Matrix Games (developed by Chris Engle) are an excellent classroom tool. A handbook detailing their application in education and other professional settings has recently been published. They represent a flexible and easy to use game mechanism for any role play or simulation setting. In brief, players (either individually or in teams) make arguments about what they wish to do and why this should happen. An umpire then assesses these arguments and evaluates how likely they are to succeed. A die is rolled to simulate luck and the argument either happens or fails to happen. Games can be relatively free-flowing or more structured depending on the context and desired result.
So, for example in a History class in a game simulating the Russian Revolution, the Bolshevik player might argue that the First Machine Gun Regiment would lead an assault on the Winter Palace, with the backing and support of the party and that this would succeed because the regiment was well armed and prepared, was militarised and supported the party and because the palace was weakly defended by troops whose loyalty was suspect. The umpire might rule this argument average, giving it a 50% chance of success. The umpire’s reasons for ruling this way might be that although the First Machine Gun Regiment historically did indeed ask the Bolsheviks to take action, the Bolshevik leaders turned down their request to begin the revolution, fearing it was premature. Each player makes arguments which either succeed or fail and the game develops in his way along its own trajectory. In this example it is likely that the players will develop a better understanding of the background and the forces at play in shaping the outcome of the revolution. The Matrix Game is an excellent tool for running simulations in the classroom, but I want to argue that the Matrix Game represents a cognitive tool in its own right and should be added to every teachers’ tool box. The Matrix Game supports two major cognitive processes: thinking and communicating with clarity and precision and listening with empathy and understanding.
Thinking and Communicating with Clarity & Precision:
When advancing an argument, players need to think about what they want to happen and the reasons why this action will be successful. This can be scaffolded by providing a matrix of reasons (which is why it is called a matrix game), but usually players use the matrix of the real world or of imaginary worlds to draw on for supporting their arguments. In this way the argument represents the conclusion and the matrix of reasons the premises for any logical argument. The form of the Matrix game thus forces players to think in logical and coherent ways about what they want to argue and why it should work.
Empathy & Understanding:
Players assume different roles and compete against other players to have their perspectives advanced. This necessitates understanding the world from another’s point of view and simulating action from that perspective. I am currently running a game in which different interest groups compete to mine the moon. Each team makes arguments from their own perspective. By setting different victory conditions for each team, the players are scaffolded in framing their actions from a certain point of view. See the graphic on the right.
Because different teams have different criteria for winning they will try to manoeuvre game outcomes in their favour. I like to set Victory Points at 2 or 1 points for different outcomes. A player can claim a win on 2 points, or a partial win on 1 point. They lose if they achieve none of their victory conditions. This encourages players to work with others to reach compromises.
I believe that this mechanism helps students to develop an understanding of different perspectives in ways which encourage a much deeper appreciation of how actions are founded on world view and one’s standpoint.
Setting up a Matrix Game
Matrix Games are easy to set up. All you need is a context and roles for players to simulate. You can set up role play cue cards as depicted for the Mining The Moon game, or allow players to define their own roles. Play normally proceeds in turns during which each player gets a chance to advance an argument, but you can adapt this to suit your needs quite easily. For example, I sometimes let players submit an argument whenever they wish to, but then I make them submit in writing and adjudicate in the order received.
When umpiring arguments it is a good idea to assume average as a starting point and then decide if it is weaker or stronger based on criteria more directly linked to the curriculum. Go with your gut instinct. I always try to reward greater understanding of a context and give reasons why I am ruling something weaker or stronger. Adjudication, of course, is always done in terms of what has succeeded in the game. You cannot have one argument cancel out another. Arguments that support other arguments closely are automatically very strong.
If you try out a Matrix Game in your classroom, please drop a note in the comments. It would be great to hear your experience.