P r o c e d i a – S o c i a l a n d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e s 9 3 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 2 4 9 1 2 5 3 [612802]

P r o c e d i a – S o c i a l a n d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e s 9 3 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 2 4 9 – 1 2 5 3
1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odaba șı
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.023 ScienceDirect
3rd World Conference on Learning, Teaching and Educational Leadership – WCLTA 2012
Language Games as a Part of Edutainment
Șule ÇEL İK KORKMAZa*
aInstructor,Uluda ğ University,Bursa,Turkey
Abstract
Teaching English through games is one of the best ways to provide entertainment when learning a language. Hence,
this study aims at investigating what primary school children think about learning a language through games, and
finding out whether there is congruence between the children’s and English language teachers’ perspectives about
the issue. 121 5th grade learners and 60 language teachers were asked to complete a 23- item questionnaire about different aspects of using games in language classes. The results revealed mostly positive opinions about the issue
and there are statistically significant differences between learners’ and teachers’ ideas on several points.
Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odaba șı.
Keywords: Edutainment; education, learning through games
© 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Why does a child create classroom management problems in a class? Teachers generally accuse unruly children
of disrupting the class. However, they should not forget to examine reasons for being unmotivated for the lesson.
Teachers must raise awareness of what they expect from children to do in their classes. Do they expect them being
silent, sitting on desks in rows without moving around, being interested in and motivated for the lesson or learning
in a way that teachers teach? Of course these expectations do not become realistic when we consider energetic kids in our classes. Teachers need to be sure that they are teaching their lessons by taking children’s’ characteristics into consideration and their immediate needs such as having good time in the classroom. Thus, they need to create and
use a good many of activities in view of children’s needs for fun and without confining themselves doing whatever provided in the prescribed coursebooks step by step just as we observe in a formal classroom environment.
2
2.GGames to turn education into e ddutainment
When we consider the characteristics of young children, edutainment would be a better term rather than
education for younger children. Learners need fast, active and exploratory activities; thus, not traditional school-
based leaning but game-based learning which has the motivational power to make the learning fun may meet the
needs of learners’ demands (Kirriemuir-j, 2004). As Ahuja (1994) stated, the objectives of the activity which
sometimes have little meaning to children are explained to learners in conventional education whereas the objective
is kept hidden in the activities driven by exploration, discovery and adventure in interactive edutainment, a good
* Corresponding Author: Șule Çelik Korkmaz. Tel.: +90-224-2942256
E-mail address: [anonimizat] Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odaba șı

1250 Șule Çelik Korkmaz / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1249 – 1253
example of which is game. Learners are not directed to focus on the language during game-based activities, instead
of this, games provide meaningful and fun context in a wa y that children are motivated naturally to engage in it.
Researches to this date have signified various advantages of integrating ga mes into our language teaching which are
recapitulated as follows; games emphasize the meaning in la nguage learning, thus, learners will better remember the
language they learnt (Tuan &Doan, 2010); games enable children to develop physically , socially, emotionally and
cognitively besides being enjoyable and fun either as a co mpetition or cooperation with a clearly defined goals and
rules (Read, 2007); games provide fun and comfortable envir onment in which learners are more motivated to take
risks in language practice (Wright, Betteridge, and Buckybuy, 2006). In the TEEM report (McFarlane et al 2002),
teachers and parents recognized that games can support valuable skill development such as strategic thinking, communication, negotiating skills . However, neither teachers nor parents were happy with the notion of playing
games in lesson time since such skill development did not ma tch the criteria assessed in high stakes national tests.
Despite this fear of teachers and parents, many benefits of integrating games into language teaching as emphasized
above motivated the researcher to investigate the following research questions to determine the place of games in language classes of Turkey;
1. What do primary school children think a bout learning a language through games?
2. Is there congruence between the children’s and Englis h language teachers’ perspectives with regard to
learning through games?
3
3. MMethodology
3.1. Participants
The participants were 121 5th grade learners from three different stat e primary schools in Bursa in Turkey and 60
state primary school English teachers (43 females and 17 males) from four different provinces in Turkey. 37
teachers had three to ten years teaching experiences w ith young children whereas 23 of them had more than ten
years experiences. They all graduated from ELT de partments of different universities in Turkey.
3.2. Data Collection Tools and Procedure
In the study, a 23 item structured que stionnaire with a five- point Likert -type rating scale was formed by the
researcher in order to investigate what young learners and practicing teachers think about learning through games.
The items in the questionnaire were prepared considering the related literature about games, thus they were grouped under five categories as : general statements (1,2,3,20, 22,23); ludic principles of a game (4,5,10,11,12,13); types of
games (14,15,16,18,19,21); time issues (6,7,8,); and possible problems (9,17,24 ). The questionnaire was
administered via e-mails and handouts. Based on the Cronbach's alpha, the internal consistency reliability of the
learners’ questionnaire was found to be 0, 709 and the teache rs’ 0, 82. Furthermore, a semi-structured interview was
administered to 10 learners to de the results obtained from the questionnaire.
3.3. Data analysis
The quantitative data obtained from the questionnaire was analyzed through SPSS 13.0. to have simple
descriptive statistical results such as frequency results, mean scores and standa rd deviations in order to reveal the
participants’ views regarding the categories and the items in the questionnaire. To find out whether there are
statistically differences between the learners’ and teachers’ perspectives, the independent sample t-test was used. For
the qualitative aspect of the study, the data of the intervie ws were transcribed and content-analyzed in order to
deepen the results obtained from the questionnaire. 4. Findings
The 23-item structured questionnaire investigating primar y school learners’ ideas revealed mostly positive results
regarding learning English through games. Based on the mean scores of the categories in the questionnaire, the
learners mostly agreed on the general points. Under this category, most of the participants (94,2%) thought that

1251 Șule Çelik Korkmaz / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1249 – 1253
pupils become happy when they learn English through games (item 1; mean 4.66) and 92,6 % of them reported that
playing a game is an efficient technique when learning English (item 22). More over, most of the participants (90,1
%) agreed that children understand English when they play games in the lesson (item 2) and 89,2 % of them stated
that the subjects learners learnt thr ough games become more permanent (item 3). With regard to the item 20 which
is formed to ascertain students’ attitudes towards their teachers who use games in their classes, 84,3 % of the
participants agreed that children love their teachers more when they teach English through games.
The second high score is about ludic pr inciples of a successful game (mean 4.15), which revealed agreement on
the following points in order of high scores such as se tting rules (item 10), cooperation (item 4), competition (item
5), fun elements (item 11), teachers’ demonstration (item 13) and teachers’ use of L1 (item 11). As to this category,
97,5 % of the participants agreed that children should know the rules at the beginning of the games and 92,5 % of
them thought that when children play cooperative game s, the lesson becomes more enjoyable. Accepting the
significance of cooperation, most of them highlighted their desire for competiti on as well, as 80,2 % of them agreed
that when they play games in the form of competition, they will have more fun. Moreover, 77,7 % of the learners confirmed that if games played in a classroom are not fun, children lose their motivation. Th e last two results in this
category are so important for learners to comprehend the pr ocedure of a game. 73,5 % of the learners reported that
teachers should explain how to play a game by using simple English with the help of demonstration. On the other hand, nearly the same percentage of the learners (71,7) thought that teachers should expl ain how to play a game in
L1, which is the indicator of children’s expectation from their teachers to use L1 in explaining the game.
The third category which was about timing of a game (mean 3,40) revealed some dubious ness except for item 8.
72,8 % of the learners agreed that any subjects could be taught in the form of games at any time of the lesson. On
the other hand, although more than half of the participants (55,4 %) believed that the time allocated to play games in
English lesson was enough (item 6), 43,8 % of them thought that it was not enough. As to when to play a game,
nearly half of them (49,6%) stated that they can play games only at the end of the lesson while 49,8 % of them
disagreed . Based on the interview results, some of the learners reported that their teachers let them play games in
the lesson as a reward after completing their tasks which are mostly in the form of worksheet. For example, one of the interviewees stated that “when we play games at th e end of the lesson, it becomes more enjoyable and we can
discuss about the games during break time”. Another interviewe e (I5) mentioned; “our teachers say that if we finish
vocabulary matching activity right away, we can play games; thus we try to complete the activity immediately.”
The fourth category with regard to types of a game (mean, 4,06) revealed the following order respectively
considering the frequency results of the items; vocabulary, writing, listening, reading, grammar and speaking games.
84,3 % of the participants reported that children like pl aying games when learning vocabulary and 83,4 of them
stated that children produce more sentences when they write in English as a game. Moreover, 81, 9 % of the learners
agreed that children were able to understand English bette r when they were playing listening game and 81,8 % of
them revealed that when children read English texts as a game, they could understand better. 81 % of them believed that children like to play games when learning grammar st ructures. However, with regard to speaking games, the
participants’ views were not so positive, as only 55,4 % of them believed that children could speak English more
comfortably when playing games. Th e reason for having problems with speaking games might be understood in the
statement of interviewee 4; “ as we are concentrated on the game, we find it difficult to speak in English; therefore,
our teacher lets us speak in Turkish. However, we learn th e target subjects of the game in English by writing many
times on our notebooks.
The last category in the questionnaire was about possible problems (mean 3,11) such as noise, the use of L1 and
exam-oriented education system. Although th e results revealed that most of the learners (84,3 %) were not disturbed
by the noise when they were playing games, more than half of the participants (68,6%) agreed that they always
speak Turkish when playing games and they do not have time to be prepared for the exams when they learn English
through games. Interviewee 9 shared her ideas about us ing L1 during games based on her friend’s conversations
during break time; “speaking English is very difficult for som
e of my friends and this makes them become reluctant
to speak English, as they thought t hat speaking English is very boring.” The interview results were consistent with
the TEEM report (McFarlane et al 2002) about education syst em in Turkey; in that, some of the children mentioned
that they felt parent pressure on themselves to study for the exams to get higher scores.

1252 Șule Çelik Korkmaz / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1249 – 1253
With regard to second research question which was formed to ascertain whether there is congruence between the
children’s and English language teachers’ perspectives about learning through games, the independent sample t-test
result in table 1 indicated significant differences between the learners and teachers in 17 points whereas there
appeared congruence between two groups on 6 aspects of us ing games in the classroom such as competition, fun
elements, teachers’ use of demonstration, L1 use wh en playing games, speaking games and exam-issues.
Table 1. Descriptive and the independent t-test results of the data obtained from the questionnaires
Items Grou p N Mean Std. Deviation Si g. (2-tailed )
1 Bein g Happy learner 121 4,66 0,791 0,014
teacher 60 4,32 0,911
2 Com prehension learner 121 4,36 1,024 0
teacher 60 3,78 0,993
3 Retention learner 121 4,38 1,059 0
teacher 60 3,75 1,019
4 Coo peration learner 121 4,45 1,025 0
teacher 60 3,9 0,896
5 Com petition learner 121 4,03 1,354 0,076
teacher 60 3,68 0,965
6 Allocated time learner 121 3,27 1,597 0,001
teacher 60 2,67 0,877
7 Time for a game learner 121 3,08 1,691 0,002
teacher 60 3,7 0,926
8 Learnin g any subject learner 121 3,87 1,402 0
teacher 60 2,57 1,031
9 Noise learner 121 1,79 1,246 0
teacher 60 3,55 1,096
10 Rules of a game learner 121 4,81 0,637 0,001
teacher 60 4,32 1
11 Fun Elements learner 121 3,93 1,473 0,896
teacher 60 3,95 0,999
12 Teachers' L1 use learner 121 3,93 1,523 0
teacher 60 3,17 0,977
13 Demonstration learner 121 3,8 1,52 0,14
teacher 60 3,52 1,033
14 Vocabular y learner 121 4,31 1,132 0
teacher 60 3,63 0,956
15 Grammar learner 121 4,16 1,176 0
teacher 60 2,85 0,899
16 Writin g learner 121 4,23 1,146 0
teacher 60 3,28 1,075
17 L1 use in games learner 121 3,81 1,41 0,218
teacher 60 3,58 1,013
18 Reading learner 121 4,23 1,116 0
teacher 60 3,38 0,94
19 Listenin g learner 121 4,21 1,185 0
teacher 60 3,42 0,962
20 Lovin g teachers learner 121 4,34 1,137 0
teacher 60 3,67 1,1
21 Speaking learner 121 3,23 1,657 0,21
teacher 60 2,98 0,983
22 Efficienc y learner 121 4,64 0,796 0
teacher 60 4,1 0,951
23 Exam issues learner 121 3,74 1,514 0,43
teacher 60 3,58 1,154

The t-test result of item 1 [t = 0,014, p<0.05] showed st atistically significant difference between two groups that
the students revealed higher percentage (94,2%) than the teachers (76,6%), which means that children became happy when they played games in their English lesson. Regardi ng comprehension and retention, the t-test results [t= 0,

1253 Șule Çelik Korkmaz / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1249 – 1253
p<0.01] showed statistically significan t differences. Despite the teachers’ doubts (36,7%) about the issues, children
were more certain that they understand English when they play games in the lesson and the subjects learners learnt
through games become more permanent. Another statistical significant diffe rence appeared regarding cooperation
[t= 0, p<0.01] that although some of th e teachers were neutral, (35%) the students agreed that when they played
cooperative games the lesson became more fun.
With regard to allocated time, the t-test result revealed statistically signifi cant difference [t = 0, 01, p<0.01] that
the higher percentage of the learners (55,4 %) than the teachers (13,3%) believed the ad equacy of the time allocated
to play games in English lesson. There is also statistica lly significant difference [t= 0, 02, p<0.05] related to timing
of a game within the lesson that although 49,6% of the stude nts thought that they can play games only at the end of
the lesson, only 6,7% of the teachers agreed on this idea. Moreover, the groups differ in their ideas with regard to
item 8 [t = 0, p<0.01] that although 72,8 % of the learners agreed that a ny subjects could be taught in the form of
games at any time of the lesson, only 18,3 of the teachers agreed on the issue. When the participants’ views were
compared, the t-test results indicated significant differences related to noise [t = 0, p<0.01] and rules of a game [t=
0,001, p<0.05], which means that the st udents with higher percentage than the teachers reported that they were not
disturbed by the noise when they were playing games and the rules of a game should be clear before playing a game.
Corresponding with L1 use in explaining the game, the resu lt indicated significant differe nce [t = 0, p<0.01] that
despite the learners’ expectation from their teachers to use L1 in explaining the game, teachers preferred being
neutral. There is also significant diffe rence [t= 0, p<0.01] on the views of tw o groups in respect to loving teachers
due to the use of games in English lessons that the percen tage of the learners is higher than the teachers on this
issue. The t-test results with regard to the components of the language rev ealed significant differences [t = 0,
p<0.01] except for speaking. Although the learners thought th at learning how to read, listen and write in English
besides developing their vocabulary knowledge through games were effective, the teachers preferred being neutral.

5. Conclusion

To sum up, the results with regard to the use of games as a technique for language learning were mostly positive,
which indicated how edutainment is more powerful for young learners than educa tion. However, it is clear that the
issue of speaking English should be handled carefully and comprehensively in language clas ses, as both learners and
teachers agreed that children could not speak English co mfortably when playing Eng lish games, which directs
learners to move on the use of their L1. When we consider the positive effects of language games such as lowering learners’ anxiety and providing meaningful use of a language in the classr oom, this result is striking and should be
investigated in detail. Since the perspectives of learners and teachers might vary even about the specific issue such
as learning English through games, teach ers and researchers should conduct studies or action researches to examine
learners’ views on several points to take into considerati on when teaching a language and planning their lessons in a
way that they meet their individual learners’ needs. If learners are children, language teachers should not ignore
their natural instincts for games and they should seek fo r ways to turn education into edutainment.

R
References

Ahuja, R., Mitra, S., Kumar R & Singh M. (1994). Educati on through digital entertainment – A structured approach.
www.geocities.com/SoHo/1718/docs/edutainment.html
Kirriemuir, J. & McFarlane, C. A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning . Futurelab series. Graduate School of Education, University
of Bristol.
McFarlane, A, Sparrowhaw k, A and Heald, Y (2002). Report on the educational use of games . TEEM (Teachers Evaluating Educational
Multimedia): www.teem.org.uk
Read, C. (2007). 500 Activities for the primary classroom . Macmillen Education.
Tuan, L.T. & Doan, N. T. M. (2010). Teaching English grammar through games, Studies in Literature and Language Vol.1 No.7, pp. 61-75.
Wright, A., Betteridge, D. & Buckybuy, M. (2006). Games for Language Learning, Cambridge handbook for language teachers. 3rd edition ,
CUP.