Interactive games and learning labs for practicing historical inquiry, media ecology, source evaluation, technoskepticism, and pedagogical friction in the age of generative AI.
Playable public scholarship
Each game turns a concept into a decision space: players do not simply receive the framework, they try it, calibrate it, and notice what changes.
Featured visual simulations
These three simulations turn difficult framework concepts into visual decision spaces. Load-Bearing reveals the difference between polished artifacts and durable learning. Trailhead distinguishes productive struggle from access barriers. Answerable shows how one technology reorganizes an entire school ecology.
Build a unit; watch it become a bridge. Structural thinking holds the transfer load, while polish alone shears off. An X-ray reveals the difference between the artifact of learning and the learning itself.
One trail, four hikers. Watch productive struggle and exclusionary barriers shape who reaches the summit, then redesign the route so every learner can climb without bypassing the work.
Introduce a technology into a living school system. Use five technoskeptical lenses to reveal hidden prices, uneven effects, dependencies, ecological ripples, and alternatives before making a public decision.
Showing all 12 games.
Work through a literature review as seven stations. Judge whether a polished essay still proves learning, watch three conditions break across Ong's arc, build the friction framework in the only order that holds, sort ten scenarios where some have no clean answer, and meet the strongest objections.
Construct a 6-lesson unit on the Reconstruction era. Choose between scaffolded manual inquiry and effortless AI shortcuts, and discover how hollow polish fails under transfer stress.
Construct a vertical argument tower to support your thesis. Defend your evidence joints, and see if your stone foundations can withstand objection catapults that shatter gold-clad AI shortcuts.
Navigate a flowing river of historical and generative information. Use Friction Dams to slow the current and Corroboration Lenses to expose fabricated sources before your bibliography fails the audit.
An AI argues fluent, one-sided historical theses; players rebut with sourcing, context, corroboration, and counter-evidence — and learn when to push back and when to concede a fair point.
Step into the teacher's chair: navigate charged classroom moments with C.O.R.E. and H.E.A.R.T., balancing civil discourse, academic rigor, and student trust.
Players respond to a polished AI-generated historical claim by choosing inquiry moves that protect sourcing, context, corroboration, agency, and access.
Four charged moments — 1774 Boston, 1787 Philadelphia, 1961 Anniston, 1943 Manzanar. Assemble what actors could actually know, dodge anachronism and hindsight traps, and appraise hard decisions without presentism or easy exoneration.
Take a civic issue from question to proposal: gather evidence, map stakeholders, resist frictionless AI shortcuts, and audit the machine-drafted plan before your name goes on it.
A historical inquiry simulator focused on source judgment, evidence, and the interpretive moves that make historical claims defensible.
A calibration challenge for distinguishing productive friction, exclusionary friction, and context-dependent difficulty in learning design.
A playable media-ecology journey through the shifting sensorium, helping players feel how communication technologies reorganize thought and culture.
A continuous first-person walk from a grove to a cyber landscape. Each of the five media environments asks for a different kind of physical work rather than a different button: remember a rhythm and walk it, carry a mark to its match, tune a voice out to distant listeners, recover a contribution the routing buried, then check which spans of a generated bridge actually hold.
A first-person building game about the conditions underneath the learning. One builder raises the same signal on three sites. The judgment the job asks for never changes and cannot be made easier; the tool, the distance, the light, and the wall decide whether you ever reach it. One lot is not harder than the others. It is impossible, and saying so is a move the game asks you to make.
No games match that combination. Try widening one of the filters, or reset them.
Connected hubs
The games are companions to presentations, writing, and research-facing resources. They are public-facing learning spaces, not participant-data systems.