Graded or Nongraded Communicative Activities–What is the Answer?–An Update


  • Aleidine J. Moeller,

    1. University of Nebraska-Lincoln
    Search for more papers by this author
    • 4

      Aleidine J. Moeller(Ph.D., University of Nebraska–Lincoln) is Assistant Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at University of Nebraska–Lincoln, NE.

  • Claus Reschke,

    1. University of Houston
    Search for more papers by this author
    • 5

      Claus Reschke(Ph.D., Cornell University)is Professor of German at University of Houston, TX.

  • Sidney L. Hahn

    1. University of Nebraska-Lincoln
    Search for more papers by this author
    • 6

      Sidney Hahn (Ph.D., University of Kansas) is Professor Emeritus at University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.


ABSTRACT  An earlier study (Hahn et al., 1989) showed that grading classroom communicative activities did not by itself affect student performance. Because its sample was small (23), we have replicated it with a largergroup: 84 junior high school students, 47 in Levell classes and 37 in Levelll. At each level students were divided into an experimental group, whose oral performance was graded, and a control group, where it was not. An ACTFL-certified tester; who had evaluated the oral proficiency of Level II students at the beginning of the semester; tested all students after six months, using both the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Scale and the Bruschke Rating Scale. Results indicated no significant difference in scores between the experimental and control groups at either level. However, the ratings of ten Level II students (five in each group) increased from Novice to Intermediate, thus validating the conclusion of Hahn et al. that grading itself does not affect a student's oral proficiency