Señora Jota Jota

Teaching content and culture through proficiency-driven instruction

I have levels 3 and 4 this year – the highest you can go in our school. They are both dual credit and therefore, I am tied somewhat to university standards. This particular university uses ACTFL standards, but to my knowledge, I’m the ONLY instructor using CI.

Add to that the fact that last year I gave an anonymous end-of-year course evaluation. Students rated both the quality of the class and their own participation. The majority of students marked that they would give themselves an A in participation… even though quite a few students did NOT participate. They based their choice on the fact that they had never caused a disruption in my class.

Clearly they are confused between behaviour and participation.
In their defense, I had my fare share of Alpha Dogs last year who tried to take over class – on a very regular basis.

This year, I decided to both appease the university AND teach my students what actual participation looks like.

  • Not causing a disruption is NOT participation.
  • Following me with your eyes around the room is NOT participation. (It may be attentive, but it doesn’t mean you are participating.)
  • Being a smart alec is NOT participation.
  • Blurting in English is NOT participation.
So, then, what IS participation? How could I convey to my expectations in a positive way? How could I show them what participation IS? Especially for upper levels that have had CI for two years and are ready (or almost ready) to speak?
I went on the hunt and decided to modify/combine the Interpersonal Communication Rubric found on Grant Boulanger’s website.
This is what I came up with:


You can view and download my version here. Feel free to modify to fit your needs. (I am trying to figure out a way to make this show correctly within this page, but I’m not super techy – so it’s a stretch!)