번역채점시 교사들의 신뢰성에대한 조사를 공동으로 조사하여 작성한 70페이지 번역방법론 논문 입니다[A+]

목차

0. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
2. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE
3. THE STUDY
4. RESULTS
5. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION
6. REFERENCES

본문내용

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The aim of this report is to present the findings of our research into the reliability and
validity of various methods of translation assessment. The methods examined were elfassessment, peer-assessment and teacher-assessment. In order to examine these
methods of assessment, we conducted surveys to gain insight into the external factors
influencing translation performance and the participants’ opinions on translation assessment, as well as assigning translation tasks to be completed by participants. These translations were then assessed by the translator, their peers, and their translation tutor, following the marking criteria employed by NAATI professionals.

1. INTRODUCTION
Our research team is TRAN 827 Group 4. Our topic is self-, peer- and teacher assessment
of translations. As a research study group, we focused on the validity and reliability of
translation assessments. We were also trying to find out the similarities and differences
between these assessments.

참고자료

· Al-Qinai, J. (2000). Translation quality assessment: strategies, parameters and procedures, Meta:
· Translators Journal, 45(3), 497-519.
· Anderman, G. & Rogers, M. (1997). What is that translation for? A functional view of translation
· Assessment from a pedagogical perspective: A response to Hans G. Honig, Current Issues in Language and Society, 4(1), 56-63.
· Bloxham, S. & West, A. (2004). Understanding the rules of the game: making peer assessment as
· a median for developing students’ conceptions of assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 721-733.
· Boud, D. (1989). The role of self-assessment in student grading, Assessment and Evaluation in
· Higher Education, 14(1), 20-30.
· Brookhart, S. M. (2001). Successful students’ formative and summative uses of assessment
· Information, Assessment in Education, 8(2), 153-169.
· Carmines, E. G. & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. CA: Sage.
· Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research, The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-607.
· House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: a model revisited, Tübingen: Narr.
· ________(2001). Translation Quality Assessment: Linguistic Description versus Social
· Evaluation, Meta: Translators Journal, 46 (2), 243-257.
· Joordens, S., Desa S. & Paré, D. (n. d.). The pedagogical anatomy of peer-assessment: dissecting
· A peerScholar assignment. Retrieved from http://www.iiisci.org/journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/YE123VF.pdf
· Liu, N. & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment, Teaching
· in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290.
· Melis, N. M. & Albir, A. H. (2001). Assessment in Translation Studies: Research Needs, Meta:
· Translators Journal, 46(2), 272-287.
· O’Farrell, C. (n.d.), Enhancing Student Learning through Assessment. Retrieved from
· http://www.tcd.ie/CAPSL/academic_practice/worddocs/assessment_toolkit.doc
· Orsmond, P., Merry, S. & Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer
· and self-assessment, Assessment in Education in Higher Education, 25(1), 23-37.
· Raban, R. & Litchfield, A. (2007). Self and peer assessment in groupwork using TeCTra. In ICT:
· Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/raban-poster.pdf
· Robinson, B. J., Rodríguez, C. I. L. & Sánchez, M. I. T. (2006). Self-assessment in translator
· training, Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 14(2), 115-138.
· Ross, J. A. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment, Practical
· Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 11(10). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v11n10.pdf
· Rothe-Neves, R. (n. d.). Translation Quality Assessment for research Purposes: an Empirical
· Approach. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Retrieved from
· http://www.lingoturk.com/Sources/Rui-Cadernos10.pdf
· Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: revisiting the territory, Assessment in Education,
· 5(1), 77-84.
· Stefani, L.A.J. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment: Relative reliabilities, Studies in Higher
· Education, 19(1), 69-75.
· Taras, M. (2003). To feedback or not to feedback in student self-assessment, Assessment &
· Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 549-565.
· Wang, B. (2010). On rater agreement and rater training, English Language Teaching, 3(1),
· 108-112.