As educators, at the start of a new academic year, we are all looking for new ways to energize our students and deepen their understanding of global issues. In my U.S. Foreign Policy course at Vanguard University in California, I incorporated eight CFR Education mini simulations to help students step into the shoes of policymakers and bring global politics to life!
These fun, interactive role-play activities allowed my class to grapple with real-world dilemmas facing world leaders, from economic sanctions to soft power (vis-à-vis hard power), to even banning TikTok (due to national security concerns), all while developing critical thinking, persuasive speaking, and collaborative skills.
In this blog post, I’ll share how I implemented the CFR Education mini simulations (which can be done in one 1-hour class session), what materials I used, how I organized students, how I assessed participation, and the learning outcomes I observed.
Getting Started
Learning Objectives
- Understand the structure and purpose of the U.S. National Security Council (NSC)
- Analyze different foreign policy options
- Develop and defend arguments in a collaborative setting
Materials Needed
- CFR Education Mini Simulation handouts (printable via download option)
- White index cards for argument notes
Length of Time for the Activity
Each simulation took one 60-minute class session, plus an online debrief discussion post due later in the week.
Relevant Links
- CFR Education Mini Simulations
- Banning TikTok Mini Simulation (a good one to start with!)
- Soft Power Mini Simulation (I discussed this in detail during a webinar on using mini simulations. You can view my slide deck from that session here.)
Running the Simulation
For my U.S. Foreign Policy course, I chose eight simulations that both aligned with the topics covered throughout the semester and that I thought would pique my students’ interests.
In each session, I distributed the CFR Education mini simulation as a one-page handout, and we read aloud together the scenario overview, situation, decision point, and three policy options. I asked one student to volunteer to be the “President,” while the rest acted as NSC members. NSC members are reminded that their goal is to persuade the President with their preferred policy option, to “get the ear of the President.”
The three corners of the classroom represented the three different policy options outlined in the mini simulation. I instructed students to migrate to their preferred policy option corner after the reading. In a class of 16 students, I capped each corner to a maximum of 4 students to ensure balanced group sizes, requiring students to choose a different option if their preferred corner was full.
I gave each group a big white flashcard to jot down their arguments. The President was also given a flashcard to jot down the arguments from each team. Groups were given 5-7 minutes to discuss and formulate their best arguments, with a designated recorder noting their three main points on the flashcard. Following the group discussion, the class proceeds to the presentation phase. Each group selects one member to serve as the speaker, presenting their opening argument to the President in a concise 2-minute address. The President invites the two other groups to refute opposing arguments for 5 minutes. All group members are encouraged to respond with counterarguments to defend their position. The President is encouraged to ask follow-up questions to the group, deepening the discussion and clarifying points for 1-2 minutes.
After all three groups have presented their cases, the President makes a final decision, choosing the foreign policy option she finds most persuasive and justifying her choice based on the arguments heard. The class usually ends with cheers erupting from the corner whose foreign policy option was chosen by the President.
Quotes from Students
The interactive nature of the simulations sparked lively debates. The quotes below came from a post-simulation debriefing report, where I asked students to articulate their group’s arguments, assess the best option, and reflect on what the simulation taught them.
In the soft power mini simulation, one student reflected:
“With good soft power, you can win a war before a shot is fired.”
Another noted:
“It is really important to avoid turning to hard power when we can. It is also worth the risk to invest more in soft power because the alternative is thoroughly unacceptable.”
Results and Assessment
Participation for each mini simulation was graded on a rubric ranging from “Mastery” (10 points) to “Needs Improvement” (6 points or below), based on engagement, argument quality, and grasp of concepts demonstrated during the mini simulation. Students who are less comfortable with public speaking could earn equivalent credit through their written debriefing reports.
From my perspective, the simulations helped students:
- Apply course concepts in a realistic context
- Understand trade-offs in foreign policy decision-making
- Improve persuasive speaking and active listening skills
By the end of the semester, students demonstrated greater confidence in policy discussions and deeper appreciation for the complexity of global affairs. I had students tell me U.S. foreign policy class was memorable due to the interactive nature of the mini simulations. Try it this semester, you won’t regret it!
To learn more about integrating simulations into your classroom, watch this webinar where I discuss how I created my syllabus from last spring (it is even available as an editable Google Doc!) using CFR Education materials.
Author Bio
Eunice Kang is an Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Vanguard University in Southern California and is currently serving as a CFR Education Higher Education Ambassador Program as a Distinguished Ambassador. Connect with Eunice Kang on LinkedIn.