The Case for Classroom Simulations
Time is the most important commodity of any teacher. We are constantly weighing the costs versus benefits of all our classroom activities to make sure we do justice to the curriculum and meet the needs of the students sitting in front of us.
Simulations can take up a lot of time. Ive met teachers who argued that most are not worth it, that they risk oversimplifying history, overemphasize performance, or create non-historical outcomes. Of course, there are also certain topics in history for which simulations are not appropriate. These criticisms are not unfounded. However, rather than successfully argue for removing simulations from the classroom, I believe they make the case that teachers should be more careful about how they use simulations, and what constraints they establish to make sure student learning and outcomes add value.
In general, I think that simulations help with the big picture of history and allow students to engage with the forces, choices, and constraints of the time. Simulations are active, and push students to see the dilemmas real leaders faced, which in turn reinforces the reality that historical decisions are inherently as flawed as the humans making them. The National Center for History in Schools has an entire standard focused on this.
Similarly, simulations allow for emotional engagement that is difficult in any other classroom situation. They force students to focus on real-world skills like argumentation, compromise, perspective-taking, and synthesis illustrating the way historical thinking is applicable outside of the classroom.
Many simulations will inevitably end up different to the actual historical event they are modeling due to the relative strengths and weaknesses of students as well as the logistical constraints of the classroom. However, the “wrong” ending is not failure, its insight. These alternatives open the door to great discussions like: Why history did not unfold the same way? What factors kept real leaders from choosing these paths? History is not inevitable, and engaging in these opportunities highlights the contingencies of history.
Peace of Westphalia Simulation
I hope that makes the case for the inclusion of simulations in the classroom. In AP Comparative Government I have used simulations for Prime Minister’s Question Time, NAFTA re-negotiations, mock trials, and press conferences. And what AP World teacher has not experimented with the Trial of Genghis Khan? Recently, I wanted to do a simulation in AP European History and saw the Treaty of Westphalia as a perfect opportunity to create something.
I created eight roles and loose structure with which to run the simulation. I wanted it to be rules-light given the fact that the historical negotiations were a first for their time and participants had to make up their own protocols and processes. Students went into the simulation already learning a substantial amount on the causes and course of the 30 Years War. I wanted to simulation to be a capstone on Topic 2.4: The Wars of Religion.
Students received a prep sheet on their role and were encouraged to do additional research into their state’s perspective. The simulation had three rounds:
- Opening Speeches
- Negotiations and Drafting Proposals
- General Assembly & Debate
Students began with opening speeches of under 60 seconds. The negotiation stage encouraged both private discussions and larger group meetings to address the needs of their states. I structured the General Assembly as a Harkness discussion, with each proposal debated and then voted on. We wrapped up with a brief reflection on both the simulation process and its historical connections.
When I run this again, I will add a bit more time and structure into the negotiation round. There ended up being less debate in the general assembly because my students had done a better job than I expected at merging their proposals. This was probably due to their MUN experience. I would also find a way to include more explicit justification for their proposals, either through a redesign of the proposal form, or through a more structured debate protocol. I suspect this added layer would also strengthen the reflection.
This simulation isn’t perfect, but it was a lot of fun; I’m looking forward to fine-tuning it in future years. Feel free to take it, remix it, or design something new. If you make adjustments, I’d love to hear what worked for you. And if you’ve made it this far, I hope you’re inspired to try creating your own simulations.