Author John Hunter is a teacher and educational consultant who, in 1978, created a class activity called The World Peace Game. The students are assigned varied roles such as prime minister, arms dealers, United Nations members, and weather god/goddess; and then given 50 interrelated crises, ranging from ethnic and minority tensions to nuclear proliferation, oil spills, and climate change, to solve. Victory is defined as satisfactorily solving all of the crises as well as increasing every country's asset value beyond its starting point. In conjunction with game play, Hunter reads passages from Chinese military general Sun Tzu's The Art of War to broaden the students' understanding of strategy.
The book is a good read but misleading and disappointing in the sense that it does not actually offer any real insight or useful approaches to solving the world's problems. I suppose that was a pretty high expectation to go into a book with, but I thought it would address the topic at least on a small or even theoretical level. Instead, the book covers anecdotes of children learning cooperation, confidence, humility, foresight, assertiveness, compassion, and patience. In this regard the game is a shining success, but only superficially serves as a tool for familiarizing children with the arduous nature of negotiations, budgets, or any other political operations. The feasibility of actions can be scrutinized and factors such as duration of environmental disasters and cost of implementing a tactic are required to be backed up with research, but beyond that the game is not very realistic. Pooling a global donation, one nation conveniently developing hydrogen fuel-cell technology, or planting 10 trillion trees on every continent are nice ideas, but not remotely practical.
Hunter fully owns up to the limitations of his creation though, admitting, "the benefit of the World Peace Game is not the real-life applicability of the solutions that students devise. I don't expect nine-year-olds to come up with workable approaches to eliminating poverty or creating peace." Rather, the book serves more as a opponent for standardized testing and "teaching up to the test" practices that have basically taken over the educational system now. And in this regard, I believe the game is an even brighter shining success. Hunter breaks down education into three essential components: knowledge, creativity, and wisdom; and aims to instill these abilities in his students. Essentially, the game is a series of complexity that allows students to explore problems, adjust spontaneously, and arrive at solutions in ways that multiple choice tests will never manage to. The problem with this, as Hunter addresses, is "it is nearly impossible to quantify."
As strong of a proponent for these more intangible forms of learning as I may be, the book still does not present much evidence in support of it outside of anecdotes. The book is also extremely repetitive, and reads too much like a "how to write an essay" blueprint: introduction, conclusion, and topic sentences (e.g. "As we saw in the last chapter and shall see even more clearly in this one...") for every chapter. Still, I would consider it a worthwhile read, especially if you are in the education field, if for no other reason than just to study teaching techniques in a more independent learning setting.