Heads Up Who's Who (B2+ Listening and Speaking)
Heads Up Who's Who
Vivien Pálinkás & Viktória Reseterits
Part 1: The Game
Level & Learning Outcomes
Through this game, students will improve their speaking/ communication skills and be more confident in situations when they have to spontaneously use English in speech. In connection with speaking, global and specific listening skills will also be improved. Concerning the level, this activity was designed for a more advanced group but given its nature, it is easy to redesign it in a way that would aid students from all levels.
Materials needed
boardmarker or chalk
pieces of paper with people’s names (See Appendix)
timer
Object of Game
To get the most points by correctly guessing the given person
Rules of Play
Divide the group into pairs
All pairs receive a deck of cards with different topics
One person from the pair draws a card, without looking at it, and they hold it up against their forehead.
The other person has to describe the person on the card, by imitating them. (e.g. I am a very short, very angry French man)
They have one minute to guess as many people as they know
After each round, the pairs switch decks
The game ends when every deck has been to every pair
Scorekeeping
Each name that was guessed correctly is worth one point. The pairs count how many they have guessed after every round. The scores are kept on the board by one of the teachers. After the game is over, the scores are counted, and the winner is announced.
Part 2: Reflection
This activity was a modified version of the game Heads Up, a fairly popular video game among all age groups. It is popular for a reason, and I think this could be observed in this activity as well because the students seemed to be truly enjoying the whole task.
One problem that was present during the game was that the students forgot to use the first-person pronoun and used the second-person instead. This problem made the whole activity into a description type of activity instead of a role play. It might have been beneficial to include some constraints on this problem, for instance, they lose points when they use the wrong form. Despite this, it was a fun activity, and students were motivated to speak in English, which was, in my opinion, the main purpose of this task.
One disadvantage of the game is that with bigger groups it is almost impossible to play when there is only one teacher who can monitor what the students are doing. One solution to this problem could be making it into a group activity in which every group member has to say a different sentence that describes the person. By doing this, the teacher will have fewer groups to monitor and can also keep track of how and what the students are doing during the task.
Concerning Chou’s Octalysis model, unpredictability was present because they did not know whose name would be on the cards and could not prepare anything to do the activity beforehand. As for the other drives, I do not think that they were as highly present as unpredictability was.
In the case of An’s model of gamification of learning, more drives were present. First of all, social interaction was a key aspect because the students had to interact with each other in order to gain as many points as possible. Moreover, challenges and in connection with this failure could be also considered parts of this game as many students did not know every person on the pieces of paper, and sometimes they had to skip or accept that they could not describe this person. Lastly, competition and cooperation are the last elements of this model that were in this game. We only had one winner and given the competitive nature of this group, everyone tried their best to win the game while they were also cooperating with their partner.
In conclusion, this game could be a good and useful game for every student group but with different words. For instance, for an elementary class, giving animals to describe could be an adequate idea to use. - PV
This activity was a modified version of the game Heads Up. The overall reception of the game was very positive, as students enjoyed the fast pace and competitiveness of it, as well as the variety in topics.
One issue that arose while the students were playing the game is that it was hard for some of them to keep the sentence structures; as the task was to roleplay as the people on the cards, and not to describe them. This issue – while the game was still enjoyable to them – defeated the purpose of it being a roleplaying game.
One major disadvantage of this game is that while the difficulty and the length of it can be adjusted, it is not advised to play it with a large group. Monitoring more than 4-5 pairs at once can result in misunderstandings of the rules, or even dishonestly from the students.
Regarding Chou’s eight drives in Octalysis, I believe that there is more than one possibility for focus. The game is mostly dependent on cooperation and competition, since the students pull the cards, as well as receive the topic decks randomly, unpredictability plays a major role as a motivational factor.
Regarding An’s model of gamification of learning, the most fitting answer is social interaction, as the whole game depends on the communication between the members of each pair. Even though the pairs do not directly communicate with each other, there is still an indirect competition between them.; which at the end of each round becomes apparent. The game gives comfort to those who do not wish to present in front of the whole class, as there is only their partners who they have to communicate with. However, it contains the same competitive thrill for everyone.
Overall, I think it is a versatile game that can be modified to fit most topics and levels, and it is highly liked by students of all ages. -RV
Part 3 Appendices
________________________________________
Appendix : List of names on the cards by topic
Comments
Post a Comment