Research Gaps in TTRPG-Based Education
This document identifies areas where rigorous research is needed. If you’re considering graduate work in this field, these represent significant opportunities for contribution.
The State of the Field
Research on TTRPGs in education is promising but methodologically limited. Most studies are:
- Small-scale (single classroom or small groups)
- Short-term (one semester or less)
- Qualitative or descriptive (lacking controlled comparisons)
- Conducted by researcher-practitioners (potential bias)
This doesn’t mean the findings are wrong — but it means the evidence base needs strengthening.
Priority Research Gaps
1. Longitudinal Studies
The Gap: Almost no research tracks literacy development through sustained TTRPG participation over multiple years.
Why It Matters: We don’t know whether observed benefits persist, compound, or fade.
Possible Studies:
- Multi-year tracking of students in TTRPG clubs vs. matched controls
- Retrospective longitudinal design following adult gamers back through their literacy development
- Repeated measures across multiple school years
2. Controlled Experimental Designs
The Gap: Very few studies use random assignment, control groups, or true experimental designs.
Why It Matters: Without controlled comparison, we can’t isolate TTRPG effects from teacher effects, novelty effects, or self-selection.
Possible Studies:
- Randomized controlled trial: TTRPG-based unit vs. traditional instruction on same text
- Quasi-experimental comparison across matched classrooms
- Crossover design where same students experience both approaches
3. Multilingual Learner Outcomes
The Gap: Despite theoretical reasons to expect benefits for MLs, very little empirical research specifically examines this population.
Why It Matters: MLs are a growing population with distinct needs. If TTRPGs are particularly effective for this group, that’s important for resource allocation and instructional design.
Possible Studies:
- Comparative study of ML outcomes in TTRPG vs. traditional ELA instruction
- Language acquisition measures (not just literacy) in TTRPG contexts
- Examination of L1 use and translanguaging in TTRPG-based instruction
4. Assessment and Measurement
The Gap: No validated instruments exist specifically for measuring literacy development through TTRPGs.
Why It Matters: Current studies rely on general literacy assessments, self-report, or researcher-developed measures with unknown validity.
Possible Studies:
- Development and validation of TTRPG-specific literacy assessment
- Correlation studies between existing literacy measures and TTRPG engagement
- Rubric development for assessing roleplay-based character analysis
5. Transfer to Traditional Academic Tasks
The Gap: Limited evidence on whether skills developed through TTRPGs transfer to traditional academic performance (essays, standardized tests, grades).
Why It Matters: Teachers need to justify TTRPG use to administrators and parents. Transfer evidence is crucial for adoption.
Possible Studies:
- Pre-post essay quality comparison following TTRPG unit
- Standardized test performance correlation with TTRPG participation
- Qualitative study of student perceptions of skill transfer
6. Implementation Fidelity
The Gap: We don’t know what makes a “good” implementation or what minimum conditions are necessary for effectiveness.
Why It Matters: Findings from studies by expert facilitators may not generalize to typical classroom implementation.
Possible Studies:
- Comparison of expert GM vs. novice teacher-facilitated sessions
- Identification of critical implementation features through systematic variation
- Teacher training effectiveness studies
7. Specific Populations
The Gap: Research has primarily focused on general education students. Limited work on specific populations.
Why It Matters: Different populations may respond differently; targeted research could identify particularly effective applications.
Possible Studies:
- Students with learning disabilities (especially reading-related)
- Gifted students (different challenge calibration)
- Students with social anxiety (safe space hypothesis)
- Neurodiverse learners (structure and social scaffolding)
8. Digital vs. Analog Environments
The Gap: Increasing use of virtual tabletops (Roll20, Foundry) but almost no comparative research.
Why It Matters: Post-pandemic, many implementations are online. We don’t know if digital mediation changes outcomes.
Possible Studies:
- Comparison of in-person vs. virtual TTRPG instruction
- Examination of digital tools’ impact on specific literacy practices
- Accessibility considerations for different modalities
Methodological Recommendations
For researchers entering this field:
Strengthen Validity
- Use established literacy assessments where possible
- Include comparison conditions
- Report effect sizes, not just significance
- Address researcher positionality explicitly
Improve Generalizability
- Multi-site studies
- Diverse student populations
- Variety of texts and game systems
- Replication of promising findings
Build the Field
- Register studies and share protocols
- Publish null findings
- Create shared measurement instruments
- Establish collaborative research networks
Contact
If you’re pursuing research in this area, I’d love to hear about it:
Geoffrey Sperl geoffrey@geoffreysperl.com
I’m happy to discuss methodology, share materials, or collaborate on research design — even if I’m not pursuing doctoral work myself, I want to support the field.