Evaluating written versus audio feedback in formative assessment of consecutive interpreting

References

1. Bilbro, Jeffrey, Christina Iluzada, and David Eugene Clark
   2013 “Responding Effectively to Composition Students: Comparing Student Perceptions of Written and Audio Feedback.” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching24 (1): 47–83.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Chew, E.
   2014 “To listen or to read?” “Audio or written assessment feedback for international students in the UK.” On the Horizon22 (2): 127–135. 10.1108/OTH‑07‑2013‑0026
   https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-07-2013-0026 [Google Scholar]
3. Gould, Jill, and Pat Day
   2013 “Hearing You Loud and Clear: Student Perspectives of Audio Feedback in Higher Education.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education38 (5): 554–566. 10.1080/02602938.2012.660131
   https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.660131 [Google Scholar]
4. Han, Chao, and Fan Qin
   2020 “Using Self-assessment as a Formative Assessment Tool in an English-Chinese Interpreting Course: Student Views and Perceptions of Its Utility.” Perspectives28 (1): 109–125. 10.1080/0907676X.2019.1615516
   https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2019.1615516 [Google Scholar]
5. Han, Chao
   2018a “A Longitudinal Quantitative Investigation into the Concurrent Validity of Self and Peer Assessment Applied to English-Chinese Bi-directional Interpretation in an Undergraduate Interpreting Course.” Studies in Educational Evaluation581: 187–196. 10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.01.001
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.01.001 [Google Scholar]
6. Han, Chao
   2018b “Latent Trait Modelling of Rater Accuracy in Formative Peer Assessment of English-Chinese Consecutive Interpreting.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education43 (6): 979–994. 10.1080/02602938.2018.1424799
   https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1424799 [Google Scholar]
7. Han, Chao
   2019 “Conceptualizing and Operationalizing a Formative Assessment Model for English-Chinese Consecutive Interpreting.” InQuality Assurance and Assessment Practices in Translation and Interpreting, edited byElsa Huertas Barros, Sonia Vandepitte, and Emilia Iglesias-Fernández, 89–111. Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑5225‑5225‑3.ch004
   https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5225-3.ch004 [Google Scholar]
8. Han, Chao
   2022 “Interpreting Testing and Assessment: A State-of-the-Art Review.” Language Testing39 (1): 30–55. 10.1177/02655322211036100
   https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322211036100 [Google Scholar]
9. Ice, Phil, Karen Swan, Sebastian Diaz, Lori Kupczynski, and Allison Swan-Dagen
   2010 “An Analysis of Students’ Perceptions of the Value and Efficacy of Instructors’ Auditory and Text-based Feedback Modalities across Multiple Conceptual Levels.” Journal of Educational Computing Research43 (1): 113–134. 10.2190/EC.43.1.g
   https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.1.g [Google Scholar]
10. Jiang, Hong
    2011 “Feedback in Interpreter Training.” Korea Society of Interpretation and Translation Studies13 (1): 161–174.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Južnič, Tamara Mikolič
    2013 “Assessment Feedback in Translator Training: A Dual Perspective.” InNew Horizons in Translation Research and Education 1, edited byN. Nike, K. Pokorn and Kaisa Koskinen, 75–99. Joensuu: University of Eastern Finland.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Lincoln, Yvonna S., and Egon G. Guba
    1985 Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 10.1016/0147‑1767(85)90062‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8 [Google Scholar]
13. Lunt, Tom, and John Curran
    2010 “‘Are You Listening Please?’ The Advantages of Electronic Audio Feedback Compared to Written Feedback.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education35 (7): 759–769. 10.1080/02602930902977772
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902977772 [Google Scholar]
14. Miles, Matthew B., and A. Michael Huberman
    1994 Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Morris, Celile, and Gladson Chikwa
    2016 “Audio versus Written Feedback: Exploring Learners’ Preference and the Impact of Feedback Format on Students’ Academic Performance.” Active Learning in Higher Education17 (2): 125–137. 10.1177/1469787416637482
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787416637482 [Google Scholar]
16. Motta, Manuela
    2016 “A Blended Learning Environment Based on the Principles of Deliberate Practice for the Acquisition of Interpreting Skills.” Interpreter and Translator Trainer10 (1): 133–149. 10.1080/1750399X.2016.1154347
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2016.1154347 [Google Scholar]
17. Mutch, Alistair
    2003 “Exploring the Practice of Feedback to Students.” Active Learning in Higher Education4 (1): 24–38. 10.1177/1469787403004001003
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787403004001003 [Google Scholar]
18. Nicholson, N. Schweda
    1993 “The Constructive Criticism Model.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter51: 60–67.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Pietrzak, Paulina
    2014 “Towards Effective Feedback to Translation Students: Empowering Through Group Revision and Evaluation.” InTRAlinea, Special Issue: Challenges in Translation Pedagogy. https://www.intralinea.org/print/article_specials/2095
    [Google Scholar]
20. Price, Margaret, Karen Handley, Jill Millar, and Berry O’Donovan
    2010 “Feedback: All that Effort, but What is the Effect.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education35 (3): 277–289. 10.1080/02602930903541007
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903541007 [Google Scholar]
21. Schjoldager, Anne
    1995 “Assessment of Simultaneous Interpreting.” InTeaching Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons, edited byCay Dollerup and Vibeke Appel, 187–195. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Setton, Robin, and Andrew Dawrant
    2016 Conference interpreting: a trainer’s guide. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.121
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.121 [Google Scholar]
23. Shute, Valerie J.
    2008 “Focus on Formative Feedback.” Review of Educational Research78 (1): 153–189. 10.3102/0034654307313795
    https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795 [Google Scholar]
24. Sipple, Susan
    2007 “Ideas in Practice: Developmental Writers’ Attitudes toward Audio and Written Feedback.” Journal of Developmental Education30 (3): 22–24.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Voelkel, Susanne, and Luciane V. Mello
    2014 “Audio feedback — Better feedback?” Bioscience Education, 22 (1): 16–30. 10.11120/beej.2014.00022
    https://doi.org/10.11120/beej.2014.00022 [Google Scholar]
26. Washbourne, Kelly
    2014 “Beyond error marking: Written corrective feedback for a dialogic pedagogy in translator training.” Interpreter and Translator Trainer8 (2): 240–256. 10.1080/1750399X.2014.908554
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.908554 [Google Scholar]
27. Witter-Merithew, Anna, Marty Taylor, and Leilani Johnson
    2001 “Guides Self-Assessment and Professional Development Planning: A Model Applied to Interpreters in Educational Settings.” InProceedings of the 17th National Conference of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf: Tapestry of Our Worlds, edited byClay Nettles, 153–226. RID Publications.
    [Google Scholar]