This article offers a novel perspective to undergraduate teaching through a fantasy-themed International Relations (IR) theory simulation based on the widely popular TV Series Game of Thrones. Going beyond the prevailing academic literature, the article makes IR theories an integral component of simulation gameplay enabling students to wear distinct theoretical lenses and gain firsthand experience on how different theories engage with world politics. This also helps them develop their own narratives to represent theoretical perspectives during simulation facilitating theory learning and retention of knowledge. Accordingly, the article first discusses the prevailing literature on IR simulations and then provides the simulation overview, the structure, and the gameplay. The article then focuses on participant interviews to assess the viability of the simulation in student learning. Conclusion evaluates its portability and limitations. Overall, the article claims that the Game of Thrones simulation enables students to gain a theoretical reflexivity by simultaneously engaging with multiple theories during gameplay, advances student learning, and facilitates long-term retention of knowledge.
AndersonLWKrathwohlDRAirasianPW, et al. (eds) (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Abridged edition). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon (Pearson Education Group).
2.
AsalV (2005) Playing games with international relations. International Studies Perspectives6(3): 359–373.
3.
AsalVBlakeEL (2006) Creating simulations for political science education. Journal of Political Science Education2(1): 1–18.
4.
AsalVKratovilleJ (2013) Constructing international relations simulations: Examining the pedagogy of IR simulations through a constructivist learning theory lens. Journal of Political Science Education9(2): 132–143.
5.
AsalVMillerIWillisCN (2020) System, state, or individual: Gaming levels of analysis in international relations. International Studies Perspectives21(1): 97–107.
6.
BaranowskiM (2006) Single session simulations: The effectiveness of short congressional simulations in introductory American Government simulations. Journal of Political Science Education2(1): 89–112.
7.
BlantonRG (2013) Zombies and international relations: A simple guide for bringing the undead into your classroom. International Studies Perspectives14(1): 1–13.
8.
BloomBSEngelhartMDFurstEJHillWHKrathwohlDR (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals (Handbook I: Cognitive Domain, by a committee of college and university examiners). New York: Longmans, Green & Co.
9.
BridgeDRadfordS (2014) Teaching diplomacy by other means: Using an outside-of-class simulation to teach international relations theory. International Studies Perspectives15(4): 423–437.
10.
BrownRJ (2025) Floating on uncertain waters: Navigating ‘sensitivity’ while teaching politics and international relations in Mainland China. Politics45(1): 123–140.
11.
CampbellJRGokcekG (2019) The Final Frontier: International Relations and Politics through Star Trek and Star Wars. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
12.
ClaptonWShepherdLJ (2017) Lessons from Westeros: Gender and power in Game of Thrones. Politics37(1): 5–18.
13.
ClarkeH (2024) Toward pedagogies of decoloniality: Evaluating teaching practice and syllabus design in IR undergraduate modules. International Studies Perspectives. Epub ahead of print 19 January. DOI: 10.1093/isp/ekad026.
14.
CoxRW (1981) Social forces, states and world orders: Beyond international relations theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies10(2): 126–155.
15.
DoyleMW (1986) Liberalism and world politics. The American Political Science Review80(4): 1151–1169.
16.
DreznerD (2015) Theories of International Relations and Zombies: Revived Edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
17.
DysonSB (2015) Otherworldly Politics: The International Relations of Star Trek, Game of Thrones and Battlestar Galactica. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
18.
ElliottCWattsEZhekovaKSmithKGannRBourdonML (2025) The joy of the teaching track: Learning and Teaching in Politics and International Studies. Politics. Epub ahead of print 17 April. DOI: 10.1177/02633957251325822.
19.
ElnahlaN (2016) The other beyond the wall: A post-colonial reading of George R. R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire and HBO’s Game of Thrones. Journal of American Academic Research4(12): 37–44.
20.
FrederkingB (2005) Simulations and student learning. Journal of Political Science Education1(3): 385–393.
21.
GlazierRA (2011) Running simulations without ruining your life: Simple ways to incorporate active learning into your teaching. Journal of Political Science Education7(4): 375–393.
22.
GortonWHavercroftJ (2012) Using historical simulations to teach political theory. Journal of Political Science Education8(1): 50–68.
23.
GrenierF (2016) How can reflexivity inform critical pedagogies? Insights from the theory versus practice debate. International Studies Perspectives17(2): 154–172.
24.
HagmannJBierstekerTJ (2014) Beyond the published discipline: Toward a critical pedagogy of international studies. European Journal of International Relations20(2): 291–315.
25.
HollandMSliwinskiKThomasN (2021) Is affective effective? Measuring affective learning in simulations. International Studies Perspectives22(3): 261–282.
26.
HolmesG (2020) Teaching the United Nations, gender, and critical pedagogy. In: WibbenATRDonahoeAE (eds) Teaching Peace and War: Pedagogy and Curricula. London: Routledge, pp.133–142.
27.
HornLRubinOSchouenborgL (2016) Undead Pedagogy: How a Zombie Simulation Can Contribute to Teaching International Relations. International Studies Perspectives17(2): 187–201.
28.
IrishAShermanNWattsL (2023) Targaryen thought experiments: Do science fiction and fantasy examples aid or obfuscate student learning?International Studies Perspectives24(1): 1–19.
29.
KollarsNRosenAM (2013) Simulations as active assessment? Typologizing by purpose and source. Journal of Political Science Education9(2): 144–156.
30.
KollarsNRosenAM (2016) Bootstrapping and portability in simulation design. International Studies Perspectives17(2): 202–213.
31.
KrathwohlDRBloomBSMasiaBB (1964) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Company, Inc.
32.
Levin-BanchikL (2018) Assessing knowledge retention, with and without simulations. Journal of Political Science Education14(3): 341–359.
33.
Levin-BanchikL (2025) Learning goals in simulations. International Studies Perspectives26(1): 20–42.
34.
MaassRW (2023) DiploSim: A flexible framework for diplomatic simulations in international relations. International Studies Perspectives24(1): 20–38.
35.
MarksMP (1998) Using the game of ‘risk’ to teach international relations. International Studies Notes23(1): 11–18.
36.
MattlinM (2021) Anarchy is what students make of it: Playing out Wendt’s three cultures of anarchy. Journal of Political Science Education17(suppl. 1): 226–236.
37.
MearsheimerJJ (2001) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
38.
MendenhallETutunjiT (2018) Teaching critical understandings of realism through historical war simulations. PS: Political Science & Politics51(2): 440–444.
39.
MunoW (2018) ‘Winter is coming?’ Game of Thrones and realist thinking. In: HamenstädtU (ed.) The Interplay between Political Theory and Movies: Bridging Two Worlds. Cham: Springer, pp.135–149.
40.
NexonDHNeumannIB (eds) (2006) Harry Potter and International Relations. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
41.
O’NeillS (2025) Decolonising politics curricula: Exploring the experiences and views of racially minoritised students. Politics45(1): 141–159.
42.
PetranekCF (1992) Three levels of learning in simulations: Participating, debriefing, and journal writing. Simulation & Gaming23(2): 174–186.
43.
RaymondCUsherwoodS (2013) Assessment in simulations. Journal of Political Science Education9(2): 157–167.
44.
RittingerER (2020) Inspiring students to think theoretically about international relations through the game of diplomacy. Journal of Political Science Education16(1): 41–56.
45.
RuaneAEJamesP (2012) The International Relations of Middle-Earth: Learning from the Lord of the Rings. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
46.
SearsNA (2018) War and peace in international relations theory: A classroom simulation. Journal of Political Science Education14(2): 222–239.
47.
ShawCMSwitkyB (2018) Designing and using simulations in the International Relations classroom. Journal of Political Science Education14(4): 523–534.
48.
ShellmanSMTuranK (2006) Do simulations enhance student learning? An empirical evaluation of an IR simulation. Journal of Political Science Education2(1): 19–32.
49.
SimpsonAWKausslerB (2009) IR teaching reloaded: Using films and simulations in the teaching of International Relations. International Studies Perspectives10(4): 413–427.
50.
TaylorK (2013) Simulations inside and outside the IR classroom: A comparative analysis. International Studies Perspectives14(2): 134–149.
51.
WaltzKN (1979) Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
52.
WedigT (2010) Getting the most from classroom simulations: Strategies for maximizing learning outcomes. PS: Political Science & Politics43(3): 547–555.
53.
WehlanCWReinkeAJ (2023) Reimagining conflict management pedagogy through fantastical role-play simulations. International Studies Perspectives24(2): 128–147.
54.
WeidenfeldMCFernandezKE (2017) Does reacting to the past increase student engagement? An empirical evaluation of the use of historical simulations in teaching political theory. Journal of Political Science Education13(1): 46–61.
55.
WendtA (1992) Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization46(2): 391–425.
56.
YoungLDCarranza KoÑ (2020) Game of Thrones and the Theories of International Relations. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
57.
YoungLDCarranza KoÑPerrinM (2018) Using Game of Thrones to teach international relations. Journal of Political Science Education14(3): 360–375.
