Table 4.4 The Top One/Two Criteria for Each Category (Continued) Rank Item Criterion Mean SD Top 1 Criterion for computer software
1 4.1.1 9.53 0.632 Top 1 Criterion for computer hardware
1 4.2.1 7.68 2.363
Based on the result in Table 4.4, the selected nineteen criteria were listed in Table 4.5 along with the category each criterion belongs to.
Table 4.5 The Selected Nineteen Criteria
Item Category Criterion
1 1.1 1.1.1 Fertility and correctness 2 1.1 1.1.2 Triggering motivation
3 1.2 1.2.3 Facilitating students’ learning 4 1.2 1.2.1 Suitable for student levels
5 1.3 1.3.2 Providing the function of selecting the learning extent 6 2.1 2.1.1 Fun and interesting
7 2.1 2.1.4 Simple and understandable rules 8 2.2 2.2.5 Different levels of difficulty 9 2.2 2.2.2 Providing specific goals 10 2.3 2.3.3 Able to gain new knowledge
11 2.3 2.3.4 Promoting the ability of problem-solving 12 2.4 2.4.1 Providing reasonable game rules
13 2.5 2.5.1 Able to expand the content of the game 14 2.6 2.6.3 Able to set the difficulty of the games 15 3.1 3.1.1 Providing cooperative learning 16 3.2 3.2.2 Promoting the family interaction 17 3.3 3.3.1 Able to be extensively used in teaching 18 4.1 4.1.1 Simple interface and user-friendly 19 4.2 4.2.2 Requirements for hardware equipment
Five classes of seventh-graders (N=148) participated in this study. According to the analysis of the students’ background, there were 73 boys and 75 girls in total.
In the background questions (3, 4, 5, and 6) about their use of digital learning as a tool, the results of the questionnaires (Appendix B) were shown in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6 Frequencies and Percentage on the Use of the Digital Learning as a Facilitator
Statement of the question Frequency Percent
3. Whether or not to play PC or online games
Usually 58 35
Occasionally 76 45
Never 34 20
4. Whether or not to use digital learning software for learning
Usually 6 4
Occasionally 74 45
Never 84 51
5. Whether or not to use digital game-based learning software for learning
Usually 6 3.6
Occasionally 63 37.5
Never 99 58.9
6. Whether or not to use digital game-based vocabulary learning software for learning
Usually 2 1.2
Occasionally 48 28.6
Never 118 70.2
It is clearly seen that most of the students (almost 80%) have played PC or online games. As put forth by Prensky (2001), these students growing up with the new technology are referred as the digital natives of the “game generations”. The new “game generation” prefers doing many things simultaneously by using alternative
ways toward the game goal, rather than doing things step by step. Gros (2003) articulated that games could potentially fully engage learners and provide motivation.
Games can also motivate learners to take responsibility for their own learning (Rieber, 1996). With the growing number of software products and computer-based learning games, it may be an alternative way for teachers to make sufficient use of digital game-based learning to support and foster the students’ learning process.
At this stage, the students filled in the questionnaires (Appendix B) to show which criteria are more important for them to consider when doing game-based vocabulary learning. They marked the importance of each criterion by giving points from one to five (from very unimportant to very important). The means and the standard deviations were calculated, and the ranking of the criteria was arranged by the descending order of the mean score, as presented in Table 4.7.
Table 4.7 Ranking of the Criteria, along with Means and Standard Deviations
Item Category Criterion Mean SD ranking
2 1.1 1.1.2 Triggering motivation 4.07 1.1 1
6 2.1 2.1.1 Fun and interesting 4.05 1.06 2
4 1.2 1.2.1 Suitable for student levels 3.99 0.93 3
10 2.3 2.3.3 Able to gain new knowledge 3.99 1.7 3
3 1.2 1.2.3 Facilitating students’ learning 3.95 1.09 5
1 1.1 1.1.1 Fertility and correctness 3.93 0.99 6
7 2.1 2.1.4 Simple and understandable rules 3.85 1.06 7 18 4.1 4.1.1 Simple interface and user-friendly 3.82 1.02 8 11 2.3 2.3.4 Promoting the ability of
problem-solving
3.82 1.09 8
17 3.3 3.3.1 Able to be extensively used in teaching 3.8 1.25 10 5 1.3 1.3.2 Providing the function of selecting the
learning extent
3.79 1.01 11
8 2.2 2.2.5 Different levels of difficulty 3.76 1.11 12 12 2.4 2.4.1 Providing reasonable game rules 3.76 1.02 12
(Continued on next page)
Table 4.7 Ranking of the Criteria, along with Means and Standard Deviation
(Continued) 14 2.6 2.6.3 Able to set the difficulty of the games 3.75 1.07 14 15 3.1 3.1.1 Providing cooperative learning 3.74 1.15 15 13 2.5 2.5.1 Able to expand the content of the game 3.39 1.16 16
9 2.2 2.2.2 Providing specific goals 3.37 1.21 17
19 4.2 4.2.2 Requirements for hardware equipment 3.33 1.32 18 16 3.2 3.2.2 Promoting the family interaction 3.05 1.35 19
To further check if there are some differences between two groups, Group A (the students have used digital learning for learning) and Group B (the students do not apply digital learning for learning), the researcher showed the two rankings according to the mean scores(the most to the least) of the two groups as Table 4.8 presented.
Table 4.8 Comparison of the two rankings
Rank Group A Group B
1 1.1.2 Triggering motivation 2.1.1 Fun and interesting 2 2.1.1 Fun and interesting 1.2.1 Suitable for student levels 3 1.2.3 Facilitating students’ learning 2.3.3 Able to gain new knowledge 4 1.1.1 Fertility and correctness 1.1.2 Triggering motivation
5 1.2.1 Suitable for student levels 2.1.4 Simple and understandable rules 6 2.3.3 Able to gain new knowledge 1.2.3 Facilitating students’ learning 7 2.6.3 Able to set the difficulty of the
games 1.1.1 Fertility and correctness
8 4.1.1 Simple interface and user-friendly 2.3.4 Promoting the ability of problem-solving
9 1.3.2 Providing the function of selecting the learning extent
3.3.1 Able to be extensively used in teaching
10 2.4.1 Providing reasonable game rules 4.1.1 Simple interface and user-friendly 11 2.3.4 Promoting the ability of
problem-solving 2.2.5 Different levels of difficulty (Continued on next page)
Table 4.8 Comparison of the two rankings (Continued) 12 3.1.1 Providing cooperative learning 1.3.2 Providing the function of selecting
the learning extent 13 3.3.1 Able to be extensively used in
teaching 3.1.1 Providing cooperative learning
14 2.1.4 Simple and understandable rules 2.4.1 Providing reasonable game rules 15 2.2.5 Different levels of difficulty 2.6.3 Able to set the difficulty of the
games 16 2.5.1 Able to expand the content of the
game
2.5.1 Able to expand the content of the game
17 2.2.2 Providing specific goals 2.2.2 Providing specific goals 18 4.2.2 Requirements for hardware
equipment
4.2.2 Requirements for hardware equipment
19 3.2.2 Promoting the family interaction 3.2.2 Promoting the family interaction
As Table 4.8 shows, there is some consistency between the two groups. For Group A and Group B, fun and interesting games, triggering motivation, suitable for students’ levels are main concern in terms of game-based vocabulary learning. Both of the groups gain less attention on ability to expand the content of the game, specific goals providing, requirements for hardware equipment, and the family interaction promoting.
Then, based on the ranking result in Table 4.6, the researcher used ROC (Rank Order Centroid) (Hsieh, Tseng, & Wu, 2010) to calculate the weight of each criterion.
The algorithm of ROC is illustrated below:
wti is the weight of the ith objective i is the ith objective
Ri is the rank of the ith objective n is the total number of objectives
The weights calculated by ROC were presented in Table 4.5
Table 4.9 Weights of the Criteria
Item Category Criterion Weight Ranking
2 1.1 1.1.2 Triggering motivation 0.1 1
6 2.1 2.1.1 Fun and interesting 0.0947 2
4 1.2 1.2.1 Suitable for student levels 0.0895 3
10 2.3 2.3.3 Able to gain new knowledge 0.0895 3
3 1.2 1.2.3 Facilitating students’ learning 0.0789 5
1 1.1 1.1.1 Fertility and correctness 0.0737 6
7 2.1 2.1.4 Simple and understandable rules 0.0684 7
18 4.1 4.1.1 Simple interface and user-friendly 0.0632 8 11 2.3 2.3.4 Promoting the ability of problem-solving 0.0632 8 17 3.3 3.3.1 Able to be extensively used in teaching 0.0526 10
5 1.3 1.3.2 Providing the function of selecting the
learning extent 0.0474 11
8 2.2 2.2.5 Different levels of difficulty 0.0421 12
12 2.4 2.4.1 Providing reasonable game rules 0.0421 12 14 2.6 2.6.3 Able to set the difficulty of the games 0.0316 14 15 3.1 3.1.1 Providing cooperative learning 0.0263 15 13 2.5 2.5.1 Able to expand the content of the game 0.0211 16
9 2.2 2.2.2 Providing specific goals 0.0158 17
19 4.2 4.2.2 Requirements for hardware equipment 0.0105 18 16 3.2 3.2.2 Promoting the family interaction 0.0053 19
To compare the two ranking results made by teachers and students, the researcher presented the criteria according to the results of Table 4.2 and Table 4.9.
The comparison of the two rankings was shown in Table 4.10.
Table 4.10 Comparison of the Two Rankings on the Evaluative Criteria
Rank Criteria ranked by teachers Criteria ranked by students 1 4.1.1 Simple interface and
user-friendly 1.1.2 Triggering motivation
2 4.1.4 Providing the hint on
manipulating 2.1.1 Fun and interesting
3 4.1.3 The convenience of downloading 1.2.1 Suitable for student levels 4 1.1.1 Fertility and Correctness 2.3.3 Able to gain new knowledge 5 1.2.3 Facilitating students’ learning 1.2.3 Facilitating students’ learning 6 2.1.4 Simple and understandable rules 1.1.1 Fertility and correctness 7 2.3.3 Able to gain new knowledge 2.1.4 Simple and understandable
rules
8 4.1.2 The speed of software loading 4.1.1 Simple interface and user-friendly
9 1.2.1 Suitable for student levels 2.3.4 Promoting the ability of problem-solving
10 1.2.7 Providing timely feedback 3.3.1 Able to be extensively used in teaching
11 1.1.2 Triggering motivation 1.3.2 Providing the function of selecting the learning extent 12 2.3.4 Promoting the ability of
problem-solving 2.2.5 Different levels of difficulty 13 3.3.1 Able to be extensively used in
teaching
2.4.1 Providing reasonable game rules
14 4.1.5 The consistency of software functions
2.6.3 Able to set the difficulty of the games
15 1.3.2 Providing the function of
selecting the learning extent 3.1.1 Providing cooperative learning 16 2.2.5 Different levels of difficulty 2.5.1 Able to expand the content of
the game 17 1.1.4 Integration with everyday
situation 2.2.2 Providing specific goals
18 2.1.1 Fun and interesting 4.2.2 Requirements for hardware equipment
19 2.3.2 Developing thinking and imagination
3.2.2 Promoting the family interaction
According to Table 4.10, there are some differences between teachers’ and students’ points of view. In terms of game-based vocabulary learning, teachers put more emphasis on technology dimension, whereas students focus on teaching and game dimension. To further analyze the differences, teachers put computer software in the first place, such as simple interface, user-friendly, and so forth; teaching material and enjoyment are students’ main concern. On the contrary, students do not emphasize on computer software. One possible explanation for this may be that students, growing up with the new technology, feel comfortable with personal computers and these digital devices. Moreover, teachers do not pay much attention on the potential of the game: Fun, interesting, and triggering motivation which are students’ main concerns. Students want learning material that can really make them engaged and motivated (Prensky, 2001). Therefore, there is a need for teachers to consider teaching from the perspective of students (a learner-centered approach).
Since the vocabulary learning has been a tiring and boring job for most of the learners, fun and interesting games are needed to supplement the learning. As Krasilovsky (1996) claimed, young learners tend to ‘favor “edutainment”
application-academics-oriented games’. Learners learn more successfully and effectively only when they are in control of their own learning processing.
Nowadays, more and more software products and game-based learning systems come out to claim to foster the learning process. However, not all the products and learning systems are suitable for students to learn vocabulary. Also, how to choose an appropriate game to achieve various learning goals is vital for English teachers.
Drawn on the questionnaires conducted by the learners, the ranking and the weights of the criteria in this study showed the learners’ preferences about game-based vocabulary learning. The results of this study hope to provide these selection criteria based on the learners’ need for teachers when they use computer-based vocabulary
games as a means of teaching.