In short
- Words stick through many meetings spread over weeks, and meetings that make pupils retrieve a word count for more than meetings where they only see it.
- Different games retrieve the same word in different ways: guessing it from clues, building it, connecting it to related words, or recognising its written form.
- Games work best when the words come from the text the class is reading, so each game is another meeting with a word already met in context.
- The research on retrieval and spacing is strong; the research on specific game formats is thin, so judge a game by what it makes pupils do and by the record it leaves.
Every English department has a shelf of vocabulary games. Some are loved, some are tolerated, and few have been checked. This guide sets out what is known about how a new word becomes a known word. It then looks at four common types of word game and asks what each one actually practises.
The guide is organised around one argument. A word is learned through repeated retrieval over time. Different games retrieve a word in different ways. Games work when the words come from what pupils have read. And a game is only as good as the record a teacher can read afterwards. Each section links to shorter articles that go deeper.
How does a word become learned?
Knowing a word is not one thing. Nation (2013) describes it as knowledge of form, meaning and use. Form covers how the word sounds, how it is spelled and what parts it has. Meaning covers the link between form and concept, and the other words it brings to mind. Use covers its grammar, the words it goes with, and where it is appropriate. Each of these has a receptive side, recognising, and a productive side, producing.
These parts are not learned at once. Webb (2007) tested 121 Japanese learners of English on ten aspects of words met 1, 3, 7 or 10 times in short contexts. Each extra meeting improved at least one aspect. Ten meetings gave sizeable gains, but Webb concluded that full knowledge may need more than ten. The number of meetings a word needs is covered in detail in how many times must a learner meet a word?.
Two findings from memory research shape what those meetings should look like.
- Retrieval beats review. Roediger and Karpicke (2006) had students study prose passages, then either restudy them or take recall tests. Restudying looked better after five minutes. After two days and a week, the tested students remembered substantially more.
- Spacing beats cramming. Cepeda and colleagues (2006) pooled 839 assessments of spaced practice from 317 experiments on verbal recall. Spreading study out helped retention, and the best gap between sessions grew with how long the material had to be remembered.
Dunlosky and colleagues (2013) reviewed ten common study techniques. They rated practice testing and distributed practice as high utility, because both helped learners of many ages and abilities. Rereading and highlighting were rated low. For vocabulary, the lesson is simple. A pupil who reads a word list five times in one evening has done the weakest version of the work. A pupil who has to bring the word back from memory on Monday, Thursday and the following Tuesday has done the strongest.
One caution. Most of this research used adults or university students, and much of it used prose or word pairs rather than classroom games. The principles are among the best supported in educational psychology. How far each game format applies them is a separate question.
What the evidence says about vocabulary games
Here the ground gets thinner. There is a large body of small classroom studies of vocabulary games. Many compare a game with no activity at all, run for a few weeks, and test only straight after. Very few isolate one game format, compare it with an equally active non-game task, and test weeks later. For most specific formats, nobody has run that test.
So this guide does not claim that any game format is proven. It asks a narrower question: what does the game make the pupil do with the word? Laufer and Hulstijn (2001) gave a useful way to judge that. They proposed that retention depends on the involvement a task creates, in three parts: need, search and evaluation. Need is whether the pupil has to deal with the word. Search is whether they must find its meaning or form. Evaluation is whether they must weigh it against other words or a context.
Hulstijn and Laufer (2001) tested this with advanced adult EFL learners. The same ten words were met through reading, reading plus a gap-fill, or writing a composition with them. Retention was highest after the composition and lowest after reading alone. The tasks also took different amounts of time, which is part of the effect. The framework is still a practical lens for any game.
| Game type | Skill | What the pupil retrieves | Main limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Word-guessing (deduction) | Guessing a hidden word from letter feedback | Word forms from memory, spelling patterns | Can be solved by letter logic without thinking about meaning |
| Word-building (construction) | Making words from a fixed set of letters | Word forms and word parts, produced not chosen | Pupils may build many short, already known words |
| Word-path puzzle (connection) | Tracing related words through a letter grid | Word forms plus the theme that links them | The link is only learned if someone names it |
| Word search (recognition) | Finding listed words in a grid | Recognition of a written form | Teaches almost nothing about meaning on its own |
Two older articles in this pillar ask the same question from a teacher's side: do word games really improve vocabulary retention? and memory games to help students learn English vocabulary.
Word-guessing games: retrieving a word from clues
In a word-guessing game, pupils try to find a hidden word in a limited number of guesses. After each guess they learn which letters are right, which are in the word but in the wrong place, and which are absent. With a five-letter word from this week's story, a round might go STORM, then SHORE, then SHORT.
What does this practise? Every guess is a retrieval. The pupil has to pull real English words from memory that fit the letter pattern, then test them. That is closer to the recall tests in Roediger and Karpicke (2006) than to rereading. It also builds attention to spelling patterns, because the feedback is letter by letter.
The limit is meaning. A pupil can solve the puzzle by letter logic without ever thinking about what the word means. No study we know of has tested this format for vocabulary learning directly. The fix is cheap. Draw the target from the story, and when it is solved, ask pupils to find the sentence where it appeared and say what it means there.
Classroom example
Before reading chapter 3, the teacher writes five blanks on the board. The target is TIDES, from chapter 2. Pairs call out guesses and the teacher colours the letters. Once solved, one pair reads the sentence from chapter 2 aloud and another explains what the tide did to the boat.
For more rounds, variations and ways to adjust difficulty by level, see word-guessing games in the English classroom.
Word-building games: producing words from letters
In a word-building game, pupils get a small set of letters and make as many words as they can. Some versions fix one letter that every word must contain, and reward longer words. The pupil is producing words, not choosing from a list, which is the harder, productive side of word knowledge that Nation (2013) describes.
These games also touch word parts. Bauer and Nation (1993) argued that the word family, a base word plus its regular inflected and derived forms, is the useful unit for teaching. They graded English affixes into seven levels, from the most regular and frequent to the least. A pupil who builds LIGHT, then LIGHTS, then LIGHTER is working with one family. Pointing this out turns a letter game into a lesson on how English words are made.
The limit is that pupils drift to short, easy words they already know. Ten three-letter words may score well and teach nothing. Three steers help:
- Build the letter set from a story word, so the longest answer is a word the class has just read.
- Give extra credit for words from the story and for family members of a base word.
- End by asking each pair to explain one word they built that someone else did not.
There is no direct research on letter-set games of this kind. Their value rests on the general case for production and retrieval. Word-building games for English learners gives set-ups for different ages.
Word-path puzzles: connecting related words
A word-path puzzle hides several related words in a letter grid. The path to each word can bend, including diagonally, so pupils cannot just scan rows. They have to hold the word's spelling in mind and trace it. Because the words are related, finding one gives a clue to the next.
How the words are related matters. Tinkham (1997) compared learning sets of new words grouped in two ways. Semantic sets, such as eye, nose, ear and mouth, were harder to learn than unrelated words. Thematic sets, such as frog, green, hop and pond, were easier. His participants were university students learning artificial words paired with English ones, so the result is a guide, not a rule.
The practical lesson fits word-path puzzles well. Words drawn from one story are usually thematic: storm, lantern, harbour and rescue belong to one scene, not one category. A grid of five new colour words or five new body parts risks the interference Tinkham reported. A grid of words from one chapter does not.
The limit is that the connection only teaches if someone names it. Once the grid is solved, ask: why do these words belong together? Which part of the story links them? Nobody has tested word-path puzzles directly, so that follow-up question is where the value is most likely to come from. More in word-path puzzles for vocabulary.
Word searches: recognising a word's written form
The word search is the most familiar format and the weakest on its own. With a bare word list, the pupil matches letters. They do not need to know the meaning, the sound or the use. In Laufer and Hulstijn's (2001) terms, there is some need but no search and no evaluation.
That does not make it useless. It gives beginners an easy success, and it practises recognising the written form of words pupils have just read. It becomes a real vocabulary task when the list is replaced by clues, definitions or gapped sentences from the story, and when a short writing task follows.
Use it as revision, never to introduce new words, and never as the only vocabulary work of the week. Do word searches teach vocabulary? gives the full answer, with a worked example and a list of times to skip it.
The word journey: making words stick
Each game above is one meeting with a word. What makes a word stick is the journey across many meetings. The first is usually in a text. Later ones come in games, quizzes and writing, spread over weeks.
How many meetings? There is no single number. Webb (2007) found gains with each extra meeting up to ten, and suggested full knowledge may need more. Uchihara, Webb and Yanagisawa (2019) pooled 26 studies of learning from input, with 1,918 learners in all. They found a medium relationship between the number of meetings and learning, weaker for school-age learners than for university students. How many times must a learner meet a word? sets out the studies in a table.
The existing articles in this cluster cover the practical side:
- How to help students memorize English vocabulary combines context, production and review in one routine.
- Spaced repetition for vocabulary retention shows a simple manual review schedule.
- Daily reading habits and vocabulary retention explains why a short daily routine is easier to sustain.
- Memory games for English vocabulary separates recall games from recognition games.
- Do word games really improve vocabulary retention? gives a checklist for judging a game.
A game is only as good as its record
Spacing only works if you know which words are due. Retrieval only helps if you notice which words pupils fail to retrieve. A game played on paper and thrown away leaves nothing to plan from. Before you adopt any game, ask what record it leaves: which words, which pupils, which day, found with or without help. Then use that record to decide which words come back next week.
A simple paper version works for one class. Keep a list of each story's key words. Tick a word each time a pupil retrieves it correctly on a different day. A word with ticks from two or three separate days is well on its way. A word with none after two weeks needs another meeting.
Guides on this
Putting it together in a school week
Here is one way to fit this into an ordinary week of English lessons. It is a sketch to adapt, not a tested programme. Each day takes about ten to fifteen minutes of vocabulary work beside the reading.
| Day | Reading | Vocabulary activity | What you check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monday | New chapter, read with audio or aloud | Pick 8 to 12 key words; pupils say each one and find it in context | Which words pupils already half know |
| Tuesday | Reread one scene | Word-guessing round on a key word from Monday | Who retrieves the word, and who needs the meaning again |
| Wednesday | Continue the chapter | Word-building game from a story word, then explain one built word | Which pupils produce story words, not just short easy ones |
| Thursday | Short quiz on the chapter | Word-path puzzle or word search with clues, then one sentence per pupil | Which words appear correctly in the sentences |
| Friday | Free reading | Mixed review: this week's words plus three from two weeks ago | Which older words have slipped and need another meeting |
Three rules hold the week together. The words come from the reading, so every game is a second or third meeting, not a first. The formats vary, so pupils retrieve each word in different ways. And the Friday review reaches back, so words from earlier stories keep coming round.
If you have less time, keep the reading, keep one retrieval task a day, and keep the record. Drop the word search first.
How iRead handles this
iRead runs four word games, Think Word, Bee Genius, Intellect Link and Word Explorer, matching the four types above. They are regenerated every 24 hours from the vocabulary of the story the class is reading, with no teacher setup. Every game clear and quiz answer feeds one progress record per word, and a word cleared on two different days is marked Mastered. Teachers see retention per word, per game and per class. The vocabulary games page shows each game.
Frequently asked questions
What are the best vocabulary games for ESL students?
The best games make pupils retrieve words they have already met, rather than just look at them. Guessing, building and connecting games ask more of pupils than a plain word search. Whatever the format, draw the words from the class text and vary the game types across the week.
How do you make vocabulary stick?
Meet each key word several times, spread over days and weeks, and make some of those meetings retrievals: recalling, building or using the word. Start from a text so the word has a context. Keep a simple record so you know which words need another meeting.
How often should students play vocabulary games?
Short and often beats long and rare. Ten minutes a day, spread across the week, gives more spaced retrieval than one long session on Friday. Research on spacing and practice testing supports this pattern, although no study has fixed an ideal schedule for classroom word games.
Can vocabulary games replace teaching vocabulary?
No. Games are good for later meetings with a word, when pupils retrieve and practise it. The first meeting works best in a text, with the meaning made clear. Games also rarely ask pupils to use a word in their own sentences, so add a short writing or speaking task.
Do English vocabulary games work for teenagers as well as young learners?
The principles of retrieval and spacing apply at any age, and most of the research used older learners. What changes is the framing. Younger pupils may enjoy the game for its own sake. Teenagers often respond better when they can see their own progress over time.
Sources
- Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139858656
- Webb, S. (2007). The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 46-65. doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml048
- Uchihara, T., Webb, S., & Yanagisawa, A. (2019). The effects of repetition on incidental vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis of correlational studies. Language Learning, 69(3), 559-599. doi.org/10.1111/lang.12343
- Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x
- Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354-380. doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354
- Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58. doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266
- Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26. doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.1
- Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558. doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00164
- Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language Research, 13(2), 138-163. doi.org/10.1191/026765897672376469
- Bauer, L., & Nation, P. (1993). Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253-279. doi.org/10.1093/ijl/6.4.253