Multiple Engagement Supportive Strategy (MESS) to Foster Ghanaian Language Delivery

Anthony Oppong; Sophia Efua Cobbinah; Anthony Kwaw Armoo; Felicia Asamoah–Poku

doi:10.59573/emsj.7(3).2023.25

Authors

Anthony Oppong
Sophia Efua Cobbinah
Anthony Kwaw Armoo
Felicia Asamoah–Poku

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59573/emsj.7(3).2023.25

Keywords:

diversity, engagement, linguistics, multiple, qualitative approach, revitalization, supportive strategy

Abstract

This paper examined multiple engagement supportive strategy (MESS) designed to foster the delivery of Ghanaian language (GHL), focusing on preserving and promoting linguistic diversity in Ghana. Language preservation and revitalization are crucial for the cultural identity and sustainable development of a nation. The MESS strategy integrates multiple engagement components to ensure a holistic and inclusive approach to language delivery. This investigation revealed that there were limited resources and infrastructure, low societal prestige. It was identified that there was limited integration in formal setting. Design adapted for the investigation was descriptive. Qualitative approach was used since extensive figures are not going to be used for the analysis. Interview and focus group discussion were the data collection strategies. In total, three hundred (300) participants were involved for the investigation. Primary source of data was the adapted coupled with readings of the scholar’s work. Purposive sampling snowball techniques were used. It emphasizes the importance of collaboration and partnership between key stakeholders. This includes involving local communities, language experts, educational institutions, and governmental organizations to collectively develop and implement language revitalization initiatives. Theoretical framework that underpinned this investigation was socio-cultural theory propounded by Lev Vygotsky (1978). This theory emphasizes the importance of social interactions, cultural tools (such as language, symbols, and artifacts), and the role of more knowledgeable individuals in supporting a learner's development.

References

Agyekum, K. (2000). Multilingual education, language policy, and language development. Research Review, 16(2), 1-8. Institute of Africa Studies Legon.

Anhyidoho, A. (2000). Children Literature in Akan Marriage Ceremonies. Research Review, 16(1).

Busia, P. A. A. (1995). Discourse on language and identity in Ghana. Callaloo, 18(2).

Caram, C. A., & Davis, P. B. (2005). Inviting student engagement with questioning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(1), 19-23.

Fletcher, A. (2019). Defining student engagement: A literature review. SoundOut. https://soundout.org/defining-studentengagement-a-literature-review/

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential ofthe concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

Goodwin, B. (2011). Simply better: Doing what matters most to change the odds for student success. ASCD.

Goodwin, B., & Hubbell, E. R. (2013). The 12 touchstones of good teaching: A checklist for staying focused every day. ASCD.

Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588–600. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0019682

Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (2011). Trajectories of school engagement during adolescence: Implications for grades, depression, delinquency, and substance use. Developmental Psychology, 47(1), 233–247.

Osam, E. K. (1998). Ghanaian Language Policy, Planning, and Implementation: The Challenges for the 21st Century. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 19(5), 422- 438.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA, USA. Harvard University Press.