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.