p

Digital Games in
Language Learning and
Teaching
Edited by
Hayo Reinders
Digital Games in Language Learning and Teaching
New Language Learning and Teaching Environments

Titles include:

Hayo Reinders
DIGITAL GAMES IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING

Forthcoming

Fred Dervin, Marie-Noëlle Lamy and Katerina Zourou (editors)

SOCIAL NETWORKING FOR LANGUAGE EDUCATION

New Language Learning and Teaching Environments

Series Standing Order ISBN 978–0230–28249–0 hardback
978–0230–28250–6 paperback
(outside North America only)
You can receive future titles in this series as they are published by placing a
standing order. Please contact your bookseller or, in case of difficulty, write to
us at the address below with your name and address, the title of the series and
the ISBN quoted above.
Customer Services Department, Macmillan Distribution Ltd, Houndmills,
Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS, England
Digital Games in Language
Learning and Teaching
Edited by

Hayo Reinders
Head of Learner Development, Middlesex University, UK
Selection, editorial content and introduction © Hayo Reinders 2012
Individual chapters © the contributors 2012
Foreword © James Paul Gee 2012
All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this
publication may be made without written permission.
No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted
save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence
permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency,
Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.
Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication
may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.
The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of this
work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
First published 2012 by
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN
Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited,
registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke,
Hampshire RG21 6XS.
Palgrave Macmillan in the US is a division of St Martin’s Press LLC,
175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010.
Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies
and has companies and representatives throughout the world.
Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States,
the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries.

ISBN 978-1-137-02283-7 ISBN 978-1-137-00526-7 (eBook)

DOI 10.1057/9781137005267

This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully
managed and sustained forest sources. Logging, pulping and manufacturing
processes are expected to conform to the environmental regulations of the
country of origin.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12
For Alexa de Paris
– Game on!
This page intentionally left blank
Contents

List of Tables and Figures ix

Foreword xii

Notes on Contributors xv

Introduction 1

Part I From Theory to Practice

1 Contextualizing Digital Game-Based Language Learning:
Transformational Paradigm Shift or Business as Usual? 11
Michael Thomas

2 Conceptualizing Digital Game-Mediated L2 Learning and

Pedagogy: Game-Enhanced and Game-Based Research and
Practice 32
Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes

3 Behaviorism, Constructivism, and Communities of

Practice: How Pedagogic Theories Help Us Understand
Game-Based Language Learning 50
Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten

4 Language Learner Interaction in a Massively Multiplayer

Online Role-Playing Game 70
Mark Peterson

Part II From Practice to Theory

5 Digital Gameplay for Autonomous Foreign Language
Learning: Gamers’ and Language Teachers’ Perspectives 95
Alice Chik

6 Game-Based Practice in a Reading Strategy Tutoring

System: Showdown in iSTART-ME 115
G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle
S. McNamara

vii
viii Contents

7 Sprites and Rules: What ERPs and Procedural Memory Can

Tell Us about Video Games and Language Learning 139
Robert V. Reichle

8 Talk to Me! Games and Students’ Willingness to

Communicate 156
Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana

9 World of VocCraft: Computer Games and Swedish

Learners’ L2 English Vocabulary 189
Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén

10 Collocation Games from a Language Corpus 209

Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten

Index 230
Tables and Figures

Tables

1.1 Ten key principles for designing video games for

foreign language learning 23
2.1 Guiding questions for game-mediated L2LP research
and practice 33
2.2 Summary of game-based environments for L2LP 40
4.1 Findings on the use of MMORPGs in CALL 73
4.2 Mean scores of learner responses to the post-study
questionnaire 85
5.1 Project with teacher-participants 98
5.2 Project with gamer-participants 99
5.3 Background information of the ten gamer-participants 99
6.1 Five questions from engagement scale 125
8.1 A comparison between official and modified Ragnarok
Online 165
8.2 A mapping of learning objectives of unit 2 to gaming
activities 167
8.3 Paired samples test for average number of turns via
text-based chat per student in session 3 and session 1 171
8.4 Paired samples test for average number of turns via
voice-based chat per student in session 3 and session 1 171
8.5 Number of words, and number and length of turns, in
text-based chat and voice-based chat during gameplay 172
8.6 Discourse functions of clauses in written and oral
interaction during gameplay 173
8.7 Linguistic features of the learners’ language production
via written and oral communication during computer
game activities 175
8.8 Willingness to communicate 178
8.9 Participants’ feelings about communicating in English
in a computer game context 179
8.10 Learners’ reflection on their communication behaviour
and second language use in a computer game context 180
9.1 Average score, group, and test round (TR) 196

ix
x List of Tables and Figures

9.2 Amount of time spent on extramural English activities,

in order of popularity (n = 86; internal attrition: 16%) 199
9.3 Spearman correlation coefficient r for extramural
English, and listening and reading comprehension 200
10.1 The ten collocation types with examples and
frequencies 222
10.2 Number of collocations extracted from the Oxford
Collocation Dictionary for Students of English 223
10.3 Number of collocations in the baseline and test data 224
10.4 Collocation types with statistical data from two corpora 225
10.5 Web and BNC entries for cause + noun 226
10.6 Top ten cause + noun collocations in three
concordances 226

Figures

5.1 Language teachers, gameplay and literacy 108

5.2 Gamers, gameplay and literacy 109
5.3 Gamers, online communities and language advising 110
6.1 Screenshot of iSTART-ME selection menu 123
6.2 Screenshot of Coached Practice 126
6.3 Screenshot of Showdown 127
6.4 Average self-explanation quality is higher in Coached
Practice than in Showdown 129
6.5 Students spend more time training in Coached Practice
than in Showdown 130
6.6 Students write more self-explanations in Coached
Practice than in Showdown 130
6.7 Mean ratings for engagement subscale questions 132
8.1 Heuristic model of variables influencing WTC 161
8.2 A screenshot of quest event called ‘looking for a
computer shop sales assistant’ 168
8.3 Average number of turns per student, communicating
via text-based chat and voice-based chat while engaged
in computer game activities 170
8.4 Average number of words per student in text-based
chat and voice-based chat 172
8.5 Percentage of learners’ perceived competence in their
English communication skills before and after
participating in gaming activities 181
10.1 The Collocation Dominoes game 213
 List of Tables and Figures xi

10.2 The Collocation Matching game 214

10.3 The Common Alternatives game 215
10.4 The Related Words game 216
10.5 The Collocation Guessing game 217
10.6 Designing a Collocation Guessing game 220
Foreword

There is something of a rage these days for game-based learning, in

and out of schools. In previous work I have stressed how good video
games create good learning conditions. This also amounts to saying they
‘teach’ in a powerful way. However, the teaching method they use can
be implemented with or without games, though games are one good
platform with which to deliver such teaching.
How do good video games teach?

• They focus on well-ordered problems, not facts and information.

• They give players good tools with which to solve the problems
(including other players in multiplayer gaming, and facts and infor-
mation as tools).
• They have clear goals but, nonetheless, encourage players to rethink
their goals from time to time.
• They reduce the cost of failure so that players will explore, take
risks, seek alternative solutions and try new styles of play and
learning.
• They put performance before competence and they put experiences
and actions before words and texts. This means players learn by
doing, and that they have images and experiences to give deep mean-
ing to the words and texts they read later, in order to resource their
play and learning.
• They give copious feedback, and they assess all along the way to
ensure that the player is always well prepared for what comes next.
• They connect playing and learning to social interaction and men-
toring through collaborative and competitive play, as well as
through interest-driven fan sites where players can extend and
articulate their knowledge and even produce new knowledge and
designs.
• They ensure that at each new level, players face new problems that
challenge the routine mastery they have developed through lots of
practice on the previous level (this has been called ‘the cycle of
expertise’).
• They use narrative in two ways to create engagement. They often
have stories that make clear why the players are doing what they

xii
 Foreword xiii

are doing and what it means. And they allow players to create their
own stories through the consequential choices they have made in the
course of gameplay.
• They hold everyone to the same high standard (everyone, for exam-
ple, fights the same ‘bosses’) but allow players to reach these stan-
dards in different ways and in different amounts of time (so it
does not really matter where or when one started, only where one
finishes).
• They deal with transfer as ‘preparation for future learning’. You can
see how well players have learned by seeing how well they do in
similar later and harder games or problems in life.
• Gamers have to think like designers even to play, since they have to
figure out how the ‘rule system’ in the game works and how it can
be used to accomplish their goals. They can go further and ‘mod’ the
game (make new levels or versions) by using the design software with
which the game was made.

We do not have a name for such teaching – teaching that is designing –

though it is increasingly pervasive out of school. So let’s just call it
‘teaching as designing’ (TAD).
Over the last few years there has been a quite specific interest in
using games to teach language and literacy. It should be clear that
TAD is a good deal closer to how people acquire new languages in situ,
rather than in standard classrooms with textbooks or drill sheets. And
we should be clear that learning a language and learning literacy are
problem-solving activities, when and if they are to become real skills
and not just test passing skills. Learners need to use the language or lit-
eracy skills they are learning to carry out communicative or cognitive
goals, actions and functions that are consequential to them.
Good video games have design features that are particularly rele-
vant to language learning. They often use ‘concentrated samples’. These
are situations where you present players or learners with many more
instances in a short time of important cases than they would see in real-
ity. This is an important tool in language and literacy learning. Good
games can lower the affective filter by creating engagement and situ-
ations where learners’ fears are bypassed. Good games can create talk
and text both in the game and outside of it in an interest-driven site
where players discuss the game, gameplay and problem solving, gain-
ing metacognitive and metalinguistic skills. Games can lead to hours of
practice by placing lower-level skills inside larger more motivating and
engaging problems.
xiv Foreword

But the main thing games can do for language learning is to ‘situate
meaning’. Games associate words with images, actions, goals and dia-
logue, not just with definitions or other words. Learners come to see
how words attach to the world’s contexts or situations that they are
about and help to create or manipulate. If learners can only ‘cash out’
words for words, they have a purely verbal understanding of talk and
texts. This may be good for test passing but it is not good for deep under-
standing. If they can ‘cash out’ words for images, experiences, actions,
goals and dialogue – for a virtual theatre of motivated action in their
minds – then they have deep understanding and real learning.
Digital Games in Language Learning and Teaching is timely indeed.
It is an invitation to a barely discovered territory. But there will soon,
I predict, be a land rush.
James Paul Gee
Mary Lou Fulton Presidential Professor of Literacy Studies
Arizona State University, USA
Notes on Contributors

Judith Bündgens-Kosten works at the Department of Educational

Media and Knowledge Management at the University of Duisburg-Essen,
Germany. She received her doctorate degree in English linguistics from
RWTH Aachen University, Germany, and her MA in online and dis-
tance education from the Open University, UK. Judith focuses on an
area where language and computers meet: language use in and language
learning through computer-mediated communication (especially blog-
ging), as well as the linguistic and non-linguistic differences between
‘free range’ and educational use of Web 2.0 tools.

Alice Chik is an assistant professor in the Department of English, City

University of Hong Kong, China. Recently she has become interested
in how young people use technology to develop their learner auton-
omy. She is especially intrigued by the ways in which video gamers
use gameplay and online gaming communities and resources to develop
their out-of-class learning skills. She is also investigating the use of social
media in the classroom to enhance interaction and learning.

Kyle B. Dempsey is an instructor in Statistics at Mississippi University

for Women, USA. His primary research interests are in the develop-
ment of educational games systems. Specifically, this work has focused
on the game player’s individual differences to produce a more engag-
ing and effective learning environment. The research, funded by the
National Science Foundation and the Institute of Education Sciences,
has resulted in the creation of two game-based tutoring systems for strat-
egy instruction in reading comprehension (iSTART-ME) and persuasive
writing (Writing-Pal).

Michael Filsecker works in the Department of Educational Media and

Knowledge Management at Duisburg-Essen University, Germany. He
received his master’s degree in learning sciences at Indiana University,
USA, and continues his doctoral studies at Duisburg-Essen Univer-
sity, Germany. Michael’s interests include the influence of technology

xv
xvi Notes on Contributors

(e.g., video games, wikis, and online settings) on (a) individuals’ cog-
nitive, conative and affective processes, (b) assessment practices that
together may impact the process of learning and instruction, and
(c) collaborative/group learning.

Margaret Franken is a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Education at the

University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Her research interests
include data-driven learning and computer-assisted language learning.
The present project has resulted in joint publications in these two areas,
with Shaoqun Wu and Ian H. Witten.

James Paul Gee is the Mary Lou Fulton Presidential Professor of Literacy
Studies at Arizona State University, USA. He is a member of the National
Academy of Education. His books include Sociolinguistics and Literacies
(4th edn, 2011), An Introduction to Discourse Analysis (3rd edn, 2011),
What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy (2nd edn,
2007), Situated Language and Learning (2004), Good Video Games and Good
Learning: Collected Essays (2007), How to Do Discourse Analysis (2011),
Woman as Gamers: The Sims and 21st Century Learning (2010) and Lan-
guage and Learning in the Digital World (2011), the latter two written
with Elizabeth Hayes. He has published widely in journals in linguistics,
psychology, the social sciences and education.

G. Tanner Jackson is an assistant research professor within the Learn-

ing Sciences Institute at Arizona State University, USA. His primary
research interests are in the development of effective learning systems.
Specifically, this work has focused on combining games and intelligent
tutoring systems to produce a motivating and pedagogically sophis-
ticated learning environment. This research, funded by the National
Science Foundation and the Institute of Education Sciences, has resulted
in the creation of two game-based tutoring systems for strategy instruc-
tion in reading comprehension (iSTART-ME) and persuasive writing
(Writing-Pal).

Danielle S. McNamara is a professor in the Psychology Department and

senior scientist in the Learning Sciences Institute at Arizona State Uni-
versity, USA. Her academic background includes a linguistics BA (1982),
a clinical psychology MS (1989) and a cognitive psychology PhD
(1992). Her research involves the development and assessment of game-
based, intelligent tutoring systems (e.g., iSTART, Writing Pal; see solet-
lab.com); natural language processing (e.g., Coh-Metrix); and the use
 Notes on Contributors xvii

of interactive dialogue in automated tutoring systems. One focus of

her work is on developing methods to improve success for struggling
high-school students. She has served on numerous funding panels, gov-
erning boards and editorial boards, and as associate editor for three
journals.

Mark Peterson (http://www.users.iimc.kyoto-u.ac.jp/∼z59316/index.

html) received his PhD in linguistics from the University of Edinburgh,
UK. He is an associate professor in the Graduate School of Human
and Environmental Studies at Kyoto University, Japan, where he
teaches courses on computer-assisted language learning. His current
research explores the use of network-based virtual worlds and massively
multiplayer online role playing games in language education.

Robert V. Reichle is an assistant professor of French linguistics at

Northern Illinois University, USA. His research examines the process-
ing and acquisition of French as a second language, using behavioural
measures and the event-related potential technique for investigation.
Recent topics of interest have examined three sources of context that
affect language processing: L2 learner variables, cognitive schemata and
focus structure. Currently he is investigating the modulatory effect of
working memory on near-native-like second language processing, and
the similarities in processing signatures indexed with gameplay and
morphosyntax violations.

Hayo Reinders (www.innovationinteaching.org) is Head of Learner

Development at Middlesex University, London, UK. He is also Editor of
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, and Convenor of the
AILA Research Network for computer-assisted language learning (CALL)
and the Learner. Hayo’s interests are in CALL, autonomy and out-of-
class learning. He is a speaker for the Royal Society of New Zealand.
His most recent books are on teacher autonomy, teaching methodolo-
gies and second language acquisition, and he edits a book series entitled
‘New Language Learning and Teaching Environments’.

Jonathon Reinhardt is Assistant Professor of English Language/

Linguistics at the University of Arizona, USA, and Co-Director, with
Julie Sykes, of the Games to Teach Project at the Center for Educa-
tional Resources in Culture, Language and Literacy at the university.
His research focuses on technology in L2 teaching and learning, espe-
cially the use of digital gaming and social networking technologies,
xviii Notes on Contributors

interaction in technology-mediated environments, and digital literacies

pedagogy.

Pia Sundqvist received her PhD from Karlstad University, Sweden, in

2009. Her research interests are primarily in second language acquisi-
tion, in particular vocabulary acquisition and assessment, and informal
learning. She works as a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Arts and Educa-
tion (English) at Karlstad University, Sweden. At present she is leading
a project on informal learning of English among young learners, and
another on digital gaming and L2 vocabulary acquisition. Sundqvist
has extensive experience of teaching English, Spanish and Swedish in
secondary and upper secondary education.

Julie M. Sykes is an assistant professor of Hispanic linguistics at the Uni-

versity of New Mexico, USA. Her research focuses on the use of emerging
technologies for language acquisition, with a specific focus on inter-
language pragmatic development and intercultural competence. Her
recent projects include the design, implementation and evaluation of
place-based, augmented reality mobile games (with Prof. Chris Holden)
to engage language learners in a variety of non-institutional con-
texts, and the Games to Teach project (with Prof. Jon Reinhardt). Julie
has presented and published various articles on computer-assisted lan-
guage learning (CALL)-related topics, including synchronous computer-
mediated communication and pragmatic development, gaming and
CALL, and lexical acquisition in digitally mediated environments.

Liss Kerstin Sylvén received her PhD from the University of

Gothenburg, Sweden, in 2004. Her research interests are primarily sec-
ond language acquisition, content and language-integrated learning,
and informal learning. She works as a senior lecturer in the Department
of Education and Special Education at the University of Gothenburg,
Sweden, where she also is in charge of the English reading comprehen-
sion part of the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test. Currently she is the
research leader of a large-scale project on CLIL in Sweden, funded by
the Swedish Research Council.

Michael Thomas is a senior lecturer at the University of Central

Lancashire, UK, and course leader of the MA in TESOL with applied lin-
guistics by e-learning. He has taught at universities in the UK, Germany
and Japan and written or edited more than ten books. He is complet-
ing a new book entitled Digital Technologies for Language Learning and
 Notes on Contributors xix

Teaching. He is also the editor of two book series: ‘Advances in Digital

Language Learning and Teaching’ and ‘Digital Education and Learning’.
He is a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy in the UK.

Sorada Wattana is a lecturer at Dhurakij Pundit University in Bangkok,

Thailand. She is also a PhD student in the School of Education at the
University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand. In her research
she investigates the effects of gameplay on the quantity and quality
of L2 interaction, and willingness to communicate in the context of
English as a foreign language. She is keen to implement emerging tech-
nologies in her teaching practice and wants to continue contributing to
a variety of research projects in computer-assisted language learning.

Ian H. Witten is Professor of Computer Science at the University of

Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand, where he directs the New Zealand
Digital Library research project. His research interests include lan-
guage learning, information retrieval and machine learning. Managing
Gigabytes (1999), Web Dragons (2007), How to Build a Digital Library
(2009) and Data Mining (2011) are four of his publications. He received
the Royal Society of New Zealand Hector Medal in 2006 for ‘an out-
standing contribution to the advancement of the mathematical and
information sciences’, and in 2010 he was officially inaugurated as a
‘World Class New Zealander’ in research science, and technology.

Shaoqun Wu is currently doing postdoctoral research in the Faculty

of Computer Science and Mathematics at the University of Waikato,
Hamilton, New Zealand. Her research interests include computer-
assisted language learning, data mining and digital libraries.
Introduction

Recent years have seen a growing interest in the pedagogical potential of

digital games. The educational value of games has long been recognized
(e.g. Lee, 1979), but digital games in particular are now acknowledged as
having great potential to engage learners and to encourage interaction
in the target language. Immersive environments offer learners oppor-
tunities for situated learning, and the adaptive qualities of most games
ensure that individuals are motivated to persist in their learning, thus
increasing the chance of further exposure to target language input, and
opportunities for output. The use of computer games in language edu-
cation is based on the premise that successful learning is integrated into
the sociocultural context of learners’ lives and encourages collaboration
and lifelong learning. The use of new technologies, and in particular dig-
ital games, thus facilitates the bridging of learning within and outside
the language classroom.
The authors of this collection, notwithstanding the diversity of their
contributions, are united in their belief that the rationale for any
instructional intervention, including the use of games, should be ped-
agogically sound. All agree that it is important to critically investigate
the potential of digital games, not just from a general but also from a
specific second language learning and teaching perspective. Do games
really motivate learners? Do they actually encourage more use of the
target language? Do they offer opportunities for negotiation of mean-
ing, or focus on form? Do they result in greater uptake and acquisition?
Although some recent studies have started to address such questions
(e.g. de Haan, Reed, & Kuwada, 2010; Piirainen-Marsh, 2009; Zheng,
Young, Brewer, & Wagner, 2009), this is the first dedicated collection of
chapters to bring together the state of the art in research into digital
game-based language learning. It also does more than simply present

1
2 Introduction

new research: it actively makes links with the practice of teaching and
supporting learning by reporting on innovative use of technology in
language education in a range of settings.
A good starting point for investigating the affordances offered by dig-
ital games is to look at their characteristics. Prensky (2001) argues that
most games involve:
• rules;
• goals and objectives;
• outcome and feedback;
• conflict, competition, challenge and opposition;
• interaction;
• the representation of a story.

These are also characteristics of many successful language-teaching

environments, and indeed (perhaps with the exception of the ‘represen-
tation of a story’) of task-based language teaching, in particular as related
to the use of technology (see Thomas & Reinders, 2011 for a collection
of papers on technology in task-based language teaching). Successful
games mirror successful teaching insofar as they create environments
that balance user/learner control with clear expectations, exploration
with feedback, and ample opportunities for genuine interaction. This
relationship between what we know about L2 instruction and acquisi-
tion, and what games can contribute to this, is explored in the first four
chapters, in Part I: ‘From theory to practice’.
Michael Thomas begins by highlighting some of the potential benefits
of games for language learning and teaching that have been identi-
fied over the years. He argues that this potential has not been fulfilled,
partly because there is a disconnect between ‘traditional transmission
pedagogies of the pre-digital age [. . .] reliant on linear modes of learning
reinforced by linear hierachies of control and information access’, and
the inclusive, collaborative and process-orientated affordances offered
by digital technologies. Thomas goes on, however, to show that these
are not necessarily as far apart as they might seem. Games can con-
tribute to the implementation of pedagogic principles that are becoming
increasingly mainstream, such as the use of tasks, authentic forms of
interaction and collaboration, and community-based and situated learn-
ing. Most importantly, perhaps, games place learners at the heart of the
learning and teaching process and in this way may have an impact on
language education as a whole.
Jon Reinhardt and Julie Sykes further investigate this potential impact
through a critical review of research on games in language learning and
 Introduction 3

teaching. They begin by distinguishing between game-based and game-

enhanced L2 learning and pedagogy, and argue that these offer four
different, but complementary, perspectives. They call for more research
into the connections between learning and pedagogy, and between the
role of the learner, the game designer and the instructional context. Like
Thomas, they see an important indirect benefit of using and research-
ing games: ‘While we find both game-enhanced and game-based work
to be compelling for L2LP, we believe it is game-informed insights –
that is, understandings from research and practice in other, related
fields – which have the strongest potential to transform L2LP, whether
game-mediated or not.’
Filsecker and Bündges-Kosten take as their starting point a num-
ber of well-known learning theories to critically review several popular
games. He shows how behaviourist approaches have heavily influenced
game design with many games including reinforcement as a key tool.
Although such games have a role to play, they ‘leave little space for
teachers, social interaction and reflection’. Constructivism, on the other
hand, places learners in a more central role, and Filsecker gives exam-
ples of games where learners deal with more authentic situations and
where they actively influence how a game plays out. Similarly, such
games give teachers a more active role as faciliators of learning, but
Filsecker argues that considerably more research is needed to better
undertand these roles. Communities of practice approaches go one step
further as ‘meaning is negotiated among the participants themselves
while members of that community when taking up the values and belief
system of an emergent community’, and many games now exist that are
built around such communities. He concludes by arguing that research
and practice should not be limited to any single theory, as different
ways of learning (and teaching) contribute to the learning process in
different ways.
Mark Peterson focuses specifically on language learner interaction in
massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG). He begins
by describing the features of such games relevant to language acqui-
sition, before reviewing current research on their use. He goes on to
describe an experimental qualitative study of the use of a MMORPG
(NineRift) with Japanese EFL learners. Using discourse analysis of chat
texts collected during gameplay, researcher observation, field notes,
learner responses to pre- and post-study questionnaires, and interviews,
it was found that learners were very active in their participation – more
so than they commonly were during regular classroom instruction – and
were engaging in dialogue exclusively in the target language. Perhaps
4 Introduction

equally importantly, participants enjoyed the learner-centred nature of

the interaction.
Although studies such as Peterson’s show an important affective
role for computer games, there is likely also to be a cognitive impact
of learning to play computer games. Robert Reichle argues that both
games and language are rule-governed and strongly procedural skills,
and that the acquisition of game-playing skills and morphosyntac-
tic rules are governed by shared memory resources. He reviews recent
electrophysiological research investigating second-language processing
that has incorporated video games into the design, and he concludes
that ‘language learners can be trained to a high enough level of profi-
ciency that they exhibit nativelike brain signatures of morphosyntactic
processing when the training game couples L2 morphosyntax with
gameplay mechanics and simultaneously incorporates critical learning
by featuring:

• cooperation;
• competition;
• a requirement of successful learning in order to progress;
• feedback;
• meta-awareness of gameplay mechanics.’

Reichle then proceeds to give examples of these elements in two popular

games. The question that he poses in his conclusion is how the rules of
L2 morphosyntax can be combined with the mechanics of gameplay so
that grammar can be proceduralized during the acquisition of gameplay
skills. He offers a number of future directions and avenues for research.
In Part II: ‘From practice to theory’, the authors report on the use
of games in different educational settings and they identify princi-
ples and good practice from these. Alice Chik starts off by looking at
the ways in which game players use games and game-related activi-
ties in their foreign-language learning, and how this helps them to
assume more control over their learning and in this way develop their
autonomy. Using a range of instruments, such as classroom discussions,
learning histories, blog entries and stimulated recall sessions, she com-
pares the perceptions of gaming of learners and teachers, and finds that
teachers have a more restricted view of the role of games. Whereas
teachers do not envisage that games play an important role in learners’
language-learning experience, learners see games as offering significant
opportunities for input and interaction, and – importantly – as a way
 Introduction 5

of self-directing their learning, with the help of others. Chik argues for
more research into the ways in which learners use games in out-of-class
settings.
Taking this line of inquiry further, Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin
Sylvén present the results of three studies of the ways in which Swedish
learners make use of games in non-formal settings and how this impacts
on their acquisition of English vocabulary. The first of these was a
longitudinal study of the effects of content and language integrated
learning on vocabulary development. One of the main factors found
to affect acquisition was the use by students of texts outside school.
To investigate what types of text were most beneficial, a second study
was conducted. In this it was found that out-of-school activities were
positively correlated with L2 acquisition and that, in particular, more
‘active’ types of activity, such as use of the Internet and playing video
games, were more strongly correlated than more passive ones, such as
watching TV or listening to music. Boys were found to engage more in
the former, girls more in the latter. A third study with younger learn-
ers showed broadly similar findings. Sundqvist and Sylvén’s chapter
has a number of important pedagogical implications: there were, for
example, significant gender differences, and, in particular, weaker learn-
ers did not engage in out-of-class learning in general, and computer
games specifically, as much as stronger learners. With this knowledge,
it becomes important for educators to find ways to encourage broader
participation.
One attempt to encourage such participation is offered by G. Tanner
Jackson, Kyle Dempsey and Danielle McNamara, who describe the use
of a game-based reading strategy tutoring system called iSTART-ME,
designed to provide young adolescent to college-aged students with
reading strategy training to better understand science texts. They
describe how earlier studies had shown their Intelligent Tutoring Sys-
tem for reading strategy development to be effective but not used as
extensively by students as anticipated. In an attempt to increase the
appeal of the system, a game-enhanced version was designed which
‘provides students with opportunities to interact with texts, earn points,
advance through levels, purchase in-game rewards, personalize a charac-
ter, and play educational mini-games’. As was expected by the authors,
a comparison of the original with the game-enhanced system showed
the former to be more effective but the latter to be more engaging.
Jackson, Dempsey and McNamara argue for more longitudinal research
to establish how engagement and acquisition develop over time.
6 Introduction

Engagement is also an important element in the study by Hayo

Reinders and Sorada Wattana. They investigate the relationship between
gameplay and the quantity and quality of L2 interaction within the
game, and they are particularly interested in participants’ willingness
to communicate in the target language, hypothesizing that gameplay
is motivating and the game environment provides a non-threatening
environment, encouraging participants to interact more. In their study,
Reinders and Wattana modified an existing MMORPG (Ragnarok online)
and gave participants a number of quests to complete that required
them to communicate with other players, collaborate on shared tasks,
exchange information and coordinate their actions. They found an
overall high level of participation and an increasing willingness to
communicate. Participants’ utterances did not, however, improve in
complexity or accuracy, showing the need for alternative or additional
instruction.
In the final chapter, Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian
H. Witten describe an innovative project, called ‘Flax’, that generates
games from the Google n-gram corpus. Teachers can select the diffi-
culty level, and form or set other parameters to generate games such as
‘collocation dominoes’ (where the last word of the previous collocation
becomes the first word of the next collocation), ‘collocation matching’
(where the system selects a set of collocations with the same syntactic
pattern, splits each into its left and right component and then shuffles
the two sets of components), ‘common alternatives’ and ‘collocation
guessing’. A comparison of the collocations generated from the Google
corpus with those from the Oxford English Dictionary and the British
National Corpus shows the massive and diverse nature of the former.
The authors argue that the Flax system offers access to authentic and
motivating language practice.

Conclusion

The chapters in this collection are varied and are testament to the fact
that research into game-based language learning and teaching is still in
its infancy. A number of commanalities and themes do emerge, how-
ever. Firstly, it is important to understand gaming as a social activity
situated in students’ lives. Research such as that conducted by Chik,
and by Sundqvist and Sylvén, is beginning to shed light on the ways
in which learners use games, especially in out-of-school settings, how
they perceive gaming and how this relates to language learning. As Chik
shows, mismatches exist between teachers’ and learners’ perceptions,
 Introduction 7

and it is only on the basis of a good understanding of actual practices

that research and pedagogy can be developed. Similarly, as Sundqvist
and Sylvén show, there are significant differences in the ways in which
learners engage in out-of-class learning and the use of games. Good
pedagogy relies, at the very least, on an awareness of these differ-
ences and how they impact on the learning experience, and ultimately
learning outcomes.
The learning experience through digital games is also not yet fully
understood. As Peterson points out, games can have a major affective
impact on the language learning process and more research is needed to
understand how this takes place in practice.
At the same time, a key challenge for future studies is to make
strong links with what we already know about (language) learning
and teaching. Reichle, for example, advocates building on studies of
memory processes, Jackson, Dempsey and McNamara on research into
strategy instruction, and Reinders and Wattana on studies of interac-
tion and willingness to communicate. Other potentially fruitful areas
include the role of teacher and peer-feedback, the occurrence of focus
on form in informal settings, the quality and quantity of input as well
as opportunities for extended output in game settings.
Despite the potential evident from the contributions in this book, we
would like to end on a cautionary note. Games are only one element
in a much larger ecology of learning and teaching, and they need to be
understood and developed as such. As we learn more about how games
are used, the affordances they offer and the limitations they impose, our
findings need to be brought back into the wider body of knowledge of
learning and teaching. Although insights from game-based learning will
undoubtedly change that body of knowledge, the use of games needs
to be informed by the principles and practice of second-language acqui-
sition. Perhaps the greatest contribution the authors in this collection
have made is to show the many ways in which game-based learning is
connected to language learning and teaching research and practice, and
how it forms an important (although not always yet realized) part of its
future direction.

References
de Haan, J., Reed, M., & Kuwada, K. (2010). The effect of interactivity with a
music video game on second language vocabulary recall. Language Learning &
Technology, 14(2), 74–94.
Lee, W. R. (1979). Language teaching games and contests. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
8 Introduction

Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for partic-

ipation in the activity of playing a video game. The Modern Language Journal,
93(2), 153–169.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Zheng, D., Young, M. F., Wagner, M., & Brewer, B. (2009). Negotiation for action:
English language learning in game-based virtual worlds. The Modern Language
Journal, 93(4), 489–511.
Part I
From Theory to Practice
1
Contextualizing Digital
Game-Based Language Learning:
Transformational Paradigm Shift
or Business as Usual?
Michael Thomas

Introduction

The use of games in language learning has long been contested ter-
ritory. Advocates identify advantages that range from the ‘cognitive
aspects of language learning to more co-operative group dynamics’
(Lengeling & Malarcher, 1997, p. 42). According to this view, games
can be motivating (Lee, 1979); reduce anxiety (Richard-Amato, 1988);
focus learners on communicating in the target language rather than on
using correct linguistic structures (Silvers, 1982; Zdybiewska, 1994); pro-
vide more introverted students with a greater range of opportunities for
self-expression (Hansen, 1994); and create an informal atmosphere that
enhances learner receptiveness (Richard-Amato, 1988; Wierus & Wierus,
1994). On the other hand, debunkers may dismiss games as mere ‘ice
breakers’ and ‘gap fillers’, or activities for a rainy day and no more.
Administrators may go further and ban them altogether as ‘disruptive’
activities that threaten a ‘serious’ learning environment, thus confirm-
ing the opposition of ‘enjoyment’ and ‘fun’ to so-called ‘real learning’
(Kim, 1995). This debate also highlights the way language learning itself
can be seen in more general terms as a less ‘serious’ academic pur-
suit, and thus the need to marginalize game-like activities is part of
a wider response that attempts to establish it as a ‘theory-driven’ or
‘quasi-scientific’ discipline in its own right.
Whereas prior to the 1980s games were likely to be made or invented
by teachers with materials that lay close to hand, the last three decades
have been characterized by the rise of digitalized versions in the form

11
12 From Theory to Practice

of video games, dedicated handheld games consoles, games on mobile

phones, teen cultures that engage with ‘game modding and remix cul-
tures’ (Ito, 2009, p. 192) and, latterly, networked game worlds that have
thousands if not millions of regular users. Recognizing this potential,
as far back as the early 1990s, Hubbard (1991) predicted that digital
game-based language learning (DGBLL) could become an ‘integral part
of modern language teaching methodology’ (p. 220). Two decades later,
however, Chik (2011) more plausibly considers these as somewhat exag-
gerated claims, arguing that in fact digital games are much more likely
to be ‘integral to many people’s leisure consumption’ with ‘their roles
in language teaching methodology . . . still questionable’ or marginal at
best (p. 30).
Although Chik’s scepticism appears to be closer to the typical reality
in today’s language classrooms, research has steadily attracted funding
on the subject, and a growing number of researchers in the inter-
vening period suggest that digital games can be used to enhance
language acquisition (Garcia-Carbonell, Rising, Montero, & Watts, 2001)
or at least supplement it in effective ways via autonomous learn-
ing. Indeed, further studies undertaken in the last few years (deHaan,
Reed, & Kuwada, 2010; Piirainen-Marsh & Taino, 2009) have given
this area of interest renewed prominence as an emerging sub-field
within computer-assisted language learning (CALL). According to this
reading, educational games have been repackaged as ‘serious games’,
mere game-related ‘enjoyment’ as ‘hard fun’ (Negroponte, 1995; Shaffer,
2008), game-based learning as ‘deep learning’ (Gee, 2007), and read-
ing and writing activities on a computer screen as multimodal digital
literacy tasks in which learners move seamlessly between video, text,
images and audio, as if they’d been ‘born digital’ (Lankshear & Knobel,
2008; Palfrey & Gasser, 2008; Pegrum, 2009; Prensky, 2001a, 2001b,
2007). Bored with school and its culture of ‘surveillance and control’
rather than ‘creativity’, teenagers are now displaying ‘new’ propensi-
ties for ‘multitasking’, social networking on Facebook, talking on the
phone and simultaneously doing their school homework (Tapscott,
2009). When combined, belonging to gamer communities, or ‘affin-
ity groups’ (Gee, 2007), and with a full knowledge of the multimodal
sign systems of the game worlds in which they participate, or ‘semiotic
domains’ (Gee, 2007), digital technologies seemingly have the poten-
tial to rectify almost anything, especially the ailing and disabled spaces
of traditional education. Whereas there was an earlier concern about
how to convert entertainment-focused digital games for the educational
 Michael Thomas 13

sector (Prensky, 2001b), latterly they are held to already integrate cog-
nitive and problem-solving skills that could be beneficial in education
(Gee, 2007).
The discourse in which digital gaming is advanced, as these seman-
tic changes suggest, frequently aligns advocates with ‘the incessant
“hyping” of technology’, a trend which should be viewed as part of a
‘wider tendency in contemporary society towards a “techno-romantic”
or “techno-utopian” reading of the technological’ (Selwyn, 2011, p. 12).
The prevalence of this technological determinism reinforces the point
that DGBLL cannot be separated from its particular social, cultural and
historical context. Indeed, many of the arguments made on behalf of
digital games (and digital technologies in general) reflect those iden-
tified above arising from earlier generations of non-digital language
games, but have been subject to an ahistoricism in which the past fail-
ures of learning technologies are forgotten and replaced by a ‘pervasive
sense of leaving the past behind’ (Cuban, 1986) for the ‘allure’ of a
bright new digital future (Lockard & Pegrum, 2007; Selwyn, 2011, p. 7).
Rehearsing arguments from Illich (1971), the rhetoric of the wider dis-
course of digital education is particularly significant in its idealization
of game-like worlds built on notions of online communitarianism (Gee,
2007; Rheingold, 2000) as well as out-of-school non-formal play (Beck
& Beck-Gernsheim, 2002; Ito et al., 2010).
As is clear from this cursory overview, much is at stake in this debate
that may at first glance appear to be merely concerned with local-
ized research on game design or language learning. And more research
needs to be done to deconstruct the simplified binary oppositions
that structure the debates on digital education – opposing ‘education’
and ‘entertainment’, ‘learning’ and ‘play’, ‘school’ and ‘home’, ‘bore-
dom’ and ‘fun’, ‘disengagement’ and ‘multitasking’ (Ito, 2009; Thomas,
2011b) – and threaten to create new ‘digital divides’ at the same time as
they propose to erase others (Buckingham, 2007).
Given this complex discursive context, this chapter pursues a more
critical path, highlighting the importance of the ‘questionable’ aspect
identified by Chik (2011), and examines two related questions about
future prospects in the use of digital games in language education: What
interests and discourses are shaping the case for digital games in lan-
guage learning in terms of a transformational paradigm shift? If indeed
digital games respond to new expectations from learners and require
new types of learning, what principles can be drawn on to facilitate this
in language learning contexts?
14 From Theory to Practice

Digital education

The rigid adherence to prescriptive forms of teaching and the rise of

product-oriented or ‘high stakes’ educational testing is often cited as
the cause of the contemporary disconnect between learners and learn-
ing in formal educational contexts. This disconnect has occurred at
the same time that digital technologies have gained widespread pop-
ularity, with the emergence of applications belonging to the second
generation of the web (e.g., blogs, wikis, podcasting, social networking,
video and photosharing) and what some have perceived as the potential
for user-generated content and process rather than exclusively product-
oriented education. Learners and teachers sympathetic to the use of
digital media applications and its associated media literacy skills have
targeted their criticisms at the so-called ‘industrial model’ of education,
the main focus being that instructed educational contexts, in terms of
their mode of delivery, their core curriculum content, as well as the
physical layout of their classrooms, have changed little over the last cen-
tury. This model is based on an outdated conception of literacy, that of
a ‘static print/book culture . . . where learning is geographically tied to a
desk . . . and an old-style transmission and surveillance pedagogy’ (Luke,
2003, p. 398). According to this view, it is still common to see learn-
ers obediently sitting behind rows of horizontal desks being addressed
by an authoritative teacher who presides over the group from the front
of the room, dictating the path of instruction and maintaining con-
trol and order. In this scenario, the teacher is the commonly cited ‘sage
on the stage’, learner interaction is kept to a minimum, and the ‘drill
and skill’ approach is paramount (Norton, Tilley, Newstead, & Franklyn-
Stokes, 2001). The traditional transmission pedagogies of the pre-digital
age are reliant on linear modes of learning reinforced by linear hierar-
chies of control and information access. Indeed, according to Prensky
(2007), this situation has provoked young people to transfer their cre-
ative skills to the use of new technologies in out-of-school practices, the
separation of the ‘digital native’ generation of younger learners from
the older ‘immigrants’, and the associated demand for a ‘new pedagogy’
in which kids teach themselves with the teacher acting as a ‘guide’ to
student-centred discovery (see also, Mitra et al., 2005).
Pitted against the ‘syllabus-bound’ interpretation of learning (Norton
et al., 2001), then, in recent years advocates of digital technologies
(including social media, virtual worlds and video games) outline a
vision of education based on collaborative and participatory class-
room communities in which critical thinking and problem-solving
 Michael Thomas 15

activities engage frustrated and inactive students. Investing heavily in

this technological vision, Prensky (2001b) looks forward to a seemingly
inevitable future when game-based learning will re-engage a lost gener-
ation of learners: ‘The days of sitting bored to tears in classrooms or in
front of a boring computer or Web-based training systems are numbered’
(p. 34). The seeming ‘inevitability’ of these developments is purported
to be an integral part of the technology as it is of the new generation of
learners and their digital skillset. Central to this discourse of ‘new’ tech-
nologies and a ‘new generation’ of learners are the twenty-first-century
skills that school leavers and graduates are expected to have if they are
to progress in the knowledge economy:

The process of knowledge creation is dependent on personal skills of

information access, location, analysis, and evaluation, which involve
the manipulation of sophisticated and ever-developing software
applications, and also on the performance of human ‘conversational
networks’.
(Goodfellow, 2006, p. 69)

At the same time, it is clear that this discourse is also deeply rooted in a
particular social and economic context:

The emphasis on collaboration, on new technologies, and on com-

petition as the key driver is highly typical of the discourse of what
Gee and others have called ‘fast capitalism’ . . . and is paradigmatic of
an approach to educational opportunity which is oriented simultane-
ously to participation in a social order and to individual competitive
advantage.
(Goodfellow, 2006, p. 69)

As these passages from Goodfellow suggest, there are wider interests at

stake beyond the integration of digital technologies in individual class-
rooms, and in uncovering the discourses that contribute to it, it is also
necessary to identify how digital technologies are ‘intertwined deeply
with globalisation, the rise of neo-liberalism, [and] the celebration of
technology consumption’ (Brown & Murray, 2005, p. 84). Although typ-
ically advanced as a ‘fix’ for a broken system, or a rejection of traditional
education for an alternative of idealized play, pleasure and fun (Ito,
2009), on the macro-level, digital technologies are also aligned with an
important strategic role in terms of the wider economy. Examples of this
wider strategic importance include the Australian Government’s funded
project, ‘Digital Education Revolution’, Singapore’s ‘Intelligent Nation
16 From Theory to Practice

2015’ project and New Zealand’s ‘Digital Strategy’ initiative (Selwyn,

2011). In the UK, one need only turn to interactive whiteboards as a
case study of a similar government-supported digital ‘revolution’ in the
classroom by the Blair Government (Thomas & Cutrim Schmid, 2010).
Advocates of digital technologies in education are often guilty of exag-
gerated idealism and, by way of response, more sceptical educators retort
that digital games have yet to be effectively integrated into curricula
and risk promoting little more than easy entertainment rather than
rigorous academic skills. At worst, the emergence of digital technolo-
gies in education over the last two decades has often been underpinned
by an implicit technological determinism driven by marketization and
commercial interests. The mere appearance of technology is meant to
miraculously transform learning environments along constructivist and
sociocultural lines so that instructors become facilitators and learners
engage in collaborative learning. As Selwyn (2011) notes, however, this
idealism typically conflicts with the reality on the ground in which class-
rooms are under-resourced, lacking in qualified technical support staff,
and significant discontinuities exist between the idealism of digital mar-
keters and the realities of the curricula. Where digital technologies are
installed, they are often not truly integrated and, in place of a transfor-
mation of pedagogy, it results in the continuation of previous practice
under another name (Thomas, 2011a, 2011b; Thomas & Cutrim Schmid,
2010). It is perhaps more appropriate then to talk about the ‘dumping’
of ICT hardware in education or their ‘insertion’ rather than ‘integra-
tion’ into curricula (Selwyn, 2011). Nivala (2009) similarly warns of the
mismatch between idealism and reality and of the dangers of promoting
digital education policies that are based on not only

the agency of teachers or pupils, on whom the information soci-

ety narrative is imposed, but ‘forces’ them to use ICT whether they
find it useful of not. The spirit of the discourse, its economic and
technological determinism, leaves no space for a critical and rational
approach to ICT or its educational use. Second, the halo of omnipo-
tence often attributed to ICT lessens the chances of a successful
implementation of ICT in education. Unrealistic expectations could
lead to a big disappointment if teachers come to perceive ICT as just
another ‘faddish educational innovation of the moment’. Further-
more, if ICT is believed to be a panacea for all educational and societal
ills, other more effective measures to ameliorate these ills might be
overlooked.
(Nivala, 2009, p. 445)
 Michael Thomas 17

This ‘digital evangelist’ discourse then is driven by a number of

business-led arguments, including in particular the idea that the indus-
trial or Fordist model of schooling, having altered little over the last
one hundred years, is no longer capable of educating learners for
what are frequently now called twenty-first-century skills (Lankshear &
Knobel, 2008; Solomon & Schrum, 2008). To achieve this goal, game-
based learning is associated with a fundamental paradigm shift or
radical discontinuity in teaching and learning (de Freitas & Maharg,
2011, p. 18).

Digital games in education

Stimulated by the emergence of personal computers and dedicated

games consoles, interest in commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) digital
games aimed at the entertainment and leisure market has burgeoned
over the last three decades (Ito et al., 2010). Though the stereotypical
image of the average gamer is 34 and male (Entertainment Software
Association, 2010), digital games generate ever-increasing revenues and
are targeted at a wide range of audiences, including, for example, certain
games such as The Sims which typically attract girls and women users
(Gee & Hayes, 2011). Aside from the use of digital games for entertain-
ment and leisure purposes, game-based technologies, simulations and
virtual worlds have been used with increasing regularity by the mili-
tary, business and medical sectors (de Freitas & Maharg, 2011). Typically,
digital games are produced by the commercial sector with a focus on
entertainment, with very few if any companies having found a busi-
ness model to support serious investment in the education-only market
(Prensky, 2007).
Whereas earlier stages in computer games accompanied the personal
computer revolution at the start of the 1980s, the emergence firstly
of networked computing environments, followed by greater increases
in bandwidth, dedicated games machines and, latterly, social network-
ing and widely available mobile and wi-fi technologies, have pushed
digital games to new positions of prominence as acceptable leisure activ-
ities. Dedicated games consoles deploying media-rich content – such
as the Microsoft X-Box, Sony Playstation or Nintendo Wii – have also
developed along communal lines, leading to the development of social
gaming and ‘social interactive learning’ (de Freitas & Maharg, 2011,
p. 1) facilitated by online communities of gamers. The emergence of
simulations or virtual worlds, such as Second Life, which draw on the
feel of game worlds while being structured in different ways, has also
18 From Theory to Practice

stimulated interest in massively multiplayer online role-playing games

(MMORPG). While interest in the 3D virtual world and economy of Sec-
ond Life is seemingly in decline (Terdiman, 2010), the immersive 3D
game – for example, World of Warcraft – currently has an online popula-
tion of 11.5 million users (Burnes, 2010). Furthermore, the use of online
games associated with social networking sites such as Facebook, partic-
ularly FarmVille which has over 16 million monthly active users, has
stimulated new interest and broken down gaming stereotypes. These
social games are closely connected with problem-solving activities but
they are focused on the entertainment end of the spectrum rather than
education or training.
With an increasing focus in language learning on authentic task-based
learning, both the reality-based or fantasy-based immersive environ-
ments of digital games provide ample opportunity to explore learners’
skills and engage them more effectively in learning (Squire, 2007). Build-
ing on the work of Gee (2007), Bogost (2007) argues that games develop
‘procedural literacy’, in which learners understand the synergies and
building blocks of representational forms. Likewise Shaffer (2006) iden-
tifies how ‘epistemic games’ can develop a plethora of learning engage-
ments, focused not just on curriculum content but more specifically
on community-based learning or situated learning (Gee, 2007; Lave &
Wenger, 1991), as well as social, cognitive and metacognitive skills.
The success of digital games and simulations, then, has a great deal
to do with the development of immersive approaches in which role
plays and live practice training have been given a central role (Haskell,
2001). The rationale for their use has drawn on the importance of
experiential theories of learning, which have the potential to develop
authentic digital environments and improve learners’ motivation, lev-
els of participation, interactivity and engagement (Jenkins, 1992, 2006;
Panteli & Chiasson, 2008). This emphasis chimes with the currently
topical idea that ‘learners are becoming active participants in their learn-
ing experiences and are shaping their own educational environments’
(Sharpe, Beetham, de Freitas, & Conole, 2010, p. 2), as they transition
from being so-called passive consumers to active ‘prosumers’ of learning
(Bruns, 2008). It is in this active element, rather than merely belong-
ing to a group, that higher order or meta-level skills are most likely
to develop. Consequently, whereas before the wave of Web 2.0 it was
common to talk of instructional technologies, now it is more common
to identify online learning technologies, a distinction which precisely
captures this change of emphasis.
 Michael Thomas 19

Over the last five years, the potential of digital games in more general
education has been pointed out with growing regularity by educators
(Gee, 2007), principally due to the arguments about the potential for
enhancing engagement but also because digital games attract young
people for more significant amounts of their extra-curricular leisure time
than other forms of popular media, including television, films and of
course traditional reading matter in the form of books (Gee & Hayes,
2011). As well as focusing on an identifiable group, these changes also
reflect deeper social and cultural movements. Whereas earlier research
by Hoover, Clark and Alter (2004) and Livingstone (2002) reinforced
the relationship between social class and media consumption, namely
that middle-class parents tended to restrict access to video games in
favour of more ‘educational’ activities, more recent research suggests
some notable movement in this respect. Roberts and Foehr (2008), for
example, suggest that media consumption of digital media like games
has been increasing among children with parents with a college educa-
tion. Consequently, gaming and the new media literacy skills identified
with it have participated in an overturning of the assumptions that pop-
ular culture and its artefacts are always antithetical to serious learning
(Johnson, 2005).
Reiterating many of the themes identified above with traditional
games, research on digital games has focused on ‘play’ as an important
element of the learning process (Shaffer, Squire, Halverson, & Gee, 2005)
as well as the opportunity to ‘revisit core thinking around “learning as
experience” ’ (de Freitas & Maharg, 2011, p. 5). The approach takes issue
with the preconceived, typically linear, nature of existing curriculum
formats, choosing instead to emphasize the role of ‘learning as experi-
ence’ in which learning pathways are ‘choreographed and re-sequenced
according to the personalised and specified requirements of the learner’
(de Freitas & Maharg, 2011, p. 18). The dominance of the ‘experiential’
approach to learning is associated with the encouragement of deeper
learning (Gee, 2007) as well as improving learner motivation through
the personal association with an avatar-like representation of one’s own
identity in an immersive and authentic environment (Rankin, Gold, &
Gooch, 2006; Steinkuehler, 2007). For Gee (2007), the best kind of cre-
ative thinking emerges from instruction that ‘stresses strategic thinking
and problem solving, often collaboratively’ (p. 4). Advocates behind the
use of gaming see that the ‘theory of learning in good video games fits
better with the modern, high-tech, global world today’s children and
teenagers live in than do the theories (and practices) of learning that
20 From Theory to Practice

they sometimes see in school’ (p. 5). At their best, when played in the
active and critical spirit Gee identifies, video games ‘situate meaning in
a multimodal space through embodied experiences to solve problems
and reflect on the intricacies of the design of imagined worlds and the
design of both real and imagined social relationships and identities in
the modern world’ (pp. 40–41).
Gaming is therefore a prime example of the type of technology that
can encourage learning based on social and collaborative activity in
which learners actively engage in knowledge construction. This type
of ‘social interactive learning’ (de Freitas & Maharg, 2011, p. 5) also
breaches traditional distinctions between home and school learning
spaces and practices. One of the challenges is to decide the blend of
home and institutional focus; how, for example, digital games can be
used to stimulate approaches to learning that create contexts for their
use which are formal instructed or curriculum-based as well as those
which are outside these settings. These wider trends in digital gaming
are clearly also relevant to the localized context of digital game-based
language learning where answers to these challenges are necessary in
order to drive advances in teaching and research.

Digital game-based language learning

Following the arguments above, one of the main reasons given for the
turn towards digital games has been the need to re-engage undermoti-
vated and underachieving learners who have been turned away from
learning due to a formal system of education that has changed lit-
tle during the last century. Research by Gee (2008), Black (2008), and
Martin and Steinkuehler (2010), in particular, highlights the plight of
young males (who have seemingly rejected print-based reading activi-
ties) and the need to re-engage them by encouraging reading in ways
connected with their individual interests or ‘passionate affinity spaces’
(Gee, 2011, n.p.), such as in relation to fanfiction or video gaming
handbooks. Such a rationale is strongly in evidence in Gee’s 36 learn-
ing principles based on the use of video games (2007) as well as his
more recent 17 principles for the design of situated learning environ-
ments (2011). The central elements of Gee’s thinking vis-à-vis a new
pedagogical framework can be seen in his earlier choice of terms, such
as the ‘Active, Critical Learning Principle’, ‘Committed Learning Princi-
ple’, ‘Self-Knowledge Principle’, ‘Ongoing Learning Principle’, ‘Practice
Principle’ and ‘Discovery Principle’ (2007, pp. 221–227). This emphasis
is also evident in his 17 principles, which incorporate learning based
 Michael Thomas 21

on ‘multiple routes to full and central participation’, copious feedback

mechanisms, the ‘tight integration’ of learning and assessment, the use
of failure as a ‘learning device’, the emphasis on a ‘lifetime of learning’,
and the idea that ‘all learners are well prepared to be active, thoughtful,
engaged members of the public sphere’ (2011, n.p.).
Looking at language education over the last three decades, we may
still recognize the same physical layout in terms of classroom design to
those from over one hundred years ago, with one difference being the
appearance of the dedicated language laboratory or networked computer
room. From the perspective of methodology, however, we can identify a
number of trends that incorporate the emphasis established by many of
Gee’s learning principles mentioned above. Whereas over a century ago
language learners typically engaged in grammar translation methods
centred around teachers’ instructions, today’s learners are much more
likely to engage in small group tasks, typically in pairs, and to interact
with one another and with the teacher in the target language.
Though we cannot strictly adhere to a process of linear development,
language learning methodologies have moved through behaviourism
and cognitivism to more constructivist and collaborative forms of learn-
ing (Kolb, 1984), at the same time as language learning technologies
have developed from the use of computers as first a tutor to that of a
tool for learning and discovery (Beatty, 2010; Levy & Stockwell, 2006).
As language learning methodology over the last three decades has taken
a general turn towards both the communicative language teaching (CLT)
approach as well as task-based language teaching (TBLT) (Ellis, 2003;
Van den Branden, 2006; Van den Branden, Bygate, & Norris, 2009),
the radical shift required of other educational disciplines that rely on
a transmission or lecture-based format may not be asked of language
educators.
These changes are evident in Purushotma, Thorne and Wheatley’s
(2008) discussion which argues that, by following a task-based approach,
DGBLL provides an alternative model for achievement-oriented learn-
ing, thus undermining the wider educational trend of centralized test-
ing. Through the appeal of a number of genres of games, including
puzzle adventure games, simulation games, virtual pet social sims, web-
based strategy games, MMORPG and alternate reality games (ARG),
digital games not only serve as ‘learning tools’ but also as ‘critical
contemporary arenas for task-relevant communication and relationship
building’ (p. 32). These ‘goal-directed gaming environments’ draw on
students’ digital literacy and gaming expertise but also ‘provide feed-
back at the level of linguistic form and exposure to and movement
22 From Theory to Practice

toward awareness, and eventually mastery, of a wide range of communi-

cation genres, including those associated most closely with traditional
literacies’ (p. 33). Based on these objectives, a strategy characterized as a
‘three-point sequence’ ought to be used for developing digital language
learning games with a task-based approach. The three points include
genuine player need, linguistic support and creative feedback. Thus
games are not merely concerned with reproducing traditional forms of
language learning activity in a new digital context. On the contrary, the
affordances of the digital games should also be activated to contribute
new factors to the language learning experience. Purushotma, Thorne
and Wheatley outline a strategy of trying to identify which parts of
the language learning process ‘are already present within modern video
game genres, and use them as the basis for further development’ (p. 7).
Following this task-oriented strategy they draw on research to design
digital game-based spaces utilizing ten key principles, many of which
have evidently been influenced by Gee (2007, 2011) (see Table 1.1).
Based on these principles, language teaching methodology has
therefore evolved to accept that activities should be focused on
communicative tasks, that communicative tasks should be based on
authentic activities, and that learners be engaged in collaborative
activities in order to achieve the requirements of the goal-oriented
approach. These ten principles are clearly aligned with a task-based lan-
guage teaching approach (Ellis, 2003). A task-based approach involves
activities in which different aspects of the language learning process –
intercultural, communicative, vocabulary and grammar – are incorpo-
rated. Bygate and Samuda (2008) define a ‘task as a holistic activity
which engages language use in order to achieve some non-linguistic
outcome while meeting a linguistic challenge, with the overall aim
of promoting language learning, through process or product or both’
(p. 69). Typically, tasks have been rather simplistic activities such as jig-
saw tasks, mix and match or based on comparison, for example. Making
tasks more complex and developing more integrated tasks for language
learners has become a priority and new forms of technology are making
this possible (Thomas & Reinders, 2010). These new forms of task-based
language teaching involve including learners in more complex narra-
tives or plots in which they assume the part or role of a character.
These tasks also involve more complex negotiations between learners
who have assumed particular roles and bring creativity to the develop-
ment of their characters by generating more activities in which they feel
they have more of a personal investment.
 Michael Thomas 23

Table 1.1 Ten key principles for designing video games for foreign language
learning

No. Principle

1 At least as much thought needs to go into the design of failure states

as for success states.
2 Instruction needs to ensure that learners focus predominantly on
meaning. Secondarily, however, instruction should include focus on
form.
3 All elements of the game, particularly communication and input
mechanisms, should have a playful spirit to them.
4 Metalinguistic descriptions and terminology should be presented
through optional supporting material, not as part of the core
gameplay.
5 Learning content should be organized around tasks, not presented
taxonomically.
6 New concepts should be introduced gradually and interspersed with
other content before requiring difficult responses from players.
7 Assessment should intelligently track free production tasks
throughout the game, not simply measure controlled production
during test events.
8 Consider the full range of gaming platforms available.
9 Games should allow students to spend extra time in activities they
enjoy and to minimize time in ones they don’t. Ultimately,
instructional activities should be designed to teach students
how they can autonomously continue playing similar games or
performing similar activities taken directly from the target culture.
10 Where possible, multiplayer games should provide players with
meaningful and distinct roles.

Source: Adapted from Purushotma, Thorne, and Wheatley (2008).

Nevertheless, some caution must also be taken in applying this

approach to digital game-based language learning. Research by deHaan
(2005) indicates that language learners may divide their attention
between game tasks and language-focused tasks (reading and writ-
ing) during the game, such that a balance needs to be maintained.
Comparing both watchers and players of a game, deHaan, Reed and
Kuwada (2010) also indicate that the watchers were able to recall sig-
nificantly higher vocabulary than the actual game players, who, being
more involved with the game, were distracted from noticing changes
in form. Becoming too immersed in the game-related tasks (or tech-
nology) may distract attention from the potential for actual language
learning gains.
24 From Theory to Practice

Studies of multiplayer games involving language learners in non-

classroom contexts have also focused on questions relevant to language
educators, such as pragmatics (Sykes, Oskoz, & Thorne, 2008) as well
as slight improvements in learner confidence by using games to com-
municate with native speakers who were members of the gaming world
(Zheng, Young, Brewer, & Wagner, 2009). Typically these studies have
been done outside formal language learning contexts. When applied
within instructed contexts, some researchers have identified the rele-
vance of skills and activities arising from engagement rather than from
prolonged and direct playing of the game in question (Arnseth, 2006;
Reinders, 2009). Such activities incorporate familiar communicative and
collaborative language learning tasks such as negotiating, note tak-
ing, planning, reflecting, discussing and problem solving (Carrier, 1991;
Jordan, 1992; Taylor, 1990). Simulations such as Sim City potentially
extend these collaborative problem-solving tasks, and other simulated
games have also been used as a subject to stimulate language learning
activities such as reflective writing. Indeed, Reinders (2009) specifically
focuses on writing, identifying a range of writing-focused tasks, from
describing gaming characters, to analysing game chat logs and building
websites aimed at informing non-native speakers of the target language.
Constructionist learning principles inform much of this research,
then, as is clear from deHaan’s recent study (2011), in which he engaged
language learners in Japan with the creation of two digital gaming
projects using an English version of the game design application RPG
Maker VX. The primary goal of the first project was to create a game
and, peripherally, to use the subject matter to engage learners in target
language discussion. Topics for language learning therefore centred on
story generation, plot and script writing, and character development.
Students developed their practical skills in relation to programming
and creating the digital games, but also in related areas, such as music
management. In the second project, constructivist learning principles
allied to media literacy theories (Buckingham, 2007) led to the develop-
ment of a project to make an English game magazine in which students
continued to use their practical and language skills (Black, 2009). Lan-
guage learning tasks included those related to speaking skills (discussion
of games, as well as the focus and scope of the magazine), listening
skills (involved in the discussion process), reading (games reviews) and
writing (describing game features). Additional language skills associated
with dictionary, word processor, thesaurus and translation software were
also an integral part of the project. The students, who were studying at
a computer science university, had a high level of interest in games and
 Michael Thomas 25

were, as deHaan notes, perhaps more suited to extra-curricular instruc-

tion. As a result this type of task-based project ‘may not easily fit into
traditional English language curriculums or classes with other goals’
(p. 73), or suit situations where the technology skills of instructors or
learners is not so advanced.
Developments in networked-based computing have also led to online
role-playing games, and these environments have been taken up by lan-
guage educators (Peterson, 2010; Thorne, Black, & Sykes, 2009) though
it is still in an early stage of development. While noting a number
of gaps in existing research, notably the lack of studies outside North
America, language learner attitudes, novice learners in game interaction,
and the importance of prior factors such as training and experience with
digital games, Peterson (2011) examines Japanese language learners’ use
of MMORPGs. Research to date on MMORPGs has focused on building
learner participation and collaboration to facilitate language learning
activities in a number of areas. These include opportunities for increased
negotiation of meaning (Peterson, 2010); reducing learner anxiety that
may occur in face-to-face learning (Garcia-Carbonell et al., 2001); using
text chat to aid awareness of linguistic form (Ellis, 2005); and gen-
erating opportunities for peer collaboration and collaborative learner
interaction in the target language (Rankin et al., 2006; Thorne, 2008)
based on social interaction and community membership. MMORPGs are
identified with target language discourse management as well as with
risk-taking and are amenable to a task-based approach.

Future directions

The above discussion has contextualized the powerful discourses – com-

mercial as well as pedagogical – shaping the way digital gaming is
being represented in education in general and language learning in
particular. The transformational rhetoric associated with digital games
emerges from a wider anti-school discourse, a frequent lament of edu-
cators over the last 20 years, which argues that ‘formal educational
contexts and objectives often have limited relevance to the immediate,
and mediated, social, communicative, and informational needs of stu-
dents’ (Purushotma, Thorne, & Wheatley, 2008, p. 25). Opposed to the
existing industrial model of education, game-based learning and sim-
ulations have been proposed as one antidote to the current situation
(Ang & Zaphiris, 2008). In considering the role of digital games in lan-
guage learning, however, language educators have a wider responsibility
to avoid both this ‘false optimism’ and ‘fatal cynicism’ (Selwyn, 2011,
26 From Theory to Practice

p. 136), and to reflect on the potential damage caused by unnecessarily

raising expectations.
The focus needs to be on the pedagogical rather than solely on the
business case, with examination of learner as well as cultural attitudes
to gaming (Thomas, 2011c). As Squire (2002) suggests, in developing
appropriate frameworks for digital game-based language learning, ‘there
needs to be a close match among desired learning outcomes, avail-
able computer and supporting human resources, learner characteristics,
such as familiarity with games conventions, “educational” game-play
and potential supplementary learning experiences’ (p. 6). The under-
lying learning principles of digital game-based language learning lend
themselves to a sociocognitive view of learning, to emphasize both a
process- and a product-oriented view of learning. Bearing this in mind,
the design of digital game-based language learning curricula should
incorporate a blend of both formal instructed language learning con-
texts as well as informal extra-curricular contexts that stimulate learner
play. Digital game-based language learning is perhaps unique in pro-
viding learners with tools that can work across this traditional divide,
developing learners’ actual communication and negotiation of mean-
ing skills rather than the typical school-based view of language learning
as a system of rules to be learned in a vacuum. Shorn of the inflationary
rhetoric of a ‘paradigmatic shift’ in language learning, digital game-
based language learning can be seen as part of a necessary reorientation,
to develop task-based language learning approaches by foregrounding
learners’ communicative skills and abilities.
While research on digital game-based language learning is increas-
ing in prominence, then, it is clearly not satisfactory to argue that,
merely because digital games involve the use of the target language, that
they are conducive to effective language learning, they must be situated
within wider research on language learning methodology. As Neville
(2009) has argued in this respect, digital game-based language learning
stands perhaps its best chance of contributing to curricula if it adopts
a ‘content-oriented, culture- and task-based foreign language curricula’
(p. 47; see also Bellotti et al., 2011; Purushotma et al., 2008; and Willis,
1996). Once set on this course, one real challenge for the future of
digital games-based language learning will be to bring together advo-
cates of a task-based language teaching approach and those working in
CALL (Lai & Li, 2011; Thomas & Reinders, 2010). For sure the effect
will not result in a sudden paradigmatic shift in teaching and learn-
ing (change in education rarely if ever does), or one that is likely to be
attractive to commercial interests liked by games companies, vendors
 Michael Thomas 27

and marketers promoting the myth of the digital native (Thomas,

2011b). It might however produce incremental changes in which learn-
ers’ needs are placed firmly at the centre of the process and, it is to
be hoped, fewer examples of technology as a ‘quick fix’ for the more
fundamental educational and administrative reforms that are surely
required.

References
Ang, C., & Zaphiris, P. (2008). Computer games and language learning. In
T. Kidd & H. Song (Eds.), Handbook of research on instructional systems and
technology (pp. 1–31). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Arnseth, H. C. (2006). Learning to play or playing to learn: A critical account
of the models of communication informing educational research on computer
gameplay. Game Studies: The International Journal of Computer Games Research,
6(1). Retrieved from http://gamestudies.org/0601/articles/arnseth
Beatty, K. (2010). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning (2nd
ed.). London: Pearson.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization. London: Sage.
Bellotti, F., Berta R., De Gloria A., Panizza G., Pellegrino M., & Primavera L. (2011).
Designing serious games for cultural heritage purposes. In S. deFreitas &
P. Maharg (Eds.), Digital games and learning (pp. 252–276). London & New York:
Continuum.
Black, R. (2008). Adolescents and online fan fiction. New York: Peter Lang.
Black, R. (2009). Online fanfiction, global identities, and imagination. Research in
the Teaching of English, 43(4), 397–425.
Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Brown, M., & Murray, F. (2005). A culture of technology critique. In M. Cooper
(Ed.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual Australian teacher education association con-
ference, Griffith University, centre for professional development. Brisbane: Griffith
University.
Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, second life, and beyond: From production to
produsage. Bern & Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: Children’s learning in the age of digital
culture. Malden, MA: Polity.
Burnes, A. (2010). World of Warcraft: 70% of trial players give up before level ten.
Retrieved from http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/52996/World-Of-Warcraft-
70-Of-Trial-Players-Give-Up-Before-Level-Ten
Bygate, M., & Samuda, V. (2008). Tasks in second language learning. London &
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Carrier, M. (1991). Simulation in English language teaching: A cooperative
approach. Simulation & Gaming, 22(2), 224–233.
Chik, A. (2011). Learner autonomy development through digital gameplay.
Journal of Digital Culture & Education, 3(1), 30–45.
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920.
New York & London: Teachers College, Columbia University.
28 From Theory to Practice

de Freitas, S., & Maharg, P. (Eds.). (2011). Digital games and learning. London &
New York: Continuum.
deHaan, J. (2005). Acquisition of Japanese as a foreign language through a
baseball video game. Foreign Language Annals, 38(2), 278–282.
deHaan, J. (2011). Teaching and learning English through digital game projects.
Journal of Digital Culture & Education, 3(1), 46–55.
deHaan, J., Reed, W. M., & Kuwada, K. (2010). The effect of interactivity with a
music video game on second language vocabulary recall. Language Learning &
Technology, 14(2), 74–79.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33(2), 209–224.
Entertainment Software Association (2010). Industry facts. Retrieved from http://
www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp
Garcia-Carbonell, A., Rising, B., Montero, B., & Watts, F. (2001).
Simulatio/Gaming and the acquisition of communicative competence in
another language.
Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
London & New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, J. P. (2008). Policy brief: Getting over the slump: Innovation strategies to promote
children’s learning. New York: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center.
Gee, J. P. (2011). Beyond mindless progressivism. Retrieved from http://www.
jamespaulgee.com/node
Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. R. (2011). Language and learning in the digital age. London &
New York: Routledge.
Goodfellow, R. (2006). From ‘equal access’ to ‘widening participation’: The dis-
course of equity in the age of e-learning. In J. Lockard & M. Pegrum (Eds.),
Brave new classroom: Democratic education and the internet (pp. 55–74). Bern &
Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Hansen, M. (1994). Grajmy w jezyku francuskim. Jezyki Obce w Szkole. March–
April, 118–121.
Haskell, R. (2001). Transfer of learning: Cognition, instruction and reasoning. London:
Academic Press.
Hoover, S. M., Clark, L. S., & Alter, D. F. (2004). Media, home and family. New York:
Routledge.
Hubbard, P. (1991). Evaluating computer games for language learning. Simula-
tion & Gaming, 22, 220–223.
Illich, I. (1971). Deschooling society. Hammondsworth: Penguin Books.
Ito, M. (2009). Engineering play: A cultural history of children’s software. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Ito, M., Horst, H.A., Antin, J., Finn, M., Law, A., Manion, A., . . . Yardi, S. (2010).
Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new
media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jenkins, H. (1992). Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture.
New York: Routledge.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York:
New York University Press.
Johnson, S. (2005). Everything bad is good for you. New York: Riverhead Books.
 Michael Thomas 29

Jordan, G. (1992). Exploiting computer-based simulations for language learning

purposes. Simulation & Gaming, 22(1), 88–98.
Kim, L. S. (1995). Creative games for the language class. Forum, 33(1), 35.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lai, C., & Li, G. (2011). Technology and task-based language teaching: A critical
review. CALICO, 28(2), 498–521.
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (Eds.). (2008). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and
practices. Bern & Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, W. R. (1979). Language teaching games and contests: Teacher’s library. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Lengeling, M., & Malarcher, C. (1997). Index cards: A natural resource for
teachers. Forum, 35(4), 42.
Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-
assisted language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Livingstone, S. (2002). Young people and new media. London: Sage.
Lockard, J., & Pegrum, M. (Eds.). (2007). Brave new classroom: Democratic education
and in the internet. Bern & Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Luke, C. (2003). Pedagogy, connectivity, multimodality, and interdisciplinarity.
Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 397–413.
Martin, C., & Steinkuehler, C. (2010). Collective information literacy in massively
multiplayer online games. eLearning and Digital Media, 7(4), 355–365.
Mitra S., Dangwal, R., Chatterjee, S., Jha, S., Bisht, R. S., & Kapur, P. (2005). Acqui-
sition of computer literacy on shared public computers: Children and the ‘Hole
in the wall’. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(3), 407–426.
Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. London: Coronet.
Neville, D. (2009). In the classroom: Digital game-based learning in second
language acquisition. The Language Educator, 4(6), 37–41.
Nivala, M. (2009). Information society strategies: Simple answers for com-
plex problems: Education and ICT in Finnish. Media, Culture & Society, 31,
433–448.
Norton, L., Tilley, A., Newstead, S., & Franklyn-Stokes, A. (2001). The pressure of
assessment in undergraduate courses and their effects on student behaviours.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 269–284.
Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of
digital natives. New York: Basic Books.
Panteli, N., & Chiasson, M. (Eds.). (2008). Exploring virtuality within and beyond
organizations: Social, global and local dimensions. London & New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Pegrum, M. (2009). From blogs to bombs: The future of digital technologies in
education. Perth: University of Western Australia.
Peterson, M. (2010). Massively multiplayer online role-playing games
(MMORPGs) as arenas for language learning. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 19(1), 79–103.
Peterson, M. (2011). Digital gaming and second language development: Japanese
learners’ interactions in a MMORPG. Journal of Digital Culture & Education, 3(1),
56–73.
30 From Theory to Practice

Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Taino, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for partic-

ipation in the activity of playing a video game. The Modern Language Journal,
93, 153–169.
Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital game-based learning (1st ed.). St. Paul, MN: Paragon
House.
Prensky, M. (2007). Digital game-based learning (2nd ed.). St. Paul, MN: Paragon
House.
Purushotma, R., Thorne, S. L., & Wheatley, J. (2008). 10 key principles for designing
video games for foreign language learning. Retrieved from http://knol.google.com/
k/10-key-principles-for-designing-video-games-for-foreign-language-learning#
Rankin, Y., Gold, R., & Gooch, B. (2006). Evaluating interactive gaming as a language
learning tool. Paper presented at SIGGRAPH 2006, Boston, MA.
Reinders, H. (2009). Using computer games to teach writing. English Teaching
Professional, 63, 6–58.
Rheingold, H. (2000). The virtual community. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Richard-Amato, P. A. (1988). Making it happen: Interaction in the second language
classroom: From theory to practice. New York: Longman.
Roberts, D. F., & Foehr, U. G. (2008). Trends in media use. Children and Electronic
Media, 18(1), 39–62.
Selwyn, N. (2011). Schools and schooling in the digital age: A critical analysis.
London & New York: Routledge.
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Shaffer, D. W. (2008). Education in the digital age. The Nordic Journal of Digital
Literacy, 4(1), 39–51.
Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. D., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Video games and
the future of learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(2), 105–111.
Sharpe, R., Beetham, H., de Freitas, S., & Conole, G. (2010). An introduction to
rethinking learning for a digital age. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. de Freitas
(Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own
experiences (pp. 1–12). London & New York: Routledge.
Silvers, S. M. (1982). Games for the classroom and the English-speaking club.
English Teaching Forum, 20(2), 29–33.
Squire, K. (2002). Cultural framing of computer/video games. International Journal
of Computer Game Research, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.gamestudies.org/
0102/squire/
Squire, K. (2007). Open-ended video games: A model for developing learning
for an interactive age. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth,
games and learning (pp. 167–198). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2008). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Washington:
International Society for Technology in Education.
Steinkuehler, C. (2007). Massively multiplayer online gaming as a constellation
of literacy practices. ELearning, 4(3), 297–318.
Sykes, J., Oskoz, A., & Thorne, S. L. (2008). Web 2.0, synthetic immersive envi-
ronments, and mobile resources for language education. CALICO Journal, 25(3),
528–546.
Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world.
London & New York: McGraw Hill.
 Michael Thomas 31

Taylor, M. (1990). Simulations and adventure games in CALL. Simulation &

Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Theory and Research, 21(4), 461–466.
Terdiman, D. (2010). Where virtual worlds once ruled, FarmVille dominates.
Retrieved from http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10460293-52.html
Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2011a). Digital education: Opportunities for social collaboration.
London & New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2011b). Deconstructing digital natives: Young people, technology
and the new literacies. London & New York: Routledge.
Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2011c). Digital games and second language acquisition in
Asia. Special Edition. Journal of Digital Culture and Education, 3(1), 1–76.
Thomas, M., & Cutrim Schmid, E. (Eds.). (2010). Interactive whiteboards: Theory,
research and practice. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Thomas, M., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2010). Task-based language learning and
teaching with technology. London & New York: Continuum.
Thorne, S. L. (2008). Transcultural communication in open internet environ-
ments and massively multiplayer online games. In S. Magnan (Ed.), Mediated
discourse online (pp. 305–327). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Thorne, S. L., Black, R., & Sykes, J. L. (2009). Second language use, socialization,
and learning in Internet interest communities and online gaming. The Modern
Language Journal, 93a, 802–821.
Van den Branden, K. (Ed.). (2006). Task-based language education: From theory to
practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van den Branden, K., Bygate, M., & Norris, J. M. (Eds.). (2009). Task-based language
teaching: A reader. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Wierus, B., & Wierus, A. (1994). Zagraj razem a nami. Czesc I. Jezyki obce w szkole.
May–June, 218–222.
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. London: Longman.
Zdybiewska, M. (1994). One-hundred language games. Warszawa: WSiP.
Zheng, D., Young, M. F., Brewer, R. B., & Wagner, M., (2009). Attitude and self-
efficacy change: English language learning in virtual worlds. CALICO Journal,
27, 205–231.
2
Conceptualizing Digital
Game-Mediated L2 Learning and
Pedagogy: Game-Enhanced and
Game-Based Research and Practice
Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes

Introduction

With millions of players worldwide, digital games have grown in ubiq-

uity, diversity, and accessibility over the last decade across the globe.
They are now played in most of the world’s major languages. Once con-
fined to the physical boundaries of an arcade, single PC, or television
console, games have boomed with the expansion of broadband Internet,
in the form of massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs) and, most
recently, casual social networking games (SNGs). In combination with
a growing variety of platforms and player configurations, new narrative
forms and distinct game genres have emerged, merged, and re-emerged
as new forms.
Faced with these developments, applied linguists and language edu-
cators have begun to pay closer attention. Some are looking at the
L2 learning, intentional or not, that goes on in what we term ‘ver-
nacular’ games – commercially available popular games not designed
purposefully for L2 learning purposes. Others have started designing
and researching L2 learning in educational games specifically pur-
posed for second/foreign language learning and pedagogy (L2LP). Many
researchers find useful insights in the research from games studies
(e.g., Arnseth, 2006; Juul 2005) and educational gaming (e.g., deFreitas,
2006; Gee, 2007), which have developed and adapted a variety of frame-
works to research digital gaming, both in- and outside of educational
contexts. Their work on L2 learning and teaching with digital games is

32
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 33

laying the groundwork for the newly emerging field of ‘game-mediated

second/foreign language learning and pedagogy’.
In this chapter we propose a taxonomy to frame the research and
practice of game-mediated L2LP by surveying this work. In new trans-
disciplinary fields, new knowledge can emerge by exploring possible
epistemologies, or how that knowledge might be organized. Explo-
ration of this nature leads to new understandings because of the affor-
dances and limitations engendered by conceptual metaphors (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980; Sfard, 1998). This work is important because the ter-
minology used to frame discussions of new phenomena influences
how they are conceptualized and how their potentials are imagined.
In proposing this taxonomy, we hope to offer researchers and practi-
tioners a framework for orienting their work, as well as suggestions for
future research and practice in this emerging interdisciplinary field.
Our framework begins with the distinction between ‘game-enhanced’
and ‘game-based’, and between L2 learning and pedagogy. Using this
dual lens results in four broad perspectives that offer guiding questions
for research and practice (see Table 2.1). We believe research from all four
perspectives is necessary because each informs the other. Research on
game-enhanced L2LP using vernacular games, even if it just involves the
researcher playing games individually to understand them, necessarily
informs the design of game-based L2LP environments. Yet game-based
pedagogy is not necessarily the end goal since there are many reasons for
considering the use of vernacular games in the L2 classroom. Moreover,
we acknowledge that research on L2 learning and pedagogical practice
is intertwined and that many studies incorporate both perspectives.
Research on L2 learning informs pedagogical practice, and research

Table 2.1 Guiding questions for game-mediated L2LP research and practice

L2 learning focus L2 pedagogy focus

Game-enhanced: How does game-mediated How can vernacular

working with vernacular L2 learning occur ‘in the games be pedagogically
games wild’? mediated for L2 learning
and teaching?
Game-based: working How do specific game How can game-based
with educational and L2 designs afford particular environments be
learning purposed games L2 learner behaviors? designed to incorporate
(i.e., synthetic immersive and/or complement L2
environments) pedagogical uses?
34 From Theory to Practice

on L2 pedagogy necessarily entails theories of L2 learning, whether

game-mediated or not.
For each perspective, we survey research that addresses the associated
question. First, research on game-enhanced L2 learning (e.g., Piiranen-
Marsh & Tainio, 2009; Thorne, 2008) often focuses on the broad poten-
tial of digital games as learning environments, whether part of a formal
L2 learning curriculum or not. Second, research on game-enhanced L2
pedagogy (e.g., Reinhardt & Zander, 2011) focuses on pedagogical prac-
tices and the integration of vernacular games into more formal curricula
and learning environments. Third, research on game-based L2 learn-
ing (e.g., Sykes, 2010) seeks to directly investigate the patterns of L2
learner behavior that comes from specific controlled designs. Similarly,
research on game-based L2 pedagogy (e.g., Holden and Sykes, 2011;
Neville, 2010) focuses on the design of L2LP-purposed games, but from
an implementational or pedagogical design perspective.
Our distinction between the use of vernacular and L2LP-purposed
educational digital games is straightforward, since the intentioned pur-
pose of a game is easy to determine. Other taxonomies might propose
a distinction between ‘enhanced’ and ‘based’ to be determined by the
degree to which a game-mediated application is integrated into a cur-
riculum, or comprehensive in nature, so that ‘enhanced’ would be less
integrated or comprehensive than ‘based’. We resist this proposal, how-
ever, for three major reasons. First, we believe it is more natural to
consider ‘game-enhanced’ to refer to the use of vernacular, rather than
educational, games. If one defined ‘enhanced’ as ‘less comprehensive’
or ‘less integrated’ vis-à-vis curricula, then vernacular games might be
associated with being less useful for L2LP research and practice than
L2LP-purposed games. On the contrary, we maintain there are reasons
for researching L2 learning in, and teaching with, vernacular games
that cannot be replicated with L2LP-purposed games, and we propose
that the pedagogical mediation of vernacular games is underexplored.
Moreover, we think some vernacular games can be very effectual when
deeply integrated into an L2 curriculum. Second, not all L2LP-purposed
educational games are, or should be, all-encompassing; we believe there
is great potential and need for L2LP-purposed games targeted at par-
ticular L2LP areas that can be used as curricular supplements, rather
than as comprehensive L2 learning environments. Finally, if ‘game-
based’ is equated with ‘more comprehensive’ and ‘more integrated’, it
might imply a less important role for the instructor and other forms
of pedagogical mediation in such environments. On the contrary, we
maintain that even with the most comprehensive all-encompassing
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 35

game-mediated L2 learning environments, a human instructor should

play a key role. Above all, we believe a multiplicity of resource types
is more efficacious for L2LP, no matter how comprehensive a single
resource might be. It is easy to be enticed by digital games, but it is
important to remember that any application is part of a larger ecology
of learning.

Towards digital game-enhanced L2LP

In our taxonomy, game-enhanced1 research seeks to investigate how ver-

nacular games can afford L2 learning and how those affordances might
be realized in formal pedagogical environments. There are thousands of
vernacular games available commercially and ‘off-the-shelf’, in dozens
of languages, including computer, web-based, console, handheld, and
mobile games. They can be of a variety of genres, including action,
adventure, role play, and simulation, and they may be complex, casual,
or mini in nature – complex games can be played intensely for months,
casual games can be played casually on and off, and mini-games can be
finished in several hours (Prensky, 2001). Player configurations can be
solo, multiplayer, and massively multiplayer.
Vernacular games offer educational advantages not possible with
games or virtual environments specifically purposed for L2 learning. For
example, an MMOG like World of Warcraft (WoW) or Runescape offers
an L2 learner a huge population of native or expert speaking interlocu-
tors, many of whom would interact with the learner in the L2, for the
genuine purposes of playing the game. Also, because they are vernacu-
lar, the games are potentially seen by learners as an everyday genuine
activity to which they can relate that is practiced by native and expert
speakers. Moreover, the games are genuine cultural products and, as
such, can be seen to incorporate cultural discourses and narratives that
lend themselves to language learning and the development of critical
cultural awareness. On the other hand, vernacular games may prove
challenging or ineffectual for the same reasons that they may be useful.
First, some vernacular games may not be appropriate for learners, with
regards to content or linguistic complexity. In addition, because they are
vernacular or everyday in nature, learners may view them as inauthen-
tic means for L2 learning, in spite of their genuine qualities. Finally,
the structure of some games may not lend themselves to the institu-
tional and programmatic demands of task, syllabus, and assessment.
These are important considerations when developing game-enhanced
L2 pedagogical applications using vernacular games.
36 From Theory to Practice

Game-enhanced L2 learning
Several studies have concluded that there is indeed much learning going
on in game playing, especially in certain social contexts and player
configurations. This research seeks to apply L2 acquisition and learn-
ing theories to digital game-mediated environments, and to demon-
strate how particular contexts, configurations, and game structures may
afford L2 learning. Some research (e.g., Piiranen-Marsh & Tainio, 2009;
Thorne, 2008) emphasizes the importance of emergent social interac-
tion, both within the game and around it in attendant discourses. Other
research (e.g., deHaan, Reed, & Kuwada, 2010) examines gameplay as an
individual cognitive phenomenon.
Thorne (2008; also Sykes, Reinhardt, & Thorne, 2010) explains that
MMOGs such as WoW offer players the opportunities to interact with
others and pursue shared goals in a structured game-mediated environ-
ment. Players’ outside identities are generally unknown, and they may
assume new identities and role-play their characters by interacting with
other players’ characters. Thorne (2008) explains that in an MMOG
like WoW, plurilingual and transcultural practices are often prevalent
on particular game servers. These emergent literacy practices occur ‘in
the wild’ (Thorne, 2010) as players meet and interact to accomplish
immediate shared in-game goals. Players learn autonomously and often
incidentally, as they learn the L2 in order to play, rather than playing
the game in order to learn the L2 (Arnseth, 2006), as it might be in a
more formalized curricular structure.
Piiranen-Marsh & Tainio (2009) observed two teens playing Final Fan-
tasy X, an adventure/role-play game similar to WoW, but different in
that it is not massively multiplayer. Sharing the same physical space, the
players interacted with each other in their L1 and in their L2 English,
and voiced characters in the game via ‘other repetition’. The researchers
used conversation analytic techniques to show how learning emerges as
one learner watches the other play, repeating the language used in voice-
overs and by in-game characters, making plurilingual commentary, and
engaging in language play. The study illustrates the importance of learn-
ing context around gameplay, and how game-enhanced L2 learning may
be understood as sociocognitive in nature.
As the above research demonstrates, game-enhanced L2 learning
can occur in and around multiplayer adventure/role-playing games
like WoW or Final Fantasy, perhaps because their designs afford
player–player interaction and their content includes more narrative and
language use than other game genres. Other game-enhanced L2 learn-
ing research, however, has examined learning in games from other
genres, using frameworks informed by psycholinguistics. For example,
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 37

deHaan et al. (2010) examined the incidental learning of vocabulary

by pairs of students playing an action/music game called Parappa the
Rapper, one student playing the game and another observing. Using
an experimental set-up, the researchers found the student playing the
game did not recall as many of the in-game lexical items as the one
observing, a result they ascribe to the cognitive demands of gameplay.
In other words, a player-learner might not be paying attention to the
language of a game because he has to focus on learning game rules. The
results have implications for game-mediated L2 pedagogy, with regards
to which game genres are most appropriate for L2 learning, and how
game-enhanced activities are designed and implemented.

Game-enhanced L2 pedagogy
Game-enhanced pedagogy involves the mediated use of vernacular dig-
ital games in more formal L2 educational contexts. A few studies of
game-enhanced L2 pedagogy have used simulation games, which have
also garnered much attention in educational gaming research (Aldrich,
2005). Simulation games are less progression-oriented and more open-
ended in design than adventure games, so that gameplay alternates
between a player arranging various game resources and then automat-
ing them with a simulation engine. For example, in the life simulation
The Sims, a player can choose a house, job, and friends for one of
their simulated characters, which over time have consequences for the
character’s happiness and success. Purushotma (2005; also Purushotma,
Thorne, & Wheatley, 2008) noted the great amount and variety of
everyday vocabulary involved in a game like The Sims, and taught him-
self German using the German version of the game. He developed an
add-on bilingual dictionary program to run alongside the game, giving
him easy access to translations when needed. He shows there is much
potential for pedagogical mediation via add-on applications. Unfor-
tunately, as of this writing, very few add-ons are available, perhaps
because of the technical programming skill necessary for their creation.
Future research might look at how add-ons might be integrated with a
game-enhanced L2 learning unit using a particular vernacular game like
The Sims.
Other research has investigated game-enhanced L2 pedagogy by
developing materials and integrating gameplay into formal instruction.
For example, Miller and Hegelheimer (2006) incorporated The Sims
into an ESL teaching context, providing students with supplemental
materials focusing on the in-game vocabulary. A controlled experimen-
tal implementation of the materials found positive impact on learning
of pre-play mandatory vocabulary activities, in contrast to supplemental
38 From Theory to Practice

and optional activities, or activities that focused explicitly on grammar

or culture.
Focusing on social networking games like FarmVille, Reinhardt and
Zander (2011) used a pedagogical framework designed to develop game
and social networking literacies with adults in an intensive English
program. Their framework was informed by the notion of bridging
activities (Thorne & Reinhardt, 2008), where learners bring familiar
vernacular digital literacy practices into the classroom as situated prac-
tices (Gee, 2007). Activities were designed to raise learners’ experiential
and analytic awareness of social networking and social network gaming
practices, and included discussion, reflective writing, and group presen-
tations. The researchers found that some students rejected the games
because of their vernacular nature, while others embraced them and
continued playing them with one another outside of class.
Although it was aimed at the L1 literacy development of elementary
school age children, the pedagogical and theoretical frameworks used
by Lacasa, Martínez, and Méndez (2008) are applicable to L2 pedagogy
as well. They conducted a workshop where the students played a video
game, Tomb Raider, and then created and performed a play using the
game characters. Students also developed and posted a website dis-
cussing their critical experiences playing the game, focusing on the spa-
tial architecture of the game world and the violent nature of many video
games. The researchers used narrative theory from both cultural studies
and games studies to inform a pedagogical framework, and their analysis
showed that narrative-focused pedagogy can also raise critical awareness
of everyday activities like game playing as a social literacy practice.

Future directions for game-enhanced research and practice

In sum, research has found that game-enhanced L2 learning can and
does occur incidentally ‘in the wild’, because of the resource potentials,
or affordances, of particular contexts, player motivations and config-
urations, and the gameplay structures inherent in vernacular games.
Which sorts of game genres, structures, and player configurations afford
which sorts of potentials is an ongoing question. While some of these
potentials have been identified and examined empirically for L2LP,
many have not, and there is a great need for further research. Upon
identification, the resources can be incorporated in the design of
game-enhanced L2 pedagogical frameworks, and ultimately integrated
into game-based environments designed purposefully for L2 learning.
In this way, game-enhanced research informs both game-enhanced and
game-based practice.
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 39

With regards to game-enhanced L2 pedagogical practice, research is

still exploratory. Results show that with mediating materials and frame-
works, game-enhanced L2 pedagogy has potential as a highly effectual
means for L2 learning. Informed by game-mediated learning research,
pedagogical application is trending towards seeing digital games as
social literacy practices and sociocultural literacy objects that afford
narrative experiences. In this view, playing digital games involves the
interaction between the narratives designed in a game (Juul, 2005;
Salen & Zimmerman, 2005) and those that the players are design-
ing themselves, from which L2 learning can potentially emerge. While
we believe there is much potential in pedagogical application of this
play-as-design perspective, we think there is a great need for the develop-
ment, implementation, and evaluation of game-enhanced pedagogical
frameworks from a variety of approaches.

Towards digital game-based L2LP

Game-enhanced research and practice with vernacular games both com-

plement, and are complemented by, game-based research and practice
with games purposefully designed for L2LP. Researchers focusing on
game-based environments can draw from vernacular game behaviors
and design principles; at the same time, those focused on the use of ver-
nacular games can utilize what is known about learning and pedagogy
from research in game-based spaces.
Game-based, we propose, refers to the use of games and game-inclusive
synthetic immersive environments that are designed intentionally for
L2 learning and pedagogy. The purpose of game-based L2LP research is
to inform the evaluation and design of these games and environments.
We can predict that in the future, various commercial, non-profit educa-
tional, and government-sponsored initiatives will continue to put forth
a variety of game-based L2LP products, from mini-games that focus on
one or two features to comprehensive, game-like environments that are
meant to encompass all aspects of L2LP.2 It is critical that researchers
and practitioners actively engage in the evaluation of these games, as
well as understand how L2LP principles, rather than market demands,
should drive their designs.
While the variety and scope of digital game-based environments
are limited in comparison to the myriad vernacular games available,
several game-based L2LP environments are being created in a vari-
ety of languages. Table 2.2 presents a selection of the game-based
 40

Table 2.2 Summary of game-based environments for L2LP3

Digital Language Description Availability

Game-based status
environment

Croquelandia Spanish A synthetic immersive environment specifically created for the Research
learning of Spanish pragmatics (i.e., apologies and requests); prototype only
learners complete a series of quests which guide them through
apologizing and requesting in a variety of contexts.
Language Island English, Spanish, French, A virtual world developed for young learners of foreign Demo only
Italian, German, languages, functioning much like an online amusement park
Mandarin Chinese, with various games, group adventures, storytelling, and a
Korean, Arabic, Japanese, multilingual chat feature.
Portuguese http://www.languageisland.com/educators.html
Mentira Spanish A place-based, augmented reality mobile game in which Open-source;
learners must search for clues in both a virtual neighborhood freely available
and existing physical neighborhood to solve a murder
mystery; learners utilize a mobile device to interact with a
Spanish-speaking neighborhood in Albuquerque, NM.
http://www.mentira.org
MIDDWorld Spanish, French ‘A first-person online role playing game (RPG) that immerses Beta version
Online players in environments unique to each language’s specific available
culture. Students will interact with other players and with January 2011
computer-controlled characters who are voiced by native
speakers.’ (Cowan, 11 August 2010, personal communication).
http://middleburyinteractive.com/products/middleburyprep.php
Tactical Arabic, Dari, French, Immersive 3D environments which teach language and culture Commercially
Language & Pashto skills for defense situations; include training and practice phases available
Culture Training with a focus on voice recognition. primarily for
Systems http://www.alelo.com/tactical_language.html military
purposes

Zon Chinese A two-dimensional virtual world developed at Michigan State Online; freely
University; offers a comprehensive built-in syllabus structure available
similar to an introductory textbook; learners embark on a
journey to China and must interact with non-player characters
to complete various activities.
http://enterzon.com/
41
42 From Theory to Practice

L2LP environments currently in existence, including resource links and

availability status.

Game-based learning
As mentioned previously, game-based L2LP environments offer cus-
tomizability and targeted instruction that focuses on the appropriate
content and language complexity. There are a number of advantages
of a game-based approach to L2 learning research, especially when the
researcher is directly involved in the game design. First, the researcher
can target the particular element under investigation by manipulat-
ing or isolating specific design parameters. Second, the researcher can
design the game to collect gameplay data behind the scenes, gaining a
more comprehensive picture of learner interaction with, and within, the
mediated space. Finally, this process allows for immediate use of what
is learned to modify and improve game content, promoting desired
learner behaviors.
Focusing on learning outcomes in the synthetic immersive environ-
ment she created called Croquelandia, Sykes (2009) reports on an exper-
imental study investigating learner acquisition of requests in Spanish
after completing five multi-staged quests in the environment. Results of
a pre-test/post-test design showed very little change in requesting behav-
ior in terms of type of strategy, perspective (hearer vs. speaker orienta-
tion), and external modifiers. Sykes attributes this lack of improvement
to a number of factors including the limited number of quests, lack of
complexity and opportunities for experimentation, insufficient in-game
feedback, and the testing mechanism. She points out the importance of
empirical work for future creation of such spaces with an emphasis on
task/gameplay design and feedback mechanisms.
Again working with Croquelandia, Sykes (2010) examined gameplay
patterns to better understand how learning was occurring and to offer
design suggestions for the future creation and implementation of game-
based environments. Drawing primarily on 120 hours of in-game data
(n = 53) and one-on-one interviews (n = 25), Sykes found four distinct
learner behavior patterns. This included the Explorer, Student, Presenter,
and Non-Player groups. The Explorer group approached the game-based
space the most like a vernacular game, with multiple entry points, the
most time spent in-game (183–601 minutes), and the most evidence
of exploration. The Student group approached the space most like an
assignment, completing all of the quests yet spending less time explor-
ing (62–185 minutes). Finally, the Presenter group only spent enough
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 43

time in Croquelandia to glean information for an in-class presentation

(20–44 minutes), and the Non-Player group did not enter the space at
all. Based on these learner behavior patterns, Sykes suggests consider-
ations for the future design of game-based spaces, including caution
in utilizing past gaming behavior to predict learning behavior, and the
creation of a variety of complex tasks with multiple learning opportuni-
ties. Finally, demonstrating how learning research informs pedagogical
implementation, Sykes notes the need for careful curricular integration
of game-based environments to ensure optimal use.
Although they were not involved in the design of the game they
used, Zheng et al. (2009) examined the English learning that took place
in Quest Atlantis, a virtual world designed specifically for educational
purposes, albeit not specifically for language learning. They paired two
teenage learners in China with similar native speakers in the US, and had
them complete quests together. Their study used an ecological frame-
work to show the negotiation of meaning and the co-construction of
intercultural understanding that emerged in the game-based environ-
ment, which they partially attribute to the unique 3D qualities of the
game. While the researchers used a qualitative case study approach,
they focused on the L2 learning that resulted from the experiment,
rather than on the pedagogical structures embedded in the game and
facilitated by the researchers in implementation.

Game-based L2 pedagogy
Game-based L2 pedagogy research refers to the analysis of the peda-
gogical implementation of a particular L2LP-purposed game, as well
as analysis of the pedagogical elements designed into a game. It may
involve consideration of how institutional constraints, instructional
context, and ecological factors might impact L2 learning. Since so few
L2LP-purposed games are available compared to vernacular games, anal-
ysis of implementation is still relatively unexplored. While a focus on
implementation is relatively easy to identify, analysis of pedagogy as it is
designed into a game is difficult to separate from learning research – the
difference may be a matter of perspective or analytic approach. When
research focuses on how a game ‘teaches’ an L2, we would consider
it pedagogy research, while if it focuses on how learners learn with
a particular game, we would consider it learning research. While the
perspectives are complementary, they are both useful and necessary.
As an example of a theoretical study from a pedagogical design per-
spective, Neville (2010) uses a process design approach to consider how
44 From Theory to Practice

L2 learning, general learning, and game design theory might inform

the potential design of L2LP-purposed game environments. He focuses
on the dynamic nature of digital games as an interplay between narra-
tives embedded by the designer and those that emerge in play. He notes
that the agency players experience in emergent play may be at odds
with the structure imposed by embedded narratives, but that the gap
this tension affords may be the ideal space for narrative-based learning
through intentioned pedagogical decisions. Neville’s work is important
as it applies game design theory to L2LP and identifies narrative-based
learning as a fruitful direction for future game-based research.
As an example of experimental research on implementation, O’Brien
and colleagues (O’Brien & Levy, 2008; O’Brien, Levy, & Orich, 2009)
studied how the choice of game platform may impact the learning
of culture. Specifically, they examined the role that delivery platform
(i.e., PC or immersive CAVE environment4 ) had on learners’ recollection
of cultural products and practices by using pre- and post-test data prior
to, and after, participation in a virtual reality game for learning German.
Results demonstrated no difference in cultural learning between the two
platforms with more emphasis on the recollection of cultural products
in both cases. The authors suggest, therefore, that the PC version, easily
accessible on a computer, may be the best pedagogical choice, despite
the large-scale, immersive experience offered in the CAVE.
Holden and Sykes (2011) conducted a broad implementation
study that bridges learning and pedagogy research. They analyzed data
from three semesters of in-class play of Mentira – a place-based mobile
game they developed – to address how gameplay patterns and learner
engagement with ‘place’ could be utilized to improve and enhance
future iterations of the game. Their findings indicated learners actively
played Mentira and found the place-based portion of the game to be
valuable for their learning. For future iterations, the researchers stress
the importance of actively involving learners in the design process,
thoughtfully integrating the game as a component of the curriculum,
and creating stronger connections to the local community through
student reflection and meaningful involvement in the design process.

Future directions for game-based research and practice

Future L2 game-based research needs to balance consideration of
learning with pedagogy, that is, consideration of the game from the
perspective of the learner, the game designer, and the instructional
context, especially if the game is meant to be integrated into a
curriculum. Learning research examines a learner’s gameplay experience
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 45

and in-game behavior patterns, while pedagogical research considers

how game-embedded instruction is complemented by game imple-
mentation. Research must continue to examine game design, in-game
behaviors, and learning outcomes. As has been discussed in previous
work (Purushotma et al., 2008; Sykes et al., 2010; Thorne, Black, & Sykes,
2009) task design (quests), interaction (player-to-player and player-to-
non-player character), and feedback type and presentation are especially
noteworthy areas in which to begin.
Careful consideration of how learning processes are acknowledged in
the pedagogical design of various gameplay structures provides numer-
ous insights for future research and implementation. One area that
has received very little attention is the interaction of L2 learning
style and strategy preferences (Cohen, 2007, 2011; Cohen & Weaver,
2006; Oxford, 1990, at press), gameplay styles (Bartle, 1996), and game
designs. For example, MMOG designers have found that different play-
ers demand different gameplay styles, and that not all players wish
to group or interact with other players – for these non-social play-
ers, embedded narratives and solo activities are more enjoyable. In L2
pedagogical contexts, these players might be those learners who prefer
to memorize rules and vocabulary on their own, and not participate
in interactive group activities. An effective L2LP-purposed MMORPG
would find a way to appeal to player-learners with this combined
playing/learning style.

Acknowledging game-informed insights

Research on game-mediated L2LP is sparse but growing. As those who

have done research show us, however, we do not need to re-invent the
wheel – game-mediated L2LP research can find much inspiration and
guidance from research in educational gaming, games studies, and game
design. While we find both game-enhanced and game-based work to
be compelling for L2LP, we believe it is game-informed insights, that
is, understandings from research and practice in other, related fields,
which have the strongest potential to transform L2LP, whether game-
mediated or not. Game-informed insights can come from studies of
game-enhanced learning using vernacular games, as well as studies of
game-based learning using games developed specifically for educational
purposes.
One game-informed insight into learning we find to be especially
compelling for L2LP is the way that feedback is delivered. Almost every
successful game, whether it is useful for L2 learning or not, is especially
46 From Theory to Practice

gifted at providing scaffolded, meaningful feedback, at the level the

player needs – no more, no less. As an example, in Super Mario Broth-
ers (a vernacular game not suited for L2LP), an important skill to be
mastered is the power jump, that is, the ability to jump extra high
or over long distances. When learning to power jump, the player first
encounters the skill in a practice space where failure is annoying, but
does not inhibit gameplay. However, as the game progresses, the power
jump becomes more and more critical until it is impossible to move for-
ward without it. In this way, the player receives continuous feedback on
the success (or failure) of the power jump until it is impossible to survive
without it. L2 pedagogy would also benefit from employing this type of
gradual, scaffolded feedback that uses low-stakes failure to encourage,
rather than discourage, continued practice. It goes against this princi-
ple to learn something one day and then be tested on it at the end of
the unit, never to return to it again, except perhaps as a surprise item
on a final exam. In a game-informed curriculum there would be plenti-
ful, meaningful, and individualized low-stakes practice of key language
features, followed eventually by reflection on their structures and func-
tions, before any high-stakes assessment.5 Game-informed pedagogy
draws on lessons learned from games in general, game-enhanced L2LP,
and game-based L2LP to add to our understanding of learning and, ulti-
mately, improve general pedagogical practices, whether they relate to
digital or non-digital contexts.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we believe there is a place and necessity for both game-

enhanced and game-based L2LP research and practice in the field.
Research on game-enhanced L2LP can inform the development of game-
based L2LP environments, and at the same time it can inform further
game-enhanced practice. However, while vernacular games offer benefits
for L2LP that cannot be replicated in game-based L2LP environments,
they do not offer all that is needed. The potential for L2LP-purposed
games for targeted, curriculum-integrated instruction is enormous, and
the L2 learning game industry is booming. We should heed the fact that
the number of well-intentioned educational games that have failed is
enormous as well, and that L2 education professionals have not always
been the most informed of digital game consumers. The solution is
for researchers and practitioners to learn to evaluate, and eventually
speak to the design of, game-mediated instruction, both game-enhanced
and game-based. The first step is simple – interested researchers and
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 47

practitioners should play digital games themselves, keeping an open

mind and analytical disposition towards insights into language use and
learning. From there, active involvement in the design, research, and
implementation of game-mediated practices has the potential to move
beyond the discussion of the theoretical potential of digital games to
productive, empirically-based, transformational L2LP practices.

Notes
1. The notion of ‘enhanced’ comes from a similar term used in the field of CALL
or computer-assisted language learning. Some (e.g., Bush) have called for a
change to the term ‘technology-enhanced language learning’, because the
term ‘assisted’ may imply deficiency otherwise.
2. Although it is too early to know, it may be that economic realities eventually
privilege game-based L2LP environments that are commercially developed
and bundled with, perhaps even replacing, textbooks. In this case, it is
paramount that L2 learners, instructors, and program administrators can crit-
ically evaluate and implement these games, ideally engaging in dialogues
with designers both in- and outside the burgeoning educational L2LP digital
gaming industry.
3. There are likely other small spaces being created and tested in local contexts
(e.g., O’Brien et al., 2009). These are not included here due to the lack of
information available.
4. CAVE environments are ‘multiscreen projection system that provides users
with a high level of immersion. CAVEs are built around a stereo projection
system, giving users a 3D experience. Other features of a CAVE can include
head tracking of the subject and surround sound’ (O’Brien et al., 2009).
5. We acknowledge, of course, that many educators have come upon this insight
by other means and do indeed practice it, while others have to operate under
institutional pressures and constraints that render such insights very difficult
to implement.

References
Aldrich, C. (2005). Learning by doing. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Arnseth, H. C. (2006). Learning to play or playing to learn – A critical account
of the models of communication informing educational research on com-
puter gameplay. Game Studies, 6(1). Retrieved from http://gamestudies.org/
0601/articles/arnseth
Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Retrieved
from http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm
Cohen, A. D. (2007). Coming to terms with language learner strategies: Surveying
the experts. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: 30
years of research and practice (pp. 29–45). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, A. D. (2011). Strategies in learning and using a second language (2nd ed.).
Harlow, England: Pearson Education/Longman.
48 From Theory to Practice

Cohen, A. D., & Weaver, S. J. (2006). Styles and strategies-based instruction: A teach-
ers’ guide. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language
Acquisition, University of Minnesota.
deFreitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds: A review of game-based learn-
ing. JISC E-Learning Programme. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/
documents/programmes/elearninginnovation/gamingreport_v3.pdf
deHaan, J., Reed, W. M., & Kuwada, K. (2010). The effect of interactivity with a
music video game on second language vocabulary recall. Language Learning and
Technology, 14(2), 74–94.
Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy
(2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Holden, C., & Sykes, J. (2011). Leveraging mobile games for place-based language
learning. International Journal of Game-based Learning, 1(2), 1–18.
Juul, J. (2005). Half-real: Video games between rules and fictional worlds. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Lacasa, P., Martínez, R., & Méndez, L. (2008). Developing new literacies using
commercial videogames as educational tools. Linguistics and Education, 19(2),
85–106.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago.
Miller, M., & Hegelheimer, V. (2006). The SIMS meet ESL: Incorporating authentic
computer simulation games into the language classroom. Interactive Technol-
ogy & Smart Education, 3(4), 311–328.
Neville, D. (2010). Structuring narrative in 3D digital game-based learning envi-
ronments to support second language acquisition. Foreign Language Annals,
43(3), 446–469.
O’Brien, M., & Levy, R. (2008). Exploration through virtual reality: Encoun-
ters with the target culture. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(4),
663– 691.
O’Brien, M., Levy, R., & Orich, A. (2009). Virtual immersion: The role of CAVE
and PC technology. CALICO Journal, 26(2), 337–362.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know.
New York: Newbury House/Harper Collins.
Oxford, R. L. (at press). Teaching and researching language learning strategies.
Harlow, England: Longman/Pearson Education.
Piiranen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for partici-
pation in the activity of playing a video game. Modern Language Journal, 93(2),
153–169.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. St. Paul, MN: Paragon House.
Purushotma, R. (2005). You’re not studying, you’re just . . . . Language Learning and
Technology, 9(1), 80–96.
Purushotma, R., Thorne, S. L., & Wheatley, J. (2008). Language learning and
video games. Paper produced for the Open Language & Learning Games
Project, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, funded by the William and
Flora Hewlett Foundation. Retrieved from http://knol.google.com/k/ravi-
purushotma/10-key-principles-fordesigning-video/27mkxqba7b13d/2
Reinhardt, J., & Zander, V. (2011). Social networking in an intensive English pro-
gram classroom: Insights from language socialization. CALICO Journal, 28(2),
326–344.
 Jonathon Reinhardt and Julie M. Sykes 49

Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2005). Game design and meaningful play. In
J. Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of computer game studies (pp. 59–80).
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just
one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Steinkuehler, C. (2008). Massively multiplayer online games as an educational
technology: An outline for research. Educational Technology, 48(1), 10–21.
Sykes, J. (2008). A dynamic approach to social interaction: Synthetic immersive
environments and Spanish pragmatics (PhD thesis, University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN, USA).
Sykes, J. (2009). Learner requests in Spanish: Examining the potential of mul-
tiuser virtual environments for L2 pragmatic acquisition. In L. Lomika &
G. Lord (Eds.), The second generation: Online collaboration and social networking in
CALL. San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Sykes, J. (2010). Multi-user virtual environments: User-driven design and imple-
mentation for language learning. In G. Vicenti & J. Braman (Eds.), Teaching
through multi-user virtual environments: Applying dynamic elements to the modern
classroom. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Sykes, J., Reinhardt, J., & Thorne, S. L. (2010). Multiplayer digital games as sites
for research and practice. In F. Hult (Ed.), Directions and prospects for educational
linguistics (pp. 117–136). New York: Springer.
Thorne, S. L. (2008). Transcultural communication in open internet environ-
ments and massively multiplayer online games. In S. Magnan (Ed.), Mediating
discourse online (pp. 305–327). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Thorne, S. L. (2010). The ‘intercultural turn’ and language learning in the crucible
of new media. In F. Helm & S. Guth (Eds.), Telecollaboration 2.0 for language and
intercultural learning (pp. 139–164). Bern: Peter Lang.
Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. (2009). Second language use, socializa-
tion, and learning in internet interest communities and online games. Modern
Language Journal, 93, 802–821.
Thorne, S. L., & Reinhardt, J. (2008). Bridging activities, new media literacies, and
advanced foreign language proficiency. CALICO Journal, 25(3), 558–572.
Zheng, D., Young, M., & Wagner, M. (2009). Negotiation for action: English
language learning in game-based virtual worlds. Modern Language Journal, 93,
489–511.
3
Behaviorism, Constructivism,
and Communities of Practice:
How Pedagogic Theories Help
Us Understand Game-Based
Language Learning
Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten

Introduction

Issues of boredom, disengagement, and dropouts (in schools, colleges,

and e-learning scenarios) have long been of central concern for educa-
tional practitioners and policy makers (Charles, Bustard, & Black, 2009;
Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). One solution may be to capi-
talize on the interest and energy with which the current generation –
controversially referred to as ‘digital natives’ (Prensky, 2001) – engages
with new social media (Jenkins, 2006; Ito, 2010), in particular video
games (Barab et al., 2007; Gee, 2003, 2007; Jenkins & Squire, 2004;
Shaffer, 2006). While some researchers see games as opportunities for
deep, sustained, and transferable learning (Gee, 2003, 2008; Loftus &
Loftus, 1983), others question whether engaging environments can also
interfere with students’ learning (Blumenfeld, Kempler, & Krajcik, 2006;
Jackson, Dempsey, & McNamara, Chapter 6 in this volume) or further
complicate the potential for game-based learning (Kerres, Bormann, &
Vervenne, 2009).
In this chapter we argue the importance of teachers’ and educational
game designers’ assumptions about teaching and learning (Hickey &
Pellegrino, 2005). These assumptions have important implications to
the extent that they:
• inform practitioners about how they see their learners (Bruner, 1996);
• frame how the foundations of any learning environment (e.g., psy-
chological, pedagogical, technological) are operationalized and
studied (Hannafin & Land, 1997);

50
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 51

• suggest key mechanism and processes related to teaching, learning,

and successful transfer (Greeno, Collins, & Resnick, 1996).

What follows is an overview of key learning theories and their peda-

gogical implications. In our discussion we have attempted to integrate
previous efforts at classification and description (Case, 1996; Greeno
et al., 1996; Mayes & de Freitas, 2004). We describe different learning
theories and their pedagogical implications, as well as the ways in which
they inspire different educational uses of video games that fall into
different ‘generations’ of educational computer use (Egenfeldt-Nielsen,
2007). Given the close relation between learning theories and instruc-
tional design, the focus of our analysis is games that have been ‘designed
for learning’. We are aware, however, of other possibilities of games
use, such as adapting commercial games for educational purposes (Gee,
2008; Phrainen-Marsh & Tainio, 2009; Reinders, 2009; Thorne, 2010)
or making people build/program their own games using user-friendly
software (e.g., Scratch and Kodu).1 Finally, we conclude with a sum-
mary of the findings and recommendations for further development of
game-based education.

Learning theories – An overview

Learning is an elusive construct though it has been intensively stud-

ied in psychology. Despite this, our understanding remains limited
(Bruner, 1985, 2004; Valsiner & Voss, 1996). The way we conceptual-
ize learning shapes the ways in which we study it. Below, we describe
three perspectives on learning and their pedagogical implications, and
exemplify how they are realized in concrete educational uses of video
games. We extend this discussion using Egenfeldt-Nielsen’s ‘genera-
tion’ metaphor of computer games use in education (Egenfeldt-Nielsen,
2007).

The associativist/behaviorist perspective

The basic idea of associationism is that the simple and discrete sensa-
tions coming from the environment are associated in the brain with
others to form more complex structures (Slife & Williams, 1995). This
notion is the core of behaviorism, a philosophical approach to the
study of human actions. According to this view, stimuli in the envi-
ronment can affect individuals’ behavior when they associate those
stimuli with their own personal responses. The stimuli can be percep-
tual elements, sensations, or ideas, so that a person’s knowledge can
52 From Theory to Practice

be thought of as a set of organized associations between these stimuli

and responses. Learning evolves when there is a strengthening between
these associations (Greeno et al., 1996). Consequently, ‘Learning is fre-
quently defined as a change in behavior due to experience. It is a
function of building associations between the occasion upon which
the behavior occurs (stimulus events), the behavior itself (response
events) and the result (consequences)’ (Burton, Moore, & Magliaro,
1996, p. 9).
Gagné believed that contiguity, repetition, and reinforcement are
classical learning principles that can be controlled and are external to
learning (Gagné & Briggs, 1979). Therefore, in order to produce learn-
ing, the associations should be as contiguous and contingent as possible,
that is, close in space and time, respectively (Chance, 1994). Contiguity
refers to the closeness of the stimulus to the learner’s response, while
repetition refers to the need that the stimulus situation and its response
must be repeated or practiced in order for learning to be improved.
Finally, reinforcement refers to the fact that learning a new act is
strengthened when the occurrence of that act is followed by a satisfy-
ing state of affairs (reward). In order to learn, individuals should be first
exposed to a pattern (stimuli) to which, in time, they start to recognize
and respond appropriately (Case, 1996).
The pedagogy implicit here tells us that we need to present infor-
mation to the learners, make opportunities for practice, while giving
learners specific feedback that will strengthen the associations of the
material. This approach has been used in programmed instruction2 (e.g.,
Beatty, 2003, p. 87), where the goal is to orchestrate a set of contin-
gencies that lead to the desired performance. This can be achieved by
the logical presentation of content, the requirement of overt responses,
and the presentation to the learners of feedback (i.e., right or wrong).3
Behaviorist approaches have dominated early computer-assisted lan-
guage learning (CALL), which focused on explicit teaching of grammar
and a wide range of drills, usually in translation, grammar, and vocab-
ulary (Beatty, 2003). With translation having lost most of its earlier
importance in the language classroom, today’s language learning games
focus mostly on vocabulary, spelling, and grammar. These types of
games specify a clear reward structure (e.g., points or scores) but are
often disconnected from the learning experience. Reinforcement pro-
motes drill-and-practice while emphasizing extrinsic motivation with
scarce teacher presence and little attention to learners’ individual differ-
ences. Egenfeldt-Nielsen (2007) calls these types of games ‘Edutainment’
due mainly to the lack of teacher engagement in the activity and the lack
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 53

of integration of the game/entertainment and the learning components

(cf., ‘extrinsic games’, Ang & Zaphiris, 2006).

Mingoville: Edutainment and the associationist/behaviorist

perspective
An example of the behaviorist approach is represented by the language
learning platform Mingoville.4 Mingoville is a web-based platform for
language learning for primary school learners, aged 9–10. Mingoville rep-
resents a serious game that is ‘structured around themes and activities
that capitalize on children’s desire to explore and play games’ (Meyer &
Sørensen, 2007, p. 564). Though Mingoville is not a game in itself, it
contains several activities and ‘mini-games’ that resemble activities chil-
dren engage in outside school. For example, the missions have content,
drills, and tasks combined with games for vocabulary training, spelling,
and word recognition. The narrative of the platform and the avatars
(flamingos) do not form a single story; they are limited to a series of
individual and isolated tasks that do not necessarily relate to a previous
or subsequent event.

Super speed boat challenge

This mini-game is meant to teach children English vocabulary. It is a
2D representation of a small island near to the coast. The player’s per-
spective is situated from above, so she can see the island surrounded by a
boat, a few pictures, and small texts, that seem to float on the water, plus
secondary paraphernalia, such as trees, a small ship, and a beach. The
pictures and the texts form pairs, where some of them match and others
don’t (e.g., the picture of a ship with a text saying ‘ship’). The boat is
the only object the player can control. The task is to take the boat and
go around the island four times (laps), passing over the matching pair of
picture and text (e.g., a picture of a car with a text saying ‘car’). For each
pair correctly identified the player gets eight points. Up on the left and
the right corners, respectively, the number of laps to go and the time
are displayed. Each time the player finishes a lap, either the picture-text
pairs change their position around the island or new pairs appear. After
the fourth lap, the game ends and gives the player the final score and
time. The player has the choice to compare her score with other players
as well. Other Mingoville games follow similar principles, that reflect the
classic structure of reinforcement described above: contiguity in space
between stimuli (text-picture), the response (running your boat on a
picture) and its consequence (get points).
54 From Theory to Practice

The cognitivist/constructivist perspective and

problem-based learning
Borrowing their metaphors from the field of computer science, cogni-
tivists claim that the mind is a set of ‘cognitive processes’ (Gardner,
1985). According to cognitivist assumptions, the processes represent
instances of symbol manipulation and transformation. Human thinking
and problem solving involve an information processing system sim-
ilar to how computers process information (Newell & Simon, 1972).
Given its epistemological similarity with behaviorism (Slife & Williams,
1995), cognitivists tend to privilege direct instruction and practice as
key pedagogical strategies (Case, 1996).
For constructivism, the knowledge in our mind is ideally a ‘viable’
construction accomplished by individuals given their current experi-
ence with the environment. This knowledge does not account for any
independent, external (i.e., ontological) ‘reality’ (von Glasersfeld, 1982).
It is never ‘found’ or ‘discovered’, but is actively constructed (Rorty,
1991). Knowledge should be understood as an ‘adaptive function’, a
set of conceptual structures that are viable in the face of an individual
present experience. Equilibrium or ‘viability’ would mean that an indi-
vidual cognitive structure yields expected outcomes without any con-
flicts or contradictions during the manipulation with the objects in the
environment. For von Glasersfeld, ‘cognitive change and learning take
place when a scheme, instead of producing the expected result, leads to
perturbation, and perturbation, in turn, leads to accommodation that
establishes a new equilibrium’ (1989, p. 128).
Based on Von Glasersfeld and Rorty’s work, Savary and Duffy iden-
tified three key constructivist tenets: (1) understanding occurs in the
interaction with the environment; (2) puzzlement is the stimulus for
learning, determining the nature of what is learned; (3) knowledge
advances through social negotiation and evaluation of individual under-
standing (i.e., its ‘viability’) (Savery & Duffy, 1996, pp. 2–3). From these
tenets they deduced ten pedagogical principles (pp. 5–9), which state
that we need to search for (and design) an authentic,5 challenging and
complex task/problem around which to organize learning activities that
promote broad interaction, foster learners’ puzzlement, and promote the
growth of learners’ understanding by social negotiation with others, while
supporting reflection and ownership of both the problem and its solu-
tion. For Savery and Duffy, this conceptualization of constructivism is
embodied to its fullest by the known Problem-based learning pedagogy or
PBL (Barrows, 1985, 1986).
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 55

PBL originates from medical schools (Barrows, 1985) and can be por-
trayed as a cycle consisting of several stages (Hmelo-Silver, 2004): the
problem scenario, identification of facts, hypothesis generation, identi-
fication of knowledge deficiencies, self-directed learning, application of
new knowledge, evaluation, and back again to new fact identification
and generation of new hypotheses. The key aspect is the engagement
of learners in self-directed learning motivated by learning issues6 or puz-
zlements (knowledge domain and problem solving related) that come
from consideration of the problem (e.g., somebody’s set of symptoms)
for which learners take ownership and through which they engage in
metacognitive discussions with their professors/instructors and peers
(Savery & Duffy, 1996). Regarding the importance of learning goals
as key for determining what ultimately is learned, there are learning
goals related to self-directed learning, content knowledge, and problem
solving. Inspired by these goals, learners develop strategies for identify-
ing learning issues and evaluating resources, and learn how to use the
hypothetic-deductive problem-solving model.
The role of computer games within this framework is to provide a
varied and rich context where the multimedia experience of the game
presents information and facts in such ways that learners can extract
them and form hypotheses. Games should provide a complex con-
text with organized activities around an authentic problem, so that the
actions of the learners have a clear impact in the environment that pro-
vides ‘puzzlement’ to stimulate thinking, while providing the adequate
support, scaffolded reflection, and critical thinking (Hickey & Filsecker,
2012; Hickey, Filsecker, & Kwon, 2010).
The increased attention to the learner and the cognitive processes
involved in learning, as well as the emphasis on scaffolding, analy-
sis, and problem solving, is seen in Egenfeldt-Nielsen’s (2007) ‘second
generation’ of computer games (as contrasted with the ‘first genera-
tion’, which he also calls ‘Edutainment’). While some elements, such
as multimedia presentation of content, have become more important
over time and are indeed frequently found in later generations of learn-
ing software and learning games, the mere presence of multimedia
does not make a product any more constructivist. The increase of
multimedia elements may instead be seen as a consequence of tech-
nological development, which made distributing games with high
multimedia content feasible – a development that overlapped with a
stronger turn toward constructivist pedagogies. It can be argued that
‘second generation games’, as described by Egenfeldt-Nielsen, reflect
56 From Theory to Practice

some aspects of constructivist pedagogy, ignoring others, and including,

as he recognizes, elements of behavioristic pedagogies: ‘each generation
is carried forward to the next, but de-emphasized’ (Egenfeldt-Nielsen,
2007, p. 276).

Tactical Iraqi: The cognitivist/constructivist perspective

Finding a game that closely matches the PBL pedagogy or construc-
tivist learning theory is not easy. The complexities of these approaches
present high demands on game developers. In this section we will
discuss Tactical Iraqi, a game that has adapted some elements of PBL.
Tactical Iraqi is a program for learning Arabic embodied in a serious
game environment (Johnson & Wu, 2008; Peterson, 2010; Wu, 2008),
that helps learners acquire knowledge of Iraqi language and culture. The
game-based architecture involves three learning environments:

(1) Mission Skill Builder (MSB) is an interactive lesson module for the
development of cultural and language skills. Here learners speak
into a microphone and get feedback on their choice of responses
and pronunciation. For example, when learning to say ‘hello’ in
the target language, learners hear a ’pedagogical agent’ (non-player
character or NPC) pronounce the phrase. Learners then try to repeat
the phrase and receive simple feedback on their pronunciation
(e.g., ‘It seems that you said “salaamu”. Please try again.’).
(2) Mission Practice Environment (MPE) is a 3D role-playing game
where learners, through their avatars, explore and talk to NPCs in a
simulated social setting. For example, in one mission, players regis-
ter the home of a local resident. The goal or winning condition is
to communicate correctly throughout the game by using appropri-
ately grammatical and cultural aspects of communication in Arabic.
The learners listen to NPCs, make gestures through their avatars and
respond by speaking into a microphone. A simulated tutor (in an
aide function) is near learners’ avatars and can suggest specific for-
eign phrases or give a hint in English, letting learners decide how
to say it. Depending on the difficulty level of the game, different
levels of help are available for the learners. Depending on the lan-
guage skills of the learners, the NPCs can collaborate with them or
if learners speak/act rudely they can be confronted by the NPCs,
making the achievement of the mission’s tasks more difficult.
(3) Arcade Game (AG) is a 3D mini-game where learners practice their
listening and speaking skills in a first-person interaction mode.
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 57

These skills were covered in the lessons of MSB. The game incorpo-
rates two modes: listening mode and speaking mode. In the former,
learners listen to a voice command, and have to move to the right
position on the map, pick up a reward, and get points. As in the
MSB, the learners have to use their speech to control the movements
of their characters. If they speak the correct commands that lead to
the right place and pick up the right reward, they get points. In both
modes, requesting hints will get the learners’ points deducted. This
game is, in many ways, similar to the drill-and-practice games found
at Mingoville.

Tactical Iraqi fulfills to some extent the characteristics we described for

PBL. The most important aspects of this are the problem and the learn-
ers’ goal. It can be argued, at least for the objective population (e.g., the
military), that the problem is authentic to the extent that it emulates
the context of Iraq and demands from them the kinds of skills they will
need to demonstrate while stationed in Iraq. Likewise, it can be assumed
that learners’ goal will be related to content knowledge (e.g., how to say
‘hello’ to the family whose house is being searched) and problem solving
(e.g., the culture-related communication style that best suits the situa-
tion). In the game, for example, this is reflected if players take off their
sunglasses before addressing the family members. In brief, the environ-
ment provides an authentic context closely related to what learners will
be likely doing in some point in time in Iraq. However, the other charac-
teristics of challenge and complexity cannot be easily identified. These
elements, together with the focus of the learning outcomes on basic
grammar and cultural skills, do not necessarily provide the learners a
starting point, or a learning issue, from which a self-directed learning
process could be developed.
Concerning the support that PBL recognizes as important in order
to help students to own the problem, reflect, and experience a chal-
lenge to their understanding, some of it can be seen in a modest way
through Tactical Iraqi’s MPE. This module provides NPCs who have the
role of an aide, to help learners work through the problem when they
are stuck in some part of the game (e.g., when they cannot pronounce
the right word or sentence required in the virtual situation). We con-
sider this assistance as a kind of scaffold to the extent that the aides
compensate for the learners’ lack of knowledge of some expressions of
the foreign language in order to keep the learner engaged in the learning
activity. However, the goal of the environment does not put emphasis
on understanding as much as it does on lower level communication
58 From Theory to Practice

skills. The opportunities for reflection are in the link that Tactical Iraqi
offers between grammar, communicative skills, and cultural issues that
frame the meaning in a communicative act, but in the game the cul-
tural aspects are included as strategic knowledge in order to achieve the
goal of the mission in the game, and not as a topic in itself on which
players could be expected to reflect. However, for pedagogical purposes
beyond military training, we find these aspects of Tactical Iraqi’s cur-
riculum highly interesting and worth more exploration and eventual
adaptation.
Developing these types of games is certainly more expensive than pro-
ducing a smaller-scale, behaviorist-oriented drill-and-practice version.
It may be worth the investment, however, as such games may prepare
learners for more realistic life situations (as opposed to vocabulary tests).
Transfer from learning to action might be easier when language learn-
ers played Tactical Iraqi than when they acquired Iraqi Arabic words and
phrases through a game similar to Super Speed Boat Challenge.

The situated perspective and legitimate peripheral participation

The third approach we will talk about focuses more on the contextual
aspects of learning; that is, what Mayes and de Freitas call ‘PEDAGOGY
DERIVED FROM THE SITUATIVE PERSPECTIVE’ (original emphasis)
(2004, p. 19). The situated7 perspective looks both at the social (e.g., role
of community for learning, or the distribution of knowledge among col-
laborating individuals) and the physical context (e.g., role of tools or
environment).
The breadth of teaching methods that adopt a more or less situ-
ated perspective on learning is quite expansive (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
Many theorists and practitioners concerned with the role of context
in learning do not label themselves as situated/situative theorists or
practitioners because of the difficulties of drawing the line between
‘situativity’ and, for example, constructivism, given that ‘actual inter-
pretations of situativity and of constructivism share many underlying
similarities’ (Barab & Duffy, 1999, p. 25). Other theorists, on the other
hand, such as Mayes and de Freitas (2004), are happy to offer guidelines
for differentiating between the two.
For the purpose of this paper, we chose a school of thought within the
situated approach that encompasses this situated/situativity perspective
in the utmost degree: Lave & Wenger’s legitimate peripheral participa-
tion (LPP). LPP is not concerned with creating ‘practice fields’, but rather
with learning in contexts that have not been created for the purpose
of learning, but to serve an extra-learning purpose.8 In communities
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 59

of practice, the context in which LPP takes place, learning cannot be

separated from participation:

In our view, learning is not merely situated in practice – as if it were

some independently reifiable process that just happened to be located
somewhere; learning is an integral part of generative social practice
in the lived-in world ( . . . ).
(Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 35)

The term LPP is closely connected with the notion of community. This
approach stresses the role of communities of practitioners/communities
of practice as ‘set of relations among persons, activity, and world, over
time and in relation with other tangential and overlapping communities
of practice’ (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 98):

In using the term community, we do not imply some primor-

dial culture-sharing entity. We assume that members have different
interests, make diverse contributions to activity, and hold varied
viewpoints. In our view, participation at multiple levels is entailed
in membership in a community of practice. Nor does the term commu-
nity imply necessarily co-presence, a well-defined, identifiable group,
or socially visible boundaries. It does imply participation in an activ-
ity system about which participants share understandings concerning
what they are doing and what that means in their lives and for their
communities.
(Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 97)9

The process by which a person starts sharing the values and belief sys-
tem of a community is called legitimate peripheral participation, through
which people gain an increasingly sophisticated understanding of the
activities of a group of people and their meaning for the community.
For example, a person learns a trade by joining a community, such as an
apprentice carpenter learning to build and repair woodwork. By doing
meaningful work, such as creation of a chair under the direction of a
master carpenter from the community, as well as by observing other
members of that community during work, the carpenter gains expe-
rience through the authentic, meaningful activity. At the same time,
through LPP, people learn to be a particular kind of person by acquir-
ing the values and practices of a community. In brief, you learn a skill
by joining a community and by developing the identity associated with
membership in that community (e.g., baker, linguist, English teacher,
WoW player, etc.).10
60 From Theory to Practice

Games, especially those in which the player is represented by an

avatar, such as in massively multiplayer online role-playing games
(MMORPGs) or multi-user virtual environments (MUVEs), allow play-
ers to adopt specific identities, such as assassin, detective, or scientist.
These identities are closely intertwined with learning the rules of one’s
trade (cf., Gee, 2008, ‘Situated Learning Matrix’). In a game, a learner
can also take over the role of a ‘competent speaker’ of a language or
language variety. Players become part of the game as an extension of
their selves in the virtual environment, doing activities as their character
works through the virtual world, and their speech becomes their char-
acter’s speech. They are supported by the rich context games provide
through contextual cues that support learners in choosing appropriate
levels of formality in their language production.
Learning models within the situated framework focus on groups and
community membership. Games can integrate this in three ways: In the
first, the community in question is entirely ‘in the game’, with charac-
ters in the game that do not represent actual individuals (i.e., NPCs). Sec-
ondly, in (massively) multiplayer games, the community can consist of
game characters played by other game players. Finally, a player can inter-
act with other players as players, as opposed to as characters, such as by
talking to co-present players or by interacting with fans of a game out-
side the game, such as in fan bulletin boards. In any case, players adopt
specific identities, such as a member of an anti-terrorist unit, a ‘compe-
tent speaker’ or even a ‘native speaker’11 and develop specific practices,
and in doing so contribute to a specific community in a game or sur-
rounding a game. In this context, Gee (2008) differentiates between the
‘game’ and the ‘Game’: ‘The “game” is the software in the box and all
the elements of in-game design. The “Game” is the social setting into
which the game is placed, all the interactions that go on around the
game’ (Gee, 2008, p. 24). While a ‘game’ can simulate a community of
practice, a ‘Game’ is constituted by a community of practice:

Gamers often organize themselves into communities of practice that

create social identities with distinctive ways of talking, interacting,
interpreting experiences, and applying values, knowledge, and skill
to achieve goals and solve problems. This is a crucial point for those
who wish to make so-called serious games: to gain these sorts of
desired learning effects will often require as much care about the
social system (the learning system) in which the game is placed as
the in-game design itself.
(Gee, 2008, p. 24)
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 61

In sum, games represent opportunities for players to continuously par-

ticipate in and build a community or ‘affinity group’, where they can
negotiate and construct knowledge, while developing skills and artifacts
to participate successfully within these groups by coordinating increas-
ingly informed discourses (Steinkuehler, 2006). The focus of the use of
computer games lies on how people engage with games and develop
communities – inside or outside the game.
Egenfeldt-Nielsen’s ‘third generation’ of computer games has only
limited similarities with the approach outlined above. Certainly, a
statement like the following describes nicely how learning happens
in situated contexts: ‘You learn new things by participating in these
communities and appreciating and negotiating what counts as knowl-
edge, skills and attitudes’ (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2007, p. 275). We do not
agree, though, with the assumption that games that support learning in
communities of practice have higher demands on teacher engagement
(which, strictly speaking, does not play any role in most traditional com-
munities of practice, although it is highly relevant when working with
practice fields) than games from earlier generations.

Quest Atlantis: The situated perspective/legitimate peripheral

participation
Quest Atlantis is a three-dimensional game world in which players, repre-
sented by avatars, can interact with objects, non-player characters, and
other players. It is similar to commercially available role-playing games,
such as World of Warcraft or Rift. The game encourages interactions by
setting missions, or goals that the student learner can attempt to com-
plete. Communication opportunities are a key element in Quest Atlantis.
Students can communicate with other learners through the chat space
or in-game e-mails. The environment is sufficiently detailed to provide
a ‘physical context’ for these interactions.
Quest Atlantis has been designed with a focus on identity. Learners
are encouraged to take on different identities, such as a field investi-
gator, journalist, or scientist, based on the specific task they are ask to
complete. Even though learners merely ‘play’ these roles (similar to a
practice field), the avatars within the game-world transform into sci-
entists insofar as they use scientific knowledge to solve ‘real’ in-world
problems (Barab, Gresalfi, & Ingram-Goble, 2010). Within the game
logic, avatars participate in ‘an activity system about which participants
share understandings concerning what they are doing and what that
means in their lives and for their communities’ (Lave & Wenger, 1991,
p. 98): They solve quests to improve the quality of life on New Atlantis.
62 From Theory to Practice

Students, aged 9–12, are the main target group for this game. They
join the game in the role of ‘Questers’ who come to New Atlantis to solve
missions in order to protect this world. The successful completion of a
mission earns lumins (‘marvelous crystals made from hard work, good
acts and discoveries’, Quest Atlantis comic12 ), which help reconstruct a
mythical artifact, the ‘Arch of wisdom’. The teacher’s role consists of
rating the success of quests (this is embedded in the narrative – learners
are asked to submit their work to the ‘council’), and choosing which
missions their students will be able to play.
Without its missions, Quest Atlantis would merely be a MUVE, an
environment in which communication between individuals is possi-
ble. Therefore, it makes sense to look at how a specific mission design
can further encourage learning along the lines of the communities
of practice model. Zheng, Young, Wagner, and Brewer (2009) provide
an example of how Quest Atlantis can be used in a language learn-
ing context. They discuss how native speaker/non-native speaker dyads
learn from each other by co-questing. In Zheng et al.’s study, specific
quests were designed for the purpose of both language learning and
intercultural-communication/awareness. For example, in the ‘Words of
Meaning Village’ quest, learners had to work on English and Chinese
proverbs, explaining them in such a way that ‘Atlantians will under-
stand these proverbs and may use them to make Atlantis a better place’
(Zheng et al., 2009, p. 509).
Completing this task involved combining the knowledge of both
speakers – no player could successfully complete it on his/her own. The
finished work was then to be submitted to the ‘Council’, so that teachers
could provide rich, meaningful feedback within the context of the game.
Zheng et al. (2009) arranged for a US and a Chinese class to work
together on these quests. They focus on the co-questing activities of
four children in this class, two American English speakers, as well as two
Chinese non-native speakers of English (Mandarin speakers), who had
spent more time on QA together than the other children in the sam-
ple. For their co-questing activities, the adolescents worked in tandems
(‘dyads’), with one native speaker and one non-native speaker in each
group. In order to solve their quests, they communicated in-game by
chatting (synchronous), by sending in-game e-mails and ‘telegrams’,
and by using bulletin boards (asynchronous).13
These multiple opportunities for interaction in the sociocultural con-
text of dyads’ co-questing provide the background for negotiation not
only of the meaning of a particular proverb (e.g., the early bird catches
the worm) or concept (e.g., global warming), but also the dyads’ cultural
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 63

identities (i.e., US and China). Zheng et al. conclude that, generally,

the native English speaker (NES) took the role of instructor in these
exchanges with the non-native English speakers (NNES): ‘the interac-
tion was nudged by the NESs, who were more attuned to cultural and
linguistic cues. Thus the NESs in this segment can be taken to be the
instructors, and Lulu, the NNES, the learner’ (Zheng et al., 2009, p. 501).
But this does not mean that overall learning (which included inter-
cultural learning and content learning) was limited to the non-native
speakers only.
Overall, the degree to which the Quest Atlantis fosters learning along
the communities of practice model depends very much on the design
of individual quests or missions. The world itself, which includes an
extensive history that provides a shared purpose for ‘questers’ and its
options for communication that allows learning from and in coopera-
tion with other players while solving ‘real’ problems, provides a suitable
environment for such quests.

Conclusions

The goal of this chapter was to describe the core tenets of classical
and modern learning theories. We believe that they influence the way
we teach by providing suggestions for organizing instruction (e.g., if
we want to emphasize recall, drill-and-practice activities inspired by
behaviorism could do the job). Similarly, learning theories influence the
role we assign to technology (e.g., for supporting collaborative activ-
ities inspired by constructivism). And, finally, they influence how we
study and implement innovative teaching and learning by providing
specific conceptual frameworks that ultimately guide researchers’ and
practitioners’ inquiry efforts.
Firstly, from behaviorism and its emphasis on the consequences of
stimulus-response dyads, we have inherited reinforcement as a key
mechanism to support learning of basic facts and simple content. Sup-
porting this, game technology has been widely used in the form of
edutainment as we discussed in the example of Mingoville’s mini-games.
Games such as these leave little space for teachers, social interaction, and
reflection. On the other hand, constructivism puts learners at the center
of the educational space and reminds us that a person’s own interpreta-
tion of the learning situation is key for learning to take place. It also
reminds us that learning activities benefit from the inclusion of an
authentic problem that provides the meaning necessary to help learn-
ers take ownership of the problem and engage in self-directed learning.
64 From Theory to Practice

Some of this can be seen in Tactical Iraqi as it creates virtual worlds

where people’s decisions impact and shape the story line and challenge
learners with problems demanding the use of skills similar to those
used in real life. Equally at the center here is the role of the teacher,
who needs to facilitate and support learners’ thinking, reflection, and
ownership of the problem. However, what this guidance should look
like and how it needs to be provided is still unclear and will require a
great deal more research and innovative practice (cf., Crookall, 2010;
Reinders, 2009).
Secondly, communities of practice place an even stronger emphasis on
the way people organize themselves around practices where meaning is
negotiated among the participants themselves while members of that
community take up the values and belief system of an emergent com-
munity. Through the co-questing activity in Quest Atlantis, the dyads
interacted in such a way that they did not only make meaning related
to the goal of the quests but also were required as learners to negoti-
ate their respective cultural identities while progressing from novice to
expert in the context of the game. This ‘context’ includes also activities
outside the classroom where students from home are questing and chat
to one another about the goal and content of their quests.
Thirdly, one of the limitations of this attempt of classification is that it
may lead to the conclusion that we need to limit ourselves to only one
theory of learning. Even though we believe that our learning theories
and teaching practices should be closely related, it is true that no single
theory could account for the kinds of learning that happens inside and
outside of schools, in formal and informal settings or with children and
adult learners. Theories are always tentative representations of complex
phenomena, and do not need to encompass all aspects of those phe-
nomena. It is important, in our view, that we take a complementary
rather than an oppositional stance.
Last but not least, when using games for education, the role of the
teacher and guidelines for designing debriefing sessions are fundamental
to support reflection. More generally is our believe that, for a game-
based activity to be educational, we need more than engagement in
general, we need cognitive engagement with the subject matter (Bereiter &
Scardamalia, 1989; Corno & Mandinach, 1983; Dewey, 1913; Salomon,
1984) and we need more than motivation for entertainment, but we
need to foster motivation to learn (Brophy, 2010; Keller & Burkman,
1993). With this in mind, a game-based activity will more likely be
an educational one: one that will prepare learners for experiencing the
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 65

world in richer ways (Dewey, 1938); that is, that will prepare them for
future learning (Bransford & Schwartz, 1999). This, we believe is the
greatest, as yet unfulfilled, promise of computer games.

Notes
1. See Scratch (http://scratch.mit.edu/) and Kodu (http://www.planetKodu.
com/)
2. Programmed instruction was an approach used even before the advent of
computers in education. Learners would either work with printed material,
or work with mechanical or electrical ‘teaching machines’.
3. Another approach is mastery learning, see also, for example, Bloom, 1971.
4. Mingoville is part of a broader project Serious Games on a Global Market Place
(http://www.dpu.dk/site.aspx?p=11097) that aims at creating serious games
with global impact. You may also visit Mingoville at http://www.mingoville.
com/en.html.
5. As Savery and Duffy define it: ‘An authentic learning environment is one in
which the cognitive demands, i.e., the thinking required, are consistent with
the cognitive demands in the environment for which we are preparing the
learner’ (1996, p. 6).
6. Compare concepts such as Intentional Learning (Bereiter & Scardamalia,
1989) and Committed Learning (diSessa, 2001).
7. Situative and situated are both used. We have decided to use the slightly more
frequent situated here.
8. Barab and Duffy consider cognitive apprenticeships (traditionally subsumed
under the situated approach) and problem-based learning (traditionally
subsumed under the cognitivist approach) to be practice fields (1999,
cf., p. 30).
9. For many linguists and language teachers, discussions of communities of
practice/communities of practitioners are reminiscent of debates over the
role of ‘discourse communities’ for acquiring certain genres (cf., Swales,
1990).
10. Lave and Wenger point out the relevance of this approach for language
learning when they state that the process in which a person learns his/her
native language and in which some adults learn languages may be taken
as an example of legitimate peripheral participation: “We might equally
have turned to studies of socialization; children are, after all, quintessentially
legitimate peripheral participants in adult social worlds” (1991, p. 32).
11. Thorne (2010, p. 152, Excerpt 3) quotes the example of a World of Warcraft
player who only admits to not being a native speaker of German when com-
munication problems occur. For the purpose of the game, he/she has adopted
a ‘native’ role.
12. See http://atlantis.crlt.indiana.edu/centers/QA_Comic_Small.pdf
13. This bears some similarity to the more traditional format of ‘tandem
learning’ (Little et al., 1999). There are also some similarities with
telecollaboration (Guth & Helm, 2010).
66 From Theory to Practice

References
Ang, C. S., & Zaphiris, P. (2006). Developing enjoyable second language learn-
ing software tools: A computer game paradigm. In P. Zaphiris & G. Zacharia
(Eds.), User-centered computer aided language learning (pp. 1–22). New York: Idea
Group.
Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. M. (1999) From practice fields to communities of practice.
In D. Jonassen, & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments
(pp. 25–55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2010). Transformational play:
Using games to position person, content, and context. Educational Researcher,
39(7), 525–536.
Barab, S. A., Sadler, T. D., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007). Relating
narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of
Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 59–82.
Barrows, H. S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical
years. New York: Springer Publishing Co.
Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical
Education, 20(6), 481–486.
Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning.
Harlow: Pearson Education.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruc-
tion. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of
Robert Glaser (pp. 361–392). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bloom, B. S. (1971). Mastery learning. In J. H. Block (Ed.), Mastery learning: Theory
and practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Blumenfeld, P., Kempler, T., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engage-
ment in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge hand-
book of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal
with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100.
Brophy, J.E. (2010). Motivating students to learn. New York, NY: Routledge.
Bruner, J. S. (1985). Models of the learner. Educational Researcher, 14(6), 5–8.
Bruner, J. S. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Bruner, J. S. (2004). A short history of psychological theories of learning.
Daedalus, 133(1), 13–20.
Burton, J. K., Moore, D. M., & Magliaro, S. G. (1996). Behaviorism and instruc-
tional technology. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational
communications and technology (pp. 46–73). Washington, DC: Association for
Educational Communications and Technology.
Case, R. (1996). Changing views of knowledge and their impact on educational
research and practice. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of
education and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling
(pp. 75–99). Cambridge: Blackwell.
Chance, P. (1994). Learning and behavior. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Charles, M., Bustard, D., and Black, M. (2009). Game inspired tool support for
e-learning processes. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 7(2), 101–110.
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 67

Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in

classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88–100.
Crookall, D. (2010). Serious games, debriefing, and simulation/gaming as a
discipline. Simulation & Gaming, 41(6), 898–920.
Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education. Carbondale: Southern Illinois
University Press.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.
diSessa, A. A. (2001). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S. (2007). Third generation education use of computer games.
Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(3), 263–281.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement:
Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research,
74(1), 59.
Gagné, R. M., & Briggs, L. J. (1979). Principles of instructional design. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gardner, H. (1985). The mind’s new science: A history of the cognitive revolution.
New York: Basic Books.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games + good learning: Collected essays on video games,
learning, and literacy. New York: Peter Lang.
Gee, J. P. (2008). Learning and games. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games:
Connecting youth, games, and learning (pp. 21–40). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learn-
ing. In D. Berliner and R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology
(pp. 15–41). New York: Palgrave Macmillian.
Guth, S., & Helm, F. (2010). Introduction. In S. Guth & F. Helm (Eds.),
Telecollaboration 2.0: Language, literacies and intercultural learning in the 21st
century (pp. 13–35). Bern: Peter Lang.
Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of
technology-enhanced, student-centered learning environments. Instructional
Science, 25, 167–202.
Hickey, D. T., & Filsecker, M. (2012). Participatory learning assessment for
organising inquiry in educational videogames and beyond. In K. Littleton,
E. Scanlon & M. Sharples (Eds.), Orchestrating inquiry learning (pp. 146–174).
New York, NY: Routledge.
Hickey, D. T., Filsecker, M., & Kwon, E. J. (2010). Participatory assessment: Sup-
porting engagement, understanding, and achievement in scientific inquiry.
In Gomez, K., Lyons, L., & Radinsky, J. (Eds.), Learning in the Disciplines:
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS
2010). Volume 2, Short Papers, Symposia, and Selected Abstracts. Chicago, IL:
International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Hickey, D. T., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2005). Theory, level, and function: Three dimen-
sions for understanding the connections between transfer and student assess-
ment. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary
perspective (pp. 251–253). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students
learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.
68 From Theory to Practice

Ito, M. et al. (2010). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and
learning with new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jackson, G., Dempsey, K., & McNamara, D. (2012). Game-based practice in a read-
ing strategy tutoring system: Showdown in iSTART-ME. In H. Reinders (Ed.),
Digital games in language learning and teaching (pp. XX–XX). New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York:
NYU Press.
Jenkins, H., & Squire, K. (2004). Harnessing the power of games in education.
Insight, 3(1), 5–33.
Johnson, W., & Wu, S. (2008). Assessing aptitude for learning with a serious game
for foreign language learning. In B. Woolf, E. Aïmeur, R. Nkambo, & S. Lajoie
(Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 520–529). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Keller, J. M., & Burkman, E. (1993). Motivation principles. In M. Fleming &
W. H. Levie (Eds.), Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral
and cognitive sciences (pp. 3–54). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology
Press.
Kerres, M., Bormann, M., & Vervenne, M. (2009). Didaktische Konzeption von
Serious Games: Zur Verkn\üpfung von Spiel-und Lernangeboten. Zeitschrift
MedienPädagogik, www.medienpaed.com/2009/kerres0908.pdf.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Little, D., Ushioda, E., Appel, M. C., Moran, J., O’Rourke, B., & Schwienhorst, K.
(1999). Evaluating tandem language learning by e-mail: Report on a bilat-
eral project (Occasional Paper No. 55). Dublin: Centre for Language and
Communication Studies.
Loftus, G.R., & Loftus, E. F. (1984). Mind at play: The psychology of video games.
New York: Basic Books.
Mayes, T., & de Freitas, S. (2004). JISC e-learning models desk study: Stage 2:
Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models. Retrieved from http://
www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Learning%20Models%20
(Version%201).pdf, accessed on 12 October 2010.
Meyer, B., & Sørensen, B. H. (2007, September). Serious games in language learn-
ing and teaching – A theoretical perspective. Paper presented at the Third Digital
Games Research Association International Conference, Tokyo, Japan. Abstract
retrieved from http://www.digra.org/dl/search_results?title_index=perspective
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Peterson, M. (2010). Computerized games and simulations in computer-assisted
language learning: A meta-analysis of research. Simulation & Gaming, 41(1),
72–93.
Phrainen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009) Collaborative game-play as a site for par-
ticipation and situated learning of a second language. Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, 53(2), 167–183.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
Reinders, H. (2009). Game on! Using computer games to teach writing. English
Teaching Professional, 63, 56–58.
Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivity, Relativism and Truth. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
 Michael Filsecker and Judith Bündgens-Kosten 69

Salomon, G. (1984). Television is ‘easy’ and print is ‘tough’: The differential

investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and
attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 647–658.
Savery, J., & Duffy, T. (1996). Problem based learning: An instructional model and
its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environ-
ments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 135–148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications.
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Slife, B. D., & Williams, R. N. (1995). What’s behind the research?: Discovering hidden
assumptions in the behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006). Massively multiplayer online video gaming as partici-
pation in a discourse. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(1), 38–52.
Swales, J. M. (1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research setting.
Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Thorne, S. L. (2010). The ‘intercultural turn’ and language learning in the cru-
cible of new media. In S. Guth & F. Helm (Eds.), Telecollaboration 2.0: Language,
literacies and intercultural learning in the 21st century (pp. 138–164). Bern: Peter
Lang.
Tobias, S., & Duffy, T. M. (2009). Constructivist instruction: Success or failure?
New York, NJ: Routledge.
Valsiner, J., & Voss, H. H. (1996). The structure of learning processes. Norwood, NJ:
Ablex Publishing Corporation.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1982). An interpretation of Piaget’s constructivism. Revue
Internationale de philosophie, 36, 612–635.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching.
Synthese, 80(1), 121–140.
Wu, S. (2008). Reducing unproductive learning activities in serious games for second
language acquisition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Zheng, D., Young, M., Wagner, M., & Brewer, R. (2009). Negotiation for action:
English language learning in game-based virtual worlds. The Modern Language
Journal, 93(4), 489–511.
4
Language Learner Interaction
in a Massively Multiplayer
Online Role-Playing Game
Mark Peterson

Introduction

Massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) have

been identified in the literature on computer-assisted language learn-
ing (CALL) as tools with the potential to facilitate learning, as it is
claimed that they provide opportunities to engage in types of inter-
action hypothesized as beneficial in second language acquisition (SLA)
research. This chapter first provides an examination of the key features
of these games. The discussion then focuses on an overview of current
research. This is followed by an analysis of findings from an experi-
mental qualitative study that investigates the real-time MMORPG-based
interaction of Japanese intermediate-level EFL learners based at a univer-
sity in Japan. The data show that the orientation enabled the learners
to effectively utilize the communication tools provided. Analysis indi-
cates that during participation in the game the learners assumed an
active role in managing their interaction. Moreover, it was found that
the learners utilized discourse management strategies that facilitated the
consistent production of coherent target language output. The findings
demonstrate that the participants engaged in social interaction involv-
ing collaborative dialog that was conducted exclusively in the target
language. Learner feedback suggests that interaction in the MMORPG,
though challenging, proved to be engaging, motivating, and enjoyable.
The participants further claimed that they gained valuable fluency prac-
tice. This chapter concludes by identifying areas with potential in future
research.

70
 Mark Peterson 71

Computer games and language learning

The use of computer-based games has expanded dramatically in

recent years (Aldrich, 2009). Online gaming has become increasingly
widespread, and network-based role-playing games are now highly
popular (Thorne, Black, & Sykes, 2009). As participation in network-
based gaming has become a significant means of communication and
social interaction, this phenomenon has been the subject of increasing
research (Steinkuehler, 2007; Thorne & Black, 2007). In this context,
researchers working in the field of CALL who have long had an interest
in the potential of computer games (Ang & Zaphiris, 2006; Bryant, 2007,
2008; Garcia-Carbonell, Rising, Montero, & Watts, 2001) have increas-
ingly focused on investigating the use of online role-playing games
(Bryant, 2006; Peterson, 2010a). Although research in this area is at
an early stage, as will be noted later in this discussion, existing stud-
ies have produced some encouraging findings, leading to claims that
MMORPGs may provide potentially valuable arenas for language learn-
ing. The discussion in the following section will provide an overview of
the significant features of these games.

MMORPGs

Significant features
MMORPGs are a genre of network-based role-playing game where large
numbers of individual players interact within a graphically rich and
permanent 2D or 3D virtual world that is usually based on a fantasy
theme. Individual players assume the role of a character and are rep-
resented in the game by an avatar. These user-controlled agents can be
customized to meet individual preferences, and are designed to enhance
the sense of telepresence experienced. Player agents frequently represent
a class of player in the game who possess specific skills and roles, such as
protecting other players from harm. Users can navigate a complex vir-
tual geography and interact with other avatars and non-player agents in
real-time through text, voice chat, and hypertext commands.
The ultimate aim of play in these games is to achieve character devel-
opment, which facilitates reward in the form of skills attainment and
status progression through the game hierarchy. In order to achieve
these ultimate goals, individual players must successfully undertake
progressively more challenging in-game tasks known as quests. These
include solving puzzles, engaging in combat, and trading virtual com-
modities. Quests are frequently undertaken collaboratively, under the
72 From Theory to Practice

auspices of complex game-based social organizations known as guilds.

Guild membership enhances the development of collaborative interper-
sonal relationships based on common goals, teamwork, and the alliance
building necessary for progression in the game. Moreover, belonging
to a guild provides novice users with opportunities to enhance their
gaming skills through collaboration with more experienced players both
in-game, and on game-related web forums.

Current research

Researchers have claimed that interactionist SLA research provides a

credible basis for justifying the use of MMORPGs in CALL (Bryant, 2007;
Zhao & Lai, 2009). Discussion in the literature has focused on the plenti-
ful opportunities provided for real-time target language (TL) interaction
with diverse interlocutors (Peterson, 2010a). This would appear to pro-
vide a context where learners can obtain potentially valuable language
practice and develop the TL discourse management skills involved in the
operation of communicative competence (Peterson, 2010b). Moreover,
in this context communication problems may arise, leading to the pos-
sibility of noticing, and negotiation of meaning (Long, 1996; Schmidt,
2001). Researchers have noted that successful quest completion and pro-
gression in the game usually requires players to cooperate and engage
in alliance building (Bryant, 2006; Peterson, 2010a). These aspects of
gameplay have led to claims that MMORPGs facilitate beneficial types
of social interaction involving TL dialog and peer scaffolding that may
lead to language development (Thorne, 2008). Although the potential
of MMORPGs has been examined in the CALL literature (Bryant, 2006,
2007; Peterson, 2010a, 2010b; Zhao & Lai, 2009), to date, few studies
have been undertaken. However, a small number of learner-based stud-
ies have been reported in the literature, and their significant findings
may be observed in Table 4.1.
In an early study reported by Rankin, Gold, and Gooch (2006),
the in-game and game-related interaction of a small group of
EFL learners based in the United States was analyzed. The researchers
found evidence that, for the intermediate-level learners, participation
appeared to facilitate the production of TL output. Transcript
data further contained evidence that for this group, participa-
tion in the game enhanced vocabulary skills. In a less positive
finding, it was reported that the high beginner-level participant
appeared to find the environment overwhelming and experienced
cognitive overload. Moreover, the researchers conducted no in-depth
 Mark Peterson 73

Table 4.1 Findings on the use of MMORPGs in CALL

Researchers Rankin et al. (2006) Rankin et al. (2009) Suh et al.

(2010)

Participant Four Eighteen ESL Two hundred

backgrounds intermediate-level learners and twenty
learners and one Korean EFL
high beginner learners

Project Four one-hour game Six participants Forty-minute

duration sessions held once a undertook five classes held
week over a month hours of game play twice a week
with native speakers over two
Six participants months
played the game by
themselves for four
hours
Six participants
undertook three
hours of classroom
instruction

Methodology Analysis of in-game Analysis of One survey

chat transcripts and five tests
Transcripts Pre- and post-tests

Significant Enhanced TL output Learners who Participants

findings and comprehension played the game who
of vocabulary displayed enhanced undertook
reported for the understanding of game-based
intermediate game-related interaction
participants vocabulary and recorded
Positive attitudes engaged in higher scores
were displayed collaborative social in listening,
by the interaction reading, and
intermediate-level involving TL dialog writing tests
learners The majority of than the
learners displayed control group
The beginner
experienced increasing levels of
cognitive overload comfort

exploration of learner attitudes, leaving this potentially important area

unexplored.
Further research on the use of a MMORPG in a learner-based
CALL project, reported by Rankin, Morrison, McNeal, Gooch, and
Shute (2009), draws attention to a number of positive findings. These
74 From Theory to Practice

researchers claimed that 6 of the 18 project participants who played

a MMORPG with native speakers showed higher post-test scores for
game-related vocabulary than the learners who undertook classroom
instruction or played the game by themselves. The data for this learner
group contained evidence of a range of TL discourse functions related
to collaborative social interaction, such as conversational openings and
closings, requests, assertive statements, attempts to influence other play-
ers’ future actions, offers, and commitments to future in-game actions.
The data further indicated that as the project progressed, the majority
of the participants became more comfortable with the communication
environment provided.
A large-scale study involving elementary EFL learners, conducted by
Suh, Kim, and Kim (2010), reported significant findings. In contrast to
the research conducted by Rankin, Gold, and Gooch (2006), cognitive
overload was not reported. The participants appeared able to effec-
tively utilize the communication tools provided, and engaged in chat.
They undertook team-based game play involving quizzes, trading, and
guild membership. The researchers found that participants who took
part in MMORPG-based interaction recorded higher scores in listening,
reading, and writing tasks than a control group who undertook regu-
lar face-to-face classroom instruction. The researchers further claimed
that learner motivation and performance appeared influenced by prior
knowledge and could be negatively affected by computer bandwidth
issues. Although this study utilized a large subject group, a number of
areas were not investigated. For example, the researchers did not report
on learner in-game interaction in any detail, and no samples of learner
target language output were discussed. Moreover, no data were provided
on learner attitudes, leaving this important area unexplored.

Research questions

The discussion in the previous section has indicated that the findings
reported to date suggest that participation in MMORPG-based gaming
may be beneficial with regards to aspects of foreign language learn-
ing. However, as was observed previously, current research is limited,
and significant factors that play an important role in language develop-
ment, such as learner discourse management strategies, collaboration,
and attitudes, remain only partially explored. This study therefore seeks
to answer the following research questions:

• During interaction in a MMORPG, do learners utilize interaction

management strategies, and engage in types of TL interaction
 Mark Peterson 75

involving collaboration that are held to be beneficial in SLA

research?
• What are learner attitudes toward game play in a MMORPG?

Research Question 1 was selected as few studies have focused on

investigating the strategies used by learners to manage their TL dis-
course during interaction in MMORPGs. SLA research emphasizes that
the development of communicative competence requires that learners
actively participate in the management of their TL interaction (Lafford,
2007). The CALL literature suggests that successful discourse manage-
ment in computer-based communication environments involves the use
of strategies that represent transfers from face-to-face contexts, such
as politeness (Peterson, 2006). A further type of discourse manage-
ment identified by researchers involves the use of adaptive strategies
that are designed to deal with the computer-based nature of interac-
tion in online contexts, such as the use of emoticons and acronyms
(Murray, 2000; Simpson, 2003). This research also draws attention to
the benefits of engagement in forms of collaborative social interaction
that involve TL dialog such as negotiation of meaning and scaffolding
(Peterson, 2006; Thorne, 2008). This exploratory study seeks to add to
knowledge in these areas, by investigating the in-game interaction of a
learner group that has yet to be the focus of published research, namely,
Japanese undergraduate intermediate-level EFL learners based in Japan.
Research Question 2 focused on investigating learner attitudes as these
are identified as playing a significant role in language development
(Savignon & Wang, 2003). However, to date, the attitudes of Japanese
learners towards participation in network-based gaming remain largely
unexplored.

Methodology

In order to answer the above questions, this study utilizes discourse

analysis. The primary source of data is transcripts of learner text chat
collected during in-game interaction. This qualitative study also incor-
porated other sources of data into the analysis. Data were obtained
through researcher observation, field notes, learner responses to pre-
and post-study questionnaires, and interviews. This variety of sources
enabled the researcher to obtain a broad perspective on the data. The
collection of multiple types of data supported triangulation, and further
provided access to a richer set of sources than could be obtained through
other means. Moreover, the analysis of multiple sources enabled the
76 From Theory to Practice

researcher to identify significant patterns and themes while facilitating

a holistic analysis.

Participants

Six undergraduate intermediate-level EFL students studying at a uni-

versity in Japan took part in this study. Responses to a pre-study
questionnaire indicated that five of the participants were native speakers
of Japanese, and one was a native speaker of French. The learners ranged
in age from 19 to 37 and the median age was 22.8 years. There were
two male and four female participants. The learners were competent
computer users who had no previous experience of playing a MMORPG.

Procedures

This research was conducted in three stages during the fall semester
of 2010. In order to obtain background information, the participants
were first requested to complete a pre-study questionnaire. The learn-
ers, who were volunteers, provided written consent for the collection,
and use of the transcript, interview, and questionnaire data. They then
took part in a 90-minute orientation. This involved a thorough intro-
duction to the features of the game (see below), followed by a practice
session. In the second stage, the learners undertook two gaming sessions
held one week apart. Due to university network restrictions, the partic-
ipants accessed the MMORPG using their own laptops from separate
off-campus locations. Each session lasted approximately 90 minutes.
However, the length of the sessions varied somewhat due to the late
arrival in the game of two learners during the first session. The researcher
was present in the game throughout. During each session the researcher
monitored the learners’ gameplay and interaction as an observer. At the
conclusion of each session, the researcher recorded the participants’ text
chat. The day after the last session, all of the participants completed a
post-study questionnaire, and took part in individual interviews where
they provided additional feedback.

Data analysis

The data collected in the two game sessions were the focus of analysis.
As was noted previously, the primary analysis tool used was discourse
analysis of participant text chat transcripts. On completion of the two
game sessions, the researcher undertook repeated readings of the chat
 Mark Peterson 77

logs. During this process, significant patterns and themes emerged.

In order to provide a broader perspective on the data, researcher
observations were recorded in field notes. Learner responses to a post-
study questionnaire, and interviews, were also the subject of analysis.
The researcher conducted individual interviews lasting approximately
30 minutes. During the interviews, the participants were invited to pro-
vide feedback on their experiences. To ensure anonymity during the
data write up, all participants and their interlocutors were provided with
aliases (Learner 1, Player 1).

Research venue

This study investigates learner interaction in the MMORPG NineRift

(http://www.ninerift.com/). This game provides players with access to
a graphically rich, and engaging, 2D virtual world based on a fantasy
theme. Users can interact in real-time with other players, and non-
player agents, through text chat in an on-screen text box. The game
engine further displays individual comments in on-screen text bubbles
that emanate from player avatars. These can traverse virtual space and
undertake a limited repertoire of physical actions through mouse clicks.
The interface further provides access to an on-screen toolbar, where indi-
vidual players can use mouse clicks to select from a limited number
of facial expressions that are displayed briefly in real-time above their
avatars. NineRift incorporates in-game quests that facilitate player pro-
gression in the game hierarchy, and further provides opportunities to
join guilds. This free game was selected as the venue for this research
as it provided the participants (who were novice players) with access to
a user-friendly, and accessible, interface. As a browser-based game that
is relatively easy to install and play, the researcher hoped to reduce the
steep learning curve associated with some more advanced MMORPGs
(Peterson, 2010b). A further reason for selection was that the website
incorporates extensive support for new users in the form of an online
game guide and player forum.

Findings: Interactional features

In order to answer Research Question 1, the researcher analyzed the

data for evidence of strategies associated with interaction management
in computer-based communication environments. The data contained
evidence that the participants made use of both transfer and adaptive
strategies in order to effectively manage the interaction.
78 From Theory to Practice

Discourse management strategies involving transfer

As has been noted previously, the CALL literature on real-time
computer-based communication suggests that in order to manage their
interaction effectively, learners use strategies that represent transfers
from face-to-face contexts. Analysis revealed that the main transfer
strategy used by the participants was politeness. The interaction in
both sessions was characterized by the appropriate use of positive
politeness strategies designed to display familiarity, rapport, and a
desire to obtain group membership (Brown & Levinson, 1987). One
type of politeness identified in the data was the use of greetings.
In the following excerpts, all data is reproduced unedited, and lines
of text chat not relevant to the interaction under discussion are in
parentheses.

(1) 1. Learner 1: hello

2. Learner 2: hello!

3. Learner 6: hey

4. Player 1: hi

(2) 1. Learner 4: hi!

2. Player 2: hi

3. Learner 4: where are you from?

(2 lines of text)
4. Player 2: philipines

5. Learner 4: philipines!
6. Player 2: yeah

As the above data shows, greetings were informal in nature and brief.
Transcript data showed that greetings were used by all of the learners
to attract attention, display interest, and signal a desire to establish
collaborative interpersonal relationships with peers and other play-
ers. Researcher observation confirmed that in both sessions, the use
of greetings enabled the participants to successfully establish their
presence in the game, and facilitated ongoing interaction with other
players.
Another form of positive politeness identified in the data was the
use of leave-takings. As was the case with greetings, leave-takings
 Mark Peterson 79

incorporated informal language designed to minimize social distance.

The following excerpt from session one shows how leave-takings were
utilized appropriately to signal that the interaction is coming to a close:

(3) 1. Learner 6: I must go now . . . it’s dinnertime

2. Learner 6: ouch

3. Learner 2: yeha its time to go

4. Learner 3: bye everyone

5. Learner 1: see you!!

6. Player 3: oh you are going?

7. Learner 1: see you next week!

8. Learner 2: yeah its late for me

9. Learner 4: bye!

10. Learner 6: see you next class

11. Learner 3: see you

The data showed that, in both sessions, the learners avoided abrupt
departures choosing instead to engage in more lengthy leave-takings
that appeared designed to achieve a harmonious parting.
A further type of positive politeness identified in the data was the
use of small talk. Analysis revealed that, although the bulk of the
participants’ interaction concerned game-related activities, there were
occasions when the learners engaged in small talk to build rapport and
facilitate social cohesion. A typical example occurred in the first ses-
sion, where two participants engaged in small talk related to a technical
problem experienced during the session:

(4) 1. Learner 2: i once log out

(2 lines of text)
2. Learner 1: why?

3. Learner 2: my computer browser crashed

(3 lines of text)

4. Learner 1: ohno!
80 From Theory to Practice

Another instance occurred in the early stages of the second session when
Learner 6 initiated small talk on two different topics:

(5) 1. Learner 6: where are you from?

(1 line of text)

2. Learner 3: Japan
3. Learner 6: kyoto?

4. Learner 3: Kyoto!
5. Learner 3: yes!

6. Learner 3: are you . . .

7. Learner 3: from the same class?

8. (1 line of text)
9. Learner 6: yeah

10. Learner 6: first time here?

11. Learner 3: yeah

As this excerpt shows, the use of small talk enabled Learner 6 to success-
fully establish the location of her interlocutor and also facilitated the
creation of a continuing context for interaction.
Further instances of positive politeness indentified in the data
included the use informal language (excerpts 6, 7, and 8) and humor
(excerpt 9):

(6) 1. Learner 2: hey

2. Learner 6: hi!

(7) 1. Learner 5: where are you from?

2. Learner 2: kyoto

(1 line of text)
3. Learner 5: cool!

(8) 1. Learner 4: are you here?

2. Learner 1: yeah

(9) 1. Learner 3: hey nice outfit!

2. Learner 7: i want more clothes . . . haha

 Mark Peterson 81

As with the other types of politeness, the use of these types of positive
politeness enabled the learners to signal interest in the interaction, and
a desire to obtain group membership which, in turn, contributed to the
establishment and maintenance of social cohesion. Politeness appeared
effective in preventing occurrences of flaming, as no instances of hostil-
ity or other types of anti-social behavior appeared in the transcript data.
Moreover, by utilizing politeness the participants actively contributed
to the creation of a friendly supportive atmosphere during the sessions
that was conducive to collaborative social interaction.

Discourse management strategies involving adaption

The data contained evidence that the learners used discourse manage-
ment strategies that involved adaptations to the computer-based nature
of the interaction. The chat transcripts contained instances of acronyms
and contractions:

(10) Learner 6: BTW could you mail me?

(11) Learner 3: sob killed me

(12) Learner 7: you’ll get points for shopping

(13) Learner 1: I’m from Japan

The use of these strategies may reflect the need to save time, and keep
up with the scrolling of text messages. Another type of adaptive strategy
discovered in the data was the use of combinations of keyboard sym-
bols to display feedback. A typical example is shown in the following
excerpt:

(14) 1. Learner 6: I once log out

2. Learner 4: me too

3. Learner 6: in the middle of class by mistake ><

The use of emoticons reflects the limited communication features of the

avatars in NineRift, which could only display a limited range of facial
expressions.
The data also contained evidence of adaptive discourse manage-
ment strategies that have not been previously indentified in research
on learner interaction in MMORPGs. These strategies included the use
of strings of dots known as suspension dots (Simpson, 2003). As the
82 From Theory to Practice

following excerpts show, in this study, this strategy was used to signal a
pause (excerpt 15) and display uncertainty (excerpt 16):

(15) Learner 5: I must go now . . . it’s dinnertime

(16) Learner 1: i don’t know . . .

Another previously unreported adaptive strategy involved an interest-

ing use of quotation marks. As the following excerpt shows, quotation
marks were used to attract attention and display emphasis:

(17) Learner 5: from the shop “box”

A final adaptive strategy identified in the data was the splitting of long
turns. This strategy has been reported in studies of native speaker inter-
action in computer messaging systems (Hentschel, 1998), and may be
observed in the following excerpt:

(18) 1. Learner 2: thanks,

2. Learner 2: I talked to others

3. Learner 2: but no conversation . . .

4. Learner 2: I couldn’t chat

5. Learner 3: how about you?

Analysis of the transcript data revealed that all of the participants made
use of this strategy in both sessions. Researcher observation confirmed
that the use of split turns appeared to provide an effective means to sup-
ply additional relevant information, and drive the interaction forward.
Data analysis indicates that the consistent use of adaptive strategies
contributed to effective discourse management. The data showed that
although communication breakdowns did occur, they were infrequent.
Moreover, researcher observation confirmed that the use of these strate-
gies facilitated the consistent production of coherent target language
output across the project sessions.

Collaborative TL dialog involving requests

The researcher examined the data for types of interaction associated
with language development in interactionist SLA research. Analysis of
transcript data collected in both sessions revealed that communication
problems occurred. However, these were infrequent, and there was an
 Mark Peterson 83

absence of any evidence that these problems led to the negotiation

of meaning hypothesized in the cognitive account of SLA. Although
no evidence was found for negotiation of meaning, as this discussion
has shown, the data provided evidence for social interaction. Moreover,
analysis revealed that collaborative group dynamics involving dialog
and assistance occurred.
A noteworthy feature of the participants’ interaction was the presence
of collaborative TL dialog focusing on in-game activities. The data con-
tained evidence that the learners made requests for assistance relating
to aspects of quest completion. A typical instance of this phenomenon
occurred in the first session:

(19) 1. Learner 6: I can’t kill sheep

2. Learner 4: well, click blue-headed man’s icon bottom of the

window

3. Learner 4: then that’s your warrior

4. Learner 4: click on your warrior and then click the sheep.
warrior will a automatically attack.

5. Learner 6: i’ll try. thanks!

(3 lines of text)
6. Learner 6: i killed 2 sheep.

7. Learner 4: welldone!

In the above interaction, Learner 6 signals to other players that she is

unaware of how to undertake the first type of quest encountered by new
users of NineRift. This request for assistance meets with a swift response
from Learner 4, who in lines two, three, and four provides accurate feed-
back on how to activate the non-player agent required to complete the
quest and advance in the game hierarchy. In response, Learner 6 uti-
lizes positive politeness, expressing thanks to her interlocutor for this
helpful advice. After a delay of three turns, Learner 6 signals successes
in carrying out the quest. In response, Learner 4 provides further pos-
itive feedback signaling encouragement in an utterance incorporating
politeness.

Non-response
The data showed that while most requests for assistance were met with a
positive response, there were occasions when a request for help did not
84 From Theory to Practice

meet with any reaction from other players. An instance of this situation
occurred in the early stages of the second session:

(20) 1. Learner 2: hello

2. Learner 2: working on the quest?

(3 lines of text)

3. Learner 2: wow nice hat

(1 line of text)

4. Learner 2: hello, sinjid?

5. Learner 2: could you tell me how to complete the quest?

(4 lines of text)

6. Learner 2: are you there?

(6 lines of text)

7. Learner 2: hello

8. Learner 2: hi

9. Learner 2: think everyone’s busy working right now

In the opening line of the above excerpt, Learner 2 makes a greeting

directed at other players. This is followed by a question designed to
elicit a response from the group. After a delay, where three lines of text
scroll, Learner 2 makes another attempt to initiate contact. In line three
this learner, in a statement incorporating politeness, makes a further
attempt to attract attention by commenting positively on the appear-
ance of another player’s avatar. In the next turn, this learner greets this
player by name, and follows up on their earlier statement with a direct
request for assistance regarding the conduct of a quest. As this meets
with no reaction, in line six, Learner 2 attempts to establish if the other
player is still present in the game. When this question meets with no
response, Learner 2, in the following lines, attempts to contact other
players.
Possible reasons for this phenomenon are difficult to establish with
certainty from the transcripts. In the case of the above excerpt, the
researcher observed that as Learner 2 arrived somewhat late, the other
participants appeared to have already established contact with other
players. However, the researcher recorded in field notes that, as the
 Mark Peterson 85

session progressed, this learner was eventually able to successfully

engage in quests and interact with other players. Further possible expla-
nations for non-response are examined at a later stage of this discussion.
Although non-response occurred, a positive feature of the data was the
degree to which most players responded positively to requests for assis-
tance. As the analysis has shown, the learners in this study consistently
engaged in collaborative social interaction involving TL dialog with
peers and other players.

Learner attitudes
As was noted at an earlier stage of this discussion, one of the main con-
cerns of this study is the investigation of learner attitudes. In order to
answer Research Question 2, the researcher administered a post-study
questionnaire incorporating 15 Likert-scale questions. The participants
were requested to select one response for each statement from the
following options: (1) strongly disagree, (2) disagree, (3) no opinion,
(4) agree, (5) strongly agree. Analysis of learner responses is provided in
Table 4.2.
The first three statements of the questionnaire were designed to
explore learner attitudes toward usability and the communication
environment provided. In reaction to the first statement, participant
responses averaged 3.3. This finding indicates that the learners had
mixed views regarding the level of difficulty presented by the game.

Table 4.2 Mean scores of learner responses to the post-study questionnaire

Statement

1. The game was easy to play 3.3

2. The chat system was easy to use 4.6
3. It was difficult to follow the conversation 2.0
4. The quests were too difficult 3.0
5. I experienced communication problems in the game 3.3
6. There was not much feedback from other players 2.8
7. Other players were helpful 3.5
8. I could express my opinion more freely than in a regular class 2.8
9. Having my own avatar made me feel more involved in the game 2.8
10. Most of the discussion was not useful 2.6
11. I could learn new vocabulary 3.2
12. The game made me use my English more than in a regular class 3.8
13. I enjoyed interacting in the game 4.3
14. Chatting in the game was a good way to improve my English 4.0
15. I would like to play the game again in the future 3.8
86 From Theory to Practice

Four learners agreed that the game was easy to play. In contrast, the
other participants found the game somewhat challenging. This finding
draws attention to the value of holding the orientation, which appeared
effective for the majority. In response to statements 2 and 3, responses
averaged 4.6 and 2.0 respectively. These findings indicate that the learn-
ers encountered no major problems when utilizing the chat system, and
that they were able to follow the real-time interaction.
Statements 4 through 10 were designed to elicit attitudes toward
specific features of game play and in-game interaction. In reaction to
statement 4, responses averaged 3.0. The participants expressed con-
trasting views toward the perceived level of difficulty of the quests,
with three agreeing that they were challenging while the others dis-
agreed. Responses to the next question averaged 3.3, indicating that the
learners also had differing experiences with regards to communication
problems. Four participants expressed no opinion, while two agreed that
they encountered problems. The reasons for this somewhat ambiguous
feedback will be examined below. In the case of statements 6 and 7,
learner responses averaged 2.8 and 3.5. These findings indicate a mod-
est level of disagreement with statement 6 suggesting that the learners
received feedback, and general agreement with statement 7 that other
players were helpful. These findings were confirmed by observation. The
researcher noted that in both sessions, once a participant succeeded in
establishing an ongoing interaction, they usually received helpful feed-
back from their interlocutor. Reactions to statement 8 averaged 2.8. This
finding suggests that for the group as a whole, interaction in the game
did not greatly reduce the social context cues that can inhibit learners
from expressing themselves in the TL. A similar response was provided
to statement 9, with reactions averaging 2.8, a finding which indicates
that, for this learner group, the presence of individual avatars did little to
enhance the sense of telepresence experienced. In response to statement
10, the participants averaged 2.6, a finding that expresses disagreement.
In reaction to statement 11 the response was 3.2. This shows limited
agreement with the statement that participating in the game assisted
vocabulary learning. Responses to the following statement were 3.8 and
this would appear to signify that the game provided a context conducive
to TL use.
The final three questions focused on establishing the overall bene-
fits, if any, of undertaking the sessions and future intentions regarding
the game. Participant responses to statement 13 averaged 4.3, and the
agreement with this statement draws attention to the general view that
interacting in the game was an enjoyable experience. Learner reactions
 Mark Peterson 87

to statement 14 averaged 4.0, indicating majority agreement with the

view that communicating in the game was beneficial in terms of lan-
guage development. This positive reaction was mirrored to a lesser
degree in the response to the final statement, where answers averaged
3.8. This finding suggests that playing the game was an interesting
enough experience for the learners to consider playing it again in the
future.
In order to obtain an additional source of data, post-study interviews
were conducted and these shed further light on learner attitudes. The
researcher asked the learners to identify any beneficial aspects of partic-
ipating in this research. In their comments the learners claimed that
interacting in the game brought a number of benefits. In a finding
that confirms the questionnaire feedback, four learners noted that the
game possessed an interface that was accessible and that it was easy
to play. In contrast, two learners claimed that, initially, they found
the game confusing and difficult to play. These participants further
observed that, although problems persisted in the first session, they
became more comfortable with the environment by the second ses-
sion. Two learners claimed that the real-time text-based nature of the
interaction helped them to improve their reading and typing skills.
Although five participants claimed that they encountered unknown
vocabulary during their interaction, only one learner provided exam-
ples of new lexis. These were the words quest, guild and blueprint.
In related feedback, one participant stated that they learned natural
English expressions from their interlocutors. Moreover, three learners
claimed that they encountered communication problems in the game.
However, of these learners, two noted that problems were not always
successfully resolved. Four participants commented favorably on the
opportunities provided to develop discourse management skills. One
learner claimed that the game provided useful practice in explaining
quests in the TL, while three participants noted that chatting improved
their comprehension. Three learners observed that they found the inter-
action to be enjoyable and motivating. Another two participants stated
that it was interesting to chat and collaborate with native speakers.
A majority indicated that, overall, they considered the interaction to
be beneficial, and that they were interested in playing the game in the
future.
The researcher asked the participants to identify any difficulties
encountered or possible drawbacks of the game. In this regard, feed-
back interviews revealed a number of significant findings. In the first
session, two learners indicated that, on occasion, due to bandwidth
88 From Theory to Practice

problems they experienced some delays between turns and this inhib-
ited their ability to maintain interaction. These learners observed that
their computers were rather old and lacked the processing power neces-
sary to run the game without difficulty. A further issue highlighted in
the feedback, also mentioned above, was that, on occasion, attempts to
initiate interaction were ignored by other players. The learners claimed
that some higher level players appeared more interested in completing
the quests than communicating with other players. Three participants
mentioned that they found this situation somewhat frustrating. One
learner claimed that they found the quests to be somewhat challenging.
Two participants claimed that the avatars provided only very limited
visual feedback and that the instructions for quests provided by non-
player agents were confusing. These learners also drew attention to what
they regarded as the limited support features provided by the game web-
site. Several participants noted that, although the orientation was useful,
a longer training period would have enabled them to become more
comfortable with aspects of the game such as quests and game-specific
terminology.

Conclusions

The data analysis conducted in this experimental study revealed a num-

ber of significant findings with regard to Research Question 1. The
data discussed previously have shown that the participants used a com-
bination of transfer and adaptive discourse management strategies in
order to effectively manage their interaction. In a likely transfer of
L1 sociocultural practices to the online medium, the mainly Japanese
participants made extensive use of politeness (Lebra, 1976). The data
examined in this discussion show that the learners effectively utilized
types of positive politeness, including the appropriate use of greetings
and leave-takings, small talk, informal language, and humor to create
and maintain social cohesion. This supportive environment facilitated
collaboration focused on game quests, and was effective in preventing
misunderstandings and flaming.
The data shows that the learners made use of adaptive discourse man-
agement strategies that have been identified in previous research. The
presence of time-saving devices and emoticons demonstrates how
the learners adapted their communicative practices to deal with the
computer-based nature of the interaction. In this context, a significant
finding was the presence of strategies that have not been reported in
the literature on learner interaction in MMORPGs. The interesting uses
 Mark Peterson 89

of suspension dots, quotation marks, and split turns examined in this

discussion, draws attention to the active role played by the participants
in managing their interaction. The analysis further demonstrates that
the use of these strategies facilitated the consistent production of coher-
ent TL output. Although communication problems did arise, they were
infrequent, and did not lead to breakdowns.
Analysis of the text chat transcripts confirmed that no instances of
negotiation of meaning occurred in the data. This finding may, in part,
reflect the limited duration of the sessions and the real-time nature
of the interaction. The need to keep up with scrolling messages could
have resulted in avoidance. A further possible explanation for this phe-
nomenon may lie in the L1 background of the participants. The majority
of the participants were Japanese, a culture where maintaining status
among peers retains a powerful influence on behavior (Matsumoto,
1988). The absence of negotiation may reflect a general desire to avoid
displaying ignorance. Another significant feature of the data in this
regard were instances of learner attempts to initiate interaction being
ignored by other players. Researcher observation offers a possible expla-
nation for this situation, as it was noted that non-response occurred
most frequently with higher level players, who appeared focused on
quest completion rather than interaction. As was noted at an earlier
stage of this discussion, learner interview feedback provides evidence
to support this interpretation. The possibility remains that a combina-
tion of the above factors contributed to the absence of negotiation in
the data.
An encouraging feature of the data was that the participants con-
sistently engaged in collaborative social interaction. The discussion
has shown that the learners were able to engage in dialog that was
exclusively conducted in the TL. In a positive finding, no instances
of L1 use were identified in the data. The data indicates that dur-
ing in-game interaction, learners requested, and received, appropriate
assistance that was relevant to quest completion. Although as noted pre-
viously, the data contains instances of non-response, such behavior was
infrequent. Moreover, researcher observation confirmed that a low stress
and supportive atmosphere prevailed during the sessions.
In the context of answering Research Question 2 (What are learner
attitudes toward game play in a MMORPG?), learner feedback was
broadly positive. The data confirmed that although a minority of the
learners encountered technical difficulties and initial problems in deal-
ing with aspects of game play (such as undertaking the quests), the
initial orientation proved effective, and these issues did not significantly
90 From Theory to Practice

restrict participation. Feedback suggests that the majority appeared

motivated by the learner-centered nature of the interaction, and that
they found the experience to be enjoyable. The participants also claimed
that they appreciated the opportunities provided for fluency and dis-
course management practice, and that they would like to play the game
again in the future.
This study was subject to a number of limitations. As a result of
circumstances beyond the researcher’s control, the number of partic-
ipants was limited. Moreover, due to other restrictions, it was not
possible to schedule any additional sessions. The somewhat contradic-
tory nature of some of the learner feedback may, in part, reflect the
novelty of the game, and highlights the potential limitations associated
with learner self-reporting. Although these factors require acknowledg-
ment, the findings of this research nonetheless provide valuable insights
into previously little understood aspects of learner participation in, and
attitudes towards, MMORPG-based gaming.
The findings of this research study, when taken as whole, suggest
that for intermediate-level foreign language learners, interaction in
MMORPGs provides access to an engaging and potentially beneficial
environment. The findings draw attention to a number of areas that
would appear to be of interest in future research. Longitudinal studies
incorporating larger learner groups from more diverse L1 backgrounds
offer the prospect of providing significant data relating to the influence
of training on learner performance. Other areas that may benefit from
additional research include the influence of proficiency level, affective
factors, and prior gaming experiences. Moreover, the modification of
existing MMORPG platforms, to better meet the needs of language learn-
ers, represents an area of great potential. The findings reported here,
though preliminary in nature, provide a valuable window into the use of
MMORPGs in CALL. Additional learner-based studies offer the prospect
of providing further insights into the potential of MMORPGs as venues
for language development.

Note
This research was made possible by the generous support of the Foundation for
the Fusion of Science & Technology (F0ST).

References
Aldrich, C. (2009). Learning online with games, simulations, and virtual worlds:
Strategies for online instruction. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
 Mark Peterson 91

Ang, C., & Zaphiris, P. (2006). Computer games and language learning. In
T. Kidd & H. Song (Eds.), Handbook of research on instructional systems and
technology (pp. 1–31). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bryant, T. (2006). Using World of Warcraft and other MMORPGs to foster a
targeted, social, and cooperative approach toward language learning. Retrieved
from http://www.academiccommons.org/commons/essay/bryant-MMORPGs-
for- SLA, accessed 12 July 2010.
Bryant, T. (2007). Games as an ideal learning environment. Retrieved from http://
dspace.nitle.org/handle/10090/6565, accessed 15 May 2010.
Bryant, T. (2008). From Age of Empires to Zork: Using games in the language
classroom. Retrieved from http//www.academiccommons.org/commons/essay/
gamesinclassroom, accessed 12 June 2010.
Garcia-Carbonell, A., Rising, B., Montero, B., & Watts, F. (2001). Simula-
tion/gaming and the acquisition of communicative competence in another
language. Simulation & Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32(4), 481–491.
Hentschel, E. (1998). Communication in IRC. Linguistik Online, 1(1). Retrieved
from http://www.linguistik-online.de/bays.htm, accessed 10 February 2011.
Lafford, B. A. (2007). Second language acquisition reconceptualized? The
impact of Firth and Wagner (1997). The Modern language Journal, 91(5),
735–756.
Lebra, T. S. (1976). Japanese patterns of behavior. Honolulu, HI: University of
Hawaii Press.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language
acquisition. In W. C. Richie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of research on lan-
guage acquisition. Vol. 2: Second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York:
Academic Press.
Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness
phenomena in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), 403–426.
Murray, D. E. (2000). Protean communication: The language of computer-
mediated communication. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3), 397–421.
Peterson, M. (2006). Learner interaction management in an avatar and chat-based
virtual world. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 79–103.
Peterson, M. (2010a). Massively multiplayer online role-playing games
(MMORPGs) as arenas for second language learning. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 23(5), 429–439.
Peterson, M. (2010b). The use of computerized games and simulations in
computer-assisted language learning: A meta-analysis of research. Simulation &
Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 41(1), 863–885.
Rankin, Y., Gold, R., & Gooch, B. (2006). 3D Role-playing games as lan-
guage learning tools. In E. Gröller & L. Szirmay-Kalos (Eds.), Proceedings of
EuroGraphics 2006, 25(3), New York: ACM.
Rankin, Y., Morrison, D., McNeal, M., Gooch, B., & Shute, M. (2009). Time
will tell: In-game social interactions that facilitate second language acquisi-
tion. In R. Michael Young (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th international conference on
foundations of digital games (pp. 161–168). New York: ACM.
Savignon, S. J., & Wang, C. (2003). Communicative language teaching in EFL
contexts: Learner attitudes and perceptions. International Review of Applied
Linguistics and Language Teaching, 41(3), 223–249.
92 From Theory to Practice

Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language

instruction (pp. 3–33). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simpson, J. (2003). The discourse of computer-mediated communication: A study of
an online community (PhD thesis, University of Reading, Reading, Berkshire,
England).
Steinkuehler, C. (2007). Massively multiplayer online gaming as a constellation
of literacy practices. E-Learning, 4(3), 297–318.
Suh, S., Kim, S. W., & Kim, N. J. (2010). Effectiveness of MMORPG-based instruc-
tion in elementary English education in Korea. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 26(5), 370–378.
Thorne, S. L. (2008). Transcultural communication in open Internet environ-
ments and massively multiplayer online games. In S. Magnan (Ed.), Mediating
discourse online (pp. 305–327). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Thorne, S. L., & Black, R. W. (2007) Language and literacy development in
computer-mediated contexts and communities. Annual Review of Applied Lin-
guistics, 27(1), 133–160.
Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. M. (2009) Second language use, socializa-
tion, and learning in Internet interest communities and online gaming. The
Modern Language Journal, 93, 802–821.
Zhao, Y., & Lai, C. (2009) Massively multi-player online role playing games
(MMORPGS) and foreign language education. In R. Ferdig (Ed.), Handbook of
Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education (pp. 402–421). New York:
IDEA Group.
Part II
From Practice to Theory
5
Digital Gameplay for Autonomous
Foreign Language Learning:
Gamers’ and Language Teachers’
Perspectives
Alice Chik

Introduction

The rapidly increasing sales of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) and mas-

sively multiplayer online role-play games (MMORPGs), and the growing
numbers of discussion forums and walkthroughs on gaming strategies,
indicate that digital gaming is thriving. A recent survey shows that
67 per cent of US households play digital games, and about half of these
gamers are between 18 and 49 years old (Entertainment Software Asso-
ciation, 2010). Playing digital games is about as mainstream as going to
the cinema or watching television, and it is no longer a domain exclu-
sive to teenagers. In Hong Kong, 37.8 per cent of all households have
at least one game console, and 82 per cent of game console owners
are school students (Friends of the Earth, 2009). In addition to console
games, a government survey also indicates that 30.1 per cent of the pop-
ulation play online digital games, and gamers between 15 and 24 play an
average of 8.7 hours per week (Census and Statistics Department, 2009).
We can assume that most of these gamers are playing English-
language digital games. In terms of the language choice, the gaming
scenario in the Asian contexts presented a different picture. The usual
language for 95 per cent of the population is Cantonese, a Chinese
dialect. Though many of the more recently released console games claim
to be bilingual (English and Chinese), in most cases, this only means a
bilingual information booklet in the package. With specific reference
to in-game texts, the most popular COTS games use either English or
Japanese.1 While all Hong Kong students are required to take English as

95
96 From Practice to Theory

a foreign language, Japanese is not offered in public schools. Thus, while

the surveys suggested that many Hong Kong young people are gamers,
it is also reasonable to assume that most are playing games in a foreign
language in their leisure time. This chapter will discuss the ways digital
gamers manage gaming and gaming-related activities to assume auton-
omy in their foreign language learning, which were a sharp contrast to
language teachers’ views on the pedagogical potential of gaming.

Gaming and autonomous language learning

In a recent publication, Leander, Phillips, and Headrick Taylor (2010)

argue that the advancement of digital technology points to expanded
spaces for learning. They use three metaphors to signify the new mobil-
ities and shifting boundaries of learning: learning-in-place, learning
trajectories and learning network. When learning is no longer only
taking place in fixed locales (e.g., schools and classrooms), it is recon-
figured as fluid movements for learners to take control of, engage in,
choose from, and experiment with, according to their own tempera-
ments. Extending these metaphors to foreign language learning, it is
possible to view the new mobilities in language learning as affording
language learners greater degrees of autonomy. Studies in the area of
New Literacies have already demonstrated that teenagers are innovative
in manipulating online interest-driven activities for foreign language
learning and use (e.g., Black, 2008, on fanfiction; Ito et al. 2010, on fan-
subbing; Lam, 2006, on chatroom interactions). The common thread in
these studies is the ways these teenagers envisioned and practised for-
eign language learning and use autonomously, through activities they
were passionate about, and moved the learning process beyond the
classroom. Though Benson (2011) argues that this type of learning is
frequently not structured, the requirement on the learners to take ini-
tiatives, and the use of authentic target language, makes ‘a prima facie
case for its effectiveness in fostering autonomy and target language com-
petence’ (p. 140). This exercise of autonomy in out-of-class language
learning contexts is a relatively under-explored area, especially in activ-
ities that have no direct linkage with schooling. Situated in ‘entirely
out-of-school non-institutional realms of freely chosen digital engage-
ment’ (Thorne, Black, & Sykes, 2009, p. 802), digital gaming is an
important emerging realm for investigating language learner autonomy.
Gamers are interacting with game texts and other gamers online in
their first language, and increasingly, in English on globalized gaming
platforms (Piirainen-Marsh & Tainio, 2009; Thorne, 2008). Described
 Alice Chik 97

as an ‘integral part of modern language teaching methodology’ in the

early 1990s (Hubbard, 1991, p. 220), recent calls for appropriating leisure
digital technologies as language learning tools show that digital games
have yet to be incorporated in most classrooms (e.g., Apperley, 2010;
Reinders, 2009; Swenson, Rozema, Young, McGrail, & Whitin, 2005).
Gee and Hayes (2011) argue that, as out-of-school ‘passionate affinity
spaces’, digital games afford gamers the autonomy to pursue literacy
and knowledge at their own paces. Language learning with and through
video games is not a new concept; educational language learning games
have been developed in the last 20 years (Squire, 2003), as digital
games reconfigure the ways learners place themselves in naturalistic
learning contexts (Benson, 2011; Gee, 2003, 2007). On a discussion
of console-operated English-language fantasy games, Piirainen-Marsh
and Tainio (2009) show evidence of language learning in talk between
two Finnish-speaking boys discussing game texts and semiotic struc-
ture. Extending to online gaming mode, the in-game chats between
an American and Ukraine gamers in Thorne’s (2008) study show how
the use of Russian, Latin and English is driven by the shared interest
in gaming. Expanding learning beyond gameplay, Ito (2007) suggests
that learning about games and with games should be understood from
an ecological perspective which includes gaming and gaming-related
activities. This was demonstrated clearly in Thomas’s (2007) work on
teenagers’ engagement with the online fanfiction writer communities,
which shows participants’ gaming practices were extended to fiction
writing, reading and reviewing. While Thomas’s work explores the link
between gaming and gaming-related activities in the participants’ first
language (English), Benson and Chik (2010) extend the investigation to
the second language learners. An examination of the language learning
history of a Chinese-speaking Hong Kong gamer shows that engage-
ment in gaming and gaming-related activities (both online and offline)
is instrumental to satisfactory self-directed foreign language learning.
This sense of satisfaction in language learning is also connected to other
aspects of gamers’ social worlds. Chik (2011a) shows a gamer’s basketball
play with English-speaking international students was the main driv-
ing force in sustaining English learning through sports digital games.
These studies show that literacy practice and learning do not necessarily
only centre around gameplay, whether it be human-console interac-
tion or player interaction. Apperley and Beavis (2011) use the term
‘paratexts’ to include gameplay and other gaming-related activities, for
instance, walkthroughs reading and sourcing, game wiki writing, game
text analysis, and so on. They show that both the consumption and
98 From Practice to Theory

production of paratexts engage gamers to question gaming and game

texts at different levels as learning tools.
Although digital games are popular, they have yet to be treated as tools
for foreign language learning in many educational contexts. The bur-
den also rests on the teachers to select, integrate, monitor and evaluate
digital games for pedagogical application (Lacasa, Méndez, & Martínez,
2008). Teachers who are already familiar with digital gaming appear to
have better imagination in envisioning its pedagogical potential (Chik,
2011b; Santo et al., 2009; Schrader, Zheng, & Young, 2006). This implies
that teachers with limited knowledge might not consider the pedagogi-
cal potential of digital tools which are an essential part of young people’s
daily activities, and teachers’ limited experience with these tools could
become a hindrance to classroom implementation. The aim of this
chapter is to discuss language teachers’ and gamers’ perspectives on dig-
ital gaming for foreign language learning and use. Their views will offer
glimpses into gaming as autonomous language learning and practices.

Research methodology

This chapter discusses the qualitative findings drawn from an umbrella

project on digital gaming for foreign language learning and teaching.
I adopted Gee’s (2007) definition of digital gaming, which included
commercial games played on computers and on game consoles, online
or offline. Included in the umbrella project were two related projects
exploring the different perceptions and attitudes of teachers and gamers
on the pedagogical potential of digital games (see Tables 5.1 and 5.2).
The first project investigated in-service language teachers’ experiences
with digital gaming during a course on a Master’s programme (n = 34;

Table 5.1 Project with teacher-participants

Participants Data collection

34 in-service English teachers (F = 26, M = 8):

• >5 game console owners;
• 2 regular online gamers;
• estimated their own gaming hours per week
were less than 10 hours;
• estimated their students’ weekly gaming was
between 10 and 20 hours.
• survey on digital habits;
• class discussion;
• 7-day digital gaming trial
recorded as blog entries by
6 teachers;
• comments on blog entries.
 Alice Chik 99

Table 5.2 Project with gamer-participants

Participants Data collection

10 undergraduates (F = 4, M = 6): language learning histories;

all Chinese speakers, and English
as a foreign language learners
video-taped gaming sessions;
blog entries of gaming practices;
group discussion sessions;
stimulated recall sessions on gaming videos;
interviews with other video gamers;
posts from online discussion forums.

8 males, 26 females). Teachers on the course acknowledged the univer-

sal popularity of digital gaming among their students, but at the same
time they were reserved about its pedagogical potential (Chik, 2011b).
Among the 34 teachers, only 5 claimed to be regular gamers, and many
were less confident with information technology (Table 5.1). In class,
the teachers surveyed their pupils’ digital habits, held a discussion on
the pedagogical merits of digital gaming, and six chose to play dig-
ital games for seven days. The participants then shared their gaming
experiences on their personal webpage for others to comment on.
The second project explored the gaming practices of ten Hong Kong
undergraduates (F = 4, M = 6, see Table 5.3), focusing on the impact

Table 5.3 Background information of the ten gamer-participants

Gamer Discipline Gaming preferences/consoles∗

Tracy English English online role-playing games/PC and PS2

Jana English Japanese games/NDS
Mabel English English role-playing games/NDS, PS3, PSP
Michael English English real-time strategy/PC
Sam Surveying English sports games/PC
Edmond Electronic English sports and real-time strategy games/PC
Engineering
Carrie Computer Japanese action-adventure and role-playing
Science games/PC and arcade centres
Kenneth Psychology English action-adventure games/NDS
Raymond Business English first-person shooter games/PC
Tom Creative Media English first-person shooter and
action-adventure games/PC

∗ Gaming consoles: Personal Computer (PC), PlayStation®2 (PS2), PlayStation®3 (PS3),

PlayStation®Portable (PSP), and Nintendo DS (NDS).
100 From Practice to Theory

of gaming in foreign languages on learner autonomy (Chik, 2011a). All

participants had five plus years of gameplay experiences, and the project
was designed to capture their existing and regular gaming practices. The
gamer-participants shared language learning histories, created and com-
mented on entries on a shared blog site, joined focus group sessions on
gaming habits and gaming-related activities, video-recorded gameplay
sessions, interviewed gamer-friends, and collected threads from online
discussion forums. The data collected were content-coded and anal-
ysed in the narrative inquiry tradition, treating data as narrative units
which give better insight into the overall longitudinal development of
the gaming and language learning process (Chase, 2005; Clandinin &
Connelly, 2000; Lieblich, Tuval-Mashiach, & Zilber, 1998). The data
collected from discussion forum threads, published between 2004 and
2010, were mostly in Chinese and have been translated into English.
In the following sections, I will first discuss language teachers’ experi-
ences and perceptions of digital gaming as learning tools, which are then
contrasted with gamers’ communities, experiences, and perception.

Language teachers, digital gameplay and literacy

Among the 34 teacher participants, only five owned game consoles, and
two played MMORPGs regularly. Though most had little exposure to
digital games, during discussion they commented that all games were
violent commercial products and time-wasting:

Frankly speaking, I disapprove of online gaming as I really think it

is a waste of time. Also, I am not skilled at playing online games
and therefore it really takes me a long time to know how to play a
particular online game.
(FT07)

In class, teachers discussed the ‘inappropriateness’ of most digital game

content. While the teachers zoomed in on game content, they did
not comment on gaming language. As the more popular COTS and
MMORPG games are mostly available in English, gamer-teachers argued
that gamers had to read instructions for game level advancement, and
had to use English to play and interact with others in online mode.
The non-gamer teachers, however, viewed game text English as infe-
rior to print-text English, and denied gamers’ engagement with English
game text:
 Alice Chik 101

Players usually do not read the instructions, they just learn how to
play by guessing, trying or being taught by someone else.
(FT08)

Non-gamer teachers held a view that the pedagogical potentials offered

by digital games were narrowly conceived. They particularly pointed
out that non-educational digital games were ‘commercial products’,
thus rendering them unsuitable for youngsters as ‘they are made for
the sake of profit making’ (FT24). However, exception was granted to
grammar-teaching educational games. The suggested grammar games
were developed by textbook publishers and were included with the elec-
tronic textbooks. Otherwise, teachers had virtually no experience with
non-publisher developed educational games.
In the course of the study, six teachers opted to play free online
games, and reflected on the pedagogical potential based on their expe-
riences. When game sites required registration with a valid personal
e-mail account, teachers viewed this as a violation of privacy, thus push-
ing them to game sites which did not require registration. As a result,
four of them ended up playing casual games that were not cognitively
demanding, and this further reinforced the perception that ‘gaming was
just a waste of time’ (MT05). Other causal game players believed that
these games were so simple that there was no need to read the English
game instructions (FT26). One teacher (MT04) came across a free online
role-playing game, and had to read the English game manuals in order
to play. But he soon dismissed the reading as time-consuming and non-
productive when he found that he could not advance to a higher level
after a short period of gaming. Although he made a fair attempt to read
and comprehend the English game manual, he did not believe younger
players would have done the same.
Drawing from personal experiences, the two gamer-teachers sup-
ported the pedagogical value of digital gaming. One teacher (MT06)
used games to motivate students to read more in English. As a senior
teacher in a primary school, he took his Nintendo DS game console to
school and used family-friendly and age-appropriate games (e.g., Cook-
ing Mama) to teach his students vocabulary. Another gamer-teacher
(MT07) believed that limited experience with gaming stopped teachers
from treating gaming as a possible autonomous language learning tool.
They both knew that in order to improve the quality and enjoyment of
game play, gamers who chose to play games in English had to improve
their language skills:
102 From Practice to Theory

During the game (Rise of Nation), I talked to my friend (the native

English teacher) in English. We formed a group to challenge other
groups. We shared information and planned tactics. I have to use
English as this game only supports English use. Besides, this is an
online game, and I play with players from around the world. English
is the best chatting language.
(MT06)

These gamer-teachers, like other gamers, understood that gameplay

enjoyment was their primary motive. However, the motive was power-
ful enough to encourage them to improve their English. They also found
the idea of restricting themselves to only educational games to be laugh-
able when educational games usually could not deliver the same level of
gaming satisfaction as commercial games could. These gamer-teachers
wanted a satisfactory gaming experience, and the foreign language
learning was incidental.

Gamers, digital gameplay and literacy

Among the ten gamer-participants, most started playing since the late
1980s or early 1990s, and the choice of gaming language was their first
marker of autonomy as foreign language learners and users:

Japanese games were the norm then, except for online games, it was
really difficult to get hold of the English versions. I simply didn’t
know enough Japanese to enjoy playing. So I thought being able to
play in English was a godsend.
(Michael)

As revealed in the group discussion, Michael believed this was his first
memory of choosing to ‘do something in English’ on his own initiative
as a young teenager. But not every participant had a choice:

I only had hand-me-down games from my elder brother and cousins.

At that time Japanese games were cheaper, so I grew up playing
mostly Japanese video games.
(Carrie)

The only way she could game in Japanese was by sourcing unofficial fan-
made Chinese-language walkthroughs, and Raymond concurred imme-
diately by counting the hours he spent ploughing through discussion
 Alice Chik 103

forums for such walkthroughs. The discussion on language issue in

gaming soon expanded to ‘sinicized’ English and Japanese video games.
Sinicized games, similar to Chinese walkthroughs, are unofficial fan-
created Chinese versions, and are freely circulated on bulletin board
systems and discussion forums. But these Chinese-language add-ons or
subtitles were not welcomed:

Home-brew Chinese subtitles and plots add-ons, made by the Main-

land Chinese or Taiwanese players, are available for download.
I don’t know whether the people who made the add-ons had very
bad English, or they simply used electronic dictionary to do the
translation, the subtitles were usually ridiculous.
(Carrie)

Though official Chinese or bilingual versions were becoming more read-

ily available from the 2000s, all participants believed that the original
Japanese and English versions were of superior qualities.
The choice of gaming language signalled an initial willingness, but
participants’ gaming histories also showed their uses of in-game texts
and online gaming mode for that purpose. When the desire to advance
in game level was strong, gamers were keen on understanding the for-
eign language in-game texts. This called for an active process of control
and learning:

I love football, and I read sports news about my favourite clubs.

So when I play video games, I choose football management games.
When I play in English, I need to understand the game commentary,
data and instructions to win. When I see words that I do not know,
I use the dictionary.
(Raymond)

Gamers invest their time and energy in learning unfamiliar language

items in games, Raymond also illuminated another aspect of learn-
ing through gaming: the integration of gaming in gamers’ life worlds.
This connection between sports and game preferences was particularly
prominent among the male participants. Like Raymond, Edmond is a
sports fan. Living in a resident hall with many international students,
Edmond likes playing basketball with his hallmates. When he had trou-
ble understanding basketball jargons in English, his friends suggested
playing basketball digital games. Wanting to be able to communicate
fluently in English with his basketball teammates, Edmond paid close
104 From Practice to Theory

attention to in-game texts: audio commentaries, jokes and instructions.

He even switched among three different basketball games to maximize
his language learning. Gaming, and the resulting language learning, was
sustained by the desire to use English in his social interaction.
Though they generally agreed that language learning via gaming
depended on gamers’ initiatives, they were clear about the limita-
tions of games as learning resources. One obvious limitation was
genre-specificity:

It depends on what games you play, say, if you play soccer games,
you’ll learn about soccer-related terms, but not much else.
(Raymond)
In addition to sports-related vocabulary, the male participants claimed
to have a large vocabulary of military terminologies, which was the
result of playing real-time strategy games over the years. Vocabulary
acquired from digital gaming might be highly genre-specific, but the
gamers did not appear to be bothered. Michael and Tom relished their
specialist knowledge in military English, and had an extended round of
discussion on the accuracy of Chinese translations (in both official and
unofficial versions) during our first group session.
Online gaming expanded the opportunity for authentic interactions
when gamers first realized that they had to, and could, use English on
these globalized gaming platforms. The gamers generally agreed that it
was not about ‘chatting in perfect English, it was getting the meaning
across that counted’ (Michael):

When I was in F.2 [secondary 2], I first visited a website called the
‘Zone’ to play Age of Empire online. I met gamers from all over the
world, America, Britain, Russia and Japan, and our common language
on ‘Zone’ was English. When chatting with these gamers, I learned
another kind of English. I meant the tones, vulgarities and jokes, like
‘What’s up, dude’. There was no foul language filter in the early days,
what a feast!
(Tom)
Other than using English for gaming purpose, Tom raised an addi-
tional issue about learning English used outside the classroom. Language
teachers might have frowned on the mentioning of vulgarity, but these
gamers treated it as part of the game culture. Acquiring this aspect of
communicative competence in gameworlds was important: ‘I learned
to swear quickly because I have to be tough enough to ignore stupid
insults’ (Michael).
 Alice Chik 105

The autonomy to learn language items on topics that they were pas-
sionate about was also afforded by the medium of delivery, but in
this respect, not all games were equal: some console games provided
more reading and listening texts than others, and online gaming mode
provided opportunities for interactions in English. Contrary to casual
games, role-playing games engaged gamers to pay more attention to the
in-game language (Tracy). However, these participants felt that the true
value of using games was the opportunities ‘to learn while having fun’
(Kenneth). When language learning through gaming was viewed as ‘an
unexpected positive side-effect’ (Kenneth), gaming is a viable and sus-
tainable tool. This was particularly clear when gaming is extended to
game paratext consumption and production (Apperley & Beavis, 2011).

Gamers, discussion forums and language advising

A recent survey suggested that 64 per cent of US gamers played games

with other gamers in person (Entertainment Software Association, 2010,
p. 4). The gamer-participants mentioned being initiated into gaming
by older siblings and family members. They also played with family
and friends together, either physically or virtually, and chatted about
game play strategies. When the gamers grew older, they visited online
discussion forums or bulletin boards to get gaming advice:

Castlevania was my game for learning Japanese. It is a cross between

RPG [Role-playing Game] and action game, and I had to listen to the
conversation between characters (with the help of English subtitles).
I got so addicted that I went to both Hong Kong and American forums
to get help.
(Carrie)

Carrie highlighted the use of both local and overseas online discussion
forums, and stressed that she did it on her own initiative as a secondary
school student. The use of local discussion forums and bulletin boards
(with threads usually posted in Chinese) was an important step in seek-
ing language advice beyond the classroom. A random search on topic
about English learning and use on discussion forums yielded various
posts in similar veins:

Does any brother read the game plot and use the online dictionary?
(2 October 2010, 2:09 p.m.)
106 From Practice to Theory

Not all forum participants would agree that learning through gaming
was possible (‘It is self-deceptive to think that you can learn while play-
ing’, 2 October 2010, 2:12 p.m.), but some discussants rationalized by
providing certain folk theories on foreign language learning:

English learning is all about immersing in the environment – as long

as you persist, gaming in English is not a bad idea.
(22 November 2009, 2:51 p.m.)

The suggestion of creating an immersion environment was about the

issue of control, which was frequently constructed as the main benefit
of using games as learning tools. Posts suggested that gamers could con-
trol when, where and what to learn on their own terms. As the threads
were collected from public forums which were not necessarily gaming-
related, participants constantly had to ‘defend’ and ‘justify’ gaming as
learning to non-gamers:

There are so many English phrases in role-play games, do you know

that? All the dialogues in Dragon Age are in English, and you say you
can’t learn English? English lessons in school were so boring. Gaming
is an additional way to learn English. What’s wrong with that?
(3 August 2010, 5:56 p.m.)

Forum participants usually nominated their favourite games for lan-

guage learning purposes, but the more general advice elicited more
diverse responses:

You can learn English by playing online English games, but you have
to use overseas servers to game with foreigners. Then your English
will improve very rapidly. When it comes to video games, a lot of peo-
ple are amazingly persistent, that is the why they can learn English
through video gaming. You may not learn the perfect English, but
you will learn how to communicate in English.
(28 February 2010, 6:14 p.m.)

This post was followed by both positive and negative responses:

Thanks bro, I never thought about the English words, just play the
games. Now I know I should read a bit more XD.
(28 February 2010, 6:29 p.m.)
 Alice Chik 107

You hit the right point – imperfect English. What’s the point then?
Learning bad English and pretend that you are doing something
right? You must be joking.
(28 February 2010, 7:46 p.m.)

Forum participants did not necessarily agree on the specific recommen-

dations, but posts about learning were regularly posted across forums
and by different users. To begin with, the choice of gaming language
was usually viewed as the most important marker for gamers to declare
their intention on learning English through gaming:

choose US version of role-playing games, like Final Fantasy X-2, use

English walkthroughs, go to game forums and faq sections, then you
will be reading English for more than ten hours a day.
(24 May 2004, 2:22 a.m.)

This post provided more general directions in connecting various para-

textual activities surrounding gaming. In addition to encouraging fel-
low gamers to take on English-language games, many also denounced
‘sinicized’ games:

Don’t play the sinicized games, you ended up reading incor-

rect Simplified Chinese translation and subtitles, and having bad
English.
(4 November 2010, 3:34 a.m.)

Other than warning about wrong translation, similar to the gamer-

participants, the discussion participants were also honest about the
limitations of using digital games for language learning. The advice
might also be narrowed to specific games, but forum discussants fre-
quently highlighted the various steps. Some discussants also viewed
video gaming as an opportunity to learn colloquial language that is
not taught in class, such as ‘street English from GTA [Grand Theft
Auto]’ (3 November 2010, 8:50 p.m.). Statements about explicit learning
were quite frequent. For example, ‘I learned a lot of specialist jargons
from Flight Simulator – do you know the differences between pitch,
yaw and roll? What are flaps, landing gear and HUD [Head-Up Display]?’
(21 November 2009, 6:16 p.m.). Combing through discussion forums
gave a broad picture that advice on language learning through gaming
has been offered by different discussants on a fairly regular basis and in
a coherent manner.
108 From Practice to Theory

Discussion

This chapter provides different perspectives on utilizing digital games

as tools for language learning and use among language teachers and
gamers. The three figures in this section represented stripped-down
models of the relationship between digital gaming and foreign language
learning among the different participants. Language teachers, especially
the non-gamers, mostly viewed gametexts as the only source of lin-
guistic inputs (Figure 5.1). They also appeared to conceive gameplay as
an independent activity that was not connected with language learn-
ing and use in gamers’ personal and social worlds (as represented by
the solid, impermeable line in Figure 5.1). Interactions between gamers
were assumed to be conducted in Chinese (Cantonese), thus making
the interactions non-conducive to English language learning. To many

Chatting
with other
gamers in
In-game person in
English texts Chinese
(instructions/
dialogue)

Gaming-related activities

Other aspects of language learning and use in

personal and social worlds

Figure 5.1 Language teachers, gameplay and literacy

 Alice Chik 109

teachers, English learning and use through gaming was not a likely
event for most gamers.
Meanwhile, the gamer-participants purposed three areas to actualize
language learning potential: in-game texts, online gaming platforms,
and discussion forums (Figure 5.2). First, multimodal in-game texts were
the prime sources of language inputs. Second, interacting with over-
seas gamers on globalized online gaming platforms provided authentic
reasons and opportunities for active English learning and use. Finally,
gamers’ participation on discussion forums also formed part of the
ecology of language learning (Ito, 2007). Carrie and Raymond used
Chinese walkthroughs to advance their Japanese gameplay and also
learn Japanese phrases. Other gamers recommended reading English
walkthroughs to learn more about the games, and more English.
It appeared that accessing forums for gaming advice was an essential
part of the ecology. The gamer-participants also indicated strongly that

Online discussion
forums on digital
gaming strategies
and walkthroughs

Online gaming
platforms In-game texts
(interaction with (instructions/
other gamers) dialogue)

Gaming-related activites

Other aspects of language learning and use in

personal and social worlds

Figure 5.2 Gamers, gameplay and literacy

110 From Practice to Theory

their gaming experience was very much connected with other aspects of
language learning and use in their personal and social worlds. Michael’s
interest in historical-based real-time strategy games prompted him to
read beyond game texts to history books. The various gaming-related
activities formed an interconnected learning web, and for many of these
games, locally-accessed bulletin boards and discussion forums played an
indispensible role.
Though the gamer-participants all indicated that they did not usu-
ally play games in Chinese, they had all accessed local online bulletin
boards and discussion forums for sourcing walkthroughs and cheats,
and posting discussion threads in Chinese. As shown in the previous
section, issues related to digital gaming and language learning were dis-
cussed actively on various forums and bulletin boards. In the simplest
terms, the local Chinese Hong Kong online discussion forums and bul-
letin boards provided the links between language learning and gaming
beyond the classroom (Figure 5.3). The threads collected, published

Online discussion
Online
forums on video
discussion
gaming strategies
forums in
and walkthroughs
Chinese
in English

Online gaming
platforms in English
In-game
(interaction with
English texts
other gamers)
(instructions/
dialogue)

Gaming-related activites

Other aspects of language learning and use in

personal and social worlds

Figure 5.3 Gamers, online communities and language advising

 Alice Chik 111

between 2004 and 2010, showed that discussion threads on gaming

and foreign language learning were initiated on a regular basis. Anony-
mous discussion participants took up roles as language advisers by
giving general directions on integrating English games for learning:
using the online dictionary for unfamiliar language items in game texts,
joining overseas servers to interact with other MMORPG players in
English, reading English paratexts, and so on. Admittedly this advice
was not tailor-made for the language learning routines of individual
gamers; the advice was simply directives to the next steps in utiliz-
ing game texts and paratexts as learning tools. The advisory threads
collected across forums over time showed a high degree of similarity,
and thus a certain level of collective coherence in the public concep-
tion of learning through gaming. By posting these advisory threads,
the discussion participants were also taking and fulfilling the language
advisory roles that, in most cases, language teachers had failed to
envision.

Conclusion

This chapter aims at investigating the potential for autonomous lan-

guage learning through gaming from language teachers’ and gamers’
perspectives. Gee and Hayes (2011) recently argue that digital media
offer opportunities for equality through participation when the ‘ama-
teurs’ and the ‘marginalized’ could also have their voices heard on
participatory platforms. This might be a way to see the widening spaces
of language learning through digital gaming and gaming-related activ-
ities. Language teachers, under the constraints of traditional classroom
resources and curricula, might have their hands bound when it comes
to envisioning gaming as learning tools. However, gamer-participants
who had first hand experiences were happy to share their game-related
language learning experiences, both orally and digitally. They exer-
cised their autonomy in choosing the game texts and their engagement
to immerse themselves in the target languages. They also stressed the
importance of paratextual consumption for assuming learner auton-
omy. Gamers were, and are, also assuming the roles as language advisers
on various digital platforms. Individually, these examples of language
learning advice might appear to be random advice. When the advice
threads were viewed collectively, there was a strong sense of commu-
nity support to provide younger (or less experienced) gamers with the
tools to exercise their learner autonomy beyond the traditional class-
room. The direction to cross both local and global online platforms
also indicates that information is fluidly transmitted. At present, we
112 From Practice to Theory

are only beginning to understand the roles of gameplay in human-

console interaction and player-interaction; perhaps it is also productive
in extending our exploration to the paratextual consumption and pro-
duction among gamers over time and space. This expansion will also
give us better ideas of the true mobilities of learning among foreign
language learners and users.

Note
1. An illustrative example is the sales of Nintendo’s Wii game console and soft-
ware in Hong Kong. The console is sold with a traditional Chinese language
interface, but only four Chinese-language Wii games are officially available.
On the official website, console owners are advised to buy and play the
console-compatible Japanese-language version, but they were also given the
information that all in-game texts will be in Japanese.

References
Apperley, T. (2010). What games studies can teach us about videogames in
the English and literacy classroom. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy,
33(1), 12–23.
Apperley, T., & Beavis, C. (2011). Literacy into action: Digital games as action and
text in the English and literacy classroom. Pedagogies, 6(2), 130–143.
Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning (2nd ed.).
Harlow, UK: Longman Pearson.
Benson, P., & Chik, A. (2010). New literacies and autonomy in foreign language
learning. In M. J. Luzon, N. Ruiz-Madrid, & L. Villanueva (Eds.), Digital gen-
res, new literacies and autonomy in language learning (pp. 63–80). New York, NY:
Cambridge Scholar Press.
Black, R. W. (2008). Digital design: English language learners and reader reviews
in adolescent fan fiction. In M. Knobel & C. Lankshear (Eds.), A new literacies
sampler (pp. 115–136). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Census and Statistics Department. (2009). Thematic household survey report No. 43:
Information Technology Usage and Penetration. Hong Kong: Hong Kong SAR
Government.
Chase, S. E. (2005). Narrative inquiry: Multiple lenses, approaches, voices.
In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research
(3rd ed., pp. 651–680). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chik, A. (2011a). Learner autonomy development through digital
gameplay. Digital Culture and Education, 3. Retrieved from http://www.
digitalcultureandeducation.com/volume-3/learner-autonomy-development-
through-digital-gameplay/
Chik, A. (2011b). Digital gaming and social networking: English teachers’
perceptions, attitudes and experiences. Pedagogies, 6(2), 154–166.
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story
in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
 Alice Chik 113

Entertainment Software Association. (2010). 2010 Essential facts about the com-
puter and video game industry. Retrieved from http://www.theesa.com/facts/
pdfs/ESA_Essential_Facts_2010.PDF.
Friends of the Earth. (2009, May 31). Get a life: Get one less e-
products. Press release http://www.foe.org.hk/welcome/geten.asp?id_path=1,
%207,%2028,%20150,%204017,%204151
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games + good learning: Collected essays on video games,
learning and literacy. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. (2011). Language and learning in the digital age. London:
Routledge.
Hubbard, P. (1991). Evaluating computer games for language learning. Simula-
tion & Gaming, 22(2), 220–223.
Ito, M. (2007). Education vs. entertainment: A cultural history of children’s
software. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and
learning (pp. 89–116). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., boyd, d., Cody, R., Herr-Stephenson, B., . . . Tripp,
L. (2010). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning
with new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lacasa, P., Méndez, L., & Martínez, R. (2008). Bringing commercial games into
the classrooms. Computers and Composition, 25(4), 341–358.
Lam, W. S. E. (2006). Re-envisioning language, literacy, and the immi-
grant subject in new mediascapes. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 1(3),
171–195.
Leander, K. N., Phillips, N. C., & Headrick Taylor, K. (2010). The changing social
spaces of learning: Mapping new mobilities. Review of Research in Education, 34,
329–394.
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading,
analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for partic-
ipation in the activity of playing a video-game. The Modern Language Journal,
93(2), 153–169.
Reinders, H. (2009). Using computer games to teach writing. English Teaching
Professional, 63, 6–58.
Santo, R., James, C., Davis, K., Katz, S. L., Burch, L., & Joseph, B. (2009). Meeting
of minds: Cross-generational dialogue on the ethics of digital life. Global Kids’
Digital Media Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.macfound.org/atf/cf/
%7Bb0386ce3-8b29-4162-8098-e466fb856794%7D/DML-FOCUS-DIALOGUE-
REPORT-0910.PDF
Schrader, P., Zheng, D., & Young, M. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of
video games: MMOGs and the future of preservice teacher education.
Innovate, 2(3). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?
view=article&id=125
Squire, K. (2003). Video games in education. International Journal of Intelligent Sim-
ulations and Gaming. Retrieved from http://www.cyberfest.us/Education/Video_
Games_in_Education-MIT_Study.pdf
Swenson, J., Rozema, R., Young, C. A., McGrail, E., & Whitin, P. (2005). Beliefs
about technology and the preparation of English teachers: Beginning the
114 From Practice to Theory

conversation. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(3/4),

210–236.
Thomas, A. (2007). Youth online: Identity and literacy in the digital age. New York,
NY: Peter Lang.
Thorne, S. L. (2008). Transcultural communication in open internet environ-
ments and massively multiplayer online games. In S. Magnan (Ed.), Mediated
discourse online (pp. 305–327). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. L. (2009). Second language use, socializa-
tion, and learning in internet interest communities and online gaming. The
Modern Language Journal, 93s, 802–821.
6
Game-Based Practice in a Reading
Strategy Tutoring System:
Showdown in iSTART-ME
G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara

Introduction

Many contend that the future of affordable, high-quality education lies

in harnessing the potential of computer technologies. While imple-
menting computer technologies in schools has had both failings and
challenges (Dynarski et al., 2007), significant progress in the quality of
education to some extent depends on our ability to leverage the many
advantages of computer technologies. Computer technologies enable
adaptive, one-on-one tutoring to virtually all students in the classroom.
The most common goal of these one-on-one intelligent tutoring sys-
tems (ITSs) is to produce learning gains. Two of the most common areas
of learning address content within specific domains (e.g., physics) or
cognitive skill acquisition (e.g., strategies to improve reading compre-
hension). Both types of learning are often characterized by exposure to
declarative information and subsequent interaction with the material
(Anderson, 1982). However, acquiring a new skill usually requires a sig-
nificant commitment to continued practice and application. Skills are
often developed and improved with practice over an extended period of
time (Newell & Rosenbloom, 1981).
Unfortunately training and tutoring experiments can be costly for
researchers, especially when they require interaction over long peri-
ods of time. Though ITS-related experiments can on occasion span
days, weeks, or months, studies that evaluate training for much shorter
spans of time, such as the study outlined in this chapter (e.g., 30 min-
utes to a few hours), are more common (Lester, Converse, Stone,
Kahler, & Barlow, 1997; Moreno & Mayer, 2002; Van Lehn et al., 2007).

115
116 From Practice to Theory

Such studies produce valuable results for a number of scientific inquiries;

however, they cannot address issues of skill acquisition over extended
durations of time (e.g., across an academic year). By contrast, a few
ITSs have been developed that focus on skill acquisition requiring mul-
tiple, long-term interactions, as well integration within school curricula
(Jackson, Boonthum, & McNamara, 2010; Johnson & Valente, 2008;
Koedinger & Corbett, 2006). Due to the extended nature of these inter-
actions, students often become disengaged and uninterested in using
the systems. To combat this problem, researchers have begun to incor-
porate tutoring elements within serious games (McNamara, Jackson, &
Graesser, 2010).

Serious games

But why should serious games be used? How might a game enhance a
learning environment? Perhaps an overarching benefit is that games,
similar to tutoring systems, provide the opportunity for adaptive, indi-
vidualized interactions. Within a serious game, learners are able to
practice, and instructors are able to monitor progress of the learners
based on their score(s). Games usually include various forms of feedback
that help learners to better regulate their activities. In serious games this
feedback could be points for a correct answer, or it could come as a
reaction from another character within a 3D world. Serious games pro-
vide the opportunity for learners to engage in individual practice with
skills and knowledge. Also, to a greater extent than traditional tutoring
systems, games can help to render that practice more enjoyable for the
learner.
It is clear that people enjoy games. Recently, games have seen a dra-
matic rise in popularity and have become a common household form of
entertainment (Combs, 2008). Researchers are often looking to leverage
this natural entertainment value to make an educational task enjoyable.
Previous efforts suggest that enjoyment is the core of the entertain-
ment process, resulting from (1) sensory pleasure, which may be due
to such factors as photorealism and immersion, (2) suspense, thrill, and
relief, which is highly influenced by such factors as caring for characters
and a strong narrative, and (3) achievement, control, and self-efficacy,
which should be influenced by the degree of interactivity (Vorderer,
Klimmt, & Ritterfeld, 2004). In theory, entertainment may aid learn-
ing by stimulating engagement or by rewarding performance. Indeed,
some research has found game-based learning environments to be more
engaging and motivating than traditional instruction and to yield rapid
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 117

skill acquisition and greater learner self-confidence (e.g., Johnson et al.,

2004). However, these serious games differ from games for entertain-
ment in that they provide a much more narrow focus on the skills and
knowledge required to win or advance: essentially, demonstration of
some content knowledge relevant to an educational setting is required
from the learner. For example, rather than a focus on reflexes or hand-
eye coordination, the goal of a serious game is to afford the application
of subject matter learned in the classroom or through tutoring.
A key aspect of effective serious games is that they require involve-
ment from the learner. Games that are involving for learners pro-
mote two basic Piagetian (1952) learning functions: imitation and play
(Rieber, 1996). Imitation provides accommodation for new knowledge.
A structure can be built and practiced around the new knowledge
through use. Play provides assimilation through the integration of new
knowledge into the structure already in place. Play adapts existing skills
and knowledge used in the game to new difficulties or problems. The
application of these skills and knowledge is often used within games
to either win or explore the constraints of a complex world (Gredler,
2004). For example, video and poker games are designed for the user to
win points, whereas games such as SimCity have no winners or losers,
but engage the learner to explore the complex challenges in building
a city.
Serious games must also engage the learner. A system could involve
the user by requiring multiple interactions; however, these actions may
not be sufficient to engage the user. Well-designed games are appeal-
ing because they address affective states, motivation, and expectancies
of the player (O’Neil, Wainess, & Baker, 2005). One thing that serious
games offer, as opposed to more typical educational settings, is that they
require that the learner be involved in order to progress. An uninvolved
learner runs the risk of losing the game. However, engagement is not
guaranteed simply because a game is present. For the game to be effec-
tive, the learner must want to play the game. Engagement from learners
has been hypothesized to require at least three factors: interest, fantasy,
and challenge (e.g., Malone & Lepper, 1987).
Interest in the actual content of the game is a preferred method of
obtaining involvement, but not all learners share interests. While the
content is important for determining interest, perhaps more critical
is how the content is framed. Thus, the game itself can be used as a
springboard to capture the interest of the student. However, designers
must be careful not to take away from the educational aspects of the
environment in order to obtain interest. One way to sustain interest is
118 From Practice to Theory

through fantasy (Malone & Lepper, 1987). The learners are involved in
an activity that is outside of themselves (Rieber, 1996). The activity can
either be separated from the content of the game, exogenous fantasy, or
connected to the content, endogenous fantasy. The assumption is that,
if the fantasy is provoking enough, the learner will gain interest in the
content. If this happens, then enjoyment of the game is enjoyment of
the content. Endogenous games would lend more support to the con-
tent over exogenous games, because the line between game and content
is harder to distinguish.
Another factor that potentially determines interest within a game
is challenge (Gredler, 2004; Rieber, 1996). Games that are easily won
require little effort from learners. On the other hand, games that are
too difficult can result in lowered interest because learners are unable to
accomplish goals. Vygotsky (1978) posited that learning is most effec-
tive when the material is slightly more advanced than the learner. With
respect to game challenge, the same hypothesis could apply. A game
that is slightly more challenging than the learner’s skill and knowledge
may sustain interest by providing accomplishment while maintain-
ing effort. Indeed, self-efficacy and interest in games have been found
to be highly correlated (Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 1995). Ratings of
higher self-efficacy during gameplay coincide with higher preferences
for one game over others. Thus, accomplishment by the player over
consistent challenges should raise their self-efficacy and their overall
enjoyment.
Serious games often go beyond enjoyment to fulfill a number of
purposes (Gredler, 2004). Serious games can be used for assessment,
where the game informs whether the learner can appropriately apply
skills and knowledge. They can be used for practice, where the game
requires repeated application of the relevant knowledge in a variety of
contexts, and the game sustains the learner’s attention and motivation
throughout the practice period (e.g., Shank & Neaman, 2001). Serious
games can be used for summation, where the game provides a venue
to apply a variety of skills in one task. Similarly, serious games can be
used for inter-relating information and novel combinations of existing
knowledge that can lead to insights. Some exercises induce learners to
refine and combine existing knowledge (Swaak & de Jong, 2001). These
pedagogical functions have helped to make serious games a hot topic
within the field of automated tutoring systems. One such example is
a recently updated system (called iSTART) that has transitioned from a
traditional intelligent tutoring system into a game-based learning envi-
ronment (Jackson, Dempsey, & McNamara, 2010). The remainder of this
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 119

chapter focuses on the development and study of iSTART as it attempts

to balance the constraints of motivation and learning.

iSTART

The interactive Strategy Training for Active Reading and Thinking

(iSTART) tutor is a web-based reading strategy trainer that pro-
vides young adolescent to college-aged students with reading strategy
training to better understand challenging science texts (McNamara,
Levinstein, & Boonthum, 2004). It is well known that science text is
difficult for many students to understand (Graesser, Leon, & Otero,
2002; Snow, 2002). Students’ reading ability is partly to blame: as
many as 26 percent of eighth graders cannot read at the basic level
(National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2003). Reading problems
become most apparent when the student is faced with a challenging
text for which they have knowledge deficits. Science text is loaded
with technical terms to be deciphered. There are complex mechanisms
with multiple components, attributes of components, relations between
components, and dynamic processes that flow throughout the system.
Thus, the need for reading comprehension interventions is clear. iSTART
responds to this need by providing reading strategy instruction in an
automated web-based system. Pedagogical agents instruct trainees in the
use of self-explanation and other active reading strategies to explain the
meaning of science text while they read. The training was motivated
by empirical findings that show that students who self-explain text
are more successful at solving problems, more likely to generate infer-
ences, construct more coherent mental models, and develop a deeper
understanding of the concepts covered in the text (Chi, Bassok, Lewis,
Reimann, & Glaser, 1989; Chi, de Leeuw, Chiu, & LaVancher, 1994;
McNamara, 2004).

The iSTART modules

Reading strategy instruction occurs in three stages, with each stage

requiring increased interaction on the part of the learner. During the
Introduction Module of iSTART, the trainee is interactively engaged
by a trio of animated characters that interact with one another by
providing information, posing questions, and providing explanations
of the reading strategies. The three characters (an instructor and two
students) speak using a text-to-speech synthesizer and possess a reper-
toire of gestures. The trainee is provided with instruction concerning
120 From Practice to Theory

self-explanation and reading strategies. Students are coached in five

essential reading strategies: prediction, comprehension monitoring, para-
phrasing, making bridging inferences, and making elaborations (McNamara,
Ozuru, Best, & O’Reilly, 2007). Predicting what information might be
coming up within the text helps users to anticipate potential relations
between concepts and facilitate their integration. Comprehension mon-
itoring enables the reader to recognize a failure of understanding, and it
is this recognition that triggers the use of other, somewhat more active,
reading strategies. The first such strategy, paraphrasing, essentially helps
students understand and remember the surface structure of the text by
transforming it into more familiar ideas. Generating bridging inferences
improves comprehension by linking the current sentence to the mate-
rial previously covered in the text (e.g., Oakhill, 1984). Such inferences
allow the reader to form a more cohesive global representation of the
text content (e.g., Kintsch, 1988). Finally, readers may associate the cur-
rent sentence with their own related prior knowledge using a strategy
called elaboration. When elaborating, readers are encouraged to draw
upon logic and common sense, or domain-general knowledge, particu-
larly when they do not have sufficient knowledge about the topic of the
text (e.g., Kintsch, 1988; McNamara, Kintsch, Songer, & Kintsch, 1996;
Pressley et al., 1992; Spilich, Vesonder, Chiesi, & Voss, 1979).
These reading strategies were included in iSTART because their use is
characteristic of successful, skilled reading and because instruction to
use the strategies can improve comprehension. Skilled readers are more
aware of whether or not they understand a text, likely because they more
closely monitor their comprehension (e.g., Brown, 1982). Skilled read-
ers are also more likely to use comprehension repair strategies when
understanding fails (e.g., Chi & Bassok, 1989). Inference generation is
also a key ingredient of successful reading comprehension (e.g., Long,
Oppy, & Seely, 1994; Yuill, Oakhill, & Parkin, 1989). Beneficial infer-
ences include making connections between ideas within the text (i.e.,
bridging inferences) and making links to what is not explicit in the text
(i.e., elaborating). Skilled readers are more likely to make inferences and
less skilled readers benefit from instruction to do so (e.g., Bereiter & Bird,
1985; Palincsar & Brown, 1984).
In the second phase, called the Demonstration Module, two agents
demonstrate the use of self-explanation using a science text and the
trainee identifies the strategies being used by the agents. A science text
is presented on the computer screen, one sentence at a time. Genie
(representing a student) reads the sentence aloud and produces a self-
explanation. Merlin (the teacher character) asks the trainee to indicate
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 121

which strategies Genie employed in producing his self-explanation. The

trainee answers by clicking on a strategy in the bottom-right corner
of the screen. Merlin might then ask the (human) student to identify
and locate the various reading strategies contained in Genie’s self-
explanation. Finally, Merlin gives Genie feedback on the quality of
his self-explanation. This feedback mimics the interchanges that the
student will encounter in the subsequent practice module.
In the third phase, practice, Merlin coaches and provides feedback to
the trainee while the trainee practices self-explanation using the reper-
toire of reading strategies. The goal is to help the trainee acquire the
skills necessary to integrate prior text and prior knowledge with the cur-
rent sentence content. For each sentence, Merlin reads the sentence and
asks the trainee to self-explain it by typing a self-explanation. Merlin
gives feedback, sometimes asking the trainee to modify unsatisfactory
self-explanations. Once the self-explanation is satisfactory, Merlin asks
the trainee to identify what strategy was used, after which Merlin
provides feedback.
Within iSTART there are two types of practice modules. The first prac-
tice module is situated within the core context of iSTART (initial two
hour training) and includes two texts. The second practice module is
a form of extended practice, which operates in the same manner as the
regular practice module. During this extended practice phase, additional
texts within the iSTART library can be assigned to the students and new
texts can be added to the system for the students to read and explain.
Because of the need to incorporate various texts, the iSTART feedback
algorithm has been designed to adapt to new texts, and its performance
has been comparable to that of humans (Jackson, Guess, & McNamara,
2010). The extended practice module is designed to provide a long-
term learning environment that can span weeks or months. Research
on iSTART has shown that the extended practice is effective at increas-
ing students’ performance over time (Jackson et al., 2010). However,
one unfortunate side effect of this long-term interaction is that students
often become disengaged and uninterested in using the system (Bell &
McNamara, 2007).

iSTART-ME

To combat the problem of disengagement over time, the extended

practice module of iSTART has been situated within a game-based
environment called iSTART-ME (motivationally enhanced). This game-
based environment builds upon the existing iSTART system. The
122 From Practice to Theory

main thrust of the iSTART-ME project is to implement several game-

based principles and features that are expected to support effective
learning, increase motivation, and sustain engagement throughout
a long-term interaction with an established ITS. Previous research
has indicated that increasing self-efficacy, interest, engagement, and
self-regulation should positively impact learning (Alexander, Murphy,
Woods, Duhon, & Parker, 1997; Bandura, 2000; Pajares, 1996; Pintrich,
2000; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001). The iSTART-ME project attempts
to implement and potentially manipulate these motivational constructs
via game-based features that map onto one of the following five cate-
gories: feedback, incentives, task difficulty, control, and environment,
as discussed by McNamara et al. (2010). Feedback is an important fea-
ture common to both ITSs and game technologies. There is a good
deal of research on the effects of feedback structure, schedule, and
delivery method, indicating that providing students with accurate, intel-
ligent, well-timed, and motivating feedback is a crucial aspect of learn-
ing (e.g., Anderson, Corbett, Koedinger, & Pelletier, 1995; Corbett &
Anderson, 1990; Merrill, Reiser, Ranney, & Trafton, 1992; Jackson &
Graesser, 2007; Moreno & Mayer, 2005). Incentives can help to main-
tain interest and prolong student engagement (Graesser, Chipman,
Leeming, & Biedenbach, 2009; Moreno & Mayer, 2005). Generally,
incentives are contingent on some aspect of performance. For exam-
ple, in games, the player may earn points to be traded for things such as
powers, tools, skills, or weapons. Varying task difficulty and matching
it to the learner is also characteristic of both ITSs and games. Malone
and Lepper (1987) argued that challenge is a crucial component of games
and many argue that successful games have optimal levels of challenge
that sustain engagement with just enough amounts of success and effort
(Conati, 2002; Malone & Lepper, 1987; Rieber, 1996). The amount of
control that a student has in a learning environment is also an impor-
tant issue to consider. An internal locus of control can enhance students’
efficiency in completing tasks (Corbett & Anderson, 2001). However,
designers need to consider that low ability learners are often unable to
make choices that optimize learning (McNamara & Shapiro, 2005), and
thus sometimes the decisions need to be made for them. Notably, game-
based features offer a means of giving learners a sense of control over
certain aspects of the learning environment, without allowing them to
make choices on what and how they learn the serious content. Finally,
the environment of an ITS or game is what is most apparent and visi-
ble. Many popular entertainment games are set in colorful, semi-realistic
settings, including avatars as well as simulation. There are many aspects
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 123

of the environment, including the nature of the avatars and aesthet-

ics as well as the use of multimedia and narrative. Indeed, the use of
narrative and immersive environments is infrequently used in ITSs, and
considered to be more characteristic of games. In addition, game nar-
ratives have a distinctive status in comparison to other mediums such
as text or films because the story plans can be co-constructed between
the player(s) and game system and it is possible to experience multiple
variations of a story (Gee, 2003; Van Eck, 2007; Young, 2007).
These aspects of the learning environment have been modified within
iSTART-ME to add game-based features to iSTART. The previous version
of iSTART automatically progressed students from one text to another
with no intervening actions. The new version of iSTART-ME is con-
trolled through a selection menu (see Figure 6.1 for screenshot). This
selection menu provides students with opportunities to interact with
new texts, earn points, advance through levels, purchase rewards, per-
sonalize a character, and play educational mini-games (designed to use
the same strategies as in practice).
Within iSTART-ME, students can earn points as they interact with
texts and provide their own self-explanations. Each time a student

Figure 6.1 Screenshot of iSTART-ME selection menu

124 From Practice to Theory

submits a self-explanation, it is assessed by the iSTART algorithm and

points are awarded based on a scoring rubric. The rubric has been
designed to reward consistently good performance. So, students earn
more points if they repeatedly provide good self-explanations, but earn
fewer points if they fluctuate between good and poor performance.
In addition to providing another form of feedback, earning points
within iSTART-ME serves two main purposes: advancing through levels
and purchasing rewards.
As students accumulate more points, they advance through a series
of levels. Each subsequent level requires an increasing number of
points, requiring students to expend slightly more effort for each sub-
sequent advancement. The levels are labeled to help increase interest
(e.g., ‘ultimate bookworm’, ‘serious strategizer’), and also serve as global
indicators of progress across texts.
Points can also be used to ‘purchase’ rewards within the system. Being
able to spend points means that the new extended practice module
must maintain two point counters: total iSTART points and iBucks. The
iSTART points are used to progress the student through the iSTART-ME
levels and serve as global feedback. The iBucks represent the points avail-
able to use for purchasing rewards. When a student spends iBucks, the
point value associated with that reward is subtracted from their current
available points (the iSTART points are not affected).
One of the options available as a reward is for students to change
aspects of the learning environment. They can spend some of their
iBucks to choose a new tutor agent, change the interface to a new
color scheme, or update the appearance of their personal avatar. These
features provide students with a substantial amount of control and
personalization, and have been designed as purchasable replacements,
rather than continuously available options, to help reduce off-task
behaviors (such as switching back and forth between agents just to see
what they all look like).
Lastly, several educational mini-games have been designed to be
incorporated within the iSTART-ME extended practice module. The
mini-games have been designed such that the student implements the
reading strategies presented within iSTART. Some games require identi-
fication of strategy use, while others may require students to generate
their own self-explanations. For example, Balloon Bust is one of the
available educational mini-games wherein students are presented with
a target sentence and an example self-explanation. The student must
decide which iSTART strategy was used in the self-explanation and
then click on the corresponding balloons. The majority of these games
are designed to incorporate the same leveling structure and can be
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 125

completed within 10–20 minutes. After completion of a mini-game,

students are directed back to the main iSTART-ME selection screen.

Current study

A focused study was conducted to assess the benefits of specific com-

ponents within iSTART-ME. The main goal of the study is to deter-
mine if the inclusion of game-like elements affects engagement and
performance.

Procedure

In this study, 36 participants from a southern US university volunteered

to participate in exchange for credit in their General Psychology course.
Participants received two points that were applied to their course grades.
These participants were native English speakers and had no prior expe-
rience with the iSTART system. Participants were randomly assigned to
either Coached Practice or Self-Explanation Showdown.
All students completed a short demographics survey and were transi-
tioned into an abbreviated version of iSTART training consisting of just
the introduction modules. After the introductory lessons, students were
assigned to interact with one of two training environments: Coached
Practice or Showdown, for two texts. Text order was counterbalanced,
and the same texts were used in both practice environments. At the
end of the study, participants completed an engagement question-
naire which we adapted from Jennett et al. (2008). The overall scale is
designed to measure attention, temporal dissociation, transportation,
challenge, engagement, and enjoyment within a game system. Five
items from the overall scale were used as a subscale that focused on
emotional involvement and desire to win (i.e., engagement). The five
Likert-scale questions are shown in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1 Five questions from engagement scale

1. To what extent did you feel emotionally attached to the game?

2. To what extent were you interested in seeing how the game’s events would
progress?
3. How much did you want to ‘win’ the game?
4. Were you in suspense about whether or not you would win or lose the
game?
5. At any point did you find yourself become so involved that you wanted to
speak to the game directly?

Source: Adapted from Jennett et al. (2008).

126 From Practice to Theory

Training environments

In Coached Practice participants are guided by Merlin, a wizard who

provides formative feedback for the student-generated self-explanations
(see Figure 6.2). Merlin reads sentences from the text aloud to the par-
ticipant and then asks the participant to self-explain a bolded target
sentence. After each self-explanation, Merlin provides feedback on the
quality of the self-explanation. Merlin’s feedback is based on an auto-
matic natural language processing (NLP) algorithm that assess length,
similarity, and overlap with the target text as well as the addition of
outside information (Jackson, Guess, & McNamara, 2010; McNamara,
Boonthum, Levinstein, & Millis, 2007). Using this assessment, the feed-
back provides hints to the user on how to improve the quality of
their next self-explanation. If the current contribution quality is low,
then the student can use Merlin’s feedback to improve their current
self-explanation.
The Coached Practice system used in the current experiment has
been slightly modified from its original version described in McNamara
et al. (2004). The new version of the system includes a quality feedback

Figure 6.2 Screenshot of Coached Practice

 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 127

bar, points, and a self-explanation history window. The feedback bar

(currently green under the passage window in Figure 6.2) is updated
after each student self-explanation. Self-explanations receive scores of
0, 1, 2, or 3 from the NLP algorithm. These scores are represented
on the feedback bar as poor, ok, good, and great, respectively. The
feedback bar fills to the appropriate score and changes color accord-
ing to the score (poor = one red box, ok = red bar, good=yellow
bar, great = full green bar). In addition to the feedback bar, each
time that a student submits a self-explanation, it is assessed by the
iSTART algorithm and points are awarded based on the iSTART-ME
scoring rubric (i.e., rewarding consistently good performance). The last
updated feature is the self-explanation history window. This window
provides students with an opportunity to review any of their previ-
ous self-explanations within the current text along with any associated
points.
Showdown is one of the game-based practice modules specifically
developed for iSTART-ME (see Figure 6.3 for screenshot). In Showdown,
participants compete against a computer player by attempting to write
a higher quality self-explanation. Participants are guided through the

Figure 6.3 Screenshot of Showdown

128 From Practice to Theory

game by text-based instructions (generated by ‘Mr. Smiley’). Similar

to Coached Practice, the participants are provided with a text and
prompted to generate their own self-explanation for a bolded target
sentence. Each text in this study has nine target sentences that are pre-
sented one at a time in order, along with all of the prior sentences.
After the participant completes each self-explanation, the computer
scores the student’s contribution using the same NLP algorithm as
Coached Practice. Instead of a feedback bar, Showdown indicates the
quality of a self-explanation using 0, 1, 2, or 3 stars. Points are also
awarded in Showdown using the same scoring rubric from Coached
Practice.
One of the major differences between Showdown and Coached Prac-
tice is the element of competition. Showdown includes a virtual oppo-
nent that competes against the human player. For each target sentence,
an opponent self-explanation is randomly selected from a database of
prior human players. After the current player has submitted a self-
explanation, the selected opponent self-explanation is presented along
with its associated stars and points. The self-explanation scores are com-
pared and the player with the most stars wins the round. In case of a tie
score, the players move on to the next target sentence and it is worth
two points instead of one. A game of Showdown is complete when the
student has written a self-explanation for each of the target sentences
within a text. Whichever player wins the most rounds is declared the
winner.

Results and discussion

The primary analyses for this study focused on performance and engage-
ment. Performance measures consisted of self-explanation scores during
training, along with accompanying indices of time on task (Fredrick &
Walberg, 1980) and the number of self-explanations generated. Time on
task and number of self-explanations generated were included to deter-
mine if there were fundamental differences in the amount of practice
for each practice condition. The amount of practice, including time on
task (Fredrick & Walberg, 1980) and number of practice attempts, has
been linked with increased performance. Therefore, time on task (mea-
sured in minutes) and the number of practice attempts (measured as the
total number of self-explanations produced) were included as dependent
measures. Engagement was measured using questions adapted from a
pre-existing questionnaire (Jennett et al., 2008).
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 129

Performance
Students’ self-explanation scores during training were used as the pri-
mary outcome measure. Two texts were used, each of which contained
nine target sentences. Performance on both texts was assessed across
the two conditions. An analysis of variance revealed that those stu-
dents who interacted with Coached Practice generated significantly
better self-explanations (M = 2.54, SD =. 27) than the students who
played Showdown (M = 1. 85, SD =. 47), F(1,34) = 29. 74, p <. 001.
Self-explanation score means are displayed in Figure 6.4.
These results indicate that students within Coached Practice gen-
erated higher quality self-explanations than the students within
Showdown. However, Coached Practice allows for students to resubmit
low quality self-explanations. This benefit would likely include more
time on task as well as more practice attempts, both of which could be
related to the increased performance scores.
To investigate this possibility, two related measures were also ana-
lyzed: time taken to complete each training condition and the
total number of self-explanations generated during the interaction.
An ANOVA on the total training time (minutes) for each condition
revealed that students within Coached Practice (M = 53. 2, SD = 13. 6)
interacted with the environment for a significantly longer amount of
time than those participants in Showdown (M = 26. 0, SD = 7. 2), F(1,34)
= 56.18, p < .001. Average time on task for each condition is displayed
in Figure 6.5. This result indicates that those students in Coached Prac-
tice spent significantly more time with the target task. Additionally,

Self-explanation scores (0−3)

3

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
Coached practice Showdown

Figure 6.4 Average self-explanation quality is higher in Coached Practice than

in Showdown
130 From Practice to Theory

Time on task (min.)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Coached practice Showdown

Figure 6.5 Students spend more time training in Coached Practice than in
Showdown

Average number of self-explanations

21
20
19
18
17
16
Coached practice Showdown

Figure 6.6 Students write more self-explanations in Coached Practice than in

Showdown

an ANOVA on the total number of self-explanations for each student

revealed that students within Coached Practice generated significantly
more self-explanations (M = 20.17, SD = 3.3) than those participants
in Showdown (M = 18.0, SD = 0.0), F(1,34) = 7.54, p < .05. Average
number of self-explanations per condition is displayed in Figure 6.6.
Notably, due to the competition aspect within Showdown, students
are only allowed one attempt at a self-explanation per target sentence
(for a total of 18 self-explanations across the two texts in this study).
Students in Coached Practice successfully generated higher quality self-
explanations, but they also had more time with the system and engaged
in more practice trials.
As a follow-up, an additional analysis was conducted to investigate
the relation between self-explanation scores and these extra practice
variables. An analysis of covariance revealed that, when covarying time
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 131

on task and the number of self-explanations, the adjusted means for

conditions comparing participants in Coached Practice (M adj = 2.52,
SE =. 12) to those in Showdown (M adj = 1.88, SE =. 12) remained statisti-
cally different, F(1,32) = 10.32, p < .01, indicating that those in Coached
Practice generated significantly higher quality self-explanations than
students in the Showdown condition.
This follow-up analysis suggests that the fine-grained pedagogi-
cal elements within Coached Practice help to improve students’
self-explanation abilities more than the elements contained within
Showdown. Specifically of note, Coached Practice includes formative
feedback spoken aloud by the animated agent (Merlin). This feed-
back provides hints to the student on how to improve the quality
of their subsequent self-explanation. In contrast, the pedagogy within
Showdown includes modeling through the opponent’s self-explanation.
Unfortunately, it is unknown whether students attend to the oppo-
nent’s self-explanation or consider it for modeling purposes. If this is
indeed the case, then the fine-grained nature of formative feedback may
be necessary to help students when they are in the initial stages of
skill acquisition. By contrast, modeling strategy use through other stu-
dents’ self-explanations may require too much metacognitive effort to
be effective during early stages of acquisition. In this study, we have little
information on the students’ prior skill levels. However, we assume that
the majority of the students are in the initial stages of learning because
they had not been exposed to iSTART prior to the study.

Engagement
In addition to performance, responses to the post-test survey were
analyzed to investigate potential differences in engagement. The five
questions for the engagement subscale (shown in Table 6.1) were com-
bined to produce a composite ‘engagement’ score, which was used to
analyze potential differences between training conditions. A one-tailed
ANOVA conducted on the composite engagement measure revealed that
participants who interacted with Showdown (M = 3.04, SD = .74) rated
it as significantly more engaging than students within Coached Practice
(M = 2.43, SD = 1.13), F(1,34) = 3.69, p < .05. Follow-up analyses were
conducted on each of the questions within the engagement subscale (see
means displayed in Figure 6.7). These analyses revealed significant dif-
ferences for two of the engagement questions. Students in Showdown
(M = 4.50, SD = 0.86) were significantly more interested in ‘winning’
the game than students in Coached Practice (M = 3.17, SD = 1.38),
132 From Practice to Theory

1
To what extent To what extent How much did Were you in At any point did
did you feel were you you want to 'win' suspense about you find yourself
emotionally interested in the game? whether or not become so
attached to the seeing how the you would win or involved that you
game? game's events lose the game? wanted to speak
would progress? to the game
directly?

Coached practice Showdown

Figure 6.7 Mean ratings for engagement subscale questions

F(1,34) = 12. 09, p < .001. Additionally, students who interacted with
Showdown (M = 3.61, SD = 1.38) were significantly more likely to be
in suspense about the game outcomes than students within Coached
Practice (M = 2. 50, SD = 1.34), F(1,34) = 6.02, p < .05.
Another indicator of engagement is the player’s willingness to persist
within the learning environment. The post-test survey included a ques-
tion that targeted user persistence, ‘Were there any times during the
game in which you just wanted to give up?’ Analyses on this question
revealed that students who played Showdown (M = 1.78, SD = 1.31)
were significantly less likely to have the desire to give up than those stu-
dents within Coached Practice (M = 3.00, SD = 1.65), F(1,34) = 6.09,
p <. 05.
These results contrast those found for performance. Students view
Showdown as a game, and they experience some of the associated
benefits (increases in engagement and persistence). Indeed, we also
observed students during the study whose behaviors while engaged with
showdown indicated excitement when winning (e.g., raising their fists
to the air), and disappointment when losing (e.g., moaning). These
results are encouraging for the continued development of iSTART-ME,
and indicate important features to include within future designs. While
the game-based features within Showdown were successful at improving
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 133

student engagement, the pedagogical model within that system needs

improvement.

Conclusions

The current chapter is a focused effort to analyze components of

an existing game-based Intelligent Tutoring System for reading com-
prehension, iSTART-ME. The results from this study indicated that
learning is better for the non-game environment (Coached Practice),
but that engagement is better for the game-based system (Showdown).
The differences in learning may largely be due to the different peda-
gogical approaches employed within the respective training environ-
ments. Coached Practice includes fine-grained feedback designed to
improve the quality of subsequent self-explanations, and Showdown
implements modeling by presenting example self-explanations from
an opponent player. Performance results clearly suggest that the fine-
grained feedback provides better support during the application of
the self-explanation strategies. In contrast to the performance differ-
ences, students expressed increased engagement and persistence within
Showdown. While Coached Practice may have produced higher qual-
ity self-explanations during these two texts, it is clear that students
preferred the interaction with Showdown. This being the case, it is pos-
sible that interactions over the long-term may favor Showdown, as the
students would be more likely to return and use the system in the future.
An important caveat to point out is that this study was conducted
within a relatively short timeframe. On average, students completed the
experiment within 90 minutes. As mentioned previously, research has
suggested that the benefits of serious games may manifest over longer
periods of time (i.e., several hours, days, weeks, or months) and these
effects would likely be most apparent when students would otherwise
become fatigued (Graesser, Chipman, Leeming, & Biedenbach, 2009;
McNamara et al., 2010; Moreno & Mayer, 2005). Thus, the learning
differences found here are not surprising, but they nonetheless offer
important insights for potential improvements.
Future work with these systems involves combining the performance
and engagement results to develop a new version of Showdown. This
new version (Showdown-Feedback), currently being developed, includes
the same formative feedback from Coached Practice in addition to
modeling from the opponent’s self-explanations. Showdown-Feedback
will be included in a future study and compared to both the original
Showdown as well as Coached Practice. This anticipated study should
134 From Practice to Theory

help to address the potential explanations for the results of this study
that we have discussed in this chapter.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation

(IIS-0735682). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommen-
dations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.

References
Alexander, P. A., Murphy, P. K., Woods, B. S., Duhon, K. E., & Parker, D. (1997).
College instruction and concomitant changes in students’ knowledge, inter-
est, and strategy use: A study of domain learning. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 22, 125–146.
Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of a cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89,
369–406.
Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive
tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207.
Bandura, A. (2000). Self-efficacy: The foundation of agency. In W. Perig & A. Grob
(Eds.), Control of human behavior, mental processes, and consciousness: Essays in
honor of the 60th birthday of August Flammer (pp. 17–33). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bell, C., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). Integrating iSTART into a high school cur-
riculum. Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the cognitive science society
(pp. 809–814). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Bereiter, C., & Bird, M. (1985). Use of thinking aloud in identification and
teaching of reading comprehension strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 2,
131–156.
Brown, A. (1982). Learning how to learn from reading. In J. A. Langer &
M. T. Smith-Burke (Eds.), Reader meets author: Bridging the gap (pp. 26–54).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Chi, M. T. H., & Bassok, M. (1989). Learning from examples via self-explanations.
In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert
Glaser (pp. 251–282). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989).
Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve
problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.
Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-
explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.
Combs, S. (2008). Current trends in the media industry: File production, television
commercials and video games. The Current and Potential Economic and Fiscal
Impacts of Texas’ Moving Media Industry, Texas Comptroller of Public Account
report, pp. 4–7.
Conati, C. (2002). Probabilistic assessment of user’s emotions in educational
games. Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence, 16, 555–575.
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 135

Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (1990). The effect of feedback control on learning
to program with the LISP tutor. Proceedings of the twelfth annual conference of the
cognitive science society (pp. 796–803). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Locus of feedback control in computer-
based tutoring: Impact of learning rate, achievement and attitudes. Proceed-
ings of ACM CHI-2001 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
(pp. 245–252). New York: ACM Press.
Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., Heaviside, S., Novak, T., Carey, N., Campuzano, L., . . .
Sussex, W. (2007). Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Find-
ings from the first student cohort. Washington, DC: US Department of Education,
Institute of Education Sciences.
Fredrick, W. C., & Walberg, H. J. (1980). Learning as a function of time. The
Journal of Educational Research, 73, 183–194.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
New York: Palgrave Macmillian.
Graesser, A. C., Chipman, P., Leeming, F., & Biedenbach, S. (2009). Deep learning
and emotion in serious games. In U. Ritterfield, M. Cody, & P. Vorderer (Eds.),
Serious games: Mechanisms and effects (pp. 81–100). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge,
Taylor and Francis.
Graesser, A. C., Leon, J. A., & Otero, J. C. (2002). Introduction to the psychology
of science text comprehension. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.),
The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 1–5). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gredler, M. E. (2004). Games and simulations and their relationships to learning.
In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and
technology (pp. 571–582). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jackson, G. T., Boonthum, C., & McNamara, D. S. (2010). The efficacy of iSTART
extended practice: Low ability students catch up. In J. Kay & V. Aleven (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 10th international conference on intelligent tutoring systems
(pp. 349–351). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
Jackson, G. T., Dempsey K. B., & McNamara, D. S. (2010). The evolution of an
automated reading strategy tutor: From classroom to a game-enhanced auto-
mated system. In M. S. Khine and I. M. Saleh (Eds.), New Science of learning:
Cognition, computers and collaboration in education (pp. 283–306). New York, NY:
Springer.
Jackson, G. T., & Graesser, A. C. (2007). Content matters: An investigation of
feedback categories within an ITS. In R. Luckin, K. Koedinger, & J. Greer (Eds.),
Artificial intelligence in education: Building technology rich learning contexts that
work (pp. 127–134). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
Jackson, G. T., Guess, R. H., & McNamara, D. S. (2010). Assessing cognitively
complex strategy use in an untrained domain. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2,
127–137.
Jennett, C., Cox, A. L., Cairns, P., Dhoparee, S., Epps, A., Tijs, T., & Walton,
A. (2008). Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games.
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66, 641–661.
Johnson, W. L., Beal, C., Fowles-Winkler, A., Lauper, U., Marsella, S., Narayanan,
S., ... Vilhjajlmsson, H. (2004). Tactical language training system: An interim
report. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3220, 336–345.
Johnson, W. L., & Valente, A. (2008). Collaborative authoring of serious games
for language and culture. In Proceedings of SimTecT 2008. Lindfield, NSW: SIAA.
136 From Practice to Theory

Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension:

A construction–integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.
Koedinger, K. R., & Corbett, A. T. (2006). Cognitive tutors: Technology bringing
learning science to the classroom. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook
of the learning sciences (pp. 61–78). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lester, J., Converse, S., Stone, B., Kahler, S., & Barlow, T. (1997). Animated
pedagogical agents and problem-solving effectiveness: A large-scale empirical
evaluation. Proceedings of the eighth world conference on artificial intelligence in
education (pp. 23–30). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Long, D. L., Oppy, B. J., & Seely, M. R. (1994). Individual differences in the time
course of inferential processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1456–1470.
Malone, T., & Lepper, M. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic
motivations of learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning,
and instruction: Vol. 3. Cognition and affective process analyses (pp. 223–253).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse
Processes, 38, 1–30.
McNamara, D. S., Boonthum, C., Levinstein, I. B., & Millis, K. (2007). Evaluating
self-explanations in iSTART: Comparing word-based and LSA algorithms. In
T. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent
semantic analysis (pp. 227–241). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
McNamara, D. S., Jackson, G. T., & Graesser, A. C. (2010). Intelligent tutoring and
games (ITaG). In Y. K. Baek (Ed.), Gaming for classroom-based learning: Digital
role-playing as a motivator of study. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts
always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and
levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14,
1–43.
McNamara, D. S., Levinstein, I. B., & Boonthum, C. (2004). iSTART: Interactive
strategy trainer for active reading and thinking. Behavioral Research Methods,
Instruments, & Computers, 36, 222–233.
McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., Best, R., & O’Reilly, T. (2007). The 4-pronged compre-
hension strategy framework. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension
strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 465–496). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
McNamara, D. S., & Shapiro, A. M. (2005). Multimedia and hypermedia solutions
for promoting metacognitive engagement, coherence, and learning. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 33, 1–29.
Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Ranney, M., & Trafton, J. G. (1992). Effective tutoring
techniques: A comparison of human tutors and intelligent tutoring systems.
The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 277–305.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Learning science in virtual reality multimedia
environments: Role of methods and media. Journal of Educational Psychology,
94, 598–610.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2005). Role of guidance, reflection, and interactiv-
ity in an agent-based multimedia game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97,
117–128.
 G. Tanner Jackson, Kyle B. Dempsey and Danielle S. McNamara 137

National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2000). Retrieved from http://nces.

ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006459.pdf.
Newell, A.,& Rosenbloom, P. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law
of practice. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. l–55).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
O’Neil, H. F., Wainess, R., & Baker, E. L. (2005). Classification of learning out-
comes: Evidence from the computer games literature. Curriculum Journal, 16,
455–474.
Oakhill, J. (1984). Inferential and memory skills in children’s comprehension of
stories. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 31–39.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational
Research, 66, 543– 578.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-
fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117–175.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: W. W. Norton.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000) The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning.
In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation
(pp. 451–502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pressley, M., Wood, E., Woloshyn, V., Martin, V., King, A., & Menke, D. (1992).
Encouraging mindful use of prior knowledge: Attempting to construct explana-
tory answers facilitates learning. Educational Psychology, 27, 91–109.
Rieber, L. P. (1996). Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning
environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 2, 43–58.
Shank, R., & Neaman, A. (2001). Motivation and Failure in Educational Systems
Design, Smart Machines in Education. In K. Forbus & P. Feltovich (Eds.) Smart
Machines in Education, pp. 37–69. Cambridge, MA: AAAI Press/MIT Press.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading
comprehension. Arlington, VA: Rand Corporation.
Spilich, G. J., Vesonder, G. T., Chiesi, H. L., & Voss, J. F. (1979). Text process-
ing of domain-related information for individuals with high and low domain
knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 275–290.
Swaak, J., & de Jong, T. (2001). Discovery simulations and the assessment of
intuitive knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 284.
Van Eck, R. (2007). Building artificially intelligent learning games. In D. Gibson,
C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning
research & development frameworks (pp. 271–307). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Van Lehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P.
(2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive
Science Journal, 31, 3–62.
Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media
entertainment. Communication Theory, 14, 388–408.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Young, R. M. (2007). Story and discourse: A bipartite model of narrative
generation in virtual worlds. Interaction Studies, 8, 177–208.
Yuill, N., Oakhill, J., & Parkin, A. (1989). Working memory, comprehension
ability and the resolution of text anomaly. British Journal of Psychology, 80,
351–361.
138 From Practice to Theory

Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self-

regulation: Shifting from process goals to outcome goals. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 89, 29–36.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). Reflections on theories of self-
regulated learning and academic achievement. In B. J. Zimmerman &
D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical
perspectives (pp. 289–307). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7
Sprites and Rules: What ERPs
and Procedural Memory Can Tell
Us about Video Games
and Language Learning
Robert V. Reichle

Introduction

Language acquisition and the development of skills used in playing

video games have in common the notion of proceduralization. In this
chapter I argue that video games can tie together these two uses of pro-
cedural memory in order to maximize the chances of success in language
learning. To support this argument I review research in the event-related
potential (ERP) literature showing that, under controlled experimental
conditions, computer games have already been used to train language
learners to the point where they exhibit nativelike brain signatures of
morphosyntactic processing. Crucially in these experiments, the mor-
phosyntactic features to be acquired and perfected were tied to the
mechanics of the game. In light of the success of these training games
in controlled settings, I outline the learning principles detailed by Gee
(2003) that facilitated learning in these cases, and propose that this prac-
tice of coupling morphosyntax with gameplay mechanics could also
prove fruitful in real-world language learning settings. Turning to recent
commercial video games, I show how game developers have relied on
design techniques that take advantage of the audience’s expectations of
gameplay procedures in a way that enhances the gameplay experience.
Finally, I suggest directions for future studies on the interplay between
gameplay mechanics and language acquisition, as well as ways of design-
ing games to harness this connection for the benefit of the language
learner.

139
140 From Practice to Theory

Game mechanics and the development

of game-playing skills

The execution of gameplay in most video games can be described

in terms of the interaction between in-game entities and gameplay
mechanics. In-game entities (also referred to as agents or content)
include the player’s avatar, the avatars of other players, enemy charac-
ters, friendly characters, playing pieces, weapons, power-ups, locations,
or any other ‘person, place or thing’ interacted with by the player.
Gameplay mechanics, conversely, govern those interactions within the
game, and encompass the possible behaviors of the player and of other
in-game entities (Hunicke, LeBlanc, & Zubek, 2004). As an example
of this distinction, consider Super Mario Bros., a fairly simplistic two-
dimensional side-scrolling platformer (i.e., a game in which the player
must jump from platform to platform while avoiding obstacles). The
interactions between entities (e.g., the player-controlled Mario, mush-
rooms, fireballs, coins, power-up bricks) are governed by the limited
inputs available to the player (walk or run left or right; jump; shoot fire-
balls). In the terminology of 8- and 16-bit video games, in-game entities
are represented on-screen via sprites – small two-dimensional animations
integrated into the larger on-screen display.
Gameplay mechanics are rule-governed. By design, they apply uni-
formly given the proper in-game context, and players must internalize
these regularities in order to develop the skills needed to exploit them
and successfully apply the mechanics to gameplay. The building of inter-
nal representations of gameplay mechanics is thus a two-step process.
First, novice players must (consciously or not) acquire knowledge of the
regularities of in-game behaviors, after which they can develop the cog-
nitive/motor skills necessary to provide input to the game and execute
the behaviors available to the in-game avatar. Those who can remember
their first video game playing experience can probably recall their initial
confusion as they tried to execute in-game behaviors; if they eventu-
ally became more proficient at the game, they might now be aware
of their greater understanding of ‘how the game works’ paired with
improved manual dexterity. The automatization of this sort of cognitive-
motor skill first consists of the learner consciously relying on declarative
knowledge to steadily practice routines, followed by an eventual pro-
ceduralization of this declarative knowledge into an automatized skill
(Anderson, 1983; Anderson & Lebiere, 1998; Segalowitz & Hulstijn,
2005). In its most general definition, the term gameplay mechanics can
refer to the ensemble of the rules programmed by game designers
 Robert V. Reichle 141

(which exist in the software of the game itself) combined with the
representation of these mechanics and the associated cognitive-motor
skills that must necessarily be acquired and employed by the player to
perform these behaviors during play (Avedon, 1971; Sicart, 2008). How-
ever, from the point of view of learning and cognition, the distinction
between in-game rules and the player’s interactions within those rules
is of importance; thus, here I use the term gameplay mechanics to refer
solely to in-game rules, and skills to refer to the behaviors acquired and
performed by the player.
On their own, these observations about the development of game-
playing skills might seem far removed from the realm of language
learning. However, examining this skill development process in terms of
rule-based patterns of behavior interacting with non-decomposable in-
game referents brings to mind a dichotomy similar to the one espoused
by Ullman’s declarative/procedural model of language (Ullman, 2001,
2004). This is a dual-system model, with one system for associative
memory in the lexicon, and another system governing rule-based
processes. Crucially, what makes this model different from other dual-
system models of language is that the lexicon and grammar are parts of
larger, domain-general systems of declarative and procedural memory
that relate to the storage of facts (declarative memory) and processes
(procedural memory). Declarative memory is specialized for learning
arbitrary associations between form and meaning which, in the case of
the meanings of non-compositional words (e.g., boat, house, and ran –
words whose meaning and referents are not relatable to their form)
make up the mental lexicon. With regards to language, the procedu-
ral system consists of rules that carry out mental operations in real time,
transforming morphology and syntax by manipulating symbols. Words
whose surface forms can be predicted by grammatical rules are gov-
erned by this system. This includes such derived forms as plurals (bird ∼
bird+s) and predictable verb tenses (walk ∼ walk+ed). According to this
model, neither memory system is specific to the domain of language.
Declarative memory also retrieves facts, events, and other items subject
to conscious recollection (Eichenbaum, 1997), while procedural mem-
ory governs motor and cognitive skills (Ullman, 2001; see also Ullman,
1999; Ullman et al., 1997).
Returning to the development of game-playing skills, the acquisition
and performance of in-game behaviors should be considered a cogni-
tive/motor skill, a type of skill which Ullman’s declarative/procedural
model predicts is governed by the domain-general procedural sys-
tem. Learned associations pairing the sprites or other on-screen
142 From Practice to Theory

representations of in-game entities with meaningful identities, on the

other hand, are in general non-decomposable and unpredictable, and
would therefore fall within the domain of declarative memory. To bor-
row a turn of phrase from Pinker’s (1999) discussion of dual-system
models of language, instead of consisting of ‘words and rules’, the devel-
opment of proficiency in video games is thus a matter of acquiring
‘sprites and rules’.
Given this theoretical motivation for positing that the acquisition of
game-playing skills and morphosyntactic rules are governed by shared
memory resources, there is fertile ground for linguists and language
acquisition researchers to put this hypothetical link to the test. I am
not aware of any existing studies that have overtly addressed the pos-
sible connection between these facets of procedural memory, nor am
I aware of any work that has approached this from the angle of sec-
ond language acquisition. However, several recent electrophysiological
experiments investigating second language processing have incorpo-
rated video games into their design in a way that sheds much light on
this possible connection, and on its potential for language learning.

Game-related ERP findings

The ERP technique provides electrophysiological data corresponding to

the brain activity indexed with linguistic and other cognitive processes.
A rich and varied literature drawing on findings from this technique
has established the existence of several language-related ERP effects.
The N400 effect is a negative shift in voltage at the scalp observed
400 ms after a subject is presented with an anomaly of local lexical
semantics, such as ‘I take my coffee with cream and dog’ (Kutas &
Hillyard, 1980). This effect is larger for content words than for func-
tion words, and its amplitude is modulated by the cloze probability of
the semantically anomalous word (Kutas & Hillyard, 1984; Van Petten &
Kutas, 1991). Furthermore, manipulations of the greater discourse con-
text surrounding the target stimulus have been seen to modulate the
N400 effect (Van Berkum, Holleman, Nieuwland, Otten, & Murre,
2009; Van Berkum, van den Brink, Tesink, Kos, & Hagoort, 2008). The
P600 effect is a positive increase in voltage at centroparietal regions
of the scalp observed 600 ms after a subject is presented with a syn-
tactic anomaly, such as ‘The cats will eating the food’ (Osterhout &
Holcomb, 1992; Osterhout & Nicol, 1999). This effect often co-occurs
with an early left anterior negativity (LAN) for certain types of mor-
phosyntactic anomalies (Kluender & Kutas, 1993; Neville, Nicol, Barss,
 Robert V. Reichle 143

Forster, & Garrett, 1991; see also Friederici, 2004). Although there are
some notable exceptions to the trend (Kolk, Chwilla, van Herten, &
Oor, 2003; Kuperberg, Sitnikova, Caplan, & Holcomb, 2003), schemat-
ically speaking this amounts to a semantics/syntax dichotomy in ERP
effects that holds true for comprehenders processing their native lan-
guage. The correspondence between anomalies related to the lexicon
and the N400, and between anomalies related to morphosyntactic rules
and the LAN, has been cited by Ullman (2004) as evidence supporting
his domain-general declarative/procedural model.
In the last decade, much attention in the ERP literature has been
directed toward investigating the ERPs of second language learners. The
current consensus is that language learners display ERPs that continually
evolve as their proficiency increases. Very early in the L2 acquisition
process, learners display N400 effects when presented with semantic
anomalies, but they do not consistently exhibit a nativelike bipha-
sic LAN/P600 pattern for syntactic anomalies in their L2; rather, they
show an early negativity that more closely resembles an N400 than
the LAN one would expect among native speakers, or show a P600
effect of relatively low amplitude (Clahsen & Felser, 2006; Osterhout,
McLaughlin, Pitkänen, Frenck-Mestre, & Molinaro, 2006; Weber-Fox &
Neville, 1996). In other words, morphosyntactic anomalies do not gen-
erally correspond to nativelike ERP effects for low-proficiency learners.
However, as the learner’s L2 proficiency increases, these ERP signatures
also change. Steinhauer, White, and Drury (2009) describe a dynamic
sequence of L2 ERP components that change as a function of L2 profi-
ciency: Novice learners presented with morphosyntactic errors exhibit
an N400. Then, as proficiency increases, learners exhibit a small P600,
then a larger P600, and finally a bilateral or lateralized anterior nega-
tivity followed by a P600 essentially identical to the patterns observed
for native speakers. While recent work has shown that increasingly
nativelike ERPs correspond to increasing proficiency for learners of nat-
ural languages like English and French – including for the processing
of other types of linguistic anomalies and constructions, such as those
relating to focus structure (Reichle, 2009, 2010) – several of the early
ERP studies in this area focused on miniature subsets of natural lan-
guages (Mueller, 2005, 2006; Mueller, Hahne, Fujii, & Friederici, 2005)
or on artificial languages.
One widely cited ERP study that relied on training participants in an
artificial language was Friederici, Steinhauer, and Pfeifer’s (2002) inves-
tigation of the miniature artificial language BROCANTO. The investiga-
tors found that native German-speaking participants who were trained
144 From Practice to Theory

to a high level of proficiency in this artificial language – which contained

several morphosyntactic differences from German, while still fulfilling
the syntactic requirements of a natural language – displayed late pos-
itivity effects when presented with morphosyntactic anomalies; these
positivities resembled the P600 effects seen in the processing of native
natural languages. Participants who did not undergo the same training
did not display these nativelike signatures of processing. When it was
published, the Friederici et al. study was noted for providing early evi-
dence that language learners are capable, under the right conditions,
of exhibiting nativelike brain signatures of syntactic processing, even
when language learning occurs after any putative critical periods for
L2 acquisition. One crucial aspect of the study that has perhaps been
overlooked – and which makes it particularly relevant when address-
ing the question of video games and language learning – is that the
experimenters trained their participants to high proficiency using a
computer game.
Both participant groups in the Friederici et al. (2002) study under-
went training in the vocabulary of BROCANTO; however, only one of
the two groups received training that included learning the grammar
of the artificial language. The training for these participants consisted
of playing a two-player ‘computer board game’ specially designed for
this task. In this game, four classes of playing pieces (tok, plox, gum,
trul) carried out four types of moves (prez ‘capture’, pel ‘release’, glif
‘swap’, rix ‘buy’) on an opponent’s pieces. Participants in the training
group were instructed in the rules of this game, and engaged in sev-
eral training sessions lasting up to five hours per session. Participants
played against each other in pairs, and they were required to verbally
express all game moves in BROCANTO. After hearing a move described
verbally, the opposing player was required to update the game board on
his own computer to reflect the most recent move. The computer pro-
vided auditory corrective feedback for invalid moves, and players were
penalized for language errors, creating a situation where ‘language mas-
tery in both production and perception was necessary to win the game’
(Friederici et al., 2002, p. 530). ERP data collection using syntactically
felicitous and anomalous items took place after participants in the train-
ing group reached a 95 per cent accuracy threshold. The control group
only received instruction in the vocabulary – not morphosyntax – of
BROCANTO, to which they trained to 95 per cent accuracy.
As previously mentioned, only the group trained by computer game
displayed nativelike P600 ERP signatures when auditorily presented
with violations of the syntax of BROCANTO, and this has been
 Robert V. Reichle 145

interpreted as evidence that such effects can be observed for the pro-
cessing of late-learned L2s. Several related studies (Morgan-Short, Sanz,
Steinhauer, & Ullman, 2010; Opitz & Friederici, 2003, 2004) have suc-
cessfully addressed similar research questions using variations of this
artificial language paradigm. More important for the present volume,
however, is the link between the acquisition of the mini-language and
the participants’ gameplay experience. After the initial training session,
players’ acquisition and perfection of BROCANTO syntax took place
entirely within the context of the game, and I suggest that the similari-
ties in rule-based processing between the training in, and execution of,
video game rules and the manipulation of morphosyntactic rules facili-
tated the acquisition process. While this link is speculative, it would be
possible for future ERP studies to examine whether violations in syntax
and gameplay mechanics are associated with the same ERP effects (i.e.,
LAN and/or P600 effects), thereby adding to the debate on the nature
(exclusively linguistic versus domain-general) of the P600 component.
It is also worthwhile to examine the learning principles at work
during the Friederici et al. (2002) and Morgan-Short et al. (2010)
BROCANTO training sessions, and Gee (2003) provides a framework
for such an analysis. Approaching the BROCANTO game as what Gee
(2003) labels a ‘semiotic domain’, it is immediately apparent that the
content of this semiotic domain – that is, the ensemble of entities that
take on meaning within it – is largely valueless outside of the gameplay
context, since its nonce words and gameplay mechanics are only found
in this one game. However, as Gee has argued, it is not the content of a
game that can take on external value, but rather three processes of active
learning: ‘experiencing the world in new ways, forming new affiliations,
and preparation for future learning’ (Gee, 2003, p. 23). Furthermore,
active learning becomes critical learning when the learner develops the
meta-ability to ‘reflect on, critique, and manipulate’ the elements of
a domain (Gee, 2003, p. 40). Active, critical learning took place for
the BROCANTO player-learners: Learners experienced the world in a
new way (through the lens of the training game); they engaged in the
social process of forming affiliations as they worked with – and simul-
taneously competed against – partners undergoing the same training;
they prepared for future learning, inasmuch as successful communica-
tion in BROCANTO was required to continue (and successfully compete
in) gameplay; and players were required to have a meta-awareness of
gameplay mechanics and BROCANTO grammar when they were made
to orally state gameplay moves and when attention was drawn to their
errors in the mini-language. (One could also argue that the later ERP
146 From Practice to Theory

session may have touched on elements of meta-awareness by present-

ing participants with ungrammatical stimuli.) At the same time, the
BROCANTO training game did not exhibit some of the design princi-
ples that Gee (2003) suggests can best facilitate active learning. As this
game was played in the environment of a controlled experiment, the
players did not use their gameplay experience as grounds for interaction
with like-minded players (or, in Gee’s terms, affinity groups). Similarly,
the abstract nature of the game presumably limited the extent to which
players constructed virtual identities within the game.
A related study by Morgan-Short et al. (2010) investigated one addi-
tional set of learning principles, namely, explicit versus implicit L2
training. Prior to employing BROCANTO2 (a variant of BROCANTO)
in the computer board game, participants were trained in the grammar
of the artificial language either by means of explicit instruction with
grammatical explanations, or by an implicit instruction condition that
aimed to replicate L2 immersion by using meaningful examples from
the target language. The authors reported that low-proficiency partici-
pants only exhibited early N400 effects for gender agreement violations
if they had been part of the implicitly trained group. Explicitly trained
low-proficiency participants showed no early N400 effect, although they
did display ERP effects in later time windows and at higher levels of
proficiency. As Williams (2009) points out, this finding suggests that
induction of L2 grammatical rules is more likely to lead to nativelike
processing than explicit instruction. The BROCANTO2 results also indi-
cate that computer games can be successfully used in conjunction with
implicit learning, and that this may even prove more fruitful than pair-
ing the game with explicit instruction. It should also be noted that
during the game, even participants in the implicit training group were
provided explicit corrective feedback – a type of feedback that has been
found to be more effective than implicit feedback in some conditions
(Ellis, Loewen, & Erlam, 2009).
To summarize, these ERP studies suggest that language learners can
be trained to a high enough level of proficiency that they exhibit
nativelike brain signatures of morphosyntactic processing when the
training game couples L2 morphosyntax with gameplay mechanics and
simultaneously incorporates critical learning by featuring:

• cooperation;
• competition;
• a requirement of successful learning in order to progress;
• feedback;
• meta-awareness of gameplay mechanics.
 Robert V. Reichle 147

The first three principles are fairly standard components of modern

game design. However, the last principle presents unique challenges if
it is to be incorporated into entertaining games, if only due to the rel-
ative scarcity of commercial games that actively cultivate or demand a
meta-awareness of game rules. Nevertheless, there are several examples
from contemporary mainstream games that can give insight into how a
meta-awareness of gameplay mechanics has already been translated into
real game design.

Meta-awareness of gameplay mechanics and recent

commercial video games

By necessity, virtually all video games feature some kind of gameplay

mechanic which, as previously stated, will lead to players using proce-
dural memory systems to acquire gameplay skills. While these kinds of
gameplay mechanics are ubiquitous, it is useful to examine how game
developers have occasionally played off the audience’s expectations of
how those mechanics are supposed to work. This is illustrative because
it highlights the importance of gameplay mechanics and the acquisition
of game-playing skills in commercial game design, and it also serves as
a starting point from which we can explore ways of coupling gameplay
mechanics with L2 syntax in order to serve the goal of language learn-
ing. Here, I briefly present examples from two recent games: Batman:
Arkham Asylum and Red Dead Redemption. In both of these (critically
acclaimed and commercially successful) games, developers altered game
mechanics at crucial points in the gameplay in order to exploit the
player’s meta-awareness of gameplay mechanics and highlight moments
in the game’s narrative.
In Batman: Arkham Asylum, the player controls the comic book hero
Batman as he fights criminals and villains (such as the Joker and the
Scarecrow) in an asylum for the criminally insane. Gameplay most fre-
quently consists of engaging groups of enemies in hand-to-hand combat
or stealthily moving about an area in order to neutralize threats without
being seen. It often happens that the player fails in these combat tasks,
and encounters a ‘game over’ screen: a prompt to retry the section in
which his avatar has just been defeated. At the same time as the player
is given the option to retry or quit, a message on this screen offers the
player tips on how to progress (e.g., ‘If surrounded, use evade to escape
and give yourself more space and time’). When the player first starts the
game, there is an extended introductory cinematic sequence in which
Batman arrives at the asylum with the Joker as his prisoner. As the
story line of the game progresses, the Joker escapes and wreaks havoc,
148 From Practice to Theory

and the Scarecrow attacks Batman by exposing him to a hallucinogenic

compound that puts the player into surreal dream sequences.
Near the end of the game, when the Scarecrow attacks Batman for
the final time, the villain’s presence is not immediately made explicit
to the player. Instead, as the player guides Batman down a seemingly
innocuous hallway, the game suddenly ‘freezes’ – the game’s audio and
video appear to malfunction, the screen goes black, and the game’s
introductory sequence begins as if the game has unexpectedly restarted.
However, subtle changes to the introductory sequence soon let the
player know that the game has not restarted, but rather that this is
a continuation of the game’s narrative. The player shortly finds that
Batman is a prisoner of the Joker, who draws a gun and shoots Batman
at point blank range. The ‘game over’ screen appears, giving the player
the option of quitting or retrying, while suggesting that the player ‘use
the middle stick to dodge Joker’s gun fire’. Upon selecting the ‘retry’
option, the player finds that the preceding scenes were part of a hallu-
cinatory dream sequence, and instead of restarting the previous section,
the game continues into yet another hallucination in which the player
takes control of Batman to fight the Scarecrow.
This ten-minute-long segment of the game plays off of the audience’s
expectations at several points. From the simulated hardware failure to
the altered introductory sequence, the designers have attempted to trick
the player into thinking that the game is starting over. This goes against
the expectation that, by playing the game, the player can see it to com-
pletion (rather than having to arbitrarily start over due to a bug in
the program). When the Joker fatally shoots Batman and the player is
prompted to progress through the section by using ‘the middle stick’ –
which does not exist, given that current game control peripherals only
have two sticks – the designers feign toward tricking the player into
believing that he could have avoided failing, if only he had played bet-
ter. These illusory violations of the procedures of gameplay make for a
memorable, and appropriately ‘scary’, moment in the game.
The rules of success and failure are similarly violated at the end of
Red Dead Redemption, a ‘sandbox’ (i.e., open-ended exploration) game in
which the player controls a reformed outlaw exploring a fictionalized
version of the old American West. The player makes frequent use of
‘dead eye’, a gameplay mechanic that allows him to slow time down in
order to make precise shots with six-shooters, rifles, or other types of
weaponry. As is common for sandbox games, the player can choose to
ignore the main story line in the game – in which the main character
is blackmailed back into gunslinging in order to save his wife and son,
 Robert V. Reichle 149

whom he hoped to raise in a life without violence – and an ‘honor’

mechanic allows the player to build an in-game reputation as either a
do-gooder or outlaw.
While the core mechanics of the game – as well as its narrative
themes – explicitly emphasize the player’s ability to choose his moral
alignment, two points near the end of the main story line contradict
any expectation players might have of controlling their in-game des-
tiny. When player-controlled John Marston is finally cornered by the
lawmen who have been seeking him, the game enters into ‘dead eye’
mode, giving the player several seconds to carefully line up shots and
take out as many lawmen as possible. However, the game artificially
limits the player’s ability to succeed at this: The player only has access
to a weapon with a small number of rounds (unlike the other, more
advanced weapons the player has by now unlocked), and there are far
too many opponents for the player to defeat. Instead of giving the player
the option of surrendering (the morally optimal option, from the point
of view of a player trying to live a lawful life in-game), the game forces
the John Marston character to resist and be killed in a shootout. In the
final scenes of the game, the player takes control of John Marston’s
son Jack – the son John had tried to steer away from the life of a gun-
slinger – and is put in the position of avenging Jack’s father in a duel.
But, contrary to all the other duels in the game, there is no option of
disarming the player’s opponent; rather, the player must fatally shoot
him, or else fail that section of the game. To the player attempting
to lead a lawful life in which Jack does not become an outlaw, the
optimally lawful choice is once again taken away by the game develop-
ers. In other words, a game whose story line and gameplay mechanics
paid service to the ideas of free will and redemption breaks its own
rules in order to remove that freedom from the player in the game’s
final scenes.
These examples illustrate how commercial game designers create sat-
isfying gameplay experiences by going against gamers’ expectations
of gameplay mechanics. In other words, they know that players have
enough meta-knowledge of gameplay mechanics that violations of these
mechanics will elicit an emotional response. From the language learn-
ing perspective, this meta-knowledge of gameplay mechanics can be
put to use as an opportunity for those who create games to exploit
violations of expectations to both engage players and simultaneously
force them to be aware of gameplay mechanics. If, as I propose, the
gameplay mechanics of language learning games are made to coin-
cide with the rules of morphosyntax in the L2, then this game design
150 From Practice to Theory

approach would be effective at ensuring that learners acquire the rules

of, and are consciously attentive to, the grammatical rules of the L2.

Future directions

The question for future practical work in this area is therefore how to
combine the rules of L2 morphosyntax with the mechanics of gameplay
so that grammar can be proceduralized during the acquisition of
gameplay skills, at the same time that players develop a meta-awareness
of the structure of the L2 which is in turn engaged during gameplay.
Games set in two diverse environments – the court of law, and worlds
where people use magic – present the opportunity to incorporate lan-
guage use into gameplay mechanics in such a way. Both settings can be
made to employ speech acts as an integral part of gameplay. For exam-
ple, Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney is one in a series of courtroom-based
adventure games in which the player-controlled titular lawyer examines
witnesses and collects evidence with the goal of defending clients on
trial. The most meaningful actions in the courtroom segments of the
game are either interactions with other characters during cross exami-
nation or performing such speech acts as protesting to statements made
by the prosecution (‘Objection!’). Language-learning games set in a sim-
ilar milieu could employ a variation of this gameplay mechanic whereby
the player is required to write grammatical sentences in order to exam-
ine witnesses. Similarly, the player might be required to raise objections
in court not by identifying false testimony, but by monitoring sentences
to identify grammatical or lexical infelicities.
In the same vein, games based on magic and wizardry present another
opportunity for the performance of grammatical speech acts to be a req-
uisite for successful gameplay. If words must be recited by the player’s
character in order to cast a spell, the player might have to construct
these utterances on his own, or monitor the speech of opponents for
errors to prevent them from casting spells. The Elder Scrolls series of
sword-and-sorcery role-playing games has long featured an elaborate
spell-casting system, and Skyrim, the latest installment in the series,
expands on this system by introducing a speech-act-oriented system of
casting spells using ‘dragon shouts’. Each time the player slays a dragon
during the course of the game, he acquires a new battle cry that bestows
offensive or defensive advantages when utilized in combat. While the
most basic implementation of dragon shouts relies on simply pressing
a button to cause one’s avatar to utter a battle cry, advanced players
can further develop their shouts by seeking out ancient relics covered
 Robert V. Reichle 151

in runes. Reading the right runes allows the player to learn new words
in this ‘dragon language’, thereby expanding the simplistic shouts into
longer phrases. This mechanic is of course tailored to a fantasy set-
ting, but one can easily imagine using an analogous mechanic that
replaces the constructed dragon language with a real-world target lan-
guage, and that forces players to not only find new words and syntactic
constructions in the gameplay world, but additionally combine them
grammatically before being awarded gameplay advantages.
Note that these suggestions allow for flexibility in the degree of
metalinguistic knowledge required by the player/learner. A gameplay
mechanic that relies on the identification of ungrammatical utterances
presupposes a certain amount of metalinguistic knowledge on the part
of the player, and might be better coupled with explicit language
instruction. A mechanic that relies more on the acquisition and com-
bination of new words and structures, on the other hand, could allow
for more implicit instruction as the player discovers for himself what
combinations work, and in what contexts. In light of recent findings on
the neurocognitive substrates engaged by implicit and explicit language
learning (e.g.,Morgan-Short et al., 2010; Williams, 2009), as well as
other studies on the effectiveness of explicit versus implicit instruction
(e.g.,Reinders & Ellis, 2009), computer games that maximize opportu-
nities for implicit learning could potentially lead to more nativelike
processing. This possibility warrants further investigation.
As the examples of Batman and Red Dead Redemption illustrate, com-
mercial game developers already rely on the player’s meta-awareness
of game rules for narrative or emotional effect. Crucially, the above
gameplay suggestions unite meta-awareness of gameplay mechanics
with metalinguistic knowledge. Whether implicitly or explicitly, players
must learn what constitutes a valid utterance in order to execute in-
game actions, and when these mechanics correspond to L2 syntax, there
is also a correspondence between meta-awareness of game rules and
metalinguistic knowledge. We should thus expect players of language
learning games to develop a similar awareness, which can be exploited
to facilitate noticing and awareness of L2 forms.
These possible implementations of syntax-as-gameplay mechanics –
or others like them – could conceivably be integrated into game design
without overwhelming the player with the notion that they are engag-
ing in ‘edutainment’, all the while preserving the learning principles
identified as having contributed to the success of the BROCANTO train-
ing game. At the same time, the theoretically motivated link between
morphosyntactic processing and gameplay skills has implications both
152 From Practice to Theory

for linguistic and second language acquisition research. The shared use
of procedural memory raises the possibility that similar ERP signatures
would be observed for morphosyntactic violations and for violations of
the rules of gameplay (either with regards to the mechanics in-game,
or inasmuch as the player’s input to the game does not correspond
to an expected outcome). While there is some evidence for late pos-
itivities similar to the P600 ERP component in non-morphosyntactic
domains such as music and mathematics (Heras, & Fernández-Frías,
2006; Martín-Loeches, Casado, Gonzalo, de Núñez-Peña, & Honrubia-
Serrano, 2004; Patel, Gibson, Ratner, Besson, & Holcomb, 1998; see also
Gouvea, Phillips, Kazanina, & Poeppel, 2010), to my knowledge there
are no ERP studies of violations in expected gameplay behavior. Future
work in this area would be crucial to determining the nature of the link
between these two uses of procedural memory, and would at the same
time inform the debate on the purely linguistic versus domain-general
nature of the P600 effect.

References
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Avedon, E. M. (1971). The structural elements of games. In E. M. Avedon &
B. Sutton-Smith (Eds.), The study of games (pp. 419–426).New York: Wiley and
Sons.
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). How native-like is non-native language process-
ing? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(12), 564–570.
Eichenbaum, H. (1997). Declarative memory: Insights from cognitive neurobiol-
ogy. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 547–572.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2009). Implicit and explicit corrective feed-
back and the acquisition of L2 grammar. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder,
R. Erlam, J. Philp, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second
language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 303–332). Bristol, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
Friederici, A. D. (2004). The neural basis of syntactic processes. In M. S. Gazzaniga
(Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences III (pp. 789–801). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Friederici, A. D., Steinhauer, K., & Pfeifer, E. (2002). Brain signatures of artificial
language processing: Evidence challenging the critical period hypothesis. Pro-
ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(1),
529–534.
Gee, J. P. (2003) What video games have to teach us about language and literacy.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gouvea, A. C., Phillips, C., Kazanina, N., & Poeppel, D. (2010). The linguis-
tic processes underlying the P600. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(2),
149–188.
 Robert V. Reichle 153

Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., and Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A formal approach to game
design and game research. In Proceedings of the AAAI workshop on challenges
in game AI, 19th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Technical Report
WS-04-04. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Kluender, R., & Kutas, M. (1993). Bridging the gap: Evidence from ERPs on the
processing of unbounded dependencies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(2),
196–214.
Kolk, H. H. J., Chwilla, D. J., van Herten, M., & Oor, P. J. W. (2003). Structure
and limited capacity in verbal working memory: A study with event-related
potentials. Brain and Language, 85, 1–36.
Kuperberg, G. R., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D., & Holcomb, P. (2003).
Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within
simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 117–129.
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials
reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203–205.
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word
expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307(1), 161–163.
Martín-Loeches, M., Casado, P., Gonzalo, R., de Heras, L., & Fernández-Frías,
C. (2006) Brain potentials to mathematical syntax problems. Psychophysiology,
43, 579–591.
Morgan-Short, K., Sanz, C., Steinhauer, K., & Ullman, M. T. (2010). Second
language acquisition of gender agreement in explicit and implicit train-
ing conditions: An event-related potential study. Language Learning, 60(1),
154–193.
Mueller, J. L. (2005). Electrophysiological correlates of second language process-
ing. Second Language Research, 21(2), 152–174.
Mueller, J. L. (2006). L2 in a nutshell: The investigation of second language pro-
cessing in the miniature language model. Language Learning, 56(s1), 235–270.
Mueller, J. L., Hahne, A., Fujii, Y., & Friederici, A. D. (2005). Native and nonnative
speakers’ processing of a miniature version of Japanese as revealed by ERPs.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(8), 1229–1244.
Neville, H., Nicol, J. L., Barss, A., Forster, K. I., & Garrett, M. F. (1991). Syntac-
tically based sentence processing classes: Evidence from event-related brain
potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3(2), 151–165.
Núñez-Peña, M. I., & Honrubia-Serrano, M. L. (2004). P600 related to rule
violation in an arithmetic task. Cognitive Brain Research, 18, 130–141.
Opitz, B., & Friederici, A. D. (2003). Interactions of the hippocampal system
and the prefrontal cortex in learning language-like rules. Neuroimage, 19(4),
1730–1737.
Opitz, B., & Friederici, A. D. (2004). Brain correlates of language learning: The
neuronal dissociation of rule-based versus similarity-based learning. The Jour-
nal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 24(39),
8436–8440.
Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by
syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785–806.
Osterhout, L., McLaughlin, J., Pitkänen, I., Frenck-Mestre, C., & Molinaro,
N. (2006). Novice learners, longitudinal designs, and event-related potentials:
A means for exploring the neurocognition of second language processing.
Language Learning, 56(s1), 199–230.
154 From Practice to Theory

Osterhout, L., & Nicol, J. (1999). On the distinctiveness, independence, and time
course of the brain responses to syntactic and semantic anomalies. Language
and Cognitive Processes, 14(3), 283–317.
Patel, A. D., Gibson, E., Ratner, J., Besson, M., & Holcomb, P. J. (1998). Processing
syntactic relations in language and music: An event-related potentials study.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 717–733.
Pinker, S. (1999) Words and rules. New York: HarperCollins.
Reichle, R. V. (2009). ERP correlates of syntactic focus structure processing:
Evidence from L1 and L2 French. In J. Chandlee, M. Franchini, S. Lord, &
G. Rheiner (Eds.), BUCLD 33: Proceedings of the 33rd annual Boston university con-
ference on language development. Vol. 2 (pp. 420–431). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla
Press.
Reichle, R. V. (2010). Near-nativelike processing of contrastive focus in L2
French. In B. VanPatten & J. Jegerski (Eds.), Research in second language processing
and parsing (pp. 321–344). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Reinders, H., & Ellis, R. (2009). The effects of two types of enhanced input
on intake and the acquisition of implicit and explicit knowledge. In R. Ellis,
S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit
knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 281–302). Bristol,
UK: Multilingual Matters.
Segalowitz, N., & Hulstijn, J. (2005). Automaticity in bilingualism and second
language learning. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. De Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingual-
ism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 371–388). Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press.
Sicart, M. A. (2008) Defining game mechanics. Game Studies, 8(2), http://
gamestudies.org/0802/articles/sicart
Steinhauer, K., White, E. J., Drury, J. E. (2009). Temporal dynamics of late sec-
ond language acquisition: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Second
Language Research, 25(1), 13–41.
Ullman, M. T. (1999). The functional neuroanatomy of inflectional morphology.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1041–1042.
Ullman, M. T. (2001). The declarative/procedural model of lexicon and grammar.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(1), 37–69.
Ullman, M. T. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language: The
declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92(1–2), 231–270.
Ullman, M. T., Corkin, S., Coppola, M., Hickok, G., Growdon, J. H., Koroshetz,
W. J., et al. (1997). A neural dissociation within language: Evidence that the
mental dictionary is part of declarative memory, and that grammatical rules
are processed by the procedural system. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(2),
266–276.
Van Berkum, J. J., Holleman, B., Nieuwland, M., Otten, M., & Murre, J. (2009).
Right or wrong? The brain’s fast response to morally objectionable statements.
Psychological Science: A Journal of the American Psychological Society/APS, 20(9),
1092–1099.
Van Berkum, J. J., van den Brink, D., Tesink, C. M., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008).
The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,
20(4), 580–591.
Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1991). Influences of semantic and syntactic context
on open and closed class words. Memory and Cognition, 19, 95–112.
 Robert V. Reichle 155

Weber-Fox, C. M., & Neville, H. J. (1996) Maturational constraints on func-

tional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in
bilingual speakers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8(3), 231–256.
Williams, J. N. (2009). Implicit learning in second language acquisition. In
W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition
(pp. 319–353). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
8
Talk to Me! Games and Students’
Willingness to Communicate
Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana

In recent years there has been a lot of interest in the potential role of
computer games in language education. Playing games is said to be moti-
vating to students and to benefit the development of social skills, such
as collaboration, and metacognitive skill, such as planning and orga-
nization. An important potential benefit is also that games encourage
the use of the target language in a non-threatening environment. Will-
ingness to communicate has been shown to affect L2 acquisition in a
number of ways and it is therefore important to investigate if there is a
connection between playing games and learners’ interaction in the tar-
get language. In this chapter we report on the results of a pilot study
that investigated the effects of playing an online multiplayer game on
the quantity and quality of L2 interaction in the game and on par-
ticipants’ willingness to communicate in the target language. We will
show that computer games can indeed affect L2 interaction patterns
and contribute to L2 acquisition, but that this depends, as in all other
teaching and learning environments, on careful pedagogic planning of
the activity.

The rationale for computer games in language education

Recent years have seen a growing interest in the pedagogical benefits of

computer games for language learning. Gee (2003), for example, iden-
tified 36 learning principles that he found to be present in many of
the games he investigated. An example of these is the ‘Active, Critical
Learning Principle’. This stipulates that ‘All aspects of the learning envi-
ronment (including the ways in which the semiotic domain is designed
and presented) are set up to encourage active and critical, not passive,
learning.’ In other words, computer games engage learners and involve

156
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 157

in the tasks at hand. A second principle is the ‘Regime of Competence

Principle’ where ‘the learner gets ample opportunity to operate within,
but at the outer edge of, his or her resources, so that at those points
things are felt as challenging but not “undoable” ’ (idem.). Most games
adapt to the player’s level until they succeed, at which point new chal-
lenges appear. These principles are intuitively appealing and grounded
in educational research, but it is not clear how and to what extent
they are related to L2 acquisition. There is not much research on the
effects of gameplay on learning a second language, and so the purpose
of this chapter is to review this small body of research, then describe
the results of a study investigating the relationship between partici-
pation in an online multiplayer gaming environment, L2 interaction
patterns and participants’ attitudes towards interacting in the target lan-
guage (English). We limit ourselves in this study to an investigation of
the acquisition of aspects of the target language. We acknowledge the
importance of sociocultural and ecological views of language acquisi-
tion (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron 2008; Van Lier 2004) but these were
not the focus of this study. For a ‘cognitive ethnography’ of gaming and
its effect on literacy practices, we refer the reader to Steinkuehler (2006,
2007).

The effects of gameplay on L2 acquisition

Many claims are made for the benefits of games on affective factors
such as anxiety and motivation, but few studies have directly investi-
gated the effects of computer game on L2 acquisition. An example of
such a study was conducted by de Haan, Reed and Kuwada (2010), who
investigated the effects of playing a computer game, versus watching
it, on immediate and delayed recall of vocabulary by Japanese learners.
Participants in the study were given a music game in which the play-
ers had to complete parts of a song by pressing controller buttons at
the correct time. Participants in this study did not collaborate but were
interacting only with the computer (Chapelle’s human-computer inter-
action, 2001). An important feature of the study, and perhaps a major
limitation, is that participants did not have to understand the English
in order to play the game. The authors found that playing the game
resulted in less vocabulary acquisition than watching it (although both
resulted in learning gains), probably as a result of the greater cognitive
load of having to interact with the game. A post-experimental question-
naire revealed that there was no difference between players and watchers
in terms of their mental effort, so the effects are due only to their
158 From Practice to Theory

interaction with the game. The authors argue that playing games and
interactivity are therefore not necessarily conducive to language acqui-
sition. However, it is of course important to understand these findings
in light of the fact that the language was not a focal part of participants’
experience and that they could complete the tasks without attention
to the vocabulary. It is therefore important that future studies investi-
gate gaming environments that do involve meaningful language use.
Another limitation of this study was the nature of the game that was
chosen. This particular type of game did not include a more narrative
component, where immediate action is required, such as is common in
many adventure games. This may have mitigated against participants
having the time to notice the language.
That noticing linguistic elements in an environment where the pri-
mary focus is not on language is possible in a gaming environment
was shown by Piirainen-Marsh and Tainio (2009), who used Conver-
sation Analysis to examine how two teenage boys repeated language
elements in the game to show their involvement and to make sense of
the game. Video recordings of their game interactions showed frequent
repetitions both in the form of immediate imitation but also for antic-
ipatory use and to recontextualize previously heard utterances, or to
expand on them. The authors conclude: ‘On the whole, repetition offers
a flexible resource through which the participants display continued
attention to relevant features of the game and co-construct the collabo-
rative play activity’ (p. 166). This study did not investigate the effects of
this repetition on linguistic acquisition, however.
Similarly, Zheng, Young, Wagner, & Brewer (2009) focused on the
effects of gameplay on the interaction and collaborative construction of
cultural and discourse practices between native and non-native speakers
in the educational game Quest Atlantis. The collaborative nature of the
game required a deep exchange between the two dyads of players and
encouraged the development of not only semantic and syntactic, but
also pragmatic knowledge, and both from native to non-native speaker
and vice versa. The authors refer to this type of interaction as negotiation
for action.
Chen and Johnson (2004) modded a commercial role-playing game
called Neverwinter Nights to investigate whether a computer game simu-
lating a foreign language learning context could promote a state of ‘flow’
and motivate students to practise language skills (Spanish in the case of
this study) outside of the classroom. The authors used questionnaires,
video transcripts, field notes and a post-game interview to investigate
this but realized that there were significant differences in the amount
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 159

of experience the participants had with playing games, and that this
strongly affected their ability to play the game successfully. For exam-
ple, the one participant who did have previous game-playing experience
felt more comfortable in the game, spent less time accomplishing the
tasks, and self-reported a higher level of enjoyment and flow in the game
than the other participants. This study thus highlighted the importance
of sufficient training, both to encourage greater success in playing the
game and to minimize the possiblity of differences between students
acting as a confounding factor in subsequent analyses.
A key element in the studies above, and in discussions of computer
games in education in general, is that learners more actively participate
in the activity at hand (see also Garcia-Carbonell, Rising, Montero, &
Watts, 2001). In language learning, this means that games are sug-
gested to encourage more interaction in the L2. We therefore now briefly
discuss the importance of interaction on L2 acquisition.

The role of interaction in L2 acquisition

Interaction is the term used to refer to the interpersonal activity that

takes place both face-to-face and electronically between people or
between people and computer, as well as the intrapersonal activity that
occurs within our minds (Chapelle, 2001). Interaction in the foreign lan-
guage has been found to contribute to language acquisition. Interaction
helps generate comprehensible input (Krashen, 1985), encourages nego-
tiation of meaning (Pica, 1994), facilitates noticing (Schmidt, 1990),
produces negative feedback (Schmidt, ibid.) and encourages output
(Swain, 1985). Swain’s Output Hypothesis (1985) posits that, for success-
ful second language acquisition (SLA) to occur, comprehensible input
alone is insufficient, but learners must also be given opportunities to try
out new language and produce comprehensible output during interac-
tion, which in turn enables them to develop competence in the target
language.
For comprehensible output to be produced, however, learners have
to be pushed in their language production. Pica (1994) claimed that
negotiation of meaning helps learners make input comprehensible and
helps them modify their own output, which, in turn, provides oppor-
tunities for them to acquire new language. Similar claims for the
benefits of negotiation have been made by Long (1996) in his Inter-
action Hypothesis. According to Long, negotiation of meaning during
interaction contributes significantly to L2 comprehension and the neg-
ative feedback received through negotiation facilitates L2 development,
160 From Practice to Theory

particularly for vocabulary, morphology and syntax. Negotiation also

provides opportunities for learners to focus their attention on linguistic
form and to notice aspects of the target language. Noticing has been
considered important because when input is noticed, it can become
intake; this is, input that the learner has comprehended semantically
and syntactically, which facilitates acquisition (Schmidt, 1990). In addi-
tion, noticing pushes learners into a more syntactic processing mode
that will help them to internalize new forms and improve the accuracy
of their existing grammatical knowledge.
All of the above, however, assumes that learners are not only given
opportunities to produce the target language, but are also willing to
make use of this opportunity. The crucial aspect of ‘willingness to
communicate’ is therefore discussed below.

Willingness to communicate

Many claims have been made for the benefits of games on lowering
affective barriers and encouraging learners to interact within a target
domain. In the area of L2 acquisition this can have potentially impor-
tant implications, as decades of research have convincingly shown that
exposure to L2 input affects L2 acquisition (Ellis, 2002). However, even if
learners have potential access to input, this does not mean that they are
willing or able to interact with that input. Willingness to communicate
(WTC) as an SLA concept emerged from previous research on ‘predispo-
sitions toward verbal behaviour’ (Mortensen, Arntson, & Lustig, 1977),
‘shyness’ (McCroskey & Richmond, 1982), and ‘unwillingness to com-
municate’ (Burgoon, 1976). Studies were initially mainly done on first
language acquisition. When applied to L2 learning, WTC was used to
explain why communicative competence alone is necessary but not suf-
ficient for effective communication in the target language; situational
influences affect willingness to initiate or engage in communication
(MacIntyre, Dörnyei, Clément, & Noels, 1998). In this view, WTC in
an L2 is defined as ‘readiness to enter into the discourse at a particu-
lar time with a specific person or persons, using a L2’ (MacIntyre et al.,
1998, p. 547).
WTC has been found to influence the frequency with which learn-
ers engage in L2 communication (Clement, Baker, & MacIntyre, 2003;
Yashima, 2002), which in turn is related to the development of L2
communication skills. WTC is also regarded as a crucial factor in ulti-
mate proficiency levels in second language production (Kang, 2005);
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 161

the more use of the L2, the more likely that L2 proficiency will develop
(although of course, proficiency does not necessarily extend to gram-
matical accuracy or nativelike language use, as demonstrated by Swain
and others). Consequently, WTC has been proposed as a fundamen-
tal goal of L2 learning and instruction in line with the emphasis on
authentic L2 communication as an essential part of L2 learning and to
increase the likelihood of learners actually using the target language, not
only in class, but also in more naturalistic settings (MacIntyre, Baker,
Clément, & Conrod, 2001; MacIntyre, Baker, Clément, & Donovan,
2003; MacIntyre et al., 1998)
MacIntyre and colleagues (1998) conceptualized WTC in the L2 as a
layered pyramid model in which a range of different variables influence
L2 learners’ eventual L2 use (see Figure 8.1). The authors propose that
WTC is influenced by both situational influences (Layers I, II, III) and
enduring influences (Layers IV, V, VI). As the learner moves up the pyra-
mid, the learner has more control over the act of communicating in
an L2.
Past studies into WTC have demonstrated its positive effect on L2
acquisition; a willingness to communicate is clearly related to the likeli-
hood of students improving their L2 skills, particularly in productive

1
Communication
Layer I L2 use behaviour
2
Behavioural
Layer II Willingness to
intention
communicate

Desire to 3 4 Situated
communicate State
Layer III with a specific communicative antecedents
person self-confidence
5 6 7
Motivational
Layer IV Interpersonal Intergroup L2 propensities
motivation motivation Self-confidence

8 9 10

Layer V Intergroup Social Communicative Affective-cognitive

attitudes situation competence context
11 12
Social and individual
Layer VI Intergroup climate Personality context

Figure 8.1 Heuristic model of variables influencing WTC

Source: MacIntyre et al., 1998, p. 547
162 From Practice to Theory

skills. Major findings from WTC studies indicated that learners who
demonstrate WTC interact in the target language actively, which, in
turn, contributes to increased frequency and greater amount of L2 use
(Clement et al., 2003; Freiermuth & Jarrell, 2006; Hashimoto, 2002;
MacIntyre & Charos, 1996; Yashima, Zenuk-Nishide, & Shimizu, 2004).
L2 researchers have recognized that language learners who are more
active with L2 use have a greater potential to develop language pro-
ficiency as a result of having more opportunities to communicate
with others. Language learners who are more willing to communi-
cate have been found to have more potential to practise in an L2
(MacIntyre et al., 2001), improve their communicative skills (Yashima
et al., 2004), acquire language fluency (Derwing, Munro, & Thomson,
2008), and generally achieve greater language proficiency (MacIntyre
et al., 1998, 2001; Yashima, 2002). Clearly, an important aim of L2
instruction should be to improve willingness to communicate, and for
L2 acquisition research to investigate how this can best be done.
Games can affect some aspects of the above variables influencing L2
WTC. As games are considered by learners as ‘fun’ and engaging, they
generally create low anxiety environments. Intergroup attitudes within
gaming environments are based on expectations of constant interaction
and the social situation is frequently one that is non-hierarchical and
inclusive, and one in which the (L2) participant has a genuine desire
to communicate. In addition, games, particularly MMORPGs (massively
multiplayer online role-playing games such as World of Warcraft), pro-
vide opportunities for authentic interaction and social support, increas-
ing exposure to authentic L2 input and opportunities for L2 output.
Such social support is found crucial for developing levels of WTC,
especially outside the classroom (MacIntyre et al., 2001).

The study

Willingness to communicate has been shown to affect L2 acquisition,

and the use of computer games is thought to facilitate L2 commu-
nication. In this study we are interested in the relationship between
participating in MMORPG games and L2 interaction and therefore pose
the following questions:

(1) What effects does playing a MMORPG have on (a) the quantity and
(b) quality of L2 interaction?
(2) What effects does playing a MMORPG have on learners’ WTC?
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 163

Methodology

Participants
The participants were ten male and six female fourth-year undergrad-
uate IT students, between 21 and 26 years of age, at a university in
Thailand. All of them indicated that they had played MMORPGs before
and played computer games on average 27 hours per week. In addition,
all males and three of the females had played Ragnarok, the game used in
this study, before. We therefore did not expect participants to be unduly
affected by novelty and training effects. Their English proficiency lev-
els ranged from beginning to intermediate, as indicated by their grades
from a previous language course, as well as their test scores on the uni-
versity test of English proficiency. The pre-survey result revealed that
the participants had no other contact with English other than during
the class, that 14 of them considered their English communication skills
only as ‘fair’.

The game and how it was adapted

Using a commercial game has the advantage of enabling students to
use a high-end and attractive product. It is, however, difficult to find
the right type of game with a design and with content that are appro-
priate for L2 learners and that match the desired learning outcomes.
Consequently, we decided to modify an existing game called Ragnarok
Online, the most popular MMORPG in Thailand. We obtained permis-
sion from its Thai distributors to use the game in the Computer Assisted
Language Learning (CALL) lab of a university, using a private server,
and to modify the game in order to ensure its appropriateness to the
L2 learning context, as well as its alignment with our learning activities
and objectives.
Although the game contains a variety of authentic scenarios and tasks
(similar to those that players may need to achieve in real life), the con-
tent of the original game was considered less than ideal as a CALL
environment, in the sense that the opportunities for target language
exposure and ‘language learning potential’ (Chapelle, 2001) were lim-
ited. This was due to the fact that the original game was created for Thai
native speakers as a form of entertainment, not education. The inter-
national version available from Ragnarok’s servers was considered, but it
was not possible to obtain permission to use it for our study. Also, the
international version may not be suitable in terms of the language level
used, which could easily be too advanced.
164 From Practice to Theory

Another important reason for modifying the game was that the
original in-game quests were considered to be too long for the study
participants to complete during class time. The modification in this
study, as a result, meant creating new quest events relevant to the
course that the participants were on, to allow for application of language
skills at the level appropriate. The modification also meant inserting
language learning content inside the game activities to use in ways
perceived to be meaningful to students. Generally, the modified ver-
sion of Ragnarok Online had some differences in the number of players,
gameplay, language and game server as shown below (Table 8.1).
Ragnarok Online was chosen because it is one of the most popu-
lar games in Thailand. Students could therefore be expected to be
more likely to know about it or be interested in playing it. We also
chose it because this game allowed us to make partial modifications
and extensions to the original game and host the game on our own
server, giving us more control. The most important reason, however,
was that Ragnarok Online requires participants to communicate in order
to progress in the game more quickly, and for this reason it seemed
particularly suited as a medium for our study.
In this study, computer games were used as CALL and integrated as
part of the regular language course. Overall, there were two objectives for
CALL activities in the form of computer games. The first objective was to
give students opportunities to review the course material through play,
or ‘plearn’, for ‘play and learn’, which is also the Thai word for ‘enjoy’
(Samudavanija, 1999). The term plearn is one of the most important
concepts in Thai education, stressing that learning should be an enjoy-
able activity and students should gain knowledge through their play.
As part of playing newly modified quests, students had opportunities
to learn and practise the vocabulary and language skills they studied in
class in a fun way. By lowering the affective barrier, the intention was
to encourage students to relax and learn in a more natural way (Aoki,
1999). The other objective of using computer games was to encourage
more participation. Thai students are notoriously reticent and generally
avoid interaction in English classes (Kamprasertwong, 2010). By encour-
aging students to work together in a non-threatening environment, the
aim was to encourage them to become more actively involved in the
learning process.
Three new quests – the missions that players are assigned to accom-
plish in order to get items and progress throughout the game – were
specifically designed in agreement with the learning activities and
objectives of the three lessons with which computer games activities
 165

Table 8.1 A comparison between official and modified Ragnarok Online

Original Ragnarok Online Modified Ragnarok Online

Description Ragnarok Online is set in a fantasy and adventure world inspired

by a Norse mythology and a popular Korean comic series by
Lee Myung-jin. The game provides collaboration and social
interaction, allowing players to interact with others, undertake
quests and combat computer-controlled enemies.

Genre Massively multiplayer online Multiplayer online

role-playing game (MMORPG) role-playing game
In the study, access was limited
to study participants only.

Environment The game environment is divided into a series of maps with

their own unique terrains and native monsters. Game events
take place in different game locations. Players are free to
explore the game environment in a non-linear manner,
although they are all required to start in the same part of the
online world.

Gameplay Players can use the keyboard and the mouse to control most of
and tasks the basic functions. Players can create several characters per
account but they can only control one character at a time.
Players begin as ‘Novices’ and then gain new skills and abilities
as they specialize in the job they choose and earn experience
points and level up. In general, basic gameplay involves:

• Finding the starting NPC and then accepting a quest for

special rewards required to progress to the next one.
• Interacting with NPCs in order through controlled dialogues.
• Engaging in non-violent combat by attacking monsters
wandering around each game area in order to collect the
items required for quest completion and gain experience
and level up.

However, a few differences in gameplay for regular players and

study participants are:

• Collaborating and • Collaborating and

communicating with other
players in their native
language via an in-game
communication tool.
• Undertaking optional series
of quests from NPC for job
advancements.
communicating with other
players in English via both
an in-game communication
tool and additional voice
communication software.
166
Table 8.1 (Continued)
Original Ragnarok Online
Quest Quests in original Ragnarok
Description Online are for item hunting
and NPC searching. During
and after completing the
quest, players will receive
special rewards required to
advance to other quests.
Language The regional (Thailand)
version of Ragnarok Online
is in Thai.
Game server • The official game is run
and managed by
authorized game servers.
• Players have to pay by a
monthly subscription
or by pre-paid card.
Modified Ragnarok Online
The original game quests were
modified to encourage participants
to use the target language and
practise the vocabulary and
language skills they learned in class
in a fun way.
To complete the quests,
participants were asked to talk to
NPCs, read texts, listen to NPCs’
dialogue and talk to other players
via either text or oral chat.
Participants were asked to
collaborate as they planed
game strategies, discussed
maps, solved problems, made
decisions, helped each other and
exchanged information to progress
throughout the quests.
During and after game events
participants were offered certain
in-game rewards such as base and
skill levels, top headgear and items
required to proceed to the next
quests. In addition, participants
were given immediate and
continuous in-game feedback
when they chose wrong responses
while communicating with NPCs
through controlled dialogue.
The entire game is available in
English only.
• The modified version of
Ragnarok Online is implemented
on a private server administered
by the researchers, allowing only
the participants of this study to
play the game together free of
charge.
• This server is carried out for the
purpose of this study only.
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 167

Table 8.2 A mapping of learning objectives of unit 2 to gaming activities

Unit The objectives for this unit Computer game activities are:
are for the students to:

2. Computer 1. Use names and types of Quest Event:

Architecture computers and computer
features
2. Understand computer
advertisements
3. Understand computing
terms and abbreviations
4. Make inquiries and give
answers about computer
specifications
5. Describe the function of an
item
6. Give instructions
Looking for a computer shop
sales assistant
Quest Description:
Students were required to pass
the test about computer
knowledge (i.e., names and
types of computers 1,
computing terms and
abbreviations 3). They were
asked to complete several tasks
(i.e., reading computer ads 2,
describing computer specs 4,
using computing terms and
abbreviations 3, describing
functions 5) in order to be
employed as a new sales
assistant in a computer shop.
Students needed to talk to the
Shop Manager to start the
quest, help a Customer, hunt
for required items, exchange
ideas and information, listen to
each other, and help each
other to progress in the quest.
This help could include giving
their friends instructions 6 on
how to complete each task in
the quest.

were integrated, as well as students’ English proficiency at a university

level. The development of new quests was in alignment with particu-
lar lessons; the quests purposefully contained scenarios, language and
lexical items related to what the students had previously studied in
class. Table 8.2 shows an example of how learning objectives were
mapped to activities in Ragnarok Online. Figure 8.2 shows an example
of a screenshot of the modified quest for this study. The tasks in the
quests constantly gave students instantaneous feedback and gradually
increased in difficulty as the game progressed to encourage more com-
munication. Each quest was designed to fit into a 90-minute teaching
168 From Practice to Theory

Figure 8.2 A screenshot of quest event called ‘looking for a computer shop sales
assistant’

session in a CALL lab. Each quest itself lasted approximately 40 minutes

but the remaining class time was devoted to the integration of support-
ing activities such as preparation and debriefing. Only data for quests 1
and 3 were recorded and are reported here.

Procedures
Students were requested to participate in three computer game ses-
sions. Before starting each session, a 15-minute briefing was given
which included linguistic preparation (giving students planning time
to write down the questions that might be asked during gameplay and
to learn from one another about words, phrases, grammar and language
functions that could help them during the game), and familiarizing par-
ticipants with the quests (discussing quest information such as which
NPC they needed to interact with to accept the quest, what kinds of
tasks needed to be completed, and so on). Students were briefed clearly
on what they were expected to do and when and why. The expectations
involved length of class time students had to complete the quest, ground
rules for communication (e.g., what is good ‘netiquette?’) and collab-
oration (e.g., what is collaboration and what is cheating?), as advised
by Whitton (2010, p. 81), things they could and could not perform as
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 169

players (e.g., dos and don’ts), and benefits they could obtain from the
activity. Students were also instructed to focus on collaboration rather
than competition, to play the game not only for fun but also for learn-
ing, and to try to use the target language for communication in the
game. During gameplay, students were randomly divided into either a
text-based chat or a voice-based chat group and were instructed to col-
laborate and communicate synchronously with other playing characters
(PCs) in order to progress throughout the game. After each game ses-
sion ended, students were asked to complete a WTC questionnaire and
finally a collaborative debriefing took place during which participants
were asked to discuss in small groups about their experience, success and
failure in the game and how they had communicated synchronously.

Data collection and analysis

Two types of data were collected: (a) transcripts of students’ produced
discourse were recorded using Skype Chat Recording or Skype Call
Recording, for evidence of their interaction and language use as they
worked on computer game activities, and (b) students’ responses to a
questionnaire for evidence of their WTC. The questionnaire was adapted
from previous studies on WTC (Cao & Philp, 2006; Freiermuth & Jarrell,
2006; LÈger & Storch, 2009; MacIntyre, et al., 1998, 2001) and was
specifically modified to focus on communication situations that com-
monly take place during gameplay. The transcripts were analysed using
(a) discourse analysis to describe the syntactic and functional charac-
teristics of the language produced during gameplay, and (b) interaction
analysis for tabulating the number of words and the number and length
of turns. Descriptive statistics were calculated for the mean and fre-
quency of the responses to Likert-scale items on the questionnaire data,
revealing to what extent students accept each statement in mean scores
and percentage points, and responses to open-ended questions were
grouped according to recurrent themes.

Results

Research question 1: What effects does playing a MMORPG have on

(a) the quantity and (b) quality of L2 interaction?
Below we first look at the amount of interaction that took place during
text and voice chat and compare them. In the following section we look
at the type of interaction that took place.
170 From Practice to Theory

M = 75.88
80 SD = 20.518
M = 66

Number of turns per student

70 SD = 18.174
60 M = 51
M = 43.50 SD = 9.957
50
SD = 10.170
40
30
20
10
0
Session 1 Session 3

Text-based chat Voice-based chat

Figure 8.3 Average number of turns per student, communicating via text-based
chat and voice-based chat while engaged in computer game activities

Quantity of L2 interaction
The results showed that gameplay had positive effects, when compared
with anecdotal observations of students’ communicative behaviour
during face-to-face interaction, on the quantity of L2 interaction via
text-based chat and oral-based chat during the three computer game
sessions, as measured by the number of words and length of turns.
Figure 8.3 and Table 8.5 show that students took 528 and 607 turns in
text chat in sessions 1 and 3, respectively. Individuals ranged from 35 to
121 turns, with the average and also the minimum and maximum num-
ber of turns increasing between the two sessions. The average number
of turns per student in session 3 (M = 75.88, SD = 20.518) was greater
than the average number of turns per student in session 1 (M = 66,
SD = 18.174) which was when they had just started and were not yet
used to the game. A paired t-test was performed to determine if this
difference was statistically significant. As shown in Table 8.3, this was
found to be the case (t = 3.837, p =.006; p < .05) with a medium effect
size (d = 0.49), meaning that the amount of interaction increased from
session 1 to session 3.
In voice-based chat, participants took 348 turns during the first and
408 during the third session (see Table 8.5), again showing a similar
pattern of increasing averages and a higher minimum and maximum
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 171

Table 8.3 Paired samples test for average number of turns via text-based chat per
student in session 3 and session 1

Pair 1 t df Sig. Mean 95% Confidence

(2-tailed) Difference Interval of the
Difference

Lower Upper

Session 3 3.837 7 .006 9.875 3.790 15.960

cf. Session 1

t = t test value, df = degree of freedom, 2-tailed significance = probability

Table 8.4 Paired samples test for average number of turns via voice-based chat
per student in session 3 and session 1

Pair 1 t df Sig. Mean 95% Confidence

(2-tailed) Difference Interval of the
Difference

Lower Upper

Session 3 8.101 7 .000 7.500 5.311 9.689

cf. Session 1

t = t test value, df = degree of freedom, 2-tailed significance = probability

number of turns. As shown in Figure 8.3, the average number of turns

per student in session 1 was M = 43.50 (SD = 10.170) and in session 3
M = 51 (SD = 9.957). According to Table 8.4, this difference was found
to be significant (t = 8.1, p = .000; p < .05) with a medium effect size
(d = 0.75).
Not surprisingly, a slightly higher proportion of incomplete T-units
(17.82% vs. 10.98% and 15.93 % vs. 10.05%) was found in a voice-
based chat (see Table 8.5) while a greater proportion of the number of
words produced (235 vs. 133 and 307 vs. 156 average words per stu-
dent) was found in a text-based chat between the two sessions (see
Figure 8.4). However, the increased number of words produced seemed
unstable. Finally, it was found that there was a higher number of
English words used through written interaction than in oral interac-
tion (1875 vs. 1054 and 2455 vs. 1245 in sessions 1 and 3, respectively)
(see Table 8.5).
172 From Practice to Theory

Table 8.5 Number of words, and number and length of turns, in text-based chat
and voice-based chat during gameplay

Session 1 Session 3

Written Oral Written Oral

(n = 8) (n = 8) (n = 8) (n = 8)

Number of turns 528 348 607 408

Length of turn
• Single word 49 (9.3%) 19 (5.6%) 53 (8.7%) 41 (10%)
• Phrase 27 (5.1%) 20 (5.7%) 31 (5.1%) 21 (5.2%)
• Incomplete T-units 58 (11%) 62 (17.8%) 61 (10%) 65 (15.9%)
• Complete T-units 394 (74.6%) 247 (71%) 462 (76.1%) 281 (68.9%)
Total words 1881 1064 2456 1249
English-only total words 1875 1054 2455 1245

350
Number of turns per student

307
300

250 235

200
156
150 133

100

50

0
Session 1 Session 3

Text-based chat Voice-based chat

Figure 8.4 Average number of words per student in text-based chat and voice-
based chat

Quality of L2 interaction
Although a large quantity of the target language was produced, L2
interaction during gameplay did not seem to pose a development
of accuracy and complexity of learners’ produced discourse, probably
due to the demands for simultaneous communication flow. However,
L2 interaction during gameplay did, indeed, encourage a variety of
discourse functions, which is summarized in Table 8.6. The oral-based
chat transcripts showed more use of greetings than did the text-based
chat transcripts (16 vs. 8 and 24 vs. 6 in sessions 1 and 3, respectively).
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 173

Table 8.6 Discourse functions of clauses in written and oral interaction during
gameplay

Session 1 Session 3

Written Oral Written Oral

(n = 8) (n = 8) (n = 8) (n = 8)

Greeting 8 16 6 24
Clarification requests 10 21 4 23
Confirmation checks 0 18 0 17
Self-corrections 17 6 18 11
Questions
• Wh-questions 22 20 23 22
• Yes/no questions 27 24 29 21
• Tag questions 0 0 0 0

Especially in the third session of oral interaction, where students

seemed to have stronger interpersonal relationships, greetings were
found to be more formulaic and interaction contained more turns and
small talk, while students engaged in written interaction spent less
time greeting each other and initiated their conversations directly (see
Example 1).

Example 1
Example of voice-based chat Example of text-based chat
Hunna: Hello Momman [15:09] ManN: hi
Momman: Hello Hunna. How are you [15:11] LKAK:
today?
Hunna: I’m fine. Thank you. And [15:17] r u ok?
you?
Momman: I’m fine too. Today is last [15:19] ManN: yes
game session. I so sad.
Hunna: Why? [15:29] have u
find NPC
‘Newton’?
Momman: Because I can’t talk to you [15:30] LKAK: no
in game again. I wanna cry.
Hunna: Don’t cry now, Momman.
We should start quest or we
can’t finish.
Momman: OK
174 From Practice to Theory

Use of clarification requests was present frequently through both writ-

ten and oral interaction. Not surprisingly, more clarification requests
were made via the oral-based chat than the written-based chat (21 vs.
10 and 23 vs. 4 in sessions 1 and 3, respectively). Probably because
of problems with pronunciation, a lack of preparation time, the use
of recording equipment and audio quality issues, clarification requests
were often produced during the voice-based chat. An example of how
clarification requests were used in both voice- and text-based chat is
shown in Example 2.

Example 2
Example of voice-based chat Example of text-based chat
YEEHAAA: What’s the function [16:51:56] Number1: Why you
of mouse? not wearing
Innoker: control cursor the hat?
YEEHAAA: I don’t understand. [16:52:14] Coopy: what do you
Say it again. mean?

As comprehension was required to proceed to other game tasks, a large

number of confirmation checks were made throughout the oral interac-
tion (18 in session 1 and 17 in session 3), while none were present in
the written communication. However, self-corrections were more fre-
quent in the written interaction than in the oral interaction (17 vs. 6
and 18 vs. 11 in sessions 1 and 3, respectively). The fact that partici-
pants engaged in the former medium could read on-screen messages,
and that they had time to think and prepare, would easily allow them
to reflect and correct their messages before and after posting. Example 3
gives an example of confirmation checks taking place during voice- and
text-based chat.

Example 3
Example of voice-based chat Example of text-based chat
PzMaxGate: West is lift [16:34:58] Burn Zero: find another
yes or no? NPC
BadlyAG: Eh? [16:35:02] where in NPC?
PzMaxGate: Sorry. West is [16:35:05] where is∗ NPC?
left or right? [16:35:39] Zerotz: north of town
BadlyAG: Left
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 175

In addition, questions were more frequent in the written communi-

cation than in the oral communication. However, most questions asked
in both mediums were incomplete (e.g., ‘where?’) and ungrammatical
(e.g., ‘is Burn Zero download something?’). Both text and voice-based
chat transcripts bore evidence of few wh-questions, many yes/no ques-
tions, many uninverted questions (e.g., ‘u find Professor?’), and no-tag
questions. Moreover, in the voice-based chat, questions were usually
interrupted by another interlocutor (e.g., ‘Have you finish the . . .’
‘Yes’).

Linguistic features
Learners’ linguistic features are summarized in Table 8.7. Overall, stu-
dents engaged in written interaction were found to pay more attention
to grammatical accuracy than those communicating orally via voice-
based chat during gameplay. Lexical accuracy was also found to be
generally high during written interaction (1327 in session 1 and 1611 in
session 3) although some words were misspelled deliberately in the writ-
ten interaction, as an approach to saving typing time. In voice-based
chat, participants did not have pronunciation problems with simple
words but did with long, difficult, unfamiliar ones. Finally, use of native
language words was more frequent in the oral interaction than in the
written interaction, particularly in the first session (10 vs. 6), but was

Table 8.7 Linguistic features of the learners’ language production via written
and oral communication during computer game activities

Session 1 Session 3

Written Oral Written Oral

(n = 8) (n = 8) (n = 8) (n = 8)

Grammatical accuracy
Tense (unit of analysis = clause)
• Present simple 301 203 378 233
• Present continuous 65 33 48 35
• Present perfect 2 0 7 0
• Future simple 26 11 29 13
Lexical accuracy (spelling) 1327 − 1611 −
Pronunciation − 967 − 1026
Use of native language words 6 10 1 4
176 From Practice to Theory

rare in both written and oral interaction in the last session. An example
of use of native language in voice- and text-based chat is illustrated in
Example 4.

Example 4
Example of voice-based chat Example of text-based chat
Panzil: do u know ans [15:57:31] Burn Zero: i have a problem
Funzy: about how david [15:58:03] LKAK: serious?
use computer in [15:58:13] don’t worry
free time? [15:58:21] IKAK: yeah drink!!
no [15:58:29]
my ans yoong yai krean!!!1
[15:58:31] LKAK:
laew1
Note1 : ’my ans young yai laew’ Note1 : ’Krean’ is a slang Thai word
means ‘my answer is now commonly used in an online game
confusing’ in English. community to refer to a misbehaving
gamer

Use of simplified or reduced registers

Simplified or reduced registers here included (1) leets commonly used
among chat and online game communities, where letters are replaced
by numbers and symbols (i.e., emoticons) and words are commonly mis-
spelled, (2) omission of articles, (3) contractions, and (4) abbreviations.
Examination of text-based chat transcripts revealed use of emoticons
to exhibit facial expressions and use of exclamation marks to represent
tone of voice. Obviously, the presence of these features was to compen-
sate for the absence of paralinguistic features found in face-to-face oral
communication. Besides, many omissions of articles and contractions
were found in both text- and voice-based chat, which made it easier
and faster for the delivery of the messages. Abbreviations were also fre-
quently posted in text-based chat but not much found in voice-based
chat, so that messages became more comprehensible to the interlocu-
tor. With the use of simplified or reduced registers, the researchers could
observe learners’ increased capacity to quickly read, comprehend and
produce messages in English while communicating during gameplay.
Use of simplified or reduced registers, particularly leets, might be con-
sidered inappropriate (see Example 5). However, it was found necessary
for gamers to interact with others quickly so that they could complete
the game quest within the time allotted.
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 177

Example 5
Example of text-based chat

[15:20:31]Coopy: hi Masumoto
[15:20:55]MasumoTo: hi Coopy
[15:20:55] have u started test yet dood1 ?
[15:21:31] it’s very hard
[15:21:38]Coopy: yes!!!!!!!!!!!
[15:21:57] hard 4 me 2 eiei2
[15:22:22]Number1: How many bytes are in megabyte? What’s
your ans?
[15:22:57]MasumoTo: i don’t know T_T
[15:23:00]Coopy: 555
[15:23:07] die
[15:23:14] we die!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[15:23:46] T must kill us
[15:23:49]MasumoTo: lol

Note1 : dood is a deliberately inaccurate spelling for dude.

Note2 : eiei is the textual representation of laughter, which is like ‘heehee’, ‘huhu’,
‘haha’, ‘hoho’, in Korean laughter expressions

Research question 2: What effects does playing a MMORPG

have on learners’ willingness to communicate?
After finishing each computer game session, participants were given a
questionnaire to complete which asked them to rate their willingness to
communicate in English on a scale from 1 (‘absolutely not willing’) to
5 (‘very willing’) in a range of situations normally encountered during
gameplay. The resulting Chronbach Alpha coefficient was .72, which
was rather high and indicated acceptable internal consistency among
the five WTC items. The results revealed that participants were gen-
erally willing to communicate in English (mean 4.52) and generally
showed positive changes in their willingness to engage in communi-
cation situations between the two sessions using L2. Particularly when
participants were confused about the quest, they were increasingly will-
ing to use English to ask for explanations from other players (mean
4.00 and 4.81 in the first and third session, respectively). As shown in
Table 8.8, the mean score of participants’ WTC in session 3 (M = 4.84,
SD =.13) was higher than the mean score of participants’ WTC in session
1 (M = 4.19, SD =.34) and this was found to be statistically significant
178 From Practice to Theory

Table 8.8 Willingness to communicate

Situations Session 1 Session 3 Total

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

Give game instructions to 4.63 .62 4.88 .34 4.76 .18

other players.
Ask for explanations from 4.00 .82 4.81 .4 4.41 .57
other players when you are
confused about the quest you
must complete.
Talk to other players about the 4.19 .75 4.88 .34 4.54 .49
quest.
Read/listen to other players’ 4.38 .5 5.00 .01 4.69 .44
conversations attentively.
Read/listen to non-player 3.75 .86 4.63 .5 4.19 .62
characters’ dialogues actively.

Total mean 4.19 .34 4.84 .13 4.52 .23

(t = 5.921, p = .004; p < .05), showing that participants became more

willing to interact in the L2 over time. The actual difference (Cohen’s
d = 1.34) revealed a very large effect according to Cohen’s d (1988) scale
of magnitudes of correlation, which means that computer game playing
had very practical importance in WTC improvement among L2 learners.
The second section of the questionnaire dealt with participants’
feelings about communicating in English during gameplay such as
apprehension, excitement, motivation and self-confidence, which are
considered important factors contributing to L2 WTC. The resulting
Alpha score was .69, indicating that the four items on this construct
were fairly reliable. Again, each item was rated on a 5-point scale, with
the anchors ‘strongly disagree’ (1) and ‘strongly agree’ (5). Overall, par-
ticipants reported their positive feelings about using English to interact
with others during gameplay (mean 4.26), which in turn suggested that
they had high levels of WTC in English. However, the results showed
that participants gave a low score to ‘confidence’ (mean 3.69). As not
all of the participants were confident in their L2 communication, a low
level of WTC could be present. Table 8.9 shows that the average score of
session 1 was 3.89 and the average score of session 3 was 4.63. This dif-
ference between sessions 1 and 3 was statistically significant (t = 6.301,
p =.008; p < .05). The effect size (Cohen’s d) of 1.15 was large and
showed a huge magnitude of the impact of computer games on L2
learners’ feelings about communicating in English during gameplay.
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 179

Table 8.9 Participants’ feelings about communicating in English in a computer

game context

Situations Session 1 Session 3 Total

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

I feel relaxed communicating 3.75 1 4.56 .46 4.15 .57

in English during gameplay.
I find communicating in 4.50 .89 5.00 .01 4.75 .35
English during gameplay
challenging.
It is fun communicating in 3.94 .85 4.94 .25 4.44 .7
English during gameplay.
I feel confident when 3.38 .89 4.00 .97 3.69 .44
communicating in English
during gameplay.

Total mean 3.89 .47 4.63 .46 4.26 .45

The third section examined participants’ reflections on their com-

munication behaviour and second language use in a computer game
context. The five items showed a fairly good level of internal consis-
tency, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .68. In general, what the participants
thought about communicating in the L2 was found to be closely related
to their actual communication behaviour and discourse produced dur-
ing gameplay. Responses given on a 5-point scale with the anchors
‘never’ (1) and ‘always’ (5) revealed that participants often used English
only to communicate with other players (mean 4.13) and often made
an effort to communicate in English (mean 4.04). Therefore, it was not
surprising to find from the transcripts that the participants gradually
reduced the use of their native language and became willing to use
only English as a medium of communication. As shown in Table 8.10,
the mean score of session 3 (M = 4.05, SD =.67) was also higher than
the mean score of session 1 (M = 3.24, SD =.39) and again, this was
significant (t = 4.866, p = .008; p < .05). The effect size (Cohen’s d
= 0.75) was medium, according to Cohen’s d scale of magnitudes of
correlation.
The fourth section, containing both Likert-scale and open-ended
questions, was designed to elicit participants’ experiences of communi-
cating in a computer game context, as well as their comments on their
progress on L2 communication over the three computer game sessions.
Participants were required to complete this section once they had fin-
ished the last computer game session only. Regarding participants’
180 From Practice to Theory

Table 8.10 Learners’ reflection on their communication behaviour and second

language use in a computer game context

Situations Session 1 Session 3 Total

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

I communicate in English 3.13 .62 4.06 .57 3.60 .66

fluently (with few hesitations
and pauses).
I communicate in English 3.19 .83 4.13 .62 3.66 .67
clearly (i.e., understandable to
the interlocutors).
I request repetition or 2.69 .6 2.94 .68 2.82 .18
clarification when I do not
understand what other players
are saying in English.
I use English only to 3.75 .58 4.50 .52 4.13 .53
communicate with other
players.
I make an effort to 3.44 1.15 4.63 .62 4.04 .84
communicate in English.
Total mean 3.24 .39 4.05 .67 3.65 .52

experience communicating in English while working on computer game

activities, they gave a favourable rating to their overall experience
(M = 3.8, SD =.4), thus suggesting a high level of WTC. Most of
them claimed that they liked communicating in a gaming environment
because of the fact that playing and having opportunities for language
use went together and enabled them to communicate without anxi-
ety or embarrassment. In addition, all of the participants realized that
gameplay helped them improve their L2 communication in a number
of ways. Here are some of the reasons given by the participants:

Playing computer games contributes to my comprehension development.

If I make no effort to understand the quest assignment, NPCs’ dialogues,
and contributions from other players, I cannot complete the game tasks
successfully.

I learn more vocabulary from the game and other players. Besides, I have a
chance to use a variety of new words and language functions and therefore
increase my language practice.

Playing games is fun, thus developing more confidence and motivation to

use English for communication.
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 181

Playing computer games require instant reaction and communication, so it

enhances the development of my language fluency.

Playing computer games provides me the opportunity for L2 communication

outside the classroom.

However, what the majority of the participants disliked about com-

municating in English during gameplay was the use of abbreviations,
emoticons, smileys, simple words and ungrammatical sentences to com-
municate, because they felt that over-use of these would not contribute
to their accuracy and complexity in language production.
There were some changes in the way participants rated their com-
munication skills (see Figure 8.5). In other words, while only 6.2 per
cent of participants considered their English communication skills as
‘good’ before taking part in the study, 44 per cent claimed that their
English communication skills had improved over the three computer
game sessions because gameplay had made them feel relaxed, confi-
dent and, in turn, more willing to use the target language. Similarly,
the observation of the actual communication behaviour of this group
showed their improvement in both the quantity and quality of their
language production. More interestingly, students who were normally
shy in face-to-face class tended to become less reluctant, increase par-
ticipation levels and express themselves in a different way through the

100.00%
90.00% 87.50%

80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00% 43.75% 43.75%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00% 12.50%
10.00% 6.25% 6.25%
0.00%
Good Fair Poor

Before participation After participation

Figure 8.5 Percentage of learners’ perceived competence in their English com-

munication skills before and after participating in gaming activities
182 From Practice to Theory

games. However, the participants who still considered their communi-

cation skills as poor after computer game participation reported that
they did not achieve any improvement because they were unable to
stay focused on L2 communication but tended to concentrate on the
game itself. When observing their transcripts, it was found that this
group of students hardly initiated any conversations, often delayed
their responses to other players, and always used only simple words,
abbreviations and emoticons.

Discussion

The results above reveal some interesting findings. Firstly, the differ-
ences between voice- and text-based chat in computer games are quite
marked, as could be expected. Voice chat is generally considered difficult
and more demanding, while text chat might be preferred by learners as
it gives them more time to read others’ answers and prepare their own
(Sykes, 2005; Sykes, Oskoz & Thorne, 2009). Participants communicat-
ing using voice chat communicate less and less often, produce a greater
proportion of incomplete t-units, use fewer words and make more clarifi-
cation requests. Voice chat resulted in discourse that was, in some ways,
more similar to face-to-face communication, especially in greetings,
probably because this modality offers an environment which is real-
time in nature and creates more authentic communicative situations
for interaction. These findings support the results of other chat studies
which also reported more communication (Kern, 1995) and more for-
mal and complex discourse (Warschauer, 1996) among learners when
engaging in text chat than in voice chat and face-to-face interaction.
Similar results were also reported in Jepson (2005), which found that,
in the voice chat environment, learners were more willing to negotiate
for meaning and used significantly more repair moves than they did in
text chat.
Perhaps more interesting is the overall high number of turns for par-
ticipants. Although there was considerable variation between speakers,
generally participants communicated quite freely in this online com-
puter game, and increasingly so from session 1 to session 3. However,
language production was quite inaccurate and neither complexity nor
accuracy improved from session 1 to session 3. The most likely expla-
nation for this is that participants were unable to pay attention to both
form and meaning. At first glance, this finding seems to contradict those
made by Piirainen-Marsh and Tainio (2009); however, in their study, par-
ticipants did not converse in the game, only about the game, and were
found to repeat input derived from the game. In our study, participants
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 183

met as characters in the game and therefore had to actively participate in

a communicative exchange. This poses considerable cognitive demand
on learners’ language systems (Levelt, 1989) and prevents learners from
allocating limited resources to both exchanging meaning and paying
attention to grammar. This seems to be confirmed by the fact that par-
ticipants produced fewer mistakes in text than in voice chat. Similar
results were found by Ortega (2009) for text chat.
When investigating participants’ willingness to communicate, the
results showed that, on the whole, students were quite prepared to
speak in English, and this was confirmed by their actual participation
in the computer game quests. This result is more impressive than it
might seem; students in Thailand are notoriously reticent when it comes
to communicating in English (Kamprasertwong, 2010) and teachers
frequently report having great difficulty in encouraging language pro-
duction in class. The computer game environment clearly posed less of
a barrier to them, and – an important finding – their willingness to com-
municate improved significantly from session 1 to session 3. In other
words, not only did the game provide an attractive environment to par-
ticipants, but communicating in that environment led them to become
more willing to communicate in that environment, with the proportion
of L1 use diminishing over time.
This is particularly interesting when comparing this with participants’
self-evaluation of their communication skills; seven participants felt
their skills had improved. Students who were normally shy in face-
to-face classes tended to become less reluctant, increased participation
levels and expressed themselves quite freely in the game. However, those
participants who still considered their communication skills to be poor
after participating in the game did not show any improvement. When
observing their transcripts, it was found that they hardly ever initiated
a conversation, often delayed their answers and tended to use only sim-
ple words, abbreviations and emoticons. When asked about this, they
said they found it difficult to focus on the language while also having to
learn to use the game.

Limitations and future research

This exploratory study has a number of limitations. Firstly, due to the
small sample size and descriptive nature of this study, statistical anal-
ysis is challenging and the results may not be directly generalizable
to other populations. Secondly, some of the data used in the study
were self-reported and this poses a number of well-known challenges
(Crockett, Schulenberg, & Petersen, 1987). Finally, and perhaps most
184 From Practice to Theory

importantly, we do not know if participants would have increased their

amount of interaction as much if they had participated in a more tra-
ditional, face-to-face class. In other words, we cannot be certain that
the above findings can be attributed to the computer environment
(although participants’ responses to the questionnaires do make this
likely). Our aim was not to compare different learning environments,
simply to investigate what happens when L2 learners are asked to play
and communicate at the same time.
There was considerable variation between players in terms of their par-
ticipation levels and their willingness to communicate, as shown by the
large SDs. This variation should not be ignored and further investigation
is needed, to identify the impact of individual differences and to deter-
mine if there are certain (types of) learners for whom the use of games
is more suitable than others, or whether there are ways of ensuring that
games are used in a way that is more inclusive.
Perhaps most importantly, this study took one, admittedly limited,
approach to the students’ interaction; it focused predominantly on
their language production and did not take a more holistic, sociocul-
tural view of the learning experience of the students in this particular
online environment. Future studies should investigate all aspects of the
learning process to complement the more narrowly interactional per-
spective taken here. An example of such a study, also drawing on chat
data, is Zheng et al. (2009), who applied an iterative and multilay-
ered analysis of the chat data to show how ‘meaning emerges when
language is used to coordinate in-the-moment actions’ (p. 489). This
type of analysis is promising in that it can provide a deeper view on
the data.
It is also important that future studies further explore the effect
of learners’ willingness and readiness for interacting in games (cf.,
Chen & Johnson, 2004) and the type and amount of teacher preparation
necessary to be able to make use of games.

Implications
This study has a number of implications, the most obvious of which
is perhaps that commercial games can be adapted for use in L2 learn-
ing and teaching, thus removing one important barrier for teachers
who may not have the time and resources to develop their own games.
The results have also shown that students increase their interaction
when playing games, which of course is an encouraging finding. The
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 185

differences between voice- and chat-based text show that students write
more than they speak, and make fewer mistakes in writing, but that in
both oral and written interaction their participation increases; teach-
ers can thus choose one or the other modality, depending on their
educational objectives.
Interestingly, however, when students were asked about changes in
their confidence in communicating in English, they were not as positive.
It is possible that playing computer games on three occasions only was
simply not enough to help them build that confidence, but it is also
likely that participants felt safe in the confined space of the game, access
to which had been restricted from the general public. This shows that it
may be important for teachers to be careful about gradually opening up
communication and not to withdraw the perceived safety of the closed
environment immediately, and to provide ample support and feedback
when doing so.
More generally, the above shows once again the importance of
affective factors in L2 acquisition, especially the potentially nega-
tive impact of anxiety. Aoki (1999) suggests the development of a
‘psychologically secure environment’ (p. 149). Clearly, participants in
this study found such a secure environment in the computer game.
They confirmed this in their responses on the questionnaires, which
showed they felt they did not have to be embarrassed or anxious
about making mistakes within the game. Participants also felt that
playing the game and communicating in English went together and
that they were therefore less conscious of themselves. Participants
mentioned other benefits too, such as the ability to develop their
vocabulary, the fact that they had to respond quickly and therefore
became more fluent, and that they could practise English outside the
classroom.
What this study has shown, then, is that games are able to increase
student enthusiasm, lower anxiety and improve willingness to com-
municate. These are of course very valuable for supporting the L2
acquisition process, and computer games may deserve a more frequent
place in the L2 curriculum.

Note
This article is a slightly revised version of an article previously published in Digital
Culture & Education, 2011, 3(1), 4–28.
186 From Practice to Theory

References
Aoki, N. (1999). Affect and the role of teachers in the development of learner
autonomy. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 142–154).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burgoon, J. K. (1976). The unwillingness to communicate scale: Development
and validation. Communication Monographs, 43(1), 60–69.
Cao, Y., & Philp, J. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate:
A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System,
34(4), 480–493.
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foun-
dations for teaching, testing, and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Chen, M., & Johnson, S. (2004). Measuring flow in a computer game simulating
a foreign language environment. Retrieved from http://www.markdangerchen.
net/pubs/flow_in_game_simulating_fle.pdf.
Clement, R., Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2003). Willingness to communicate
in a second language: The effects of context, norms, and vitality. Journal of
Language and Social Psychology, 22(2), 190–209.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Crockett, L. J., Schulenberg, J. E., & Petersen, A. C. (1987). Congruence between
objective and self-report data in a sample of young adolescents. Journal of
Adolescent Research, 2, 383–392.
de Haan, J., Reed, M., & Kuwada, K. (2010). The effect of interactivity with a
music video game on second language vocabulary recall. Language Learning &
Technology, 14(2), 74–94.
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I. (2008). A longitudinal study of
ESL learners’ fluency and comprehensibility development. Applied Linguistics,
29(3), 359–380.
Ellis, N. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implica-
tions for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188.
Freiermuth, M., & Jarrell, D. (2006). Willingness to communicate: Can
online chat help? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2),
189–212.
Garcia-Carbonell, A., Rising, B., Montero, B., & Watts, F. (2001). Simula-
tion/Gaming and the acquisition of communicative competence in another
language. Simulation Gaming, 32(4), 481–491.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hashimoto, Y. (2002). Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors
of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context. Second Language Studies, 20(2),
29–70.
Jepson, K. (2005). Conversations – and negotiated interaction – in text and voice
chat rooms. Language, Learning & Technology, 9(3), 79–98.
Kamprasertwong, M. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English speech as a
second language: A study of Thai, Chinese, and Dutch samples (Unpublished
MA dissertation). University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
 Hayo Reinders and Sorada Wattana 187

Kang, S.-J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate

in a second language. System, 33(2), 277–292.
Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked comput-
ers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern
Language Journal, 79(4), 457–476.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London:
Longman.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Research methodology on language
development from a complex systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal,
92(2), 200–213.
LÈger, D. d. S., & Storch, N. (2009). Learners’ perceptions and attitudes: Impli-
cations for willingness to communicate in an L2 classroom. System, 37(2),
269–285.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language
acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language acqui-
sition. Vol. 2: Second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York: Academic
Press.
MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to
communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion
students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(03), 369–388.
MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2003). Talking in
order to learn: Willingness to communicate and intensive program. Canadian
Modern Language Review, 59(4), 589–607.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes and affect as pre-
dictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social
Psychology, 15(1), 3–26.
MacIntyre, P. D., Dörnyei, Z., Clément, R., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing
willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and
affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545–562.
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1982). Communication apprehension and
shyness: Conceptual and operational distinction. Central States Speech Journal,
33(4), 458–468.
Mortensen, D. C., Arntson, P. H., & Lustig, M. (1977). The measurement of ver-
bal predispositions: Scale development and application. Human Communication
Rl’search, 3(2), 146–158.
Ortega, L. (2009). Interaction and attention to form in L2 text-based computer-
mediated communication. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives
on interaction in SLA: Research in honor of Susan M. Gass (pp. 226–253). New York:
Routledge.
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-
language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning,
44(4), 493–527.
Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for partic-
ipation in the activity of playing a video game. The Modern Language Journal,
93(2), 153–169.
Samudavanija, C. (1999). Plearn Puea Roo (enjoyment for learnng). Bangkok:
Vajiravudh College.
188 From Practice to Theory

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning.

Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.
Steinkuehler, C. (2006). Massively multiplayer online videogaming as participa-
tion in a Discourse. Mind, Culture & Activity, 13(1), 38–52.
Steinkuehler, C. (2007). Massively multiplayer online gaming as a constellation
of literacy practices. eLearning, 4(3), 297–318.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible
input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden
(Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury
House.
Sykes, J. (2005). Synchronous CMC and pragmatic development: Effects of oral
and written chat. Calico, 22(3), 399–432.
Sykes, J., Oskoz, A., & Thorne, S. L. (2009). Second language use, socialization,
and learning in Internet interest communities and online gaming. Modern
Language Journal, 93 , 802–821.
van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural
perspective. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the
second language classroom. CALICO, 13(2&3), 7–26.
Whitton, N. (2010). Learning with digital games: A practical guide to engaging
students in higher education. New York: Routledge.
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The
Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54–66.
Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimizu, K. (2004). The influence of attitudes
and affect on willingness to communicate and second language communica-
tion. Language Learning, 54(1), 119–152.
Zheng, D., Young, M. F., Wagner, M. M., & Brewer, R. A. (2009). Negotiation for
action: English language learning in game-based virtual worlds. The Modern
Language Journal, 93(4), 489–511.
9
World of VocCraft: Computer
Games and Swedish Learners’ L2
English Vocabulary
Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén

Learning languages is a social activity – and so is playing computer

games. Many parents would probably object to the latter part of the
statement, having experiences of their teenager not joining the rest of
the family for dinner due to a quest, a dungeon, or a raid in World of
Warcraft. But while being kept from family by a computer game may
seem asocial, a teenager immersed in World of Warcraft is in fact meet-
ing with people ‘of all ages, countries, and value systems’ (Gee, 2007b,
p. 182) in an international virtual world. In this chapter, our aim is to
show that playing computer games indeed facilitates second language
(L2) acquisition.1 In order to do so, we present three studies, each of
which shows mounting evidence for the positive role of extramural
English in general, and computer games in particular, in the acqui-
sition of English vocabulary by Swedish learners. We will show how
gender, age, and the type of gaming affect acquisition, and we discuss
implications of these for teaching practice.

Theoretical background

In research on gaming, two terms are used more or less interchange-

ably: video games (see, e.g., Gee, 2007b; Rankin, Gold, & Gooch, 2006a)
and computer games (see, e.g., Begg, Dewhurst, & Macleod, 2005). In line
with the title of this book, we adopt the latter, computer games, and
use it in reference to games played on computers as well as those
played on video game consoles (e.g., PlayStation, Nintendo, and Xbox).
Computer games can be played either online or offline and can range
from fairly simple text-based games to those that incorporate complex

189
190 From Practice to Theory

graphics and virtual worlds, populated by many players simultane-

ously.2 In fact, with the growth of broadband Internet access, thousands
of players can meet online at the same time in virtual worlds to
play games together. When many players unite in a particular game,
the game is referred to as a massively multiplayer online game (MMO)
(e.g., Linderoth & Bennerstedt, 2007). MMOs have become immensely
popular in the developed world, evidenced when Blizzard Entertain-
ment, Inc. in October 2010 announced that the subscriber base for
their massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) World of
Warcraft exceeded 12 million players worldwide.
According to biannual reports from the Swedish media council,
gaming is an increasingly popular spare time activity among Swedish
children and youths (Medierådet, 2006, 2008, 2010b). In fact, even
toddlers are reported to use computers rather frequently (Medierådet,
2010a). In sum, gaming (and computer use in general) is undoubtedly
part of popular culture today, in Sweden and elsewhere; Viberg (2000)
even argues that the influx of English in Swedish society is so great
that English might be perceived as a second rather than as a foreign
language. From the perspective of L2 acquisition, gaming becomes a rel-
evant object of inquiry since the default language of a popular game
such as World of Warcraft is English (Waters, 2007), something which
thus forces learners to communicate in their L2.
At this point, we would like to comment on two particular games,
World of Warcraft (WoW) and The Sims. As mentioned above, WoW is a
game in which thousands of players simultaneously inhabit the same
online game world. Often, smaller groups play different types of charac-
ters with different skills (Hunter, Warrior, Paladin, Druid, Priest, and so
on) and will cooperate to achieve objectives, for instance in dungeons
or raids. Moreover, players typically interact with one another both in
the actual game and via various types of chat (Gee, 2007b; Lindh, 2009);
it is thus a game that encourages both production (writing, speech) and
consumption (reading, listening) (Gee, 2007a; Sundqvist, 2009). In con-
trast, The Sims is a single-player, offline, strategic life-simulation game.
It should also be emphasized, however, that single-player games may
involve people in joint play, sharing, and collaboration; for example,
on websites, in chat rooms and game guides, many produced by players
themselves (Gee, 2007a, p. 133). Thus, although The Sims is a single-
player game, it can include interactive aspects as well. According to
Gee (2007a), both MMOs and single-player games offer opportunities
for learning in highly motivating contexts. Nevertheless, from an L2
acquisition perspective, some crucial differences between WoW and The
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 191

Sims need to be addressed. In WoW, game texts are only available in

English, whereas several translations (including Swedish) are available
in The Sims. Furthermore, the amount and type of text a player has to
read to participate in WoW is much larger and more demanding than
the texts used in The Sims. Finally, while social interaction is neither
forced upon players of WoW nor forbidden for players of The Sims, it
must be emphasized that the WoW game design makes social interac-
tion an important and integral part of the game itself. These differences
are important to bear in mind when reading the results of our studies.
Among the first linguists to see the potential of computer games for
learning and literacy was James Paul Gee. Gee (2003) identifies 36 learn-
ing principles involved in gaming. Several of these principles are closely
related to second language acquisition (SLA) theory and we would like
to highlight some of them here. First, according to the ‘Active, Crit-
ical Learning Principle’, all aspects of a computer game are set up to
encourage players/learners to be active and critical rather than passive
(p. 207). Second, the ‘Practice Principle’ states that learners practice (use
language) in a context (a compelling virtual world) where practice is
enjoyable rather than boring, where learners experience ‘ongoing suc-
cess’, and get to spend much time on task (p. 208). Together, these
two principles align very well with SLA theory on the importance
of interaction in L2 acquisition (Gass & Mackey, 2006; Long, 1981;
Riggenbach, 1998), the importance of target language (TL) input and
output (Long, 1981; Swain, 2000), and the importance of task-based
learning (Ellis, 2003; Reinders, 2006). That interacting in the TL medi-
ates acquisition has also been shown in empirical studies (Iwashita,
2001).
A third principle is called the ‘ “Regime of Competence” Principle’
(Gee, 2003, p. 209). When engaged in gaming, a learner has several
opportunities to operate within – but at the outer edge of – his or her
ability, so that the tasks at hand are perceived as challenging but not
undoable. This is closely related with sociocultural theory, in particu-
lar Vygotsky’s (1926/1999) zone of proximal development, which refers
to the range of tasks that children can complete independently and
those for which they need assistance from a more able person, such
as a more-skilled child (here a more-skilled gamer) or an adult/teacher.
Furthermore, the ‘ “Regime of Competence” Principle’ links to Krashen’s
(1985) input hypothesis, which states that a learner acquires an L2 by
understanding input containing structures that are slightly beyond the
learner’s current competence. That is, by focusing on meaning (what is
said in a computer game is more important than how it is said) and
192 From Practice to Theory

through the extralinguistic context (such as game graphics), L2 acquisi-

tion is facilitated. Expressed differently, taking part in a computer game
in L2 English entails understanding its meaning. Thus, a player is likely
to be highly motivated (cf., Julkunen, 2001) to learn specific game ter-
minology. Marton (2006, p. 528), in his discussion on transfer, argues
that ‘what the learner learns in some situations might enable her to do
something different in other situations thanks to perceived differences
(and similarities) between situations’. This means that what is learned in
a computer game might carry over into what is learned in the L2 English
classroom. In fact, Gee (2003, p. 211) lists a ‘Transfer Principle’ as well.
Another example is the ‘Intuitive Knowledge Principle’, which means
that intuitive or tacit knowledge builds up while gaming, thanks to
repeated practice and experience, and such knowledge is honored in the
gaming context (Gee, 2003, p. 210). An empirical study from Finland
(Piirainen-Marsh & Tainio, 2009) shows that the Intuitive Knowledge
Principle holds. The participants (boys, aged 10–14) developed their lin-
guistic and interactional competence in English thanks to the repeated
lexical and prosodic features that were integral features of the game they
played (Final Fantasy X). Moreover, this specific principle connects with
the discussion about implicit and explicit learning within SLA, as well as
with formal versus informal learning, and various forms of naturalistic
learning. In N. Ellis’ (1994) overview of implicit and explicit language
learning, he states that:

[i]mplicit learning is acquisition of knowledge about the under-

lying structure of a complex stimulus environment by a process
which takes place naturally, simply and without conscious opera-
tions. Explicit learning is a more conscious operation where the
individual makes and tests hypotheses in a search for structure.
(p.1)

As a consequence, he continues, the acquisition of knowledge can take

place (a) implicitly, a non-conscious/automatic abstraction of the struc-
tural nature of input via experiences; in our case that would be the
structure of the TL English via frequent exposure to TL forms provided
by the game, (b) explicitly, through selective learning; here when play-
ers, thanks to the English input provided by the computer game, build
hypotheses and test them while playing, or (c) explicitly via given rules
(such as in an L2 English classroom).
Gaming can be viewed as an example of naturalistic learning. In SLA,
several terms are used to describe such learning, for instance naturalistic
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 193

language learning, self-directed naturalistic learning, and out-of-class learning

(see, e.g., Benson, 2001; Benson & Reinders, 2011; Lamb, 2004; Yi,
2005). Forsman (2004) proposes yet another term, unintentional learning,
and when focus is specifically on the acquisition of vocabulary, inciden-
tal learning is frequently used (see, e.g., Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001; Sylvén,
2004). Sundqvist (2009, p. 25) suggests an umbrella term, extramural
language learning, which emphasizes (a) that no degree of deliberate
intention to acquire the TL is necessary on the part of the learner,
even though deliberate intention by no means is excluded, and (b) that
the learning takes place extramurally, that is, outside of the classroom.
Whichever term one adopts, it is essential to acknowledge that when
the actual learning process takes place in a non-instructional context
outside of school (cf., through gaming), it is an example of informal
learning. In the following, we use the term extramural English.
Consequently, learners who play computer games in L2 English in
their spare time are engaged in extramural English. They use both writ-
ten and spoken English, and they are highly motivated to make progress in
the game (Astrén, 2010; Linderoth & Bennerstedt, 2007). Motivation is
central to all learning in general and to language learning in particular
(Dörnyei, 2001). In turn, motivation is driven by a multitude of factors
(see, e.g., Dörnyei, 2001; Gardner, 2006; McDonough, 2007; Pintrich &
Schunk, 1996; Ryan & Deci, 2000). From a motivation theory perspec-
tive, what makes our pilot study (see below) particularly interesting is
the fact that, while our main focus is on language learning, measured by
means of learning outcomes in school, our empirical data are primarily
based on the extramural language activities of our informants.
In motivation theory, several dichotomies, or clines, are used. Perhaps
the most well-known of these is the dichotomy between extrinsic moti-
vation (i.e., driven by external factors, such as grades, appreciation) and
intrinsic motivation (i.e., driven by individual, internal factors, such as
pleasure and satisfaction) (Deci & Ryan, 1985). This can be compared
with the similar dichotomous pair of social and personal motivation
as set out by Weiner (1994), where the former has to do with being a
part of society and the latter has more to do with the internal needs of
the individual. Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory takes
its point of departure in the strict dichotomous terminology, and pro-
poses a cline ranging from self-determined (at the most intrinsic end
of the scale) to controlled (at the most extrinsic end), realizing that in
the intrinsic–extrinsic relationship, one can lead to the other (Ryan &
Deci, 2000). For the purpose of our article, we assume that learning at
school involves mostly extrinsic or social motivation, while learners’
194 From Practice to Theory

extramural exposure to English is activated more by intrinsic or personal

motivation.
In school, language arts subjects compete with other subjects for time
and attention. In Swedish secondary school, students study as many as
17 different subjects, making time a scarce commodity. When choosing
what to spend time on, the more motivating alternative tends to win,
which makes motivation a pivotal factor (Dörnyei, 2001). From having
been essentially a school subject, at least in a small language community
such as Sweden, English is now a part of daily life, especially for those
who are active on the Internet. Thus, extramural linguistic activities are
part of the L2 acquisition process and therefore essential to study in
relation to intramural school learning activities.
We have now discussed gaming and SLA, and to some extent also
described the relationship between the two and the special role motiva-
tion has. Before we end this section with a few words on L2 vocabulary
acquisition, we would like to stress that, while language learning is both
a cognitive and a social activity, so is gaming. We return to Gee (2003,
p. 212) and his ‘Affinity Group Principle’, which highlights the cogni-
tive and social sides of gaming: groups are formed where members bond
primarily through shared endeavors, goals, and practices.3 Such groups
are good examples of the positive effects team motivation might have
(Swezey, Meltzer, & Salas, 1994).
Vocabulary is widely recognized as central to any language acquisi-
tion process (see, e.g., Boyd Zimmerman, 1997; Nation, 2001; Schmitt &
McCarthy, 1997). Consequently, it is one of the most relevant and fruit-
ful areas to focus on when investigating the acquisition process among
L2 learners. With regard to vocabulary acquisition and gaming, Gee
(2007a, pp. 143–144) argues that there are two ways of understanding
words: a verbal or a situated understanding. The verbal understanding
of a word is a top-down process that ‘implies an ability to explicate
one’s understanding in terms of other words or general principles, but
not necessarily an ability to apply this knowledge to actual situations’,
whereas the situated understanding is a bottom-up process that ‘implies
the ability to associate the word with specific images, actions, experi-
ences, or dialogue in such a way that one knows how to apply the word
in specific contexts to solve problems or accomplish goals’. This suggests
that playing computer games can promote situated learning of words,
which has also been shown in a US small-scale study (Rankin et al.,
2006a). The study revealed that intermediate and advanced L2 English
students increased their vocabulary by 40 per cent as a result of playing
EverQuest 2 (a MMORPG). They conclude that MMORPGs can provide
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 195

motivation and adequate language learning support for L2 learners.

There are also other recent studies on L2 acquisition and gaming (see,
e.g., deHaan, Reed, & Kuwada, 2010; Zheng, Young, Wagner, & Brewer,
2009), but very few aimed at young learners, which we hope to partly
compensate for with our pilot study.

Three empirical studies

Our chapter is based on data from three separate studies investigating

extramural English activities, including the use of computer games, and
their relation to English vocabulary acquisition by Swedish learners.
In the subsections below, we briefly describe each study and present
the results that are pertinent to our topic, that is, computer games and
vocabulary acquisition. The studies are presented in chronological order:
Sylvén (2004), followed by Sundqvist (2009), and finally our joint pilot
study from 2010.

Teaching in English or English Teaching?

The first study, Teaching in English or English Teaching? – On the effects
of content and language integrated learning on Swedish learners’ inciden-
tal vocabulary acquisition (Sylvén, 2004), was a two-year longitudinal
study of content and language integrated learning (CLIL) and non-CLIL
students at upper secondary school level (N = 363, 99 CLIL and 264
non-CLIL students). The main aim was to investigate what effect, if any,
CLIL has on the incidental acquisition of vocabulary. In this study, CLIL
is defined as the use of English as the medium of instruction in content
subject classrooms.
Students were tested three times, first at the beginning of grade 10
(first year of upper secondary level and the first year of CLIL), next
at the end of grade 10, and finally at the end of grade 11. Non-CLIL
students were tested on the same occasions in order to compare their
performance. The test battery used on each of the three test occasions
consisted of four different types of vocabulary test: (1) a self-report test
(based on Paribakht and Wesche’s (1997) Vocabulary Knowledge Scale),
(2) a words-in-context test, (3) a multiple choice test, and (4) a cloze test.
There was also a questionnaire at the beginning and at the end of the
study, dealing with the students’ backgrounds, attitudes towards school,
personal interests, and reading of English texts outside of school, includ-
ing reading ordinary books as well as texts used in role-playing board
games and computer games.
196 From Practice to Theory

Table 9.1 Average score, group, and test round

(TR)

Group TRI TRII TRIII

CLIL 128 149 160

Control 110 119 122

Source: Sylvén (2004, p. 219).

The main results, illustrated in Table 9.1, indicated that CLIL students
acquired a larger English vocabulary than their non-CLIL peers (p < .01).
However, the data also showed that the CLIL students had a signifi-
cantly larger English vocabulary already from the start (p < .01). Male
students in both the CLIL and the non-CLIL groups outperformed their
female peers in all test rounds, but the gender gap in the CLIL group
decreased throughout the study. In the third test it was shown that CLIL
had a certain impact on students’ vocabulary. However, the factor that
proved to have the statistically most central impact was the reading of
English texts outside of school (p < .01). One explanation for the gen-
der differences in the result was found here: 59 per cent of the males
read outside of school whereas only 36 per cent of the females did so.
Interestingly, CLIL seemed to spark a higher interest in reading English
texts; at the outset of the study 54 per cent of the CLIL students said
that they engaged in such activities outside of school and at the end
of the study that figure had increased to 60 per cent. The impact of
out-of-school L2 input raised several further questions (Sylvén, 2004,
p. 220): Are all types of text, including non-fiction books, magazines,
and websites, conducive to vocabulary learning? Are some more bene-
ficial than others? What types of texts do students read? Questions like
these led to the development of the language diary (Sylvén, 2005, 2006,
2007), which was implemented in Sundqvist (2009), the second study
of relevance to this chapter.

Extramural English Matters

The second study, Extramural English Matters: Out-of-School English and
Its Impact on Swedish Ninth Graders’ Oral Proficiency and Vocabulary
(Sundqvist, 2009), was a one-year longitudinal study carried out in
2006–2007. The study focused on learners (N = 80; 36 boys, 44 girls) in
ninth grade (aged 15–16) and the impact of extramural English on their
oral proficiency and vocabulary skills. As was previously mentioned, the
term extramural English was broadly defined and refers to any type of
contact that learners have with English outside the classroom.
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 197

Extramural English was measured with the help of interviews, a

questionnaire and two one-week language diaries. In the diaries, the
learners noted how much time they had spent on seven activities
(reading books, reading newspapers/magazines, watching TV, watch-
ing films, surfing the Internet, playing computer games, and listening
to music) and a final open category. Vocabulary was measured with
two written vocabulary tests, adapted versions of the Productive Lev-
els Test (Laufer & Nation, 1999) and the Vocabulary Levels Test (Nation,
2001).
Data from the language diary showed that the time learners spent
on extramural English correlated positively and significantly (r s = .357;
p < .01) with the size of their vocabulary. Similar to what was found in
Sylvén (2004), the boys scored significantly higher than the girls on the
vocabulary tests. Backward linear regression analysis revealed that some
extramural activities were more important than others for vocabulary
acquisition. Activities that required the learners to be productive and
rely on their language skills (i.e., playing computer games, using the
Internet, and reading) had a greater impact on vocabulary acquisition
than activities where learners could remain fairly passive (listening to
music or watching TV/films). Since the boys spent more time on the pro-
ductive activities than the girls, extramural English had a greater impact
on their vocabulary development than on that of the girls. In par-
ticular, the boys spent significantly more time than the girls on two
of the activities, namely, on playing computer games (7.9 hours/week
vs. .7 hours/week; p < .01) and using the Internet (1.1 hours/week
vs. .4 hours/week; p < .05). The highest reported values (hours/week)
were 40.1 for gaming and 6 for using the Internet.
As for gaming, the boys and the girls did not only differ in terms
of the amount of time spent on playing, but also in the types of game
played. The boys preferred playing WoW and the results clearly indi-
cated that they benefited from doing so (cf. Linderoth & Bennerstedt,
2007; Piirainen-Marsh & Tainio, 2009; Rankin et al., 2006a). In contrast,
the girls preferred The Sims, but they did not play as much as the boys,
and the girls’ gaming did not contribute significantly to their L2 vocab-
ulary acquisition. Questionnaire data and the interviews corroborated
these game-related findings.

Extramural English among young learners – pilot study 2010

The third study is our joint pilot study. It focuses on young learners
(N = 244, 4–6th grade, aged 10–12) and their extramural English, and
examines whether there is a relationship between what young learners
do in English in their spare time and their learning outcomes in school.
198 From Practice to Theory

In this chapter, we focus on the results for the students in grade 5 only
(N = 102; 48 boys, 54 girls). Similar to Sundqvist (2009), we used a ques-
tionnaire and a language diary to measure extramural English, but no
interviews were conducted in this study. The general purpose of the pilot
was to try out our assessment methods and the design of the study in
preparation for a future longitudinal study.
The language diary covered one week and included the same seven
extramural activities (plus an open final category) as Sundqvist (2009),
but its design was adapted to suit the age group. To measure the stu-
dents’ learning outcomes, results from the national test of English
and a vocabulary test were used. The national test consists of interac-
tion/speaking, listening comprehension, reading comprehension, and
writing components. We looked at reading comprehension scores
(pass ≥ 11; max = 31) as well as pass-fail rates for the other components.
We designed the vocabulary test ourselves using test items from the
levels tests available at the Compleat Lexical Tutor homepage (http://
www.lextutor.ca/). The test included three parts:

(1) Recognition (1000 word level)

(2) Recognition (2000 level)
(3) Production (2000 level)

In the following we report on the results from the language diary and
the questionnaire. After that, we give the results of the examination of
extramural English in relation to learning outcomes.
All participating students had a computer at home and access to
the Internet. The language diary revealed that the fifth graders spent
on average 9.4 hours/week on extramural English activities, in total
(see Table 9.2). Playing computer games was the most popular activity.
We would like to emphasize that individual variation was large. In terms
of the total amount of time spent on extramural English activities, some
students reported none, whereas others reported up to 40 hours. In the
latter cases it is very likely that students engage in two activities concur-
rently (such as listening to music while using the Internet). With regard
to gaming, the highest reported value was 22.7 hours.
When we analyzed language diary data by gender, we found that the
boys spent more hours per week (10.6) than the girls (8.4) on extramural
English activities, but this difference was non-significant. For each of the
various activities, both the boys’ and the girls’ values were fairly similar,
but there was one exception: playing computer games. The boys played
4.4 hours per week on average, which can be compared with 1.1 for the
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 199

Table 9.2 Amount of time spent on extramural English

activities, in order of popularity (n = 86; internal attrition:
16%)

Extramural English Mean SD

activity (hours/week)

Playing computer games 2.6 4.3

Watching TV 2.1 2.7
Listening to music 1.8 2.5
Watching films 1.3 2.1
Using the Internet 1.2 2.1
Other .3 1.0
Reading books .1 .2
Reading newspapers/magazines .0 .1

Total 9.4 7.9

girls, a statistically significant difference (p = < .01). As for gaming, the

results obtained from the questionnaire corroborated the findings from
the language diary data. For example, with regard to gender differences,
four out of five boys responded that they play computer games, while
only two out of three girls indicated they did. In addition, similar to
what was found in Sundqvist (2009), the boys and the girls generally
played different types of game. Both in their diaries and questionnaires,
the boys had often noted playing WoW, Call of Duty and/or Counter-
Strike, whereas The Sims was most popular with the girls. A game that
was listed by both boys and girls was Restaurant City.
In order to analyze the relationship between extramural English
and learning outcomes, the sample was first divided into two groups,
depending on whether or not the student had passed all parts of the
national test. As it turned out, among the 86 students who handed
in their language diary, 76 passed all parts of the national test (Group
Pass) and ten failed one or more parts of the test (Group Fail). Then,
for both these groups, the mean values of extramural English activi-
ties were compared with the help of an independent samples t tests.
Group Pass students spent more time in total on extramural English
(10.0 hours/week) than Group Fail did (5.2), even though it should
be noted that this difference was non-significant (p = .072). Moreover,
Group Pass also spent more time on two of the activities, namely on
playing computer games (2.9 hours/week, as opposed to .3 for Group
Fail) and on using the Internet (1.3 hours/week as opposed to .1). For
the remaining six activities, values were very similar. Despite the fact
200 From Practice to Theory

Table 9.3 Spearman correlation coefficient r for extramural English, and

listening and reading comprehension

Listening comprehension Reading comprehension

Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total

N 26 37 63 26 37 63
Extramural .494∗ .562∗∗ .514∗∗ .480∗ .562∗∗ .499∗∗
English

∗ Sig. at the .05 level.

∗∗ Sig. at the .01 level.

that the number of Group Fail students was so small, the identified dif-
ferences for playing computer games and using the Internet were almost
statistically significant at the .05 level. As for the scores on the vocab-
ulary test, the sample mean was 19 points (out of 37). Boys had a
significantly higher mean score (21) than the girls (17) (p < .05).
Then we examined the relationship between the total amount of
extramural English and learning outcomes with the help of correlation
analysis (Spearman). It was possible to correlate extramural English with
two parts of the test, namely with listening and reading comprehen-
sion.4 The analyses revealed that the total amount of extramural English
correlated significantly, positively, and strongly, with both listening and
reading (see Table 9.3). When the same types of analyses were performed
for gender, the correlations for the girls were slightly stronger for both
listening and reading (see Table 9.3).
Correlation analysis was also used to examine the relationship
between extramural English and the learners’ scores on the vocabulary
test. At sample level, there was a positive (r s = .256) but non-significant
correlation between the vocabulary score and the total amount of
extramural English. For two parts of the test, (1) Recognition and (3) Pro-
duction, the positive correlations with extramural English were indeed
statistically significant (r s = .662, p < .05, and r s = .310, p < .05,
respectively).

Discussion

From the results in our three studies, patterns emerged regarding

gaming, gender, and the age of the learners. These patterns are discussed
below, before this section of the chapter closes with a discussion on
pedagogical implications.
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 201

The importance of playing computer games at all three levels

All three studies looked at the relevance of extramural English for L2
acquisition, with an increased focus on the role of gaming in the lat-
ter two. Even though it is difficult (if not impossible) to fully know the
direction of causality between any two variables, the findings presented
here, as well as those in previous studies of gaming (deHaan et al., 2010;
Gee, 2003, 2007a; Piirainen-Marsh & Tainio, 2009; Rankin et al., 2006a;
Rankin, Gold, & Gooch, 2006b; Rankin, McNeal, Shute, & Gooch, 2008;
Rankin, Morrison, McNeal, Gooch, & Shute, 2009; Zheng et al., 2009),
point in one direction: gaming benefits English L2 vocabulary acquisi-
tion. Admittedly, it was reading outside of school that was pinpointed
as a crucial factor in incidental vocabulary acquisition in Sylvén (2004);
that is, at first sight that particular conclusion does not seem to align
with our argument about the importance of playing computer games
for L2 vocabulary acquisition. However, we have to remember that read-
ing was broadly defined in Sylvén (2004) and encompassed texts read
while playing computer games. Thus already in Sylvén (2004) there were
implications that engagement in English activities outside of school is
positive for the development of students’ vocabulary. In both Sundqvist
(2009) and our pilot study, these implications are mounting. However,
further studies are needed in order to describe the relationship between
playing computer games and vocabulary acquisition in more detail;
suffice it to conclude here that such a relationship actually exists. More-
over, as indicated by the scores on the vocabulary tests among ninth
and fifth graders, there might be reason to believe that gaming pro-
motes both learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary. It is, however,
necessary to discuss the reliability of the language diary, from which
game-related data were drawn. Naturally, the informants had to estimate
when they filled out their diaries, because it is difficult to remember
exactly how much time was spent on certain activities; thus, a cer-
tain margin of error seems unavoidable. We would like to emphasize,
though, that questionnaire data corroborated the language diary data.
Consequently, we feel the collected data are reliable and should render
valid conclusions.

Gender differences
When we compared the results from the three studies, we discovered
a pattern of gender differences. First, despite the fact that girls in gen-
eral do better in languages than boys (Björnsson, 2005; R. Ellis, 1994;
Klapp Lekholm, 2008), in our three studies, the boys outperformed
202 From Practice to Theory

the girls in terms of vocabulary – ‘the bedrock of L2’ (N. Ellis, 1994,
p. 11). Second, the boys spent more time on extramural English than
the girls, particularly on gaming. If we accept that involvement in
extramural English influences learner language in a positive way, the
boys’ extramural English habits have a key function in their L2 acqui-
sition. It seems very likely that, had the boys not taken advantage of
the various opportunities for engaging in extramural English activities
the way they did, they would have been worse off, both overall and
with regard to their L2 vocabulary. On the other hand, had the girls
chosen to engage in the same extramural activities as the boys – and
to the same extent – it seems very likely that they would have stayed
ahead of the boys also in terms of vocabulary. A third gender difference
relates to the type of game boys and girls favored. At all three levels,
the boys were more interested in role-playing games that involved more
than one player (e.g., WoW), whereas the girls preferred The Sims (in
both fifth and ninth grade). Since MMORPGs such as WoW are cogni-
tively and linguistically more demanding than The Sims, we argue that
the boys’ favored type of gaming is more beneficial for L2 acquisition
than the girls’.

The age of the learners

Our three studies deal with learners of different ages; the first 16-
to 18-year-olds, the second 15- to 16-year-olds and the third 11- to
12-year-olds. Interestingly, the correlation between extramural English
and learning outcomes gets more convincing the lower the age of the
informants. One plausible explanation is that the first study is based on
data collected around the turn of the century, the second in 2006–2007
and the third in 2010. Thus, almost ten years have passed between the
first and the last study, and even more years if we consider in what year
the informants in the first study actually were in fifth grade. During this
period of time, there has been an unprecedented rate of development in
the virtual world. In the year 2010, at least in Sweden, learners engage
with computer games, the Internet and web-based social networks at a
very low age. The aforementioned media council recently reported that
as many as 67 per cent of 2- to 5-year-olds use computers (Medierådet,
2010a, p. 18). The fact that the initial questionnaire included in Sylvén
(2004) did not even mention computer games as an activity on its own,
in comparison with the very prominent role computer games play in
our pilot study where fifth graders were even asked to specify the name
of the games they play, gives an indication of the rate of this change
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 203

in computer habits. The number of hours spent on extramural English

among fifth graders was about half of what was reported among ninth
graders in Sundqvist (2009), but we need to consider the fact that these
young learners start their extramural English at a relatively low level
of proficiency in English. Given the established impact of motivation
on learning (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Dörnyei, 2001), one conclusion to
be drawn from these results is that also very young learners probably
benefit considerably from extramural English.

Pedagogical implications
Considering the findings presented in this chapter, it is evident that
extramural English must be acknowledged as an important factor in L2
acquisition and, consequently, it has pedagogical implications that need
to be addressed. First of all, today L2 learners enter the English classroom
with varying experiences of extramural English. For some, the use of
English outside of school is so common that English is indeed perceived
as a second language (Viberg, 2000), whereas for others, it is literally a
foreign language. With such discrepancy between learners, knowledge
polarization within the walls of single classrooms becomes a huge chal-
lenge for the teachers. Unless teachers manage to bridge the gap between
classroom English and extramural English, this polarization is likely to
increase. However, by becoming aware of, and acknowledging, learn-
ers’ extramural English habits (for example by introducing language
diaries or similar tasks), teachers may pre-empt this. When teachers
know more about their learners’ extramural English activities, this facil-
itates individualized teaching (and learning) and makes it easier to meet
the needs of all learners: low, intermediate, and high achievers. Thus, a
crucial pedagogical implication would be to start discussing extramural
English intramurally, so to speak. Such discussions would most likely
increase intrinsic motivation and promote learner autonomy. Learn-
ers’ own experiences and interests are always a good starting point in
teaching.
A potential problem might be that teachers are unfamiliar with some
of the extramural English activities that their students engage in, for
example, gaming, and therefore perhaps fear addressing the topic alto-
gether. Another might be that they feel that extramural English conflicts
with an increasingly standards-driven schooling system (Halverson,
2005). Slightly more controversial is the idea that incorporating stu-
dents’ experiences from outside of school is difficult mainly because
current school organization focuses more on social control than on
learning (Squire, 2005). However, based on data and experience from
204 From Practice to Theory

the three studies presented in this chapter, teachers should be able to

relax. In general, students appreciate it when teachers (or researchers)
take an interest in their extramural English habits – and they are more
than willing to share what they know.

Conclusion

Based on the results presented in this chapter, and provided that learn-
ers play MMORPGs, it is possible to conclude that gaming is related
to L2 vocabulary acquisition. Just as was concluded regarding EverQuest
2 (Rankin et al., 2006a), a game such as WoW supplies an authen-
tic environment for learning where learners can practice, develop, and
test their interactive skills. WoW functions as an informal arena for an
immersive L2 experience. We hypothesize that not only WoW but all
similar MMORPGs help learners automatize L2 use, in particular since
language is such an important and integral part of such games. How-
ever, there appears to be a linguistic as well as a gender-related threshold
for participation in MMORPGs. Our results indicate that weak learners
are not involved in gaming at all. This is something that needs to be
addressed in further studies. In addition, our results also suggest gaming
as a possible gateway to language learning. For instance, the role of
MMORPGs in relation to offline, single-player games is a matter which
needs to be explored from the perspective of L2 acquisition. Our results
show that the boys, who predominantly played MMORPGs, performed
better than the girls, who predominantly played offline, single-player
games. At the same time the boys spent considerably more time overall
on playing. Thus, more research is needed on the relationship between
L2 acquisition on the one hand and gaming on the other, taking into
consideration the amount of time played as well as the types of games played.
Summing up, what a learner learns in the autonomous, self-regulated
context of gaming seems to be transferred into useful knowledge and
proficiency in the language classroom and lead to improved learning
outcomes. That there is relationship between gaming and L2 learning
seems indisputable.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Peter Wikström, experienced gamer and English

linguistics major at Karlstad University, for his expertise and comments
on previous drafts of this chapter.
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 205

Notes
1. To us, ‘L2 acquisition’ includes foreign language learning/acquisition as well
as second (third, fourth) language acquisition; that is, any language learned
after one’s mother tongue (Ellis & Barkhuizen, 2005, p. 3).
2. Description on the World Wide Web at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_
computer_game. Accessed 28 December 2010.
3. The ‘Affinity Group Principle’ holds, at least for MMOs.
4. At the time of writing this chapter, such data were available for three of the
six classes in grade 5.

References
Astrén, J. (2010). ‘Man måste ju typ lära sig, annars går det inte’ – World of Warcraft
och lärande av engelska. Falun: Examensarbete, Högskolan Dalarna. Retrieved
from http://dalea. du.se/theses/default.aspx.
Begg, M., Dewhurst, D., & Macleod, H. (2005). Game-informed learning: Apply-
ing computer game processes to higher education. Innovate, 1(6). Retrieved
from http://www.innovateonline.info/.
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow:
Pearson Education.
Benson, P., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2011). Beyond the language classroom: The the-
ory and practice of informal language learning and teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Björnsson, M. (2005). Kön och skolframgång: Tolkningar och perspektiv. Stockholm:
Myndigheten för skolutveckling.
Boyd Zimmerman, C. (1997). Historical trends in second language vocabu-
lary instruction. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary
acquisition (pp. 5–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in
human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum.
deHaan, J., Reed, W. M., & Kuwada, K. (2010). The effects of interactivity with a
music video game on second language vocabulary recall. Language Learning and
Technology, 14(2), 74–94.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow: Longman.
Ellis, N. (1994). Implicit and explicit language learning – An overview. In N. Ellis
(Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 1–31). London: Academic
Press.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Forsman, L. (2004). Language, culture and context: Exploring knowledge and atti-
tudes among Finland-Swedish EFL-students with particular focus on extracurricular
influence. Vasa: Åbo Akademi.
206 From Practice to Theory

Gardner, R. C. (2006). Motivation and attitudes in second language learning.

In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language & linguistics (pp. 348–355). Oxford:
Elsevier.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2006). Input, interaction and output: An overview.
AILA Review, 19, 3–17.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, J. P. (2007a). Good video games + good learning: Collected essays on video games,
learning and literacy. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Gee, J. P. (2007b). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy:
Revised and updated edition. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Halverson, R. (2005). What can K-12 school leaders learn from video games and
gaming? Innovate, 1(6). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/.
Iwashita, N. (2001). The effect of learner proficiency on interactional moves and
modified output in nonnative-nonnative interaction in Japanese as a foreign
language. System, 29(2), 267–287.
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 Hawai’i Press.
Klapp Lekholm, A. (2008). Grades and grade assignment: Effects of student and school
characteristics. PhD, Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, Göteborg. Retrieved
from http://gupea.ub.gu.se/dspace/handle/2077/18673.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London:
Longman.
Lamb, M. (2004). ‘It depends on the students themselves’: Independent language
learning at an Indonesian state school. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 17(3),
229–245.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second
language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1),
1–26.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive
ability. Language Testing, 16(1), 33–51.
Linderoth, J., & Bennerstedt, U. (2007). Att leva i World of Warcraft. Stockholm:
Medierådet, Regeringskansliet.
Lindh, S. (2009). Online computer game English: A study on the language found in
World of Warcraft. Karlstad: Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Education.
Retrieved from http://kau.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?searchId= 1&pid=
diva2:221885.
Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction and second language acquisition.
In H. Winitz (Ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition (Vol. 379,
pp. 259–278). New York, NY: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
Marton, F. (2006). Sameness and difference in transfer. The Journal of the Learning
Sciences, 15(4), 501–538.
McDonough, S. (2007). Motivation in ELT. ELT Journal, 61(4), 369–371.
Medierådet. (2006). Ungar och medier 2006 – Fakta om barns och ungas användning
och upplevelser av medier. Stockholm: Kulturdepartementet.
Medierådet. (2008). Unga och medier 2008 – Fakta om barns och ungas användning
och upplevelser av medier. Stockholm: Regeringskansliet.
 Pia Sundqvist and Liss Kerstin Sylvén 207

Medierådet. (2010a). Småungar och medier 2010. Fakta om små barns användning
och upplevelser av medier. Stockholm: Regeringskansliet.
Medierådet. (2010b). Ungar & Medier 2010. Stockholm: Regeringskansliet.
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and
reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In J. Coady
and T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 174–200).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for partic-
ipation in the activity of playing a video game. The Modern Language Journal,
93(2), 153–169.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research,
and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
Rankin, Y. A., Gold, R., & Gooch, B. (2006a). 3D role-playing games as language
learning tools. Paper presented at the EuroGraphics 2006, Vol. 25, Vienna,
Austria, September 4–8, 2006. Retrieved from http://www.thegooch.org/.
Rankin, Y. A., Gold, R., & Gooch, B. (2006b). Evaluating interactive gaming as a lan-
guage learning tool. Paper presented at the EuroGraphics 2006, Vol. 25, Vienna,
Austria, September 4–8, 2006. Retrieved from http://www.thegooch.org/.
Rankin, Y. A., McNeal, M., Shute, M. W., & Gooch, B. (2008). User centered game
design: Evaluating massively multiplayer online role playing games for second lan-
guage acquisition. Paper presented at the ACM SIGGRAPH ‘08 Sandbox, Los
Angeles, CA, 11–18 August 2008. Retrieved from http://www.thegooch.org/.
Rankin, Y. A., Morrison, D., McNeal, M., Gooch, B., & Shute, M. W. (2009). Time
will tell: In-game social interactions that facilitate second language acquisition.
FDG ’09: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Foundations of Digital
Games. Retrieved from http://portal.acm.org/dl.cfm.
Reinders, H. (2006). The effects of different task types on L2 learners’ intake and
acquisition of two English grammatical structures. PhD, University of Auckland,
Auckland.
Riggenbach, H. (1998). Evaluating learner interaction skills: Conversation at
the micro level. In R. Young & A. W. He (Eds.), Talking and testing: Discourse
approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency (pp. 53–67). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic
definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.
Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.), (1997). Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and
pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Squire, K. (2005). Changing the game: What happens when video games enter
the classroom? Innovate, 1(6). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/.
Sundqvist, P. (2009). Extramural English matters: Out-of-school English and its
impact on Swedish ninth graders’ oral proficiency and vocabulary. Karlstad: Karlstad
University Studies. Retrieved from http://kau.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?
pid= diva2:275141.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition
through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and
second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
208 From Practice to Theory

Swezey, R. W., Meltzer, A. L., & Salas, E. (1994). Some issues involved in moti-
vating teams. In H. F. O’Neill Jr & M. Drillings (Eds.), Motivation: Theory and
research (pp. 141–169). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sylvén, L. K. (2004). Teaching in English or English teaching? On the effects of con-
tent and language integrated learning on Swedish learners’ incidental vocabulary
acquisition. Göteborg: University of Gothenburg.
Sylvén, L. K. (2005). Hur kan skolelevers extramurala exponering för engelska utnyttjas
i undervisningen? Paper presented at the ASLA höst symposium: Språkforskning
på didaktisk grund, Växjö Universitet.
Sylvén, L. K. (2006). How is extramural exposure to English among Swedish
school students used in the CLIL classroom? VIEWS – Vienna English Working
Papers, 15(3), 47–53.
Sylvén, L. K. (2007). Are The Simpsons welcome in the CLIL classroom? VIEWS –
Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3), 53–59.
Viberg, Å. (2000). Tvåspråkighet och inlärning av språk i och utanför
skolan. Språk 2000:18. Kursplaner, betygskriterier och kommentarer (pp. 27–41).
Stockholm: Skolverket.
Vygotsky, L. (1926/1999). Problem i undervisningen och den intellektuella
utvecklingen i skolåldern. In G. Lindqvist (Ed.), Vygotskij och Skolan: Texter
ur Lev Vygotskijs Pedagogisk psykologi kommenterade som historia och aktualitet
(pp. 259–277). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Waters, J. K. (2007). On a quest for English. T. H. E. Journal, 34(10), 26–32.
Weiner, B. (1994). Integrating social and personal theories of achievement
striving. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 557–573.
Yi, Y. (2005). Asian adolescents’ out-of-school encounters with English and
Korean literacy. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 15(1), 57–77.
Zheng, D., Young, M. F., Wagner, M. M., & Brewer, R. A. (2009). Negotiation for
action: English language learning in game-based virtual worlds. The Modern
Language Journal, 93(4), 489–511.
10
Collocation Games
from a Language Corpus
Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten

Introduction

The notion of language games gained prominence with communicative

language teaching as course developers and teachers thought of ways to
structure opportunities for meaning negotiation. They used split infor-
mation activities to provide the impetus for learners to interact with
each other. Task-based language teaching has more recently explored
the parameters of interactive tasks to improve the nature of that interac-
tion and to ensure better and more diverse learning outcomes (Skehan,
2003). The use of computers in the design and implementation of lan-
guage games has added significant value to what teachers can now offer
students in terms of challenging and productive interactive language
games (Warschauer, 2004; Warschauer & Kern, 2000). Wright, Betteridge
and Buckby (2006, p. 1), writing of games in general, define a game as
‘an activity which is entertaining and engaging, often challenging and
an activity in which the learners play, and usually interact with others’,
thereby focusing on interaction as a key feature of language games.
The games we describe in this chapter are able to be played with oth-
ers, but we believe that there are more significant features that make
them entertaining, engaging and challenging, and which support effec-
tive learning of language. This chapter presents an explanation of a
system, FLAX, that supports collocation language games (these games
are available at flax.nzdl.org/collocation_games). Underpinning the sys-
tem is a corpus of contemporary collocations from the web: the Google
n-gram collection. The text constituting this corpus was collected in
January 2006 by Google from publicly accessible web pages and was gen-
erated from approximately one trillion word tokens of text. The corpus
contains short sequences of consecutive words, called n-grams, along

209
210 From Practice to Theory

with their frequencies. The system making use of this corpus provides
for the automatic generation of games at the instigation of the teacher,
who may choose to set particular parameters such as type of colloca-
tion. In such a way, the games can be controlled by the teacher both in
terms of form and level of difficulty or complexity. Using such an exten-
sive and relatively contemporary corpus to generate a seemingly endless
supply of new language items means that learners can be exposed to
a wealth of different language forms. One of the other affordances of
language games based on large language corpora is the randomness of
items that come into ‘play’. Smed and Hakonen (2003) see this random-
ness as a hypothetical opponent. They say, ‘The opponent (which can
include unpredictable humans and unpredictable random processes)
obstructs the players from achieving the goal. Because players do not
have a comprehensive knowledge on the opponent, they cannot deter-
mine precisely the opponent’s effect on the game’ (Smed & Hakonen,
2003, p. 2).

Collocation learning and games

The role of lexical sequences in the process of language learning, and

their importance in supporting fluent language production as ‘islands of
reliability’ (Dechert, 1980; Pawley & Syder, 1983), has recently received
renewed attention (Ellis, 1996; Schmitt, 2004). In this regard, colloca-
tions in particular are seen as much more significant and useful than
other lexical sequences such as idioms, which are relatively infrequent
but somewhat easy to learn because of their saliency. Collocations rep-
resent a type of lexical sequence (Wray, 2002) in which the lexemes
‘co-occur in natural text with greater than random frequency’ (Lewis,
1997, p. 8), and which occur in particular grammatical patterns.
Collocations are of great importance for second language learners.
Knowledge of them plays a key role in producing language fluently
(Pawley & Syder, 1983; Wray, 2002). But such knowledge is difficult
to acquire for a number of reasons. Firstly there is simply so much of
this knowledge to acquire, and it is of a complex nature. As a number
of researchers have pointed out (Benson, Benson, & Ilson, 1986; Lewis,
1997; Nattinger & DeCarrico, 1992; Nesselhauf, 2003), collocations vary
in a number of ways that present challenges for learners: in terms of
the degree to which items are fixed, the relative frequency of the words
they are made up of, whether they occur in an unbroken sequence or
whether they can tolerate lexical insertion, and so on. In addition, the
 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 211

boundaries of collocations are often difficult to identify (Bishop, 2004).

These factors also present challenges for teachers in their selection of
collocations for students’ learning. Hill (2000) recommends choosing
collocations that follow particular grammatical patterns, particularly
those that incorporate nouns, such as adjective + noun, noun + noun,
verb + adjective + noun, verb + adverb, adverb + adjective and verb + prepo-
sition + noun. He also suggests that teachers think of collocations on a
spectrum, with weak and strong collocations at each end and medium-
strength ones in the middle. It is those of medium-strength that are
particularly important for learners, because they make up a large part
of what we say and write every day. Nation (2001) likewise regards fre-
quency – together with range (frequency of occurrences across different
texts) – as an essential criterion for selection.
Teachers must have access to tools, particularly online tools, to enable
the selection of frequent and useful collocations. While such tools are
available for linguists, few – other than Tom Cobb’s Compleat Lexical
Tutor (http://www.lextutor.ca/) from Université du Québec à Montréal,
and the search and browse functions of FLAX (flax2.nzdl.org) described
in Wu, Witten and Franken (2010) – are readily accessible to teachers.
An activity or game-generating system based on selected collocations, as
described in this chapter, is to our knowledge not available elsewhere.
There are a small number of collocation exercises on the web, as opposed
to an extensive number of vocabulary- and grammar-based ones. For
example, a4esl.org, one of the most popular English learning websites,
hosts hundreds of language exercises contributed by teachers around the
world, of which only two are collocation exercises, each containing ten
questions.
Collocation exercises, normally presented as complementary material
for vocabulary study, often take the form of quizzes, puzzles, fill-in-the-
blanks, matching, permutation or games. The two collocation exercises
on a4esl.org are matching ones. The website www.better-english.com
provides 15 business collocation exercises in multiple choice format.
Each one contains 20 questions, focusing on a particular group of nouns
or adjectives. The student chooses the noun that fits the context pre-
sented in each question. The noun is removed from the question text
and the student chooses one from a dropdown list that is the same for
all questions. The words in the dropdown list appear to be randomly
rather than pedagogically selected. The 11 collocation exercises offered
by another website, angelfire.com, take the form of drag-and-drop,
matching and gap filling.
212 From Practice to Theory

Playing the games

We have designed and implemented five collocation games under-

pinned by a system that identifies collocations by type, by pattern and
by frequency. The games are designed to be interesting in that they
move beyond the conventional arrangements discussed above. They can
be played individually or in groups, either cooperatively or competi-
tively. For example, students can work on networked computers logging
into the games simultaneously, or the games can be played in a class or
group setting, by having students nominate suggestions to the group or
class from their own computers.
These games are created automatically under the guidance of a
designer, usually the teacher, through an interface described in a later
section (‘designing the games’). The main technical innovation is the
use of the Google n-gram collection, a vast collection of collocations
(30 million) and phrases (500 million) gathered from the World Wide
Web. These collocations are selected and identified by syntactic type
and are listed by frequency. Another resource that is used when creating
games are three sets of commonly used lists of words, the most frequent
1000 and 3000 words in English (West, 1953), and a list containing these
plus the 570 most frequent academic words (Coxhead, 1998) and their
word families. This process is described in the section entitled ‘Under
the hood’.
The five games described below are: Collocation Dominoes, Colloca-
tion Matching, Common Alternatives, Related Words and Collocation
Guessing.

Collocation Dominoes

The first example of a game mimics the traditional game of dominoes

where the last word of the previous collocation becomes the first word
of the next collocation. Here is an example:

bank cheque – cheque book – book club – club sandwich – sandwich board –
board room . . .

Beginning with an initial seed word (in this case bank), players come
up with the remaining words in succession, each word pair forming a
collocation. The game can be open or closed: in the closed version words
are chosen from a fixed list; in the open version, which is much more
difficult to play, they are freely chosen.
 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 213

Figure 10.1 The Collocation Dominoes game

Figure 10.1 illustrates a game created using our system from the start-
ing word turn, using dominoes of the form noun + of + noun. This screen
is what players see when the game begins. The list of available words is
given at the top of the panel. Players move a word into the appropri-
ate box, whereupon the adjacent box is also updated to contain the
same word. The last word (person in this case) as well as the first (turn) is
given; players can work forwards from the beginning or backwards from
the end.
Moves can be undone by clicking the word in the domino, where-
upon it is erased and reappears in the list of words at the top. When the
‘Check Answer’ button is clicked, incorrectly formed collocations revert
to empty boxes and their contents reappear in the list of words.
English word classes are highly flexible as many verbs can be used
as nouns, and nouns can be used as adjectives. Many learners, even
advanced ones, can feel challenged when attempting to use noun +
noun combinations accurately, given this conflation of form and func-
tion. Collocation Dominoes can help them gain fluency in using these
collocations. However, different syntactic patterns can be specified for
the game. The designer (usually the teacher) selects a syntactic pat-
tern for the collocation type, chooses a starting word and the num-
ber of dominoes, and determines whether the game is to be open
or closed.
This type of game relies on the capacity of a system that has a large
repertoire of collocations in order to determine a suitable list of words
in the closed version, and to check the player’s answer in either version.
214 From Practice to Theory

A system such as ours which is underpinned by a huge corpus has this

capacity.

Collocation Matching

In the Collocation Matching game the system selects a set of colloca-

tions with the same syntactic pattern, splits each into its left and right
component, and shuffles the two sets of components. For example,
the secretary of state, course of action, and hundreds of dollars might be
presented as:

the secretary of action

hundreds of state
course of dollars

Learners must re-match them in a way that requires them to discrimi-

nate between language items, that might easily otherwise not be noticed
as being different. This is evident in Figure 10.2 which shows a game cre-
ated using six quantification words: grain, drop, slice, sheet, chunk and bar.
The words and their associated nouns are separated, shuffled and placed
in the left and right columns respectively. Players match quantification
words with the appropriate noun by dragging and dropping the words
in the right-hand column, so that together they form a strong partner-
ship. At any point they can restart the game, check their answer, or begin
a new game that uses the same quantification words but with different
nouns.
In addition to having to engage in careful discrimination between
language items that appear similar, picking collocations thematically

Figure 10.2 The Collocation Matching game

 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 215

(in this case, quantification) can help learners practise particular groups
of collocations, which adds extra value to this activity.

Common Alternatives

For the Common Alternatives game, learners enter as many colloca-

tions as possible and their choices are scored. Figure 10.3 shows a
game that focuses on nouns commonly associated with the verb reduce.
To get learners started, they are given some sample collocations – in
this case reduce stress, reduce heat loss, reduce fighting and reduce the
risk of.
Learners type a word or phrase into the text box and press the ‘Enter’
key, at which point the system checks it. For example, reduce more
would be rejected because this exercise requires a noun, or a phrase
that contain a noun. Then the input text, preceded by the word reduce,
is sought amongst n-grams of the same length in the database. If it is
found, the associated usage frequency is retrieved and displayed as a
score.
In Figure 10.3 the user has previously entered reduce costs and reduce
poverty, and has just entered reduce the possibility of, bringing his or her
total score of 10,181. The competitive factor makes this activity com-
pelling. Players can be connected to work on the same game and see
one another’s scores. This challenges them to increase their score by dis-
covering more collocations. Pedagogically, this game is of benefit in that

Figure 10.3 The Common Alternatives game

216 From Practice to Theory

it reinforces the notion that some collocations are ‘stronger’ and more
widely used than others.

Related Words

The Related Words game picks several related words and a number of
their associated collocations, removes the related words, and shuffles
the remaining text. For example:

pay make
_____the bill, _____ efforts, _____the debt, ____a difference

Learners are asked to choose the correct word to complete each colloca-
tion (here pay the bill, make efforts, pay the debt and make a difference).
Figure 10.4 depicts a game for the pair speak and tell, which are shown
at the top. The main panel shows a list of collocations with related words
replaced by blanks. Players drag a word and drop it onto a line below
to complete the collocation. The numbers following the words indicate
how many occurrences there are, and decrease whenever the word is
used. Moves can be undone by clicking the collocation text. When the
‘Check Answer’ button is clicked, incorrect collocations revert to their
original state.
Learners are often confused by frequent words which have a wide
range and often overlap in meaning, and find it difficult to understand
their differences just by looking them up in dictionaries. This activity
works well with these types of words and, like the Common Alternatives

Figure 10.4 The Related Words game

 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 217

game, supports learners to discriminate between closely related items,

found often amongst high-frequency words. Some further examples are
make and do, wound and injury, and see and look.

Collocation Guessing

For the Collocation Guessing game, the teacher chooses a target word
and a number of associated collocations. The target word is removed
and the associated collocations are revealed one by one; players must
guess the target word as quickly as possible. For example, given this
list – plain, dark, white, bitter, milk, bar of – learners guess the word that
collocates with all of them. (The answer is obvious to chocolate lovers!).
This game, like Common Alternatives, helps learners to see the range of
items that potentially can collocate with a particular word.
The interface, shown in Figure 10.5, mimics the well-known puzzle
game of Tetris, which has been called the ‘greatest game of all time’
(100 million copies have been sold for cell phones alone). ‘Bricks’ that
show a collocation where the target word is missing appear in the main
panel on the left. They drop down one by one from the top of the panel,
and as soon as one reaches the bottom, the next one launches. Players
type guess after guess, and the game ends when the correct word is given
or the collocations run out. Bonus points are awarded according to the

Figure 10.5 The Collocation Guessing game

218 From Practice to Theory

number of collocations that have been shown. Players can restart the
current game or move on to another one at any time. The slider adjusts
the speed at which the bricks drop.
To create a set of games, the teacher provides some target words. This
allows for topic-related exercises. Alternatively, exercises can focus on a
particular collocation type or a range of types. Taking the word make as
an example: if verb + noun were chosen, the collocations might be make
money, make use of, make every effort. If all collocation types were used,
they might be make sure, make up, actually make, make money. Both are
good ways to enrich collocation knowledge.

Designing the games

A number of parameters can be set and manipulated by teachers when

designing the games. While these have been mentioned in relation to
the descriptions above, it is useful to reiterate them and discuss the
affordances associated with them. The parameters include: target words,
collocation type, wordlist, the number of collocations and selection
method. Having selected appropriate values for these parameters, the
teacher has an opportunity to review and modify the material that has
been selected before making the game available to students.
Target words are used to retrieve the collocations that will appear. The
opportunity to specify these gives the teacher control over the game’s
focus or purpose. If target words are not specified, the system picks
words randomly from one of the three wordlists mentioned above (most
common 1000 and 3000 words, and a list that includes academic words
as well). However, randomly generated words are unsuitable for some
games. For example, those used for Related Words should be somehow
related, as the name suggests.
Collocation type is determined by a grammatical pattern. Some types
are particularly suitable for certain games, such as noun + noun and
noun + of + noun for Collocation Dominoes (as illustrated earlier). Dif-
ferent groups of students may experience difficulty in learning specific
collocation types, and so a careful selection can target areas for learning.
Another parameter is used for generating random words in situations
where the target words parameter is not specified, and can be set to
one of the three lists mentioned earlier. For example, when set to 1000,
target words are picked from the list of the 1000 most common English
words (West, 1953). If the collocation type parameter mentioned above
is also set, words are picked at random from the words used in these
collocations. For example, if the collocation type is noun + noun and the
 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 219

wordlist parameter is set to 1000, words are randomly picked from the
most frequent 1000 nouns extracted from all noun + noun collocations.
The number of collocations determines the size of a game. In Collo-
cation Guessing, the more collocations there are, the easier the game,
because learners are able to see more hints. For the other games, bal-
ance is necessary to avoid learners from being overwhelmed by, and
unable to adequately pay attention to and process, the language items
presented.
The final parameters control the actual selection of collocations. How
can games be created that use the best group of collocations, and also
allow learners to practice a variety of collocations associated with a par-
ticular word? Most words, particularly common ones such as take, make,
cause, have many collocations, and they can be grouped together by fre-
quency. The top one or two collocations are normally at least twice as
frequent as the others; a second group with various numbers of colloca-
tions follows, and so on. It is crucial that learners study collocations in
the first group, and they should also study the second or third groups
in order to expand their collocation knowledge. Our system selects the
n best collocations for a word and randomly picks one for each game,
so that learners can practice different groups of collocations by clicking
the ‘New Game’ button. The value of n (default 5) is specified by the
teacher and should be adjusted according to the frequency of usage of a
particular word and the language ability of students. A general rule is to
use a high value for common words or more advanced students.
In the Collocation Matching and Related Words games, learners
match or differentiate collocations of two or more words. Of course,
different words may share the same group of collocates, such as speak
the truth and tell the truth. In this case our system chooses the strongest
collocate, tell the truth, which is more frequent than speak the truth.
Since collocations are picked randomly, learners still have the chance
to practise speak the truth when another collocation is chosen for tell.
Games are designed using a standard interface that varies slightly from
one game to another depending on the parameters that can be manipu-
lated. We use Collocation Guessing below in Figure 10.6 as an example
of the interface. Here a teacher is creating a game that asks students
to differentiate between the words make and take. She specifies two or
more target words by entering them in the input box near the top (make
and take in this case), or uses randomly generated words by choosing
a wordlist and the number of words to generate. Then she specifies
the desired collocation type (here, verb + noun), which collocation con-
stituent to practise (here the first word, i.e. the verb), the number of
220 From Practice to Theory

Figure 10.6 Designing a Collocation Guessing game

collocations to use in this game (10), and how to select collocations

(randomly from the top 15).
When the ‘Preview’ button is clicked, the system retrieves collocations
that match the criteria specified. Particular collocations can be discarded
by unchecking the check box following them. For example, here either
make a good decision or make any decisions might be removed because
they are similar.

Under the hood

Some researchers have made use of Google for language activities (see
for instance, Guo & Zhang, 2007; Shei, 2008). The fact that this is an
emerging area of activity is evidenced by the recently coined neologism
GALL, for Google Assisted Language Learning (Chinnery, 2008; Shei,
2008). However, as discussed in Wu, Franken and Witten (2009), there
 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 221

are serious limitations to using Google and the live web. For one, ‘search
engine companies do not support the use of their services through sec-
ondary interfaces’ (Wu, Franken, & Witten, 2009, p. 253). One logical
response to constraints is to use the Google n-gram collection. It is an
extensive resource with the potential for teachers to build a seemingly
inexhaustible supply of games for their learners. However, exploitation
of this resource to date is limited, perhaps largely because people are
unaware of its existence, and maybe also because of the complexity of
building the system (FLAX) which mediates it – something we were able
to do as part of a doctoral project (Wu, 2010), and also because of our
access to Greenstone digital library software.1
Essentially the process involved assigning part-of-speech tags to the
five-grams, matching tagged five-grams against syntactic patterns, dis-
carding ‘dirty’ collocations, and ranking collocations by frequency. The
OpenNLP tagger2 was used to assign part-of-speech tags to five-grams
and the tagged five-grams were compared with a chosen set of ten syn-
tactic patterns or collocation types. The first six patterns were adopted
from the work of Benson, Benson and Ilson (1986). The other four cate-
gories, noun + noun, adverb + verb, verb + to + verb and verb + adjective,
were used because of their presence in the Oxford Collocation Dictionary
for Students of English. Those collocations that matched the patterns
were extracted as candidate collocations. The next step was to ‘clean’
the collocations. Like the web itself, the five-grams are messy. They
include many non-word character strings, website names and gram-
matical errors. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to eliminate all
errors. However, we used the British National Corpus wordlist to remove
non-words and website names, and we located and discarded unconven-
tional single-character words (other than the article a or pronoun I) such
as time t, p values and m sections, or repeated words. Finally, the surviv-
ing collocations were ranked by frequency. Further details of the way in
which we ‘cleaned’ and refined the corpus for use are detailed in Wu,
Franken and Witten (2009).
The total number of collocations, and the number of words within
each type of structure that remained after the process described above
was carried out, is shown in Table 10.1.

Evaluating collocations

One of the major arguments in this chapter is that a corpus such as

the Google n-gram collection can much more successfully provide a
tool for learning frequent, relevant and useful collocations than more
 222

Table 10.1 The ten collocation types with examples and frequencies

Collocation type Examples Collocations Words

verb + noun(s) includes: verb + noun + noun make appointments, cause liver 8, 700, 000 54, 000
verb + adjective + noun(s) damage, take annual leave, result
verb + preposition + noun(s) in dismissal
verb + adverb apologize publicly 200, 000 11, 000
noun + noun a clock radio 4, 200, 000 53, 000
noun + verb includes: noun + verb with present tense
noun + be + present participle the time comes, the time is running 1, 200, 000 34, 000
noun + be + past participle out, the time is spent on
noun + of + noun a bar of chocolate 7, 800, 000 40, 000
adjective + noun adjective + noun + noun
includes: adjective + adjective + noun(s) a little girl, a solar energy system, a 6, 300, 000 56, 000
beautiful sunny day
verb + adjective
includes: verb (incl. phrasal) + adjective make available, take up more, take 91, 000 9, 800
verb + noun + adjective it easy
verb + to + verb cease to amaze 440, 000 11, 000
adverb + verb beautifully written 500, 000 13, 000
adverb + adjective seriously addicted 200, 000 10, 000
 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 223

traditional sources. In order to substantiate this claim, we present evalu-

ations of collocations extracted from Google five-grams with respect to
those in the British National Corpus (BNC) and the Oxford Collocation
Dictionary for Students of English.

FLAX collocations vs. Oxford Collocation Dictionary

for Students of English

After investigation, we decided to build the baseline data from The

Oxford Collocation Dictionary for Students of English (OCDSE) for compar-
ison, as it is based on a relatively large corpus (the BNC), and contains
about 150,000 collocations for 9000 headwords, organized into 11 col-
location types shown in Table 10.2. For each type it gives the number of
headwords, the number of collocations and some examples. Adjective +
noun collocations constitute the largest group (37.5%), followed by verb
+ noun (19.2%), adverb + adjective (7.0%), and so on. It is unclear how
this dictionary was generated: automatically, manually or both?
The dictionary contains about 185,000 collocations in all, consider-
ably more than the 150,000 that it claims. Upon further investigation,
it was found to include some arguable collocations such as 19th century,
$20 reward, children’s book and men’s loo.
Only adjective + noun, noun + noun and adverb + adjective collocations,
comprising 52 per cent of the total, were used as baseline data. This is

Table 10.2 Number of collocations extracted from the Oxford Collocation Dictio-
nary for Students of English

Collocation type Headwords Collocations Example

adjective + noun 4997 69362 (37.5%) vague recollection

verb + noun 4529 35516 (19.2%) keep the promises
noun + preposition or 3584 12475 (6.7%) in press, position on
preposition + noun
noun + verb 1846 8091 (4.4%) plot unfolds
noun + noun 2100 12283 (6.6%) plot development
adverb + verb or verb 1436 10144 (5.5%) directly recruit,
+ adverb: recruited specially
verb + to + verb: 749 3539 (1.9%) try to recruit
verb + preposition: 1076 3027 (1.6%) recruit as
adverb + adjective: 1450 13006 (7.0%) awfully careful
verb + adjective 1464 7605 (4.1%) be + careful
adjective + preposition 689 1121 (0.61%) careful about
phrases 2791 8850 (4.8%) a plot of land
224 From Practice to Theory

Table 10.3 Number of collocations in the baseline and test data

Collocation Headword OCDSE Average FLAX Average

type collocations collocations

adjective + 4863 62,919 13 4, 234, 318 870

noun
noun + noun 2048 11,836 5.8 1, 459, 283 712
adverb + 1420 11,385 8 24, 9147 175
adjective

because the other types contain non-consecutive words; and they are
variable in length and form.
For each of the three collocation types, test data were extracted and
organized by headword. Table 10.3 gives the size of the two data sets
(headwords are in bold). The largest group, adjective + noun, covers
4,234,318 FLAX collocations with 870 per headword, which is almost 66
times larger than the 62,919 OCDSE collocations with 13 per headword.
The data show that the FLAX collocation corpus contains many more
potential collocations for games than the Oxford Collocation Dictionary
for Students of English

FLAX collocations vs. BNC collocations

For this evaluation all of the ten types were extracted from the BNC.
Table 10.4 shows the total number of collocations, the number of
headwords and the average number of collocations for each headword
of each collocation type. For each collocation type, the headword
(in bold) is somewhat arbitrarily selected to give some idea of how many
collocations there are for a particular word.
As the table shows, 2–9 times more collocations were extracted from
the FLAX collocations than from the BNC, and the number of col-
locations available for a particular headword increases accordingly.
The top three types have more than ten million examples, contain-
ing 50,000–80,000 headwords. Even the smallest, verb + to + verb,
contains 170,000 collocations. The most frequent web collocation is
constitutes acceptance of (95,000,000 times), while the most frequent
one in the BNC is last year. The 767 FLAX collocations demonstrate
great diversity in the language patterns they represent. For example,
there are 285 variants of cause problems, including cause serious prob-
lems, cause major problems and cause unpredictable problems. The BNC
Table 10.4 Collocation types with statistical data from two corpora

FLAX collocations British National Corpus

Collocation type Collocations Headwords Collocations/ Collocations Headwords Collocations/

headword headword

verb + noun 20,000,000 72,000 277 1, 700, 000 64, 000 27

noun + verb 6, 600, 000 92, 000 71 800, 000 27, 000 30
adjective + noun 19,000,000 80,000 237 2, 800, 000 84, 000 33
noun + noun 8, 500, 000 70, 000 121 1, 000, 000 39, 000 26
adverb + adjective 510, 000 20, 000 25 75, 000 13, 000 6
adverb + verb 1, 300, 000 20, 000 65 180, 000 12, 000 15
noun + of + noun 14,000,000 50,000 280 1, 200, 000 41, 000 29
verb + adverb 870, 000 19, 000 45 190, 000 9, 000 21
verb + adjective 230, 000 16, 000 14 37, 000 6, 600 6
verb + to + verb 170, 000 9, 500 17 90, 000 6, 200 15
225
226 From Practice to Theory

Table 10.5 Web and BNC entries for cause + noun

collocation FLAX BNC examples

cause + problems 285 56 cause serious problems, cause major problems

cause + damage 257 54 cause permanent damage, cause significant
damage
cause + harm 147 24 cause irreparable harm, cause no harm
cause + injury 90 14 cause physical injury, cause substantial injury
cause + death 68 14 cause sudden death, cause premature death

Table 10.6 Top ten cause + noun collocations in three concordances

FLAX collocations British National Compleat

36,000 collocations Corpus Concordancer
2360 collocations 54 collocations

samples frequency samples frequency samples frequency

cause 2, 100, 000 cause 160 cause problems 5

problems problems
cause actual 1, 900, 000 cause trouble 71 cause suffering 4
results
cause 1, 300, 000 cause 48 cause damage 2
damage damage
cause harm 850, 000 cause 40 cause offence 2
difficulties
cause injury 580, 000 cause cancer 34 cause death 2
cause cancer 580, 000 cause injury 32 cause distress 2
cause 400, 000 cause death 28 cause a great 2
confusion increase
cause death 410, 000 cause 27 cause another 1
confusion war
cause trouble 280, 000 cause harm 23 cause 1
deactivation
cause pain 250, 000 cause offence 22 cause a 1
deviation

contains only 56, half of which occur only once. Table 10.5 gives five
more examples.
As a final example, we include results from the Compleat
Concordancer.3 Table 10.6 shows the top ten cause + noun(s) colloca-
tions from three resources: the collocation database, the BNC and the
Compleat Concordancer.
 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 227

The first contains 36,000 collocations, the second 2360 (of which
84 per cent occur once and 8 per cent twice), and the third 54, most
of which appear just once. Interestingly, cause problems is the most fre-
quent entry in all three cases. Upon further examination, it seems that
cause is used mostly in a negative sense and associated with problems,
damage, death, and so on.
The results of the evaluations comparing the number and type of
collocations from different sources underscore the massive and diverse
nature of the FLAX collocations. While the sheer volume of examples
could present a challenge for less-proficient learners, we believe it is
valuable for advanced learners who wish to expand their range of collo-
cation phrases for expressing propositions in precise and authentic ways.

Conclusion

The particular games and the underpinning system described in this

chapter need to be considered in terms of an alternative to a paper-
based representation, and to what a teacher can generate from more
traditional sources of language data. What affordances are associated
with a system that automatically generates a seemingly endless supply
of authentic and relatively contemporary language items for colloca-
tion games? While parameters for each of the games can be set by the
teacher, the sheer number of possible collocations that can be generated
leads to a degree of randomness, which can, as argued by Smed and
Hakonen (2003), function as an ‘opponent’. This is important for games
that are not of necessity interactive. However, the games described above
can be played with a human opponent. Sørensen and Meyer note that
‘games may be a lever for the transformation of drill-based to context-
based acquisition’ (Sørensen & Meyer, 2007, p. 561). We maintain that
these games motivate learners to want to continue playing them and
also push their performance beyond simple language manipulation.
We note that, as we write this chapter in January of 2011, Google has
just released news of its new searchable database of 500 billion words
contained in books published between 1500 and 2008. The database
was created from Google’s index of some 5.2 million books digitized
as part of its Google Books project, and includes texts in English,
French, Spanish, German, Chinese and Russian. We look forward to
considering this as potential source of language learning. We also con-
tinue with current developments exploring how best to provide learners
with opportunities to interact with their peers or teachers through
computer-mediated communication tools such as text-based chat.
228 From Practice to Theory

Notes
1. http://www.greenstone.org/
2. http://opennlp.sourceforge.net/
3. http://www.lextutor.ca/

References
Benson, M., Benson, E., & Ilson, R. (1986). The BBI combinatory dictionary of
English: A guide to word combinations. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John
Benjamins.
Bishop, H. (2004). The effect of typographic salience on the look up and com-
prehension of unknown formulaic sequences. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic
sequences: Acquisition, processing, and use (pp. 227–244). Philadelphia, PA: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Chinnery, G. M. (2008). You’ve got some GALL: Google-assisted language
learning. Language Learning and Technology, 12(1), 3–11.
Coxhead, A. (1998). An academic word list. Occasional Publication Number 18,
LALS, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
Dechert, H. W. (1980). Pauses and intonation as indicators of verbal plan-
ning in second-language speech productions: Two examples from a case
study. In H. W. Dechert & M. Raupach (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech
(pp. 271–285). The Hague: Mouton.
Ellis, N. C. (1996). Sequencing in SLA: Phonological memory, chunking, and
points of order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 91–126.
Guo, S., & Zhang, G. (2007). Building a customised Google-based collocation col-
lection to enhance language learning. British Journal of Educational Technology,
38(4), 747–750.
Hill, J. (2000). Revising priorities: From grammatical failure to collocational suc-
cess. In M. Lewis (Ed.), Teaching collocations (pp. 70–87). Hove, UK: Language
Teaching Publications.
Lewis, M. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice.
Hove, UK: Language Teaching Publications.
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English
and some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 223–242.
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike
selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.),
Language and communication (pp. 191–226). New York: Longman.
Schmitt, N. (Ed.). (2004). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing, and use.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Shei, C. C. (2008). Discovering the hidden treasure on the Internet: Using Google
to uncover the veil of phraseology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(1),
67–85.
Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(1), 1–14.
 Shaoqun Wu, Margaret Franken and Ian H. Witten 229

Smed, J., & Hakonen (2003). Towards a definition of a computer game. Turku,
Finland: Turku Centre for Computer Science.
Sørensen, B. H., & Meyer, B. (2007). Serious games in language learning and
teaching – a theoretical perspective. Situated Play: Proceedings of DiGRA 2007
conference (pp. 559–566). Digital Games Research Association.
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technological change and the future of CALL. In
S. Fotos & C. M. Browne (Eds.), New perspectives on CALL for second language
classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.). (2000). Network-based language teaching:
Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
West, M. (1953). A general service list of English words. London: Longman, Green
and Co.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Wright, A., Betteridge, D., & Buckby, M. (2006). Games for language learning:
Cambridge handbooks for language teachers (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Wu, S. (2010). Supporting collocation learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Wu, S., Franken, M., & Witten I. H. (2009). Refining the use of the web (and
web search) as a language teaching and learning resource. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 22(3), 249–268.
Wu, S., Witten, I. H., & Franken, M. (2010). Utilizing lexical data from a Web-
derived corpus to expand productive collocation knowledge. ReCALL, (1),
83–102.
Index
active learning, 145–6
Age of Empire, 104
alternate reality games (ARG), 21
anti-school discourse, 25
anxiety, 11, 25
authentic L2 communication, 161
avatar, 71, 77, 81, 84, 85, 86, 88
behaviourism, 51, 54, 63
briefing, 168
BROCANTO, 143–6, 151
CALL, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 78, 90
clarification requests, 173–4, 182
CLIL, 195, 196, 208
cognitive ethnography, 157
cognitive-motor skills, 140–1
collaboration, 15, 25, 156, 165, 168–9,
190
collocation exercises, 211
Collocation Dominoes game, 212
Collocation Guessing game, 217
Collocation Matching game, 214
collocations, 209
Common Alternatives game, 215
commercial video games, 17, 140,
147–51
communities of practice, 59, 60, 61,
62, 63, 64
competition, 128, 130
confirmation checks, 173–4
constructivism, 16, 20, 21, 24, 54,
58, 63
Cooking Mama, 101
debriefing, 168–9
declarative memory, 140–3
deep learning, 12
dialog, 70, 72, 73, 75, 82, 83, 85, 89
digital education revolution, 13,
15, 16
230
digital games
in Japan, 24, 25
paradigm shift, 13, 26
principles, 14, 23, 24
digital media, 14, 19
digital native, 14, 27
discourse, 172, 179, 182
analysis, 169
functions, 172–3
discussion forum, 95, 99, 100, 103,
105, 106, 107, 109, 110, 111
Dragon Age, 106
ecological, 157
frameworks, 43
educational change / reform, 26–7
Edutainment, 52, 53, 55, 63
emoticons, 176, 181
enduring influences, 161
engagement, 116, 117, 119, 121, 122,
125, 126, 128, 130, 131, 132, 133
English (language), 97, 99, 100, 101,
102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108,
109, 110, 111
ERP, 139, 142–6, 152
extramural English, 189, 193, 194,
195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201,
202, 203, 204, 207, 208
fanfiction, 20
feedback, 70, 76, 77, 81, 83, 85, 86,
87, 88, 89, 90
final fantasy, 107
FLAX collocation corpus, 224
fluency, 212
foreign language learning, 96, 97, 98,
102, 106, 108, 111
formative feedback, 126, 131, 133
GALL, Google Assisted Language
Learning, 220
game-based, 39

game-enhanced, 35
game-informed, 45
gameplay mechanics, 139–41, 145–7,
149–52
gender, 196, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202,
204
Google n-gram collection, 209, 212
grammatical accuracy, 161, 175
Grand Theft Auto, 107
incidental vocabulary acquisition,
195, 201, 206, 208
industrial model of schooling, 14,
17, 25
informal learning, 192, 193
in-game communication tool, 165
in-game text, 95, 103, 104, 109
input, 191, 192, 196, 206
interaction, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76,
77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86,
87, 88, 89, 90, 156–9, 162, 164–5,
169, 170–6, 182, 184–5
anaylsis, 169
iSTART, 115, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122,
123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 131, 132,
133
Japanese (language), 95, 96, 99, 102,
103, 105, 109, 112
L2 acquisition, 189, 190, 191, 192,
194, 195, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205
LAN effect, 142–3, 145
language advising, 105, 110, 111
learner autonomy, 96, 97, 98, 100,
101, 102, 105, 111
learning theories, 51, 63, 64
legitimate peripheral participation, 58,
59, 61
lexical accuracy, 175
linguistic
features, 175
preparation, 168
literacy, 97, 100, 102, 108, 109
massively multiplayer online
role-playing game (MMORPG),
18, 21, 25, 36, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74,
75, 76, 77, 81, 88, 89, 90, 162–3,
165, 190, 194, 202, 204
Index 231
metacognitive skills, 156
Mingoville, 53, 57, 63
morphosyntax, 139, 141–6, 149–52
motivation, 193, 194, 195, 203, 205,
206
multiplayer online role-playing game,
165
multitasking, 12, 13
N400 effect, 142–3, 146
narrative, 100
based learning, 44
negotiate for meaning, 159, 182
netiquette, 168
output, 191, 206, 207
P600 effect, 142–5, 152
paratexts, 97, 98, 105, 107, 111, 112
persistence, 132, 133
place-based mobile games, 44
plearn, 164
politeness, 75, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 88
problem-based learning (PBL), 54, 55,
56, 57
procedural memory, 139, 141–3, 148,
150, 152
product-oriented and process-oriented
learning, 14, 15, 19
psycholinguistic frameworks, 36
quest, 71, 77, 83, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89,
164–8, 176–8, 183
Quest Atlantis, 61, 62, 63, 64
Ragnarok Online, 163–7
randomly generated words, 218
randomness, 210
reading comprehension, 115, 119,
120, 133
related words game, 216
repair move, 182
Rise of Nation, 102
rules, 140–52
second language acquisition, SLA, 70,
72, 75, 82, 83, 191, 192, 194, 205,
206, 207
Second Life, 17, 18
232 Index
self-corrections, 173, 174
self-explanation, 119, 120, 121, 123,
124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130,
131, 133
serious games, 11, 12, 19, 116, 117,
118, 133
simplified registers, 176
simulation games, 37
situational influences, 160–1
skill (acquisition), 115, 116, 117, 131,
139–42, 147, 150–1
social interaction, 17, 20, 191, 207
social media, 14
social networking games, 38
social skills, 156
sociocognitive learning, 26, 36
sociocultural, sociocultural theory,
157, 184, 191, 207
sprite, 140–2
strategies, 115, 119, 120, 121, 123,
124, 131, 133
synthetic immersive environments, 42
Tactical Iraqi, 56, 57, 58, 64
target language (TL), 191, 192, 193
task-based learning, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24,
25, 26
teacher’s role, 95, 96, 98, 99, 100, 101,
102, 104, 108
technoromanticism, 13
testing, 14, 21
The Sims, 17, 24, 190, 191, 197, 199,
202
training game, 139, 143–7
transfer, 192, 204, 206
user-generated content, 14
vernacular games, 32
vocabulary learning, 101, 104
voice communication software, 165
Web 2.0, 18
willingness to communicate
(WTC), 156, 160–2, 169, 177–8,
180–5
World of Warcraft and WoW, 18, 189,
190, 191, 197, 199, 202, 204,
205, 206