Designing Digital Simulations to Promote Inclusion in
the Social Studies Classroom
Anneliese Paulson
Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN
Kat Albrecht
Truman State University, Kirksville, MO
Keywords simulations; digital simulations; inclusion; accessibility; English
Language Learners; Special Education
How to cite this article (APA): Paulson, A., & Albrecht, K. (2025). Designing digital simulations to promote
inclusion in the social studies classroom. Annals of Social Studies Research for Teachers, 7(1), 11-28.
https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83
ABSTRACT
Engaging social studies pedagogy has a history of using simulations in
the classroom. In their present form, simulations can often come with
logistical elements that distract from fundamental learning goals. In this
paper, we summarize our experience building and facilitating a digital fur
trade simulation for use in a 6th grade Minnesota Studies classroom with
the goal of alleviating logistical and exclusion strain. Importantly, we make
an existing simulation more accessible to students with limited
mathematics, reading comprehension, or English-language skills—
specifically English Learners and Special Education students who have
traditionally struggled with the existing simulation. Reflecting on this
experience, we identify new possibilities for accessibility, inclusion, and
engagement promised by digital simulations that demonstrate their
compelling utility for classroom social studies teachers.
Published June 29, 2025
Corresponding Author
Kat Albrecht
kalbrecht@truman.edu
DOI
https://doi.org/0.29173/ass
ert83
Pages: 11-28
Distributed under Creative
Commons
Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0
International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
Copyright: Ownership of this
article’s copyright remains with the
author(s), subject to the Creative
Commons license.
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 12
INTRODUCTION
Many social studies teachers—especially those teaching in diverse settings—are intimidated by
classroom simulations because of the potential for them to go horribly wrong (Onion, 2019), the
structural barriers presented by technology (Hébert et al., 2021), and budget limitations. However, it
is also true that simulations are a mainstay of social studies teaching and research (Wright-Maley,
2015b).
In this paper, we present our experience collaboratively building and facilitating a digital fur trade
simulation for use in the fur trade unit of a 6th grade Minnesota Studies classroom. In doing so, we
attempt to alleviate some of the traditional pain points of simulation implementation while also
providing a new lens for accessibility, inclusion, and engagement.
THE RESEARCH
Creating Simulations
We created a digital version of an existing paper-pencil fur trade simulation developed by the
Minnesota Historical Society aiming to make it more accessible to students with limited mathematics,
reading comprehension, or English-language skills—specifically English Learners and Special
Education students who struggled with the traditional simulation. Using Qualtrics, an online survey
builder, we based the survey pathways on the content of the established fur trade simulation. We
also examined how the switch to a digital simulation impacted student understanding of fur trade
economics elaborated upon within the lesson. To assess these outcomes, we observed student
small-group discussions and collected reflection sheets.
In the simulation, 6th grade students played the role of fur trader for a fictionalized fur company in
Minnesota during the 1600s. The simulation aimed to teach students about the business of the
Minnesota fur trade, specifically which types of goods were most desired by Indigenous trading
partners, and why. First, students selected manufactured trade goods they would like to trade.
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 13
Students had a limited budget, and could not purchase every option. They were provided a reflection
sheet to track their budget and record the options they selected. Students were asked to reflect on
their selected trade goods and why they chose them. Then, they traded these items with various
fictional trading partners by reading text, making choices, and answering the survey questions in
Qualtrics.
There were 3 primary types of content in the simulation. First, story-based instructions that helped
the students understand the context of the simulation. These instructions were written to be as
concise as possible, with key details repeated strategically during the simulation to help students
understand the task. Second, interactive devices like a shopping list that allowed students to select
goods to trade and buttons to click to complete various trades. Third, survey reflection questions
designed to help prompt students to transition to the in-class reflection activity. The figures below
demonstrate some of these essential elements:
Figure 1a
Sample Instructions
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 15
Figure 1d
Sample Outcome
Figure 1e
Sample Reflection Question
Depending on the outcome of each trade, students were routed through different pathways similar to
those in the existing paper-pencil simulation. For example, students who selected a musket,
spending their entire budget, could only successfully make one trade. When they completed all
possible trades for their chosen items, the Qualtrics survey calculated their profits and students
reflected on their profit outcomes and learning on the reverse side of their reflection sheet.
Specifically, students were asked what strategies earned the most profit in the simulation, what
goods their trading partners most wanted, and to make inferences about why trading partners wanted
these goods. Depending on the choices the students made, there were 14 possible outcomes—some
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 16
more profitable than others. The simulation was playable via a reusable URL given to students.
Approximately 150 6th grade students completed the simulation during their 50-minute class periods.
FINDINGS
Converting the simulation to a digital format benefitted teachers and students with fewer logistics, the
ability for repeated and self-directed engagement, and increased time discussing the economics of
the fur trade.
The most noticeable benefit was time savings. The traditional simulation required two 50-minute
class periods, whereas the digital format reduced simulation duration to one class period. Instead of
a 5-minute debrief at the conclusion of the traditional simulation, the digital format allowed for the
facilitation of a 15-minute student-debrief discussion. This time was invaluable to students’
processing and understanding of the reflection questions they were asked about, which strategies
worked best in the fur trade, and which goods were most desired by trading partners. Students were
able to learn independently at the start of the lesson and then reflect further during in-person
randomized peer groups, without relying on direct teacher instruction. This discussion time allowed
the teacher to conduct formative assessment and redirect student misconceptions. When direct
instruction was needed, the time savings allowed for vocabulary review, extension of reflection
questions, and guiding students to make connections to prior course content on gender-roles and
“jobs” in early Ojibwe & Dakota cultures.
Further, the simulation was simple to facilitate and build. Unlike the traditional simulation, it required
little preparation of classroom space, and because every student had a device, it required minimal
supplies—only a half-sheet reflection and shopping list. Since the simulation took place in one class
period, no students lost their work. Using Qualtrics meant that the simulation was simple to build,
cost-effective, and easily accessible online via URL. The most challenging aspect of creating the
simulation was developing pathways and possible outcomes, but the existing simulation provided a
model we could follow. Using the pencil-paper framework, we created the digital version of the
simulation in a matter of hours.
Most importantly, the digital format benefitted students. Like the original simulation, students made
active decisions about trades, expressing their agency as learners (Rector-Aranda & Raider-Roth,
2015). But, the digitally-formatted simulation also allowed students to self-pace. Self-pacing allowed
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 17
students to self-differentiate, make multiple attempts, and allowed the teacher and paraeducators to
provide accommodations for students, including translation and “chunking” the task than spending
their time managing student behaviors and logistics. Given multiple attempts, students were able to
try different approaches, or “pathways,” adding nuanced understandings to the lesson’s subject
matter and allowing students to learn from mistakes they made in prior attempts. These opportunities
were not available in the traditional simulation due to time constraints.
Challenges presented by the switch to a digital simulation were typical to technology use in the
classroom. Management of technology-related behaviors and 1:1 access to devices that were
functional, charged, and used in on-task ways were obstacles. Largely, students participated
enthusiastically throughout the simulation. Some students resisted randomly-assigned discussion
groups during the debrief, which is not unusual in middle school classrooms.
Overall, the digital simulation format was successful in promoting student engagement and
understanding of fur trade economics concepts. For inclusion classes with large numbers of English
Learners and Special Education students, the digital format further facilitated adult support and
inclusion of these students in collaborative group discussions.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHERS
Our experience designing and implementing the fur trade simulation has direct implications for
practice, especially as teachers mediate the challenges and benefits of technology in the classroom.
Digital simulations are particularly compelling for social studies teachers due to their promises of
accessibility, inclusion, and engagement. Many classroom teachers are intimidated by, or
misunderstand simulations (Onion, 2019; Wright-Maley, 2015a; Wright-Maley, 2015b), without taking
into account digital simulations specifically. Practitioners struggle to define simulations and frequently
lump them in with role-plays, games, and other related pedagogical tools (Wright-Maley, 2015b).
Despite these misunderstandings, simulations are one of the best tools social studies teachers have
for teaching complex systems in our classrooms (Aldrich, 2005). At the crux of the issue is
pedagogical mediation (Wright-Maley, 2015b). Many classroom teachers either misperceive digital
simulations as “just games,” or perceive a “simulation day” as an opportunity to disengage, assuming
students will learn via the simulation regardless of teacher intervention. Our experience underscores
the flaw in this logic. Our digital simulation does not replace traditional classroom learning and
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 18
student-teacher engagement; rather, it allows for increased engagement by lessening other structural
barriers to participation. Knowledge of—and active engagement with—our content, learners, and
context are essential for effective classroom use of simulations (DiCamillo & Gradwell, 2012). What
made the digital simulation format effective and inclusive was the space it afforded for pedagogical
mediation.
Despite structural barriers, like access to Wi-Fi and easy-to-use technology, most teachers remain
motivated to use digital tools to improve student experiences (Hébert et al., 2021). Using technology
in the classroom can present a variety of management challenges (Kuntz, 2012), but it is also
perceived by teachers, parents, and communities as beneficial for learning (Dubé & Wen, 2021).
Since the early-2000s, learning technologies have become essential for teaching and learning in the
social studies (Lee & Friedman, 2009) and many social studies teachers are well-versed in using
tools such as digital databases to engage their students in authentic intellectual work (Hofer & Swan,
2014). While teachers are faced with a constantly changing technological landscape of tools, the
effective use of technology affords teachers the ability to differentiate and individualize curriculum
(Johnson et al., 2022). Digitizing simulations provides the opportunity for teachers to combine
graphics, video, and audio which can support English Learners (Brozek & Duckworth, 2011) and
students with limited reading comprehension who may struggle when presented with text-only
activities. Our experience building and facilitating a digital fur trade simulation affirms this—applying
new technologies to time-honored simulation pedagogies created a more accessible lesson.
Inclusive teaching practices are necessary in social studies classrooms. More English Learners are
placed in mainstream classes than ever before (Stairs-Davenport, 2023), and social studies is
frequently one of the few classes where students are grouped heterogeneously rather than by
standardized test scores. As such, social studies teachers are compelled to find ways to blend
established social studies pedagogies, like simulations, with inclusive teaching practices requiring
shifts away from “one size fits all” models toward individualized, differentiated learner experiences
(Lindner & Schwab, 2020). Drawing on the assets of technology, allowing teachers the space to
teach, and providing avenues for greater differentiation and individualization, digital simulations are a
tool that can help teachers meet students’ needs.
Ultimately, teachers should use digital simulations in the same way that they would use any other
learning tool. It is essential to accommodate, modify, supplement, discuss, and provide context, and
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 19
the digital format eases the way. Technology allows for greater differentiation, individualization, and
accommodation. Time savings allow for deeper discussion, collaborative learning, and student self-
pacing. On the surface, sending students a single link to a digital simulation might seem less
“customized,” but it is important to remember that the simulation is a tool. Treating digital simulations
as a tool allows practitioners to harness their potential for breaking down barriers to learning,
increasing engagement, and centering students in lessons about highly complex social studies
topics.
Q & A with Annelise Paulson & Kat Albrecht
Question #1
Teacher’s Question:
How do digital simulations promote inclusion and differentiation in social studies instruction?
Annelise Paulson & Kat Albrecht’s Response:
We found that the digital version of this fur trading simulation promoted a wide range of
differentiation and inclusion strategies. Lindner and Schwab (2020) describe inclusive education
as consisting of collaboration, co-teaching, grouping, modification, individual motivation and
feedback, and personnel support of students. The digital format of our simulation allowed for a
more rigorous implementation of these inclusive strategies. Specifically, it allowed us to modify
learning environment, material, process, product and time frame (2020). In the original paper-
pencil simulation, students could choose their own trade goods, but could not determine the pace
of the simulation. This meant that all students needed to move around the room from station-to-
station during a prescribed time in the lesson. Many students with disabilities struggled to
complete the paper-pencil stations within the allotted time frame. By switching to the digital
format, students were able to self-manage many of their individualized learning needs. For
example, students with sensory needs were able to stay in one comfortable space and maintain
emotional regulation, students with mobility needs were able to participate fully without a need for
different materials from their peers, students with visual impairments were able to adjust font size
and screen brightness, and bilingual students with language needs were able to use translation
tools to better understand the course content presented in the simulation. The digital simulation
structure also provided greater ability for personnel support of students throughout the lesson
(2020). Students with self-management needs were able to complete the simulation in a para- or
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 20
teacher-led small group. Previously, the logistics presented by these needs were difficult to
manage. Students with mathematics needs especially struggled with the calculations required in
this lesson. The use of the digital format mitigated these challenges because the survey
calculated profits for students automatically. As such, those students were better able to focus on
the social studies topics of the lesson rather than getting bogged down and frustrated in the
logistics of calculations.
The time savings of digital simulations also provided greater opportunities for inclusion through
strategic grouping (2020). Since the digital format allowed for more discussion time, we were
able to implement group discussion strategies and bring more student voices into the simulation
reflection/debrief than in the paper-pencil simulation. By using randomized groups for discussion,
students who completed the simulation at different paces brought a variety of different insights to
the reflection questions. Since students were able to set their own pace and make multiple
attempts on the Qualtrics survey if they finished before their peers, those students who needed a
faster pace were able to pursue an enriched simulation experience by exploring a variety of
pathways leading to different profit outcomes. Then, because they were grouped randomly, their
insights were shared with a wider peer group during discussion. This grouping strategy would not
have been feasible due to the time constraints presented by the paper-pencil simulation, and its
use engaged more students in discussion about the simulation topics.
Question #2
Teacher’s Question:
When designing and enacting lessons using digital simulations, what procedures should be taken
by teachers to ensure the digital simulation supports learning outcomes?
Anneliese Paulson & Kat Albrecht’s Response:
When designing and enacting lessons using digital simulations, it is necessary that teachers
remember that simulations, digital or not, are pedagogically mediated learning experiences
(Wright-Maley, 2015b). Along these lines, we would suggest prioritizing student reflection and
discussion as a key component of the pedagogical mediation of digital simulations. As with any
effective simulation, students must be actively engaged in learning throughout (Wright-Maley,
2015b). Utilizing strategic discussion protocols is one way to successfully mediate the digital
simulation experience in the classroom.
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 21
For example, in our digital simulation we facilitated reflection and discussion strategies to focus
student learning on understanding the economics of the fur trade. Specifically, students were
asked to reflect independently on why they chose certain trade goods prior to completing their
trades. Once trading was completed, students reflected on their results, and whether they were
happy with their results and, if they redid the simulation, what would they change. The paper-
pencil version of the simulation ended student reflection there. However, because the tool of
digital simulations afforded time savings within the lesson, the teacher was able to facilitate
small-group discussion on additional reflection questions meant to deepen students’
understanding of fur trade economics: What strategies seemed to work best—earn the most
profit—in the simulation? What inferences (educated guesses) can you make about the fur trade
from the simulation? Hint: What goods were most wanted? Who would’ve wanted these the
most? Why would they have wanted them? Students explored these questions three times: once
independently, once in a randomized small group, and once in a whole-class, teacher-led
discussion. As such, the discussion protocol allowed for the teacher and paraeducator to redirect,
reframe, and extend student learning using questioning strategies. Further, these reflections
were better targeted to the learning outcomes of the simulation, and when written responses
were turned in, they also served as a direct formative assessment the teacher could use to
determine whether or not students could articulate which goods were most desired by Indigenous
trading partners in the fur trade, and why.
It is also necessary that the builder of the digital infrastructure of the simulation has a clear
understanding of the learning goals embedded in the simulation. Speaking for ourselves, it can
be very tempting for technologists and designers to revel in the opportunity to design a game or
simulation such that the pedagogical goal can take a back seat to the game itself. However, we
found that working together to design the logic of the simulation and talking through the learning
goals guarded against this problem.
Question #3
Teacher’s Question:
What adaptations can be made to a digital simulation activity if not every student has a digital
device?
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 22
Anneliese Paulson & Kat Albrecht’s Response:
Access to student devices, and classroom technology in general, is a major barrier for many
teachers (Hébert et al., 2021) when it comes to the use of digital simulations. If it is not possible
for every student to have a digital device, we recommend grouping students into pairs or small
groups to complete the digital portion of the simulation. Group work is not only an inclusive
teaching strategy (Lindner & Schwab, 2020), but it can also serve as an effective work-around for
classrooms with limited devices. The group-work strategy could be especially effective if students
are assigned group roles (recorder, reporter, scribe, etc.) to structure their work. After having
students work in pairs or groups on the digital simulation, we recommend randomizing discussion
groups so that students are not discussing the debrief or reflection questions with the same
peers with whom they completed the digital stage of the simulation. This strategy would broaden
the perspectives students have access to, allowing them to learn from peer insights.
The well-known jigsaw strategy often used in collaborative learning would be an effective way to
address this particular challenge. As in a jigsaw activity, students can first be sorted into
technology-sharing base groups to complete the digital simulation. These base groups could be
heterogenous groupings or, to provide greater accommodations or differentiation, homogeneous
groupings based on reading level, personnel support needs, language needs, or a variety of
other factors at the teacher’s discretion. After completing the digital simulation, students would
then re-group into jigsaw groups. Jigsaw groups should be composed of students from various
base groups so that no student is working with the same group twice. In jigsaw groups, students
can either work on reflection/debrief questions, or share their base groups’ reflections and
engage in discussion countering misconceptions or sharing multiple perspectives. After
participating in both base and jigsaw groups, teachers can then engage students in individual
formative assessment strategies such as written reflection, verbal reflections/conferencing, or
exit tickets.
Question #4
Teacher’s Question:
How can Qualtrics (and/or other tools) be used to digitize existing simulations? Could you
provide examples?
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 23
Anneliese Paulson & Kat Albrecht’s Response:
The simulation we created translated well to Qualtrics because of the various “pathways”
students could be routed through based on different trade decisions. But the beauty of this
simulation is that we relied on a very simple system that could be implemented by a teacher who
did not have any experience with coding or programming. The simulation is, at its core, a cleverly
designed survey making use of skip and branching logics, and the simulation could be
implemented in any survey builder. For example, Google Forms is another free survey building
tool that teachers have access to through a Google Suite account.
The key to implementing this type of simulation is in creating logic diagrams to represent the
different possible pathways. In our simulation creation, we were advantaged by a pre-existing
simulation, but we still followed the practice of creating individual logic trees that mapped out
possible outcomes. To do this, we met to discuss the price of trade goods, the value of various
furs, and create a list of all possible outcomes, as well as what decisions a learner would have to
make to yield that outcome. We drew out the pathways on paper and consulted those diagrams
when building the actual survey. This gave us a reference document to make sure we had
recreated every possible outcome in the survey/simulation.
Below, we provide two sample logic diagrams to show how this can be straightforward, or require
more consideration. The first flow chart marks the simple outcome of what happens if a student
decides to purchase a musket. The musket purchase exhausts the total budget, so it is the only
good a student can purchase. However, the second example depicts the possible outcomes if a
student foregoes the musket and decides to purchase at least one copper kettle, leaving the
student with additional possibilities for later trades.
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 24
Figure 2a
Sample Logic Diagram for Musket
Figure 2b
Sample Logic Diagram for 1 or More Copper Kettle
We also made sure to play the simulation through every pathway, and we recruited friends and
colleagues to play too. This gave us confidence that every pathway worked, and that any
confusing instructions were addressed. We made several choices in the survey specifically with a
6th grade audience in mind, including some strategically-repeated instructions and reminder
documents. We also tested the simulation with the goal of breaking it, ending our testing when all
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 25
attempts to break it had failed. Our testing procedure was very successful, and there were no
problems reported during the simulation with the survey itself.
There are also more complex (and more aesthetic) ways of developing pick-your-path games
with different apps, and various companies offer a variety of free or low-cost builders. However,
we didn’t do this because we wanted to test something in the classroom that was quick to set up
and easy to implement. Indeed, including meetings, logic diagramming, and set-up, it only took
about 3 hours to develop and build this simulation, and it is also completely reusable in future
classes.
Similar methods could also be used to create various other Economics simulations where
economic decision making is bounded by scarcity or government regulation. In our example, the
pathways students could select in Qualtrics were tied to budget constraints. So long as there are
pathways for student decision-making to follow, Qualtrics or Google Forms could be used to
digitize the simulation. Along these lines, an Economics simulation demonstrating the differences
in production between command, market, and mixed economic systems could also be effectively
digitized. In this simulation, students might follow different sets of pathways in which they
encounter differing levels of government regulation or supply/demand factors to eventually bring
a product to market. The survey could tabulate the number of products created in each economic
system, and, during discussion, students could consider the ease of bringing products to market,
the quality of the products, and the variety of products brought to market under each economic
system. But this is just the beginning of the possibilities for such simulations, since any domain of
learning where student decision-making and analysis is emphasized is amenable to the
fundamental structure of this simulation.
Question #5
Teacher’s Question:
What advice do you have for teachers new to using digital simulations in the classroom?
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 26
Anneliese Paulson & Kat Albrecht’s Response:
We encourage teachers to remember the old adage “Don’t reinvent the wheel!” We relied heavily
on an existing paper-pencil simulation to design our digital version. Using extant curriculum
resources helped us focus our efforts on the opportunities of digitization as a tool for improving
student outcomes and inclusion. We advise teachers new to using digital simulations to do the
same. Start with a simulation you know addresses your desired course outcomes and build a
digital simulation from there. Preferably, you will have facilitated this simulation several times and
can address common obstacles that your students face when you digitize it. Using extant
curriculum resources can also help you to maintain rigor when creating your digital simulation
version. Remember, the digital simulation is a tool for facilitating student learning, so make sure
you choose the correct tool for the job at hand—the lesson outcomes or learning targets.
Also, center your lesson planning around facilitating discussion or a “debrief” of the simulation.
We found that the crucial benefit of using a digital simulation rather than a paper-pencil
simulation was the amount of discussion time that this switch affords. Pairing your digital
simulation with a discussion protocol will help students process the complicated topics covered in
your simulation. Additionally, we encourage teachers to use structured discussion protocols and
assigned partners or groups. Structuring the discussion/debrief in this way can help students shift
their mindset about the simulation away from the misconception that simulations are “just games”
(Wright-Maley, 2015a) and help them stay focused on the learning outcomes for the lesson.
Lastly, we recommend setting clear technology expectations with your students prior to, or at the
start of, the digital simulation. While technology can be a tool for increasing classroom
engagement (Kuntz, 2012), access to, and effective use of, technology in the classroom can be a
major challenge (Hébert et al., 2021). We encourage teachers to set classroom technology use
expectations at the beginning of the term as part of establishing classroom norms, and also to
ensure that they revisit these expectations in the context of the digital simulation. For example,
facilitate discussion with students about what effective use of technology in the classroom looks
like and sounds like. This strategy could also be effective if used to revisit both technology and
discussion/group work norms in your classroom community. Finally, be sure that you have a
backup plan in place for students who may not come to class prepared, or who run into technical
difficulties. Consider our recommendations above for how you could facilitate a digital simulation
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 27
when not all students have access to a digital device. Partner or group work is a reliable,
inclusive teaching strategy (Lindner & Schwab, 2020) that can be utilized in the event one or
more students do not arrive prepared for the lesson.
Note
We have no conflicts of interest to disclose. This research was done in conjunction with the
Teaching and Learning Fellowship program at Georgia State University. We are grateful to our
colleagues for their feedback and support.
REFERENCES
Aldrich, C. (2005). Learning by doing: A complete guide to simulations, computer games, and
pedagogy in e-learning and other educational experiences. Pfeiffer.
Brozek, E., & Duckworth, D. (2011). Supporting English language learners through technology,
Educator
’
s Voice, IV, 10–15.
https://www.nysut.org/~/media/Files/NYSUT/Resources/2011/March/Educators%20Voice%204%
20Technology/edvoiceIV_ch2.pdf
DiCamillo, L., & Gradwell, J. M. (2012). Using simulations to teach middle grades U.S. history in an
age of accountability. RMLE Online, 35(7), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2012.11462090
Dubé, A. K., & Wen, R. (2021). Identification and evaluation of technology trends in K-12 education
from 2011 to 2021. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10689-8
Hébert, C., Jenson, J., & Terzopoulos, T. (2021). “Access to technology is the major challenge”:
Teacher perspectives on barriers to DGBL in K-12 classrooms. E-Learning and Digital Media,
18(3), 204275302199531. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753021995315
Hofer, M. J., & Swan, K. (2014). Technology and disciplined inquiry in the social studies.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 25-30.
Johnson, C. C., Walton, J. B., Strickler, L., & Elliott, J. B. (2022). Online teaching in K-12 education
in the United States: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 93(3),
003465432211055. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221105550
Kuntz, B. (2012). Engage students by embracing technology. ASCD, 54(6).
https://ascd.org/el/articles/engage-students-by-embracing-technology
Lee, J., & Friedman, A. M. (2009). Research on technology in social studies education. Information
Age Publishing, Inc.
Lindner, K.-T., & Schwab, S. (2020). Differentiation and individualisation in inclusive education: A
systematic review and narrative synthesis. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1(1), 1–
21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1813450
Onion, R. (2019). Classroom historical role-playing games can easily go wrong. So why do teachers
keep assigning them? Slate Magazine. https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/05/history-
classroom-role-playing-games-slavery-holocaust.html
Designing Digital Simulations
Paulson & Albrecht
ASSERT, 7(1) | 2025 | https://doi.org/0.29173/assert83 28
Rector-Aranda, A., & Raider-Roth, M. (2015). “I finally felt like I had power”: Student agency and
voice in an online and classroom-based role-play simulation. Research in Learning Technology,
23. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.25569
Stairs-Davenport, A. (2021). “Where Do I Start?” Inquiry into K-12 mainstream teachers’ knowledge
about differentiating instruction for ELLs in one U.S. school district. Education Inquiry, 14(2), 1–
15. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2021.1969078
Wright-Maley, C. (2015a). Beyond the “Babel problem”: Defining simulations for the social studies.
The Journal of Social Studies Research, 39(2), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssr.2014.10.001
Wright-Maley, C. (2015b). What every social studies teacher should know about simulations.
Canadian Social Studies, 48(1), 8–23.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Anneliese Paulson
I am currently a doctoral student in Curriculum and Instruction at Indiana University Bloomington,
located on the ancestral homelands of the myaamiaki (Miami), Lënape (Delaware), Bodwéwadmik
(Potawatomi), and saawanwa (Shawnee) people. At IU I hope to further examine the nexus between
social and civic education, linguistic, and neurodiversity inclusive practices for language learners and
students with disabilities in social studies classes. Ultimately, I aim to prepare future social studies
teachers to facilitate inclusive classroom communities which empower multilingual and neurodiverse
social studies students. Previously, I taught secondary social studies, including 6th grade Minnesota
Studies, in Mni Sota Makoce (Minnesota) in Prior Lake, Minnesota, on the traditional and contemporary
lands of the Mdewakanton Dakota people. Outside of professional pursuits, I enjoy making music,
reading murder mystery novels, and crafting art projects from recycled materials.
Kat Albrecht
I am an Assistant Professor at Truman State University in the Social Sciences and Human Inquiry Department,
though I was an Assistant Professor at Georgia State University in the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies
during the initiation of this research. I hold a PhD in sociology and a JD from Northwestern University. I am also
currently an MFA student at the University of Georgia in the screenwriting program. My research sits at the
intersection of computational social science, the study of fear, and criminal law. I direct my lab, the Fear and
Computational Law Lab where we use innovative methods to measure how fear becomes entangled with U.S.
law. I am also the Executive Director of the SCALES OKN, a court data non-profit where we work to make public
data meaningfully public such that everyone can measure what’s happening in the legal system at scale. I am
also the North American Director of the Summer Institutes in Computational Social Science, where we provide
support for and host free 2-week summer programs to teach computational social science techniques all around
the world. Outside of my academic and non-profit pursuits I am a staff writer for Horror DNA where I specialize
in reviewing creature features, low-budget horror, and practical special effect films.
