1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Interpreting
  4. Volume 20, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 20, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1384-6647
  • E-ISSN: 1569-982X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Over the past decade, interpretation assessment has played an increasingly important role in interpreter education, professional certification, and interpreting research. The time-honored assessment method is based on analysis of (para)linguistic features of interpretation (including such items as omissions, substitutions, un/filled pauses and self-corrections). Recently, use of descriptor-based rating scales to assess interpretation has emerged as a viable alternative (e.g., Angelelli 2009 ; Han 2015 , 2016 ; J. Lee 2008 ; Tiselius 2009 ), arguably providing a basis for reliable, valid and practical assessments. However, little work has been done in interpreting studies to ascertain the assumed benefits of this emerging assessment practice. Based on 17 international peer-reviewed journals over the last twelve years (2004–2015), and other related publications (e.g., scholarly books, reports, documents), this article provides an overview of practices in scale-based interpretation assessment, focusing on four major aspects: (a) rating scales; (b) raters; (c) rating procedures; (d) reporting of assessment outcomes. Problem areas and possible emerging trends in interpretation assessment are examined, identifying a number of future research needs.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00003.han
2018-04-26
2023-10-04

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/intp.00003.han
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ALTA Language Services
    ALTA Language Services (2007) Study of California’s court interpreter certification and registration testing. www.courts.ca.gov/documents/altafinalreport.pdf (accessed10 June 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education
    American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (2014) Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Angelelli, C. V. & Jacobson, H. E.
    (Eds.) (2009) Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies: A call for dialogue between research and practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv [Google Scholar]
  4. Angelelli, C. V.
    (2007) Assessing medical interpreters: The language and interpreting testing project. The Translator13 (1), 63–82. doi: 10.1080/13556509.2007.10799229
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2007.10799229 [Google Scholar]
  5. (2009) Using a rubric to assess translation ability: Defining the construct. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–47. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv.03ang
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv.03ang [Google Scholar]
  6. Arjona-Tseng, E.
    (1993) A psychometric approach to the selection of translation and interpreting students in Taiwan. Perspectives1 (1), 91–104. doi: 10.1080/0907676X.1993.9961203
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.1993.9961203 [Google Scholar]
  7. Arocha, I. S. & Joyce, L.
    (2013) Patient safety, professionalization, and reimbursement as primary drivers for national medical interpreter certification in the United States. Translation & Interpreting5 (1), 127–142. doi: ti.105201.2013.a07
     https://doi.org/ti.105201.2013.a07 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S.
    (1996) Language testing in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bachman, L. F.
    (2004) Statistical analyses for language assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511667350
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667350 [Google Scholar]
  10. Barik, H. C.
    (1973) Simultaneous interpretation: Temporal and quantitative data. Language and Speech16 (3), 237–270.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Barkaoui, K.
    (2007) Rating scale impact on EFL essay marking: A mixed-method study. Assessing Writing12, 86–107. doi: 10.1016/j.asw.2007.07.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2007.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2010) Variability in ESL essay rating processes: The role of rating scale and rater experience. Language Assessment Quarterly7 (1), 54–74. doi: 10.1080/15434300903464418
     https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300903464418 [Google Scholar]
  13. Beeby, A.
    (2000) Evaluating the development of translation competence. In C. Schäffner & B. Adab (Eds.), Developing translation competence. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 185–198. doi: 10.1075/btl.38.18bee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.38.18bee [Google Scholar]
  14. Bond, T. G. & Fox, C. M.
    (2015) Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Bontempo, K. & Napier, J.
    (2009) Getting it right from the start: Program admission testing of signed language interpreters. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 247–295. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv.13bon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv.13bon [Google Scholar]
  16. Bontempo, K. & B. Hutchinson
    (2011) Striving for an ‘A’ grade: A case study in performance management of interpreters. International Journal of Interpreter Education3, 56–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Brennan, R. L.
    (2001) Generalizability theory. New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4757‑3456‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3456-0 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bühler, H.
    (1986) Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua5 (4), 231–235.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Campbell, S. & Hale, S.
    (2003) Translation and interpreting assessment in the context of educational measurement. In G. Anderman & M. Rogers (Eds.), Translation today: Trends and perspectives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 205–224.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Carroll, J. B.
    (1966) An experiment in evaluating the quality of translations. Mechanical Translation and Computational Linguistics9 (3–4), 55–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. CCHI
    CCHI (2011) Technical report on the development and pilot testing of the CCHI examinations. Washington, DC: Certification Commission for Healthcare Interpreters. www.cchicertification.org/images/pdfs/cchi%20technical%20report%20-%20public%20final.pdf (accessed22 May 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  22. CCHI
    CCHI (2012) Technical report on the development and pilot testing of the Certified Healthcare Interpreter™ (CHI™) examination for Arabic and Mandarin. Washington, DC: Certification Commission for Healthcare Interpreters. www.cchicertification.org/images/pdfs/cchi%20arabic%20and%20mandarin%20technical%20report-final.pdf (accessed22 May 2015).
  23. Chen, J.
    (2009) Authenticity in accreditation tests for interpreters in China. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer3 (2), 257–273. doi: 10.1080/1750399X.2009.10798791
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2009.10798791 [Google Scholar]
  24. Cheung, A. K. -F.
    (2007) The effectiveness of summary training in consecutive interpreting (CI) delivery. Forum5 (2), 1–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Choi, J. Y.
    (2006) Metacognitive evaluation method in consecutive interpretation for novice learners. Meta51 (2), 273–283. doi: 10.7202/013256ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/013256ar [Google Scholar]
  26. Clifford, A.
    (2001) Discourse theory and performance-based assessment: Two tools for professional interpreting. Meta46 (2), 365–378. doi: 10.7202/002345ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/002345ar [Google Scholar]
  27. (2005) Putting the exam to the test: Psychometric validation and interpreter certification. Interpreting7 (1), 97–131. doi: 10.1075/intp.7.1.06cli
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.7.1.06cli [Google Scholar]
  28. Dragsted, B. & Hansen, I. G.
    (2009) Exploring translation and interpreting hybrids: The case of sight translation. Meta54 (3), 588–604. doi: 10.7202/038317ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/038317ar [Google Scholar]
  29. East, M. & Young, D.
    (2007) Scoring L2 writing samples: Exploring the relative effectiveness of two different diagnostic methods. New Zealand Studies in Applied Linguistics13 (1), 1–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Engelhard, G.
    (1994) Examining rater errors in the assessment of written composition with a many-faceted Rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement31 (2), 93–112. doi: 10.1111/j.1745‑3984.1994.tb00436.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1994.tb00436.x [Google Scholar]
  31. (1996) Evaluating rater accuracy in performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement33 (1), 56–70. doi: 10.1111/j.1745‑3984.1996.tb00479.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1996.tb00479.x [Google Scholar]
  32. Feng, J. Z.
    (2005) 论口译测试的规范化. [Towards the standardization of interpretation testing]. 外语研究, 89, 54–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Feuerle, L.
    (2013) Testing interpreters: Developing, administering, and scoring court interpreter certification exams. Translation & Interpreting5 (1), 80–93. doi: 10.12807/ti.105201.2013.a04
     https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.105201.2013.a04 [Google Scholar]
  34. Floros, G.
    (2013) Evaluating assessment practices at the MCI in Cyprus. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 145–162.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Fulcher, G.
    (1996) Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. Language Testing13 (2), 208–238. doi: 10.1177/026553229601300205
     https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229601300205 [Google Scholar]
  36. Fulcher, G. , Davidson, F. & Kemp, J.
    (2011) Effective rating scale development for speaking tests: Performance Decision Trees. Language Testing28 (1), 5–29. doi: 10.1177/0265532209359514
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209359514 [Google Scholar]
  37. Garant, M.
    (2009) A case for holistic assessment. AFinLA-e Soveltavan kielitieteen tutkimuksia1, 5–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Gile, D.
    (1999) Variability in the perception of fidelity in simultaneous interpretation. Hermes22, 51–79.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Goldman-Eisler, F.
    (1967) Segmentation of input in simultaneous interpretation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research1, 127–140. doi: 10.1007/BF01068102
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068102 [Google Scholar]
  40. Goulden, N. R.
    (1992) Theory and vocabulary for communication assessments. Communication Education41 (3), 258–269. doi: 10.1080/03634529209378887
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529209378887 [Google Scholar]
  41. Grbić, N.
    (2008) Constructing interpreting quality. Interpreting10 (2), 232–257. doi: 10.1075/intp.10.2.04grb
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.10.2.04grb [Google Scholar]
  42. Hale, S. B. & Ozolins, U.
    (2014) Monolingual short courses for language-specific accreditation: Can they work? A Sydney experience. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer8 (2), 1–23. doi: 10.1080/1750399X.2014.929371
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.929371 [Google Scholar]
  43. Hale, S. , Garcia, I. , Hlavac, J. , Kim, M. , Lai, M. , Turner, B. & Slatyer, H.
    (2012) Development of a conceptual overview for a new model for NAATI standards, testing and assessment. Sydney, Australia. www.naati.com.au/PDF/INT/INTFinalReport.pdf (accessed22 May 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Hamidi, M. & Pöchhacker, F.
    (2007) Simultaneous consecutive interpreting: A new technique put to the test. Meta52 (2), 276–289. doi: 10.7202/016070ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/016070ar [Google Scholar]
  45. Hlavac, J.
    (2013) A cross-national overview of translator and interpreter certification procedures. Translation & Interpreting5, 32–65. doi: 10.12807/ti.105201.2013.a02
     https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.105201.2013.a02 [Google Scholar]
  46. Han, C.
    (2014) Measuring rater variability in interpreter performance testing: Using classical test theory, G theory and Rasch measurement. Paper presented atthe Biennial Conference of the Association for Language Testing and Assessment of Australia and New Zealand at the University of Queensland, 27–29 November 2014.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. (2015) Investigating rater severity/leniency in interpreter performance testing: A multifaceted Rasch measurement approach. Interpreting17 (2), 255–283. doi: 10.1075/intp.17.2.05han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.17.2.05han [Google Scholar]
  48. (2016) Investigating score dependability in English/Chinese interpreter certification performance testing: A generalizability theory approach. Language Assessment Quarterly13 (3), 186–201.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Han, C. , & Slatyer, H.
    (2016) Test validation in interpreter certification performance testing: An argument-based approach. Interpreting18 (2), 231–258.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Huang, M.
    (2005) 谈口译资格认证考试的规范化设计. [Toward a more standardized large-scale accreditation test for interpreters]. 中国翻译26 (6), 62–65.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. ILR (Interagency Language Roundtable)
    ILR (Interagency Language Roundtable) (2015) ILR skill level descriptions for interpretation performance. www.govtilr.org/Skills/interpretationSLDsapproved.htm (accessed1 July 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  52. IoL
    IoL (2010) Diploma in Public Service Interpreting: Handbook for candidates. London, UK. www.iol.org.uk/qualifications/DPSI/Handbook/DPSIHB11.pdf (accessed22 May 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Iwashita, N. & Grove, E.
    (2003) A comparison of analytic and holistic scales in the context of a specific purpose speaking test. Prospect18 (3), 25–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Jacobson, H. E.
    (2009) Moving beyond words in assessing mediated interaction. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 49–70. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv.04jac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv.04jac [Google Scholar]
  55. Jamieson, J. & Poonpon, K.
    (2013) Developing analytic rating guides for TOEFL iBT® integrated speaking tasks. https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-13-13.pdf (accessed12 June 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Kelly, N.
    (2007) Interpreter certification programs in the U.S.: Where are we headed?The ATA Chronicle36 (1), 31–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Knoch, U.
    (2009) Diagnostic writing assessment: The development and validation of a rating scale. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. (2011) Rating scales for diagnostic assessment of writing: What should they look like and where should the criteria come from?Assessing Writing16 (2), 81–96. doi: 10.1016/j.asw.2011.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  59. Ko, L.
    (2008) Teaching interpreting by distance mode: An empirical study. Meta53 (4), 814–840. doi: 10.7202/019649ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/019649ar [Google Scholar]
  60. Lee, J.
    (2008) Rating scales for interpreting performance assessment. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer2 (2), 165–184. doi: 10.1080/1750399X.2008.10798772
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2008.10798772 [Google Scholar]
  61. Lee, S. -B.
    (2015) Developing an analytic scale for assessing undergraduate students’ consecutive interpreting performances. Interpreting17 (2), 226–254. doi: 10.1075/intp.17.2.04lee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.17.2.04lee [Google Scholar]
  62. Lee, Y. -H.
    (2005) Self-assessment as an autonomous learning tool in an interpretation classroom. Meta50 (4). doi: 10.7202/019869ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/019869ar [Google Scholar]
  63. Lim, H. -O.
    (2006) A comparison of curricula of graduate schools of interpretation and translation in Korea. Meta51 (2), 215–228. doi: 10.7202/013252ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/013252ar [Google Scholar]
  64. Lin, I. I. , Chang, F. A. , & Kuo, F.
    (2013) The impact of non-native accented English on rendition accuracy in simultaneous interpreting. Translation & Interpreting5 (2), 30–44. doi: ti.105202.2013.a03
     https://doi.org/ti.105202.2013.a03 [Google Scholar]
  65. Liu, M.
    (2013) Design and analysis of Taiwan’s interpretation certification examination. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 163–178.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Liu, M. , Chang, C. -C. & Wu, S. -C.
    (2008) Interpretation evaluation practices: Comparison of eleven schools in Taiwan, China, Britain, and the USA. Compilation and Translation Review1 (1), 1–42.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Llewellyn, J. P.
    (1981) Simultaneous interpreting. In J. K. Woll & M. Deuchar (Eds.), Perspectives on British Sign Language & Deafness. London: Croom Helm, 89–104.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Lu, M. , Liu, C. & Gong, X. F.
    (2007) 全国翻译专业资格(水平)考试英语口译试题命制一致性研究报告. [How to maintain consistency in CATTI’s interpretation tests: A research report]. 中国翻译, 5, 57–61.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Lunz, M. E. & Stahl, J. A.
    (1990) Judge consistency and severity across grading periods. Evaluation and the Health Professions13 (4), 425–444. doi: 10.1177/016327879001300405
     https://doi.org/10.1177/016327879001300405 [Google Scholar]
  70. Lynch, B. K. & McNamara, T. F.
    (1998) Using G-theory and many-facet Rasch measurement in the development of performance assessments of the ESL speaking skills of immigrants. Language Testing15 (2), 158–180.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Matthews, G. & Ardemagni, E. J.
    (2013) Judicial interpretation education in U.S. colleges and universities. Translation and Interpreting Studies8 (1), 73–93. doi: 10.1075/tis.8.1.04mat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.8.1.04mat [Google Scholar]
  72. McAlester, G.
    (2000) The evaluation of translation into a foreign language. In C. Schäffner & B. Adab (Eds.), Developing translation competence. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 229–241. doi: 10.1075/btl.38.21mca
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.38.21mca [Google Scholar]
  73. McDermid, C.
    (2014) Cohesion in English to ASL simultaneous interpreting. Translation & Interpreting6 (1), 76–101. doi: ti.106201.2014.a05
     https://doi.org/ti.106201.2014.a05 [Google Scholar]
  74. McNamara, T. F. & Adams, R. J.
    (1991) Exploring rater behavior with Rasch techniques. files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED345498.pdf (accessed20 March 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Mead, P.
    (2005) Methodological issues in the study of interpreters’ fluency. The Interpreters’ Newsletter13, 39–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Meuleman, C. & Van Besien, F.
    (2009) Coping with extreme speech conditions in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting11 (1), 20–34. doi: 10.1075/intp.11.1.03meu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.11.1.03meu [Google Scholar]
  77. Mikkelson, H.
    (2013) Universities and Interpreter Certification. Translation & Interpreting5 (1), 66–78. doi: 10.12807/ti.105201.2013.a03
     https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.105201.2013.a03 [Google Scholar]
  78. Moreno, M. , Otero-Sabogai, R. & Newman, J.
    (2007) Assessing dual-role staff-interpreter linguistic competency in an integrated healthcare system. Journal of General Internal Medicine22 (Suppl2), 331–335. doi: 10.1007/s11606‑007‑0344‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0344-8 [Google Scholar]
  79. Myford, C. M. & Wolfe, E. W.
    (2003) Detecting and measuring rater effects using many-facet Rasch measurement: Part I. Journal of Applied Measurement4 (4), 386–422.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Napier, J.
    (2004) Sign language interpreter training, testing, and accreditation: An international comparison. American Annals of the Deaf149 (4), 350–359. doi: 10.1353/aad.2005.0007
     https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2005.0007 [Google Scholar]
  81. National Center for State Courts
    National Center for State Courts (2013) Federal Court Interpreter Certification Examination for Spanish/English: Examinee handbook. www.ncsc.org/sitecore/content/microsites/fcice/home/About-the-program/~/media/Microsites/Files/FCICE/Final%20Examinee%20Handbook%201-23-2013%20for%20online.ashx (accessed22 May 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Office of China Accreditation Tests for Translators and Interpreters
    Office of China Accreditation Tests for Translators and Interpreters (2005) 二级口译英语同声传译类考试大纲. 外文出版社. [Syllabus of CATTI Level-two Simultaneous Interpreting Test]. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press.
  83. Pellatt, V. , Griffiths, K. & Wu, S. -C.
    (Eds.) (2010) Teaching and testing interpreting and translating. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Peng, K. -C.
    (2006) The development of coherence and quality of performance in conference interpreter training. PhD Dissertation, University of Leeds.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Petronio, K. & Hale, K.
    (2009) One interpreter education program, two sites: A comparison of factors and outcomes. International Journal of Interpreter Education1, 46–61.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Pio, S.
    (2003) The relation between ST delivery rate and quality in simultaneous interpretation. The Interpreters’ Newsletter12, 69–100.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Pöchhacker, F.
    (2001) Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta46 (2), 410–425. doi: 10.7202/003847ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/003847ar [Google Scholar]
  88. (2004) Introducing interpreting studies. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  89. (2007) “Going simul?” Technology-assisted consecutive interpreting. Forum5 (2), 101–124.
     [Google Scholar]
  90. (2011) Researching interpreting: Approaches to inquiry. In B. Nicodemus & L. Swabey (Eds.). Advances in interpreting research, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 5–25. doi: 10.1075/btl.99.04poch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.99.04poch [Google Scholar]
  91. Postigo Pinazo, E.
    (2008) Self-assessment in teaching interpreting. TTR21 (1), 173–209. doi: 10.7202/029690ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/029690ar [Google Scholar]
  92. Pradas Macías, M.
    (2006) Probing quality criteria in simultaneous interpreting: The role of silent pauses in fluency. Interpreting8 (1), 25–43. doi: 10.1075/intp.8.1.03pra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.8.1.03pra [Google Scholar]
  93. PSI Services LLC
    PSI Services LLC (2010) Development and validation of oral and written examinations for medical interpreter certification: Technical report. Burbank, CA. www.certifiedmedicalinterpreters.org//sites/default/files/oral-and-written-medical-interpreter-technical-report-final.pdf (accessed22 May 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  94. PSI Services LLC
    PSI Services LLC (2013) Development and validation of oral examinations for medical interpreter certification: Mandarin, Russian, Cantonese, Korean, and Vietnamese forms. www.certifiedmedicalinterpreters.org/sites/default/files/tech-report-development-validation-language-forms.pdf (accessed22 May 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Rennert, S.
    (2010) The impact of fluency on the subjective assessment of interpreting quality. The Interpreters’ Newsletter15, 101–115.
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Ribas, M. A.
    (2010) Formative assessment in the interpreting classroom: Using the portfolio with students beginning simultaneous interpreting. Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning3, 97–131.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Roat, C. E.
    (2006) Certification of health care interpreters in the United States: A primer, a status report and considerations for national certification. Los Angeles, CA. www.calendow.org/uploadedFiles/certification_of_health_care_interpretors.pdf (accessed22 May 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Roels, B.
    (2013) Certification of social interpreters in Flanders, Belgium: Assessment and politics. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 179–197.
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Rosiers, A. , Eyckmans, J. & Bauwens, D.
    (2011) A story of attitudes and aptitudes? Investigating individual difference variables within the context of interpreting. Interpreting13 (1), 53–69. doi: 10.1075/intp.13.1.04ros
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.1.04ros [Google Scholar]
  100. Rovira-Esteva, S. & Orero, P.
    (2011) A contrastive analysis of the main benchmarking tools for research assessment in translation and interpreting: The Spanish approach. Perspectives19 (3), 233–251. doi: 10.1080/0907676X.2011.590214
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2011.590214 [Google Scholar]
  101. Russell, D. & Malcolm, K.
    (2009) Assessing ASL-English interpreters: The Canadian model of national certification. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 331–376. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv.15rus
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv.15rus [Google Scholar]
  102. Russo, M.
    (2011) Aptitude testing over the years. Interpreting13 (1), 5–30. doi: 10.1075/intp.13.1.02rus
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.1.02rus [Google Scholar]
  103. Sawaki, Y.
    (2007) Construct validation of analytic rating scales in a speaking assessment: Reporting a score profile and a composite. Language Testing24 (3), 355–390. doi: 10.1177/0265532207077205
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532207077205 [Google Scholar]
  104. Sawyer, D. B.
    (2004) Fundamental aspects of interpreter education: Curriculum and assessment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.47
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.47 [Google Scholar]
  105. Schjoldager, A.
    (1995) Assessment of simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup & V. Appel (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 3: New horizons. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 187–195.
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Setton, R. & Motta, M.
    (2007) Syntacrobatics: Quality and reformulation in simultaneous-with-text. Interpreting9 (2), 199–230. doi: 10.1075/intp.9.2.04set
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.9.2.04set [Google Scholar]
  107. Shinjwa, K.
    (2004) Exploration into perceived quality of simultaneous interpretation. Forum2 (1), 71–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Skaaden, H.
    (2013) Assessing interpreter aptitude in a variety of languages. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 35–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Skyba, K.
    (2014) Translators and interpreters certification in Australia, Canada, the USA and Ukraine: Comparative analysis. Comparative Professional Pedagogy4 (3), 58–64. doi: 10.2478/rpp‑2014‑0036
     https://doi.org/10.2478/rpp-2014-0036 [Google Scholar]
  110. Stenzl, C.
    (1983) Simultaneous interpretation: Groundwork towards a comprehensive model. MA thesis, University of London.
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Strong, M. & Rudser, S. F.
    (1985) An assessment instrument for sign language interpreters. Sign Language Studies49, 343–362. doi: 10.1353/sls.1985.0008
     https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1985.0008 [Google Scholar]
  112. Timarová, Š. & Ungoed-Thomas, H.
    (2008) Admission testing for interpreting courses. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer2 (1), 29–46. doi: 10.1080/1750399X.2008.10798765
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2008.10798765 [Google Scholar]
  113. Timarová, Š. , Čeňková, I. , Meylaerts, R. , Hertog, E. , Szmalec, A. & Duyck, W.
    (2014) Simultaneous interpreting and working memory executive control. Interpreting16 (2), 139–168. doi: 10.1075/intp.16.2.01tim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.16.2.01tim [Google Scholar]
  114. Timarová, Š. & Ungoed-Thomas, H.
    (2009) The predictive validity of admissions tests for conference interpreting courses in Europe: A case study. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 225–245. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv.12tim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv.12tim [Google Scholar]
  115. Tiselius, E.
    (2009) Revisiting Carroll’s scales. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 95–121. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv.07tis
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv.07tis [Google Scholar]
  116. Tsagari, D. & van Deemter, R.
    (Eds.) (2013) Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. doi: 10.3726/978‑3‑653‑02510‑1
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-02510-1 [Google Scholar]
  117. Turner, B. , Lai, M. & Huang, N.
    (2010) Error deduction and descriptors – a comparison of two methods of translation test assessment. Translation & Interpreting2 (1), 11–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Upshur, J. & Turner, C. E.
    (1995) Constructing rating scales for second language tests. ELT Journal49 (1), 3–12. doi: 10.1093/elt/49.1.3
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/49.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  119. Vermeiren, H. , Gucht, J. V. & De Bontridder, L.
    (2009) Standards as critical success factors in assessments: Certifying social interpreters in Flanders, Belgium. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 291–330. doi: 10.1075/ata.xiv.14ver
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiv.14ver [Google Scholar]
  120. Wallace, M.
    (2013) Rethinking bifurcated testing models in the court interpreter certification process. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 67–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Wang, B. H.
    (2007) 口译能力评估和译员能力评估 – 口译的客观评估模式初探. [From interpreting competence to interpreter competence – a tentative model for objective assessment of interpreting]. 外语界3, 44–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. (2011) 口译能力的评估模式及测试设计再探 – 以全国英语口译大赛为例. [Exploration of the assessment model and test design of interpreting competence]. 外语界1, 66–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  123. Wang, J. -H. , Napier, J. , Goswell, D. & Carmichael, A.
    (2015) The design and application of rubrics to assess signed language interpreting performance, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer9 (1), 83–103. doi: 10.1080/1750399X.2015.1009261
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2015.1009261 [Google Scholar]
  124. Wang, M. W. & Stanley, J. C.
    (1970) Differential weighting: A review of methods and empirical studies. Review of Educational Research4, 663–705. doi: 10.3102/00346543040005663
     https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543040005663 [Google Scholar]
  125. Wigglesworth, G.
    (1993) Exploring bias analysis as a tool for improving rater consistency in assessing oral interaction. Language Testing10 (3), 305–319. doi: 10.1177/026553229301000306
     https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229301000306 [Google Scholar]
  126. Wu, J. , Liu, M. & Liao, C.
    (2013) Analytic scoring in interpretation test: Construct validity and the halo effect. In H. -H. Liao , T. -E. Kao & Y. Lin (Eds.), The making of a translator: Multiple perspectives. Taipei: Bookman, 277–292.
     [Google Scholar]
  127. Wu, S. C.
    (2010) Assessing simultaneous interpreting: A study on test reliability and examiners’ assessment behavior. PhD thesis, Newcastle University.
     [Google Scholar]
  128. (2013) How do we assess students in the interpreting examinations?In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 15–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  129. Xi, X. -M. & Mollaun, P.
    (2006) Investigating the utility of analytic scoring for the TOEFL Academic Speaking Test (TAST). https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-06-07.pdf (accessed15 June 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  130. Yan, J. X. , Pan, J. & Wang, H. -H.
    (2010) Learner factors, self-perceived language ability and interpreting learning: An Investigation of Hong Kong tertiary interpreting classes. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer4 (2), 173–196. doi: 10.1080/13556509.2010.10798803
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2010.10798803 [Google Scholar]
  131. Yan, J. X. , Pan, J. , Wu, H. & Wang, Y.
    (2013) Mapping interpreting studies: The state of the field based on a database of nine major translation and interpreting journals (2000–2010). Perspectives21 (3), 446–73. doi: 10.1080/0907676X.2012.746379
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2012.746379 [Google Scholar]
  132. Yeh, S. -P. , & Liu, M.
    (2006) 口譯評分客觀化初探：採用量表的可能性 [A more objective approach to interpretation evaluation: Exploring the use of scoring rubrics]. 國立編譯館館刊34 (4), 57–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  133. Youdelman, M.
    (2013) The development of certification for healthcare interpreters in the United States. Translation & Interpreting5 (1), 114–126. doi: ti.105201.2013.a06
     https://doi.org/ti.105201.2013.a06 [Google Scholar]
  134. Zanotti, M.
    (2011) Authentic and valid assessment: Assessing the performance of public service interpreters. Investigation in University Teaching and Learning7, 99–105.
     [Google Scholar]
  135. Zhao, N. & Dong, Y. P.
    (2013) 基于多面Rasch模型的交替传译测试效度验证. [Validation of a consecutive interpreting test based on multi-faceted Rasch model]. 解放军外国语学院学报36 (1), 86–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  136. Zheng, B. -H. & Xiang, X.
    (2014) The impact of cultural background knowledge in the processing of metaphorical expressions: An empirical study of English-Chinese sight translation. Translation and Interpreting Studies9 (1), 5–24. doi: 10.1075/tis.9.1.01zhe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.9.1.01zhe [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00003.han
Loading
Using rating scales to assess interpretation
Interpreting 20, 59 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00003.han
/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00003.han
/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00003.han
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): interpretation assessment; rating scales; reliability; validity

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error