My preferred gradebook configuration is to have five different categories: Reading, Listening, Speaking, Writing and Miscellaneous . I weight each of these categories evenly at 20%. Other people use the modes (Interpretive, Interpersonal and Presentational) as their categories and I think that\u2019s great. I preferred to use the skills rather than modes, because my students and I got more specific feedback this way. I found that a student\u2019s interpersonal speaking and presentational speaking skills were much more congruous than their presentational speaking and presentational writing skills were. If I used Presentational as a category, I would not immediately be clear whether a struggling student needed support for writing or speaking. Note: If I were in a school with standards-based grading, I would eliminate the Miscellaneous category and move the other categories to 25%. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Step 2: Formative Assessments<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In my classroom the majority of the each class period was spent on communicative activities that I assessed as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Interpretive Reading:<\/strong> When the students read something in class and completed some type of comprehension-based task, I either gave whole class feedback (providing the correct answers) or collected their work for written feedback. This feedback was usually limited to a score (I scored out of 10 rather than percentages) based on accuracy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Interpretive Listening:<\/strong> I assigned a lot of Edpuzzles (but only because FluentKey wasn\u2019t yet available!) I used the computer-generated score as a basis for a score out of 10. Because I didn\u2019t expect my students to get all of my questions correct (I designed some questions to encourage my high flyers to stretch), I usually gave a 10\/10 for 90% or higher, 9\/10 for 80% or higher, etc. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Interpersonal Speaking: <\/strong>I circulated among my students as they worked on interpersonal tasks. Sometimes I filled out a rubric with specific feedback and recorded a score (out of 10) but most times I jotted down notes on a class roster. Occasionally I used these notes to determine a grade. I did not generally assign any interpersonal writing tasks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Presentational Writing:<\/strong> I often assigned short written tasks based on the interpretive and interpersonal tasks from the lesson and gave basic feedback and a score out of 10. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Presentational Speaking<\/strong>: I seldom assigned a presentational speaking task as a formative assessment.\u00a0 When I did so, I provided feedback and a score out of 10.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition to these communicative activities, I occasionally gave a quiz of some kind. For example, if the students had done a pair activity that involved describing pictures to each other, I might describe 5 pictures and have the students identify them. If they had done a reading activity with a partner, I might ask some oral true\/false questions about the reading. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the end of a 4-6 week unit, I had a LOT of scores. They ALL went in the Miscellaneous category. A better name for this category would have been Formative Assessment, but I was leaving myself a little wiggle room for the rare instances that I needed to include something that I didn\u2019t consider to be a formative assessment but that I was required to assign by my department. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Step 3: Summative Assessments<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n At the end of each unit, I assigned an Integrated Performance Assessment. Each task in the assessment resulted in a separate grade. So for most IPAs I had a grade for each performance category: Interpretive Reading, Interpretive Listening, Interpersonal Speaking and Presentational Writing. If I included a Presentational Speaking task, that would be an additional grade in my Speaking category. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The grades for the IPAs were the only grades that went into my performance categories. In other words, 80% of my grades (all but the formative assessments) came from IPAs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n When I graded my IPAs, I used the following rubrics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Interpretive Reading:<\/strong> I used the rubric<\/a> from the ACTFL publication, <\/em>Implementing Integrated Performance Assessment <\/em>by Bonnie Adair-Hauck<\/a>, Eileen W. Glisan<\/a> and Francis J. Troyan<\/a>. I assigned 10\/10 for students whose work fell in the Accomplished Comprehension category, and 8\/10 or 9\/10 for Strong Comprehension, a 7\/10 for Minimal Comprehension and a 5\/10 or 6\/10 for Limited Comprehension. I did not assign scores of less that 5\/10. (See this article <\/a>for an explanation of this policy.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n Interpretive Listening<\/strong>: Because I did not use the IPA Interpretive Template<\/a> for my listening assessments, I developed individual rubrics for my listening tasks. I usually used a graphic organizer or comprehension questions for listening assessment and a rubric something like this: <\/p>\n\n\n\n 10: <\/strong>Identifies the main ideas and supports each one with relevant details<\/p>\n\n\n\n 9: <\/strong>Identifies the main ideas and supports most of them with relevant details<\/p>\n\n\n\n 8: <\/strong>Identifies some main ideas and\/or several details<\/p>\n\n\n\n 7:<\/strong> Identifies a main idea and a couple of details.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6:<\/strong> Identifies a few details.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5:<\/strong> Is unable to identify a main idea or provide any relevant details. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Interpersonal Speaking:<\/strong> I used this proficiency-based rubric <\/a>from the Ohio Department of Education. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Presentational Speaking and\/or Presentational Writing:<\/strong> I used this proficiency-based rubric<\/a> from the Ohio Department of Education. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Note: The Interpersonal and Presentational rubrics do not provide a numeric or letter grade.\u00a0 I preferred to just check the relevant boxes to provide feedback to my students.\u00a0 In order to determine a numerical grade for my gradebook, I used this conversion chart:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/madameshepard.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Table.jpg\")
<\/figure><\/li><\/ul><\/figure>\n\n\n\n