This paper pilots a method of testing the learning effects of a role-playing simulation of negotiations over the Nile basin. Players negotiate how to apply general principles from international law, such as sharing water equitably and avoiding significant harm, to specific circumstances of the river basin. Students are presented with a set of factual statements about the basin and surveyed before and after play as to which facts will be (were) most important in negotiations. Surveys of 75 participating graduate students show interesting patterns: (1) a shift from emphasis on managing risks to exploiting cooperative opportunities; (2) change in the value orientation of the statements students consider most important, with development-oriented values increasing and environment-oriented values decreasing; and (3) change in the dimensions of power students consider most salient, including an increased appreciation for the institutional and knowledge-related elements of power and a de-emphasis on the structural aspects of power. Before-and-after surveying offers an alternative to the more common methods of learning assessment, based on knowledge acquisition or student satisfaction, while discussion of the survey results with students allows for a richer, more reflective learning experience.