It’s all about the feedback: Checklists to accompany Ohio’s Scoring Guidelines for World Languages

feedback The arrival of the new Ohio Scoring Guides for World Languages, as well as an excellent post by Amy Lenord served as an important reminder that I need to improve the feedback that I give my students.  Although I have used a checklist for feedback in the past, I haven’t been completely consistent in using it as of late.  Furthermore, my previous checklist was not aligned to these new scoring guidelines.  It was definitely time to do some updating!

Fortunately, the Ohio Scoring Guides for Performance Evaluation provide a great framework for meaningful feedback.  Each of the rubrics includes an additional page that lists the criteria, as well as blank spaces for self or teacher feedback. Unfortunately, I know that my written comments do not always meet the students’ needs, especially on speaking assessments. The notes that I do jot down while listening to their production are most likely incomprehensible to my students.  My hurried handwriting is illegible, and it is difficult for my students to see the connection between my comments and their success on the performance. In order to address these issues, I prepared a series of checklists that I will incorporate when providing feedback using these rubrics.  For each set of criteria on the ODE rubrics I have added specific comments to target the student’s strengths, as well as a list of comments to identify suggestions for improvement.  By providing these specific comments, I hope to provide legible, focused feedback to my students on both formative and summative performance tasks.  In addition, I envision having the students do their own goal-setting by highlighting specific areas of the rubric that they would like to focus their attention on.

When developing my comments, I considered both the criteria, and the comments that I find myself using over and over again.  As a French teacher, I specifically addressed common errors made by English speakers, especially in terms of pronunciation and common structures.  In addition, I have included an “Other” line, for strengths/errors that are not specifically addressed on the checklist.  It was important to me that my checklist fit on one sheet of paper for ease of use, so I tried to include only those errors that are the most often made by my students.

It is my hope that these checklists will help my students identify both their strengths and areas for improvement and streamline their progress toward higher levels of proficiency. Here are the checklists, let me know what you think! Feedback checklists

13 thoughts on “It’s all about the feedback: Checklists to accompany Ohio’s Scoring Guidelines for World Languages

  1. Rebecca B.

    This is a thrilling checklist, Madame! I love the three big columns. I doubt I can record this much data as I listen to students speaking live (esp. if they’re speaking in pairs) – do you plan to complete this sheet live or while listening to recordings of their speech?

    1. madameshepard Post author

      I do my speaking assessments live, I know I’d never find time to listen to recordings. I’m hoping that I’ll be able to mark some key things as I’m listening, and then spend a minute or two filling out the rest before calling the next student/pair. I should then be able to record a score and return the checklists by the following day. I really need to make my feedback more timely!

  2. Jenna Harvey

    I absolutely love these checklists! I find myself constantly writing the same comments, and these will help me to be sure to give a well-rounded comment while not requiring me to write a page-long comment every time! Thank you!

    1. madameshepard Post author

      I’m so glad you like them! I’m hoping the kids will pay more attention to this type of feedback, too. I know they don’t always read my comments, but maybe they’ll read this. If nothing else, they might begin to notice that they are seeing certain items checked repeatedly and be motivated to improve in those areas. Feel free, of course, to change any comments to suit your own objectives. I’m sure my copy will evolve when I start using it.

  3. jeiden

    Oh my goodness! This is terrific — and I laughed out loud upon reading your comment about students struggling to read your writing! You do beautiful work! Thank you!

  4. Saundra

    Thank you so much for creating and sharing your checklists. As previously stated, I find myself write similar comments for multiple students and the check list will make giving feedback easier and quicker. I think the students are more apt to look at a checklist to see where they can improve instead of trying to read my quickly written comments.

    One question – How do you then turn the checklist into a grade? Maybe someday, we will be able to give proficiency levels for grades instead of the traditional A-F. I really struggle trying to merge proficiency levels into a grade for report cards.

    1. madameshepard Post author

      Hi,Saundra! You’ve asked a great question for which I don’t have a great answer. I’m facing the exact struggle that you describe. As for the checklist, each one is designed to be used in conjunction with a rubric. I used the Ohio rubrics for Presentational Speaking/Writing and Interpersonal and the ACTFL rubric for Interpretive when designing these checklists. In the past, I’d used by own rubric for the Presentational and Interpersonal tasks, and my rubric had numbers (5-10)for each level of performance. Since I was using the ACTFL template for Interpretive tasks, I used the descriptors from their rubric, but added a numerical value for each descriptor on each task. There are examples on the IPA’s that I’ve included on this site. However, since I’m switching to these new Ohio rubrics and embracing the ACTFL rubric in its original form, I won’t have numbers anymore. I’m planning on giving the students the rubrics “as is” in order to emphasize the learning and de-emphasize the grade. However, like you, I do need a number for the book. I’m currently thinking that an “Accomplished” Interpretation (ACTFL) or “Strong” Performance (Ohio) will be a 10/10, a “Strong” Interpretation or “Good” Performance will be 8-9/10, a “Minimal” Comprehension or “Developing” performance will be a 7/10, and “Limited” Interpretation or “Emerging” performance will be a 6/10. Students who fail to demonstrate Limited Interpretation or Emerging performance will earn a 5/10, the lowest score that I give. I’d love your feedback about what I have in mind so far—I’ve got 10 weeks to change my mind!

  5. Angelika Becker

    Great checklists!!! Thanks for sharing.
    May I reference them when I give AP presentations and send the teachers to your website?



  6. Saundra

    Hi Lisa,
    I was thinking the same as you with a 10 for strong, 8-9 for good and so on. A 5 would also be the least I would give for developing. I’ve been really trying this 2nd semester to use the ACTFL and Ohio rubrics and intend to totally switch over this fall. I think using a consistent point value assigned to the “strong”, “good”, etc categories along with the checklists you developed will help the students know what their “grade” is and how they can improve it.

    Thanks so much for sharing all the work you’ve been doing. It is really helpful as we make this change to a proficiency based learning.

    I have one more week to go this year but plan on working over the summer to be ready for the fall.

  7. Alma Rivera

    I am so intrigued and excited about these checklists! I was wondering how to make what to use Ohio rubrics. Thank you. I appreciate you sharing this and your time to create this. I hope to share with you someday.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *