Reconvening the Senate: Learning Outcomes after Using the Reacting to the Past Pedagogy in the Intermediate Latin Class

  • Christine L. Albright


Building on the previous implementation of Reacting to the Past (RTTP) and research on students’ learning experiences therein, the author of this chapter examines continued incorporation and innovation around the RTTP game Beware the Ides of March: Rome in 44 BCE in her Latin 2001 class. Within the study, students’ survey answers in the author’s class were compared with those of students in two other sections of Latin 2001 in which students read the same Latin texts but did not play the RTTP game. The chapter reports on how students who played the RTTP game in Latin 2001 felt that they had a better understanding of the history surrounding the Latin texts they read than students in the other two classes, that they had learned more history in class during the semester than students in the other two classes, and that their Latin skills had improved more during the semester than students’ skills in the other classes.


  1. ACTFL. (2015). World-readiness standards for learning languages. Alexandria: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.Google Scholar
  2. Albright, C. L. (2013). Reimagining Latin class: Using the reacting to the past pedagogy in the intermediate Latin class. Teaching Classical Languages, 5(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, C. A., & Dix, T. K. (2008). “Reacting to the past” and the classics curriculum: Rome in 44 BCE. The Classical Journal, 103, 449–455.Google Scholar
  4. Bogost, I. (2014). Why gamification is bullshit. In S. Waltz & S. Deterding (Eds.), The gameful world: Approaches, issues, applications (pp. 65–79). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Carnes, M. C. (2014). Minds on fire: How role-immersion games transform college. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davison, A., & Goldhaber, S. L. (2007). Integration, socialization, collaboration: Inviting native and non-native English speakers into the academy through “reacting to the past.”. In J. Summerfield & C. Benedicks (Eds.), Reclaiming the public university: Conversations on general and liberal education (pp. 143–161). New York: Peter Lang Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Dolmays, J. M. (2015). Reacting to translations past: A game-based approach to teaching translation studies. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 10(1), 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., & Smith, B. L. (1990). Learning communities: Creating connections among students, faculty, and disciplines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  9. Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. (2015). World of wordcraft: Foreign language grammar and composition taught as a term-long role-playing game. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 14(4), 368–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Knapp, R., & Vaughn, P. (2003). Finis rei publicae: Eyewitness to the end of the republic (2nd ed.). Newburyport: Focus Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates. (2005). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  12. LaFleur, R. (1994). Love and transformation: An Ovid reader (2nd ed.). New York: Scott Foresman-Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  13. Laufgraben, J. L., & Shapiro, N. (2004). Sustaining and improving learning communities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  14. Lazrus, P. K., & McKay, G. K. (2013). The reacting to the past pedagogy and engaging the first-year student. In J. Groccia & L. Cruz (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development (Vol. 32, pp. 315–416). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  15. Magnan, S., Murphy, D., Sahakyan, N., & Kim, S. (2012). Student goals, expectations, and the standards for foreign language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 45(2), 170–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McKinley, J. (2013). Reacting to the past: A CLIL pedagogy. The Language Teacher, 37(5), 69–71.Google Scholar
  17. Mulligan, B. (2014). Coniuratio! Ethopoeia and “reacting to the past” in the Latin classroom (and beyond). The Classical Journal, 110(1), 107–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Paule, M. T. (2016). Companions of Aeneas: Gamifying intermediate Latin. Teaching Classical Languages, 6(2), 1–16.Google Scholar
  19. Pike, M. (2015). Gamification in the Latin classroom. Journal of Classics Teaching, 16, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Reinhard, A. (2012). Learning Latin via gaming. In T. Thorsen (Ed.), Greek and Roman games in the computer age (pp. 127–153). Trondheim: Tapir Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Sapsford, F., Travis, R., & Ballestrini, K. (2013). Acting, speaking, and thinking like a Roman: Learning Latin with operation LAPIS. Journal of Classics Teaching, 28, 13–16.Google Scholar
  22. Schaller, P. (2012). Can role-playing the French revolution en Franҫais also teach the eighteenth century? Digital Defoe: Studies in Defoe and His Contemporaries, 4(1), 41–60.Google Scholar
  23. Shapiro, N. S., & Levine, J. (1999). Creating learning communities: A practical guide to winning support, organizing for change, and implementing programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  24. Slota, S. T., & Young, M. F. (2014). Think games on the fly, not gamify: Issues in game-based learning research. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 6(4), 628–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Slota, S. T., Ballestrini, K., & Pearsall, M. (2013, October). Learning through operation LAPIS: A game-based approach to the language classroom. The Language Educator, pp. 36–38.Google Scholar
  26. Smith, B. L., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., & Gabelnick, F. (2004). Learning communities: Reforming undergraduate education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  27. Travis, R. (2011). Practomimetic learning in the classics classroom: A game-based learning method from ancient epic and philosophy. New England Classical Journal, 38(1), 25–42.Google Scholar
  28. Webb, J., & Engar, A. (2016). Exploring classroom community: A social networking study of reacting to the past. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 4(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & van der Spek, E. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Young, M. F., Slota, S., Cutter, A. B., Jalette, G., Mullin, G., Lai, B., Simeoni, Z., Tran, M., & Yukhymenko, M. (2012). Our princess is in another castle: A review of trends in serious gaming for education. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 61–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhao, C. M., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christine L. Albright
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations