Official Rulebook & Facilitator Guide · v3.1
ROOM
CHAOS
A reflective discussion game for surfacing teaching philosophies
Everything beyond this point is optional depth for those interested and curious readers.
A reflective discussion game for groups of 3 or more. Teachers respond to short classroom dilemmas and the room votes on which responses resonate. It is intended to provoke thoughts and your beliefs to be articulated when put into a situation.
One person facilitates, everyone else plays on their own device. Read a dilemma, write what you'd do (under 25 words), back it with one fact or opinion, vote on the responses you find most compelling, then talk about why.
At the end you can download a transcript of every response you made and it is usable as raw material for the teaching philosophy paper. The game is most useful right before any reflective writing assignment.
To test the waters, start with the Tutorial scenario on the facilitator's Common tab. It's low stakes and everyone should be comfortable with a silly classic trivia.
Full setup guide ↓01
What is this
game?
At Kamo Senior High, you and your fellow teachers deal with life changing experiences every day. One day, you head into your classroom to start the session. Before you even sit down, something's already happening one after another. A student refuses to work. Another questions the rules. And then your lesson falls apart mid-class. It's a total Classroom Chaos!
You then head into the teachers office, and there you realized that every other teacher is dealing with something just like it. Fellow teachers are talking, comparing, figuring things out. Not arguing over who's right, but sharing what they'd do. You listen. Some responses don't resonate quite right (not necessarily wrong). Some feel right. Some stick with you.
And so, Kamo Senior High calls for a teachers' meeting. One teacher takes the role of facilitator, guiding the flow. You take turns sharing what happened in your classroom — what you did, and why you did it. Others respond with their own perspectives, backed by facts or opinions. Then, together, you decide which responses resonate most!
Message from Creator
This game is more useful when players can say what they actually think. Write what you want, and keep on learning. As you hear everyone's takes, question your own, test & apply, and come to a conclusion, you keep updating your philosophy and it will shape how you design your class and curriculum.
How you respond isn't random, but it comes from what you believe teaching and learning should be. That belief shows up everywhere — in how you plan your lessons, in what you prioritize, in how you adjust when things don't go as expected. And over time, it shapes the kind of classroom you create, what kind of curriculum you design, and what kind of belief you hold through your classes as a teacher of any subject.
Classroom Chaos is a jack in the box-styled reflection education game. Each round, a real classroom dilemma appears on screen — something with no clean answer. A twist complicates it. Everyone in the room submits how they'd actually handle it (their solution, often rooted from their teacher philosophy), justifies it with either a fact or an opinion, and then the group votes on which responses resonated most.
There's also this thing called the Schema Reveal, and it names the underlying belief the whole room was debating without knowing it — things like "Rules vs. Relationships" or "Authority vs. Truth." That reveal is the moment the game becomes a tool. It's not about who was right. It's about where your instinct came from.
The game runs entirely in your browser. One facilitator sets up the session, shares a four-letter code, and players join on their own devices. Everything is anonymous by default.
02
The research
behind it
Teaching philosophies are rarely built through reasoning. They're absorbed — from classrooms you sat in as a child, teachers who shaped you, and cultures that defined what learning is supposed to look like. Bartlett (1932) called these structures schemas: organised mental templates that don't just store knowledge but shape what we notice, what we expect, and what we assume is normal.
"Cultural schemas are socially shared representations deployable in automatic cognition — meaning they run before conscious choice."
Boutyline & Soter · American Sociological Review, 2021Vygotsky (1978) adds a further wrinkle: beliefs about teaching don't originate inside individuals. They begin on the social plane and get internalised through culturally mediated activity. What you believe about grading, authority, or student wellbeing is, to a significant degree, what your culture practised around you before you were old enough to question it.
The implication for this game is that before teachers can write a philosophy, they need to excavate one. The schema is already running and the game just happen to make it visible. Each dilemma is designed to activate a specific schema, and each Schema Reveal names the one that was driving the room's responses all along.
Almusharraf's 2020 study found that while student teachers struggled to develop a cogent teaching philosophy on their own, their reflection improved substantially through oral, collaborative tasks — particularly peer observation feedback meetings, where participants reached high reflection levels that written tasks alone didn't produce. The study concluded that student teachers don't lack the capacity for reflection, however they lack the prompts and the social conditions that make reflection happen.
"Becoming critically reflective of one's own assumptions is the key to transforming one's taken-for-granted frames of reference — an indispensable dimension of learning for adapting to change."
Mezirow, 1997 · cited in Almusharraf, 2020Almusharraf's framework, drawing on El-Okda's (2009) rubric, defines three levels of reflection: a low level that merely describes classroom puzzles without deeper reasoning; a moderate level that identifies alternatives and rationale; and a high level that surfaces tacit beliefs and weighs them against explicit principles. Classroom Chaos is designed to push past low-level description by making the tacit visible through the fact/opinion sort, the schema reveal, and structured discussion.
Bartlett (1932); Rumelhart (1980). Memory and meaning are reconstructed through mental templates, not retrieved intact.
Vygotsky (1978); Lantolf & Thorne (2006). Beliefs originate socially before becoming internal through cultural mediation.
Almusharraf (2020); Kaywork (2011). Oral discussion consistently unlocks deeper reflection than written tasks alone.
Boutyline & Soter (2021). Schemas operate automatically — below the level of deliberate choice.
Forbes et al. (2021); Liu & Evans (2016). Non-linguistic beliefs about learning directly shape teaching practice.
Mezirow (1991, 1997). Tacit beliefs act as filters; critical reflection is how they're examined and transformed.
03
Setup &
getting started
There are two roles: the Facilitator (one person, usually the teacher or session leader) and Players (everyone else). The facilitator controls the pace and flow of the session. Players respond to dilemmas on their own devices.
- Facilitator: one device with a browser, ideally projected so the room can see the dilemma together.
- Players: any device — phone, laptop, tablet. Each person joins individually.
- Internet: required for fonts and session storage. Once loaded, the session is stable.
- Room size: works with 3 or more. Best between 3 and 8 — that's where every voice still gets heard.
A note on character descriptions
The sentence you write about yourself matters. If Assigned Character Mode is enabled, someone else will have to argue from your stated beliefs. Write it like you mean it — vague answers make poor role cards.
"I think students learn best when they feel psychologically safe, even if that slows down the curriculum."
- Open the game in your browser and tap "Facilitate a session." A four-letter room code appears — put it on the shared screen.
- While players join, read their anonymous teacher characters in the "Who's in the room" panel — it helps you pick a relevant first dilemma.
- Optionally: toggle Assigned Character Mode on and shuffle assignments before round one begins (see section 07).
- If this is your group's first session, start with the Tutorial scenario at the top of the Common tab. It's intentionally low-stakes (it's about pineapple pizza) and gets everyone comfortable with the flow before harder dilemmas land.
- Pick a dilemma from the Common, Spicy, Hot Take, or Custom tab and start the round.
- Open the same game URL and enter the room code in the "Join in" box on the home screen.
- Create your teacher character: pick an avatar emoji, give yourself an anonymous name (e.g. "Professor Compass"), and write one sentence about your teaching beliefs.
- Wait in the lobby — the game will automatically move you forward when the facilitator starts the first round.
If the page won't load
Some adblockers and privacy extensions (uBlock, Brave Shields, AdGuard) block the connection the game uses to sync. If the page just sits on "Loading…", try whitelisting the page in your blocker, switching to a different browser, or using your phone instead. The home page itself should always load.
04
How a round
works
Each round moves through five phases. The facilitator controls the transitions — players move automatically when the facilitator advances.
What "Reclassified" means
During the Reveal, you may see a ⚠️ Reclassified flag. This means the room voted the opposite of how the author labelled their own reasoning — someone tagged a justification as a fact, but the room read it as an opinion. Almost always more interesting than agreement, and worth a few minutes of discussion.
No timers by design
There are no automatic phase timers. The facilitator reads the room and decides when to push forward. For a reflection-focused game, the trade-off lands on the side of letting discussion breathe.
Why every voice stays on screen
Earlier versions hid zero-vote submissions at the reveal. The current version keeps all of them visible. The contrarian voice nobody voted for is often the most pedagogically interesting one — and quietly removing it from view sends the wrong signal.
05
The dilemmas
& hot takes
There are four types of content the facilitator can deal:
A real classroom situation — something ambiguous that requires a decision. Every scenario has 2 possible Twists. The game deals one at random.
14 base scenarios + 1 tutorial across common teaching tensions
Harder dilemmas involving race, AI, or personal accusations. Same structure as common scenarios. Best unlocked after 2–3 regular rounds.
Requires psychological safety to work well
A single provocative claim. No scenario, no twist, no schema reveal. Players agree, disagree, or complicate the statement. Good for changing pace.
14 base + 9 spicy hot takes available
The facilitator writes their own dilemma, twist, schema, and description. Useful for bringing in real classroom situations from the group's own experience.
Unlimited — write whatever fits the room
Hot Take rounds use the same submission format: players write a response and tag it as fact or opinion. But there's no schema reveal at the end — the discussion after is the point.
Facilitator tip: picking the right content
Read the "Who's in the room" panel before picking a dilemma — it shows everyone's self-descriptions. If several players described themselves as strict or boundary-focused, a dilemma about leniency will land harder.
If the group is unfamiliar with each other, start with the Tutorial or a Common scenario. Save Hot Takes for after a card round on a related theme — the contrast sharpens both.
06
All 14
schemas
The creator, Mughni, loves schemas for some reason. Schemas are basically a big part of the CALM project. For Classroom Chaos, every base scenario is mapped to one underlying cultural schema — a belief about what teaching is, what fairness means, or where authority lives. The schema reveal isn't a verdict on who was right. But, it's a label for what was really at stake.
How to use a schema reveal in discussion
Don't explain it — ask about it. "Does this name fit how you were thinking?" "Where did your position on this tension come from?"
The Tutorial scenario uses a 15th schema — Authority vs. Self-Expression — phrased lightly enough to teach the mechanics without anyone feeling exposed. Spicy scenarios use eight further schemas (Defensiveness vs. Accountability, Evidence vs. Instinct, Autonomy vs. Protection, and others) listed in-game.
07
Assigned character
mode
When this mode is active, players don't argue from their own stated teaching identity. They argue from someone else's. The game shuffles character assignments so that each player is assigned a different person's teacher character — and must respond to each dilemma as that person would.
Mezirow (1997) calls unexamined beliefs "taken-for-granted frames of reference." Assigned character mode is a mechanism for stepping outside your own frame — temporarily. When you have to argue a position you don't personally hold, you often discover where your own boundaries are. The game is harder. The reflection is deeper.
Debrief question for assigned character rounds
"Did you end up smuggling in your real position anyway? Where did the character's view end and yours begin?"
Characters are not disguises
The purpose is to explore an unfamiliar position — not to parody or dismiss it. Name this clearly before enabling the mode. If someone is uncomfortable arguing a position, they can flag it or pass the round. The tool is for reflection, not performance.
- In the lobby, the facilitator toggles "Assigned character mode" on.
- With at least 2 players in the room, tap "Shuffle & assign characters." Each player is silently assigned someone else's character.
- When a round opens, each player sees a banner showing whose identity they're playing as — including that person's name and one-sentence belief statement.
- The facilitator can re-shuffle between rounds if needed.
08
Running the
discussion
The most important part of each round is not the voting! It's actually the 5–10 minutes after the reveal. Almusharraf (2020) found that oral, collaborative dialogue consistently unlocked higher reflection levels than written tasks alone. The game's discussion phase is designed to create those conditions.
- "Where does your position trace back to? A specific teacher, classroom memory, or cultural expectation you absorbed before you ever thought about teaching."
- "What does your response suggest you value more in the schema?"
- "Did you vote for something that actually contradicts what you usually believe? Where does the contradiction come from?"
- "If you were assigned a character different from your own, did arguing as them change what you think? Or did you end up smuggling in your real position anyway?"
- "If you had to defend your answer in writing tomorrow, how would you explain why you believe it?"
- "What mattered most to you in your solution?"
- "What would your students say?"
Resist the temptation to resolve
After the schema reveal, your instinct might be to explain it. Resist. The most effective move is to pause, read the schema name aloud, and let the room sit with it for a moment before asking a question. Tension is productive. Resolution is for the philosophy paper.
How broadcasting works
During the Reveal phase, the facilitator sees a private panel of prompts. Tap "Broadcast" on any prompt and it appears as a full-screen overlay on every player's device. Players dismiss it by tapping "Got it." The facilitator can also write custom prompts.
- After a reclassification: Ask the person whose submission was relabelled: "What made you call that a fact? What would a fact version of it look like?"
- After a top-voted solution: Ask the room: "Why did this one land? What does that tell us about the values we were applying?"
- After a zero-vote solution that's actually interesting: Read it aloud yourself. Ask: "What's the strongest case for this one?" Often the most honest discussion of the round.
- After a character assignment round: Ask: "Did anyone find the assigned character's beliefs easier to argue than you expected? Why?"
- To end a discussion: Ask each person to complete: "This round made me realise I believe that teachers should..."
09
Session timing
guide
| Session | Rounds | Structure |
|---|---|---|
| 30 minutesQuick intro session | 2–3 rounds | Tutorial + 1–2 Common scenarios. Short discussion (3–4 min). End with one "what surprised you?" question. |
| 45 minutesStandard class session | 3–4 rounds | 2 Common + 1 Hot Take + 1 Spicy (if appropriate). 5–6 minutes of discussion per reveal. |
| 60–90 minutesDeep reflection session | 5–6 rounds | Mix of all types. Assigned Character mode from round 3. Full debrief (10 min) after final round. |
| Single-phase useBefore a writing task | 1–2 rounds | One dilemma, one reveal, then skip to end. Good as a 15-minute pre-writing warm-up. |
- Reading the dilemma: 1–2 minutes
- Submissions: 3–5 minutes
- Sort phase: 1–2 minutes
- Vote phase: 1–2 minutes
- Reveal + discussion: 5–10 minutes — don't cut this short
If the room is quiet after a reveal
Silence after a schema reveal is usually productive, not awkward. Wait 10 full seconds before speaking. If nothing emerges, broadcast: "Where does your position trace back to?" — the most reliably generative prompt in the set.
10
After the
game
When the facilitator ends the session, players see a summary of every response they made across all rounds and can download as a text file.
The end screen shows every submission you made, organised by round. Before you leave the session, download the transcript file — it won't be available after you close the tab. These submissions can be utilized as the raw material for a teaching philosophy: specific, contextualised positions you've already committed to in front of others. Tbh gng, that's more honest than most philosophy writing starts out.
For players: downloading the transcript
On the end screen, tap "Download my reflections." This saves a plain text file with every round's dilemma, every submission you made, and which character you played as.
- Look at schemas from rounds where your response got votes — what does the room resonating with you reveal?
- Look at rounds where your submission was reclassified. That gap between what you called a fact and what the room called an opinion is where assumption lives. That's philosophy material.
- Look at any round where the assigned character's position was surprisingly easy to argue. What does that say about the range of positions you could hold?
- Look for a schema that appeared in multiple rounds. If your responses keep revealing the same underlying tension, that tension is probably the beginning of your philosophy.
"Every person has two educations, one which he receives from others, and one, more important, which he gives to himself." — Edward Gibbon
11