DATE:

Dear Dr Lucas and Professor Lim,

I have completed the changes you required to my dissertation: Secondary Students’ Incidental English Language Learning Through A Computer Game. In this cover note I have listed each correction you required followed by the pages containing new text I have written. I hope this is useful to you. In the dissertation all the new text is highlighted in yellow. I have also made many spelling and grammar corrections. These are not highlighted.

Thank you very much,

CHENG CHI LAP

1) Some key literature on multi-literacies and multi-modalities should be included in the literature review in order to show the relevance of this work to the study. Work by the New London Group, Kress, Luke, Freebody, Gee and Lemke should form part of this literature.

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATUREP.41-52 2.10 Computer (video) games, learning and literacyP.59-61 2.12.4 Learning principles of video games

2) Any incorporation of new literature in the literature review should also be utilised in the findings and discussion chapters of the thesis – where appropriate.

CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS (1) – OBSERVATIONS AND TESTSP.133-135 5.3 Interaction with the game world

CHAPTER SEVEN: DISCUSSIONSP. 190 7.2.1 Interactivity with the game worldP. 211-212 7.2.4 MultimodalityP. 212-213 7.2.4 Multiliteracies

3) A number of key methodological aspects of the study require further discussion and elaboration in the methodology chapter as follows;

a) Further discussion and elaboration to be given on the process of the generation of items for the questionnaire.CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY

P. 97-99 4.5.3.3 Construction of the questionnaire items

b) More discussion should be given on ensuring the validity of the questionnaire and any challenges in relation to this.

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGYP. 99-101 4.5.3.4 The validity of the questionnaireP. 101-102 4.5.3.4 Challenges to the validity of the questionnaire

c) More discussion is needed on the pre and post-test. Explain and justify the design of the tests, especially the fact that the test items have been based on the game play. If the test items are based on the game play, it will be most likely that the test scores for the post-test will be higher than the pre-test.

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGYP. 92-95 4.5.2.4 Construction of the tests items

d) Some more reflections on and discussion of the process of conducting the focus groups is needed. You should also make use of the wide range of literature available that discusses focus groups in order to inform your discussion.

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGYP. 114-119 4.8.4.2 Reflections on and discussion of the focus group interview

e) It is suggested that you use ‘thematic analysis’ as an approach for analysing all of the qualitative data. The analysis of the focus group data and the presentation of this should be changed to reflect this.

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGYP. 119-124 4.9.1 Analysis of observation data and interview data

CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS (1) – OBSERVATIONS AND TESTSP. 131-132 5.3 Data collected from the field observation during the gaming sessions in the computer centre

CHAPTER SIX: FINDINGS (2) – QUESTIONNAIRES AND INTERVIEWP. 174-186 6.3 Data collected from the focus group interview

4) Chapter 3 and chapter 4 should be reversed in order in the thesis.

5) All typos and grammar errors should be corrected – many of which are highlighted in the annotated text given by the internal examiner, however, the full thesis should be checked before submission.