Conference Agenda

Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).

Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 17th May 2024, 04:13:53am GMT

 
 
Session Overview
Session
99 ERC SES 05 H: ICT in Education and Training
Time:
Monday, 21/Aug/2023:
3:30pm - 5:00pm

Session Chair: Klaus Rummler
Location: James McCune Smith, 630 [Floor 6]

Capacity: 30 persons

Paper Session

Show help for 'Increase or decrease the abstract text size'
Presentations
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper

Investigating the Form and Purpose of Augmented Reality and Game-Based Learning when Designing and Implementing Curriculum to Support Student Learning.

Janelle Dixon

University of Melbourne, Australia

Presenting Author: Dixon, Janelle

In our rapidly changing world, technology has become an inescapable part of people’s lives. Unprecedented availability of cost-effective technology offers opportunities to innovate teaching practices to match widespread demand for young people to understand and use emerging technologies (Education Services Australia, 2019).

Augmented reality (AR) is an emerging technology that affords students access to tools and environments not available previously. Game-based learning (GBL) is the use of games to facilitate learning. Augmented reality game-based learning (ARGBL) experiences result from AR being implemented in learning environments in combination with GBL.

Despite the importance of AR as an emerging technology, and the opportunities that ARGBL offers for innovative practice in education, there has been limited research conducted into the emerging area of ARGBL. The research that has been conducted into ARGBL indicates that ARGBL offers opportunities to enrich learning experiences through increasing enjoyment, collaboration, knowledge and engagement (Pellas et al., 2019). Yu et al. (2022) conducted a systemic review of ARGBL research and highlighted the need for future studies to investigate the opportunity for learning in areas such as 21st-century skill development using ARGBL. The majority of research that has been conducted into ARGBL focuses on the students and their experiences but neglects the perspective and experience of the teacher.

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced more rapid change upon the educational landscape than what might have occurred otherwise (OECD, 2020). There is demand for reimagining the way in which educational materials are delivered to students. The immersive and portable nature of ARGBL makes it an increasingly important area in education to be researched (Sepasgozar, 2020).

This study, through an online survey and semi-structured interviews with teachers, aims to investigate how ARGBL is currently being used in classrooms and for what purpose, and to identify what affordances and challenges exist when integrating ARGBL into classrooms to support learning. Emerging findings are providing insight into the current usage of ARGBL in classrooms. The results of this research aim to inform how curriculum design that incorporates ARGBL can enrich and optimise the learning experiences of students, whilst providing insight into the risks, limitations and considerations that need to be taken into account.

Research questions and sub-questions

The purpose of these research questions and sub-questions is to establish the nature of the current usage of ARGBL in classrooms and to investigate the affordances and challenges that exist for teachers when implementing ARGBL.

1. How is ARGBL being used in classrooms and for what purpose?

a. How do teachers conceptualise ARGBL?

b. Which learning areas and topics are utilising ARGBL?

c. In which demographics are the teachers that are using ARGBL?

2. What affordances and challenges exist for teachers when implementing ARGBL?

a. Why do teacher choose to use/not use ARGBL?

b. How is ARGBL planned for and implemented within and across classes?

c. What is essential for the integration of ARGBL into classrooms?

Theoretical framework

The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework attempts to model the complex nature of the knowledge required by teachers, specifically regarding the integration of technology into teaching (Mishra, 2019). The four key knowledge areas are: (1) Pedagogical knowledge, (2) Content knowledge, (3) Technological knowledge and (4) Contextual knowledge.

This research considers whether the knowledge required by a teacher, when incorporating ARGBL into their teaching, can be categorised into the main knowledge areas that the TPACK framework identifies and, if so, whether this provides a model for assisting with the development of knowledge that teachers require in order to integrate ARGBL effectively into their curriculum planning and implementation.


Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
This study is being conducted within a constructivist paradigm, using an interpretive approach and inductive analysis. This approach has been chosen for this research as it allows the data to be analysed and interpreted to form new data, contributing an original understanding and new knowledge about the current incorporation of augmented reality game-based learning (ARGBL) into classrooms.
This qualitative study consisted of two data collection phases. The first phase (online survey) was used to inform the second phase (semi-structured interviews).
The first phase of this research consisted of a survey that was distributed to teachers through professional networks. The purpose of the survey was to elicit some base level information regarding the current scope of practice of ARGBL in schools (e.g., who is using it, how is it being used, do teachers feel adequate support to implement it?). As well as providing insight into the current landscape of ARGBL, the survey asked participants to nominate if they wish to take further part in the study.
Transitioning from phase 1 to phase 2 involved the purposeful selection of participants from phase 1 to participate in phase 2. This research used homogenous sampling; the selection of participants who belong to a specific group based on distinctive characteristics (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).
The second phase of this research involved a deeper analysis of the incorporation of ARGBL in classrooms. This phase consisted of four semi-structured interviews with the teachers who have used (or expressed interest in using) ARGBL in their classroom. The purpose of phase 2 was to document the experience of the teachers delivering the experience and to gain insight into their conceptions around ARGBL and its implementation in classrooms during the interviews.

Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
This study aims to provide insight in regards to the following outcomes:

1. Contribute to the development of definitions based on teachers’ conceptions for the terms: augmented reality (AR), game-based learning (GBL), and augmented reality game-based learning (ARGBL);
2. Insight into the current degree of usage of ARGBL and the skills required by teachers;
3. Situational examples of how ARGBL is being implemented in classrooms;
4. Recommendations for teachers on ARGBL implementation in the classroom; and
5. Recommendations for developers of ARGBL software regarding the features that make ARGBL software a more effective tool in the classroom.

Initial findings indicate that there is a strong desire to use ARGBL in the classroom and that teachers perceive multiple benefits to its implementation but that there are also many barriers preventing its widespread use. These barriers include a lack of professional learning networks in which teachers can collaborate, a lack of examples of practice from which teachers can learn, and a lack of ARGBL educational tools designed specifically for classroom use. Further analysis is being conducted in order to provide specific insight and recommendations regarding the areas listed above.

References
Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 21(6), 34–47.http://doi.org/10.1109/38.963459
Chen, Y.-H., & Wang, C.-H. (2018). Learner presence, perception, and learning achievements in augmented-reality-mediated learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(5), 695-708.http://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1399148
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Education Services Australia. (2019). Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration.https://www.dese.gov.au/alice-springs-mparntwe-education-declaration/resources/alice-springs-mparntwe-education-declaration
Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170-179.http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
Hsiao, H.-S., Chang, C.-S., Lin, C.-Y., & Wang, Y.-Z. (2016). Weather observers: a manipulative augmented reality system for weather simulations at home, in the classroom, and at a museum. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(1), 205-223.http://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.834829
Mishra, P. (2019). Considering contextual knowledge: The TPACK diagram gets an upgrade. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(2), 76-78.http://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1588611
OECD. (2020). Lessons for Education from COVID-19: A Policy Maker’s Handbook for More Resilient Systems. OECD Publishing.https://doi.org/10.1787/0a530888-en
Pellas, N., Fotaris, P., Kazanidis, I., & Wells, D. (2019). Augmenting the learning experience in primary and secondary school education: A systematic review of recent trends in augmented reality game-based learning. Virtual Reality, 23(4), 329-346.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0347-2
Sepasgozar, S. M. E. (2020). Digital twin and web-based virtual gaming technologies for online education: A case of construction management and engineering. Applied Sciences, 10(13), 4678.https://doi.org/10.3390/app10134678
Sin, A. K., & Zaman, H. B. (2010). Live solar system (LSS): Evaluation of an augmented reality book-based educational tool. 2010 International Symposium on Information Technology [Symposium], Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSIM.2010.5561320
Qian, M., & Clark, K. R. (2016). Game-based learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50 -58.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023
Tobar-Muñoz, H., Baldiris, S., & Fabregat, R. (2017). Augmented reality game-based learning: Enriching students’ experience during reading comprehension activities. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(7), 901-936.https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116689789
Wojciechowski, R., & Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education, 68, 570-585.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.014
Yu, J., Denham, A. R., & Searight, E. (2022). A systematic review of augmented reality game-based learning in STEM education.Educational Technology Research and Development, 70(4), 1169-1194. https://10.1007/s11423-022-10122-y


99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper

Integration of Computational Thinking into Mathematics and Science Preservice Teacher Education Courses

Nisanka Uthpalani Somaratne Rajapakse Mohottige, Annette Hessen Bjerke, Renate Andersen

Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway

Presenting Author: Rajapakse Mohottige, Nisanka Uthpalani Somaratne

During the past two decades, computational thinking (CT) has gained renewed international interest with many countries taking policy initiatives to integrate it in their general education curricula (Bocconi et al., 2022). CT is broadly conceptualised as a problem-solving approach which draws on the concepts fundamental to computer science (Wing, 2006). In order to ensure successful integration of CT, teachers with necessary CT competence are a vital factor. However, there is empirical evidence pointing out that teachers struggle to understand what CT is and how to integrate it into teaching (Kravik et al., 2022; Nordby et al., 2022). Thus, teacher education becomes a crucial point for producing a sustainable pipeline of teachers equipped with the required CT skills (Yadav et al., 2017). Research suggests that preservice teachers should not only gain CT content knowledge but also pedagogical content knowledge to successfully teach CT (Ottenbreit-Leftwich et al., 2022). In line with this argument scholars suggest that CT needs to be integrated not only into educational psychology courses but also into methods courses for preservice teachers to gain both content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Yadav et al., 2017). CT integration into subject /methods courses at preservice teacher education is an underexplored area where there is a need for more knowledge and would thus be the focus of this study.

Previous research in CT integration into teacher education comprises research reporting interventions aiming to integrate CT in both education technology courses (Yadav et al., 2017), educational technology methods courses (e.g. Umutlu, 2021), and science methods courses (Jaipal-Jamani & Angeli, 2017; Adler & Kim, 2018) and mathematics methods courses (Gadanidis et al., 2017). Programming, particularly block-based programming appears to be the most popular vehicle for developing CT skills among preservice teachers (Umutlu, 2021). Instructional strategies employing robotics (Jaipal-Jamani & Angeli, 2017) and modelling (Adler & Kim, 2018) are also utilized to promote CT skills in preservice teachers. Although there exist some studies that report the efficacy of interventions on CT integration into subject courses, there is a lack of studies demonstrating how CT is actually implemented in subject courses in teacher education. Our study aims to investigate how CT is implemented in mathematics and science courses at preservice education by drawing on data from interviews conducted with teacher educators. The findings will be important particularly to teacher educators and researchers in and beyond the European context.

The context of the study is Norway where a new primary and secondary school curriculum has been implemented, through which CT is integrated into several existing subjects including mathematics and science primarily through the integration of programming into these subjects (Ministry of Education and Research, 2019). Since CT is integrated into existing subjects in the school curriculum, teacher education should also prepare prospective teachers to teach accordingly. Our focus of the study is mathematics and science. By integrating CT into mathematics and science, content learning can be facilitated simultaneously providing meaningful contexts to apply CT (Weintrop et al., 2016). The following research question will guide our research:

How is computational thinking integrated into existing mathematics and science preservice teacher education courses?

Theoretical framework:

There are multiple definitions and frameworks for CT (Wing, 2006; Weintrop et al., 2016; Brennan & Rensnick, 2012) and there is no consensus on a basic definition. Since this study focuses on mathematics and science, we chose the CT in mathematics and science taxonomy developed by Weintrop et al. (2016). In this taxonomy, there are four major categories – data practices, modelling and simulation practices, computational problem-solving practices, systems thinking practices – each of which is composed of five to seven practices.


Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
This study is designed as a qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 teacher educators (nine in mathematics and eight in science) who are currently working at a 1-7 teacher education programme which prepares preservice teachers to teach in grades 1-7 (ages 6-13) in Norway. After conducting 17 interviews we realised that we have reached the data saturation point in relation to our research question. The sample consisted of teacher educators affiliated to eight teacher education institutions out of the ten public teacher education institutions that offer 1-7 teacher education in Norway. Since not all teacher educators use CT in their teaching, the sample was selected purposively to recruit teacher educators who have incorporated CT in their teaching. The interviews were conducted on Zoom by the first author, and each interview lasted for approximately 45 minutes. Written consent was obtained from the participants prior to holding the interviews. The audio recordings were transcribed verbatim by the first author using F4transkript.
Thematic analysis was employed as the analysis method using a theory driven, deductive approach. We follow the six phases of conducting a thematic analysis described by Braun and Clarke (2006) which are 1) familiarising with the data, 2) generating initial codes, 3) searching for themes, 4) reviewing potential themes, 5) defining and naming themes and 6) producing the report. All three authors read the transcripts to familiarise themselves with the data. Then, an operationalisation of Weintrop et al.’s CT taxonomy was agreed upon. Next, the three authors independently conducted coding of three randomly selected interviews, followed by some necessary justifications of the operationalisation of the CT taxonomy before coding all 17 interviews. Sub-themes and candidate themes emerged during the coding process. The candidate themes are being revisited to review and refine the themes.

Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
In the preliminary analysis of interview data, three candidate themes emerged- analog programming, block-based programming, modelling and robotics.
Analog programming
Mathematics teacher educators stated that they start their CT and programming teaching with analog programming using some unplugged activities. Most of the activities they described focused on algorithmic thinking- performing a task in a logical sequence of steps and especially convincing the preservice teachers the importance of precision of instructions to obtain the desired end result. Moreover, mathematics teacher educators underscored the place of algorithms in mathematics.
Block-based programming
Mathematics teacher educators’ accounts revealed that from analog programming they make a quick transition to programming activities which were mostly block based programming. Programming is the solid context preservice teachers get to apply their CT skills. The examples they provided were mostly associated with geometry, however, they stated that probability, numbers are also areas that are suited for CT integration.  
Modelling and robotics
Robotics is employed by both mathematics and science teacher educators in their teaching. In science, the typical examples of CT integration given by science teacher educators included creating artefacts either making robots or making models with Scratch. Comparing the examples of teaching learning situations given by teacher educators, it is evident that in mathematics, programming was employed as a tool to learn deeply about mathematical concepts via problem-solving, for example, creating a polygon in Scratch, while in science, programming was often used to solve a larger problem, for example, by making a model that illustrate a larger concept/ phenomenon such as the solar system. The science programming activities described by the science teacher educators were predominantly in the form of group projects which continued for several sessions. This kind of projects involved different practices that came under the four categories in the Weintrop taxonomy.

References
Adler, R. F., & Kim, H. (2018). Enhancing future K-8 teachers’ computational thinking skills through modeling and simulations. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 1501–1514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9675-1
Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Kampylis, P., Dagienė, V., Wastiau, P., Engelhardt, K., Earp, J., Horvath, M., Jasutė, E., Malagoli, C., Masiulionytė-Dagienė, V., & Stupurienė, G. (2022). Reviewing computational thinking in compulsory education: State of play and practices from computing education. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/126955
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. DOI: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012, April 13-17). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association meeting, Vancouver, Canada.
Gadanidis, G., Cendros, R., Floyd, L., & Namukasa, I. (2017). Computational thinking in mathematics teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 17(4), 458-477.
Jaipal-Jamani, K., & Angeli, C. (2017). Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers' self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175–192.
Kravik, R., Berg, T. K., Siddiq, F. (2022). Teachers’ understanding of programming and computational thinking in primary education – A critical need for professional development, Acta Didactica Norden, 16(4). https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.9194
Ministry of Education and Research. (2019). Læreplanverket [The Curriculum]. Established as regulations. The National curriculum for the Knowledge Promotion 2020. https://www.udir.no/laring-og-trivsel/lareplanverket/
Nordby, S. K., Bjerke, A. H., & Mifsud, L. (2022). Primary Mathematics Teachers’ Understanding of Computational Thinking, KI - Künstliche Intelligenz, 36, 35–46, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-021-00750-6
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Yadav, A., Mouza, C. (2022). Preparing the Next Generation of Teachers: Revamping Teacher Education for the 21st century. In A. Yadav & U. D. Berthelsen (Eds.), Computational thinking in education: A pedagogical perspective (pp. 151–171) Routledge.
Umutlu, D. (2021). An exploratory study of pre-service teachers’ computational thinking and programming skills. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1922105
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining Computational Thinking for Mathematics and Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127-147.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
Yadav, A., Gretter, S., Good, J., & McLean, T. (2017). Computational thinking in teacher education. In Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking (pp. 205–220). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.


99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper

Commercial off-the-Shelf Game Play and L2 Identity Development

Nur Çakır, Neslihan Gök Ayyıldız

Middle East Technical University, Türkiye

Presenting Author: Gök Ayyıldız, Neslihan

As developments in the digital gaming industry increased (Takahashi, 2015), the use of digital games in education has also increased. Studies on digital gaming in language learning have explored both game-enhanced learning (commercial, off-the-shelf games) and game-based learning (digital games created for the teaching and learning of languages) to support language learning in different areas (Sykes, 2018). Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) games are “designed purely for fun and entertainment rather than for learning” (Whitton, 2010, p. 199). Foreign language learners play digital games in the target foreign language out of class. Sykes and Reinhardt (2013) highlight the contributions of digital gaming in L2 learning as five features such as learner directed goal, interaction with the game, individualized feedback, relevant context, and motivation. Moreover, research has shown that digital games can be beneficial in terms of autonomy (Chick, 2014), intercultural learning (Thorne, 2008), providing authentic texts (Reinhardt, 2013), rich learning environment (Reinders, 2012), listening and reading language skills (Chen & Yang, 2013), and having fun while learning a language (Ballou, 2009; Chin-Sheng & Chiou, 2007). Additionally, exposure to the target language provides language skills such as grammar and vocabulary in a real context (Purushotma, 2005).

L2 identity can be considered as the learners’ relationship with the culture of the target language, and the engagement with the culture and the natives of the culture. Thus, the close connection with the target language and the culture are associated with the L2 identity which is dynamic and multifaceted, language both constructs it and is constructed by it (Norton, 2006). Dörnyei and Ushioda (2009) proposed that L2 Motivational Self System which is an L2 motivational self-system takes the ideal L2 self, the ought-to L2 self, and the L2 learning experiences in foreign language learning and teaching. The concept ideal self is the representation of characteristics that one would most like to have like one’s personal wishes. The ought-to self, a complimentary self-guide, is the representation of characteristics that one feels one ought to have like one’s sense of responsibilities and obligations. So, the rationale behind the hypothesis is that the learners will be more motivated to learn the target language if they get the idea that their ideal self and ought-to self to be L2 proficient in order to reduce the gap between current and future selves.

The relationship between identity formation and COTS games has received increasing attention (Barab et al., 2012; DeVane, 2014; Godwin-Jones, 2019; Jeon, 2014; Punyalert, 2017; Shaffer, 2006; Musaoğlu Aydın & Akkuş Çakır, 2022). Online experiences such as gameplay including language socialization produce complex and context-based language practices (Thorne, 2008). COTS games can afford opportunities to develop L2 identities for foreign language learners, as they provide language learners with opportunities to interact with others and to immerse themselves in a real-life context, the target language, and the culture (Godwin- Jones, 2019; Jeon, 2014; Musaoğlu Aydın & Akkuş Çakır, 2022).

While game-enhanced language learning is becoming popular in foreign language teaching, more research is still needed on investigating the role of COTS gaming in L2 identity formation to understand the learning potential of L2 gaming better. It is essential to explore the ways COTS games could be used to promote L2 identity. Thus, this study aims to investigate the role of game-enhanced language learning in the development of L2 identity. More specifically the research question is;

-How do gamer language learners’ construct their L2 identities during COTS gameplay?


Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
This qualitative case study aims to investigate how gamer language learners’ construct their L2 identity during COTS game play. A case study is the in-depth description and examination of a particular case that is an exploration of a bounded system or a case (or multiple cases) over time through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information-rich contexts (Cresswell, 1998, p.61). Bassey (1999) proposes that case studies can be used in education to inform policymakers, practitioners, and theorists. Data are collected through semi-structured interviews developed by the researchers using L2 Motivational Self-System as a framework (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2009).
After developing interview forms, two expert opinions from the educational sciences department are taken and the form is piloted with an undergraduate EFL student. The final interview schedule consists of two parts, demographical information and descriptive questions part which mostly focus on L2 Motivational Self-System Framework (ideal self, ought-to self, and language learning experiences) and COTS game play. Semi-structured interviews are conducted with 15 volunteered EFL students in a research university through criterion sampling (Cohen et al., 2018). Participants included in the study are undergraduate EFL students who identifies themselves as gamers. Data are collected through face-to-face and online interviews (via Zoom) that took 45-60 minutes.
In qualitative research design, data collection and data analysis go at the same time in order to lead to a coherent interpretation (Marshall & Rossman, 2006). Thus, after each interview which is recorded with the voice recorder is transcribed and raw data is prepared for analysis. Qualitative content analysis is used to present the data in a meaningful way and identify the similarities and differences (Miles & Huberman, 1994) by following four steps (a) encoding the data, (b) finding the themes, (c) arranging codes and themes, and (d) identifying and interpreting the findings (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2013). The researchers started the data coding process within the framework of the L2 Motivational Self-System and the codes were varied in the form of words, word phrases, or paragraphs by varying the data that emerged during the data collection process. In order to increase external reliability, peer debriefing (Cresswell, 2014); to increase the external validity of the study analytical generalization (Yin, 2014) are used.

Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
The preliminary findings indicated that COTS games’ capacity to encourage language learning is one of the key ways in which they can facilitate language learners’ L2 identity development. Considering characteristics of game-enhanced language learning, participants reported that digital gaming provides a real context for experiencing the target language, exposure to the daily life experience, and having fun while learning the language outside the class. For instance, COTS games offer language learners a chance to interact with native speakers, practice their foreign language in a fun and interesting way, and gain a deeper understanding of the culture surrounding the language.
In addition to promoting authentic language learning opportunities, COTS games provide foreign language learners with opportunities to reflect on their own L2 identity. For example, foreign language learners encounter situations during the gameplay where they were required to respond to others, present themselves to others, and/or reflect on their language abilities, values, and beliefs about the target language and culture. Through these experiences, they are reported to gain a greater understanding of themselves and their own L2 identity.

References
Ballou, K. (2009). Language learner experiences in an online virtual world. The JALT CALL Journal, 5(2), 61-70.
Barab, S., Pettyjohn, P., Gresalfi, M., Volk, C., & Solomou, M. (2012). Game-based curriculum and transformational play: Designing to meaningfully positioning person, content, and context. Computers & Education, 58(1), 518–533. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.001
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education. Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Sage Publications, Inc.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
DeVane, B. (2014). Beyond the screen: Game-based learning as nexus of identification. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(3), 221–237.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.). (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (Vol. 36). Multilingual Matters.
Godwin-Jones, R. (2019). Riding the digital wilds: Learner autonomy and informal language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 23(1), 8–25.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research. Thousands Oaks: Sage Publication.
Musaoğlu, A. S. M., & Akkuş Çakır, N. (2022). The effects of a game-enhanced learning intervention on foreign language learning. Educational technology research and development, 70(5), 1809-1841.
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Newbury Park,, CA: Sage.
Norton, B. (2006). Identity as a sociocultural construct in second language research. In K. Cadman & K. O’Regan (Eds.), TESOL in Context [Special Issue], 22-33.
Purushotma, R. (2005). You’re not studying, you’re just....Language Learning & Technology, 9(1), 80–96.
Reinders, H. (Ed.). (2012). Digital games in language learning and teaching. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Reinhardt, J. (2013). Digital game-mediated foreign language teaching and learning: Myths, realities and opportunities. Apprendre les langues à l’université au 21ème siècle, 161-178.
Sykes, J. M. (2018). Digital games and language teaching and learning. Foreign Language Annals, 51(1), 219-224.
Sykes, J. M., & Reinhardt, J. (2013). Language at play: Digital games in second and foreign language teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Thorne, S. L. (2008). Transcultural communication in open Internet environments and massively multiplayer online games. In S. Magnan (Ed.), Mediating discourse online (pp. 305–327). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Whitton, N. (2010). Learning with digital games: A practical guide to engaging students in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin.
Yin, Robert K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.


 
Contact and Legal Notice · Contact Address:
Privacy Statement · Conference: ECER 2023
Conference Software: ConfTool Pro 2.6.149+TC
© 2001–2024 by Dr. H. Weinreich, Hamburg, Germany