Figurative Language Games Jeopardy
Someone posted a request for a figurative language games jeopardy on a forum last week. I figured I’d actually try to put something together instead of just scrolling past. I’ve run English classes, AP Lit prep sessions, and a couple of workshop groups where students needed to distinguish metaphor, simile, personification, and irony under time pressure. That background is what made me test a bunch of different jeopardy formats before settling on one that actually works. The basic idea is simple. You create a grid with categories and point values. Each cell contains a question or prompt. Students pick a cell, answer it, and earn points. The categories are usually things like Simile, Metaphor, Personification, Alliteration, Hyperbole, and sometimes Idiom or Symbolism. The points go from 100 to 500, with higher points meaning the question is more nuanced or requires more analysis. I learned the hard way that not every category needs a question at every point level. When I first built a full 6-by-5 grid with 30 questions, the final round ended up with only two teams still guessing. The others bailed out at 300 because they felt stuck. My workaround was to include daily double-style clues where the student had to supply both the figurative device and the example text. That kept them engaged longer and forced deeper thinking instead of just pattern-matching.
The format itself is easy to build if you have PowerPoint or Google Slides. I use a simple table slide for the board and hyperlink each cell to a question slide. It takes about 20 minutes to set up once you’ve got a template. I’ve cut my prep time down to roughly 10 minutes per session after making reusable boards for the major devices. Some teachers spend an hour. That’s usually because they try to write 30 original prompts from scratch. A faster approach is to pull lines from texts your class is already reading and reword them into answer format.
How to build the board
Create six categories. Standard ones are simile, metaphor, personification, alliteration, hyperbole, and idiom. Add symbol or imagery if you want to stretch into more advanced material. Assign point values 100 through 500 in increments of 100. That gives you five difficulty tiers per category. For each cell, write the prompt as a question. The answer should state the figurative device and, ideally, the line or phrase it comes from. I avoid yes-or-no prompts because they make the game too easy at higher point levels. Instead I use something like “This line from Frost uses which device to suggest isolation.” That forces the student to identify the technique and explain how it functions in context. Here is where most people go wrong. They make the 100-level questions too trivial and the 500-level questions impossibly vague. A better distribution is to reserve the hard cells for questions that require distinguishing between similar devices, like metaphor versus symbolism, or personification versus anthropomorphism. Those distinctions are what separate a basic identification exercise from actual analysis.
Get the Full Details
How to run the game
Divide students into small teams. Two or three works well. Have them take turns selecting a cell. When a team picks a question, give them 30 seconds to discuss. Then call on one member to answer. Correct answers get the point value. Wrong answers lose it if you want to add risk. I usually skip the penalty because it discourages participation at higher levels. If a student can’t answer, allow one pass per team for the entire game. That prevents a bad streak from ending their chance too early. I also let teams steal if the first team gets it wrong. The stealing rule keeps the game competitive and stops the leading team from coasting. The final round is usually a tiebreaker. I use a rapid-fire set of three questions covering all major devices. Fast pace, no discussion, direct answers. It’s clean and avoids dragging out a game that already has a clear winner.
Where this breaks down
The biggest limitation is that students who memorize devices without understanding function will dominate the early points. A kid who knows “simile uses like or as” will ace the 100s and 200s even if they can’t analyze why a metaphor matters in a passage. That’s not a flaw in the game itself. It’s a flaw in teaching. The format rewards recognition more than reasoning unless you deliberately write questions that require explanation. Another issue is timing. A single session with 30 questions usually runs 45 to 60 minutes. If your period is shorter, drop the board to 18 questions and stop after 400. Don’t try to squeeze in everything. Half a game played well beats a rushed full game. I also found that some classrooms struggle with idiom and symbolism. Those devices don’t have the same rigid structural markers as simile or alliteration. Students guess and you end up debating whether a line is an idiom or just casual speech. When that happens, I accept the most defensible answer and move on. You can’t force precision in ambiguous territory without turning the game into a lecture.
A practical tweak that helps
Include one wildcard question per category. I write it at the 400 level. The prompt doesn’t name the device. Instead it describes a scene and asks which figurative language tool would best convey a specific mood. For example, “Write a line that uses personification to show dread at dusk.” That shifts the task from identification to creation. It also reveals whether the student actually understands how the device works rather than just labeling it. This approach adds about 10 minutes to a session but changes the dynamic noticeably. Students who previously coasted on rote answers have to think about function. It’s a small change and not everyone will like it. Some prefer the traditional format. That’s fine. The game works either way.
Resources and setup
You can build this in PowerPoint, Google Slides, or even a free online board maker. I’ve used both. The hyperlink method is the simplest if you want clickable cells that jump to questions. For a no-prep option, print the board and read questions aloud. That removes technology but loses the visual structure. Most classes prefer the slide version. If you’re looking for ready-made boards, there are several teacher sites that offer figurative language jeopardy templates. I don’t endorse any specific link here because they change often. A quick search for “figurative language games jeopardy ppt” should surface current options. Just remember to edit the questions to match your text list. A generic board works, but a tailored one is better. The format itself is public domain in practice. There’s no copyright on jeopardy-style boards. You can modify, share, and adapt without issues. The only constraint is your time. Building a solid set takes effort. Maintaining a repository of question banks across multiple years is where the real investment happens. Once you’ve got it, though, the game runs smoothly with minimal prep.
One edge case worth noting
Students sometimes confuse hyperbole with exaggeration in storytelling. I ran into this when a class analyzed a poem and one student insisted a certain line was just “dramatic speech” rather than hyperbole. The distinction matters for scoring and for analytical clarity. I solved it by adding a clarification rule: if a statement is factually impossible and clearly intended for emphasis, it’s hyperbole. If it’s simply embellished narrative, it’s not. Writing that rule on the board at the start prevents most arguments during play. I’ve found this matters most at the 500 level, where questions tend to lean toward ambiguity. Keeping a single clear criterion for hyperbole saves time and reduces disputes. It’s a small policy change with outsized effect.
Bottom line
The game works when you treat it as analysis practice, not just a vocabulary drill. Write questions that require reasoning. Include wildcard creation prompts. Keep the pace steady. Accept that some categories will generate debate. Move on. That’s how I run it now. It used to take longer. Now it takes about 45 minutes and leaves students engaged without frustration. If you’re new to this format, start with a smaller board. Six categories and three point levels is enough for a first run. Expand from there. The structure holds. The content is what changes the experience.
