VocabularyGamesand LanguageLearning* - …€™probability’the’ scores’increased’by’...

Vocabulary Games and Language Learning

Hilary Preece EDU 626 Presenta3on Georgetown College

Fall 2015

Kinesthetic or Technological? •  In language learning classrooms, occasionally teachers incorporate vocabulary games to help with vocabulary reten3on.

•  I was interested in two types of games, kinesthe3c and technological.

•  Because the school is a 1-‐1 iPad school, I focused on gaming apps in the classroom and the differences in data when compared to classroom kinesthe3c games.

Literature A Brief Introduc/on to CALL •  Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) from the 80’s, blended

classroom approach (Jarvis & Achilleos, 2013, p. 1). CALL helps assist language learning and focuses on prac3ce outside of the classroom

Benefits of Technology on Student Mo/va/on and A=tude Toward Language Learning •  Over 80% of the students found the program beneficial for

pronuncia3on prac3ce, and 94% believed their listening skills improved because of the CALL lab (Grgurovic, 2011, p. 108).

A Shi? in Technology to Mobile Devices •  Some researchers even feel that the term CALL may be outdated and

unnecessary (Jarvis & Krashen, 2014, p. 5). Instead, these researchers lean toward a new term, Mobile Assisted Language Use (MALU) (Jarvis & Achilleos, 2013, p. 1).

Research Question

• To what extent does using classroom gaming apps help with vocabulary reten3on for students learning Spanish and ESL students when compared with tradi3onal kinesthe3c classroom games?

Participants Kinesthe/c Group •  71 Spanish class students (SK) •  26 English class students (EK) •  6 ESL students within the English class.

Technology Group •  63 Spanish class students (ST) •  22 English class students (ET) •  6 ESL students within the English class

Teachers for a Survey •  50

Class Procedures

PRE-‐TEST (Beginning of the Unit)

TEACHING THE VOCABULARY (Daily)

GAME TO PRACTICE THE VOCABULARY (Daily)

OPEN-‐ENDED STUDENT SURVEY (Daily)

POST-‐TEST (End of the Unit)

Spanish Technology Group (ST) English Technology Group(ET)

Findings: Survey Technology Group (ST and ET)

compe&&ve(6%(

disliked(5%(

indifferent(4%(

helpful(26%(liked(

56%(

repeat(1%(

unhelpful(2%( Kahoot&

•  Quote 1-‐ “I think Kahoot is a entertaining way to learn our vocabulary. Also, it helps me learn my vocabulary becer. This is a way for me to be compe33ve in a fun way and learn my vocabulary.”

•  Quote 2-‐ “I'm not good at Spanish so I don't feel good about prac3cing it. I like doing Kahoot because I'm a visual learner.”


compe&&ve(5%(

disliked(9%(

hec&c((4%(

helpful(8%(

indifferent(7%(liked(

59%(

repeat(4%(

social(1%(

unhelpful(3%( Quizizz%

Quote 1-‐ “I liked quizizz because it gives people more 3me to answer the ques3on and let them do it at their own pace.” Quote 2-‐ “Quizzes isn't that fun and and not as much compe33on like playing kahoot. I believe we learn becer when we do something fun and compete against each other.”


compe&&ve(5%(

disliked(9%(

helpful(19%(

indifferent(5%(

liked(58%(

repeat(1%(

unhelpful(3%( Sca$er/(Quizlet(

Quote 1-‐ “I really enjoyed the quizlet game. It helps your memorize each word and defini3on with games you can play. I liked how it had prac3ce tests that gave you a licle something of each game. Like true or false, spelling and mul3ple choice. It helped a lot, and made me more confident about each of the words.” Quote 2-‐ “I don't like quizlet as much as Kahoot or quiz up. The matching games did not help me out as much as Kahoot. I overall didn't have that much fun.”

Spanish Kinesthetic Group (SK) English Kinesthetic Group(EK)

Findings: Survey Kinesthetic Group (SK and EK)

ac#ve&2%&

compe##ve&2%&

disliked&3%&

hec#c&1%&

helpful&26%&

unhelpful&3%&repeat&

7%&indifferent&

3%&

liked&50%&

social&3%&

Fly$Swa(er$Game$

Quote 1-‐” I enjoyed the game that we played. I really liked working with big teams. The game was fun and made everyone think.” Quote 2-‐ “It was ok, I just feel like I'm not learning anything for this stuff. “


ac#ve&11%& disliked&

12%&

helpful&18%&

indifferent&9%&

liked&31%&

mo#vated&1%&

hec#c&1%&

repeat&2%&

social&7%&

neg&social&2%&

unhelpful&5%&

interes#ng&1%&Quiz%Quiz%Trade%

Quote 1-‐ “I enjoyed the trading of notecards for the purpose of studying vocabulary because it was a fun and efficient way of studying. I also liked how it was ac3ve and we had to walk around the room to learn the other vocab words.” Quote 2 – “I didn't really like the game because it is boring and pointless.”


ac#ve&2%&

compe##ve&9%&

disliked&2%&

hec#c&2%&

helpful&15%&

indifferent&2%&liked&

48%&

mo#vated&1%&

quick&5%&

repeat&5%&

social&8%& unhelpful&

1%&

Popsicle)Race)

Quote 1-‐ “Everything is really easy to understand and remember! we should play more games ! I think it helps with remembering vocab. 5/5 stars” Quote 2-‐ “It was ok. Didn't really help me remember anything because it was so fast paced.”

Findings-‐ Pre and Post Test ET and EK

EK Pre-‐Post Test (14 students)

t=7.95 p=0

Low probability the scores increased by chance

ET Pre-‐Post Test (10 students)

t=3.82 p=0


Difference in the Difference/ Growth?

t=.78 p=.45

Not enough evidence to be sta3s3cally significant

The two English classes performed the same. The different vocabulary games did not maTer with the test results.

Findings-‐ Pre and Post Test ST and SK

SK Pre-‐Post Test (54 students)

t=-‐12.5 p=0


ST Pre-‐Post Test (57 students)

t=-‐13.67 p=0


Difference in the Difference / Growth?

t=-‐2.93 p=.004

It is likely that the ST group performed beTer on the post-‐test.

From a sta/s/cal standpoint, the Spanish Technology group performed beTer. The gaming apps were slightly more effec/ve than the kinesthe/c games.

Findings-‐ Pre and Post Test ESL students from EK and ET Student Pre-‐test

Average Post-‐Test Average

EK student 1 64% 100% EK student 2 55% 100% EK student 3 18% 100% ET student 1 17% 83% ET student 2 50% 42% ET student 3 33% 17%

The ELL students performed becer with the kinesthe3c games.

Findings: Teacher Survey

44"

6"

Helpful"

Unhelpful"

Teacher's)Opinions)if)iPad)Games)Help)Vocabulary)Learning)

Number"of"Teachers"

0" 5" 10" 15" 20" 25" 30" 35" 40" 45"

Daily"

Every"other"Day"

Once/Twice"a"Week"

Once"a"month"

How$O&en$Teachers$Use$iPads$in$the$Classroom$

Number"of"Teachers"

Findings: Teacher Survey

Very%Comfortable%

36%%

Not%Comfortable%

8%%

Have%not%used%the%games,%but%

could%try%12%%

Somewhat%Comfortable%

44%%

Teacher's)Comfort)Level)with)Gaming)Apps)

Daily&4%&

Every&Other&Day&8%&

Never&22%&

Once&a&Month&40%&

Once&or&Twice&a&Week&26%&

How$O&en$Teachers$Use$Gaming$Apps$in$the$Classroom$

Discussion Local Significance-‐ •  The majority of teachers at our school use iPads for engagement and believe they are beneficial.

•  Teachers need to be careful with ESL students, they may not benefit as much from simply studying the digital vocabulary cards. The data actually showed a decrease in pre-‐post test scores.

•  iPad games can be an effec3ve review tool for students. It also provides mo3va3on and engagement according to the surveys. Sta3s3cally, (50% and higher) students enjoyed iPad games more and felt they were more helpful.

Global Significance •  As our world moves toward technology, gaming apps can change how our students study.

Future Research • Is vocabulary.com effec/ve for English teachers to use? • Should vocabulary be more of a focus at our school? • What would best help ELL students to retain vocabulary? • Are teachers mee/ng the needs of ELL students with digital literacy?

References •  Bhao, T.M. (2013). Teaching reading through computer-‐assisted language learning. The Electronic

Journal for English as a Second Language, 17 (2). 1-‐11 •  Grgurovic, M. (2011). Blended learning in an ESL class: A case study. CALICO Journal, 29 (1),

100-‐117. Retrieved from hcps://calico.org/a-‐895-‐Blended Learning in an ESL Class A Case Study.html

•  Izapadpanah, S. Asadi, J. (2015). The comparison of computer assisted teaching and tradi3onal explicit method in learning/teaching English vocabulary. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 5 (2). 554-‐569

•  Jarvis, H., & Achilleos, M. (2013). From computer assisted language learning (CALL) to mobile assisted language use (MALU). The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language 16(4). 1-‐18

•  Jarvis, H., & Krashen, S. (2013). Is CALL obsolete? Language acquisi3on and language learning revisited in a digital age. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language 17(4). 1-‐6

•  Kentucky Department of Educa3on. (2014). Kentucky school report card. Retrieved from website: hcp://applica3ons.educa3on.ky.gov/SRC/Profile.aspx

•  Mertler, C. (2014). Ac3on research: Improving schools and empowering educators. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

•  Mutlu, A., & Eroz-‐Tuga, B. (2013). The role of computer-‐assisted language learning (CALL) in promo3ng learner autonomy. Eurasian Journal of EducaJonal Research 51.107-‐122

•  Rezaee, A., & Ahmadzadeh, S. (2012). Integra3ng computer mediated with face-‐to-‐face communica3on and EFL learner’s vocabulary improvement. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3 (3). 346-‐352

• 

Questions?

VocabularyGamesand LanguageLearning* - …€™probability’the’ scores’increased’by’...

Documents

Transcript of VocabularyGamesand LanguageLearning* - …€™probability’the’ scores’increased’by’...