Discussion
In this study, in addition to the traditional teaching methods of the
experimental group, English language learning games in the Education
Informatics Network were played. After the lectures were given in the
control group, the exercises in the book were made in the last minutes
of the lesson and after the lesson was given in the experimental group,
the exercises were done with the games.As a result of the analyzes,
there was no significant difference between the pre-test scores of both
groups. This shows that the groups are identical and similar. When the
differences between the post-test and pre-test scores of both groups
were examined, it was seen that there were significant differences
between the pre- and post-test scores of both groups. However, the
difference between the mean post-test score and the pre-test score of
the experimental group was higher than the difference between the
post-test and the pre-test of the control group. A covariance analysis
was performed to determine the difference between post test scores of
experimental and control groups. According to the results of covariance
analysis, the post-test scores of the experimental group were
significantly higher than the post-test scores of the control group. In
addition, it was observed that 36% of the change in the posttest scores
of the experimental group was performed by implementation. Cheng ve Su
(2012) found that the game-based learners learned significantly better
than the traditional group in their study on game-based learning
students and traditional learning students. Liu and Chen (2013) also
found that game-based learning increased student achievement. In another
study on digital game-based learning, Papastergiou (2009) tried to teach
the computer science course with digital play, and found that, in the
end, game-based learners learned more effectively and were more
motivated than learners without game-based learning. Ke and Grabowski
(2007) found that game-based learning increased students’ mathematics
achievement. The games have instructional effectiveness and that is
expressed in many studies (Dempsey et al, 1996). In addition to the
studies that show that the students who learn game-based learning are
more successful, there are some studies showing that students who are
not game-based learners are more successful than game-based students.
For example, Eow, Ali, Mahmud and Baki (2009) found that the
non-game-based group had significantly higher scores than the game-based
learning group. But the effect of that is too small (%2).
Computer games have become an engaging, addictive and time-consuming
task for students, for children or for adults. In this sense, as Eow
vd., (2009) said, if you look at the game in a negative way, it is not
possible to get anything. In this sense, as Eow (2009) said, looking at
the game in a negative way, it is not possible to get
anything.Therefore, in a positive learning climate (Hayes & Games,
2008), it can be used to increase students’ skills such as thinking,
making decisions, making comparisons and taking action. Rieber (1996)
states that games are important for the psychological, social and
intellectual development of children. In addition, students find boring
the traditional learning that is not game based (Prensky, 2003). For
this reason, studies can be done to use games more effectively in
teaching. In particular, it is important to see which kind of games have
more effect on learning, and which kinds of games are more effective in
what kind of lessons.