USING GAMES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING Mrs Josephine Rama Jurong Primary School Mrs Cheong Choy Ying

Jurong Primary School Mrs Koh Row Lee Jurong Primary School Ms Au Yong Luei Luei Jurong Primary School
ABSTRACT Research has shown that children learn and develop the fastest when they are at play. Gibbs (1974) defines a game as an activity carried out by cooperating or competing decision makers, seeking to achieve, within a set of rules, their objectives.

Games add an element of fun and help to stimulate thinking as well as to motivate learning. Language games can provide challenges to young minds and provide a competitive element that enhances effective learning. Language games can be used to engage children in cooperative and team learning.

The current situation in our classrooms is that while pupils may score well in their written assessments, they are usually unable to express themselves well orally as they are not articulate. Our hypothesis is that through the use of language games, pupils can interact with one another better and can improve in their oral communication skills so as to communicate their ideas

effectively to others. Games can focus on accuracy of language and the communicative function, which is fluency. The skill involved in playing language games is language proficiency. Pupils in the experimental groups will be provided with a series of different language games.

INTRODUCTION Traditionally, our teachers in Jurong Primary School have been teaching pupils listening and speaking as separate skills during English Language lessons. Pupils have also been tested separately on their speaking and listening skills. Hence, the current situation in our classrooms is that while pupils may score well in their written assessments, they are usually unable to express themselves well orally as they are not articulate.

With the introduction of an additional component in the PSLE oral examination, pupils will not only be assessed merely on their speaking skills but also on their communication skills. Examiners will no longer sit back and listen to pupils speak during oral examinations. Instead, they have to converse with pupils on a given topic. For pupils to do well in this component, they will have to improve their communication skills.

In the learning of languages, learning to communicate with one another is more crucial than just being able to speak and listen. Communication is a major function of language. Emmitt, Komesaroff & Pollock (2006) explains communication as something which refers to the conveying and receiving of a message or meaning between two or more people and that communication can also be defined as the use of language where more than one person is involved in constructing meaning (p. 38). Efficient communication requires that speakers share

the same social rules for language use (Paulston, 1992). When pupils learn listening and speaking skills separately, there is minimal interaction between two or more people. The learning of social rules for language use is also probably not emphasized when the two skills are taught separately. Pupils therefore might not be really learning to communicate when such pedagogy is used.

In the book, Language & Learning, Emmitt, Komesaroff and Pollock claim that many writers on language education, emphasize the importance of the contexts in which language is learned ever since Carol Edelsky (1989) described the process of language development as being profoundly social. In different social contexts, children are able to learn language as a set of social rules governing the way people relate to each other when they see and hear demonstrations of the language that they are learning (Emmitt, Komesaroff & Pollock, 2006).

Gibbs (1974) maintains that a game is an activity carried out by cooperating or competing decision makers, seeking to achieve, within a set of rules, their objectives. Games can, therefore, be designed to simulate the different social contexts in the real world. Within artificially defined limits, games can provide an opportunity for real communication and bridge the gap between the classroom and the real world (Hadfield, 1984). Language games thus allow the use of meaningful and useful language which is used in real contexts (Ersoz, 2000) and are able to provide a chance for pupils to use the language that they have learnt.

There are numerous benefits that come with using games to help pupils improve in their communicative ability. Research has shown that children learn and develop the fastest when they

are at play (Uberman, 1998). Games make learning fun and relaxed (Nguyen & Khuat, 2003). Games are also highly motivating and help pupils to make and sustain the effort of learning (Lee, 1995). Another advantage of using games for the language class is that they encourage pupils to interact and communicate (Lee, 1995). In addition, language games can provide challenges to young minds and can be used to engage children in cooperative and team learning (Ersoz, 2000). Finally, games also provide a competitive element that enhances effective learning as they keep learners interested (Nguyen & Khuat, 2003).

Since many researchers claim that there are many advantages in using language games in the classroom and that teachers will definitely be sourcing for the different pedagogies to help pupils improve their communication skills in order to score well in the Conversation component in their PSLE oral examination, there is a need to find out whether playing language games will really help pupils to improve their communication skills, and thus help to improve their scores in the Conversation component in the PSLE oral.

HYPOTHESIS Through the use of language games in which pupils have to interact with one another, pupils will be able to improve their communicative skills. The researchers were interested to find out whether language games do help pupils in improving their conversation component in PSLE. Our hypothesis is that through the use of language games, pupils can interact with one another better and can improve in their oral communication skills so as to communicate their ideas effectively to others. The pupils will in turn score better in the Conversation component in

their PSLE oral examinations. Pupils who are taught using the teacher-centred method will not show any improvement in their post-test scores.

METHOD Subjects Two Primary Four SHAPE (Stretching Higher Ability Pupils to Excel) classes, with a total of 78 pupils, in the school were selected for the study. The pupils in the two classes were considered as pupils with high ability as compared to pupils from other classes. Unlike Primary Five pupils, Primary Four pupils have not been taught how to prepare for the Conversation component of the PSLE examination. This suited the purpose of our study as the pupils probably would not have been taught using any other methods of how they would be able to score well in the Conversation component of the PSLE examination. Secondly, their English language teachers were members of the research team, which gave us better access at implementing and monitoring the pupils progress.

Instruments To assess whether the pupils have improved in their oral communication skills, a pre-test and a post-test were administered to the pupils individually before and after the experiment was conducted. The structure of the pre-test and the post-test that were used were similar. Only the topics for discussion in the pre-test and post-test were different. The format of the pre-test can be found in Appendix A. The tests used had the same structure as the Conversation component of the PSLE oral examinations and the pupils were assessed by the researchers according to the marking scheme that is used in the PSLE oral examinations. Surveys were also conducted after

the post-tests in order to gauge pupil participation and enjoyment when playing games. The survey that was crafted specially for this study can be found in Appendix B.

Procedure Teachers in both the experimental (Class 4B) and the control (Class 4A) groups used similar themes to teach the pupils how to communicate. The only variable that was different was the teaching method. In the experimental group, the teacher used language games, whereas in the control group, a teacher-centred method was used.

Pupils in the experimental group played a series of different language games to improve their communication skills. The teacher in the experimental group conducted language game in her class every day over a period of five days. As the pupils were of high-ability, games which varied in difficulty level could be used. The games played by the pupils were written by Jill Hadfield (1990, 1999). Two games were chosen from Jill Hadfields Beginners Communication Games (1999) and the other three games were from Intermediate Communication Games, another book also by Jill Hadfield (1990). The activities chosen were communicative games and in order to carry out the task, it will be necessary to use language. (Hadfield, 1984). During the playing of games, successful communication rather than the correctness of language is emphasized (Hadfield, 1984).

The teacher in the control group used real-life, concrete examples teach the pupils the necessary vocabulary that they needed to use if they had to converse on the given topics. Menus, newspaper cuttings and brochures were used. The teacher prompted her class for appropriate

vocabulary that they could use when they had to discuss the topics. Pupils were encouraged to suggest the vocabulary they had to use.

RESULTS Test Results Results of the pre- and post-tests of the oral component were compared between the experimental and control groups to see if the use of language games has enabled pupils to perform better, especially in their oral communication skills. Table 1 shows a summary of the results of the pre-test and the post-test. A total of 4 pupils were absent for the pre-test in Class 4A, hence the calculation of the mean for 4A only included 35 pupils who were present for both the pre- and post-test.

Compared to the pre-test, a higher mean score was obtained on the post-test for the experimental group- there was an increase from 6.51 to 7.33. The mean total score for the control group decreased a little from 7.24 to 7.15.

69.23% of pupils from the experimental group improved their post-test scores. Only 20% of the pupils in the control group had a better score in the post-test. 45.71% of the pupils in the control group showed no improvement in the post-test, while only 20.51% of the pupils from the experimental group showed no improvement in the post-test. 34.29% of pupils in the control group scored worse in the post-test. Only 10.26% of the pupils in the experimental group scored worse in the post-test.

Table 1 Computed mean scores and standard deviations by class for the pre-test and the post-test Class 4A (Control) 4B (Experimental) N 35 39 Pre-Test Score Mean (SD) 7.24 (1.27) 6.51 (1.25) Post-Test Score Mean (SD) 7.15 (1.36) 7.33 (1.11)

Survey Results Table 2 presents the survey results administered to the pupils after they had completed the activities conducted by the teachers to help them improve their communication skills. All the pupils in the experimental group agreed that they enjoyed the games that they had played. 11% of the pupils in the control group disagreed with Q1. A greater percentage of the pupils in the control group disagreed with Q2 and Q3, as compared to the pupils in the experimental group. However, a higher percentage of pupils in the experimental group disagreed with Q4, as compared to the percentage of the pupils in the control group.

In the second part of the survey, pupils were asked about their feelings and to give suggestions to improve the activities. Pupils in the experimental group said that they like all the games, although some of the games were difficult. They liked the games which required them to communicate and cooperate with their friends. Some things the pupils did not like about playing games were the high noise level, pupils quarrelling with each other and uncooperative teammates. Most of all, they did not like the feeling of losing at the games. Pupils suggested that they could play more games so that the teacher could help them to communicate better with one another. On the other hand, pupils in the control group liked the concrete examples, like flyers and brochures which were given to them for discussion. However, they found it difficult to come

up with vocabulary words associated with the topics, which they needed to use for communication purposes. The pupils actually suggested that they should play games to help them communicate better.

Table 2 Summary Survey Results Questions Q1. I enjoyed the activities introduced by my teacher during English lessons for the past 5 days. Q2. I was able to do the activities. Q3. I was able to follow the instructions. Q4. I was able to communicate with my friends better at the end of the lessons. Experimental Group (% endorsing) SD D A SA 0 0 46 54 Control Group (% endorsing) SD D A SA 0 11 42 47

0 0

3 5

67 49

33 46

0 0

11 8

45 37

45 55

15

21

33

31

11

11

32

47

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The results show that the language games did help more than half of the pupils improve their results in the Conversation component of the PSLE oral examinations. The pupils in the experimental group also enjoyed their activities more than the pupils in the control group. However, 21% of the pupils in the experimental group felt that they were not able to communicate better at the end of the lessons compared to the 11% of pupils in the control group. This could be due to various reasons, one of which could be because some of them had problems communicating with their classmates during the games.

LIMITATIONS The pre-test and the post-test were conducted by only one teacher for each class. In addition, even though there was a standardized marking guideline, marks given to the pupils may still be subjective and may not reflect the actual improvement. For further research, there should be more than one examiner to test every pupil.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Learning can be regarded as a result of internalization of such social interaction (Vygotsky, 1986). Learners are guided by other people, teachers as well as more capable peers, in their development of skills. Collaborative team learning and its underlying mechanisms are regarded from the viewpoint of the cognition rather than of motivation or social cohesion. Learning depends largely on the opportunity for pupils to discuss, argue, present their own viewpoints, and listen to one anothers viewpoints. Through mutual feedback and debate, pupils can achieve understanding and search for better solutions to improve their communication skills.

Language teaching can be an interesting and a rewarding process when teachers take the effort to explore methodology through a variety of approaches. Role play, simulation are a few of the many methods available for adoption. Jones (1982:3) sums up the simulation technique as one expression of the philosophy that students should be active participants in the learning process. Since the teacher and the pupils themselves play active roles in the classroom, language classes can become livelier, more challenging and much more rewarding. The games are activities which take the pupils through several units of language structures such as language of explanation, enquiry, clarification, requests, debates, decision and negotiation. It is within this context that

language games can help the language learning process to be more effective and challenging. The teacher who acts as the controller can oversee the task or assign leaders to do so.

Pupils inevitably learn to use language communicatively. Firstly, we must ensure that communication is purposeful instead of being merely traditional exercises and drills; and secondly, these require an integrative use of language in which communicating ones meaning takes proper precedence over the mere elements of language learning (grammar and pronunciation). Language games inject a feeling of realism and relevance into the classroom and make the language learning process more exciting as teachers move away from just using textbooks or written materials for language practice. Well-planned simulations that are relevant to the pupils will certainly encourage them to want to complete the tasks and as Jones (1982:14) points out, learners may even become oblivious to anything that is not directly relevant to the simulation experience once they get involved in the task assigned them.

For teachers who want to use language games in class, they should take note of certain limitations. To carry out games in class requires time and in most language syllabuses, time is a constraining factor. If teachers plan ahead they may be able to put in one or two games in a month or a term, depending on the intensity of the EL curriculum. Games can have duration of a one- period lesson of thirty minutes or may need two periods or two weeks. Again, the objective(s) of each game should be taken into account. In addition, some criteria will have to be set before selecting the appropriate activity. Factors to be considered include the language level of the learners, the costs of purchasing or making the games, their relevance to the pupils and other reasons.

A number of things have to be done before a language game is used in the lesson. The pupils have to be clearly instructed and suitable roles have to be designated to individual learners. The teacher has to act as the controller and once the activity begins, the teacher should not interfere but must give pupils the freedom to conduct the game. This may result in confusion, noise, and so on. Therefore, it is imperative that the initial instructions given by the teacher are understood or the activity may fail. It is equally important to de-brief the pupils after the activity is completed. For the evaluation part, the teacher has to comment on the pupils performance in the activity. This may be a difficult task if there are too many groups in a class.

If all the above considerations are observed prior to the playing of games, teachers will be able to conduct and facilitate the activities better. Pupils will then be able to benefit from the playing of language games. This study has shown that pupils are able to communicate better and can do better in the Conversation component when the teacher uses language games in the classroom. Instead of a teacher-centred method, teachers might want to consider using language games to help pupils prepare for the oral examinations.

REFERENCES Edelsky, C. (1989). Literacy education: reading and the world, English Australia, no. 89, pp. 61 71. Ersoz, A. (2000, June). Six games for the EFL/ESL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, VI(6). Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://iteslj.org/Lessons/Ersoz-Games.html. Gibbs, G. (ed.) (1974). Handbook of Games and Simulation Exercises. London: E. & F.N. Spon Ltd.

Hadfield, J. (1984). Elementary communication games. Hong Kong: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. Hadfield, J. (1990). Intermediate communication games. Hong Kong: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. Hadfield, J. (1999). Beginners communication games. England: Pearson Education Limited. Jones, K. (1982). Simulations in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jones, K. (1980). Simulations: A Handbook for Teachers and Trainers. Oxford: Kogan Page. Lee, S. K. (1995, January - March). Creative games for the language class. Forum, 33(1), 35. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol33/no1/p35.htm Marie, E., Komesaroff, L., & Pollock, J. (2006). Language & learning an introduction for teaching. (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Nguyen, T. T. H., & Khuat, T. T. N. (2003, December). Learning vocabulary through games. Asian EFL Journal. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://www.asian-efljournal.com/dec_03_sub.Vn.php Paulston, C. B. (1992). Linguistic and communicative competence. Great Britain: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Uberman, A. (1998, January - March). The use of games for vocabulary presentation and revision. Forum, 36(1), 20. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://www.teflgames.com/why.html Vygotsky, L.A. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

APPENDIX A PRE-TEST Notes to Examiners: Use the Initial Prompt to begin your conversation with the candidate. You are encouraged to use whichever Additional Prompts you consider relevant, in your response to what the candidate has said. You may need to come up with your own prompts to facilitate the conversation. You may discuss with the candidates issues that might arise in the course of the conversation.

Initial Prompt Tell me about an occasion when you had helped someone. Additional Prompts Tell me about an occasion when someone had helped you.

APPENDIX B SURVEY

The purpose of this questionnaire is purely to obtain feedback. Please answer the questions honestly. Do not write your name on this paper. Circle the best answer.

Statement

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly Agree

1.

I enjoyed the activities introduced by my teacher during English lessons for the past 5 days.

2.

I was able to do the activities.

3.

I was able to follow the instructions.

4.

I was able to communicate with my friends better at the end of the lessons.

For questions 5 8, please write your answers in the space below. 5. What did you like about the activities during the English Lessons in the past few days?

__________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________

6.

What did you NOT like about the activities during the English Lessons in the past few days?

__________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________

7.

What difficulties did you encounter while going through the lessons for the past few days?

__________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________

8.

What suggestions would you give your teacher to help you improve the way you communicate with other people in English?

__________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________