Advertisement

Acquisition of Generic Competencies Through Project Simulation in Translation Studies

  • Silvia Hansen-SchirraEmail author
  • Sascha HofmannEmail author
  • Jean Nitzke
Chapter

Abstract

Motivated by the research in several international and interdisciplinary initiatives, for example, P21 Partnership for 21st Century Learning or the Collegiate Learning Assessment instruments, we seek for a scalable and measureable set of generic competencies for translation studies. Up to now, the acquisition of competencies in translation studies has primarily been operationalized by implementing authentic projects in higher education classes using socio-constructivist approaches. This results in a hybridization of subject-specific competencies and generic competencies in translator education. Because of the necessity to focus on the acquisition of generic competencies as a primary learning outcome, an additional teaching approach, the simulated project, will be discussed and tested as a new method for a solid generic competence development within higher education.

Keywords

Authentic Projects Generic Competencies Reflective Practitioner Self-Reporting Method Simulated Projects Translation Studies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Alves, F., Pagano, A., Neumann, S., Steiner, E., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2010). Translation Units and Grammatical Shifts: Towards an Integration of Product- and Process-based Translation Research. In G.M. Shreve & E. Anglone (Eds.), Translation and Cognition (pp. 109–142). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  2. Alves, F. (2003). Triangulating Translation. Perspectives in process oriented research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  3. Alves, F. (2005). Bridging the Gap between Declarative and Procedural Knowledge in the Training of Translators: Meta-reflection under Scrutiny. Meta, 50(4). Retrieved from https://www.erudit.org/revue/meta/2005/v50/n4/019861ar.pdf
  4. Bakken, B. E., Gould, D., & Kim, D. (1992). Experimentation in Learning Organizations: A Management Flight Simulator Approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 59(1), 167–182.Google Scholar
  5. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, 369–398.Google Scholar
  6. Carl, M., Schaeffer, M., & Bangalore, M. (2016). The CRITT Translation Process Research Database. In M. Carl, S. Bangalore & M. Schaeffer (Eds.), New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research (pp. 13–54). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Čulo, O., Hansen-Schirra, S., Neumann, S., & Vela, M. (2008). Empirical studies on language contrast using the English-German comparable and parallel CroCo corpus. Proceedings of the LREC Workshop on Comparable Corpora, Marrakesch, 47–51.Google Scholar
  8. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Döring, N., & Bortz, J. (2016). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. EMT Expert Group (2009). Competences for Professional Translators, Experts in Multilingual and Multimedia Communication. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/programmes/emt/key_documents/emt_competences_translators_en.pdf
  11. Gilley, J. W. (1990). Demonstration and simulation. In M. W. Galbraith (Ed.), Adult learning methods: A guide for effective instruction (pp. 261–281). Malabar, FL: Krieger.Google Scholar
  12. Göpferich, S. (2008): Translationsprozessforschung: Stand –Methoden – Perspektiven. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
  13. Hansen-Schirra, S., Neumann, S., & Steiner, E. (2012). Cross-linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations. Insights from the Language Pair English-German. Berlin, Boston: De Gryter.Google Scholar
  14. Hansen-Schirra, S., & Kiraly, D. (2013). Projekte und Projektionen in der translatorischen Kompetenzentwicklung. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  15. Hertel, J. P., & Millis, B. J. (2002). Using simulations to promote learning in higher education: An introduction. Sterling, VA: Stylus.Google Scholar
  16. Hiltmann, M. (2002). Die Erfassung des Konstrukts „gute Lehre“ im Fragebogen-Verfahren. In Zentrum für Qualitätssicherung und -entwicklung (Series Ed.), Mainzer Beiträge zur Hochschulentwicklung, Vol. 6., Mainz.Google Scholar
  17. Kelly, D. (2005). A Handbook for Translator Trainers. A Guide to Reflective Practice. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
  18. Kiraly, D. (1995). Pathways to Translation. Kent OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kiraly, D. (2000). A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
  20. Kiraly, D. (2012). Growing a Project-based Translation Pedagogy: A Fractal Perspective. Meta, 57(1), 82–95.Google Scholar
  21. Kiraly, D. (2013). Towards a View of Translator Competence as an Emergent Phenomenon: Thinking Outside the Box(es) in Translator Education. In D. Kiraly, S. Hansen-Schirra & K. Maksymski (Eds.), New Prospects and Perspectives for Educating Language Mediators (pp. 197–224). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.Google Scholar
  22. Kiraly, D., & Hofmann, S. (2016). Towards a Postpositivist Curriculum Development Model for Translator Education. In D. Kiraly et al. (Ed.): Towards Authentic Experiential Learning in Translator Education (pp. 67–87). Göttingen: Mainz University Press at V&R unipress.Google Scholar
  23. Klein, S., Benjamin, R., Shavelson, R. J., & Bolus, R. (2007). The Collegiate Learning Assessment: Facts and Fantasies. Evaluation Review, 31(5), 415–439.Google Scholar
  24. Knoll, M. (1997). The project method: its origin and international development. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 34(3), 59–80.Google Scholar
  25. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. (2001). Experiential Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Directions. In R. J. Sternberg & L. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles (pp. 227–47). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. Krings, H. P. (2005). Wege ins Labyrinth – Fragestellungen und Methoden der Übersetzungsprozessforschung im Überblick. Meta, 50(2), 342–358.Google Scholar
  28. Lasater, K. (2007). High-fidelity simulation and the development of clinical judgment: students‘ experiences. Journal of Nursing Education, 46(6), 269–277.Google Scholar
  29. Maran, N., & Glavin, R. (2003). Low- to High fidelity simulation – a continuum of medical education. Medical Education, 37(S1), 22–28.Google Scholar
  30. Markham, T. (2011). Project Based Learning. Teacher Librarian, 39(2), 38–42.Google Scholar
  31. Massey, G. (2017/forthcoming). Translation Competence Development and Process-oriented Pedagogy. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The Handbook of Translation and Cognition (pp. 520–544). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  32. Massey, G., & Brändli, B. (2016). Collaborative Feedback Flows and How We Can Learn from Them: Investigating a Synergetic Experience in Translator Education. In D. Kiraly et al. (Eds.), Towards Authentic Experiential Learning in Translator Education (pp. 177- 199). Göttingen: Mainz University Press at V&R unipress.Google Scholar
  33. Massey, G., & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2011). Commenting on Translation: Implications for Translator Training. Journal of Specialised Translation, 16, 26–41.Google Scholar
  34. Massey, G., & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2012). Evaluating the Process: Implications for Curriculum Development. In L. Zybatow, A. Petrova & M. Ustaszewski (Eds.), Translationswissenschaft interdisziplinär: Fragen der Theorie und der Didaktik (pp. 95–100). Frankfurt/Main: Lang.Google Scholar
  35. Massey, G., & Jud, P. (2015). Teaching Audiovisual Translation with Products and Processes: Subtitling as a Case in Point. In L. Bogucki & M. Deckert (Eds.), Accessing Audiovisual Translation (pp. 99–116). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  36. National Research Council (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  37. PACTE (2003). Building a Translation Competence Model. In F. Alves (Ed.): Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research (pp. 43–66). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  38. Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills, Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  39. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Shreve, G. M., & Angelone, E. (Eds.) (2010). Translation and Cognition. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  41. Tirkkonen-Condit, S., & Jääskeläinen, R. (Eds.) (2000). Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting. Outlooks on Empirical Research. Benjamins Translation Library 37. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  42. Weinert, F. E. (2001a). Competencies and Key Competencies: Educational Perspective. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 2433–2436). Amsterdam u. a.: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  43. Weinert, F. E. (2001b). Concept of Competence: A Conceptual Clarification. In D. S. Rychen & L. H. Salganik (Eds.), Defining and Selecting Key Competencies (pp. 45–65). Seattle u. a.: Hogrefe & Huber.Google Scholar
  44. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., Blömeke, S., & Pant, H. A. (Eds.) (2015). Competency Research in Higher Education. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(4), 459–464.Google Scholar
  45. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., Pant, H. A., Lautenbach, C., Molerov, D., Toepper, M., & Brückner, S. (2017). Modeling and Measuring Competencies in Higher Education: Approaches to Challenges in Higher Education Policy and Practice. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  46. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., Toepper, M., Molerov, D., Buske, R., Brückner, S., Pant, H. A., Hofmann, S., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2018). Adapting and Validating the Collegiate Learning Assessment to Measure Generic Academic Skills of Students in Germany – Implications for International Assessment Studies in Higher Education. In O. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, M. Toepper, C. Kuhn, H. A. Pant & C. Lautenbach (Eds.), Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education – Cross-national Comparisons and Perspectives. Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Johannes Gutenberg-University MainzMainzGermany

Personalised recommendations