American Journal of Language and Literacy
Volume 1, Number 2, 2016
Review Article
Notes on Online Digital Games and Language Learning: A Review
Hélder Fanha Martins
Lisbon Accounting and Business School (LABS – ISCAL), Lisbon - Portugal
[email protected]
Citation: Fanha Martins, H. (2016). Notes on online digital games and language learning: A
review. American Journal of Language and Literacy, 1, B10-16. Retrieved from
http://www.ASRAresearch.org/ajll-vol-1-no-2-2016/
ABSTRACT
In the recent past, digital games have demonstrated potential in a learning environment. Lee
(1979) recognizes the power of games as an educational tool. These digital games have great
potential in engaging learners, and prompt them to interact in learning. Games provide an
immersive environment, critical in situated learning. Digital games have adaptive qualities, and
this provides motivation for individuals to be motivated in their learning. In this sense, it creates
further exposure to target language input, as well as opportunities for output. The preference of
computer games in teaching language is driven by the idea that success learning is embedded on
socio-cultural context of the learners’ lives, pushing learners on collaboration and lifelong
learning. Indeed, digital games facilitate the bridging of learning both inside and outside the
classroom.
Authors from diverse backgrounds agree that the use of games as an instructional intervention is
pedagogically sound. Scholars believe that it is critical to undertake a study, to reveal the
potential of digital games. The research seeks to answer questions such as do games motivate
learners? Do games serve an efficient role in use of target language? Do games provide a chance
for negotiation of meaning, form, or focus? What role do games play in uptake and acquisition?
It is worth noting that some of recent researches have sought to answer the identified questions
(e.g. de Zheng et al., 2009; Piirainen-Marsh, 2009).
Keywords: online learning, digital language learning, digital games
INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
The idea of using games in learning language has been a contested subject. Supporters of games
cite several advantages such as games providing more co-operative group dynamics and
cognitive aspects of language learning (Lengeling & Malarcher, 1997). Lee (1979) asserts that
games have a great potential in motivating learners. Richard-Amato (1988) adds that games
reduce anxiety in learners. A study by Silver (1982) and Zdybiewska (1994) revealed that games
are useful in communicating in target language, as opposed to concentrating on correct linguistic
structures. Richard-Amato (1988) argue that technology creates an informal atmosphere known
to harness learners’ receptiveness. However, dunkers have argued that games are more of gap
fillers and icebreakers.
American Scholarly Research Association
www.ASRAresearch.org
B10
American Journal of Language and Literacy
Volume 1, Number 2, 2016
Review Article
Administrators may prefer to ban the use of technology, describing games are disruptive and a
threat to serious learning. This idea rejects enjoyment and fun in learning because it never
thought to be effective (Kim 1995). The debate presents reasons why learning is seen as a less
serious academic pursuit. It is proposed to marginalize game like activities, as part of the efforts
to establish a theory driven or quasi-scientific discipline as a separate entity. Before 1980s,
teachers used the material at their disposal to create games
However, in the last three decades, games have gone digital with the creation of video games,
mobile games, dedicated handheld game consoles, and the growth of the teen culture that
supports engaging modding and remix cultures (Ito, 2009). Later, games have move online with
millions of users around the world. Hubbard (1991) predicted the potential of digital game-based
language learning, claiming that it would be transformative in teaching modern language.
Nonetheless, more than twenty years later, Chik (2011) refutes these claims and cites that digital
games form an integral part of leisure consumption. He claims that digital games ability to help
in teaching language remains unclear.
It is worth noting that Chiks scepticism has been evidenced in today’s language classes. These
topic has attracted interest of scholars and a growing body of literature has been released,
supporting the idea that digital games could be critical in enhancing language learning (GarciaCarbonell, Rising, Montero, &Watts, 2001). It could as well supplement language learning. The
recent studies on these areas (deHaan, Reed, & Kuwada, 2010; Piirainen-Marsh & Taino, 2009)
have raised interest, with the computer-assisted language learning being part of an emerging subfield of research. Game development has seen educational games repackaged as serious games,
as opposed to being elements of fun and enjoyment (Negroponte, 1995; Shaffer, 2008).
Therefore, game-based learning is equated to deep learning (Gee, 2007). In fact, learners can
perform the reading and writing tasks using computer screens, moving seamlessly through
images, audio, text, and video, to the point that learners are considered digital (Lankshear &
Knobel, 2008; Palfrey & Gasser, 2008; Pegrum, 2009; Prensky, 2001a, 2001b, 2007). Children
have increasingly become bored with the school idea of surveillance and control, as opposed to
helping reinforce their creative mind. Teenagers have demonstrated great multitasking
capabilities, as they increasingly used social media, talk on phone, and simultaneously work on
their school homework (Tapscott, 2009)
Digital technological have immense potential of achieving great results, through the
combination of the gamer communities, with these groups having full knowledge on the
multimodal sign systems, which are tenets of the game world that learners undertake (Gee, 2007;
Fanha Martins, 2012). As such, digital technologies are critical in transforming the shortcomings
of traditional learning. In the past, concerns have been raised on the need to transform the
entertainment focused digital games used in the educational sector (Prensky, 2001b). It has been
revealed that these games integrate problem-solving and cognitive skills, which could benefit
learners (Gee, 2007).
The advancement of digital games, as suggested by semantic changes, is in line with the
increased publicizing of technology. The contemporary society seems to be preoccupied by
American Scholarly Research Association
www.ASRAresearch.org
B11
American Journal of Language and Literacy
Volume 1, Number 2, 2016
Review Article
technology (Selwyn, 2011). On this account, it firmly reinforces the idea that online game
language learning is inseparable from cultural, social and historical context.
The arguments identified on digital games have closer similarities to those identified earlier,
particularly in the era of non-digital language games. However, there is a tendency to brush aside
the issues related to failure of technology and being replaced by the ideology of not caring about
the past (Cuban, 1986). Such sentiments are meant to support the idea that technology is a new
age with a bright future (Lockard & Pegrum, 2007; Selwyn, 2011).
Based on arguments raised by Illich (1971), digital games were created on the ideal of game-like
worlds, as these individuals work on online communitarianism (Rheingold, 2000; Gee, 2007).
The digital games were created out-of-school non-formal play (Ito et al., 2010; Beck and BeckGernsheim, 2002).
In essence, many issues surrounding digital game learning should be discussed. It should not be
dismissed a mere localized research centred on game design or language learning. Further
research aims to deconstruct the simplified binary oppositions, which is common in debate
relating to digital education. For instance, issues such opposing learning, multitasking,
entertainment, boredom, play, fun among others (Ito, 2009; Thomas, 2011b). These issues are
attributed to digital division, with efforts directed to erasing others (Buckingham, 2007).
ONLINE GAME-BASED LANGUAGE LEARNING
Based on the issues discussed earlier, the increased adopting of digital games is intended to reengage less motivates and dismal performing learners. These learners have lost interest in
learning because of the less appealing formal systems of education, which has experienced little
change in the last century (Fanha Martins, 2012). A study by Black (2008), Gee (2008), and
Martin Steinkuehler (2010) reveals the struggles of young males. These young learners have
rejected the idea of print-base reading. As such, the efforts to re-engage these learners should be
aligned to their individual interests, evaluating activities these learners enjoy (Gee, 2011), in line
with video gaming handbooks and fan-fiction. Indeed, the rationale is clearly depicted in Gee’s
36 learning principles, aligned to the use of video games. It as well encompasses the 17
principles for design that guide situated learning environment (Gee, 2011). The ideas raised by
Gee in his new pedagogical framework have a close relationship with his earlier choice of terms,
for instance, “Active, Critical Learning Principle,” “Self-knowledge Principle,” “Practice
Principle,” “Ongoing Learning Principles,” “Discovery Principle,” and “Committed Learning
Principle” (Gee, 2007).
The emphasis comes out clearly in the 17 principles, which constitute learning centred on
“multiple route to full and central participation,” integrating of learning and assessment, and
using failure as learning tools. The idea is centred on lifelong learning and it is believed that
learners should be prepared to active, engaged members, and “thoughtful member of the public
sphere” (Gee, 2011, n.p.).
American Scholarly Research Association
www.ASRAresearch.org
B12
American Journal of Language and Literacy
Volume 1, Number 2, 2016
Review Article
In evaluating how language has been taught in the last thirty years, it is worth noting that
physical layout of the classroom has not changed for over a century. The notable difference is the
introduction of dedicate language laboratory or the presence of networked computer room. In
relation to perspective of methodology, some of the trends have been learned, which incorporate
the emphasis of several Gees’ learning principle identified above. It should be noted that over a
century ago, learners were engaged in grammar translation approaches, with teachers being the
centre of learning. However, today, the learner prefers working in small groups, for instance,
pairs and these groups are used to interact with one another and the target language teacher.
Although the research is not restricted to linear development ideas, the language learning
approaches have been transformed through cognitivism and behaviourism, leaning towards
constructive and collaborative learning (Kolb, 1984). The use of technology in learning language
has seen great changes with the use of computers as tutors and later as a tool to help students in
their learning and discovery (Beatty, 2010; Levy & Stockwell, 2006; Fanha Martins, 2012).
The approach used in language learning in the last three decades has been turned towards
communicative language teaching methodology and task-based language teaching (Ellis, 2003;
Van den Branden, 2006; Van den Branden et al., 2009). Changes in language learning are clearly
pointed out by Purushotma et al. (2008) asserting that in using task-based approach, online
digital games language learning gives an alternative model to help in achieving-oriented learning.
In turn, it impedes the wider educational trend, advocating for central testing. The use of several
genres of games, for instance, simulation games, virtual pet social sims, puzzle adventure games,
alternate reality games, and web-based strategy, digital games have underlined the digital games
capabilities of serving as learning tools, as well as acting as ‘critical contemporary arenas for
task-relevant communication and relationship building’ (p. 32).
REFERENCES
Beatty, K. (2010). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning (2nd
ed.). London: Pearson.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization. London: Sage.
Black, R. (2008). Adolescents and online fan fiction. New York: Peter Lang.
Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: Children’s learning in the age of digital
culture. Malden, MA: Polity.
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.
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.
American Scholarly Research Association
www.ASRAresearch.org
B13
American Journal of Language and Literacy
Volume 1, Number 2, 2016
Review Article
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Garcia-Carbonell, A., Rising, B., Montero, B., & Watts, F. (2001). Simulation/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.
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
Fanha Martins, H. (2012). Aprendizagem Online de Inglês como Língua Estrangeira com Base
em Tecnologias Assíncronas e Síncronas, Colibri, Colecção Caminhos do Conhecimento, Lisboa.
Hubbard, P. (1991). Evaluating computer games for language learning. Simulation
& 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.
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.
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (Eds.). (2008). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and
practices. Bern & Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
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.
Lockard, J., & Pegrum, M. (Eds.). (2007). Brave new classroom: Democratic education
and in the internet. Bern & Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Martin, C., & Steinkuehler, C. (2010). Collective information literacy in massively
multiplayer online games. eLearning and Digital Media, 7(4), 355–365.
American Scholarly Research Association
www.ASRAresearch.org
B14
American Journal of Language and Literacy
Volume 1, Number 2, 2016
Review Article
Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. London: Coronet.
Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of
digital natives. New York: Basic Books.
Pegrum, M. (2009). From blogs to bombs: The future of digital technologies in education. Perth:
University of Western Australia.
Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Taino, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for participation 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#
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.
Selwyn, N. (2011). Schools and schooling in the digital age: A critical analysis.
London & New York: Routledge.
Shaffer, D. W. (2008). Education in the digital age. The Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 4(1),
39–51 . ondon & New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world.
London & New York: McGraw Hill.
Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2011b). Deconstructing digital natives: Young people, technology
and the new literacies. London & New York: Routledge.
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
American Scholarly Research Association
www.ASRAresearch.org
B15
American Journal of Language and Literacy
Volume 1, Number 2, 2016
Review Article
teaching: A reader. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
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.
Copyright: © 2016 Fanha Martins. Author retains copyright and grants American Scholarly
Research Association a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. Users can share, adapt, and make
commercial use of articles as long as proper credit is given to authors and the original publisher.
American Scholarly Research Association
www.ASRAresearch.org
B16