analyze the Intersections of the Crossroads: Engage foundational and contemporary theoretical frameworks (Latinx Geographies, Urban Political Ecology, and Settler Colonialism) to investigate how People, Places, and Processes converge. We will move beyond singular definitions to understand how mobility and racial formation shape environmental movements.
  
• Critique the “State Gaze” through Critical GIS: Evaluate diverse sources of evidence—including Census data, toxic facility siting, and government records—identifying technical strengths and systemic weaknesses. Students will learn to recognize when data isolates variables in a “vacuum” and how to re-contextualize that data within the lived reality of power relations and structural inequalities like redlining and land dispossession.
  
• Apply the Cuerpo-Territorio & Intersectional Frameworks: Examine the heterogeneity of Latinx identities, emphasizing how race, citizenship, gender, and Disability Justice intersect with the production of space. Students will synthesize these perspectives to build arguments that support the “particularities” of the body as a primary site of geographic and environmental struggle.
  
• Execute Community-Engaged Methodologies: Develop competencies in the use of primary sources—including testimonios, asset mapping, and counter-cartography. You will transform academic research into a “Project” of liberation, demonstrating Accuracy and Curiosity while supporting collective action and environmental stewardship.
  
• Practice the Ethic of ACCUTE Scholarship: Demonstrate Generosity and Improvement through a scaffolded, iterative writing process. By moving from a “shitty draft” to a polished Action Proposal, you will learn to produce scholarship that serves as a tool for community advocacy and real-world relevance.

Mapping Your Progress

We do not wait until the end of the semester to see if these goals are met. We will check in on these objectives during our Collective Knowledge Checks, where we collaboratively assess our Understanding of the field’s foundations and our Effort in applying them to the Los Angeles landscape.

Course Structure, Assignments, & Evaluation

The curriculum is built on five interconnected elements designed to move us beyond the “vacuum” of traditional academia. Each element is evaluated through the ACCUTE rubric, prioritizing Effort, Curiosity, and Improvement.

The ACCUTE Rubric Applied

Your work is evaluated qualitatively. When reviewing your progress, I ask:

• A – Accuracy: Does the work respect the facts, data, and genealogies of the site/people?
  
• C – Completeness: Does the work account for People, Places, and Processes?
  
• C – Curiosity: Does the work take risks? Does it ask about the “underneath” layers of the map?
  
• U – Understanding: Does the student articulate why these spatial injustices occur?
  
• T – Timeliness: Is the labor respectful of the scaffolded schedule and peer deadlines?
  
• E – Effort: Is the “Shitty Draft” significantly different from the final product?
  

Note on Generosity: Generosity is a graded metric. This means providing “nourishing” feedback during Peer Review Circles (Week 13) and Discussion Rounds.

Grade Distribution

Assignments & Requirements

1. Pre- & Post-Class Reflections: The Testimonio Practice

To foster Diaspora Literacy, we treat your thoughts as evolving testimonios.

• Pre-Class Reflexive Writing (10%): Due 12:00 pm the day before class. A 250–500 word response identifying the People, Places, and Processes at play in the readings.
  
• Post-Class Write-up (10%): Due 11:00 pm following each class. A 250–500 word synthesis incorporating peer perspectives from the “Data Dialogue.”

2. Horizontal Learning: Student-Led Discussion Model

Engagement is the “oxygen” of this course. Over 8 weeks, we will use a rotating role model (Facilitator, Discussant, Notetaker, Observer) to ensure the classroom is a site of Generosity.

• Note: 10% of this grade is dedicated to the weeks you are “off-role,” assessing your baseline presence and curiosity.

3. Critical Reflections & Collective Knowledge Checks

Replacing traditional, top-down testing, these are two-part collaborative practices that assess Understanding and Accuracy.

• Part A (Co-Construction): We work as a class to construct a “Question Bank” reflecting the course pillars.
  
• Part B (Application): You apply a core framework (e.g., Cuerpo-Territorio) to a contemporary LA issue via diagramming or annotation.

4. Scaffolded Final Project: Mapping the Crossroads

The cornerstone of the course is a Project of Praxis that links theory to community practice. You will identify a site or issue of contestation and move through 7 mandatory steps:

5. Final Synthesis of Reflexive Writing (Due May 6)

A compilation of all your pre/post reflections into a single “Genealogy of Learning” document, topped with a 3-page “meta-reflection.” You will answer: How did “Cuerpo-Territorio” or “Counter-Mapping” change the way you see the crossroads of Los Angeles?

Technical Support

• Zotero Reference Manager: We will use a Shared Zotero Library to build a collective resource for the class.
  
• Mapping Methods: Assignments will utilize the Zaragocin & Caretta Cuerpo-Territorio techniques to ensure embodiment is at the center of our spatial analysis

Writing and Presentation Guidelines

In this course, your writing is a form of counter-mapping. To ensure your voice is heard and your “Action Proposals” are effective, we follow the ACCUTE standard for professional and academic communication.

The Standard of Clarity

To achieve Accuracy and Understanding, all assignments should:

• Be Organized Logically: Your argument should move through the People, Places, and Processes in a way that allows the reader to follow your “genealogy” of thought.
  
• Prioritize Communicative Clarity: Sentences should be complete and concise. We value the “testimonio” style—writing that is grounded, urgent, and accessible.
  
• Practice Intentionality: We respect diverse linguistic backgrounds and the use of Spanglish or community-specific terminology, to do so, ensure your spelling and punctuation are used intentionally to aid the reader’s understanding.

The “Improvement” Protocol

The ACCUTE rubric values the Process. Therefore:

• Drafting: In the “Shitty First Draft” stage (Week 10), we ignore “rules” to focus on the raw Effort of getting ideas down.
  
• Polishing: For the Final Project (Week 16), we focus on Completeness. A polished final product demonstrates respect for your audience (Generosity) and the community you are studying.

Presentation Ethics

When presenting your work in Week 15:

• Accessibility: Ensure your visuals (maps/slides) are accessible. This includes using high-contrast colors and providing verbal descriptions of images (practicing Disability Justice).
  
• Voice: Speak from your own Cuerpo-Territorio. Use the “I” voice when sharing testimonios and the “Evidence” voice when discussing environmental toxics.

Cuerpo-Territorio: The Intersectional Body as Place

Establishing the philosophical and structural framework for Spatial Justice through the lens of embodiment. We use the decolonial feminist method of cuerpo-territorio to argue that the body is the first scale of geographic struggle.

Core Texts

• Zaragocin, S., & Caretta, M. A. (2021). “Cuerpo-Territorio: A Decolonial Feminist Geographical Method for the Study of Embodiment.”
  • Note: We will dismantle the “vacuum” of traditional mapping by centering the body as territory.
• Crenshaw, K. (1991). “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color.”
  • *Note: We will revisit this for practical application in Week 4.*
• Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference (Selections).
  

• Soja, E. (2010). Seeking Spatial Justice (pp. 67–110).

Synthesis: Together, these readings show how the “Cuerpo” (the body) carries “Genealogies” of Blackness and Indigeneity that defy simple Census categories.

Week 3: Perspectives from the State: Census, Citizenship, and Mobility

Analyzing how the state “sees” people through data, infrastructure, and checkpoints. We examine the Processes of categorization—from colonial casta paintings to modern Census data—and how these perspectives restrict or enable the mobility of People.

Core Readings: Genealogies of the Gaze

• Leibsohn, D., & Mundy, B. E. (2023). “Settler Colonialism, Families, and Racialized Thinking: Casta Painting in Latin America.”
• Carpio, G. (2019). Collisions at the Crossroads: How Place and Mobility Make Race.
• Kymlicka, W., & Norman, W. (2000). “Citizenship in culturally diverse societies: Issues, contexts, concepts.”
  

Latinx Particularities: Resisting the Monolith

• Irizarry, Y., et al. (2022). “Race-shifting in the United States: Latinxs, Skin Tone, and Ethnoracial Alignments.”
  
• Carvajal, D. N., et al. (2024). “We Are Not All the Same: Implications of Heterogeneity Among Latiné/e/x/o/a…”
  
• Borrell, L. N., & Echeverria, S. E. (2022). “The use of Latinx in public health research when referencing Hispanic or Latino populations.”
  

In-Class Activity: De-naturalizing the Census

1. The State’s Gaze: Review the current US Census racial and ethnic categories. Try to fit your “Cuerpo-Territorio” (from Week 2) into these boxes.
2. The Student Perspective: Generate your own “Self-Identification” categories that include the “Particularities” the state misses (e.g., indigenous nationhood, regionality, disability, or skin tone).
3. The Analysis: How does the state’s “Vacuum” perspective fail to account for the “Processes” of race-shifting?

Deliverables

• Project Step 1 Due: The Rough Idea. * Submit a paragraph describing your initial site or issue.
  • Critique your own idea: Is your initial “Rough Idea” viewing the issue from the State’s Gaze or a Community Perspective?

Week 4: The Writing Workshop I: Identifying Intersectional Processes

Translating theory into decolonial writing. We revisit our foundational texts to see how they “breathe” in the messy reality of the Inland Empire and LA, with a specific lens on disability justice.

• Chavez, F. (2021). The Anti-Racist Writing Workshop.
  • Selected chapters
  • Workshop Goal: Using Generosity and Improvement to workshop our initial research questions.
• Crenshaw, K. (1991). “Mapping the Margins.” (Revisit/Skim)
  • Workshop Application: Using Crenshaw’s “Mapping” metaphor to literally start mapping our own project sites.
    
• Anzaldúa, G. (2020). Light in the Dark/Luz en lo Oscuro. (Selected chapters).
  • The “Nepantla” Scale: Examining the psychic and physical borders of identity.

Indigeneity, Disability, and Spatial Constraints

• Ybarra, M. (2023). “Indigenous to where?” (Revisit/Skim)
  • Focus: Unpacking settler-colonialism as a spatial “Process” that restricts mobility.
    
• ¡PRESENTE! & Nosotros Platicas (National Coalition for Latinxs with Disabilities). (New Reading).
  • Analysis: Integrating Disability Justice into our Cuerpo-Territorio framework. How do we map “accessibility” as a form of spatial justice?

In-Class Activity: The “Revisited” Story-Map

Using the ACCUTE value of Understanding, we will bridge our Week 2 “Body Maps” with our Week 4 “Social Maps”:

1. Re-examine: Take your Body-Map from Week 2.
2. Layer: Overlay the mobility constraints discussed in the Carpio (Week 3) or disability readings (Week 4).
3. Draft: In small workshop groups, articulate how one “Process” (e.g., the policing of the IE or the lack of ADA compliance) impacts the “Cuerpo-Territorio” of your chosen community.

Deliverables

• Project Step 2 (Prep): Proposed Readings. Select 3-4 texts. Since we are skimming and revisiting this week, use this time to see how your foundational Week 2 readings might serve as the theoretical backbone for your project.

Week 5: Environmental Processes I: The Geography of Toxics

Establishing the quantitative and structural patterns of Environmental Racism. We move beyond “Environmental Justice 1.0” (which focuses only on malicious intent) to understand how the process of urban development and White Privilege creates a landscape of toxic inequality.

Core Readings: The Structural Perspective

• Pulido, L. (2000). “Rethinking Environmental Racism: White Privilege and Urban Development in Southern California.”
  
  
• Boer, J. T., et al. (1997). “Is There Environmental Racism? The Demographics of Hazardous Waste in Los Angeles County.”
• Pastor, M., et al. (2001). “Which Came First? Toxic Facilities, Minority Move-In, and Environmental Justice.”

Community Dialogue & Intersectionality

• Nosotros Platicas & ¡PRESENTE! (National Coalition for Latinxs with Disabilities).
  • We revisit these resources to ask: How does the “Geography of Toxics” create or exacerbate disabilities? We bridge Pulido’s “White Privilege” framework with Disability Justice to see who has the “mobility” to escape toxic air and who does not.

In-Class Activity: Deconstructing White Privilege as a Spatial Process

Using the ACCUTE value of Understanding:

1. Map the Shift: Compare a historical map of “White” industrial suburbs in the 1940s (like South Gate or Vernon) with their current Latinx demographics.
2. Apply Pulido’s Lens: Instead of asking “Did they target these people?”, ask “How did the process of urban development leave these People in this Place with these toxics?”
3. The “Cuerpo” Connection: Discuss how the accumulation of toxins over generations (Genealogies) manifests in the bodies (Cuerpos) of the community today.

Week 5 Deliverables

• Project Step 2 Due: Proposed Readings. * Self-Check: Does your bibliography include at least one text that addresses structural processes (like Pulido’s White Privilege) rather than just individual actions?

Week 6: Environmental Processes II: Health Outcomes and Policy

Moving from “where” the toxics are to “what” they do to the People. We examine the biological and political consequences of living in high-exposure zones, focusing on maternal health and the effectiveness of market-based state interventions.

Core Readings: Data, Policy, and the Body

• Kim, Y., Vohra-Gupta, S., Margerison, C. E., & Cubbin, C. (2020). “Neighborhood Racial/Ethnic Composition Trajectories… and Preterm Birth.”
  
• Ash, M., & Pastor, M. (2025). “What a Difference a Datum Makes: Revisiting the Impacts of Cap-and-Trade on Emissions and Environmental Justice.”
  
• Pastor, M., Morello-Frosch, R., & Sadd, J. L. (2005). “The Air Is Always Cleaner on the Other Side: Race, Space, and Ambient Air Toxics.”

Public Perception & Policy

• Vargas, E. D., et al. (2024). “How Latinos’ perceptions of environmental health threats impact policy preferences.”

In-Class Activity: The “Data Dialogue” & Critique

Using the ACCUTE value of Completeness:

1. The Quantitative View: We will review the statistical correlations between zip codes and respiratory health or birth weights.
2. The Qualitative Gap: We will critique these numbers. What do these statistics fail to capture about the “Particularities” of a community? (e.g., the fear of reporting health issues due to citizenship status, or the local knowledge of “bad air” days that sensors miss).
3. Synthesis: How can Critical GIS combine “hard data” with “testimonios” to create a more ACCUTE map of spatial injustice?

CRITICAL REFLECTIONS & COLLECTIVE KNOWLEDGE CHECK

In alignment with the Anti-Racist Writing Workshop philosophy, the “exam” is a student-led construction of field foundations.

• Phase I: The Collective Question Bank: In small groups, students will draft three potential “exam” questions. One must address People (Identity/Intersectionality), one must address Place (The Great Wall/Spatial Justice), and one must address Process (Toxics/White Privilege).
  
• Phase II: The Peer Consensus: The class will vote on the five most “Critical” questions that accurately represent the first six weeks of learning.
  
• Phase III: The Reflection: Students will choose two of the selected questions to answer in a written reflection.
  
• Grading Goal: To demonstrate Understanding of the “Anti-Vacuum” philosophy and Improvement in articulating complex spatial relations.

Week 6 Deliverables

• Submission: Completed Reflection from the Collective Knowledge Check.
  
• Self-Reflection: How did the process of choosing the questions change your perspective on what is “Accurate” or “Important” in Latinx Geographies?

Week 7: Methodologies I: Counter-Mapping & Particularities

Focus: Introduction to “mapping from below.” We examine how counter-mapping serves as a “Project” of resistance, reclaiming Places that have been erased by urban development or whitewashed in official records.

Core Readings: Mapping from Below

• Pulido, L., Barraclough, L. R., & Cheng, W. (2012). A People’s Guide to Los Angeles.
  
• Leal, J. N. (2021). “Mapping the city from below: Approaches in charting out Latinx historical and quotidian presence in metropolitan Los Angeles: 1990–2020.”
  
• Dyke, E. L., et al. (2020). “Counterstory Mapping Our City: Teachers Reckoning with Latinx Students’ Knowledges, Cultures, and Communities.”

In-Class Activity: The “People’s Guide” Workshop

Using the ACCUTE value of Curiosity:

1. Site Identification: Select a site from your “Rough Idea” (Step 1).
2. State vs. Counter-Map: Look up this site on a standard digital map (Google Maps/Zillow). What information is provided? (Usually commercial or navigational).
3. The Counter-Story: Using the Leal (2021) method, what “hidden” history or community “particularity” exists at this site?
4. Application: Sketch a preliminary “Counter-Map” entry for your site, focusing on People, Places, and Processes that are missing from the official view.

Week 7 Deliverables

• Project Step 3 Due: Additional Readings. * Submit a bibliography of 3–5 external academic sources.
  • The “Anti-Vacuum” Check: Ensure these readings help you look underneath the surface of your topic. Are they providing the “air” (context) that your project needs to breathe?
• Critical Reflection: How did the Collective Knowledge Check in Week 6 change how you approach the “Accuracy” of your external sources?

Week 8: Methodologies II: Asset Mapping & Community Care

Shifting the geographic lens from what a community “lacks” (the deficit model) to the “Projects” of care and resilience already in place (the asset model). We explore how People with disabilities and their families navigate and reclaim Places through community-engaged research.

Core Readings: Mapping Care & Resilience

• Suarez-Balcazar, Y., et al. (2022). “Community-engaged asset mapping with Latinx immigrant families of youth with disabilities.”
  

• Suarez-Balcazar, Y., et al. (2025). “A conceptual model for co-developing a culturally tailored intervention for Latina immigrant caregivers of children with disabilities.”

• Angeles, L., & Editor, S. (2021). “Los Angeles: A People’s Guide” (Website).

• Pulido, L., Barraclough, L. R., & Cheng, W. (2012). “An Introduction to A People’s Guide to Los Angeles.” * Requirement: Read the Introduction and select one additional chapter/entry based on your project interest (e.g., North San Fernando Valley, The Eastside, or South Los Angeles).

Public Memory as an Asset

• The Great Wall of Los Angeles (Judy Baca / SPARC).

In-Class Activity: Shifting the Map from Deficit to Asset

Using the ACCUTE values of Satisfaction and Completeness:

1. Identify the Deficit: Look at a standard “Park Deficit” map of Los Angeles or the Inland Empire. What does it tell you? (Usually just where parks aren’t).
2. Locate the Asset: Now, using the Suarez-Balcazar (2022) method, identify “informal” green spaces or sites of community stewardship. Where are the community gardens, the sidewalk vending hubs that provide social “air,” or the family-led networks of care?
3. The Counter-Map: Layer these informal assets onto the deficit map. How does this change the “Accuracy” of how we understand the health of the neighborhood?

Week 8 Deliverables

• Project Step 3 Due (Revised): Additional Academic & Popular Sources. * Submit a bibliography of 3–5 external academic sources plus 1–2 “popular” sources (murals, community websites, podcasts, or zines).
  • The “Anti-Vacuum” Check: How do these popular sources provide the “Particularities” that your academic sources might be missing?

Week 9: SPRING BREAK (No Class)

Week 10: Infrastructure, Climate Justice, and the “Shitty” Draft

A deep dive into the physical and social transformation of the barrio. We analyze the Processes of infrastructure (freeways) and climate change, while simultaneously practicing the Methodology of decolonial writing.

Core Readings: Climate Justice & Testimonio

• Méndez, M. (2020). Climate Change from the Streets. (Selected Chapters).
  
• Kalin, B. (Dir). (2015). East LA Interchange (Film).
  
• Cahuas, M. C. (2021). “Voicing Chicanx/Latinx feminisms and situating testimonio in geographical research.”
  

The Workshop: Decolonizing the Report

• Chavez, F. (2021). The Anti-Racist Writing Workshop. (Selections on “The Workshop” and “Assessment”).
  
• Lamott, A. (2005). “Shitty First Drafts.”
  
• Hunziker, S., & Blankenagel, M. (2021). “Writing up a Research Report.”
  

In-Class Activity: Writing Sprint & Co-Analysis

1. The Writing Sprint: A 20-minute silent “Shitty Draft” session. Focus on your Refined Research Question. Do not self-edit for “Accuracy” yet—focus on “Effort.”

2. Co-Analysis: In pairs, analyze a piece of Public Education Material (e.g., a community gardening guide or a mural description).

   • The Question: How does this piece of “popular” geography succeed in reaching People where a standard academic report might fail?
     

3. Peer Fortification: Using Chavez’s model, provide one “nourishing” piece of feedback to your partner: What is the most powerful “particularity” in their draft?

Week 10 Deliverables

• Project Step 4 Due (Revised): Refined Research Question, Methodology, & Action Proposal.
  • The Action Proposal: In addition to how you will study your site, include a one-paragraph Action Proposal. If your findings were to be used by the community (not just the instructor), what is the most useful form they could take? (e.g., an infographic, a letter to a council member, or a counter-map).

Week 11: Transnational Geographies: Bordering and Solidarity

Analyzing “Bordering” as a transnational Process. We examine how walls, surveillance, and environmental degradation are connected globally—specifically looking at the political and ecological ties between the U.S.-Mexico border and Palestine.

Core Readings: Shared Fates and Transnational Literacy

• Anzaldúa, G. (2010/2025). Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza.
  
• Masri, H. (2021). “From Palestine to Mexico, all the walls have got to go”: Rhetorical bordering as transnational settler colonial project. OR Pulido, L., & Lloyd, D. (2010). “From La Frontera to Gaza.”
  
• Pulido, L., & De Lara, J. (2018). “Reimagining ‘justice’ in environmental justice: Radical ecologies, decolonial thought, and the Black Radical Tradition.”
  
• Cahuas, M. C. (2025). “Where Do You Know From? Nurturing Diaspora Literacy.”
  

In-Class Activity: Counter-Mapping Workshop

Drawing from the ACCUTE value of Curiosity and Accuracy:

1. Visualizing the City from Below: Using a simple online mapping tool (such as Google My Maps or uMap), students will begin the “Action” phase of their final project.
2. Layering Narratives: Practice layering a “Transnational Connection” or a “Testimonio” over a site in Southern California. (e.g., Layering a narrative about a family’s migration path over a specific freeway interchange in East LA).
3. The Anti-Vacuum Layer: How does adding this “Diaspora” layer change the Perspective of the map? Does it make it more Complete?

Week 11 Deliverables

• Project Step 5 Due: Shitty First Draft.
  • The Goal: Focus on Effort and Generosity toward yourself. This draft should be at least 5-7 pages (or equivalent digital media) that attempts to weave together your People, Places, and Processes.
    
  • Self-Correction: Remember Anne Lamott’s philosophy—this draft is for you to figure out what you are actually saying. Don’t worry about “Accuracy” yet; that is for the Revision stage.

Week 12: Future Geographies: Just Transitions

Focus: Synthesizing the three pillars—People, Places, and Processes—to imagine a future beyond toxic industries and borders. We examine the concept of a “Just Transition” as a spatial project that requires Black-Brown solidarity and the building of community power.

Core Readings: Solidarity and Power-Building

• Méndez, M. (2020). Climate Change from the Streets. (Podcast or Selections).
  
• “Just transition: Framing, organizing, and power-building for decarbonization.” (2022).
  
• Pastor, M. (2023/2024). “Race, place, and fate in the City of Angels.”
  
• Pastor, M. (n.d.). “Community Power and Health Equity.”
  

In-Class Activity: Mapping the “Just Transition”

Using the ACCUTE values of Satisfaction and Curiosity:

1. Envisioning the Future: Select the site you have been working on all semester.
2. The Transformation: Based on the “Just Transition” framework, what does this Place look like in 2050? What new Processes (renewable energy, community land trusts, accessible transit) have replaced the old “Toxics”?
3. The Solidary Check: How does your future map reflect Black-Brown solidarity? Whose “fate” is being improved in this new geography?

CRITICAL REFLECTIONS & COLLECTIVE KNOWLEDGE CHECK 2

In this final collective check, we focus on the Methodology of the field.

• Phase I: The Methodology Matrix: Students will collaboratively create a “Methodology Matrix” on the board, listing every tool we’ve studied (Counter-mapping, Asset mapping, Testimonio, Critical GIS, Diaspora Literacy).
  
• Phase II: The “Anti-Vacuum” Essay: Students will write a reflection on how one specific Methodology allows us to see the “air” (the context) of a social issue that a traditional “scientific” approach misses.
  
• Grading Goal: To demonstrate Improvement in synthetic thinking and Accuracy in applying course concepts to future-oriented solutions.

Week 12 Deliverables

• Submission: Completed Reflection from Knowledge Check 2.
  
• Project Step 6 Due: Revised First Draft. * The Goal: Focus on Accuracy and Completeness. Use the feedback from your Week 10 workshop to polish your arguments. Ensure your “Action Proposal” is clearly integrated.

Week 13: Independent Project Work (The Effort Phase)

• The Goal: Deep revision and technical troubleshooting.
  
• In-Class Studio: I will be available for one-on-one Critical GIS consultations. We will look specifically at your “Action Proposals”—whether you are designing a map, a policy brief, or a visual testimonio—to ensure they are Accurate and ethically grounded.
  
• Reading (Optional/Consultation Bank): * Pulido, L. (2008). “FAQs: Frequently (Un)asked Questions about Being a Scholar Activist.”
  

Week 14: Finalizing the Project (The Satisfaction Phase)

• The Goal: Finalizing the “Action” component and preparing for your presentation.
  
• In-Class Studio: Peer-to-peer “Tech Help” and “Design Critique.” This is a time for Generosity. If you have mastered a mapping tool or a specific theoretical synthesis, you are encouraged to help a peer.
  
• The “Anti-Vacuum” Check: Does your final product still acknowledge the People, Places, and Processes in an interconnected way? Have you avoided “killing the people” by stripping away their context?
  

Guidance for Independent Work

As you work through these two weeks, use the ACCUTE framework as a self-check:

1. Completeness: Have I included the Genealogies of my site?
2. Curiosity: Did I dig into the Particularities (the specific stories or data points) that make this site unique?
3. Accuracy: Is my spatial data or historical narrative verified and cited correctly?
4. Improvement: How has my project evolved from my “Rough Idea” in Week 1 to now?
5. Satisfaction: Am I proud of the “Action” this project proposes? Does it feel useful?

Week 14 Deliverables

• Draft Final Presentation: Be ready to share a 5-minute “lightning talk” or a visual summary of your work next week.
  
• Teaching Evaluations: We will set aside 15 minutes at the end of Week 14 to complete course evaluations, reflecting on how this “Anti-Vacuum” pedagogical approach worked for you.

Week 15: Student Presentations & Collective Sharing

Focus: Visualizing our “ACCUTE” success. We treat the classroom as a “public square” where students share their Action Proposals and findings. We prioritize Generosity in how we receive each other’s work and reflect on our growth as critical geographers.

Presentation Format: The Lightning Testimonio

• The Presentation: Each student (or group) will have 5–7 minutes to present.
  • The Hook: What is the specific “Particularity” or “Cuerpo-Territorio” that anchored your project?
    
  • The Mapping: Show your Critical GIS or Counter-Map. What “Genealogy” or “Process” did you make visible?
    
  • The Action: What is your proposal for community change or intervention?
    
• The Response: Peers will provide “Nourishing Feedback” based on the ACCUTE values—identifying the Accuracy of the data and the Curiosity of the research question.
  

Course Wrap-Up & Teaching Evaluations

• Collective Reflection: As a class, we will revisit our Week 1 mapping of The Great Wall of Los Angeles. How have our definitions of “People, Places, and Processes” expanded over 15 weeks?
  
• Teaching Evaluations: We will conduct final evaluations. In the spirit of the Anti-Racist Writing Workshop, your feedback is essential for the Improvement of this course’s pedagogy for future students.

Week 16: Finals Week — Final Project Submission

Focus: Completing the “Project” of the semester. This week is dedicated to the final polish and submission of your work.

Final Deliverables

• Project Step 7 Due: The Polished Final Draft.
  • This should be the culmination of all seven scaffolded steps, integrating your Revised First Draft (Step 6) with the feedback received during the Week 15 presentations.
    
  • The Final Self-Check: The Anti-Vacuum Verification: Does my final project accurately represent the friction of the real world? Have I successfully linked a specific Person/Community to a specific Place through the analysis of a specific Social Process?

Grading Criteria for the Final Project

Your final submission will be evaluated using the expanded ACCUTE GIS rubric: