Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching

ISSN: 1750-1229 (Print) 1750-1237 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rill20

Gamifying the flipped classroom: how to motivate

Chinese ESL learners?

Janet Ho

To cite this article: Janet Ho (2019): Gamifying the flipped classroom: how to
motivate Chinese ESL learners?, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, DOI:
10.1080/17501229.2019.1614185

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2019.1614185

Published online: 09 May 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 73

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rill20
INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING
https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2019.1614185

Gamifying the flipped classroom: how to motivate Chinese ESL

learners?
Janet Ho
Department of English, Lingnan University, Hong Kong

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Flipped classrooms emphasise a learner-centred and results-oriented Received 27 November 2018
approach. They have been widely adopted in recent years, to enhance Accepted 29 April 2019
the effectiveness of student learning and encourage students to
KEYWORDS
understand and apply new information. This approach is also regarded Flipped classroom; game-
as a type of blended learning, given that tutors decide on the pre-class based learning; active
work, which is often characterised by online materials, and in-class time learning; collaboration;
is devoted to collaborative tasks. This paper proposes teaching English learning motivation
narrative genres by combining digital drawing with active learning
approaches – storymaking and storytelling. It also examines Hong Kong
university students’ perceptions of gamified flipped classrooms, as well
as their understanding of the narrative concepts taught. Based on a
combination of surveys, narrative writing scores, and focus group
interviews, this study found that participants regarded the group-based
game task as more effective than the group discussion task. The
collaborative group-based game fostered a positive classroom
atmosphere, served as a review session that allowed students to identify
areas for improvement and prepare for the exit examination, and
reduced their anxiety and reticence toward using English. These findings
confirmed previous research findings that students’ behavioural,
cognitive, and motivational engagement could be enhanced through a
gamified flipped classroom. Pedagogical implications for ESL teachers
were also discussed.

Introduction
Increased public funding, the influence of Hong Kong’s academic reputation on mainland Chinese
students, and the introduction of four-year undergraduate programmes have together led to a sub-
stantial increase in Hong Kong universities’ student intakes over the last twenty years (Evans and Mor-
rison 2011; Hyland 2015). Although English is widely regarded as an invaluable asset for ‘facilitating
upward and outward job mobility’ (Li 2011, 99), studies have shown that many Hong Kong university
students still encounter problems obtaining subject knowledge when English is the language of
instruction (Evans and Green 2007; Li 2009). According to a study by the Social Sciences Research
Centre of the University of Hong Kong (HKFP 2015), only 6% of respondents had a good
command of spoken English, and only 1.5% of the respondents were as fluent as native speakers.
As Li (2011) noted, ‘dissatisfaction with Hong Kong students’ poor English performance, university
graduates included, is one recurrent topic in mass media. Employers complain that newly recruited
local graduates are unable to cope with the actual needs for English in the workplace’ (99).
Implementation of the Chinese medium instruction policy since 1998 has also been criticised by
the business sector as ‘aggravating the already declining English standards and hence undermining

CONTACT Janet Ho [email protected]

© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 J. HO

the competitiveness of Hong Kong’ (Tollefson and Tsui 2014, 197). Many scholars have suggested that
Hong Kong students’ unsatisfactory English performance is due to their anxiety and reticence toward
using English (Tong 2010; Mak 2011; Cunningham 2014; Liu 2009). As Tran, Moni, and Baldauf (2013)
pointed out, foreign language anxiety would affect ‘students’ learning attitudes and emotions by
making them passive in class, feel inferior to classmates, learn only to cope with teachers or the
course requirements, or feel uneasy in class’ (119). Other studies have also suggested that weak stu-
dents tend to be even more anxious when speaking English. For example, Liu (2009) and Mak (2011)
found that Chinese ESL learners were anxious about speaking English in class because they were
afraid of negative self-evaluations and failing the class. They may also have negative perceptions
about the English classroom. Cunningham (2014) shared a similar view; she observed that ‘in the
high-pressure environment of an EAP [English for academic purposes] classroom, however, reticence
and anxiety are often present … particularly Chinese students [have] concerns about losing “face” in a
scenario where one is required to demonstrate knowledge orally’ (181). There appears to be a clear
need to reduce students’ anxiety and enhance their engagement in English classes to boost their
English performance. Meanwhile, however, Hong Kong’s publicly funded universities have recently
started to use the International English Language Testing System’s (IELTS) test score as a graduation
requirement. Students have to achieve a certain IELTS score, set by their department, to satisfy the
English language graduation requirement. While this may motivate Hong Kong university students
to find ways to improve their English skills, it is worth asking whether these requirements prompt
further anxiety and reticence.
One way to relieve ESL learners’ anxiety and reticence and encourage them to study English is to
enhance their academic engagement. Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2003) identified three main types of
academic engagement: behavioural, cognitive, and motivational. Behavioural engagement refers to
students’ willingness to pay attention in class and actively participate in discussions. Cognitive
engagement is related to the amount of time students spend planning and monitoring their learning.
Motivational engagement represents students’ interest in the subjects they study, and their affective
reactions towards their teachers and classmates. Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris (2004) shared a
similar viewpoint that categorised engagement as behavioural and cognitive, but referred to
affective responses as emotional engagement. Numerous studies have examined students’ engage-
ment and motivation (e.g. Chen 2005; Horstmanshof and Zimitat 2007). Horstmanshof and Zimitat
(2007) surveyed first-year students in Australia, and found significant interrelationships between
the behavioural and psychological dimensions of engagement. For instance, students who set
broader goals for their university education often used better approaches to learning, and spent
more time on tasks. Chen (2005) studied the relationship between academic support and academic
achievement among Hong Kong adolescents using a self-report questionnaire. The results showed
that as with parental and peer support, teacher support had a great impact on students’ academic
achievements. As Chen (2005) noted, ‘policy makers should continue investing resources to help tea-
chers better support their students’ education’ (115–116). While policy makers in Hong Kong should
continue to enhance educational resources in schools, it is also important that educators find ways to
enhance Hong Kong students’ behavioural, cognitive, and motivational engagement, and thereby
their ability to meet English standards.
The traditional input-based teaching approach focuses on what should be covered in the curricu-
lum. It is predominantly lecture-oriented, without much student participation, because the teachers
tend to focus on what they should teach in each lesson. In contrast, the flipped classroom is a more
learner-centred and results-oriented approach that emphasises the effectiveness of student learning,
and encourages students to understand and apply new information (McLean and Attardi 2018;
Foldnes 2016). Flipped learning usually incorporates independent pre-work through online learning
and cooperative in-class face-to-face tasks (Bergmann and Sams 2012; Foldnes 2016). It differs from
other blended learning models in the sense that students conduct online learning first, before attend-
ing the class, to acquire the base knowledge (Strayer 2012). In-class time is devoted to collaborative
learning aimed at solving problems (Bergmann and Sams 2012), and can take the form of debates,
 INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING 3

discussions, analyses, case studies, and problem-solving (McLean and Attardi 2018). A proliferation of
studies have considered whether a flipped learning approach can enhance student learning out-
comes, motivation, and self-efficacy (Amiryousefi 2017; Doman and Webb 2017; Lee and Wallace
2018). Amiryousefi (2017) explored the effectiveness of incorporating a flipped classroom in an
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) course in two universities in Iran. He found that both the
semi-structured flipped learning group and the structured flipped learning group demonstrated a
better performance than those in the non-flipped classroom. With a university in Macau China as
a backdrop, Doman and Webb (2017) examined students’ attitudes toward learning in both
flipped and non-flipped classrooms, and found that students’ perceptions of teachers’ roles
changed. Students acknowledged that in non-flipped classes, or prior to introducing a flipped class-
room, classes had been dominated by teacher instruction. The flipped learning approach, however,
had exposed them to more communicative-based learning within the Asian context. Doman and
Webb’s (2017) findings are consistent with those of McLean and Attardi (2018), who also found
that students regarded teachers as mentors after a class flip. Though studies have confirmed that stu-
dents have a positive attitude toward flipped classrooms (Cruaud 2018; Doman and Webb 2017; Lee
and Wallace 2018; McLean and Attardi 2018), few researchers have questioned which type of in-class
tasks are most effective for student learning after they have spent time acquiring knowledge in pre-
class time. This view is shared by Fisher, Perényi, and Birdthistle (2018), who argue that ‘there is
limited understanding of which type of learning activity benefits students or why they benefit
from flipped learning’ (3). Designing and comparing how different flipped learning activities
benefit student learning would improve our understanding of the effectiveness of a flipped learning
approach.
Teaching through games is another approach that can enhance students’ motivation to learn
English and reduce their anxiety about practising the language (Hung 2018). The term ‘gamification’
was defined as the application of game-design elements in non-game settings (Deterding et al. 2011).
Lee and Hammer (2011) added that the purpose of gamification is to engage the participants and
enable them to reach established goals through the use of game mechanisms and dynamics. A
game usually contains five elements, namely, ‘rules, variable quantifiable outcomes, valued out-
comes, player attachment to outcomes and effort’ (Miller 2013, 196). Other common features of
games are challenge, role playing, and competition. Such approaches are also beneficial for colla-
borative learning, because games enhance communication among students (Reed and Seong
2013), and foster active learning that can promote students’ cognitive and affective development
(Hwang and Wu 2012). As Hung (2018) noted, a game-based teaching approach can reduce EFL lear-
ners’ anxiety about practising English and motivate them to participate more actively in classroom
activities, and there is strong evidence confirming the benefits of using these approaches. Role
play is one of the most popular gamified approaches used in the class. For instance, Reed and
Seong (2013) examined the effectiveness of implementing drama approaches and techniques in a
drama-based language class for L2 learners in Korea. They found that game-based approaches
enabled students to express themselves freely, without the burden of making language mistakes.
The authors suggested that drama activities were beneficial for cooperative learning and social inter-
action. Stott and Neustaedter (2013) conducted case studies to examine the effectiveness of gamifi-
cation and identify the key aspects of the approach. One case concerned an instructor who adopted a
‘live action role play’ into his course ‘Introduction to Information Studies.’ This consisted in asking stu-
dents to dress up as one of their favourite characters in the video games and form teams for discus-
sions and assignments, competing against each other by showcasing their understanding of the
concepts. It was found that such gamified approach highly motivated students to improve their learn-
ing and give instant feedback to others. Gamified teaching can also be conducted using digital
games. For example, Wichadee and Pattanapichet (2018) confirmed the positive impact of a
digital game ‘Kahoot’ on students’ learning performance and motivation during an English language
lesson. ‘Kahoot’ is a popular online game used by instructors to check learner’s comprehension. Lear-
ners have to answer particular questions and the scores are calculated based on time consumption
4 J. HO

and number of correct answers. If the learners receive high scores, their names will be shown on the
leader board, encouraging them to compete against each other. The findings showed that the stu-
dents paid more attention in class because they had to compete with their classmates on the
digital game, and this motivation also led to improved academic performance. The studies men-
tioned above demonstrate the possible benefits of game-based learning. Students do obtain
greater language knowledge through game-playing – whether computer games or physical games
– than from formal education. Not only do games require dialogue, they also transcend social bound-
aries and cultural constraints. While studies of game-based teaching approaches focus mostly on
primary and secondary education (e.g. O’Rourke, Main, and Ellis 2013; Sung and Hwang 2013;
Watson, Mong, and Harris 2011), one should not overlook the positive effects of games on University
students’ English performance and motivation. As asserted by Gros (2007), digital games built for
educational purposes are user-centred, and can ‘promote challenges, cooperation, engagement
and the development of problem-solving strategies’ (23). The above studies also confirmed that
questionnaires were commonly deployed to examine students’ perceptions of flipped classrooms
and game-based learning as the research tool enabled the researchers to collect a large amount
of data with low costs in a short time, and to modify the learning approaches based on the
student feedback. It is also equally important to test how blended and flipped learning activities
influence student performance, or how well they can apply the knowledge acquired. This action
research consisted in applying a gamified flipped classroom approach for teaching English narrative
genres to Chinese tertiary-level ESL learners. In particular, it aims to address the following research
questions:

(1) What were the perceptions of students towards the gamified flipped approaches to learn
narratives?
(2) What was the impact of the gamified flipped approach on students’ narrative writing
performance?

A mixed approach including questionnaires, interviews, and a writing test was deployed to examine
students’ engagement and performance with regard to the learning of English narrative genres.
These objectives were devised in response to recent calls, through seminars and publications (Amir-
yousefi 2017; Hung 2018), that ELT researchers propose more gamified flipped classroom models to
enhance students’ confidence in using English, and their motivation to participate in classroom
activities.

Context and methodology

Course design and lesson focus
The course selected for this study was one of the credit-bearing English language enhancement
courses taught by the author at a University in Hong Kong. The course was obligatory for all under-
graduates, and the students enrolled in the course without being selected on the basis of any profi-
ciency tests. The course lasted thirteen weeks, and included three instruction hours per week, with
the aim of raising students’ awareness of a variety of genres, including narratives, proposals, and
advertisements. The students’ intended learning outcomes were to be able to evaluate and
analyse different English genres, and produce texts with appropriate genre-specific features. The
course assessments included a text analysis, a group presentation, a group writing sample, and an
e-portfolio comprising advertisement analyses and self-evaluation, as well as a written exam. Stu-
dents were graded based on the total score they obtained in these assessments. In the present
study, the unit ‘Narratives’ was used to investigate the effectiveness of a game-based approach to
student learning. The desired outcome of the lesson ‘Narratives’ was that students would be able
to identify the components of a narrative. In this lesson, students first learned how a narrative is struc-
tured (Labov 1972): abstract, orientation, complication, evaluation, resolution, and coda. The abstract
 INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING 5

summarises and evaluates the story, and prompts the readers’ expectations. The story’s background
orients the reader and provides information regarding time, place, the main characters, and their
activities. A complication refers to the problem the character encounters and must resolve,
whereas the resolution describes how the problem was resolved. Evaluation comprises linguistic
devices that express an attitude or judgement towards the character. Finally, the coda concludes
the narrative.

Study design
The participants in the current study were comprised of two groups of second-year students who had
taken the same language enhancement course as stated before. To ensure the validity of the results,
the influence of English proficiency levels was controlled: the final grade that the students awarded in
another required English enhancement course was checked. Fifty students with final grades ranging
from B- to B+ were selected and evenly distributed in group A or B. A non-gamified flipped classroom
approach was applied to group A (Control Group), while a gamified flipped classroom approach was
applied to group B (Experimental Group). Figure 1 shows the differences in lesson plans and materials
used between group A and group B.
On the pre-intervention phase, both groups A and B were first briefly asked in class about their
experience of learning the narrative structure (Labov 1972) and through the flipped classroom
approach, and were informed about the purpose and content of the experiment and the evaluation.
None of them had previous exposure to the narrative structure nor the flipped classroom approach.
On the intervention phase, both groups learned about the narrative structure before attending the
class by watching the same narrative structure videos online. They were also asked to read the hand-
outs explaining Labov’s narrative structure with examples beforehand. This phase is regarded as
flipped learning because the instruction in writing was achieved outside of the classroom. They
were then asked to complete in-class tasks: to practise what they had learned, group A read a
short story selected by Ho (2002), after which they discussed and identified the narrative components
to practise what they had learned. Group B, however, participated in a game called ‘Draw Anything’,
which included three parts: drawing, brainstorming, and storytelling. The students in group B were
asked to bring their notebooks to class and access the drawing application Sketchpad 5.1.1 Sketchpad
5.1 is an online drawing platform that enables users to draw digital pictures with its tools, which
include brushes, stamps, shapes, and clipart. Users can enhance their drawings by colouring, crop-
ping, filling, and adding layers. They can export their artwork by sharing it on social media platforms
or through emails. The students in group B formed groups of three to four, after which each student
drew anything he or she wanted, such as their favourite food, scenery, and people, using Sketchpad
5.1. Each student was asked to save his or her drawing and post the link on the course homepage in
Moodle. After approximately ten minutes, each group was asked to use the digital drawings com-
pleted by another group, and prepare a story using the narrative components they had learned—
orientation, complication, resolution, and coda—and tell the story to other class members. The stu-
dents were also encouraged to vary their use of grammar and vocabulary, and rehearse their tone
and voice, before telling the class their stories. In other words, the students first drew, then brain-
stormed, and finally told a story utilising the drawings of a whole group. There were two goals of
the game: The first was to encourage students to make use of the narrative components they had
learnt and use their creativity to plan a good narrative. Hence, the groups had to compete against
each other by telling the most creative story with every narrative component included, and the
winning group would be selected by the class teacher. The second goal was to confirm the students’
understanding of the narrative components. Therefore, after each group presented their story, the
other groups were required to compete with one another by guessing the narrative components
that each of the story parts belonged to. The group that correctly answered the matched narrative
component in the shortest time would score one mark, and the group with the highest score
won. Given that the activity was rule-based and goal-oriented, and the players had to attach to
6 J. HO

Figure 1. The lesson plans and materials used in group A and group B.

the outcomes and effort (Miller 2013), it was considered a game, and thus, the classroom was
gamified.
During the post-intervention phase, both quantitative and qualitative approaches were deployed
to evaluate the effectiveness of learning narratives through games, and to study the students’ per-
ceptions of this approach. Out of class, the research assistant asked members of both groups A (N
= 25) and B (N = 25) to complete questionnaire 1 to rate the effectiveness of the class materials,
 INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING 7

their understanding of the concepts taught, and their class performance. The questionnaire consisted
of seven questions scored on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Group B was also given a second questionnaire—questionnaire 2—to rate the effects of the digital
game on their understanding of the concepts taught, and suggest how the game could further help
them learn. Questionnaire 2 included seven questions that were also scored on a Likert scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Both questionnaires 1 and 2 were modified from the
Learning Interest, and Attitude Survey developed by Hwang and Chang (2011), which was also
adopted in Sung and Hwang’s collaborative game-based earning study (2013). Hwang and Chang
(2011)’s survey was divided into two parts. The first part consisted of 11 questions on interests in
learning, including whether learning with peers is interesting and whether the teacher’s instructions
have attracted students’ attention. The second part included 7 questions related to learning attitudes,
such as whether the students found it important to learn about the local culture and actively
searched for more information. Their survey not only investigated students’ interest in the course
content but also how well they tried to prepare for it or work with their peers. This is similar to
the design of the flipped learning in the present study, in which students are expected to prepare
for the lesson beforehand, and thereafter, actively participate in the in-class activities. Because of
this, Hwang and Chang’s (2011) survey was modified and adopted in this study.
The means and standard deviations of both groups were measured. To test how the gamified
flipped learning activities influenced students’ performance, the students’ narrative writings for
both groups were compared. This task was one of the course requirements and all students were
asked to write a narrative using the keywords provided. The two groups’ average scores were com-
pared. To avoid bias, another instructor, who taught the course before and had no prior knowledge
about which paper was from Group A or B, cross-graded the students’ narratives. The weight of the
narrative essay was one-third of the total exam score, and the assessment criteria were the appli-
cation of genre features, the use of tenses and transitions, the use of narrative structure, as well as
the range of grammar and vocabulary. Finally, students from group B were invited to participate
in a focus group interview where they could express their opinions regarding their experiences learn-
ing about narratives through games. Two focus groups were established, each of which was com-
prised of five participants who had participated on a voluntary basis, and whose responses were
anonymous. Each interview session was conducted by the research assistant and lasted approxi-
mately 50–60 min. The instructor was not present during the interviews to ensure the validity of
student responses. All the interviews were recorded with the permission of the students being inter-
viewed, and all interviewees signed a consent form before being interviewed. The interview ques-
tions can be found in Appendix 1. The recordings of the interview data were then transcribed by
the research assistant, and coded manually by the researcher based on the qualitative data analysis
procedures proposed by Merriam (1998). The transcripts were read and reviewed a couple of times to
confirm the recurrent themes in the student interview responses.

Findings
Questionnaire results
The students’ perceptions of the narrative lesson were measured using Questionnaire 1.
As Table 1 shows, both groups (M = 4.23; SD = 0.82; M = 4.12; SD = 1.29) noted that the concepts
were easy to understand from watching online videos. The mean score of group A, however, was
3.35 (SD = 1.24), while that of group B was 4.41 (SD = 0.88), indicating that group A’s learning experi-
ence was less positive. Of these students, 82% did not find the method used to teach narratives
particularly interesting (M = 2.98; SD = 0.94), and 89% reported that they did not participate more
than they usually did (M = 2.94; SD = 1.07). Compared with group A, group B showed a higher
mean score on every item. Of the students in group B, 92% thought learning about narratives
was interesting (M = 4.46; SD = 0.88), and 89% thought the exercise was helpful (M = 4.38; SD =
8 J. HO

Table 1. Comparison of the mean and standard deviation scores of both groups for questionnaire 1.
Control group Experimental
(Group A) group (Group B)
Items (N = 25) (N = 25)
Scored on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) M SD M SD
1. The concept I learned today (narratives) was easy to understand. 4.12 1.29 4.23 0.82
2. Learning about narratives was interesting. 3.22 0.92 4.46 0.88
3. The exercise about narratives was helpful. 3.49 1.03 4.38 0.74
4. I learned about narratives in a fun way. 2.98 0.94 4.61 0.63
5. I paid attention in class. 3.12 1.20 4.31 0.71
6. I communicated with my classmates when I was doing the in-class task. 3.86 1.92 4.52 0.85
7. I was willing to participate more than I usually do. 2.94 1.07 4.33 0.80
Overall 3.35 1.24 4.41 0.88

0.74); 87% stated that they paid attention in class (M = 4.31; SD = 0.71), and 91% mentioned that
they communicated with their classmates when doing the exercise (M = 4.52; SD = 0.85). This
suggests that collaborating through games is more effective than having discussions for engaging
and motivating the students.
Questionnaire 2 was used to measure the effectiveness of the gamified flipped classroom
approach on group B’s understanding of the narrative concepts, and the results are presented in
Table 2. As Table 2 shows, most of the respondents (78%) acknowledged that the digital drawing
and storytelling game helped them understand narratives. The weighted average score of 4.42
shows that the drawing and storytelling game helped the respondents further increase their famili-
arity with narratives. Nearly 87% of the respondents felt that they were able to use the concept of
narratives effectively during the drawing and storytelling game. Additionally, 76% of the respondents
(M = 4.23; SD = 0.93) reported that the drawing and storytelling exercise undertaken in a flipped class-
room inspired them to reason critically, and 83% of the respondents (M = 4.24; SD = 0.63) indicated
that they had a better understanding of the idea of narratives after they participated in the game.
Regarding learning enjoyment, 64% of the respondents (M = 4.46; SD = 0.65) confirmed that partici-
pating in the digital drawing and storytelling game was more enjoyable than participating in normal
in-class discussions. Eighty-five percent of the respondents (M = 4.13; SD = 0.94) believed that they
were able to represent themselves better during the storytelling activity. Table 2 also summarises
respondents’ opinions regarding whether they would prefer to learn other course content through
digital games.
A total of 90% of the respondents (M = 4.44; SD = 0.52) stated that they would like to learn other
lessons through similar activities. As a whole, most respondents in group B enjoyed studying course
content through such entertaining methods, and felt that the game approach was a useful way for
them to acquire knowledge.

Table 2. The mean and standard deviations of group B for questionnaire 2.

Experimental group
(Group B) (N = 25)
Scored on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) M SD
1. The digital game (Draw Something) increased my knowledge of narratives. 4.42 0.71
2. I was better able to use concepts I learned when taking part in the game. 4.27 0.74
3. The online video and game encouraged me to think critically. 4.23 0.93
4. Learning about narratives through the online video and game was more fun than the normal 4.46 0.65
in-class discussion.
5. The game allowed me to express myself better. 4.13 0.94
6. I think I have a clearer idea of what is meant by narratives/narration after taking part in the 4.24 0.63
storytelling activity.
7. I wish to learn other, related material through a similar game-based approach. 4.44 0.52
Overall 4.31 0.74
 INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING 9

Average narrative writing scores

The results revealed that group B’s average score for narrative writing (M = 7.63; SD = 0.69) was higher
than group A’s (M = 6.82; SD = 0.55). The narrative writing of students in group B showed better
awareness of the genre features and structures. Students in group B applied the narrative structure
more successfully, used more effective transitions, and were better able to express themselves using
a range of vocabulary. For instance, many of the students in group B demonstrated effort and crea-
tivity in writing the story’s complication and resolution. Compared with group B, group A’s narrative
writing was less well planned; some of these writings read like incomplete narratives. For example,
several of the students in group A wrote a great deal about the story’s complication, but used
only one or two sentences to summarise the story, and did not write a resolution. This could be
due either to confusion about the components of a narrative, or having insufficient time to finish
the story.

Focus group interview responses

The focus group interviews revealed new insights from group B respondents regarding the advan-
tages of learning English through games. The game approach impacted students’ learning experi-
ence in the four main ways presented below.

Enhancement of concept understanding

One of the main advantages of learning narratives using digital drawing and the storytelling
game is that this approach allowed the students to better understand and apply the narrative com-
ponents. One interviewee explained why she believed the activity was advantageous for her as
follows:
Extract 1

The digital games were easy to understand, which also allowed us to consolidate and apply the knowledge about
narrative structure we learned from the online videos. Being able to apply is very important to us if we want to
master a skill.

Another student indicated that the activities clarified topics that she initially misunderstood:
Extract 2

If we are just taught by the instructor, maybe we could only get some basic understanding of the concepts.
However participating in these kinds of activities, we have confirmed what we learned, which made us clearer
about those concepts.

Some students observed that the two activities helped them perform better on their examination,
because the drawing and storytelling activity was quite similar to what they were being tested on
in the examination. They felt that the two activities were useful and interesting at the same time.
An interviewee made the following comments:
Extract 3

I found the activities very useful because sometimes we may be unclear about the concepts if we only listened to
the teacher without applying them. Also, the examination was about advertisement analysis and narrative story
writing, so when I looked back I realised the games served as a kind of practise for us before the examination. I
think the games were really interesting because we could do digital drawings in class and the software was easy
to use.

As Extracts 1, 2, and 3 show, the participants found that the game-based approach enhanced their
understanding of the narrative components they had learned from the online videos. This occurred
because they had to communicate with their groupmates to create the story during the drawing and
storytelling game, while listening to the other groups. They also showed interest in the digital games,
10 J. HO

and perceived ease of use as an important factor. By discussing, listening, and collecting feedback,
the students could clear their confusion, which helped them prepare for the examination.

Improvement of communication skills

One impact identified in the qualitative analysis was that learning English through games could
enhance students’ communication skills, and improve their engagement in classroom activities.
One student noted the following:
Extract 4

I think the games have enhanced our communication skills. We not only needed to communicate with each other,
but also to stand in front of the class and present the ideas to the others.

The students were also asked to compare the lessons in which they played the drawing and story-
telling game with the usual lecture-oriented lessons; students noted that the drawing exercise was
better than just listening to the instructor. One respondent added the following observation:
Extract 5

At least we had chances to brainstorm and try to organise the ideas and create a story.

One interviewee described an important factor that she thought teachers should keep in mind when
teaching students, and how her instructor had been able to do this:
Extract 6

I think it is really important for teachers to arouse our interest of learning English, because many of us are afraid of
learning and practising English.

Extracts 4, 5, and 6 show that the game-based flipped classroom approach reduced ESL learners’
anxiety about practising English, and motivated them to participate in classroom activities. The brain-
storming, organisation, and presentation of ideas also enhanced students’ interactions with their
peers.

Fostering class atmosphere

Another impact identified in the analysis refers to fostering the class atmosphere. All the interviewees
believed the class was more participatory when they were drawing and telling stories, and the class
ambience was better than when they were doing the narratives exercise. One student made the fol-
lowing comments:
Extract 7

Many of us are usually very quiet in class as we tend to wait for the answers. However, participating in those
games gave us opportunities to tell the story in front of the others, and the activities involved everyone. Many
of us laughed aloud when we heard the funny stories told by the others. I really enjoy the learning atmosphere.

Another respondent added further observations:

Extract 8

This type of teaching method also encourages us to think; like, usually when we receive handouts, we’re just filling
out the answers on our own, then we have to wait for the answers and then turn to the next paper. However,
while doing the drawing and storytelling exercise, we had to interact with our classmates. I remember, while
the other groups were doing the presentation, members of the other groups tried to guess the ending of the
story, so I think, just like the previous student said, the atmosphere was more interesting, and encouraged us
to learn by ourselves rather than waiting for the answers.

As Extracts 7 and 8 show, the students found that the game-based approach enhanced the class
atmosphere because it kept everyone engaged presenting their stories and listening to the others,
and students felt that they were being encouraged to learn independently.
 INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING 11

Strengthening relationships with classmates

Many respondents felt that the drawing and storytelling activity helped them build a closer relation-
ship with their classmates. One interviewee said,
Extract 9

We know each other better so we even meet out of class. We became friends.

One respondent shared a story of how one of her classmates became her groupmate:
Extract 10

I just chose the boy that I teamed up with when doing the drawing and storytelling practise and then later on, he
truly became my groupmate … . These kinds of activities helped us know more about our classmates; by better
understanding each other, we could create a better learning environment.

Another respondent explained why she felt that the activities were a fun way to build closer relation-
ships with her classmates:
Extract 11

The lesson involved some games that helped us learn the online materials better, and through these games, we
could communicate more with our groupmates and became friends.

As Extracts 9, 10, and 11 show, the students regarded the small-group collaborative task as a way to
consolidate their friendships with peers, which was important for helping them find groupmates for
assessments and continuing collaborations.

Discussion
Based on the responses to questionnaires 1 and 2, the average narrative writing scores, and the focus
group interviews, the game-based flipped classroom teaching approach proved to be more effective
for enhancing students’ understanding of the narrative structure than a normal in-class discussion.
Most group B respondents believed that the drawing and storytelling activity expanded their under-
standing of narratives, and they performed better on the writing task than group A. This verifies
claims by Stott and Neustaedter (2013) and Wichadee and Pattanapichet (2018) that a game-
based approach can consolidate students’ understanding of concepts learned in class. The students’
understanding of these concepts was improved, because the gamified flipped learning activity
allowed students to apply what they had learned in a practical way. In other words, the students
might have thought that without the activity, they would not have practical opportunities to apply
the knowledge they learned. Furthermore, the game approach is proven to help students prepare
for their exams. The students thought that the game activity helped them identify which areas
they should focus on, in the event a similar topic appeared on the final exam. Some indicated that
the storytelling activity served as presentation practise. Therefore, when they finally made formal pre-
sentations, they were more aware of which mistakes to avoid, and which areas to concentrate on,
which is consistent with Bailey and Judd (2018), who found that collaborative learning can help stu-
dents improve their language accuracy.
Reed and Seong (2013) observed that the use of game-based approaches allowed students to be
more confident, and reduced their fear of making grammatical mistakes. While this study showed
that students were more willing to use English during the language game, it also demonstrated
that the gamified flipped classroom approach enabled them to identify areas that needed to be
strengthened. This suggests that the use of games in the in-class portion of a flipped classroom
can serve as a review session, which is consistent with Bord’s (2008) view that games ‘help students
think about how questions could be phrased on the upcoming exam and what areas of the material
they need to spend more time studying’. It is also worth noting that the gamified flipped classroom
approach not only enhanced students’ understanding of the lesson, but also strengthened their soft
12 J. HO

skills, including English communication skills and interpersonal skills. The use of game-based
approaches allowed students to be more confident in practising English. As explained by Fushino
(2010), students working in groups are positively interdependent because each of them needs to
contribute to the group work. They will obtain learning benefits by ‘recognizing the overall
success of the group’ and by ‘observing the success of its individual members’ (700). This finding
shows that drawing and storytelling promoted more social class interactions, and the students
were more able to practise English in class, which is in accord with Cave et al. (2018), who states
that students’ fears decreased when they worked with one another. They ‘demonstrated more enthu-
siasm and positivity’ and ‘[are] a lot more aware of the progress they make because someone is
always there to help them see their improvement’ (90–91). The activity even helped some of them
find groupmates for later assignments, and one respondent noted that she and her groupmates
became such good friends that they started meeting outside of class, which helped her build a
closer relationship with her classmates. This suggests that a collaborative small-group task can
enhance students’ interactions and encourage their further cooperation in subsequent tasks in a
way that develops long-term positive relationships. This is consistent with McLean and Attardi
(2018), who indicate that students regarded enhanced interactions with their peers as one of the
most valuable flipped learning outcomes. As Gaunt and Westerlund (2016) noted, collaborative learn-
ing can help to
capture diverse attempts at cultivating shared goals and joint problem-solving, to illuminate the complexities of
interactions involved in collaboration and how these impact on our learning, and to provide inspiration through
the improvisatory and creative aspects of collaborative learning that may break/interrupt the routines of cano-
nized professional interactions. (4)

The study’s findings confirm that game-based approaches can benefit collaborative learning and
promote social interactions in class, encouraging students to find ways to solve problems together.
The findings also reveal that students’ perceptions of their teachers change, because the classes are
no longer as instruction heavy as in the non-flipped classroom (McLean and Attardi 2018).
Overall, the results indicated that integrating digital technology with flipped learning is an
effective learning approach. This approach encouraged students to keep abreast of digital technol-
ogy; they were also more willing to participate in class, and developed more positive affective reac-
tions towards the course and their peers. Owen (2014) argues that in-class activities in a flipped
classroom should make less use of technology to increase student engagement. It appears from
this study, however, that students actually enjoy using digital technology to finish the in-class task,
as long as the application or software is user-friendly and the task is interesting. Thus, it seems
that the gamified flipped approach could enhance what Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2003) identified
as the three aspects of engagement: behavioural, cognitive, and motivational, which is consistent
with the finding of Cruaud (2018) that ‘playfulness led to engagement in the class activities’ as
gamified activities are learner-driven (341). As Mak (2011) points out, ‘all language professionals
need to respond not only to students’ linguistic but also affective needs, by attempting to provide
a secure and comfortable learning atmosphere, free from fear of speaking and conducive to risk
taking in the target language’ (211). It has been almost a decade since Hong Kong universities’
student English standard was first criticised as failing. Given the new English language exit require-
ment for all publicly funded universities in Hong Kong, perhaps educators should start using non-tra-
ditional teaching approaches, such as games, to enhance university students’ academic engagement
and reduce their anxiety and reticence towards using English, before looking for other ways to help
students improve their English proficiency.

Conclusion
This paper has proposed an innovative approach to teaching the English narrative genre by combin-
ing technology-based game and active learning strategies (i.e. storymaking and storytelling), and has
 INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING 13

explored university students’ perceptions of such a gamified flipped classroom approach. By survey-
ing groups A and B, comparing their writing scores, and conducting focus group interviews, we found
that a classroom flip combined with game-based active learning brought about positive effects to
students’ learning, in terms of their engagement with technology, and learner autonomy.
The game-based teaching approach enhanced students’ behavioural, cognitive, and motivational
engagement: the game not only encouraged more social interaction, but also served as a review
session that allowed students to identify areas for improvement and prepare for the exit examination.
Additionally, it helped boost students’ confidence in presenting their ideas to the class. Hence, the
study showed that language games can be an effective approach for enhancing students’ academic
engagement, and reducing their anxiety and reticence toward using English. Hong Kong university
students’ English language performance would be enhanced by using games to foster a more posi-
tive attitude towards the English classroom and greater motivation to practise the language. Despite
the significant effectiveness of the gamified flipped classroom approach used in the present study, it
should be noted that the data collected from the focus groups may be biased towards a more posi-
tive experience with the intervention because participation in these interviews was voluntary. Stu-
dents who did not have a positive experience may have been reluctant to participate. Another
limitation of the study is that students’ perceptions of both approaches, flipped learning and
gamified flipped learning, may change or differ if the intervention is implemented over a longer
period of time. More interventions are needed to examine the impact of gamified flipped learning
approach on student engagement and performance. Given these limitations, we suggest that
future studies should select the focus group participants balancing between those who had a
more positive experience with the intervention and those who had a more negative experience,
to better understand both sides. Further studies could also examine the changes in students’ percep-
tions on gamified flipped learning by continuing the intervention for a longer time. Researchers
should continue to explore the effectiveness of digital gamified flipped classroom approaches in
different general and discipline-specific English courses. They could also compare the perceptions
of university students from Hong Kong and other cities with regard to the use of game-based
approaches in ESL classrooms, to further explore the related cultural, sociolinguistic, and psychologi-
cal factors.

Note
1. Sketchpad 5.0. https://sketch.io/sketchpad/.

Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Teaching and Language Centre, Lingnan University (grant 102452). I would also like
to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Funding
This work was supported by The CAOBE Seed-funding, Lingnan University: [Grant Number 102452].

Notes on contributor
Janet Ho is Assistant Professor at the Department of English, Lingnan University. Her current research interests lie in
metaphor studies, discourse analysis, corpus linguistics, and English language teaching. Her recent publications have
appeared in journals including Language and Communication, English for Specific Purposes and Journal of Pragmatics.
14 J. HO

ORCID
Janet Ho http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2498-0256

References
Amiryousefi, M. 2017. “The Incorporation of Flipped Learning Into Conventional Classes to Enhance EFL Learners’ L2
Speaking, L2 Listening, and Engagement.” Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1–15. doi:10.1080/
17501229. 2017.1394307.
Bailey, D. R., and C. Judd. 2018. “The Effects of Online Collaborative Writing and TOEIC Writing Test-Preparation on L2
Writing Performance.” The Journal of Asia TEFL 15 (2): 383–397.
Bergmann, J., and A. Sams. 2012. Flipped Learning: Gateway to Student Engagement. Washington, DC: International Society
for Technology in Education.
Bord, D. 2008. “Teaching tips: Enhancing learning and exam preparation.” Accessed 15 October 2018. https://www.
psychologicalscience.org/observer/enhancing-learning-and-exam-preparation.
Cave, P. N., N. W. Evans, D. P. Dewey, and K. J. Hartshorn. 2018. “Motivational Partnerships: Increasing ESL Student Self-
Efficacy.” ELT Journal 72 (1): 83–96.
Chen, J. J. L. 2005. “Relation of Academic Support From Parents, Teachers, and Peers to Hong Kong Adolescents’
Academic Achievement: The Mediating Role of Academic Engagement.” Genetic, Social, and General Psychology
Monographs 131 (2): 77–127.
Cruaud, C. 2018. “The Playful Frame: Gamification in a French-as-a-Foreign-Language Class.” Innovation in Language
Learning and Teaching 12 (4): 330–343.
Cunningham, C. 2014. “Keep Talking’: Using Music During Small Group Discussions in EAP.” ELT Journal 68 (2): 179–191.
Deterding, S., M. Sicart, L. Nacke, K. O’Hara, and D. Dixon. 2011. “Gamification: Using Game-design Elements in Non-
gaming Contexts.” In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
(pp. 2425–2428). doi:10.1145/1979742.1979575.
Doman, E., and M. Webb. 2017. “The Flipped Experience for Chinese University Students Studying English as a Foreign
Language.” TESOL Journal 8 (1): 102–141.
Evans, S., and C. Green. 2007. “Why EAP is Necessary: A Survey of Hong Kong Tertiary Students.” Journal of English for
Academic Purposes 6 (1): 3–17.
Evans, S., and B. Morrison. 2011. “Meeting the Challenges of English-Medium Higher Education: The First-Year Experience
in Hong Kong.” English for Specific Purposes 30 (3): 198–208.
Fisher, R., Á Perényi, and N. Birdthistle. 2018. “The Positive Relationship Between Flipped and Blended Learning and
Student Engagement, Performance and Satisfaction.” Active Learning in Higher Education. doi:10.1177/
1469787418801702.
Foldnes, N. 2016. “The Flipped Classroom and Cooperative Learning: Evidence From a Randomised Experiment.” Active
Learning in Higher Education 17 (1): 39–49.
Fredricks, J. A., P. C. Blumenfeld, and A. H. Paris. 2004. “School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the
Evidence.” Review of Educational Research 74 (1): 59–109.
Fushino, K. 2010. “Causal Relationships Between Communication Confidence, Beliefs About Group Work, and Willingness
to Communicate in Foreign Language Group Work.” TESOL Quarterly 44 (4): 700–724.
Gaunt, H., and H. Westerlund, eds. 2016. Collaborative Learning in Higher Music Education. London and New York: Routledge.
Gros, B. 2007. “Digital Games in Education: The Design of Games-Based Learning Environments.” Journal of Research on
Technology in Education 40 (1): 23–38.
HKFP (Hong Kong Free Press). 25 August 2015. “Only around 6% of Hongkongers Speak English Well, HKU Study Shows.”
Accessed 15 October 2018. https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/08/25/only-around-6-of-hongkongers-speak-english-
well-hku-study-shows/.
Ho, W. Y. 2002. Narrative Writing in Australian and Chinese Schools: A Study of Text in Context. New York: Peter Lang.
Horstmanshof, L., and C. Zimitat. 2007. “Future Time Orientation Predicts Academic Engagement among First-Year
University Students.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 77 (3): 703–718.
Hung, H. T. 2018. “Gamifying the Flipped Classroom Using Game-Based Learning Materials.” ELT Journal 72 (3): 296–308.
Hwang, G. J., and H. F. Chang. 2011. “A Formative Assessment-Based Mobile Learning Approach to Improving the
Learning Attitudes and Achievements of Students.” Computers & Education 56: 1023–1031.
Hwang, G. J., and P. H. Wu. 2012. “Advancements and Trends in Digital Game-Based Learning Research: A Review of
Publications in Selected Journals From 2001 to 2010.” British Journal of Education Technology 43 (1): E6–E10.
Hyland, K. 2015. “Re-imagining Literacy: English in Hong Kong’s new University Curriculum.” In English Language
Education and Assessment: Recent Developments in Hong Kong and the Chinese Mainland, edited by D. Conium,
139–154. London: Springer.
Labov, W. 1972. Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.
 INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING 15

Lee, J. J., and J. Hammer. 2011. “Gamification in Education: What, how, why Bother?” Academic Exchange Quarterly 15 (2):
146–151.
Lee, G., and A. Wallace. 2018. “Flipped Learning in the English as a Foreign Language Classroom: Outcomes and
Perceptions.” TESOL Quarterly 52 (1): 62–84.
Li, D. C. S. 2009. “Learning English for Academic Purposes: Why Chinese EFL Learners Find EAP so Difficult to Master.”
Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 59: 33–46.
Li, D. C. S. 2011. ““Improving the Standards and Promoting the use of English in Hong Kong: Issues, Problems and
Prospects”.” In English Language Education Across Greater China, edited by A. Feng, 95–113. Bristol: Multilingual
Matters.
Linnenbrink, E. A., and P. R. Pintrich. 2003. “The Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Student Engagement and Learning.” Reading
& Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties 19 (2): 119–137.
Liu, M. H. 2009. Reticence and Anxiety in Oral English Lessons. Berlin: Peter Lang.
Mak, B. 2011. “An Exploration of Speaking-in-Class Anxiety with Chinese ESL Learners.” System 39: 202–214.
McLean, S., and S. M. Attardi. 2018. “Sage or Guide? Student Perceptions of the Role of the Instructor in a Flipped
Classroom.” Active Learning in Higher Education. Epub ahead of print 16 August 2018. doi:10.1177/1469787418793725.
Merriam, S. B. 1998. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, C. 2013. “The Gamification of Education.” In Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning:
Proceedings of the Annual ABSEL conference (Vol. 40): 196–200.
O’Rourke, J., S. Main, and M. Ellis. 2013. “It Doesn’t Seem Like Work, it Seems Like Good Fun’: Perceptions of Primary
Students on the use of Handheld Game Consoles in Mathematics Classes.” Technology, Pedagogy and Education 22
(1): 103–120.
Owen, J. E. 2014. “Teaching Naked: How Moving Technology Out of Your College Classroom Will Improve Student
Learning by José Antonio Bowen.” Journal of College Student Development 55 (7): 751–753.
Reed, J., and M. H. Seong. 2013. “Suggestions for an Effective Drama-Based EFL Course at a Korean University.” Journal of
Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 17 (2): 91–106.
Stott, A., and C. Neustaedter. 2013. “Analysis of Gamification in Education.” http://carmster.com/clab/uploads/Main/Stott-
Gamification.pdf.
Strayer, J. F. 2012. “How Learning in an Inverted Classroom Influences Cooperation, Innovation and Task Orientation.”
Learning Environments Research 15 (2): 171–193.
Sung, H. Y., and G. J. Hwang. 2013. “A Collaborative Game-Based Learning Approach to Improving Students’ Learning
Performance in Science Courses.” Computers & Education 63: 43–51.
Tollefson, W. J., and A. B. M. Tsui. 2014. “Language Diversity and Language Policy in Educational Access and Equity.”
Review of Research in Education 38: 189–214.
Tong, J. 2010. “Some Observations of Students’ Reticent and Participatory Behaviour in Hong Kong English Classrooms.”
Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 7 (2): 239–254.
Tran, T. T. T., K. Moni, and R. B. Baldauf, Jr. 2013. “Foreign Language Anxiety: Understanding its Sources and Effects From
Insiders’ Perspectives.” The Journal of Asia TEFL 10 (1): 95–131.
Watson, W. R., C. J. Mong, and C. A. Harris. 2011. “A Case Study of the in-Class use of a Video Game for Teaching High
School History.” Computers & Education 56 (2): 466–474.
Wichadee, S., and F. Pattanapichet. 2018. “Enhancement of Performance and Motivation Through Application of Digital
Games in an English Language Class.” Teaching English with Technology 18 (1): 77–92.

Appendix 1. Interview questions

1. On a scale from 1 to 5, in which 1 corresponds to ‘very easy’ and 5 to ‘very difficult,’ How difficult was the concept of
narratives?
2. To what extent did you understand the narrative structure before participating in the drawing and storytelling
activities?
3. What do you think about the impact of the drawing activity on your learning of narrative concepts?
4. What do you think about the impact of the storytelling activity on your learning of narrative concepts?
5. Which method helped you understand narratives better? The theoretical way (Instructor talks about concepts and let
you do the task) or the practical way (drawing activity)? Why?
6. When do you think the class was more participative? When you were doing the task or the drawing activity?