683560

research-article2016
LTR0010.1177/1362168816683560Language Teaching ResearchButler

LANGUAGE
TEACHING
Article RESEARCH

Language Teaching Research

Motivational elements of
1­–16
© The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
digital instructional games: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1362168816683560
A study of young L2 learners’ ltr.sagepub.com

game designs

Yuko Goto Butler

University of Pennsylvania, USA

Abstract
This article focuses on the design of digital instructional game (DIG) tasks for young second
language (L2) learners. The aim of the study is to identify motivational task elements based on
what children respond to positively in games and incorporate into their own L2 vocabulary
learning game designs. Eighty-two sixth-grade students (ages 11–12 years) in Japan were first asked
to identify game elements by examining existing games and then to design games incorporating
DIG tasks of their own and peer-evaluate them. Building on previous work (Butler, 2015), the
study uses a mixed-methods approach to examine how both task-intrinsic characteristics and
implementation conditions were realized in innovative and engaging DIG tasks by children.
Although the study focuses on young learners, the findings might be applied to any type of task,
including both digital and physical tasks for adults as well as for children. The article concludes
with suggestions for how to design instructional materials which allow individualized learning and
encourage autonomy in order to cater to the genuine interests of learners and to invoke intrinsic
motivation for learning.

Keywords
Task-based language teaching, young learners, motivation, computer games, digital games, task
design

I Introduction
Despite the fact that the number of young second language (L2) learners (up to 12 years
old) is growing worldwide, previous studies on task-based language instruction have
not given these learners much attention, and it is often reported that young L2 learners

Corresponding author:
Yuko Goto Butler, University of Pennsylvania, 3700 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6216, USA.
Email: ybutler@upenn.edu
2 Language Teaching Research 

tend to lose their motivation for language learning by sometime around the end of pri-
mary school (e.g. Carreira, 2006; Lopriore & Mihaljević Djigunović, 2011). This might
be partially due to that fact that existing instructional material and tasks designed for
young learners ‘often fail to cater to the genuine interests of children and to invoke
intrinsic motivation for learning’ (Prosic-Santovac, 2016, p. 1). As young learners
engage in playing computer games intensively (Gee, 2007; Prensky, 2001), however,
these games are promising sources of information on their interests and factors that
intrinsically motivate them.
The present study aims to identify elements of digital instructional games (DIGs) that
motivate learners in performing DIG task from children’s points of view (Pinter, 2014).
Game and curriculum designers often develop games for children based on their own
intuition, which may or may not meet young learners’ interests. As the present study will
hopefully demonstrate, the perspective of children can be an important source of infor-
mation in designing learning tasks and materials for young learners. The study is part of
a larger project on DIG design which aims to identify both game and learning elements
in DIG design (Butler, 2015). The present article, however, focuses only on game ele-
ments by taking a close look at the process and product of learners’ game design through
both quantitative and qualitative analyses.

1  Task motivation
Since the 1990s, researchers’ conceptualization of language learning motivation has
shifted from viewing motivation as a relatively stable trait that resides in individuals to
seeing it as a more situated and dynamic construct stemming from social and contextual
factors (Dörnyei, 2001). In line with this newer conceptualization of motivation, task
motivation, defined as varying degrees of situated motivation that learners exhibit
toward different tasks, has gained attention. According to Julkunen (2001), task motiva-
tion essentially concerns ‘the characteristics of the task’ or ‘task design’ (p. 33). Certain
characteristics of tasks appear to be more attractive and motivating for learners than the
others.
Building on Tremblay, Goldberg, and Gardner’s (1995) distinction between state
motivation and trait motivation, Julkunen (2001) suggested that task motivation is com-
posed of two types of motivation: a relatively stable and general motivation and a reac-
tive and temporary motivation to a specific task. Dörnyei and Kormos (2000) argued,
however, that task motivation is more complicated than Julkunen’s dichotomous model.
In addition to general and task-specific motives, they argued that multilayered motives,
such as course-specific motives, can influence one’s motivation to complete the task.
Moreover, in interactive tasks, Dörnyei (2002) indicated that task motivation is co-
constructed by each participant’s motivational disposition toward the given task.
Incorporating a processing dimension to task motivation, Dörnyei and Tseng (2009)
proposed a motivational processing model that is composed of three mechanisms: task
execution, task appraisal, and action control. Task execution is considered to be ‘the
learners’ engagement in task-supportive learning behaviors’ (p. 119); namely, this is the
realization of learning. In their study of a vocabulary-learning task, task execution was
operationalized as vocabulary learning achievement and strategic learning behaviors.
Butler 3

Task appraisal means ‘the learner’s continuous processing of the multitude of stimuli
coming from the environment’ (p. 119) which includes their feelings of satisfaction,
skillfulness, and helplessness when it came to their use of learning tactics, as well as
self-efficacy for learning in general. Finally, action control refers to ‘self-regulatory
mechanisms’ (p. 119). Their model hypothesizes that the three mechanisms had circular
relationships.
Approaching the topic from a neurobiological point of view, Schumann (2001) con-
sidered motivation to be ‘patterns of stimulus appraisal’ (p. 29). According to Schumann,
when a learner perceives stimuli (e.g. class, teachers, tasks) to be rewarding and pleasur-
able, a neurobiological system – consisting of the amygdala, orbitofrontal cortex, and
body proper – enhances stimulus appraisal, which in turn rests on dimensions such as
novelty, pleasantness (attractiveness), goal or need significance, coping ability, and com-
patibility with self and social image. Observing that people can intensively engage in
digital game playing, we can expect that games have elements that potentially evoke
players’ positive stimulus appraisal and motivation.

2  Game elements that engage players

While characteristics of games vary greatly, a game can be defined as ‘an artificially
constructed, competitive activity with a specific goal, a set of rules and constraints that
is located in a specific context’ (Hays, 2005, p. 15). In the game literature, it has been
argued that what motivates people to play games is engagement or ‘the quality of an
activity that maintains attention and investment by those participants in it’ (Sykes &
Reinhardt, 2013, p. 137). Prensky (2001) suggested that games have 12 elements that
engage players: games provide fun, play, rules, goals, interactiveness (in action), an out-
come (or feedback), adaptability, win states, challenge (e.g. competition, conflict, oppo-
sition), problem solving, interaction (socially), and representation (in a story) (p. 106).
Other major elements of digital games proposed by researchers include sensory stimuli,
speed and actions, and mystery (e.g. novelty and unexpectedness) (Garris, Ahlers, &
Driskell, 2002; Wilson et al., 2009).
Engagement is also considered to be a major precursor to flow, a specific state of
mind in which players participate in the game tasks with a very high degree of concentra-
tion and enjoyment (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004). Flow may be the ‘ultimate manifesta-
tion of motivation’ (Sykes & Reinhardt, 2013, p. 97) and may provide a condition for
effortless learning (Csikszentmihalyi, 2008), which in turn may play an important role in
one’s language development, especially among young learners. In the game literature,
flow has been extensively discussed as a mechanism for players’ enjoyment when they
engage in game tasks (e.g. Fu, Su, & Yu, 2009).
Despite the potential game elements that engage players in digital games outlined
above, our understanding of game elements in DIGs that engage young L2 learners
remains limited. Butler, Someya, and Fukuhara (2014) made one of the few forays into
the field. They identified motivational game elements among 3,945 Japanese children
(ages 4–12) by analysing their DIG-playing behaviors in an online English-learning
site. The games that were frequently played by the children provided learners with cog-
nitive challenge, generated curiosity, allowed control, and had multiple player options.
4 Language Teaching Research 

Interestingly, games with these elements were not necessarily the most effective for
English learning (as measured by an objective proficiency test).
Finally, fantasy has gained attention as a potential motivational element in the game
literature. Fantasy has long been considered one of the major sources of intrinsic motiva-
tion among young children, and the involvement of fantasy has empirically been shown
to be effective in facilitating learning among this age group (Malone & Lepper, 1987;
Parker & Lepper, 1992). While there are substantial discussions on the role of fantasy in
very young children’s cognitive development (children up to preschool age) (Woolley,
1997), the motivational and cognitive functions of fantasy among school-age children
remain unclear.
According to Vygotsky (1978), young children’s creation of imaginary situations, or
fantasy, is their conscious realization of their desire to be free from perceptional reali-
ties that limit their behaviors. But the role of fantasy changes as children grow. Very
young children (e.g. 2.5-year-olds) start with creating imaginary situations that are
close to reality. By the time children reach preschool age, concrete objects and physi-
cal actions are no longer needed to exercise symbolic activities. By creating and play-
ing amid imaginary situations and being mediated by rules in their play, preschool
children can go beyond their daily behaviors, develop abstract concepts of their behav-
iors, and self-regulate them. Playing in imaginary situations serves as ‘a major source
of development’ for preschool children (p. 102). When it comes to school-age children,
however, Vygotsky mentioned only that play itself ‘fills a specific role in the school
child’s development but lacks the significance of play for the preschooler’ (p. 104).
Considering that the game literature finds that fantasy is popular even among games
for adolescents and adults (Garris et al., 2002; Wilson et al., 2009), its motivational and
cognitive functions need to be further examined. Researchers found that if fantasy ele-
ments conflict with the game’s learning goal, learners’ increased motivation with
regard to the fantasy elements of the game actually hinders their learning (Malone &
Lepper, 1987). The challenge for game and task designers, then, is to identify fantasy
contexts that closely relate to the learning goal in order to maximize learners’ learning
outcomes.
We must also consider the possibility that today’s children who grow up with com-
puter games have different cognitive styles from older generations, as Prensky (2001)
has argued. Among the ways they might differ are that (a) they process information
faster; (b) they are good at handling multiple tasks simultaneously; (c) they access infor-
mation randomly as opposed to sequentially; (d) they experience graphics before texts;
(e) they are used to being connected rather than being isolated; (f) they learn by doing
(active learning) rather than via passive learning; (g) they consider ‘play as work’ not
‘play versus work’; (h) they value pay-off rather than patience; (i) they prefer fantasy to
reality; and (j) they see technology as a friend as opposed to a foe (p. 52). While we cer-
tainly need more empirical studies to test the extent to which Prensky’s observation
holds true, it is likely that game tasks that are aligned well with learners’ general cogni-
tive styles would more likely cater to their interests and motive them intrinsically. Having
children engage in research is critical for understanding game-based learning because
children are the main agents of this new learning paradigm.
Butler 5

3  Research questions
In the present study, children took charge of designing DIG tasks. Sixth-grade students
worked in groups to design English-vocabulary learning DIGs for fifth-grade peers. The
study seeks to understand:

1. what game elements children identified as being engaging;

2. how they incorporated them into their vocabulary-learning DIGs;
3. how they valued the incorporated elements.

Vocabulary learning was chosen for the project because it is a curriculum element that
children could conceptualize easily as a goal. Moreover, vocabulary learning which is
sometimes seen as boring, rote memorization might be conducted more enjoyably
through DIGs (Prensky, 2001).

II Method
1  Participants
Eighty-two sixth-grade students (ages 11–12 years) in a public primary school in Japan
participated in the study. They were drawn from three intact classes and constituted all of
the sixth graders at the school. Under the Japanese national curriculum (in 2014 when the
study was conducted), English was being implemented as an exploratory program in the
upper grade levels of primary schools. The English lessons at the participating school
had concentrated heavily on oral communication. A preliminary survey verified that all
but four of the 82 learners had played computer games. Boys spent an average of 11.1
hours per week on computer games whereas girls spent 2.3 hours. However, there were
substantial individual differences in both groups. Approximately 75% of the children had
experienced learning by means of a digital device.

2  Procedures
The participating children spent one class period (45 minutes) completing each of the
first four steps of the project. Detailed descriptions of the procedures (including lesson
plans and instructions) can be found in Butler (2015). The project was carried out by the
author, two curriculum development specialists, a professional game designer, and the
students’ classroom teachers. The project was conducted in the children’s first language
(Japanese), and all whole-class and group discussions were videotaped and transcribed.

Step 1: Identifying game elements that engage players.  At the beginning of the first class,
the participating children were told that the aim of the project was for them to design
computer games in groups that are both attractive and effective in English vocabulary
learning. While playing some existing games, they were asked to discuss how and why
computer games could be fun and attractive and to identify attractive features in small
groups and then as a whole class. The elements identified by the children were recorded
6 Language Teaching Research 

on the blackboard by a teacher. They were then introduced to 35 novel English nouns
using flashcards. By using this traditional method, we hope to create the need and moti-
vation for children to come up with more enjoyable ways to learn words. As homework,
they chose five of the words to learn (i.e. connecting the sound and meaning) and paid
attention to how they learned them.

Step 2: Identifying effective learning elements.  In Class 2, the children exchanged their
learning strategies in small groups and then as a whole class. The identified strategies
were recorded on the blackboard. While examining some sample DIGs, they identified
how these strategies were incorporated. The professional game designer then illustrated
how professionals draw storyboards (graphic representations for organizing and sequenc-
ing images) when they design games. This was done so that the children could draw
storyboards when they designed and presented their own game plans.

Step 3: Designing games.  In Class 3, the children designed DIGs in groups of 5 or 6. This
process involved two sub-steps: (1) decide the type of game (e.g. card game, action
game), and (2) decide which game and learning elements to incorporate. Each group was
given a note sheet for organizing their ideas and recording their results. They used any
English words that they liked as learning targets. Each group drew a storyboard on a
large sheet of paper for oral presentation.

Step 4: Evaluating games plans. The groups presented their storyboards and answered
questions from their classmates. After each presentation, the class individually evaluated
the designs against the game and learning elements that they had come up with in the
previous lessons. In an open-ended format, they then identified the game and learning
elements that were most saliently and strategically incorporated in ways that would make
the game both motivational and effective for vocabulary learning. Finally, each class
chose the best game designs and the selected games became the target of our case
studies.

Step 5: Piloting games with younger learners.  The project team developed a game based on
the children’s plans and asked students from a lower grade to play and evaluate it.

3  Analyses
The game elements recorded in Class 1 were compared with the elements identified in
the previous studies to answer Research Question 1 concerning the game elements
learners identified as being engaging. The researcher and two curriculum specialists
independently examined the students’ oral presentations and storyboards to answer
Research Question 2 concerning which elements were incorporated in their own games.
Any disagreements were resolved through discussion. Designs chosen as best by the
learners were then further examined qualitatively in order to offer concrete examples
of how selected elements were incorporated in the children’s designs and to expand on
the initial analysis of the presentations and storyboards. Finally, to answer Research
Question 3, the children’s evaluations of their game plans were analysed based on the
Butler 7

elements they identified in Class 1 and their discussion in Class 4. Again, the researcher
and two curriculum specialists independently coded the students’ peer- and self-
evaluative remarks in their evaluation sheets. Any disagreements were resolved
through discussion.

III Results
1  Quantitative analyses
a  Game elements identified as engaging.  In the first lesson, learners identified 16 game
elements (see Table 1). The game elements identified by the children in this study
included all the major motivational elements addressed in the literature and some novel
elements. One of these novel elements was repetition and recovery (7). The role of rep-
etition in learning is well recognized among L2 task researchers (e.g. Bygate, 1996;
Lambert, Kormos, & Minn, 2016; Wang, 2014). Importantly, however, the children in
this study indicated that repetition is a potential source of enjoyment as well.

b  Game elements incorporated.  Table 1 also indicates the number of game designs (out
of 15 total) that incorporated each element as well as some examples of how these ele-
ments were realized. All the game designs had the following game elements: (1) clear
rules, goals, and objectives; (2) outcome and feedback; (3) challenges; (4) sound and
visual effects; and (5) speed and time limitations. Many games also included repetition/
recovery, fantasy/unreality, and control over the play. Surprisingly, interaction and col-
laboration were rarely incorporated even though these elements were identified as impor-
tant in discussions and are often employed in entertainment games.

c  Game elements valued.  The children’s comments in their evaluation sheets are sum-
marized in Table 2. The numbers under the ‘game elements’ correspond to those in Table
1. Children’s evaluations of game elements varied depending on the game, but some
general tendencies can still be seen across the games. Game elements that were most
frequently valued by the children included challenge (4), stories (11), fantasy/unreality
(8), and control (9).

2  Qualitative analyses
Building upon the previous quantitative analyses (which identified what elements the
children used and valued), qualitative analyses were performed in order to understand
how game elements were incorporated and how they were valued. Each of the three
classes chose the best game design for their group. Two of these game designs are exam-
ined closely in this section to better understand how the game elements were incorpo-
rated and valued.

Game 1: Fairy tales.  Players choose from among 10 fairy tales. They then encounter vari-
ous English words and learn these words by answering questions related to the stories
(e.g. ‘What did the princess find in the castle?’) prompted by audio and pictorial aids.
 8
Table 1.  Game elements.

Game elements Number of designs Examples of how the elements were realized in Example quotes from peer evaluations
identified by incorporating the the children’s game designs
children element (out of 15)
*1. Clear rules 15 Setting rules clearly (e.g. players can use a The rules of the game are so clear and easy to
certain tool in designated conditions, etc.) understand; the rules are simple enough for the 5th
graders
*2. Goals and 15 Setting a clear goal (e.g. to get a kidnapped It is really fun to see that you can build your own
objectives character back within a limited time by solving city at the end and your avatar can play in the city;
English problems) achieving the goal will make you feel good.
*3. Outcome and 15 Applause (e.g. fireworks appear on the screen), It is nice to see the progress; hints are helpful to
feedback instant feedback (e.g. players can get points keep on going; it is nice to have a step-by-step
immediately for their accurate responses), progress; you won’t get bored because you can see
recording of performance (e.g. players can the next step
see progress on a route map); feeling of
achievement (e.g. players can receive awards
and points)
*4. Challenging 15 Staging by difficulty level; having risks to As you learn more words, you can challenge more
complete tasks difficult words; facing difficult problems is fun
*5. Sounds and 15 Players can get some visual and audial stimuli Illustrations are attractive.
visual effects
*6. Speed and time 15 Players have to complete a task with a limited Time pressure motivates you.
limitations time (e.g. a time bar appears on the screen)
7. Repetition and 12 Players have to keep repeating tasks before Once you learned a word, you can use it repeatedly
recovery they are allowed to move on to a next level as a weapon from the next time – keep using
the words is powerful; seeing the same words in
different sub-games is interesting; it is interesting
that the same words appear in a little bit different
way every time; it is fun to see Mr. Bold will lose
his hair if you don’t play the game every day.
Language Teaching Research 
 Butler

Table 1. (Continued)

Game elements Number of designs Examples of how the elements were realized in Example quotes from peer evaluations
identified by incorporating the the children’s game designs
children element (out of 15)
*8. Fantasy and 11 A task is taking place in an imaginary place and It is fun to see lots of things happening in the
unreality time fairy tales; characters are so cute and attractive;
adventures are fun.
*9. Control 9 Players can choose a difficulty level It is great to choose your own stage level.
*10. Obstacles 8 A monster appears and disturbs the player; It is fun to see different kinds of word monsters to
player’s car needs more fuel (more quizzes to fight with
answer), etc.
*11. Stories 5 Using stories It is nice to learn words differently along the story
lines; players will be curious to know how the story
ends.
*12. Competition 4 Competing with the computer It is exciting to have a competitor.
13. Collaborations 1 Collaborating with game characters to It is fun to see the main character grow [as the
complete a task player helps the character to answer the question].
*14. Interaction 0 n/a n/a
15. Convenience n/a n/a n/a
(playing
anytime and
anywhere)
16. Relaxing, n/a n/a n/a
stress-
releasing

Note. Elements with asterisks (*) are the elements addressed by ‘experts’ in the previous research on digital games.
9
10 Language Teaching Research 

Table 2.  Students’ evaluation.

Game titles Game elements

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Others
Class A (n = 28):
A-1 President’s Commutes 9 1 8 13 1 5 0 0 3 0 16 1 0 0 5
A-2 Pi-chan’s Adventure 3 1 3 18 0 2 3 5 0 3 15 0 0 0 5
A-3 English Word-Learning Baseball 5 0 10 10 1 7 0 0 5 1 8 1 0 0 0
A-4 Adventure or Cooking 2 0 4 11 0 1 0 2 17 0 10 0 0 0 0
A-5 Mushroom-Up 4 2 5 14 1 3 1 2 0 9 12 0 0 0 3
Class B (n = 27):
B-1 Vehicle Adventure 1 4 6 10 3 1 7 7 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
B-2 Learning by Fairy Tales 0 2 5 1 1 0 3 1 8 0 8 0 0 0 4
B-3 English Strikes 4 2 3 5 0 1 2 8 1 7 2 1 0 0 0
B-4 English Word Master 0 4 4 17 1 5 0 0 3 3 0 6 0 1 2
B-5 English Monster 1 5 1 13 0 0 0 2 3 4 11 0 3 0 6
Class C (n = 27):
C-1 Word Monster 0 8 1 5 1 0 4 3 5 10 0 0 0 0 0
C-2 Jonny’s Adventure 0 2 3 16 1 5 1 14 6 4 3 0 0 0 0
C-3 Animal Quiz 1 3 2 11 3 9 0 13 7 3 0 0 0 0 0
C-4 Pelmanism Islands 11 0 2 12 1 5 3 4 1 8 2 0 0 0 0
C-5 English Maze 0 1 0 8 3 6 3 8 7 4 3 0 0 0 0
  Total 41 35 57 164 17 50 27 69 66 56 92 9 3 1 27

Notes. The numbers indicated under the ‘game elements’ correspond to the elements listed in Table 1. Since
no child mentioned the elements #15 (convenience) and #16 (stress-releasing), these two elements were
excluded from the table. Instead, the ‘others’ category was added. This category includes evaluative remarks
on the cuteness of characters and the attractiveness of game titles, and so forth.
Source. Adapted from Butler, 2015.

The game uses multimodal functions of the DIGs as well as the players’ existing knowl-
edge of the storylines.
Three subgames (the Mr. Bold Game, the Sugoroku Game, and the English Block-
building Game) support reinforce the target words relationships between meaning and
sound, meaning and form (spelling), and sound and form, respectively. These subgames
all have time limitations and provide players with instant feedback. Players can choose
to play them at any time, any number of times, and in any order.
The Mr. Bold Game is composed of a series of meaning–sound matching quizzes.
However, as Mr. Bold, the game’s avatar, learns more words, his hair grows. If a player
does not play the game every day Mr. Bold loses his hair. This provides a form of feed-
back reinforcing constant practice. In addition, the avatar’s hair turns gray if the player
misses a certain number of points, but the player can dye his hair the color of choice if
the player reviews the items and masters them. Based on the frequency with which the
children were mentioned in the discussion, avatars seem to be a powerful motivational
device for this age group.
The Sugoroku Game is based on a traditional Japanese board game in which multiple
players compete by tossing dice. In the version developed by the sixth graders, there is a
Butler 11

road divided into small sections. Each section contains a meaning–form matching quiz
on target words. Based on a toss of the dice, a player moves while answering the English
word quizzes encountered along the way. They compete with the computer on their pro-
gress through the sections. If the player misses a question, he or she goes back to the
previous section.
The English Block-Building Game was inspired by Tetris, a popular computer game
for entertainment. In the version designed by the children, letters of the English alphabet
constantly fall down the screen individually and in clusters. As the letters fall, the player
begins to hear vocabulary words. The player has to place the falling letters in the correct
order to spell those words. Players choose from three levels of difficulty which differ in
speed and number of letters.
In this design, fairy tales were employed to provide learners with a meaningful con-
text for the targeted vocabulary. Indeed, judging from peer comments such as ‘people
may be able to learn many words without feeling too difficult if they learn them in sto-
ries,’ the children seemed to find affective benefit of learning vocabulary in story con-
texts. In addition, the children indicated that learning stories and fantasies through a
foreign language itself was meaningful and fun, as exemplified by one child’s comment
that ‘it would be fun to learn different kinds of English when we learn fairy tales from
other countries.’ A number of other children also expressed excitement about learning
stories and fairy tales from different countries. How imaginary situations (as opposed to
more realistic or authentic situations) stimulate this curiosity remains unclear, however.
Furthermore, while the player initially encounters English words in context, this game
design incorporates repetition through a playful motivational device (e.g. the avatar).
The effectiveness of repetition for learning is widely acknowledged, but the present
example demonstrates that it can also be a source of enjoyment as well. In the peer evalu-
ation, learners highly valued encountering the same words repeated in different sub-
games, as indicated by one child, who said ‘it is interesting that the same words appear
in a little bit different way every time.’ Having a slight variation in the process of repeti-
tion appears to be motivating for these learners. Finally, it is left to the player to decide
what to repeat, how much to repeat, and what aspect to repeat (meaning, sound, and
form). This is quite distinct from the teacher telling the students exactly what to repeat
(e.g. ‘Repeat after me’) in traditional classroom teaching.

Game 2: Company presidents’ commute.  In this game, players become the president of a
company in an imaginary town. The goal is to get to the office on time in spite of a num-
ber of challenges (English-word quizzes). They can choose to be the president of their
own tiny company or to run a large multinational corporation. A small company owner
may commute on foot, whereas the owner of a large corporation may use a private jet.
However, the more difficult the level chosen, the more complicated the maze, the more
quizzes encountered, and the less the time available for the avatar to reach the destina-
tion. Moreover, if the player cannot get to the office on time, the company goes bankrupt.
Thus, while playing, employees are cheering in front of the office. If the player arrives at
the office before time runs out, they applaud and give prizes. Furthermore, if the player
cannot answer the English quizzes, it is possible to ask one of the employees for help by
cashing in points acquired. The player can choose which employee to ask for help, but
12 Language Teaching Research 

different employees’ assistance costs different amounts. Finally, as an unexpected ele-

ment in the game, an employee with no title may have the correct answer, while the vice
president may be clueless even if the player has to pay more points to receive assistance
from the vice president.
The high degree of choice in this game supports the quantitative finding that children
appreciate games that allow players to have greater control of their own learning. They
liked games in which the players can choose which words to learn and the difficulty level
of those words. These features allow them to set individual goals and the pace of their
learning. Interestingly, the games designed by children in this study were generally
designed to focus on how much one can learn against individually set goals, not against
other players. The element of competition was rarely incorporated or discussed in their
evaluations. This contrasts with many commercially-available entertainment computer
games (e.g. fighting games) in which competition is a primary element.
Interestingly, the element of surprise/unexpectedness was not one of the elements that
the children originally identified in the first class, but the games they designed often
incorporated such unexpected elements, and these elements were highly valued in the
peer-evaluations. Other examples included players’ vehicle suddenly breaking down or
slowing down, and a monster using words that players have not yet learned as weapons.
In general, these elements make it so that learning a high number of English words does
not guarantee that a player will win the game. Creating such an imperfect linear relation-
ship between learning and winning the game might thus motivate learners in task design.
Indeed, one of the children in the project clearly articulated this idea during the presenta-
tion, saying ‘that way, lower-grade students who do not know many English words can
still enjoy the game.’

IV  Discussions and conclusions

This study sought to identify motivational elements in DIGs based on young L2 learners’
perspective on them. Sixth-grade students working in groups designed DIGs for English
vocabulary learning. Analyses of their small-group and whole-class discussions, their
final game designs, and their evaluations of those designs revealed a number of key
game elements that may increase learners’ engagement in performance. The elements
that the children identified through playing existing DIGs overlapped highly with ele-
ments that have been addressed in the literature. The games that children actually
designed made use of elements such as having clear rules and goals, sounds and visual
effects, speed and time limitations, and being cognitively challenging. Incorporating ele-
ments such as repetition and obstacles, and allowing the players to have greater control/
autonomy, were also popular. Finally, children’s peer-evaluations confirmed that game
designs that utilized elements such as fantasies/stories, challenging, control, and feed-
back were important to them. Although this study focused on DIGs for young learners,
the findings may apply to any type of task, including both digital and physical tasks for
adults as well as for children.
The results of the study suggest that learners’ affective engagement in tasks may
depend on both task implementation conditions as well as task-intrinsic characteristics.
Some of the elements identified related to task implementation conditions (e.g.
Butler 13

self-control functions, instant feedback, repetition) while others (e.g. challenge, fantasy)
related to task-intrinsic characteristics. Skehan (2016) makes a clear distinction between
task characteristics (e.g. number of elements in tasks) and task conditions (e.g. planning
and repetition) and argues that the later may have a more promising relationship to learn-
ing on tasks. The present study suggests that it may be worth investigating if the same
argument can be made when it comes to the effect of these factors on learners’ task
motivation.
In deciding on content and topics for tasks, it is generally suggested that they should
be familiar to the learners, intrinsically interesting, and relevant to learners’ needs (Ellis
& Shintani, 2014, p. 140). The majority of task content prepared for young L2 beginners
has tended to be limited to certain topics: plants and animals, food, sports, family and
friends, and school and so forth (e.g. Nikolov, 2016). However, these topics may not
necessarily be attractive to children depending on their age, gender and educational envi-
ronment. Partially due to technology advancement (e.g. TV, internet, social media), chil-
dren nowadays have access to much more information from abroad compared with
previous generations, and their interests may reflect such changes. Indeed, the children
in this study chose a variety of topics as the content of their game tasks (e.g. world fairy
tales and life styles). Teachers and curriculum designers might listen to children’s voices
more seriously in selecting and designing learning content and materials so that tasks can
promote children’s personal investment in the learning process.
The element of challenge was also highly valued in the children’s game designs, as
both Table 1 and Table 2 show. Many children’s designs offered multiple levels and
stages (e.g. more complicated words to learn, more time pressure to learn, etc.) as the
player progresses. Players can thus see and feel their progress concretely. Importantly,
the challenge element was almost always combined with the element of learner control.
Players were allowed to choose the words that they wish to learn and the level of chal-
lenge. The children’s game designs appear to reflect their desire to have great autonomy
in their own learning. This in turn may suggest that a traditional instructional model,
where teachers or curriculum designers preselect target vocabulary and linguistic forms
for children and provide them in a uniform fashion (e.g. everybody learning the same
sets of words at the same pace based on the same activities) may not match well with
children’s motivational dispositions. Although, individualized instruction may not
always be realistic in classroom contexts, supplemental instructional tools and materials
which allow individualized learning and encourage autonomy (such as DIG tasks) may
help to maintain children’s motivation and satisfy their desire for greater autonomy in
their learning.
The children in this study identified repetition as another important motivational
game element. As mentioned already, in task-based L2 learning studies, a number of
researchers have found that repetition is one of the most robust factors in L2 learning
(e.g. Bygate, 1996; Lambert, Kormos, & Minn, 2016; Wang, 2014). What has not been
clear, however, is learners’ attitudes and emotion towards repetition. Plough and Gass
(1993) reported adult learners’ negative reaction to repeating a task they had already
completed once. Other researchers have expressed similar concerns, suggesting that
asking learners to repeat the exact same tasks may reduce their motivation to learn (e.g.
Nitta & Baba, 2014). Researchers’ recent attention to procedural repetition (repeating
14 Language Teaching Research 

the same procedure but with different content) (e.g. Kim & Tracy-Ventura, 2013) or
repeating the same task with different partners (Lambert, Kormos & Minn, 2016)
might be responses to learners’ negative reaction to repeating exactly the same task.
When it comes to young L2-learners, our knowledge is very limited. In the present
study, learners highly valued encountering the same words repeated in different sub-
games. Having a slight variation in the process of repetition appears to be motivating
for young learners.
If we look at children’s first-language environment, we notice that it is full of repeti-
tion: repetition of rhythms, phrases, grammatical structures in songs and story books.
Importantly, many repetitions in songs and stories have slight variations each time they
are repeated (e.g. substituting different agents, adding more elements in a given sentence,
inserting different phonemes, etc.), and Cook (2000) observed that ‘children seem to
enjoy such repeated and predictable structures’ (p. 29). It is not totally clear from our data
if the children in this study (older school-age children in the 6th grade) retain the positive
attitude towards repetition itself that younger children have. It is also unclear if their atti-
tudes towards the same task repetition and procedure repetition differ, and if so, how they
differ. However, we have some evidence indicating that the children in this study valued
repetition with slight variations or repetition in different contexts, and that they made the
repetition enjoyable and motivational by strategically combining it with other motivational
elements. As in the case of Mr. Bold, for example, the repetition element was connected
to another motivation element that seems to be particularly important for this age group;
namely, creating and maintaining a cool-looking avatar of the player. Knowing that repeti-
tion promotes learning, children’s way of combining repetition with other game elements,
as in the case of Mr. Bold, can be a potentially useful strategy for teachers and task design-
ers when they incorporate repetition in tasks for young learners.
It should be noted, however, that the broader project’s procedures may have poten-
tially influenced children’s responses. For example, children identified repetition as a
game element, but it is possible that their response was an artifact of our asking them to
identify game and learning elements separately and then to combine them in their game
designs. It should also be remembered that the study was conducted in a particular cul-
tural-educational context, and it is unclear what influence this may have had on learners’
responses. Nevertheless, the study is one of the first to identify motivational elements in
task design from children’s points of view. As a next step, we need to understand the
relationship between these elements and learning. It is important to know how learners’
motivation and engagement in a specific DIG task leads to acquisition not only in the
immediate DIG learning context but also in novel learning contexts.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article: The research was partially supported by the Eiken Foundation
of Japan.

References
Butler, Y.G. (2015). The use of computer games as foreign language learning tasks for digital
natives. System, 54, 91–102.
Butler 15

Butler, Y.G., Someya, Y., & Fukuhara, E. (2014). Online games for young learners’ foreign lan-
guage learning. ELT Journal, 68, 265–275.
Bygate, M. (1996). Effects of task repetition: Apprising the developing language of learners. In
J. Willis, & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136–146).
London: Heinemann.
Carreira, J.M. (2006). Motivation for learning English as a foreign language in Japanese elemen-
tary schools. JALT Journal, 28, 135–158.
Cook, G. (2000). Language play, language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2008). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). New themes and approaches in second language motivation research. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 21, 43–59.
Dörnyei, Z. (2002). The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.),
Individual differences and instructional language learning (pp. 137–158). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task perfor-
mance. Language Teaching Research, 4, 275–300.
Dörnyei, Z., & Tseng, W.-T. (2009). Motivational processing in interactional tasks. In A. MacKey,
& C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction: Second language research in honor
of Susan Gass (pp. 117–134). London: Routledge.
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisi-
tion research. London: Routledge.
Fu, F.-L., Su, R.-C., & Yu, S.-C. (2009). EGame flow: A scale to measure learners’ enjoyment of
e-learning games. Computers and Education, 52, 101–112.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J.E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and
practice model. Simulation and Gaming, 33, 441–467.
Gee, J.P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. 2nd edition. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hays, R.T. (2005). The effectiveness of instructional games: A literature review and discussion.
Technical Report No. 2005–004. Orlando, FL: Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems
Division. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a441935.pdf (November
2016).
Julkunen, K. (2001). Situation- and task-specific motivation in foreign language learning. In Z.
Dörnyei, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 29–42).
Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Kim, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2013). The role of task repetition in L2 performance development:
What needs to be repeated during task-based interaction? System, 41, 829–840.
Lambert, C., Kormos, J., & Minn, D. (2016). Task repetition and second language speech process-
ing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Electronic publication ahead of print version.
Published online: 18 March 2016 (doi: 10.1017/S0272263116000085).
Lopriore, L., & Mihaljević, Djigunović, J. (2011). Attitudinal aspects of early EFL learning. In G.
Szabó, J. Horváth, & M. Nikolov (Eds.), UPRT 2009: Empirical research in English applied
linguistics (pp. 17–33). Pécs: Lingua Franca Csoport.
Malone, T.W., & Lepper, M.R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motiva-
tions for learning. In R.E. Snow, & M.J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction,
Volume 3: Conative and affective process analyses (pp. 223–253). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Nikolov, M. (2016). A framework for young ELF learners’ diagnostic assessment: ‘Can do state-
ments’ and task types. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), Assessing young learners of English: Global and
local perspectives (pp. 65–92). New York: Springer.
16 Language Teaching Research 

Nitta, R., & Baba, K. (2014). Task repetition and L2 writing development: A longitudinal study
from a dynamic systems perspectives. In H. Byrnes, & R.M. Manchon (Eds.), Task-based
language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 107–136). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Parker, L.E., & Lepper, M.R. (1992). Effects of fantasy contexts on children’s learning and motiva-
tion: Making learning more fun. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 625–633.
Pinter, A. (2014). Child participant roles in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 35,
168–183.
Plough, I., & Gass, S. (1993). Interlocutor and task familiarity: Effect on interactional struc-
ture. In G. Crookes, & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning (pp. 35–56). Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Prosic-Santovac, D. (2016). Popular video cartoons and associated branded toys in teaching English
to very young learners: A case study. Language Teaching Research. Electronic publication
ahead of print version. Published online: 22 April 2016 (doi: 10.1177/1362168816639758).
Salen, K., & Zimmermann, E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Schumann, J.H. (2001). Appraisal psychology, neurobiology, and language. Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics, 21, 23–42.
Skehan, P. (2016). Tasks versus conditions: Two perspectives on task research and their implica-
tions for pedagogy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 34–49.
Sykes, J.M., & Reinhardt, J. (2013). Language at play: Digital games in second and foreign lan-
guage teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Tremblay, P.E., Goldberg, M.P., & Gardner, R.C. (1995). Trait and state motivation and the acqui-
sition of Hebrew vocabulary. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 27, 356–370.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wang, Z. (2014). Online time pressure manipulations: L2 speaking performance under five types
of planning and repetition conditions. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task
performance (pp. 27–61). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wilson, K.A., Bedwell, W.L., Lazzara, E.H., et al. (2009). Relationships between game attrib-
utes and learning outcomes: Reviews and research proposals. Simulation and Gaming, 40,
217–266.
Woolley, J.D. (1997). Thinking about fantasy: Are children fundamentally different thinkers and
believers form adults? Child Development, 68, 991–1011.