18
th
century.
Conclusion
In this paper we have argued that one size does not fit all in terms of simulation
exercises in political science. Even in similar, basic introductory courses like those described
here, faculty members’ overall teaching goals, level of teaching experience, and comfort level
with regard to loosening their control in the classroom vary in significant ways which impact the
potential success of any simulation. As highlighted here, student factors (e.g., ability level)
should also guide our choices with regard to developing simulations. Given all the unique
factors that might contribute to our success in leading simulations, we must encourage faculty to
intentionally reflect on each of the factors presented in order to create or adapt a simulation
exercise that best suits our needs and the needs of our students. If the factors discussed here are
considered, we hypothesize that political science faculty will be much more likely to create
successful simulations. Specifically, consideration of the questions posed should convince
faculty members that a simulation can adapt to any unique set of circumstances.
We encourage faculty to view simulations in this “one style and size does not fit all”
way in order to overcome barriers they may have in their minds regarding incorporating
simulations in their courses. In order to accomplish this, we also feel that journals like PS and
Political Science education should encourage authors relaying their simulation experiences to be
explicit regarding the many factors identified in this paper. We would like to argue that effective
simulations, that is those that are form-fit for the professor’s needs, the specific course, and
student profile, embody what Amy Gutmann asserts as the goal of democratic education to be
helping students to engage in ‘rational deliberations of competing conceptions of the good life
and the good society.” (Gutmann, 1999, 44)
19
Convention