Duvarı Aşmak: Transmural Dijital Oyun Temelli Öğrenmenin Türk EFL Öğrencilerinin İletişim Kurma İstekliliğine Etkisi

Öz

Okul dışı dijital oyun oynama bugün İngilizceye maruz kalmanın olağan bir parçasıdır; ancak bu deneyim çoğunlukla sınıfın dışında kalır. Bu çalışma, ticari bir anlatı odaklı oyunun (Firewatch) okul dışı oynanışının, sınıf içinde ağırlıklı olarak ana dilde yürütülen tartışmalarla bilinçli biçimde birleştirildiği transmural bir tasarımı sınamakta ve bu köprünün öğrencilerin İngilizce iletişim kurma istekliliğini (WTC) artırıp artırmadığını incelemektedir. Açımlayıcı sıralı karma yöntem deseni kullanılmış; nicel aşamada bir devlet üniversitesinin hazırlık programındaki B1–B2 düzeyinde 41 öğrenciyle (18 deney, 23 kontrol) ön test-son test kontrol gruplu yarı deneysel desen uygulanmıştır. Deney grubu sekiz hafta boyunca oyunu ders dışında oynamış ve içeriği sınıfta ağırlıklı olarak Türkçe yürütülen tartışmalarla işlemiş; kontrol grubu süre bakımından eşitlenmiş geleneksel iletişimsel görevler yürütmüştür. Deney grubunun toplam WTC ortalaması 53.73’ten 63.86’ya yükselmiş (t(17) = 4.82, p < .001, d = 1.14), kontrol grubunda anlamlı değişim gözlenmemiştir (p = .134). Üstünlük başlangıç düzeyi denetlendiğinde korunmuş (ANCOVA F(1, 38) = 16.61, p < .001, ηp² = .304) ve en güçlü biçimde sınıf dışı WTC’de ortaya çıkmıştır (ηp² = .322). Sınıf içi kazanım başlangıç düzeyine göre farklılaşmış, en çekingen öğrencilerde yoğunlaşmıştır (r = −.75). Nitel bulgular, katılımı mümkün kılan mekanizmanın ana dile izin verilmesi olduğunu; ancak bu iznin gerekli fakat yeterli olmadığını göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• dijital oyun temelli dil öğrenimi
• iletişim kurma istekliliği
• sınıf dışı ingilizce
• translanguaging
• transmural dil öğrenimi

Bridging the Wall: The Effect of Transmural Digital Game-Based Learning on Turkish EFL Learners’ Willingness to Communicate

Öz

Extramural digital gameplay is now a routine part of exposure to English, yet it typically remains sealed off from the classroom. This study tests a transmural design in which out-of-school play of a commercial off-the-shelf narrative game (Firewatch) is deliberately bridged with in-class discussion conducted predominantly in the first language, and asks whether that bridge raises learners’ willingness to communicate (WTC) in English. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was used; in the quantitative phase a quasi-experimental pre-test/post-test control group design was applied with 41 B1–B2 preparatory-class students (18 experimental, 23 control) at a state university. Over eight weeks the experimental group played the game outside class and analysed it in classroom discussion conducted predominantly in the first language under an explicit translanguaging policy, while the control group completed time-matched communicative tasks. The experimental group’s total WTC rose from 53.73 to 63.86 (t(17) = 4.82, p < .001, d = 1.14), whereas the control group did not change significantly (p = .134). The advantage survived baseline adjustment (ANCOVA F(1, 38) = 16.61, p < .001, ηp² = .304) and was strongest in extramural WTC (ηp² = .322). The intramural benefit was moderated by initial WTC, concentrating among the most reticent learners (r = −.75). Qualitative findings identified permission to use the first language as the mechanism that made participation possible, while showing that this permission was necessary but not sufficient.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• digital game-based language learning
• extramural english
• translanguaging
• transmural language learning
• willingness to communicate

Kaynakça

1. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
2. Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. McGraw-Hill. https://doi.org/10.1037/11164-000
3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
4. Cao, Y., & Philp, J. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34(4), 480–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.05.002
5. Campo Santo. (2016). Firewatch [Video game]. Panic.
6. Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2017). Minority languages and sustainable translanguaging: Threat or opportunity? Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38(10), 901–912. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2017.1284855
7. Chik, A. (2014). Digital gaming and language learning: Autonomy and community. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.64152/10125/44371
8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications.

9. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
10. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper Perennial.
11. deHaan, J. (2019). Teaching language and literacy with games: What? How? Why? Ludic Language Pedagogy, 1, 1–57. https://doi.org/10.55853/llp_v1Art1
12. Dewaele, J.-M., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2014). The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and enjoyment in the foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4(2), 237–274. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2014.4.2.5
13. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press.
14. García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137385765
15. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1145/950566.950595
16. Hashimoto, Y. (2002). Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context. Second Language Studies, 20(2), 29–70. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/40649
17. Horowitz, K. S. (2019). Video games and English as a second language: The effect of massive multiplayer online role-playing games on the willingness to communicate and communicative anxiety of college students in Puerto Rico. American Journal of Play, 11(3), 379–410. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1220304
18. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
19. Lee, J. S., & Sylvén, L. K. (2021). The role of informal digital learning of English in Korean and Swedish EFL learners’ communication behaviour. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(3), 1279–1296. https://doi.org/10.1111/BJET.13082
20. Lewis, G., Jones, B., & Baker, C. (2012). Translanguaging: Origins and development from school to street and beyond. Educational Research and Evaluation, 18(7), 641–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2012.718488
21. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
22. MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(3), 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263101003035
23. MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x
24. McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly, 40(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379209369817
25. Peng, J.-E., & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60(4), 834–876. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x
26. Peterson, M. (2013). Computer games and learning. In Computer games and language learning (pp. 33–50). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137005175_3
27. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533
28. Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079
29. Reinders, H., & Wattana, S. (2015). Affect and willingness to communicate in digital game-based learning. ReCALL, 27(1), 38–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000226
30. Reinhardt, J., & Bain, L. (2026). Digital games and gaming in language learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444826101177
31. Schurz, A., & Sundqvist, P. (2025). Considering extramural English in class: Exploring teachers’ activity ideas in secondary school classrooms in four countries. Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/APPLIN/AMAF078
32. Soyoof, A., Reynolds, B. L., Vazquez-Calvo, B., & McLay, K. (2023). Informal digital learning of English (IDLE): A scoping review of what has been done and a look towards what is to come. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(4), 608–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1936562
33. Sundqvist, P. (2009). Extramural English matters: Out-of-school English and its impact on Swedish ninth graders’ oral proficiency and vocabulary [Doctoral dissertation, Karlstad University]. Karlstad University Press. https://scispace.com/pdf/extramural-english-matters-out-of-school-english-and-its-4crfp5zq00.pdf
34. Sundqvist, P. (2024). Extramural English as an individual difference variable in L2 research: Methodology matters. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 44, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190524000072
35. Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2016). Extramural English in teaching and learning: From theory and research to practice. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-46048-6
36. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
37. Sykes, J. M. (2018). Digital games and language teaching and learning. Foreign Language Annals, 51(1), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/FLAN.12325
38. Sylvén, L. K., & Sundqvist, P. (2012). Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and L2 proficiency among young learners. ReCALL, 24(3), 302–321. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401200016X
39. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
40. Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. M. (2009). Second language use, socialization, and learning in internet interest communities and online gaming. The Modern Language Journal, 93(s1), 802–821. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00974.x
41. Uyanık, B. (2018). The relationship between students’ willingness to communicate and motivation: An ESP case at a tertiary program in Turkey (Thesis No. 526191) [Master’s thesis, Gazi University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
42. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). The role of play in development. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes (pp. 92–104). Harvard University Press.
43. Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00136
44. York, J., Poole, F. J., & deHaan, J. W. (2021). Playing a new game—An argument for a teacher-focused field around games and play in language education. Foreign Language Annals, 54(4), 1164–1188. https://doi.org/10.1111/FLAN.12585
45. Zadorozhnyy, A., Winsy, L. W. Y., & Lee, J. S. (2025). EFL Teachers' Ecological Barriers to Integrating Informal Digital Learning of English. TESOL J, 59, 2009–2034. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3400
46. Zhang, J., Beckmann, N., & Beckmann, J. F. (2018). To talk or not to talk: A review of situational antecedents of willingness to communicate in the second language classroom. System, 72, 226–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.01.003