Rethinking Translation Evaluation in Academic Contexts: Performance-Based Assessment as an Alternative Practice
Hossein Heidari Tabrizi
1
(
Department of English, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
)
Juliane House
2
(
Professor Emerita, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
)
کلید واژه: Performance-based Assessment, Students’ Academic Translation Evaluation, Translation Assessment, Translation Evaluative Practices, Translation Tests,
چکیده مقاله :
In the context of translator education, evaluating students’ academic translations is a common, crucial activity. Evaluations are usually done by assigning numerical scores or letter grading in order to detect the relation established between intended instructional objectives and learning outcomes. Research shows that the dominant translation evaluation methods currently and commonly practiced by university teachers in undergraduate English translation programs are mainly based on the theoretical principles of the conventional testing paradigm. This paper tries to “address the ‘problem’ of evaluative practices provoked from the challenges and criticisms leveled against principles and procedures of Classical True Score Measurement Theory and conventional testing tradition. In doing so, the paper first reviews the status quo of translation evaluation and then pinpoints the problems and limitations which are typically associated with translation tests. As a result of the shift from conventional testing to language assessment and from language tests to alternative assessment practices, performance-based evaluation is introduced as one of the potential solutions that may help fill the gaps left by traditional testing. The paper concludes that Performance-based assessment is well-suited for translation evaluation, as both share a lot in terms of nature, features and purposes. The contributions made by the current work hopefully may open new avenues for further exploration in this decisive facet of research on translation studies, namely, academic translation evaluation.
چکیده انگلیسی :
In the context of translator education, evaluating students’ academic translations is a common, crucial activity. Evaluations are usually done by assigning numerical scores or letter grading in order to detect the relation established between intended instructional objectives and learning outcomes. Research shows that the dominant translation evaluation methods currently and commonly practiced by university teachers in undergraduate English translation programs are mainly based on the theoretical principles of the conventional testing paradigm. This paper tries to “address the ‘problem’ of evaluative practices provoked from the challenges and criticisms leveled against principles and procedures of Classical True Score Measurement Theory and conventional testing tradition. In doing so, the paper first reviews the status quo of translation evaluation and then pinpoints the problems and limitations which are typically associated with translation tests. As a result of the shift from conventional testing to language assessment and from language tests to alternative assessment practices, performance-based evaluation is introduced as one of the potential solutions that may help fill the gaps left by traditional testing. The paper concludes that Performance-based assessment is well-suited for translation evaluation, as both share a lot in terms of nature, features and purposes. The contributions made by the current work hopefully may open new avenues for further exploration in this decisive facet of research on translation studies, namely, academic translation evaluation.
Abdel Latif, M. M. M. (2020). Translator and interpreter education research: Areas, methods, and trends. Springer Nature.
Adab, B. (2000). Evaluating translation competence. In C. Schaffner & B. Adab (Eds.). Developing translation competence (pp. 215–228). John Benjamins.
Almanna, A., & House, J. (2024). Linguistics for translators. Routledge.
Arango-Keeth, F., & Koby, G. S. (2003). Assessing assessment: Translator training evaluation and the needs of industry quality assessment. In B. J. Baer (Ed.), Beyond the ivory tower: Rethinking translation pedagogy (pp. 117–134). John Benjamins.
Bailey, K. M. (1998). Learning about language assessment: Dilemmas, decisions, and directions. Heinle & Heinle.
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L., & Damböck, B. (2018). Language assessment for classroom teachers. Oxford University Press.
Bowker, L. (2000). A corpus-based approach to evaluating student translations. The Translator, 6(2), 183–210.
Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2019). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (3rd ed.). Longman.
Campbell, S., & Hale, S. (2003). Translation and interpreting assessment in the context of educational measurement. In G. M. Anderman & M. Roger (Eds.), Translation today: Trends and perspectives (pp. 205–224). Multilingual Matters.
Cheng, L., & Fox, J. (2017). Assessment in the language classroom. Palgrave.
Conde, T. (2013). Translation versus language errors in translation evaluation. Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting, pp. 97–112.
Dungan, N. (2013). Translation competence and the practices of translation quality assessment in Turkey. In D. Tsagari & R. Van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting (pp. 131–144). Peter Lang AG.
Farhady, H. (2021). Learning-oriented assessment in virtual classroom contexts. Journal of Language and Communication, 8(2), 121–132.
Farhady, H. (2022). Language testing and assessment in covid-19 pandemic crisis. In K. Sadeghi (Ed.), Technology-assisted language assessment in diverse contexts: Lessons from the transition to online testing during COVID-19 (pp. 55–68). Routledge.
Fox, J. (2017). Using portfolios for assessment/alternative assessment. In E. Shohamy, I. G. Or, & S. May (Eds.), Language testing and assessment (3rd ed.; pp. 135–147). Springer.
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. Routledge.
Heidari Tabrizi, H. (2008). Towards developing a framework for the evaluation of Iranian undergraduate students’ academic translation (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
Heidari Tabrizi, H. (2021a). Evaluative practices for assessing translation quality: A content analysis of Iranian undergraduate students’ academic translations. International Journal of Language Studies, 15(3), 65-88.
Heidari Tabrizi, H. (2021b). Pedagogical quality of English achievement tests: An untold story of Iranian high school students’ oral scores. International Journal of Language and Translation Research, 1(1), pp.17-28.
Heidari Tabrizi, H. (2022a). Assessing quality of pedagogical translations: Dominant evaluative methods in the final tests of undergraduate translation courses. Journal of Language and Translation, 12(3), 21-34.
Heidari Tabrizi, H. (2022b). Mapping out the terminology for judging quality in various translation practices: A key disciplinary desideratum. International Journal of Language and Translation Research, 2 (1), pp.1-21.
Heidari Tabrizi, H., & Chalak, A. (2021). Developing a comprehensive framework for evaluation of translated books as MA theses in translation studies in Iranian universities. Journal of University Textbooks Research and Writing, 25(48), 73-87.
Heidari Tabrizi, H., Riazi, A. M., & Parhizgar, R. (2008). On the translation evaluation methods as practiced in Iranian universities’ BA translation program: The attitude of students. Teaching English Language and Literature (TELL), 2(7), 71-87.
Holmes, J. S. (1988a/2000). The name and nature of translation studies. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The Translation studies reader (pp. 172–185). Routledge.
Honig, H. (1998). Positions, power, and practice: Functionalist approaches and translation quality assessment. In C. Schaffner (Ed.), Translation and quality (pp. 6-34). Multilingual Matters.
House, J. (2014). Translation quality assessment: Past and present. Routledge.
House, J. (2015). Translation as communication across languages and cultures. Routledge.
House, J. (2024). Translation: The basics (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Huertas-Barros, E., Vandepitte, S., & Iglesias-Fernández, E. (Eds.). (2019). Quality assurance and assessment practices in translation and interpreting. IGI Global.
McAlester, G. (2003). Comments in the ‘Round-table discussion on translation in the New Millennium.’ In G. M. Anderman, & M. Rogers, (Eds.). Translation today: Trends and perspectives (pp. 13–51). Multilingual Matters.
McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. Longman.
Meylaerts, R. & Marais, K. (Eds.). (2023). Routledge handbook of translation theory and concepts. Routledge.
Munday, J., Pinto, S. R., & Blakesley, J. (2022). Introducing translation studies: Theories & applications (5th ed.). Routledge.
Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Prentice hall.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (4th ed.). Routledge.
Salmani Nodoushan, M. A. (2008). Performance assessment in language testing. Online Submission, 3(4), 1-7.
Tsagari, D., & Van Deemter, R. (2013). Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Peter Lang AG.
Wigglesworth, G., & Frost, K. (2017). Task and performance-based assessment. In E. Shohamy, I. G. Or & S. May (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, (Vol. 7, pp. 121–133). Springer.
Yazdani, S., Heidari Tabrizi, H., & Chalak, A. (2020). Exploratory-cumulative vs. disputational talk on cognitive dependency of translation studies: Intermediate level students in focus. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 8(33), 39-57.
Yazdani, S., Heidari Tabrizi, H., & Chalak, A. (2023). Analyzing exploratory-cumulative talk discourse markers in translation classes: Covertly-needed vs. overtly-needed translation texts. Journal of Language and Translation, 13(1), 15-26.
