Simulating the Camp David Negotiations

Abstract

This article reflects critically on simulations. Building on the authors’ experience simulating the Palestinian-Israeli-American Camp David negotiations of 2000, they argue that simulations are useful pedagogical tools that encourage creative—but not critical—thinking and constructivist learning. However, they can also have the deleterious effect of reproducing unequal power relations in the classroom. The authors develop this argument in five stages:

They distinguish between problem solving and critical theory and define critical thinking—something not done by the simulation orthodoxy.

They describe the Camp David simulation. This is their contribution to the relatively small corpus of literature on simulating Palestinian-Israeli relations.

They review the constructivist learning and peer teaching accomplished through their simulation. This section is notable because it is authored by a graduate student who participated in the simulation as a meaning maker.

They review the manner in which simulations promote creative, not critical, thinking, and reproduce asymmetrical power relations.

They reflect on the overall utility of simulating the Camp David negotiations in the classroom.