Content uploaded by Barry Lee Reynolds
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Barry Lee Reynolds on Jun 05, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Power up! Vocabulary and Grammar
Gaming will Give Learners an Edge
Barry Lee Reynolds, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of English Education
Faculty of Education, University of Macau
Power Point Template
(enter texts here)
Language Learning
Grammar
Vocabulary
Gaming
Motivation
Overarching Big Idea
How can I improve my
English?
Power Point Template
(enter texts here)
Language Learning
Grammar
Vocabulary
Gaming
Motivation
Overarching Big Idea
How can I improve my
English?
•The teaching of second language writing often entails a teacher providing
written corrective feedback of second language learners’ writing
•Teacher feedback can be cate go ri zed as eith er :
•Indirect (Ferris, 2006) or direct (Ferris, 2006)
•Unfocused (Ellis, 2009) or focused (Ferris, 2010)
•Teachers that prov id e indire ct feedba ck o nl y po in t ou t erro rs wh ile teachers
that provide focused feedback point out errors and correct the errors
•Teachers that prov id e unfo cu se d feedbac k provide feedback on all errors while
teachers that provide focused feedback provide feedback on one or a few select
errors
•Previous research on second language writing has shown direct focused
feedback to be the most effective
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
INTRODUCTION
•Critiques on previous research
•Most studies have focused on written corrective feedback of article errors (i.e, the use of
a, an, the) (e.g., Bitchener, 2008; Ellis, Sheen, Murakami & Takashima, 2008; Kao & Wible,
2014; Sheen, Wright & Moldawa, 2009)
•Most studies have focused on only two uses of the English article system—first mention
of a referent (i.e., a, an) and the previous mention of the referent (i.e., the) (see Yu &
Cheng, 2017 for a different focus)
•Most studies have not considered the previous instruction received by learners
•Game play as instruction and the necessity of ”pushed output” has not been previously
considered (Minaei & Rezaie, 2014; Hwang, 2010; Zeng & Takatsuka, 2009; Baleghizadeh
& Arab, 2011)
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
INTRODUCTION
1. Which mode of instruction is the most effective for decreasing L2 writers’
English article errors?
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
•Research Participants
•45 management students were recruited from four universities in northern Taiwan
•Randomly and equally divided into two experimental and one control group:
•Te ac h er ins tr uc ti on w it h fo cu s ed er ro r cor re ct io n
•Digital game-based instruction with focused error correction
•Focused error correction
•Instrument
•3 letter-of-application writing tasks across three time periods (pre-, post-, and delayed
post-test)
•Similar in that the students were asked to do the same type of writing
•Different in that the students were asked to apply to different jobs
•The students’ article use accuracy for the three letters was calculated
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
METHODOLOGY
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
METHODOLOGY
Sample Writing Task
Te ac h er
Instruction
Game-Based
Instruction
No Instruction
Wrote first letter (pre-test)
1 week later
Received 30
minutes of
teacher
instruction
Received 30 minutes of
game-based
instruction
No instruction
Given 5 minutes to review their first letter with direct
focused written corrective feedback
Wrote second letter (post-test)
one month later
Wrote third letter (delayed post-test)
Procedures
•Teacher Instruction ( on c ontent
knowledge from the game)
•PowerPoint presentation
•Student handout
•Fill-in-the blank exercises
•Game-Based Instruction
•English Extras in Business with A, An and The
•Players interact with avatars in a business
setting
•Players need to hire three employees for
their company and interact with the
applicants during conversational turn taking
•Misuse of English articles require additional
practice
METHODOLOGY
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
RESULTS
No significant difference over
time for the focused error
correction group.
A significant difference over
time for the other two groups;
however, pairwise comparisons
show differences only between
pre-and post-/delayed but not
between posttest and delayed.
No significant difference
between the three groups was
shown on the pre, post, and
delayed posttests.
Therefore, gain scores were
computed to investigate which
condition yielder higher gains
in accurate English article use.
A significant difference in gain scores on the
pre-test/immediate posttest were shown
between the teacher instruction and focused
error correction groups.
A significant difference between the focused
error correction group and the two
instruction groups were found.
No significant difference was shown between
the two instruction groups.
•Second language learners may not statistically improve in their grammatical
accuracy through teacher feedback alone–some type of instruction is
necessary.
•Digital games can provide on-the-fly error correction, something traditional
written corrective feedback cannot provide.
•Teacher instruction a nd game-based instruction yielded similar learning and
retention results.
•As class time is limited, some grammar structures are best taught through
digital game play.
•Freed class time could be used for more communicative language teaching that
focuses on language focused input, language focused output, and fluency
development (Nation, 2013)
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
DISCUSSION
•There is need for the development of more language learning games that pay
attention to language form (Pica, 2007)
•Game developers should target other errors that are a hindrance to language
learners such as preposition use, subject-verb agreement, plural nouns (-s/-es),
and collocation errors.
•Limitations ?
•Potential limitations for the current study were that the game was focused on a business
environment and the participants were required to complete business writing that might
have been more motivating for them they were business majors.
Reynolds, B.L., & Kao, C.-W. ( 2 0 1 9 ) . T h e e f f e c t s o f d i g i t a l g a m e -based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective
feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747
DISCUSSION
Power Point Template
(enter texts here)
Language Learning
Grammar
Vocabulary
Gaming
Motivation
Overarching Big Idea
How can I improve my
English?
•Most of the vocabulary we acquire in our first and second language occurs
incidentally through the completion of tasks.
•While intentional learning and direct teaching of vocabulary is important for
acquiring the most frequent words in a target language, incidental learning
should be encouraged to acquire mid-and low-frequency words (Nation, 2013).
•The incidental acquisition of vocabulary through reading, especially the reading
of graded readers, has been well documented but less attention has been given
to the incidental acquisition of vocabulary through other means such as
gaming.
•Still, not every task is suitable for incidental vocabulary acquisition—one
method of gauging the suitability of a task for vocabulary learning is task-
induced involvement (Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001).
INTRODUCTION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
•Measuring task-induced involvement allows a teacher to quickly determine
whether a vocabulary learning task is likely to result in vocabulary learning after
learners have completed the task.
•Task-induced involvement contains three motivational and cognitive dimensions: Need,
Search, and Evaluation.
•Each of these factors may be absent (-), present with moderate strength (+), or present
with full strength (++) (Nation & Webb, 2011).
•The sum of the strengths of these three factors represents the involvement load of the
task; the greater the involvement load, the better the learning (Nation & Webb, 2011).
INTRODUCTION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
•Need is the motivational, non-cognitive dimension of involvement.
•Is the need to learn words externally imposed (+) or self imposed (++)?
•Does the learner not need to understand or use the word to complete the task (-)?
•Search is the attempt to find the meaning of unknown vocabulary or trying to
find word forms to express a concept by consulting a dictionary or another
authority.
•Is the meaning and the word form provided in the activity (-)?
•Does the learner need to retrieve or look for the meaning of the word—receptive
retrieval (+)?
•Does the learner need to retrieve or look for the word form—productive retrieval (++)?
INTRODUCTION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
•Evaluation entails a comparison of a given word with other words, a specific
meaning of a word with its other meanings, or combing the word with other
words in other to asses whether a word does or does not fit its context.
•Does the learner need to decide which word or sense of the word to use?
•No (-)
•Yes (+ )
•Does the learner have to use the word in a context and provide that context?
•Yes (+ +)
INTRODUCTION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
•Digital games have great potential for encouraging vocabulary learning because:
•Need is self imposed (++)
•Learners need search for either meaning (+) or meaning and form (++)
•Learners evaluate the word or sense of the word (+) to use and often provide their own
context (++)
INTRODUCTION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
1. What underlying factors induce incidental vocabulary acquisition through
gaming?
2. The presence of which factor is more likely to induce the incidental acquisition
of vocabulary through gaming as perceived by Taiwanese university students?
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
GAME
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
Draw Something is a social drawing game available as a free download
from the Apple App Store or Google Play. Players can be found by
linking the game to their social media account or phone contacts.
The object of the game is
for two players to guess
what each other has
drawn by selecting letters
from tiles on the screen.
Player A, the “drawer”
after selecting a friend
from their list, will be
given a selection of
three words to draw.
The words represent
three levels of
difficulty: easy, medium
and hard.
GAME
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
After selecting a word, the drawer will be prompted to
begin a drawing that represents the chosen word. A
recording of the drawing, including all erases, will be made
and sent to Player B, the “guesser.”
Before sending the recording
to the guesser, the game
allows the drawer the option
of sending a 100-character
message to the “guesser”,
which will only be displayed
after the object has been
correctly identified.
This continues and the game
keeps track of the number of
turns that have occurred
between the two players.
GAME
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
Players are encouraged to win badges by drawing thematically
related words.
•Participants
•Among six universities in Taipei two English classes from each were randomly selected.
•Among the 520 students in the sampled classes, a total of 92 (64=undergraduates;
28=graduates; 28=males; 64=females) met the inclusion criteria (i.e., had played the
game) to participate in the study.
•Average length of EFL study was 12 years.
•Average length of Draw Something game play was eight weeks.
•Average length of game play per week was three hours.
•Questionnaire
•10 Taiwanese university student players of Draw Something were recruited for
unstructured interviews about their game play.
•The transcribed interview transcripts were used to construct 18 Likert scale items related
to game play.
METHODS
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
RESULTS
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
The statements receiving the
lowest agreement was related to
using the word in a sentence;
these are equivalent to a weak
evaluation of the words.
The statements receiving the
highest agreement was related
to searching for the meaning of a
word; these are equivalent to a
strong search of the words.
RESULTS
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
The initial Eigen values showed that the first
factor (Need) explained 29% of the variance,
the second factor (Evaluation) 15.543% of the
variance and a third factor (Search) 9.88% of
the variance.
RESULTS
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
Factor 3: Search was induced the most (M= 4.120; SD = .772), followed by Factor 1: Need (M= 3.573; SD =
.684) and finally Factor 2: Evaluation (M= 3.130; SD = .729).
What underlying factors induce incidental vocabulary acquisition through
gaming?
•The factor analysis performed on the questionnaire responses from the Taiwanese university
students found three factors inducing incidental vocabulary acquisition through gaming:
need, evaluation, and search.
•Need was induced through the intrinsically motivating task of drawing as well as the
extrinsically motivating reward of game coins that could be used to buy color pallets to
enhance drawings.
•Search was induced through players’ intentional selection of unknown words to acquire coins
and their search for the meanings of the selected unknown words through web searches or
referencing dictionaries.
•Evaluation was induced when players attempted to use the newly learned words to construct
sentences, confirm meanings through dictionary/web referencing and communicating with
other players about those unknown words.
DISCUSSION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
The presence of which factor is more likely to induce the incidental acquisition of
vocabulary through gaming as perceived by Taiwanese university students?
•Search was induced significantly more than Need and Evaluation.
•The mobile device may have made it easier for the players to search for the meaning of
words and if the players did not figure out the meaning of unknown words they could not
continue game play.
•In other tasks, such as reading, if a learner does not know a word, then the word can be
skilled, thereby reducing the effect of search; however, with a game like Draw Something,
learners cannot skip the words and continue with the task (i.e, play the game).
DISCUSSION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243
•Need was found to be induced significantly less than of Search and significantly
more than Evaluation.
•Self-selected games increase intrinsic motivation and can engage players.
•The questionnaire results indicated elements of the game such as being able to boast
about a high play number on a leaderboard and being rewarded with coins appear to
have induced Need.
•Evaluation was induced the least during game play.
•Players were more willing to interact with unknown words in a receptive rather than a
productive manner.
•Players likely sought out the receptive meaning of the unknown vocabulary items before
selecting a word to draw and then would not really need to use the meaning again for
anything else as that was not part of the game play.
•More motivating game elements should be included in similar vocabulary games to
increase evaluation such as giving coins for using the guessed word in a sentence.
DISCUSSION
Reynolds, B.L. (2017). Evidence for the task-induced involvement construct in incidental vocabulary acquisition through digital
gaming. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 466-484. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.938243