Grade Conferencing

In reading "Seeing how good we can get it" by Kelly Chandler and Amy Muentener, there is talk about the idea of conferencing with students about grades.
They meet with students for a self-evaluation conference and go over four categories: reading, writing, use of time and participation (which they had discussed as a class a number of times). The teacher and the student came to the conference prepared with a grade and explanation for each of the categories. They apparently only disagreed significantly with a student three times. Cool.

I thought I might be able to do that one-on-one after an oral exam... but I have been grading them on a rubric for that... does it make a difference that I'm grading them?
Can that still work in the context of them giving themselves their grades?
Do normal, day-to-day grades (tests/quizzes/exams) fit into the scheme or does it necessitate that those are gone as well?

Or does it just matter that it can be a step in the "right direction"?

Vocabulary-Based Instruction

A former student was talking with a couple of my current students saying that my German courses were based so heavily in vocabulary that she felt like she missed out on some of the "other things" that others knew. This stuck with me. Maybe because it was criticism... maybe because it's hard to look at myself in that critical way, but the only way things in life can change for the better is if you can find and reflect on the honest truth.

So I've been thinking about this. And having minor conversations with colleagues about it.

Vocabulary is easy. Vocabulary is low level. And vocabulary is how I learned language.

I want to push it beyond that.

More into the skills of language.

But how can I assess that most efficiently and effectively so that it is the center of curriculum and consideration?

And how does this play into the concept of concept-based instruction? and backward design?

Do themes pull these skills in or do the skills pull the themes in?