Upcoming events

Follow Us

Menu
Log in


WE ARE EXPERIENCING ISSUES WITH OUR FILE LINKS THROUGHOUT THE GAME LIBRARY. WE HOPE TO HAVE THIS FIXED BY THURSDAY NOVEMBER 21, 2024.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND UNDERSTANDING. 


CHALLENGING THE CAMPS

Challenging the Camps: Korematsu v. United States, 1944

by Michael A. Barnhart

Rights versus Responsibilities

After the Pearl Harbor attack, Fred Korematsu decided to defy President Franklin Roosevelt's Executive Order 9066 requiring all Japanese-Americans to report to "internment" camps. He appealed his arrest as a violation of his constitutional rights. His case reached the United States Supreme Court in 1944. This game recreates that case.

ABOUT THE GAME

Details

Disciplines
Cultural & Social History, Political Science & Government, US History, Legal and Constitutional History, Rhetoric and Performance


Era 

20th Century


Geography 
North America, United States of America


Level
Microgame

Themes and Issues  
Constitutional Rights vs War Powers, Race

Player Interactions 
Aggressive, Factional, Competitive, Collaborative Coalition-Building


Sample Class Titles
U.S. History since Reconstruction, The Second World War


Notable Roles
Charles Fahy, Solicitor General of the United States;

Charles Horsky, ACLU;

Justice Felix Frankfurter, US Supreme Court

Mechanics 
None


Chaos and Demand on Instructor 
Highly structured, Easy for instructors


Using the Game

Class Time  

"Korematsu v. US" can be played in a single 60-90 minute session.

Possible Reacting Game Pairings
This game can be used on its own, or with other games. These pairings are meant to be illustrative rather than exhaustive or prescriptive. One might pair this with Japanese Exclusion in California: 1906-1915, Japan: 1941, or Yalta: 1945.


Assignments
You can adjust the assignments based on the desired learning outcomes of your class. "Korematsu v. US" includes a criticism assignment.

Judges must decide on three key issues in the case and vote accordingly.

Class Size and Scalability 
This game is recommended for classes with 5-30+ students. The game scales proportionally with the ideal size being thirteen players (4 litigants and 9 judges). Adding more judges and clerks can be used to expand the game, along with running multiple instances at once.

If the number of players will exceed 16, then roles will be doubled as specified in a role assignment matrix in the Instructor's Manual. Tripling roles is possible.


GAME MATERIALS

Reacting Consortium members can access all downloadable materials (including expanded and updated materials) below. You will be asked to sign in before downloading.  

Instructor's Manual

The Instructor's Guide includes guidance for assigning roles, presenting the game's context and topics, assignments, and more.  The Role Sheets are also included in this document. 

Download the Instructor's Manual
(Members Only)

.pdf file, Updated August 2024

Handouts

These handouts include name signs for students, reports, and supplementary materials.

Download Additional Materials (Members Only)
.zip folder of .pdf files, Updated August 2024

Role Sheets

Students will only need their Role Sheet, which contains biographical information, and information on how to play the game.

Download Role Sheets (Members Only)
.zip folder of .pdf files, Updated August 2024


ABOUT THE AUTHORS 

Michael A. Barnhart

Michael A. Barnhart is a Distinguished Teaching Professor Emeritus, Department of History at Stony Brook University, who has taught there for forty years. For over twenty, Micheael has used simulations as teaching tools. He has also written a book about using simulations entitled "Can You Beat Churchill?" along with other, more traditional academic publications such as "Japan Prepares for Total War."

QUESTIONS

Members can contact game authors directly

We invite instructors join our Facebook Faculty Lounge, where you'll find a wonderful community eager to help and answer questions. We also encourage you to submit your question for the forthcoming FAQ, and to check out our upcoming events


YOU MAY ALSO LIKE...

 title=The Pluto Debate
The Pluto Debate: The International Astronomical Union Defines a Planet

Galileo
The Trial of Galileo: Aristotelianism, the "New Cosmology," and the Catholic Church, 1616-1633

LONDON 1854
London 1854: Cesspits, Cholera, and Conflict over the Broad Street Pump

reacting@barnard.edu

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software