Presenter 		Scorer 		Date 		Total Score 		Grade 		
German 101 — Scoring Guide for Project 2 (K 05): Letter about Family for Homestay Guest (v. 11/06)
_Rule _of _thumb _for _4/complete: _The _letter _is _cordial _and _conveys _the _individuality _of _sender _and _family _/ _friends. _A _friendly _reader _can _understand _the _language _without _considerable _effort. _The _writer _clearly _went _beyond _the _K01-05 _language _and _seems _to _show _pride _in _the _product. _Writer’s _family _will _think _it _“cool” _when _they _see _the _portfolio.

| Global (check score, not a part of formula) | 1 on time? (10%) | 2 completeness of content (30%) | 3 basic language (30%) | 4 customized language (30%)
6 | The guest will be impressed with the letter, though it may contain scattered errors, and will happily or sadly realize that he/she will be pushed to use a lot of German during the homestay. | turned in within one week after assigned | Project contains all elements assigned, with no skimping. Neatly written or printed, as though it were the real thing. Pictures are well-chosen and exploited linguistically. An extra or “surprise” feature can make up for a few small weaknesses. | Rich and accurate use of the linguistic resources offered by Kontext 1-5. Vocabulary is reproduced very precisely. Verb forms clearly distinguish ich, Sie (or du), wir, and er/sie. Gender distinctions are observed consistently. Structure of statements and questions is solid up to current level. | Uses many more words found independently than taken from K 1-5. Selection of vocabulary is very reliable, perhaps because student consulted with instructor. Word reproduction is precise. Tries often to go beyond K01-05 structures.
5 | The guest understands or can figure out everything easily, despite some (easily remedied) errors in vocabulary, structure and form. | within two weeks after assigned | The letter contains all elements assigned, though one major area is “thinner” (but not truly thin). Pictures are attractive and the language does them justice. | Most of 5. Major linguistic resources are used richly and with no serious distortion or misunderstanding. Language could be brought to 6 by brief help from instructor and some minor corrections by writer. | The vocabulary goes well beyond the scope of that in K 1-5, but with some errors of selection / reproduction. Tries to go beyond a few K01-05 structures.
4 | Letter, picture(s), and language convey enough information and language competence that the tired guest, on arriving, can expect to conduct initial pleasantries, introductions, and a few minutes of small talk in his/her own language. | two weeks after assigned | The letter contains all elements assigned, but some major areas are “thinner.” Pictures are good enough to support good language. The language is more than perfunctory – the effort to learn independently and go beyond the textbook language is clear and often successful. | Many of the linguistic resources offered by Kontext 1-5 are used, but either sparely or with some inaccuracy. Vocabulary shows no recurrent distortion of key features. Verb forms show understanding of need to adjust to subject. Gender of personal pronouns and biological nouns is observed. Statements and questions show basic structural distinction. | Customized vocabulary sufficient to let people emerge as individuals - enough that reader would forgive frequent errors in selection and some errors in reproduction. Tries to go beyond K01-05 structures, but has evident difficulty.
3 | The guest has to work sometimes to decipher the meaning, and expects to conduct initial contact in German, but knows it will be necessary to switch to English very soon after arriving. | within 3 weeks | The letter is missing only such features that a few remarks from the instructor and a few minutes of work by the student could bring it to 4 level. The language is not sparse, so both instructor and learner have something to work with. | Major linguistic resources from K 1-5 are used, but some are distorted seriously. Vocabulary is either sparse or often distorted. Verb endings are sometimes wrong or even ignored. Noun gender is random. Simple word order is often flawed, but there are some accurate short sentences. | Customized vocabulary thin or distorted. Persons little individualized. Reader must puzzle through frequent errors of word choice and reproduction, and may just have to give up. Little or no expansion of structure.
2 | The guest is frequently puzzled by the language, but respects the good intentions. | within 4 weeks | Most of what is needed for the 4 is present, but in very rough form; or language is fair, content sparse. | Major features of the language of K01-05 are either missing entirely, or, if clearly present, frequently distorted in fundamental ways. | Customized vocabulary thin and distorted. No expansion of structure.
1 | The guest expects to smile politely but wince inwardly at the host’s brief attempts to use even simple German. | within 5 weeks | Project seems to have been thrown together quickly; student may have misunderstood what to do and apparently did not think of asking. | The language, what little there is of it, seems to be an attempt to put some German words into patterns that are either random or heavily depend on English principles. | Customized vocabulary non-existent, except perhaps for a few distorted words. Structures are so chaotic that going beyond is hopeless.