Dear Muhammad,

We think that the concepts of  Neurolinguistics ally to French Discourse Analysis, (Monte-Serrat) and to Literacy (Tfouni) can help you in this research, because they can structure a study and provide a new perspective for language learning. They diverge from other studies based on traditional clinical practice where there is the quantitative approach to data collected with basis on an ideal and standardised subject who cannot possibly correspond to reality. In our research, we collected language data from the speech in course, that is, from discourse. This enables the reflection on the signification processes that are interposed during children’s enunciation, thus becoming a particular form of signification that children apply to their speech under certain production conditions.  

In addition to studying the difficulties faced by children with language use, we also intend to contribute to their social inclusion since, without mastering discursive practices, they will hardly be able to achieve situations of social inclusion.  The theoretical basis of Literacy opens possibilities for such inclusion because it moves apart from pedagogical standards of “right” and “wrong” and concentrates on the reflection on the subject as the author of language in oral narratives. Oral narratives take the place of cognitive tests because they make it possible to place literate and illiterate subjects on the same level. So we understand that we can  observe engagement of the students on their discourse: it is on this point that we theorise and intervene.

In the context of this study, we call into question the concept of authorship (Tfouni, 2008) in order to observe what leads the unconscious to go through a dominant discursive formation and to evaluate the process of discovery of the difficulties presented by the subject as well as the alternative signification processes to which he/she resorts. This provides means for the child to refrain the slipping of meaning and provides him/her with greater independence in relation to the other, better quality of life and social inclusion. So, we suggest, you can evaluate your students beginnig with their authorship.

You may consider reviewing the following articles:

http://www.lcsc.org/cms/lib6/MN01001004/Centricity/Domain/108/The%20Measurement%20of%20Student%20Engagement-%20A%20Comparative%20Analysis%20of%20Various%20Methods.pdf

http://www.rpajournal.com/dev/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/A26.pdf

http://acce.edu.au/sites/acce.edu.au/files/archived_papers/conf_P_926_engagement.pdf

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southeast/pdf/rel_2011098.pdf

You can also check this other article. There is in detail all procedures that will help you to plan your activities and compares with others !

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ivanildo_Melo_Filho

Article Effectiveness of Gamification in the Engagement of Students

Dear Muhammad,

We think that the concepts of  Neurolinguistics ally to French Discourse Analysis, (Monte-Serrat) and to Literacy (Tfouni) can help you in this research, because they can structure a study and provide a new perspective for language learning. They diverge from other studies based on traditional clinical practice where there is the quantitative approach to data collected with basis on an ideal and standardised subject who cannot possibly correspond to reality. In our research, we collected language data from the speech in course, that is, from discourse. This enables the reflection on the signification processes that are interposed during children’s enunciation, thus becoming a particular form of signification that children apply to their speech under certain production conditions.  

In addition to studying the difficulties faced by children with language use, we also intend to contribute to their social inclusion since, without mastering discursive practices, they will hardly be able to achieve situations of social inclusion.  The theoretical basis of Literacy opens possibilities for such inclusion because it moves apart from pedagogical standards of “right” and “wrong” and concentrates on the reflection on the subject as the author of language in oral narratives. Oral narratives take the place of cognitive tests because they make it possible to place literate and illiterate subjects on the same level. So we understand that we can  observe engagement of the students on their discourse: it is on this point that we theorise and intervene.

In the context of this study, we call into question the concept of authorship (Tfouni, 2008) in order to observe what leads the unconscious to go through a dominant discursive formation and to evaluate the process of discovery of the difficulties presented by the subject as well as the alternative signification processes to which he/she resorts. This provides means for the child to refrain the slipping of meaning and provides him/her with greater independence in relation to the other, better quality of life and social inclusion. So, we suggest, you can evaluate your students beginnig with their authorship.

Dear,

Dear,

the following links , you can find useful inputs.

Success!

http://www.arcos.org.br/artigos/docencia-no-ensino-superior-o-uso-das-novas-tecnologias-na-formacao-de-professores-na-licenciatura/

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/gp/v19n2/v19n2a05.pdf

http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/2735/273520147004.pdf

 thank you for all the answers and references. these are very useful.