Several investigations have been made of second/foreign language learning/teaching by using games. Early research has made use of text-based game-like environments, such as MOOs and MUD (e.g. Neville, Shelton, & McInnis, 2009). Some researchers examined the use of video games (e.g. DeHaan, Reed, &
Kuwada, 2010; Chen & Yang, 2012). More recently, 3D virtual world such as Second life (e.g. Ranalli, 2008; Liou, 2012; Peterson, 2010; Wehner, Gump & Downey, 2011;
Zheng, Young, Brewer, &Wagner, 2010; Jauregi, Canto, Graaff, Koenraad & Moonen, 2011; Liang, 2012) and network-based role-playing games (e.g. Thorne, 2008;
Reinders & Wattana, 2012; Zheng, Newgarden, & Young, 2012; Peterson, 2012; Suh, Kim, & Kim, 2010) have received growing attention.
The aspects of language learning under investigation are various. Some took a socialcultural perspective and investigated how learners interact when playing multiplayer role-play games (e.g. Peterson, 2012; Zheng, Mewgarden & Young, 2012) and carry out tasks in simulation games (e.g. Liang, 2012). In addition, learners’
motivation and enjoyment, or attitude and perception toward learning language in game environments were often explored (Peterson, 2010; Peterson, 2012; Reinders &
Wattana, 2012; Wehner, Gump & Downey, 2011). Some other researchers looked into
15
how to design interactive tasks in game environment (e.g. Deutschmann, Panichi, &
MolkaDanielsen, 2009; Jauergi, Canto, Graaff, Koenraad & Moonen, 2011) or integrate commercially available entertaining games into classroom instruction (e.g.
Reinders & Wattana, 2012; Liou, 2012).
Some research was designed specifically to investigate the actual learning outcomes of using entertaining games on learning specific target linguistic features, such as vocabulary. Reduplicating Miller and Hegelheimer's (2006) study, Ranalli (2008) explored the possibility of vocabulary learning after playing a popular computer simulation game Sims. The study was designed to investigate the impact of using supplementary materials to facilitate the learning in the game environment. The supplementary materials (i.e. treatments) were presented in a separate website, and three conditions of supplementary supports include (a) vocabulary information and quizzes, culture notes and gaming; (b) a link to an online dictionary and culture notes;
(c) gaming instructions. Nine undergraduate ESL students formed pairs of controller and manager. Each pair experienced the three conditions and each individual took turns to be a controller and a manager.
The results show a significant increase in mean scores between pretest and post-test, which confirms the findings of Miller and Hegelheimer's (2006). The study also found that among the three conditions, the one provided vocabulary information and quizzes, culture notes and gaming result in the highest learning gain, which is significantly higher than those of other two conditions.
Although the results suggest that playing simulation games such as Sims, while supported by extra materials and practices of vocabulary items can yield positive learning outcomes, the researcher noted that it may not be practical to use simulation games when the main purposes is to learn or teach specific vocabulary items. This is so because “teachers and developers will be hard-pressed to anticipate every potential
16
avenue to these goals and the linguistic forms that learners will be exposed to in the process unless they are prepared to give very detailed, narrow instructions that could affect the game’s appeal.”
The impracticalness can also be inferred from the participants’ response to the question “I saw many the words form the resource materials and weekly quizzes while playing The Sims.” This item received the lowest mean scores of 2.6 out of five, while receiving the highest SD, reflecting a higher degree of difference in the participants’ responses. It is possible that the experience of encountering specific items differ from one learner to another while navigating the game environment.
DeHaan, Reed and Kuwada (2010) used Parappa the Rapper 2, a commercially available music video game, to investigate whether the “physical interactivity”
required by the video game causes extraneous cognitive load or germane load in terms of vocabulary learning. The study involved 40 pairs of undergraduate EFL learners.
Each participant in each pair was designated as a watcher or a player. While the player played the game, the watcher watched the player’s gaming process form another TV screen. There are no interaction between the player and the watcher. The participants played/ watched the game for 20 minutes where the same game level was repeated for five times. The post-test was a cloze test of the game lyrics.
The study found that the watchers can recall significantly more words than the players in the post-test. The watcher, though they still remember more number of target words, regressed to a larger degree than the players did in the delayed post-test.
The study also found a significant effect of interactivity on the post-test scores. The researcher concluded that the type of interactivity of Parappa the Rapper 2 was extraneous cognitive load, distracting player learners from learning the words. It is likely that the design of the game naturally did not allow or require the players to pay attention to the language of the raps in order to progress in the game.
17
Chen and Yang (2012) used a commercially available adventure video game called BONE, where players solve different tasks to precede the storyline of the game.
Learner players read/listen to narratives or dialogues in order to understand their task at hand, to make decisions and to solve problems. In other words, it has the potential to “foster deeper consideration of language.” The study was designed to examine whether learners could incidentally acquire specific words appeared in the game. The participants were divided into two groups. One group was not allowed do note-taking, and the other group was encouraged to do so. A pretest and post-test design was adopted. The results show that both groups provided L1 translation for more target English words in the post-test and the differences between pretest and post-test were statistically significant. Interestingly, the group allowed to take notes did not obtain significantly better learning outcomes than the other group. Although it was not the focus of the study, it is not clear whether the video game environment results in better learning outcomes.
It seems that games can provide an immersive environment conducive for vocabulary acquisition. The above studies all indicated positive learning outcomes.
What’s more, the participants in Ranalli (2008) and Chen and Yang (2012) showed positive attitudes toward the games and enjoyed using games to learn English. In Ranalli’s (2008) study, the participants were highly motivated by the game and the interaction between managers and controllers outside the game word was perceived as one of the favorite part by many of the students. In Chen and Yang (2012), the appearance of vocabulary items was thought highly contextualized.
These studies also highlighted two things to be considered while choosing or using entertaining games for the purpose of learning/teaching vocabulary. First, extra support may be necessary to draw learners’ attention to specific items if learning specific linguistic items was desired. Second, the deep consideration of language
18
should be required if player are to learn language from playing games. A game like Parappa the Rapper 2 certainly may not be a good choice.
Nevertheless, it is not always effective to use entertaining games for specific learning/teaching goals, as pointed out by Ranalli’s (2008). It may be difficult to find the right type of games with design and content that were appropriate for L2 learners and that match the desired learning outcomes. One possible solution is to develop a game that is specifically designed for language learning.
According to Reindardt and Sykes (2012), a distinction can be made between game-enhanced language learning and game-based language learning. Game-based refers to “the use of games and game-inclusive synthetic immersive environments that are designed intentionally for L2 learning and pedagogy.” The purposes of research on this type of game-mediated language learning, according to Reindardt and Sykes (2012), usually are to provide information to the evaluation or the design of these games. Research on game-based language learning has been scarce.
Neville, Shelton, and McInnis (2009) may be one of the few studies that investigate actual learning outcomes of game-based language learning. They developed a text-based interactive game for learning German language. In the game, American learners of German assume the persona of an American foreign exchange student living in Germany. They have to navigate a fictional train station while preparing for a trip and interact with NPCs and the narrative to advance the game. The study investigated whether the engagement in the world would enhance a sense of immersion in German culture and if it results in better vocabulary retention.
The control group read a story in class while the experimental group played an interactive fiction game which covers the same scenario as in the story and use of the same vocabulary. After the class, both groups were asked to complete homework exercises on the items in the text and the game. On the next day, they were tested on
19
the vocabulary items practiced in the homework exercises. Questionnaires were used to explore their sense of immersion in the German culture, enjoyment, task difficulty and the extent to which they were kept attentive during the game. The results show that print-based group indicate higher level of effectives and relevance of task, and higher confidence in mastering German language and they feel more satisfied with the approach than the IF game group. The IF group, however, performed better in vocabulary retention measurement.
In the second part of the study, an in-class German lesson on train station and in-class debriefing, where learners shared experiences and teachers detect issues learners encountered in the game, were added. According the researchers, the IF group did worse than the print-based group in the vocabulary retention. It is surprising that the prolonged exposure and interaction with the game did not help vocabulary retention.
The unsatisfied results may be related to the text-based natural of the game.
First, it seems less authentic because people usually expect games full of appealing images and graphics. Second, it is possible that a text-based game can frustrate foreign language learners since TL words and sentences are the only clue they have.
However, due to amount of resources needed to develop a sophisticated and appealing video game or multiplayer online game, games especially designed for language learning by researchers or educators often takes a form of casual games.
Corbeil’s (2007) study was an example of investigating the effectiveness of using a casual game intentionally designed for language learning. Although the study did not mainly focused on learning games, it revealed some useful insights about using games in teach/learn a second/foreign language.
The researcher designed a multi-media package, French Tutor, for learners of French to learn two French past tenses. The package includes various exercises and a
20
game. The study adopted a pretest and post-test design, and compare the learning gains obtained by two groups of students, one uses French Tutor and the other use textbooks. The results show that the group using the multi-media package performed better.
Although the study was not intentionally concern with game-based learning, the survey questionnaire data reveals that on third of the student reports that the feature they like the most is the game and one fourth of students who displayed a good mastery of the verb tenses thought the game helped them to better understand the tenses. What’s more, they reported to see a greater selection of games. The researcher suggested that “games can indeed serve as a powerful learning tool and should not be dismissed as frivolous activities."
A similar vein was made by Florence and Alvin (2006). They investigated the effectiveness of using two vocabulary websites, Professional Word Web and University Word Web, to learn vocabulary. The websites introduced words by providing explanation of a word’s meaning, pronunciation and example sentences.
Vocabulary games are also included. The games available on the websites included, for example, crossword puzzles, which require no particular skills other than players’
vocabulary knowledge, and ones that good motor skills were requires to succeed, such as a shooting game.
The study adopted a pretest and post-test design. The participants used three weeks to learn the vocabulary covered by the designed topics or levels in the two vocabulary websites. Their learning was measured by answering 30 fill-in-the-blank questions. Their feedback on the design and effectiveness of the website in helping them learn vocabulary were explored by questionnaires and interviews. The study found that the experimental group’s post-test mean score was significantly higher than the control group’s post-test mean score. The improvements, however, were not
21
impressive (experimental group: 8.02 in the pretest and 11.78 in the post-test). It should be noted that the post-test was not conducted until three weeks after the last treatment.
The feedback from the students indicates that they generally hold a positive attitude toward the games, but they were less satisfied with the game interface and less agreed that their interest in learning vocabulary was enhanced. They also provided feedback on the design of online learning games: interaction with other players, comparison of scores with other players, audio-visual effects, sounds and music, a clear background scenario and continuous motivation (challenging tasks and variety).
The above two studies revealed that learners could learn via playing language learning casual games and they are happy with this mode of learning. It is not clear, however, what kind of contribution the game made in terms of learning outcomes or whether the learning gains can be contributed to the games since the game only serves as a small part of the multimedia package in Corbeil’s (2007) study. It is not clear whether learners did actually use the games to learn in Florence and Alvin’s (2006) study since the websites were not intentionally designed to foster learning through games.
In light of the peripheral use of the growing available number of vocabulary learning applications available on iPhones, Cobb and Horst (2011) explored the effectiveness of playing vocabulary casual games on portable devices. They used a game called Word Coach, which contained 14 levels with a total of 14000 most frequent words. It included two games that are form-focused and four games that are meaning-focused. At the beginning of using the game, learners were tested until they were assigned an appropriate frequency zone to work in and then they began playing the games. The words played with in the games were randomly selected from the
22
frequency zone and recycled at least five times. The learners were advanced to meet words of lower frequency as learning criteria were met. The students played Word Coach via Nintendo and no restriction on the use was made. .
They study used two groups of grade 6 ESL learners, who take turns to receive the treatment. While one group of students were receiving treatment during the first two months, the other group served as a control group and received only regular school courses. After two months the two groups reversed their role. Vocabulary recognition tests and production tests were administered to both groups at three points of time: pretest, immediately after the group 1 treatment and immediately after the group 2 treatment.
The results show that after the gameplay, learners in both groups acquired new words belonging to the first five frequency levels. The second group showed a significant increase of the number of meaning recognized of 224 words. The first group, however, only improved 99 words immediately after the gameplay, but showed an improvement of 405 words in the post-test conducted after two months. The delayed growth of vocabulary, according to the researchers, can be possible since the words the learners encountered in gameplay are often encountered again outside of the game word and thus being consolidated. Compared with studies of playing website games or video games, it seems that playing a game designed for building vocabulary and playing it anytime and anywhere could result in a greater number of words learned.
The Vocabprofile-BNC analysis was used to analyze the learners’ oral description of a wordless story. The results revealed that the stories were composed overwhelmingly of first-1,000 level words, and that the pattern did not change across the period of the experiment. It seems that the words learned via the game were not ready for production. It is, however, possible that learners used some newly learned
23
words within the first 1000 words in the production and did not captured by the analysis.
There are some limitations in this study worth pointing out. First, the vocabulary test used in the study was Nation and Beglar's (2007) Vocabulary Size Test.
The test items are not the same as the items encountered while playing the game and the same items were only incidentally possible. Therefore, the test did not necessary include all the words encountered by the learners in the game and the test may contain words not met by the learners in the game. This was done probably because of the great difficulty of producing and administering a vocabulary test that contains the items met by each individual learner. What’s more, the same test was distributed to each individual learners three times. There is a good chance of practice effects.
Although there are many vocabulary learning casual games available on websites or smart phones. Collocation learning games are little. A few English learning websites do provide collocation exercises or games. For example, learners can found collocation exercises on a4esl, better-English, and speakspeak. These exercises are in a fill-in-the-blank format, and learners need to select one of the choices provide. a4esl also provides collocation games.
Wu, Franken, Witten (2012) probably was the only one study concerning collocation learning via games in the literature. They designed a set of corpus-based collocation game. The game can be automatically generated by user teachers or learners who were allowed to set different parameters. It is meaningful since teachers can create games which meet their pedagogical purposes and needs of a particular group of students without much complex skills.
The corpus used for creating games was Google n-gram collection. The study, however, primarily focused on evaluating the number and quality of collocation generated for players to work with in games. It is not clear if the game helps students
24
learn collocations in a more effective way and what are learners’ views on learning collocations via games.