







































 ‘Students Know What They Are Doing’: The Introduction of the Simulation to 

Classrooms in the United States 
 

Paul Binford 

Mississippi State University 

 

 

Abstract 

The scholarly consensus is that simulations were 

introduced to classrooms in the United States 

during the 1960s. However, a closer examination 

clearly establishes classroom simulation usage 

much earlier. The theories of Friedrich Frobel and 

John and Evelyn Dewey were becoming 

increasingly influential in schools. The use of war 

games for military training purposes and as parlor 

games was widespread. Some pioneering teachers 

experimented with the simulation method in the 

early decades of the twentieth century.  

 

“The justification for the [simulation] method and 

the philosophy is a general recognition that the 

students know what they are doing.” 

Bernard Markwell, history teacher 

Francis W. Parker School                                                                                 

 

If we are to believe several modern 

accounts, teachers in the United States first used 

classroom simulations approximately fifty years 

ago. For example, Sarane S. Boocock and E. O. 

Schild wrote, “The design of simulation games for 

classroom use is essentially a phenomenon of the 

last decade” (1968, 15). They go on to assert: 

  

In a sense, even games with simulated 

environments are not new. War games, 

really a type of simulated game, have 

been in existence for centuries, and have 

been used by most governments for 

training and prediction purposes. 

However, it is only since World War II 

that simulations have found any 

extended use in the social sciences, and 

 

Curriculum History  2018 :  29-40  

their introduction into elementary and 

secondary schools is very recent (italics 

mine). (1968, 24). 

 

Likewise, Robert Maidment and Russell 

Bronstein claim simulations were introduced into 

elementary and secondary classrooms during the 

1960’s (1973). This conclusion was also echoed by 

D. R. Cruickshank and Ross Tefler, who declared, 

“Schools pioneered the use of instructional 

simulations through the 1960s and 70’s” (1980, 

77).  Finally, Brent D. Ruben concluded, “[In] the 

late 1960’s … the idea of designing simulated 

environments for teaching and learning was novel 

to say the least” (1999, 498). As these examples 

suggest, the scholarly consensus is that classroom 

simulations are of recent advent—the last half 

century. However, a closer inspection of the 

historical record proves otherwise. Teachers were 

experimenting with the simulation method no later 

than the early part of the twentieth century.  

This paper explores the lineage of classroom 

simulations by answering the following questions: 

  

What were the historical roots and 

theoretical underpinnings of the 

classroom simulation? 

 

When were classroom simulations first 

introduced to classrooms in the United 

States? 

 

How did the pioneering teachers use 

simulations in their classrooms? 

 

 

 

 



30 
 

Simulation: Defined and Described 

The essence of the term “simulation” has 

been distilled into the following definitions:  

 

“It is an activity in which participants 

interact within an artificially produced 

environment which recreates some 

aspect of social reality” (Maidment and 

Bronstein 1973, 9). 

 

“An untaught event in which sufficient 

information is provided to allow the 

participants to achieve reality of function 

in a simulated environment” (Jones 

1987, 9). 

 

“A replica of a real world situation worth 

learning” (Lee 1994, 12). 

 

As the previous definitions indicate, educational 

simulations allow individuals to be active 

participants in their own learning experience. 

John L. Taylor and Rex Walford contended that 

educational simulations possess three basic 

attributes: 

 

1. Players take on roles which are 

representative of the real world, and then 

make decisions in response to their 

assessment of the setting in which they 

find themselves. 

2. They experience simulated 

consequences which relate to their 

decisions and their general 

performances. 

3. They “monitor” the results of their 

actions, and are brought to reflect upon 

the relationship between their own 

decisions and the resultant 

consequences (1972, 17). 

 

The simulation method calls for individual 

participation in a simplified, representational 

environment with guidelines that establish 

parameters for this educational activity (Taylor 

and Walford 1972). As active participants, 

students soon realize decision-making has 

consequences. Unavoidably, some decision-

making is faulty, but this is not an indictment of 

the simulation method. In fact, student error can 

be a simulation’s greatest virtue. As Ken Jones, the 

author of a handbook on simulations, averred: “A 

basic reason for using simulations is that mistakes 

are both inevitable and desirable. It is experiential 

learning” (1987, 18).   Experiential learning allows 

students to profit from the simulation experience 

by modifying subsequent behavior. A simulation’s 

value is, in part, “the transfer of knowledge and 

experience to other situations in the future” 

(Jones 1987, 89). 

 

Origin of The Simulation  

Educational simulations are the more 

enlightened cousins of ancient war games. Sun 

Tzu, the military philosopher who wrote, Art of 

War, is credited with creating the first war game 

known as Wei Hai (encirclement) about five 

thousand years ago. Little is known about this 

original war game except that an abstract playing 

surface was used; players maneuvered their armies 

represented by colored stone; the object of the 

game was, as the name suggests, outflanking the 

army of your opponent (Maidment and Bronstein 

1973). 

At about the same time, similar strategy 

games emerged in other parts of the East Asia. In 

Japan, the game of Go bears a strong resemblance 

to its Chinese predecessor. In India, the four-

sided board game of Chaturanga became popular 

among the nobility. The elaborate playing pieces 

were representations of “foot soldiers, chariots, 

elephants, and cavalry” (Perla 1990, 16). The 

maneuvering of these pieces was set by rules, but 

a roll of the dice decided the outcome of player 

moves. The modern game of chess likely evolved 

from Chaturanga (Perla 1990; Maidment and 

Bronstein 1973). 

Even with its strategy, tactics, and clear 

objective, chess bears only a remote resemblance 



31 
 

to the demands of leading an army—even a 

seventeenth century army. In 1664, Christopher 

Wikhmann created Koenigspiel (King's Game) in 

the German town of Ulm (Perla 1990). The game 

was based on chess, but with a larger board with 

each player having thirty pieces. Koenigspiel and 

similar games became known as “war chess,” and 

they were considered valuable training devices 

(Perla 1990, 17).  

In 1797, a scholar and military author 

named Georg Venturini designed a new war game 

that evolved into the famous Kriegsspiel. Venturini 

published a sixty-page rulebook. He expanded the 

board to roughly 3,600 squares (each representing 

one square mile), and each square was colored to 

represent the actual terrain along the French and 

Belgium border. The game pieces not only 

represented the infantry and cavalry units, but 

also included supporting arms and equipment. 

Various pieces also symbolized bridges, 

fortifications, supply magazines, artillery, convoys 

of wagons, and even field bakeries. Piece 

movement was restricted to simulate the actual 

time needed for movements of men, animals, and 

supplies. Through the adaptations of Baron von 

Reisswitz and his son, versions of Kriegsspiel were 

adopted and used by the Prussian military for 

training purposes throughout the nineteenth 

century (Lee 1994; Perla 1990). The reaction of 

General von Muffling, the Prussian Chief of the 

General Staff, upon watching a demonstration of 

the game is reflective of its realism and popularity 

-  “‘This is not a game! This is training for war! I 

must recommend it to the whole army’” (quoted in 

Perla 1990, 26).  

In 1879, German style war games were 

introduced to the United States. In that year, W. R. 

Livermore published The American Kriegsspiel 

(Perla 1990). The U. S. Army, like most of Europe 

and Japan, began using this technique for training 

purposes. War games were also popularized 

during the early part of the twentieth century. In 

1913, H. G. Wells published Little Wars. This is 

credited as the first textbook on war-gaming for 

fun (Sandars 1975, 15).  

Simulation’s Theoretical Foundations 

At the turn of the twentieth century, the 

works of Friedrich Frobel, John and Evelyn 

Dewey, Edgar James Swift, and John A. Keith 

provided the theoretical foundation for the 

introduction of simulations to America’s 

classrooms. They wrote about learning by 

doing—often referred to as “child activity” as well 

as the value of play. Their ideas influenced 

teachers of the early 1900s who began to 

experiment with new instructional methods 

including simulations. 

Froebel believed that the Spirit of God is 

most clearly manifested in the form of a child. 

Therefore, the child from birth, in conformity 

with his/her divine nature, should be given 

freedom to develop his/her powers. Prescriptive 

education resulted in training that will “annihilate, 

hinder, and destroy” the child (Froebel 1907, 9). 

This type of education prevented the divine from 

being exhibited in the life of children. Froebel 

wrote: “education in instruction and training, 

originally and in its first principles, should 

necessarily be passive, following (only guarding 

and protecting), not prescriptive, categorical, 

interfering” (1907, 7).
 
The aim of all education 

and instruction must be in this direction. In order 

to evoke these qualities from a student, education 

must be adapted to the nature and needs of the 

pupil (Froebel 1907, 10, 12-14). 

In Schools of Tomorrow, published in 

1915, John and Evelyn Dewey described the 

innovations occurring in schools throughout the 

United States, and the theoretical foundation that 

supported these changes. The Deweys wrote that 

Froebel was one of the most influential modern 

educators shaping school practice (46). While the 

Deweys affirmed the value of child activity, their 

view of the origin of these actions contrasted with 

Froebel’s belief that a child’s actions were a 

manifestation of the “Spirit of God.” The Deweys 



32 
 

saw child behavior through the lens of science. 

They wrote, “Modern psychology has pointed out 

the fact that the native instincts of a human being 

are his tools for learning” (1962, 210). A child’s 

instincts were expressed through his/her body. A 

child’s senses were means to learning. To stifle or 

restrict instincts, bodily activities, or the use of the 

senses was to resist the child’s “natural method of 

learning” (J. Dewey and E. Dewey 1962, 210). The 

Deweys noted that schools that have recognized a 

child’s natural method of learning are using 

physical activities as a means of cultivating a child’s 

reasoning and judgment (1962, 215). In summary, 

they wrote:  

 

But in schools where the children are 

getting their knowledge through by doing 

things, it is presented to them through all 

their senses and carried over into acts … 

the muscles, sight, hearing, touch, and 

their own reasoning processes all 

combine to make the result part of the 

working equipment of the child. (1962, 

215) 

 

At the beginning of the twentieth century, 

there were several educators singing the praises of 

child activity. If John Dewey was the first tenor of 

“learning by doing,” there were other voices in the 

chorus, not the least of whom was Edgar James 

Swift, who published his educational philosophy, 

Learning by Doing, in 1914. Swift also echoed the 

Deweys’ psychological explanation but added an 

evolutionary bent. In a chapter entitled, “The 

Revolt from Monotony,” Swift contended that 

instinctively children yearn for adventure, for 

activity, for play. Conventional educational 

wisdom attempted to stifle these impulses. 

Children’s thoughts and interests were those that 

give them immediate pleasure. They do not 

possess the derived interests of adults for 

reputation, business standing, or money. Even 

adults reverted back to the interests of children 

when in moments of leisure. What else could 

explain the popularity of adventure books, 

recreation, and spectator sports?  Camping, 

fishing, and hunting, which required individuals to 

surrender modern conveniences and endure the 

basest physical challenges, were evidence of 

humankind’s true nature. Swift observed, “If men 

will go through such torture and call it fun there 

must be something deep down in their nature that 

makes it worth the game. And that ‘something’ 

seems to be the primitive instincts which 

civilization has been unable wholly to eradicate” 

(1914, 9). 

John A. Keith was also a member of the 

“learning by doing” chorus. In an address before 

the Schoolmasters Club in 1907, Keith recognized 

that both social and psychological force affected 

learning (1907, 175). Keith held that the deepest 

law of human nature is that, “One becomes by 

being” (1907, 174). Keith believed that the 

mission of education is to condition children 

through various types of activities, so they may 

progressively become more socially efficient. 

Education must be viewed within a social context. 

Children are inherently interested in topics that 

have a social utility and a social significance. As 

children are able to build wider and deeper social 

relationships, they become more socially 

efficient. Furthermore, Keith asserted that school 

subjects were social products. Subjects were 

“aspects of a past and existing social life and have 

their values for education because of the 

increased social efficiency which their mastery 

confers” (1914, 175-176).
 

This social construction 

had a bearing on the curriculum. Subject matter 

should be organized around social and 

psychological considerations rather than what 

was logical. In other words, the child should 

approach a subject or topic based on how it affects 

his/her relationship with others. Schools improved 

society through a social construction of 

knowledge, accompanied by activities, which 

progressed toward invention and discovery (1914, 

175-176). 



33 
 

In addition to the importance of child 

activity, Froebel extolled the virtues of play. He 

believed play was the highest phase of 

development in early childhood. Play, at this stage 

is not trivial, but carries great significance. Parents 

are encouraged to cultivate playful activities for  

their child. The way a child plays reflects on his 

future behavior as an adult (Froebel 1907, 54-56). 

Froebel wrote, “The plays of childhood are the 

germinal leaves of all later life; for the whole man 

is developed and shown in these … tendencies” 

(1997, 55). Furthermore, he asserted that the 

purpose of play changed as children matured: 

 

For, while during the previous period of 

childhood the aim of play consisted 

simply in activity as such, its aim lies now 

in a definite, conscious purpose; it seeks 

representation as such, or the thing to be 

represented in the activity. This character 

is developed more and more in the free 

boyish games as the boys advance in 

age. This is observable even with all 

games of physical movement, with 

games of running, boxing, wrestling, 

with ball-games, racing, games of 

hunting, of war etc. (1907, 55) 

 

Children enjoyed games because they fed their 

growth in power both individually and as a part 

of a group. Froebel believed that childhood play 

is the result of vital energy and buoyancy. 

Childhood play makes pupils “intelligent, and 

quick to learn, quick to see and to do, diligent and 

full of zeal, reliable in thought and feeling, 

efficient and vigorous” (1907, 111). It also 

contributes to the development of physical, 

intellectual, and moral power (1907, 112-114). 

The Deweys also recognized, what 

Froebel had observed, that the quintessential 

activity of children is play. They believed play 

had an educational value noting that some schools 

made “organized games, toymaking, and … other 

construction based on play motives” an integral 

part of the curriculum (1962, 78-79).
 

 Children 

spend the greatest part of their time in play. 

Typically, they create their own play activities, 

which often involve imitation of the occupations 

of adults. Nearly all children will play house, 

doctor, or soldier. The Deweys concluded, 

  

The educational value of this play is 

obvious. It teaches the children about 

the world they live in. The more they 

play the more elaborate becomes their 

paraphernalia, the whole game being a 

fairly accurate picture of the daily life of 

their parents in its setting, clothed in the 

language and bearing of the children. 

Through their games they learn about the 

work and play of the grown-up world. 

Besides noticing the elements which 

make up this world, they find out a good 

deal about the actions and processes that 

are necessary to keep it going. (1962, 79) 

  

Froebel, the Deweys, Swift and Keith provided 

the theoretical support for the classroom use of 

simulations. Their ideas found a receptive 

audience among some teachers who found 

traditional practices ineffective. Learning by 

doing, child activity, and play were concepts that 

could be readily incorporated into the simulation 

method. It is not surprising then that in this regard 

Boocock and Schild concluded: Dewey’s general 

education philosophy contains most of the 

premises upon which the simulation games being 

designed . . . are built” (1968, 57). 

 

Simulations Are Introduced to Classrooms in 

the United States 

Anecdotally, there are many examples of 

simulations being used in classrooms during the 

first decade of the twentieth century. The Deweys 

indicated that schools all over the country were 

making use of the “child's instinct for play” 

(1962, 78).
 
They cite numerous instances where 

children were learning by doing, some of which 

were simulated experiences. Swift noted several 



34 
 

examples of classroom simulation use, which he 

described as experiments. He lauded their 

implementation and noted that they grew out of 

the needs of students. Swift exclaimed, “They 

[experiments] have been actually tried in schools” 

(1914, 70). The purpose of these experiments is 

to practice the “pedagogical maxim, ‘one learns by 

doing’” (1914, 98). 

 

Handwork Simulations 

Some simulations, often referred to as 

“handwork,” were being tried in schools at the 

onset of the twentieth century. Handwork is 

defined as “construction based on play motives” 

(1962, 78-79).
 
Handwork can be broadly construed 

as a simulation that combined child-directed play 

with an educationally productive activity. The 

evidence indicates that handwork was most 

commonly used at the elementary level (Richards 

1900). C. B. Shaw, a fourth-grade teacher, decided 

to experiment with “self-organized group-work” 

after hearing a presentation made on this topic by 

Dr. Scott of the Boston Normal School.
 
Shaw 

allowed students to choose a group project or 

activity that interested them (Wells 1900). The 

activities students selected included sewing, 

crocheting, drawing, arithmetic, playing house 

and store. Children were only allowed a half an 

hour each week to work on these activities. This 

modest time allotment points to the tentative 

nature of the experiment. In spite of this, the 

teacher observed students spending much extra 

time on their projects before and after school and 

during recess (Wells 1900). 

 

This experiment was continued the next 

school year. The groups for acting 

plays, stories, and poems attracted many 

students, but pupils also participated in a 

variety of other activities including 

cooking, sewing, and doll dressmaking. 

From the results of the two-year 

experiment, Shaw felt “encouraged to 

continue the group-work” (334).  

 

The Deweys also described a number of 

schools that used handwork. The Elementary 

School of the University of Missouri, under the 

direction of Professor J. L. Meriam, allotted 

handwork for one quarter of the instructional day. 

Professor Meriam believed that schools of the 

past had ignored the needs of individual children.  

He believed that “the work and play of the school 

should be children’s work and play; that the 

children should enjoy school” (quoted in Dewey 

and Dewey 1962, 32). The guiding question for the 

curriculum was: “What would these children 

naturally be doing if there were no school?” 

(quoted in Dewey and Dewey 1962, 32) Meriam 

held that children would be: 

  

Playing outdoors, exercising their bodies 

by running, jumping, throwing; they 

would be talking together in groups, 

discussing what they had seen or heard; 

they would be making things to use in 

their play, which might include boats, 

beanbags, dolls, hammocks, or dresses . 

. . Again, these occupations are all closely 

connected with the business of living, so 

we send our children to school to learn 

this. What, then, could be more natural 

than making the school’s curriculum of 

such material? (quoted in J. Dewey and 

E. Dewey 1962, 32) 
 

Consistent with this view, Professor Meriam 

divided the school day into four periods devoted 

to the following elements: play, stories, 

observation, and handwork. 

The kindergarten at Columbia University 

found that they were most successful when the 

children’s instinctive activities were linked with 

their social interests and experiences. A young 

child’s social ties and experiences revolved 

around his/her home. The educators at Columbia 

believed that a child’s intense interest in dolls was 

indicative of the importance a child placed in 

human relations. The doll thus served as the 



35 
 

starting point for the kindergarten's educational 

activities (J. Dewey and E. Dewey 1962). 

Children had all sorts of things they wanted 

to do and make for their doll. The doll needed 

clothes, so students designed patterns with paper 

and scissors.  Experimenting as needed, children 

received suggestions from the teacher. When the 

patterns were finished, the children chose and cut 

the cloth.  Then, they learned to sew. The doll not 

only needed clothes, but also shelter so the 

children constructed a house from a great chest of 

big blocks found in the corner of the room. They 

used long flat boards for the walls and roof and 

square blocks for the foundations and window 

frames.  When the house was completed, it was 

obviously in need of furniture, so students 

constructed tables, chairs, and beds from blocks of 

wood and thin boards. The doll needed dishes for 

its food, so this need served as a motivation to 

learn clay modeling. Student creations were not 

always useable, but the finished product was not 

the point. The children had been involved in 

problem solving, and they enjoyed the process. 

Children developed manual dexterity, and they 

knew the sense of accomplishment of working 

towards a definite end (Dewey and Dewey 1962). 

The Francis W. Parker School in Chicago 

provides a final example of handwork. History 

education, at the time this school was founded in 

1901, was described this way:  

  

History teaching . . . had been planned 

largely to give information in 

chronological sequence. Teachers 

carefully selected the amount of subject 

matter for a grade but gave little or no 

effort to the end that it be comprehended 

by the children. The test consisted in the 

quantity of learned facts that could be 

held in memory. (Stone 1976, 169) 

 

Colonel Parker was a freeing influence upon 

the teaching of history at theFrancis W. Parker 

School. Parker encouraged teachers to discover 

the interests of children at each age. Parker 

believed that history materials should consider a 

child’s interests; thereby adding meaning to 

children’s activities and giving social significance 

to the life around them. His attitude led to 

experimentation:  

 

Step by step, as new ideas came, Colonel 

Parker applied them, tested them, and 

rejected or accepted them, according to 

their appeal to, and effect upon, the 

children. For instance, Colonel Parker 

happened one day to see a group of 

young children making play-houses in 

the workshop, and he believed that they 

might be interested in the way in which 

people of other lands built their houses. 

He suggested that children be … 

allowed to reproduce in miniature the 

simple homes and belongings of 

interesting primitive people in different 

environments. (Stone 1976, 169)  

 

If simulations are in part, a simplified 

reality, then, clearly, handwork was a simplified, 

simplified reality. In the examples cited above 

children were active participants. They were given 

decision-making responsibility for their 

handwork. Perhaps, the simulation attribute 

lacking was a consequence(s) for student 

decisions. 

 

Classroom Organization and Management 

Simulations 

At the turn of the 20th century, simulations 

were also used for classroom management and 

organization. An implicit goal of this simulation 

type was to teach democratic principles. In 1904, 

Lotta A. Clark, a history teacher in Charlestown, 

Massachusetts, decided to try an “experiment” 

with her ancient history high school classes 

(1907, 336). She had two objectives: “(1) [students 

were] to co-operate-to work together; and (2) to 

give each individual a chance to do the sort of 

thing which he particularly wants to do (italics in the 



36 
 

original)” (1907, 336-337). 

With these objectives in mind, Clark 

turned over the classroom recitations to her 

students. A student chairman was appointed. A 

committee was formed to nominate candidates 

for the classroom president, vice-president, and 

secretary. These officers were elected by ballot 

for one month. Students faced a perplexing 

problem when they had to decide the teacher’s 

role. This question was resolved when Clark was 

given the title “chief executive officer” (1907, 

336-337). 

The new recitation took on the following 

order: 

 

1. The president called the class to order 

and took roll. 

2. The secretary's report was corrected 

and then formally accepted. 

3. The president called for any 

unfinished business. 

4. The lesson of the day was called for. 

 

With the call for the day’s lesson, students 

volunteered to describe the day’s assigned 

historical event. If an error was made in 

describing the event, any other student could 

secure the recognition of the president and make 

the necessary corrections. Any question that was 

not satisfactorily resolved was left for the next 

day’s unfinished business. Students often 

researched these unresolved issues that evening 

and presented their findings the next day (Clark 

1907). 

Clark also found classroom discipline 

satisfactory using this method. An incident, where 

a boy was severely reprimanded by the teacher, 

was well documented by the class secretary. The 

whole incident, in minute detail, was presented in 

the secretary’s report. The report was accepted by 

the class and placed on file. No further 

disciplinary incidents occurred in that class 

section (Clark 1907). 

The most compelling example of 

organizing a classroom through simulation is the 

case of Miss Nellie Hammond, who taught 

American history and government and modern 

and current history at Woburn, Massachusetts. 

Towards the middle of the school year, she was 

disabled by a physical malady. The symptoms were 

such that she was forbidden to use her eyes—a 

condition from which she later recovered. Since 

hiring a substitute at midyear seemed unwise, Miss 

Hammond was allowed to formulate a plan, so she 

could continue to perform her duties in the 

classroom. She decided upon creating a “pupil-

government” in the classroom (Swift 1914).
 
For 

her senior class, a school committee of eight 

students already existed. The eight-committee 

members were given the responsibility of 

assigning lessons, topics, and readings. Students 

eagerly discussed the local issues facing the city of 

Woburn. The class had also set up the simulated 

school/city of Woburnia. A student portrayed the 

mayor of Woburnia and delivered an inaugural 

address to the entire school (Swift 1914). 

Unlike the seniors, Miss Hammond’s junior 

class lacked an existing governmental structure. 

The class decided to write a constitution. After 

establishing the constitution’s preamble, that the 

government should increase the interest and 

efficiency of schoolwork, the constitution called 

for the establishment of several committees with 

various responsibilities. The committees included 

the Topic Committee, Library Committee, Far East 

Committee, Near East Committee, the Committee 

on European Affairs, the Committee on United 

States Affairs, and the Committee on Woburn 

Affairs (Swift 1914). 

 

Content Related Simulations 

There are a handful of documented 

instances of content area simulations being used at 

the beginning of the last century. These 

simulations provided an opportunity for students 

to put abstract concepts to practical use. They 

contain the basic attributes of a simulation as 



37 
 

previously delineated: participants take on roles 

representative of the real world; they make decisions; 

they experience consequences related to these 

decisions; they reflect on the decisions and the 

resulting consequences. 

Lotta A. Clark, who in 1904 had used 

simulations heretofore for classroom organization 

and management purposes, decided the following 

year to use another simulation with her United 

States history and civil government classes. Clark 

held two mock state and city elections. Each class 

was divided into two wards, appointed officers, and 

every pupil registered as if s/he was a voter. Typed 

lists of registered voters were posted on the 

bulletin board, and ballots were prepared. On 

Election Day in Massachusetts, Clark’s students 

got to vote like everyone else. In order to simulate 

the Australian ballot, children voted at their desks 

with desktops raised. Completed ballots were 

placed in sealed ballot boxes. The ward officers 

counted the votes, posted the results, and the 

election was declared (Clark 1907). 

Another example of a content related 

simulation involved a fifth-grade teacher 

ingeniously establishing a post office. Students 

made the money and the stamps. They brought 

bundles to school to be mailed. Two boys took the 

part of postmen. They weighed the packages, 

consulted the map, looked up the postal rate, and 

gave change to the customers. The simulation 

required the students to make use of the weight 

and multiplication tables (Dewey and Dewey 

1962). 

Mason D. Gray, a teacher at East High 

School, in Rochester, New York, tried a highly 

involved experiment with his Latin students. 

Mason had considered and tried other methods to 

make the study of Latin more meaningful. He 

found that mere descriptions of everyday life in 

ancient Rome were not illuminating unless his 

students could join in the daily activities of Roman 

life. Mason desired a method that would be both 

“continuous and self-sustaining” (1906, 297).
  He 

wanted an activity that would provide background 

and coherence to his students’ study of Latin. 

Mason decided upon simulating the political 

contests of the Roman Republic. This he hoped 

would garner student interest. The Roman State 

was organized, initially, by assigning each Latin 

section a trade guild (collegia opificum). The 

guilds, assigned by lot, included: garlic-dealers, 

grocers, carpenters, goldsmiths, porters, and 

dyers. Each trade guild selected from its members 

a president (princeps) with the remainder of the 

class section in the role of apprentices (discentes). 

The room in which students recited their lesson 

became their Clitia or place of assembly. 

Gradually, additional tasks were assigned to the 

guild including drawing-up of membership rules, 

the choice of a patron deity, and of a Roman 

patronus (Mason 1906). Mason concluded, “We 

have reproduced, as completely and accurately as 

a limited number of pupils would permit, the 

ancient Roman political organization” (1906, 

296). 

Each member of the trade guild was 

assigned a name by the president. The names 

were taken from notable military, political, and 

literary figures of the last century of the Roman 

Republic. Students were assigned these names 

randomly, and they retained the name for the 

entire school year. Students were expected to 

learn the life of the person whose name s/he had 

taken, as well as becoming acquainted with the 

names and deeds of those taken by their peers. 

Students were encouraged to use their Latin 

names in addressing one another (Mason 1906). 

Once students had received their Latin 

names, they were then classified as citizens either 

by birth, naturalization, or by manumission. The 

students then successively enrolled in the four 

political units of curia, tribus, classis, and centuria. This 

was done on the basis, respectively, of birth, 

geography, wealth, and age. Property of a definite 

amount was assigned to each citizen within the 

limits of his/her class. Each pupil was assigned a 



38 
 

tribal name on a geographical basis. The student 

then incorporated, in his/her name, the name of the 

tribe. Students were also assigned an Italian town 

as a place of residence.  Finally, once student has a 

thorough understanding of their political status, 

various political assemblies were organized and 

operated (Mason 1906). 

D. C. Knowlton, a teacher at Barringer 

High School in Newark, New Jersey, sought an 

effective way to teach his students about the 

events and lessons of the Peloponnesian War. He 

realized that while the events were complex, they 

were also filled with drama and human interest. 

Knowlton also recognized that students could 

readily connect with the democratic institutions 

in ancient Greece. When he heard about 

innovations at other schools, he decided to 

conduct his own experiment (1910). 

Knowlton implemented a simulation in his 

Greek history classes. Each class would be 

transformed into an Athenian Assembly during 

the time of the Peloponnesian War. Two or three 

students from each of his three Greek history 

classes were asked to research the Athenian 

Assembly. They determined the officers needed 

for the assembly and their exact duties. They were 

also asked to find the procedures that governed 

the assembly. These rules were modified to fit the 

constraints of the classroom and were as follows: 

 

(1) Solemn curse on traitors, 

pronounced by the herald 

(2) Declaration by the chairman 

(epistateis) that the gods are propitious 

(3) Reading of the day’s resolutions by 

the herald 

(4) Inquiry by the chairman as to whether 

the assembly wishes to discuss the 

resolutions, or to put them immediately 

to a vote 

(5) Discussion of the measures 

(6) Voting on the measure 

(7) Adjournment  

(Knowlton 1910, 483-484) 

 

After explaining the rules of parliamentary 

procedure, the simulation ensued. The assembly 

elected a presiding officer (epistateis). Students 

were also selected for the offices of herald and 

sergeant-at-arms. The assembly meeting was 

opened daily with the formula, “Cursed be anyone 

who betrays Athens by thought, word, or deed” 

(Knowlton 1910, 485).
  
Each day students debated 

resolutions similar to those, which came before the 

original assembly. The following resolutions are 

representative: 

 

(1) that Athens is prepared for war 

(2) that the plan of Pericles for the 

conduct of the war should be supported 

by all Athenians 

(3) that the proper time to make peace 

with Sparta was after the blockade on 

Sphacteria 

(4) that the only hope for Athenian 

victory is in making an alliance with 

Persia  

(Knowlton 1910, 485) 

 

Commenting on this experiment, 

Knowlton observed, “It is simply one of the many 

attempts which are constantly being made to 

stimulate that self-activity which is the real end and 

aim of all good teaching” (1910, 483). As a result 

of the simulation, Knowlton found, “At no other 

time throughout the course were so many books 

consulted and used so intelligently” (1910, 486). 

At the conclusion of the simulation, students were 

tested. They were asked to take and defend their 

position on some of the war resolutions. Their 

experience was so real students often wrote in the 

first person, as this pupil’s response indicates: 

 

Athenian citizens, we ought to ally 

ourselves with Persia. There is nothing 

else left for us to do. You say perhaps that 

the fact that Alcibiades is the one who 

proposes this ought to condemn it. Even 

if Alcibiades is not a true patriot, he will 

never dare turn traitor to Athens again 



39 
 

… We will have time to recover from our 

losses if Persia aids us. It will tide us over 

this defeat. An alliance with Persia does 

not necessarily mean subjection to Persia. 

We need money. Persia has offered us 

money. Why not accept? (quoted in 

Knowlton 1910, 487) 

 

Conclusion 
The literature of this period frequently 

employed the term “experiment” to describe the 

use of simulations. Of course, the word 

“experiment” is revealing. It suggests simulations 

were still a novelty in American classrooms; some 

teachers used this instructional method, but it was 

not yet widely practiced. The words of Lotta A. 

Clark are telling. She wrote of “experimenting” 

with group work at her high school (1907, 335-

336). Her article opened with this statement: “ A 

child, like everyone else, learns to do by doing 

(italics in the original)” (1907, 335).
 
While Clark 

believed this statement was broadly recognized 

as a truism in her day, she claimed it was not 

widespread in its application.  

Early simulation usage served a variety of 

functions. At the elementary level, it usually 

took the form of handwork. At the secondary 

level, simulations were used for classroom 

organization and management including 

democratizing the classroom. Other teachers 

sought a more effective means of teaching than 

the traditional fact-based instruction often referred 

to as recitation. They used content related 

simulations to engage students in the subject 

matter. Simulations transformed abstract topics 

into meaningful experience. 

The simulations “The Roman State” and 

the “Athenian Assembly” provide persuasive 

evidence that the simulation method was 

introduced to American classrooms at the birth 

of the last century, if not before. Students were 

assigned roles that so closely approached reality 

that they continued in their role after the 

simulation had concluded. The complexity of 

these simulations is surprising. The Roman State 

involved the majority of students in a large 

metropolitan high school, while students in the 

Athenian Assembly researched this political body 

before it was organized. Student decisions had 

consequence. Both simulations replicated ancient 

democratic institutions with the power to make 

decisions for the welfare of their peoples. The 

Athenian Assembly made decisions that would 

determine the fate of the city-state. These two 

examples and others that have been previously 

cited meet the modern criteria for a simulation. 

Undeniably, simulations have a lengthier 

and richer history than previously believed. Given 

the evidence, it should not surprise that simulations 

were introduced to students in U.S. classrooms at 

the dawn of the twentieth century. The voices of 

Froebel, the Deweys, Swift, and Keith appealed to 

teachers disenchanted with antiquated teaching 

methods. Some educators realized children needed 

more developmentally sound educational methods 

and practices. The concepts of learning by doing, 

child activity, and play could readily be 

incorporated into a simulation. This method, as 

seen in war games, was being popularized through 

parlor games. These various historical forces 

converged to bridge the chasm between 

experiential theory and the practice of 

simulation. Some pioneering teachers were 

willing to cross that divide during the twentieth 

century’s morning light.  

 

References 

 

Boocock, S. S. and E. O Schild, ed. 1968. 

Simulation Games in Learning. Beverly Hills, 

CA: Sage Publications, Incorporated. 

Clark, L. A. 1907. Group-Work in the High 

School. The Elementary School Teacher 7:335-

344. 

Cruickshank, D. R. and Tefler, R. 1980. Classroom 

Games and Simulations. Theory into Practice 

1:75-80. 



40 
 

Dewey, J. and E. Dewey. 1962. Schools of 

Tomorrow. 3rd. ed. New York: E. P. Dutton 

and Company, Incorporated. 

Froebel, F. 1907. The Education of Man. 

Translated by W. N. Hailmann. New York: D. 

Appleton and Company. 

General der Infanterie a.D. Dannhauer. Das 

Reisswitzche Kriegsspeil von seinen Beginn 

bis zum Tode des Erfinders 1827. The 

Reisswitz Wargame from the Beginning to the 

Death of Its Inventor, 1827.  Unpublished 

translation by William Leeson. Militar 

Wochenblatt, No. 56. Quoted in Perla, P. P. 

1990. The Art of Wargaming: A Guide for 

Professionals and Hobbyists. Annapolis, 

Maryland: Naval Institute Press. 

Gray, M. D. 1906. The Modern Roman State. The 

School Review 14:296-306. 

Hughes, J. L. 1894. The Educational Value of Play 

and the Recent-Play Movement in Germany. 

Educational Review 9:327-336. 

Jones, K. 1987. Simulations: a Handbook for 

Teachers and Trainers. London: Kogan Page. 

Keith, J. A. 1907. Socializing the Materials and 

Methods of Education. The School Review 

18:174-177. 

Knowlton, D. C. 1910. An Athenian Assembly: An 

Experiment in History Teaching. The School 

Review 18:481-487. 

Lee, J. 1994. Effectiveness of the Use of 

Simulations in a Social Studies Classroom. 

ERIC, ED 381 448, 1-68. 

Maidment, R. and R. H. Bronstein. 1973. 

Simulation Games: Design and 

Implementation. Columbus, OH: Charles E. 

Merrill Publishing Company. 

Perla, P. P. 1990. The Art of Wargaming: a Guide 

for Professionals and Hobbyists. Annapolis, 

Maryland: Naval Institute Press. 

Richards, C. R. 1900. The Function of Hand Work 

in the School. Teachers College Record 1:249-

259. 

Sandars, J. 1975. An Introduction to Wargaming. 

London: Pelham Books Limited. 

Stone, M. K. 1976. Between Home and 

Community: Chronicle of the Francis W. 

Parker School 1901-1976. Chicago: Francis 

W. Parker School. 

Swift, E. J. 1914. Learning by Doing. Indianapolis, 

IN: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1914. 

Tansey, P. J. 1973. Educational Aspects of 

Simulation. London: McGraw-Hill. 

Taylor, J. L. and R. Walford. 1972. Simulations in 

the Classroom. London: Penguin Books, 

Limited. 

Wells, C. B. 1907. Some Experimentation in 

Group-Work. The Elementary School Teacher 

7:329-334. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


