This paper presents an action research plan designed to address declining student interest and low test scores in middle school history classes. After noting that even a shift to Socratic questioning failed to improve engagement, the researcher proposes a controlled classroom study using role play and simulation as non-traditional instructional methods. Using three high school junior cohorts taught by the same teacher, the study compares a control group against two experimental groups. One experiment places students in the roles of 18th-century Australian aborigines and early white settlers, guiding them through conflict scenarios with assigned leader personalities. The paper outlines data collection methods, reflection procedures, and reporting expectations, aiming to determine whether experiential learning strategies can move students beyond rote memorization toward genuine historical understanding.
As reported in the press and in a number of professional journals, year after year, students at all levels are displaying decreasing interest in the study of history. Feedback consistently indicates that students believe the subject holds no relevance for them and is simply "boring." This trend presents a serious challenge for history educators who must find ways to make the discipline feel meaningful and alive for today's learners.
The specific classroom problem motivating this study is clear: during history lessons, middle school students are inattentive despite the fact that teachers have already replaced traditional classroom lecture with a more lively, modified Socratic method intended to elicit greater student interaction. Even this adjustment has not been sufficient — student test scores remain low, and engagement remains a persistent concern.
Given the limitations of current instructional approaches, this study asks a central question: can we build greater student interest in history by using non-traditional learning methods such as role play and simulation techniques? The hypothesis is that experiential, student-centered learning strategies will produce higher engagement, deeper learning, and improved test performance compared to conventional methods.
The study will employ three history classrooms, all composed of high school juniors. Each group is quite homogeneous from class to class, and all three sections are led by the same teacher — a design choice that controls for instructor variability. One class will serve as the control group, covering the same subject matter as the two experimental classrooms but using only those teaching techniques already in everyday use.
At the opening of the unit, every student in the study cohort will be given a multiple-choice pretest covering the area of Australian history appropriate to the subject matter to be studied. Because students will already have been informed that a new approach to history instruction is being investigated, they will be told in advance that pretest results will not be counted toward their final grade, reducing test anxiety and encouraging honest baseline responses.
Action research of this kind — where a practitioner designs, implements, and reflects on an instructional intervention within their own classroom — is well established in education as a tool for improving teaching practice. This study follows that model closely.
The first learning strategy to be studied is role-playing. Half of the classroom cohort will play the part of Australian aborigines in the 18th century; the other half will play early white Australian settlers. The instructor will guide students in researching the societal and personal characteristics of both groups using library and Internet resources.
With each student assigned a subtopic within the main subject, both groups will review materials relating to the backgrounds — history, culture, morals, ethics, state of technology, and more — of the two groups under study. This background research phase is intended to ground students in historical accuracy before any dramatic interaction begins.
In group sessions held upon completion of their research, students will compare notes. This procedure is intended to build cohesion within the student body and to encourage cooperation rather than competition on learning tasks. Once groups are prepared, the class will be presented with a hypothetical problem in which settlers and aborigines come into conflict.
Three leaders chosen from each group will each be assigned a "personality" by the instructor: aggressive, weak, or firm-but-fair. Several scenario variations can thus be played out during the week devoted to this experiment, with the instructor pairing leaders from the two groups on a random basis. The two leaders will work through the problem while remaining true to their assigned personality and to the historical time period.
Students on the sidelines — collections of "aborigines" and "settlers" — will be encouraged to observe the interaction and to critique the leaders when they digress from historical accuracy, when they go out of character, or when they disagree with what their leader is doing. This peer-observation component, grounded in principles of experiential learning, is intended to open livelier and more substantive discourse among students.
At the close of each class day, conclusions will be drawn, including students' answers to the reflective question: "What would life be like today here in Australia if this was what actually happened in the nation's early days?" This forward-looking prompt encourages students to connect historical events to present-day consequences — a key goal of meaningful history education.
"Teacher as facilitator, not knowledge authority"
"Observational notes, test scores, student feedback"
"Conclusions, student feedback, administrative report"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.