So I really like the economic simulation that is on OER to show the differences between socialism and capitalism.
What I am having a hard time with is that I would like to add a 3rd dimension to the simulation that shows the difference between socialism and communism, because I think that's where students really start to get tripped up. I'm having a hard time thinking of how that would work. Has anyone figured this out?
This is a tough one, Freda Anderson . But maybe I can help you brainstorm... What is the key difference between socialism and communism that you'd like the students to understand?
Just thining out loud here but maybe it's another round where there is still a communist elite that distributes the treats less than equally?
In my school, we are not allowed to use candy as a reward so I tell students to think about the poker chips that I give them represent a student's work in class. I also give out random amounts for capitalism. Some get a lot, some get a little, and some get in the middle.
For socialism, I give them an equal amount and then provide assistance from the teacher (like credit recovery work, additional lessons with the teacher, or extra credit) to help them get back in the game.
I add on pure communism by collecting all the poker chips and saying in communism that we would give out the most chips to students with the lowest grades and the least amount to the students with the higher grades. That usually gets a good debate going :).
I also give everyone one point of extra credit for their participation.
Hope that helps :).
Hmmm. This is a tough one! As I sit here and try to explain the difference aloud to myself it doesn't even sound clear enough. I have toyed with this idea too, but since my students didn't necessarily need to understand the nuances I just look the other way at using the terms interchangeably. (I know, it's not great.)
Are your students on-level or advanced?
I wonder if you did the two rounds of the simulation as it is, and then gave them some information like this: ThoughtCo or this: History.com and let them try to configure how the "game rules" would differ. Just the conversation about it alone might be a good exercise in analysis.
I feel like the key difference is like with communism there is no private property whatsoever. With socialism you still have some private property, but the government controls means of production that are "necessary for basic living" and equally distributes what they determine as essentials and enough money for essentials, and also depending on how it's configured redistributes past a certain amount or taxes past a certain amount so that the gap between richest and poorest are more equal. I mean all of these things would have to be like... decided upon bc they are just theories but that's a key difference that I see.
A History Channel article I saw explained it like this: "Under communism, there is no such thing as private property. All property is communally owned, and each person receives a portion based on what they need. A strong central government—the state—controls all aspects of economic production, and provides citizens with their basic necessities, including food, housing, medical care and education.
By contrast, under socialism, individuals can still own property. But industrial production, or the chief means of generating wealth, is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.
Another key difference in socialism versus communism is the means of achieving them. In communism, a violent revolution in which the workers rise up against the middle and upper classes is seen as an inevitable part of achieving a pure communist state. Socialism is a less rigid, more flexible ideology. Its adherents seek change and reform, but often insist on making these changes through democratic processes within the existing social and political structure, not overthrowing that structure."
Ah! Now I see where you're going with it.
Sounds to me like another way to do this - though maybe not exactly what you're going for - is to show what a mixed economy looks like. I often feel that we sometimes show these economic systems as absolutes. It might be worth pointing out how even a capitalistic society like ours, has instiutions that are publically run (i.e. the USPS, our libraries and other institutions like this that students will be familiar with).
