Content uploaded by Angela Coco
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Angela Coco
Content may be subject to copyright.
Southern Cross University
ePublications@SCU
School of Arts and Social Sciences School of Arts and Social Sciences
2001
Bingo for beginners: a game strategy for facilitating
action learning
Angela Coco
Southern Cross University, angela.coco@scu.edu.au
Ian Woodward
University of Queensland
Kirstyn Shaw
University of Queensland
Alex Cody
Queensland University of Technology
Gillian Lupton
University of Queensland
See next page for additional authors
ePublications@SCU is an electronic repository administered by Southern Cross University Library. Its goal is to capture and preserve the intellectual
output of Southern Cross University authors and researchers, and to increase visibility and impact through open access to researchers around the
world. For further information please contact epubs@scu.edu.au.
Suggested Citation
Post-print of Coco, A, Woodward, I, Shaw, K, Cody, A, Lupton, G & Peake, AG 2001, 'Bingo for beginners: A game strategy for
facilitating action learning', Teaching Sociology, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 492-503.
Bingo for Beginners: A game strategy for teaching
Angela Coco, Alex Cody, Gillian Lupton, Andrew Peake, Kirstyn Shaw, and
Ian Woodward
ABSTRACT
This paper demonstrates the use of a game strategy in a large first year sociology class. Designed in
the first instance to facilitate students’ understanding of sociological concepts, the strategy also
enables teachers to elicit reactions to the process which serve as teaching points about the theory and
practice of social research. In this teaching method ideas about theoretical concepts and operational
definitions are tackled in a manner which students find meaningful and enjoyable (and therefore
memorable). The approach would be suitable for modification to other large group teaching situations.
Introduction
As an everyday rule of thumb, universities value seriousness and scholarship over frivolity
and fun; according to this principle a traditional ‘lecture’ acquires a naturally preferred status
over a ‘game’. However, just as cultural values shift over time, so do attitudes toward
teaching strategies. The blurring of social-cultural boundaries which accompanies such
changes have been foregrounded by social scientists in notions of postmodernism and post-
fordism (see Harvey 1989, Lash 1990, Jameson 1991). Shifting distinctions between work and
play are a good example of the type of social transformations evident in the late twentieth
century. Building upon a body of literature in organizational psychology (see Lawson, and
Shen, 1998; Lardy, 1989), as managers of learning environments university educators know
that people work best when they have a level of enjoyment associated with their work. When
work has a fun element it is likely to be perceived more positively and addressed more
productively. This is the broad context in which games as a teaching tool can be situated.
The Bingo game was devised as a way to stimulate ‘action learning’ (Jenkins, 1992) in the
structured lecture environment. The lecture topic was ‘Sociological approaches to the study of
the body’ in a subject entitled Society and Gender. The session began with a brief
introduction to the field of sociology of the body and some frameworks that have been
proposed for studying the body (e.g. Scott and Morgan, 1993; Synott, 1993; Weitz, 1998).
Advantages of the Bingo game were that it enabled all students to participate equally and in
this case they would be reflecting on issues about which everybody makes decisions on a
daily basis. While facilitating students’ understanding of substantive information, the bingo
game strategy also enables teachers to elicit reactions to the process which serve as teaching
points about the theory and practice of social research.
Literature Review
Most of the games used in sociology classes encourage students to reflect on important, often
abstract, theoretical themes. Glasberg et al (1998) were concerned with the ideological nature
of children’s games, Groves et al (1996) were interested in making apparent issues of
structural inequality and Livens (1980) explored the nature of interactions in families and
marriages. Apart from being enjoyable activities, these games provoke personal reflection on
more serious sociological issues. Simulation games seem successful at allowing students to
2
empathize with the social situations of others and to reflect, in a non-threatening setting, on
the nature of their own social position (Maidment and Bronstein, 1973). Along similar lines,
one of the key aims of the Bingo game was to encourage students to reflect on their own
cultural choices. This means that during the progress of the session students were given an
opportunity to identify their location in terms of body practices in relation to that of peers.
However, the Bingo game had the further advantage of providing a context in which teachers
could model some aspects of the practice of social research by integrating methodological
processes with substantive theoretical material. For example, students could observe some of
the links between social scientific ideas and indicators that might be used to research them.
Educational psychologists maintain that teaching methods are most effective when they
engage processes that foster deep learning (Marton, and Ramsden, 1988; Marton and Säljö,
1984). A core benefit of using games in sociology relates to linking enjoyable and memorable
experiences to important sociological content. Games help reveal, through simulation, the
tacit rules and knowledges which structure individual experience and generate social patterns.
Particularly in larger classes, individuals can begin to map their own position within the
group, and reflect on the constraints and opportunities which have determined their social
position. This is an especially potent idea in Groves et al’s (1996) ‘Reversal of Fortune’
game, and O’Brien and Foley’s (1999) ‘Dating Game’. Our Bingo game was also designed to
demonstrate to students the structured nature of personal choices. As such, like these other
games, it demonstrates neatly key ideas which sociologists have traditionally denoted through
the terms structure and agency. These include such issues as the ways people’s choices and
personal tastes are to some extent determined by class, income, race, age, gender and social
context.
Our literature review reveals that there are several aspects of the use of games in teaching
which can be extended by using a Bingo game approach. Firstly, in sociology classes, games
are most often used as discrete learning strategies; they tend not to be used repeatedly
throughout courses nor last more than one teaching session (1-2 hours). An advantage of the
Bingo game is that it could be used with a number different topics in the same subject and not
lose the capacity to motivate students’ involvement. For example, another topic in the Society
and Gender course investigates the social construction of notions of work. This would lend
itself to structuring questions around ideas about people’s perceptions of the relative value of
paid and unpaid work. Secondly, unlike other games such as those of Groves, Warren and
Witschger. (1996) and O’Brien and Foley (1999) the procedures for playing the game are not
linked to the substantive material with which students are engaging. Groves et al., for
example, use varying lengths of string to illustrate metaphorically, the ways social networks
and resources are tied to certain places and the ways their reach is determined by the quality
of one’s chains of connections in the social fabric. The materials used in the bingo game are
not necessarily metaphors for, or simulations of social processes to be investigated. The game
could be used to describe characteristics of personality types tested by Personality scales in
psychology, or to explore variations in approaches to teaching in education.
A third issue regarding the use of games is that most tend to require a teacher-led debrief in
order to encourage students to forge links with course material. The advantage of the Bingo
game in this instance is that debriefing also functions as educational interaction. Finally, one
of the advantages of games is that they can be used for large groups, though often this will
involve the formation of a number of smaller groups. The networking game of inequality
developed by Groves et al. (1996) works best with groups over fifty, while the classroom
games designed to revise course content described by Grauerholz (1991) and Childers (1996)
3
could also be applied to larger groups. A significant advantage of our Bingo game is that it
could be used for groups of 100-350 students, or smaller groups, 15-100 students, equally
effectively.
There are dangers with using games however. In the first place games work best when
students have confidence in the proven abilities of instructors to manage large groups. Clear
instructions need to be given, and thorough preparation must form the basis for the generation
of sparks of insight that come with successful teaching. Also, because of the randomness built
into some games (e.g. Groves et al 1996, O’Brien and Foley 1999) instructors need to
understand that the desired educational goals of the game are not always apparent to the
players. Clearly, debriefing sessions are the best way to clear up misunderstandings and to
smooth out the bumps generated by random effects.
The ideas discussed above are related to the pedagogical use of the game strategy; however
there also need to be clearly defined aims specific to the game itself. That is, the game needs
to succeed as a game (it is fun) as well as an educative tool. We will structure our discussion
by first giving an overall description of the game. We will then outline the specific aims of the
game, the way it was designed, the materials needed, and organisational processes and
materials needed. This is followed by a discussion of the teaching points we developed as
they related to the content of a first year sociology class.
Game Description
The Bingo Game is an holistic, experiential strategy which provokes personal reflection. It
was first used in a large, first year sociology class of three hundred and twenty students to
introduce ideas about sociology of the body. As readers may know, the public kind of Bingo
game involves a reader calling out random numbers while participants have record sheets in
front of them with a selection of fifteen numbers. The person to win a game is the first person
to have all of their numbers called. They call out ‘Bingo’ and win the game. Our game could
best be described as organized like a cross between the real game of ‘Bingo’ and a traditional
class survey. We claim however, that the pedagogic implications of the game strategy are far
more significant than a class survey could hope to accomplish. The game has a number of
sub-games, each devoted to a substantive issues related to the theme of ‘Sociology of the
Body’, for example, ‘adornment’, ‘body image’ and. notions of ‘pain and pleasure’.
A series of statements related to the sub-game were devised by the teaching team. These
statements were dichotomized so that later, students could be categorized as being one kind or
another. For example, questions/statements in the ‘body image’ category were labeled as
‘healthy’, or ‘unhealthy’. One statement for the ‘healthy’ category was “Do you have a
regular exercise program?” for the ‘unhealthy’ category, “Do you think you spend a lot of
time worrying about your body size?” In playing the game, these statements are called out by
selecting a majority from one of the dichotomous categories, say ‘healthy’. Students
subsequently respond to each question by thinking ‘Yes’, that applies to me, or ‘No’ that
doesn’t apply to me.
Participants award themselves one point for each ‘yes’ response, until they fill in all of the
eight blank squares on their ‘Bingo card’. A bingo card looks much like an un-filled
crossword puzzle with filled and blank squares. Each sub-game is completed when a
participant who has filled in all blank squares calls out ‘bingo’. The person who called ‘bingo’
is given a sheet of paper labeled with a category which is related to the predominant number
4
of questions to which they must have replied ‘yes’, for example, “Body image – Healthy”.
This is because the majority of ‘healthy’ questions would have been called first interspersed
with only a few questions from the ‘unhealthy’ category.
Later in the session when all sub-games have been played, students’ responses are
categorized, counted and the results displayed as a histogram and they are able to reflect on
their position with respect to others. Using discussion and interactive processes teachers are
able to elicit reactions concerning the adequacy of category constructions and validity of
questions. These reactions/reflections can then be discussed with respect to the issues of
sociological method. Differences of opinion are used inductively to examine sociological
theories of the body and facilitate students’ exploration and understanding of other issues dear
to the heart of sociology. In a recent class where students were asked to design questions for
the category ‘clothing’ along the lines ‘functional’-‘expressive’, one female student proffered
the statement ‘The label is everything’ for the ‘expressive’ category. This drew a categorical
disagreement from one male member of the class who insisted that in the work context (with
which he was familiar) suits with a designer label were absolutely essential to one’s
acceptance. This dialogue provided an excellent example for group discussions around social
stratification in terms of class, gender, economics and so on.
Constructing and Playing the Bingo game
Aims:
Theory in the sociology of the body maintains that the body is the site of cultural
constructions of meaning and values (Synnott, 1993) which, until recently, have received little
attention from sociologists (Scott and Morgan: 1993). Particularly, ideas about women’s
bodies have been the sites of political struggles throughout recorded history (Weitz: 1998).
The Bingo game was constructed as a way of facilitating students’ reflections about and
understandings of cultural sites of inscription on the body as well as about the cultural
construction of diverse body practices. It was also a process to collect information about
students’ body practices whereby they could position themselves vis-à-vis student peers,
thereby providing an experiential illustration of the theoretical material. To provide closure
and add interest, we aimed to collate information gained from students’ records on the Bingo
sheets and to present a profile of the class on each variable. Finally we sought feedback on the
use of this strategy as a teaching tool
Design of the Game
To adjust Bingo for our purposes we needed to devise questions to which students would be
able to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’. If ‘yes’ they would mark off a square on their record sheet, if
‘no’ they would not do anything. (Illustrations of record sheets are in the Appendix, Figure 2).
We devised five sub-games, each on a particular theme derived from issues in the sociology
of the body. We wanted students to reflect on the ways they use cultural artifacts and the
meanings they attach to their bodies. Questions were devised in relation to; 1. Body image, 2.
Food, 3. Adornment, 4. Technology, 5.Pain & Pleasure. Each of these areas constituted a
separate game, that is Game 1 was ‘Body Image’ and so on.
To develop questions teachers agreed on labels for dichotomized concepts around which
questions for the Body Show would be devised. These were as follows:
5
Body image: - Healthy – Unhealthy
Food: - Adventurous – Conventional
Adornments: - Expressive – Functional
Technology: - Hi-Tech – Luddite
Pain/Pleasure: - Unconventional-Conventional
For each of these terms, a set of ideas was agreed upon. In terms of body image, ‘healthy’
meant people had a realistic image of their body size and shape. They saw themselves in a
positive light and paid moderate attention to fitness and other people’s perceptions of them.
For example one question asked was, “When people compliment you on your appearance do
you usually believe them?” A full set of questions for the Body Image category can be found
in Appendix 1) In the food category ‘adventurous’ was defined as a tendency to try many
kinds of foods and ways of eating. Conventional on the other hand was the stereotypical
(Australian) western tradition, including characteristics such as ‘eating take-away meals
frequently’, or ‘having meat and three vegetables for the main meal of the day’. ‘Expressive’
adornment was understood as those extra decorative things people might use on their bodies
which are more expressions of aesthetic taste and individual style than functional objects, for
example jewelry as opposed to a watch. In the technology category a ‘luddite’ was
understood as a person who avoids technology and resists technological trends. A ‘hi-tech’
person was one who knew, understood and engaged in as many technological
communications and leisure activities as possible. Pain and pleasure were categorized as
‘unconventional’ or ‘conventional’. An ‘unconventional’ attitude was described as one where
the person seemed to subscribe to the notion that pain and pleasure can occur together as part
of the same experience or to achieve some higher purpose, for example “In sexual practices
do you find pain increases your pleasure (e.g. bondage practices)?”‘Conventional’ meant
people separated pain and pleasure and made decisions as if pain or pleasure was an end in
itself; “Are you prepared to endure discomfort in your pursuit of fashion (e.g. high heels, neck
ties)?”
Playing the Game
There were three aspects to be considered in playing the game; instructions to students, the
caller’s questioning strategy and the identification of the first person to complete a game. As
an introduction, the aims of the game and its relationship to sociology of the body were
explained. The mechanics of the game were then described. When a question was asked
students were instructed to think ‘yes’ that applies to me, or ‘no’ that does not apply to me. If
‘yes’ they should colour, check or otherwise mark a small blank square. When all eight blank
squares in a Game were checked they were to call out the name of that game, for example
‘Image’. Each matrix was dedicated to one game , for example, Game 1 – Image/Identity.
Figure 1 shows the arrangement of students’ record matrices.
FIGURE 1 HERE
Figure 1: Example of the five game matrices used to record ‘yes’ responses.
The caller used the sets of questions appropriate for each game. When calling the questions,
certain principles needed to be kept in mind because the outcomes of the games also were
going to be used to analyze students’ responses. Firstly, questions needed to be called in a
6
particular way. For example, in order that someone could be labeled as fitting a particular
description such as being ‘Healthy’ in their Body Image, the caller needed to call mostly
questions from ‘Healthy’ set of questions (Examples in Appendix 1). Secondly, the number of
filled in squares on each game was going to serve as a kind of Likert scale and the students
divided as to whether they filled in 5 or more squares or less than 5 squares. So, a score of
more than 5 squares on the Body Image Game meant that those people had a relatively
‘Healthy’ perception of their body image according to the arbitrary categories we had devised.
Those who scored less than 5 would have been categorized as having and ‘Unhealthy’ body
image. The pattern of questioning was varied in order to avoid a response bias setting in.
Persons who were first to fill in all eight blank squares for a sub-game were given a card with
the name of the game on it together with the descriptive term which was designed to receive
most responses for that game. The labels were; Image and Identity – Healthy: Food -
Conventional: Adornment – Functional: Technology – Luddite: and Pain and Pleasure –
Unconventional. The purpose of giving students a label was to reveal to them the category
into which they had been placed and to identify them later when discussion was taking place.
In this way students had time to reflect on their reactions to this labeling and hopefully would
be willing to discuss the relative ‘fit’ of the label with their understandings of themselves.
Tallying Class Responses
In order that the ‘results’ of the sub-games could be used for generating a profile of the class’s
body practices we needed to group students’ responses and organize mechanics for counting.
With such a large number of students a speedy counting strategy was needed and materials
were organized so that a minimum period of time was taken to calculate proportions and
record data. The class was divided into eight sections marked out by the placement of teachers
and students who were enlisted to help count. The Caller asked students to raise their hands
for each category, for example, “Hand up if you scored less than 5 on Game 1”; then those
who scored five or more on Game 1. Counters recorded the tally on Tally Sheets which had
been prepared beforehand and labeled for ease of reference. The Tally sheet reproduced
below illustrates how the questions were called, that is, the label =>5 (equal to or greater than
5) on a caption indicates that mostly the questions from that category were called out in
playing the game, for example, in the Adornment game (Game 3) mostly questions from the
‘Functional’ category would have been called. This means that that dichotomized concept
functioned as the label allotted to the first person to fill in all eight of their blank squares for
that game. These corresponded to the labels on the cards given to the students as described
above.
Figure 1: Sample of the Tally Sheets used to record numbers of students scoring 5 or more or
less than 5 in each category
FIGURE 2 HERE
The game and input to this point took 45 minutes. Students were then given a 15 minute break
during which teachers calculated totals for each category on the Tabular Tally sheet (Figure 3)
and reproduced them in the form of a histogram on the transparency prepared with table axes.
7
The histogram derived from students’ responses in the Society and Gender class is reproduced
in the section below where we discuss the ‘results’ (Graph 1).
FIGURE 3 HERE
Figure 3: Tabular Tally Sheet used to record numbers of students in each category.
Using the Outcomes as Teaching Tools
Whole class and small group formats were used to discuss issues and ideas arising from
playing the game. A practical small group activity helped to consolidate knowledge and to
develop understandings about sociological concepts and methods. Whole class observation
and discussion of the histogram provided an opportunity for teaching practical skills in
diagram reading and suggesting hypotheses.
Discussion of Issues
It became clear during class discussion that people often did not agree with the labeling of
categories or the definitions of contrasting concepts. The process of constructing the questions
and categories for the bingo game strategy was instructive in conveying to the students an
understanding of the ways researchers construct questionnaires to be disseminated to large
numbers of people. Not only do adequate definitions have to be agreed upon (face validity),
but researchers also have to try to avoid constructing questions which are based upon cultural,
gendered, racial and economic or class biases (construct validity). These reactions/reflections
can then be discussed with respect to the issues of sociological method and theory.
Practical Activity
One obvious category not used in the Bingo game was ‘Clothing’. In order for students to
gain some experience in question design and strengthen the points made above, they were
asked to construct questions for the Clothing category according to the dichotomy
‘Functional’ – ‘Expressive’. The practical exercise was useful in three ways. Firstly,
suggestions from this exercise gave students an experiential understanding of the difficulty of
generating appropriate questions for a diverse group of people and the issues that needed to be
taken into account. It challenged them to provide clear definitions and/or rationales and to
come to agreement with the larger group. Finally, it generated some questions that could be
used for similar games in the future.
Discussing the Histogram with the whole Class
By way of introduction to this section we explained to students how questions for the games
were designed and grouped. Also we described how we delivered a set of questions in specific
ways in order for the game to ‘work’. Following is a description of the kinds of issues we
raised with respect to the ‘results’.
The histogram was read for what it might reveal about students’ body practices and the
reasons these results were achieved. For example, looking at the Adornment bar, we
questioned, why would most students in this class appear to have a ‘functional’ attitude
towards their use of adornment? Observations were made about the proportions of students in
each category. We also compared response rates as they varied between games. The foregoing
8
observations led to discussions of such issues as truth telling, non-response, selective response
and anonymity that bear on the interpretation of data gained from questionnaires.
Figure 4: Number of students in each category for the five Games (Dichotomized as scores of
5 and above or less than 5
In summary, the discussion of the histogram served a number of pedagogical purposes. It
introduced the histogram as a method of displaying data and taught students how to read it.
The diagram provided immediate feedback on a data collection process in which students had
a vested interest. Finally it provided a kind of profile of the first year sociology class in terms
of body practices in which students could locate themselves.
Linking to Sociological Theory
Differences of opinion were used inductively to examine sociological theories of the body and
facilitate students’ exploration and understanding of other issues dear to the heart of
sociology. In a recent class where students were asked to design questions for the category
‘Clothing’ along the lines mentioned above, one female student proffered the statement ‘The
label is everything’ for the ‘Expressive’ category. This drew a categorical disagreement from
one male member of the class who insisted that in the work context (with which he was
familiar) suits with a designer label were absolutely essential to one’s acceptance and
therefore the question should be placed in the ‘Functional’ category. This dialogue provided
an excellent example for group discussions around social stratification and the construction of
body practices in terms of class, gender, economics and so on. We could also examine the
usefulness of theoretical models, which had been outlined in the beginning of the lecture, for
conducting empirical investigations into the diversity of issues regarding surveillance and
construction of bodies.
Feedback and Conclusion
To what extent did we succeed in our stated aims? Time consuming as the development of
innovative teaching strategies may be, it is probably easy compared to assessing their success
or failure. In the case of ‘Bingo for Beginners’ we have only two short-term measures of
outcome: the impressions of the two groups involved in the process, the students and the
teachers.
Student Feedback
Fifty-seven students who took part in the session returned the feedback sheets supplied. (We
did not count the numbers present: based on responses recorded in the histogram we estimated
approximately 260). As there was no pressure on students to reply, we considered this an
‘acceptable’ result. Not surprisingly, almost all comments were highly favourable, though
three of them considered the session ‘boring’ or ‘pointless’. The session generated a positive
atmosphere and informal monitoring of the group showed that participation levels were very
high.
Most responses may be grouped into four categories. Firstly, most students thought the
exercise “fun” (e.g. ‘Really enjoyable lecture’ ‘It was good – a fun way to add a bit of variety
to lectures’ ‘ A fun way to learn). Secondly, about half commented on its ‘novelty’ value (e.g.
‘A nice change from the normal lectures’). Thirdly, and most importantly for us, nearly all
thought the session ‘informative’ (e.g. ‘A better insight into such topics’ ‘Relaxed and
informative session’ ‘Interesting and provided good information). Finally, quite a few
approved of the participatory nature of the exercise (e.g. ‘good because it was an interactive
approach with students, so we were more likely to remember the concepts’ ‘It was good to
have a session like it where everyone was involved’).
Teacher Feedback
As participants in constructing and administering the game, the teaching team felt extremely
positive: though it took a lot of work, it was enjoyable and the quality of material was
enhanced because the process enabled everybody to contribute. Additionally, we recognized
that on subsequent occasions, the game would need only minor changes.
We concluded that the approach clearly held the attention of the class and they appeared,
through their involvement, to absorb knowledge on both a skills level (i.e. designing research
material ) and a substantive level (i.e. understanding how culture is inscribed on the physical
body). The approach appears translatable not only to other areas of sociology but to other
disciplines as well; in addition it could be used in smaller groups or as a tutorial exercise in
which students could be involved in devising a similar game for the class.
10
References
Childers, Cheryl D. (1996) “Using crossword puzzles as an aid to studying sociological
concepts”, Teaching Sociology, 24, April: 231-235
Glasberg, Davita Silfen, Nangle, Barbara, Maatita and Schauer, Tracy (1998) “Games
children play: An exercise illustrating agents of socialisation”, Teaching Sociology,
26, April: 130-139
Grauerholz, Elizabeth (1991) “This is jeopardy! How to make preparation for examinations
fun and challenging”, Teaching Sociology, 19, October: 495-497
Groves, Julian McAllister, Warren, Charles and Witschger, Jerome (1996) “Reversal of
fortune: A simulation game for teaching inequality in the classroom”, Teaching
Sociology, 24, October: 364-371
Harvey, David. (1989) The Condition of Postmdoernity, Oxford: Blackwell
Jameson, Fredric. (1991) Postmodernism, Or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism,
Durham, Duke University Press
Jenkins, Aloan (1992) "Active learning in structured lectures”, in Graham Gibbs and Alan
Jenkins (Eds) Teaching large classes in higher education, London: Kogan Page
Lardy, F. J. (1989) Psychology of work behavior, 4th ed. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing
Lash, Scott. (1990) Sociology of Postmodernism, London: Routledge.
Lawson, R. B. and Shen, Z. (1998) Organizational psychology. Foundations and
applications, New York: Oxford University Press
Levinson, Richard M. (1980) “The soap opera game: A teaching aid for sociology of the
family”, Teaching Sociology, 7(2): 181-190
Maidment, R. and Bronstein, R. H. (1973) Simulation games: Design and implementation,
Ohio: Merrill
Marton, Ference and Ramsden, Paul (1988) “What does it take to improve learning?” In Paul
Ramsden (Ed.) Improving learning: New perspectives, London: Cogan Page
Marton, Ference and Säljö, R. (1984) “Approaches to learning” in Ference Marton, Dai
Hounsell and Noel Entwistle (Eds), The experience of learning implications for
teaching and studying in higher education, Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press
O’Brien, Eileen and Foley, Lara (1999) “The dating game: An exercise illustrating the
concepts of homogamy, heterogamy, hyperogamy, and hypogamy”, Teaching
Sociology, 27, April: 145-149
Scott, Sue and Morgan, David (eds.) (1993) Body matters, London: Falmer Press, Chap 1
11
.
Synnott, Anthony. (1993) The body social: symbolism, self and society, London: Routledge.
Weitz, Rose (1998) The politics of women’s bodies: sexuality, appearance, and behaviour,
New York:
12
Appendices
Figure 2: Bingo Game sheets used by students to register a ‘yes’ answer
Figure 3: Tabular Sheet used for recording and adding tallies produced by each person who
counted
Appendix 2
Sample questions for the sub-game Body Image
BODY IMAGE
Healthy
1. Do you have a regular exercise program?
2. Do you take pleasure viewing your image in a mirror?
3. When people compliment you on your appearance do you usually believe them?
4. When you compare your body size to that of others do you usually judge yourself
positively?
5. Are you generally content with your appearance?
6. Do you sometimes feel concerned about the state of your fitness?
7. Do you feel okay drinking water when all of your friends are drinking alcohol?
Unhealthy
1. Do you think you spend a lot of time worrying about your body size?
2. Do your feelings about your body frequently prevent you from enjoying public activities
like swimming or other water sports?
3. Do you usually feel dissatisfied after you have been shopping for clothes?
4. Have you been on a weight change diet 5 or more times in the past year?
5. When preparing to go to party, do you get very stressed over the way you look?
6. Do you always feels guilty about eating food you know is bad for you?
7. Do you attack zit and/or wrinkle with an many cures as you can lay your hands on or
afford to buy?
8. Does your height embarrass you i.e. too tall or too short?
