I’d do little more than write a role on a card (politician, corporate interest, activist, police, teacher, parent, student, etc.), and probably public and private motivations to prompt people beyond the obvious. Then you just let them at each other.
All this comes down to is putting people in situations of asymmetric power dynamics. Then it’s just a matter of seeing how power corrupts.
Then when you had a play through or two and made sure nobody’s completely traumatised^(1) or anything like that you have a debrief. That’s when you disclose player’s private motivations and then discuss the implications, both in game and in the real world. You say “If the role on this card corresponds to a real person or entity, who do you think it might be and why?”.
You don’t have to be abstract or speculate about actions and motivations when your students just did it right in front of you and to each other. When the player with a particular card roleplays organising a school strike and then in the debrief the private motivation is revealed as “You will be paid $10M by lobby group X if you can organise a school strike” you’ll literally see the lightbulbs go on, and without ever having to actually name Ms. Thunberg at all.
The other aspect is that if you’re going to criticise the motivations and actions of others then you better be ready to put your money where your mouth is. That means that the second half of the lesson has to involve doing something practical that is more effective for the environment than a school strike.
That is a non-trivial risk of these kind of games involving defection and deceit. Everyone should think very carefully before they black pill anyone, let alone a bunch of minors.
If you have time to share, I’ll read it!
I’d do little more than write a role on a card (politician, corporate interest, activist, police, teacher, parent, student, etc.), and probably public and private motivations to prompt people beyond the obvious. Then you just let them at each other.
All this comes down to is putting people in situations of asymmetric power dynamics. Then it’s just a matter of seeing how power corrupts.
Then when you had a play through or two and made sure nobody’s completely traumatised^(1) or anything like that you have a debrief. That’s when you disclose player’s private motivations and then discuss the implications, both in game and in the real world. You say “If the role on this card corresponds to a real person or entity, who do you think it might be and why?”.
You don’t have to be abstract or speculate about actions and motivations when your students just did it right in front of you and to each other. When the player with a particular card roleplays organising a school strike and then in the debrief the private motivation is revealed as “You will be paid $10M by lobby group X if you can organise a school strike” you’ll literally see the lightbulbs go on, and without ever having to actually name Ms. Thunberg at all.
The other aspect is that if you’re going to criticise the motivations and actions of others then you better be ready to put your money where your mouth is. That means that the second half of the lesson has to involve doing something practical that is more effective for the environment than a school strike.
That is a non-trivial risk of these kind of games involving defection and deceit. Everyone should think very carefully before they black pill anyone, let alone a bunch of minors.