Just for clarity for those interested, here is my updated version on jen’s original document, posted yet again. I do so because I used it to great success last week in my first week with students. Man, I have to say that it is so clear and simple, and the kids really get that it is half their grade so they read it from the doc camera with attention to detail:
INTERPERSONAL SKILLS RUBRIC (used in daily assessment: 50% of grade)
5 ALL SKILLS IN 4, PLUS NON-FORCED EMERGING OUTPUT.
4 (A/B) RESPONDS AUTOMATICALLY, IN TL, TO ALL INPUT, INCLUDING USING “STOP” FOR CLARIFICATION.
3 (B/C) RESPONDS REGULARLY IN TL OR VISUALLY, INCONSISTENT USE OF “STOP” SIGNAL.
2 (C/D) ATTENTIVE BUT DOESN’T RESPOND; DOESN’T USE “STOP” SIGNAL.
1 (D/F) NOT ATTENTIVE: NO EYE CONTACT OR EFFORT.
0 (F) ABSENT WITHOUT EXCUSE.
*ATTENTIVE = NOTHING ON DESK OR LAP; SITS UP; MAINTAINS EYE CONTACT WITH SPEAKER; LISTENS WITH INTENT TO UNDERSTAND; RESPONDS TO STATEMENTS /QUESTIONS WITH SHORT ANSWERS OR VISUALLY; DOESN’T BLURT.
**NOTE THAT DEMONSTRATION OF SKILLS AT LEVEL 4 DOES NOT DEPEND ON THE STUDENTS’ RATE OF PROCESSING, OR THEIR ABILITY TO SPEAK OR WRITE, BUT ON THE STUDENT’S DEMONSTRATED USE OF THE SKILLS TO NEGOTIATE MEANING IN THE TARGET LANGUAGE…THUS STUDENTS CAN EARN “A” ON INTERPERSONAL SKILLS NO MATTER WHAT THEIR LEVEL OF PROFICIENCY / READINESS TO OUTPUT. THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT CONSISTENT USE OF THESE SKILLS ENSURES THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE LEVEL OF COMPREHENSION (which precedes output).
Conversion scale:
- 5 = 95% and above
- 4 = 85% – 94%
- 3 = 75% – 84%
- 2 = 65% – 74% •
- 1 = 55% – 64%
- 0 = 0%
I’m really fired up about how jGR has changed my entire classroom energy this year. It is a strong classroom discipline tool – the strongest one possible because of its message to all kids about how observable classroom behaviors will in fact determine half of their grade.
Everything I do is based on ten points, so that I have to double jen’s five point based rubric, but it is easy – I just put 2, 4, 6, 8, or 10 into the little box in the gradebook under ACTFL Interpersonal Skill.
What is really cool about it is how each category translates SO ACCURATELY and expresses SO WELL what each kid is really doing in terms of the Interpersonal Skill mode of communication. I will try to put that into words (in red below):
5 ALL SKILLS IN 4, PLUS NON-FORCED EMERGING OUTPUT. – this is a rare kid who throws out some good unforced French every once in a while. Like if I am in the middle of piling up reps on “She went camping at Wal-Mart”, this kid is the one who says in the target language, “So there is a girl who goes camping at Wal-Mart, right?” and I go, “Yes, that’s it!”, and we go on with nary a bird dropping of English. That kid is a 5 kid. These are really strong co-creators of stories.
4 (A/B) RESPONDS AUTOMATICALLY, IN TL, TO ALL INPUT, INCLUDING USING “STOP” FOR CLARIFICATION. – this is the kid who is really involved but not spontaneously outputting speech yet. They are fun, always visually locked on, and just a blessing to each class and I tell them so. These are strong co-creators of stories.
3 (B/C) RESPONDS REGULARLY IN TL OR VISUALLY, INCONSISTENT USE OF “STOP” SIGNAL – this kid is also involved but more passively. They show that they are not always on top of all the CI because they let the stop sign slide a bit. This is the kid who used to get an A in my class just for getting 8 or above on quizzes. No more. But good kids nonetheless. These are limited co-creators of stories.
2 (C/D) ATTENTIVE BUT DOESN’T RESPOND; DOESN’T USE “STOP” SIGNAL. This is the kid who may get a good grade on a quiz but makes me work way too hard. They just aren’t involved. They don’t get how to play the game yet. They have that standard slightly pissed off teen look and they stare at me in spite of my being practically on my knees begging them for a more creative and energetic response to all the hard work I am doing. These are not co-creators of stories.*
1 (D/F) NOT ATTENTIVE: NO EYE CONTACT OR EFFORT. These are not creators at all of anything. They suck air out of the room. They mostly do really poor on tests. These are the ones to make phone calls on right about now or as early as we have figured them out to discuss options for them, since their chances of failing the course are so high.
*One might object that that is just the way some kids are, and are that way through no fault of their own. Fine, but my job, the main clause of my school’s mission statement in fact, includes how my job, my mission, is to “build productive citizens” ready for work in the 21st century workplace. I take that seriously. So if I let those same kids’ stonefaced behavior slide and give them a grade merely on what grades they get, thus not aligning my assessment with the national standards, I am not properly doing my job for my employer and I should be fired.