Open the notebook.

Advise a fictional Palestinian civic committee through documented circumstances in 1920-1936. Then enter a present-day workshop to inspect a 1939 policy and test one model rule. Your task is to explain a relationship between political rules, public work, and available choices.

1 / Begin with a usable setup

• Open index.html in a current browser, or use the case page. Choose Class mode for assigned work and enter the name your instructor expects. Practice makes writing optional.

• Allow 90-120 minutes of active work. Plan a break after encounter 9. This is a planning estimate, not a deadline or a speed score.

• All background, definitions, and source cards needed for the tasks are included. Prior reading is not required; your instructor may assign the book separately.

2 / Use one small cycle

Read the Situation. Open the Evidence. Decide on a route. Explain your reasoning and attach a source where requested. Then read the designed consequence. Most responses can be short; write enough to explain the mechanism, rather than padding a word count.

Pin the source you need before writing. On a phone the reference stays in an inline panel; on a wider screen it sits beside the response. Tap or focus underlined glossary terms for an in-place definition.

3 / Keep the two layers distinct

Blue HISTORICAL SOURCES identifies the source layer: documented records, data, or an author’s interpretation, labeled by type. The warm COMMITTEE MODEL layer shows your invented committee’s proposals and designed outcomes. A model consequence cannot independently prove a historical argument.

The full class route has 18 short explanations plus two after-outcome reflections. The minimum response total is 330 words; the counters check length, not quality.

STUDENT PACKET / SAVE, RETURN, SUBMIT

Keep a portable copy.

Pause after encounter 9

Complete the checkpoint and export your JSON progress file before stepping away. If the download is blocked, use the manual progress-text backup offered on screen. Confirm that you have kept the file or text. A download request alone does not prove it reached your device.

Return without losing your record

• Use the same browser and address when possible. Browser storage can be cleared and is not a substitute for a backup.

• To move between the online and downloaded copies, devices, browsers, or file locations, export JSON first. Open the new copy and use its progress-import control to load that JSON.

• Your JSON save contains your name and responses. Keep it as you would other coursework.

Notice a reason that changes

At encounters 12 and 18, the simulation asks you to compare your first recorded reason with what you say after seeing the outcome. A post-facto rationalization is a reason added after an outcome that is then presented as if it guided the original choice. Revising a view can be good reasoning: identify what changed and whether the basis was historical evidence or the designed result. The activity does not diagnose bias or reward stubborn consistency.

Finish and submit

Export a readable response record using the game’s print/PDF, HTML, or text options. Inspect the exported record and submit the format your instructor requests through the course system. Keep the JSON backup as well. The simulation does not submit automatically to Canvas.

A useful explanation

Name a rule or institution → explain how it shapes an actor’s options → cite a relevant source → state a limit or an observation that could change your account.

You may qualify or challenge Khalidi’s explanation. Represent it accurately, use evidence, and make the alternative clear. There is no hidden statehood victory or required political conclusion.

Companion files: Source Companion, Printable Notebook, and the offline index.html simulation. The printable notebook accompanies the browser activity; it does not reproduce every branch or replace the historical evidence.