On the Test Methods and Translation Criteria Used to Assess Iranian Students’ Translations in Translation Courses
By Abdolmehdi Riazi, Ph. D.
and
Zahra Davoodi, M.A. in translation studies,
Department of Foreign Languages & Linguistics,
Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
Get the List of 4,500+ Translation Agencies Now! No Recurring Membership Fees!
Abstract
One of the main reasons for
students’ dissatisfaction with their exam scores in translation
programs is related to the way their translations are evaluated.
Although translation courses have been taught for several
years in Iranian universities (both Islamic Azad universities
and State universities), almost no organized study has been
done on the type of tests and the criteria used to assess
students' translations. The present study set out to survey
the way translation instructors evaluate students' translations.
Participants were solicited for their test method preferences
and the criteria they used to assess students' translations.
To achieve the objectives of the study, a 22-item questionnaire
was administered to 36 male and female translation instructors
who have taught translation courses in 9 different Iranian
universities. Results of the data analysis indicated that
there is agreement among translation instructors in assessing
students’ translations. Almost all of the instructors preferred
to use essay-type questions in translation exams. They also
indicated that they paid attention to the grammatical points,
word equivalence, genre, register, and shifts to assess
students’ translations. The findings of this study may be
useful to the students majoring in translation as well as
translation instructors. Students will certainly improve
their translations if they are aware of the criteria used
to evaluate their translation. Translation instructors who
do not have much experience in teaching or testing translation
courses can also use the findings of the study to improve
their tasks.
Key terms of the study
Classroom translation, assessment
of student translation, translation test methods, translation
assessment criteria
1. Introduction
Translator Training is a roughly new course which has
been taught in almost 133 universities in Iran. Students
should take about 135 credits for a B.A degree out of which
the number of translation courses is 36 two credit, and
1 four credit courses (76 credits). Students pass the courses
through four years (eight semesters).
Assessing students’ translations in translation courses
is one of the most difficult tasks facing translation instructors.
The main difficulty in students’ translation assessment
is its subjective nature. So a translation that is appropriate
in one context or by one instructor may be unacceptable
in other circumstances.
The fact is that most of the translation instructors
teaching at universities in Iran hold a degree in English
literature, TEFL, or linguistics and rarely in translation
studies. So they do not have enough academic and educational
background in translation and this has caused many problems
for them and for students. They may be successful in teaching
in translation courses, but certainly most of them have
problems with assessing students’ translations and this
important task turns into personal preferences.
Most of the translation instructors have serious problems
with the assessment of students’ translations at universities.
Some instructors may be professional enough in teaching
and testing, but may not be in the field of translation.
On the other hand, those who might be some professional
in translation, who lack the necessary knowledge and skill
in the evaluation and assessment of classroom translation
this important task may be affected by different factors
including the instructor’s subject knowledge, language command,
reading comprehension, translation experience and attentiveness
and so forth that together could be referred to as instructor’s
traits.
The result is that students are often not satisfied with
their grades, and complain about the way their translations
have been evaluated. While instructors are usually familiar
with the theories of translation and have enough knowledge
in teaching they might not have proper criteria for assessing
students’ translations, or if they do, students are not
informed of these criteria before the exam. So they do not
know what criteria and factors are important to their instructor,
and which criteria they should pay more attention to in
their translation and at the time of exam.
Not knowing the criteria used by the instructors is mostly
the main reason of students’ dissatisfaction with their
grades. This, of course, is done by means of classroom translation
exercises in which instructors identify specific problems
in students’ translations such as translation loss, the
importance of cultural context, and so on.
This study intended to find out how translation instructors
prepare translation tests especially for midterm and final
exams and what criteria they use in the assessment of students’
translations. There is the hope that a study on translation
test preparation and assessment will translation instructors
and other stake holders in translation curriculum by identifying
test methods and assessment criteria currently being used
in Iranian universities. Being aware of the assessment criteria
in translation, students will understand what the characteristics
of a good translation are to their instructors. The findings
will be helpful to translation instructors, especially amateur
instructors. Once the instructors understand the proper
methods and test items that are more useful in making translation
tests, they will be able to prepare more effective translation
tests. This is while the finding of the study will hopefully
contribute to the body of the knowledge of the translation
studies.
The study, therefore, sought answers to the following
questions.
1.
What are the various test items translation instructors
use to assess students' translations?
2.
What are the major criteria translation instructors use
to assess students' translations?
3.
Are the criteria used by the instructors teacher-made or
theory-based?
4.
Is there any consensus between translation instructors and
translation specialists about the translation evaluation
criteria?
5.
Is there any consensus among instructors in using the criteria?
2. Review of the previous studies
The review on the previous studies that have been done
in the field of translation assessment shows that to translation
researchers and translation theorists, the followings are
the most important criteria and test methods to evaluate
a translation:
Almost all of the translation researchers and theorists
believe that a translator should render the same message
of the source text into an acceptable form of the target
language. So a translation must be accurate, natural and
clear especially to the target language readers.
Since no two languages are the same systematically and
culturally, some shifts such as; additions, omissions, and
substitutions are necessary in some occasions in translation,
but not in every occasion. So the theory of the shifts in
translation is one which is strongly confirmed by many people
(see for example, Catford 1965 cited in Leonardi, 2000).
The applied style and grammar, by the author, should
be under consideration. A translator must try to use the
same grammar and style in the target text. But if there
is a wide difference between two languages, s/he could change
them into an acceptable form in the target language.
Since each word has different meanings in different situations
(functions), the translator should try to choose the best
meaning for the words. To do that, a translation should
be done in the context. Doing translation out of context,
the translator will miss the chance to find the correct
meaning of the words (see for example, House 1997).
As every country has its own language and culture, to
translate idioms, metaphors, proverbs, etc. accurately,
paying attention to the cultural effects and differences
is very important. The translator should render the nearest
meaning of them base on the culture of both source and target
languages. However if the differences are wide, to make
the translated text sensible to the readers, s/he can translate
them according the target language culture.
Register and genre are important criteria that should
be concerned in translation, because they strongly stress
the communicative role of the text. It is also the translator’s
duty to recognize the text type before beginning his/her
translation (see for example, Nieminen, 2004).
The studies also show that the following test types are
workable to assess students’ translations:
- Open-ended questions (free-response items)
- Multiple-Choice
- True/False statements
- Matching
- Fill in the blank
3. Method
This study was a descriptive and survey study in which
translation instructors’ methods and ideas about the assessment
of students’ translations in universities was investigated.
3.1. Participants
Overall two groups participated in this study. Both groups
were the instructors that have taught translation courses
in different universities in Iran.
Five Translation instructors participated in the first
phase of the study, and completed the first questionnaire.
The participants were selected from four universities in
Iran; Azad Islamic universities in Kazeroon, Shiraz, Khorasgan,
and Yazd. This group of participants was asked to participate
in the study because they were experienced (between 10 to
20 years) in teaching and testing in translation courses
in the universities. Their answers to questions were used
to prepare the second questionnaire. To elicit accurate
and objective responses from the participants, the following
points were taken into consideration: 1) both the significance
and the purpose of the study were explained to them, and
2) the participants answered the questionnaire items anonymously,
so they felt at ease in answering the questions objectively.
In the second phase of the study, 36 translation instructors
completed the second questionnaire. The instructors were
from nine universities in Iran. 56% of them held an MA degree,
11% were Ph. D students, and 33% of them held a Ph. D. degree.
69% (25 instructors) of them were male and 31% (11 instructors)
of them were female. They had between 2 years to 35 years
experience in teaching in university. They were asked to
participate in the study because they have taught translation
courses for at least two semesters.
3.2. Instruments
Two questionnaires were used. The first questionnaire,
which was an open-ended questionnaire, was designed on the
basis of reviewing several studies on translation issues,
and interviewing translation students informally in universities
about the tests and criteria for classroom translation assessment.
The second one, which was structured, was constructed on
the basis of the participants' answers to the open-ended
questionnaire (see Appendices A and B).
The first questionnaire contained two parts. The first
part contained 9 questions about the instructors’ principles
in preparing and scoring translation tests. The second part
included four questions regarding the instructors’ ideas
and knowledge in the assessment of the students’ translations,
and the appropriate criteria that could be applied in this
regard. At the end of the questionnaire, the instructors
were asked to mention their general comments regarding evaluating
students’ translations. Completing the questionnaire, the
instructors introduced the criteria and factors that may
be observed in translation assessment, and different testing
methods which they may apply in preparing classroom translation
exams.
In the second questionnaire, 36 Translation instructors
marked the frequency of their agreement with the selected
items. Overall there were 22 items in this questionnaire
categorized under three parts. The first part contained
6 factors instructors may consider in evaluating students’
translations. In this part, the instructors marked the frequency
of the factors they applied when grading students’ translations.
In the second part, the frequency of the things students
are required or allowed to do in their translation exams
was solicited. The last part included 8 items was about
translation instructors’ attitudes toward different aspects
of students’ translations. Participants’ answers to questionnaire
items were codified and entered into SPSS program for statistical
analyses.
4. Results
Parts A and B of the second questionnaire contained 14
items and focused on the second research question. To have
a better picture, the first two scales (always and usually)
and the second two scales (often and sometimes) for each
item were are merged. Table 1 presents the frequency and
percentage of the items in parts A and B of the questionnaire.
Table 1: Descriptive statistics for
parts A and B of the questionnaire (14 items)
Item |
Frequency
and Percentage |
Always
+ Usually |
Often +
Sometimes |
Never |
1. |
19 (52.8%) |
17 (47.2%) |
0 |
2. |
25 (69.4%) |
11 (30.6%) |
0 |
3. |
19 (52.8%) |
17 (47.2%) |
0 |
4. |
31 (86.1%) |
5 (13.9%) |
0 |
5. |
9 (25%) |
22 (61.1%) |
5 (13.9%) |
6. |
9 (25%) |
18 (50%) |
9 (25%) |
7. |
21 (58.4%) |
9 (30.5%) |
3 (8.3%) |
8. |
23 (63.9%) |
11 (30.5%) |
1 (2.8%) |
9. |
8 (22.2%) |
12 (33.3%) |
16 (44.4%) |
10. |
23 (63.9%) |
13 (36.1%) |
0 |
11. |
13 (36.1%) |
19 (52.8%) |
4 (11.1%) |
12. |
13 (36.1%) |
21 (58.3%) |
2 (5.6%) |
13. |
14 (38.9%) |
19 (52.7%) |
0 |
14. |
17 (47.2%) |
16 (44.5%) |
3 (8.3%) |
Part C contained 8 items and focused on the research
question one. To have a better picture, the first two scales
(strongly agree and agree) and the second two scales (strongly
disagree and disagree) of the items were merged. Table 2
presents the results of this part.
Table 2: Descriptive statistics of part
C of the questionnaire (8 items)
| Item |
S. Agree + Agree |
Disagree + S. Disagree |
Undecided |
| 15. |
34 (94.4%) |
0 |
2 (5.6%) |
| 16. |
28 (77.8%) |
4 (11.1%) |
4 (11.1%) |
| 17. |
13 (36.1%) |
12 (33.3) |
11 (30.6%) |
| 18. |
30 (83.3%) |
2 (5.6%) |
4 (11.1%) |
| 19. |
11 (30.6%) |
14 (38.8%) |
11 (30.6%) |
| 20. |
9 (25%) |
15 (41.7%) |
12 (33.3%) |
| 21. |
7 (19.5%) |
21 (58.3%) |
8 (22.2%) |
| 22. |
28 (77.7%) |
7 (19.4%) |
1 (2.8%) |
To find out if the differences between participants' responses
were statistically significant or not, the Chi-square test
of significance was run on the data. Table 3 presents the
results of the Chi-square and as can be seen, items 6, 9
and 13 did not show a significant difference at a 0.05 level
and were, therefore, excluded from the findings.
Table 3: The Chi-square results for the
frequency of the items
| Item |
df |
Chi-square |
Sig. |
Item |
df |
Chi-square |
Sig. |
| 1 |
3 |
7.575 |
.056 |
12 |
4 |
23.917 |
.000 |
| 2 |
3 |
38.582 |
.000 |
13 |
3 |
7.211 |
.065 |
| 3 |
3 |
14.439 |
.002 |
14 |
4 |
24.750 |
.000 |
| 4 |
3 |
91.381 |
.000 |
15 |
2 |
27.350 |
.000 |
| 5 |
4 |
9.243 |
.055 |
16 |
4 |
76.410 |
.000 |
| 6 |
4 |
1.688 |
.793 |
17 |
3 |
34.787 |
.000 |
| 7 |
4 |
47.200 |
.000 |
18 |
3 |
58.513 |
.000 |
| 8 |
4 |
51.693 |
.000 |
19 |
4 |
21.535 |
.000 |
| 9 |
4 |
4.847 |
.303 |
20 |
4 |
23.639 |
.000 |
| 10 |
3 |
17.388 |
.001 |
21 |
4 |
22.556 |
.000 |
| 11 |
4 |
11.479 |
.022 |
22 |
4 |
154.958 |
.000 |
5. Discussion
This section includes three parts; in the first part,
the issues to which instructors paid attention in preparing
translation tests are discussed. The second part discusses
about the test methods that were used by the instructors
to prepare translation exams. The evaluation criteria which
were important to instructors in assessing students’ translations
are discussed in the last part. The following points were
extracted from the panels’ suggestions:
5.1. The issues related to translation tests
Majority of translation researchers and theorists believe
that assessment of translation is a subjective task and
that is really difficult to assess translations objectively
(see for example, Williams, 2001). That is while most of
the participants of this study believed in the possibility
of objective assessment of students’ translations. So there
was a disagreement between the translation specialists and
Iranian translation instructors in this regard. The instructors’
belief may be attributed to the fact that they suggest typical
equivalents and translations for words and texts in the
class and they expect students to emulate the same translations
at the time of exam. This might be what leads them to believe
that students' translations must be assessed objectively.
As there are different criteria in evaluating students’
translations, do the students have the right to be informed
of the criteria that are important to their instructors
before exam? Almost all the translation instructors agreed
that the instructors should inform students of their evaluation
criteria. They stated that they explained the criteria to
their students before exams to help them get better marks
in translation exams.
5.2. Test methods used to assess students’ translations
Participants of the study identified several test methods
including Multiple-Choice, Completion test, Essay questions,
True/False statements, and Cloze test they used in preparing
translation exams. Every instructor may consider one or
some of the test methods in translation tests. Which one
do they prefer to use to assess students’ translations in
Iranian universities? All of the mentioned test types were
more or less acceptable methods to the translation instructors,
but to assess students’ translations, almost all of them
preferred to use Essay type questions in translation tests.
To this end, the instructors stated that they usually assign
some short texts of different types and ask students to
translate them in translation exams.
Contextualization of the translation test items is an issue
which is confirmed by many translation researchers. Even
if the semantic equivalent of an expression in the source
language text is quoted in a dictionary or glossary, it
is not enough, and it does not guarantee a successful translation.
So there is no absolutely correct translation outside the
context, and the translation should be done in a context
(see Pinto, 2001 House, 2001). There was an agreement between
the translation specialists and Iranian translation instructors
in this regard. Almost all of the instructors in Iranian
universities, believed in the contextualization of the translation
test items, i.e., providing enough context for the students
to translate selected texts.
5.3. Translation assessment criteria
Although almost all of the translation evaluation criteria
stated in the questionnaire were acceptable to the instructors,
the following criteria were more important to them.
1. Almost all of the translation instructors
believed that students must try to render the same message
of the source language into the target language in their
translations. Accuracy in rendering the exact message from
source language into target language in translation has
been one of the important factors attended to by translation
theorists and specialists (see, for example, Newmark, 1988).
2. Attending to the grammatical points
and word equivalents chosen by the students in their translations
was the other important factors mentioned by all the instructors
in evaluating students' translations. They expected students
to choose the word equivalents and the grammatical points
which were close to ones in the source text and acceptable
in the target language. This is based on the fact that the
translator’s goal should be to reproduce in the receptor
language a text which communicates the same message as the
source language but using the natural grammatical and lexical
choices in the receptor language (see, for example, Larson,
1984).
3. Since each language has its own division
of the lexicon into classes such as nouns, verbs, adjectives,
etc., it is not uncommon to translate a noun in one language
into a verb in another language or vice-versa (see Larson,
1984). Applying appropriate shifts in translation was another
important issue to almost all of the translation instructors.
The important point to instructors was that students should
not apply the shifts every where in their translations,
but they should recognize the situation and use the shifts
where it is necessary (i.e. where there is no proper equivalent
part of speech for the word in the target language).
4. Most of the instructors stated that
register and genre of the texts were important things which
students ought to consider in their translations. These
criteria were not considered as important as the three criteria
mentioned above, but they were important to instructors.
Attending to the register and genre of the texts is important
because in some situations, mistranslating a word or having
an ungrammatical element in the translation does not necessarily
ruin the whole translation, but a failure to recognize either
register, or genre will affect the whole text (see Nieminen,
2004).
5. Observing the cultures of the source
language or the target language in translation is a controversial
issue. There is no agreement among researchers in this area.
Some believe that rendering the exact message of the source
text to the target text, a translator must pay attention
to the source language culture and translate the text exactly
according to it. To this group, being loyal to author’s
culture is more important than that of reader’s culture.
On the other hand, some researchers believe that because
the cultures are different, a translator must translate
according to the target language culture even if some changes
occur. All of the translation instructors indicated that
they subscribed to the second view. The instructors stated
that students must pay attention to the differences between
source and target language cultures in their translations
and translate the text according to the target language
culture to make a translated text clear to the readers.
6. Conclusion
Fortunately there is an agreement among translation instructors
in assessing students’ translations. Although most of the
instructors were not familiar with the translation theories,
they applied the theories to assess students’ translations.
So we can say the criteria that are considered to assess
students’ translations are teacher-made, because most of
the instructors chose them based on their experience in
this field, and not based on their knowledge. The followings
are the most important test method and translation criteria
used by instructors to assess students’ translations.
To prepare a translation test to assess students’ translations,
the instructor should try to use essay questions in the
context. Choosing this test type the students may get better
results in their translations qualitatively and quantitatively.
What the students must take care in their translations
as the most important factor is render the same message
of the source text into an acceptable form in the target
text.
The students must consider grammatical points, world equivalents,
and cultural differences between the source language and
target language.
Applying the necessary shifts (additions, deletions, and
substitutions) is acceptable in translation in part of the
students.
The students must also take care of register, genre, and
style in the source text.
References
House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model
revisited. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.
House, J. (2001). Translation quality assessment: Linguistic description
versus social evaluation. Meta, XLV1, 2,
243-257.
Larson, M. L. (1984). Meaning-based translation: A guide to crass-language
equivalence. New York & London: University Press
of America.
Leonardi, V. (2000, October). Equivalence in translation:
Between myth and reality. Online Translation
Journal, 4, 4, 1-14. Retrieved 27/2/2005 from the
World Wide Web: http://accurapid.com/journal/14
equiv.htm
Miremadi, A. (2003). Theories of translation and interpretation
(8th ed.). Tehran: The Center for Studying
and Compiling University Books in Humanities (SAMT).
Newmark, P. (1988). Approaches to translation. London: Prentice
Hall International (UK) Ltd.
Nieminen, T. (2004). The value of register, text type
and genre for translation and translation assessment.
Retrieved 20/8/2006 from http://www.uta.fi/
Pinto, M. (2001). Quality factors in documentary translation. Meta,
XLV1, 2, 288-300.
Williams, M. (2001). The application of argumentation theory to translation
quality assessment. Meta, XLV1, 2, 326-
344.
Appendix A: Questionnaire No. 1
Part
A: Please answer the questions about assessing translation
tests.
1. What are the various types of tests you use to assess students’ translations?
Please name.
2. What are the major criteria that you use to assess students' translations?
Please describe.
3. How did you select the criteria?
4. What sources have you used to select your criteria and what do you
think about them?
5. Do you inform your students about the criteria before exams? Why?
6. Do you prefer to be objective or subjective through the assessment
of students’ translations? Please explain.
7. Are students allowed to use dictionary during their exam? Why?
8. Do you respect students' tastes and performances in their translations,
especially for equivalence finding?
9. Some instructors compare students' translations with their own and
the more similarity between the two translations they
find, the better mark they assign. What is your idea about
it?
10. In
which situations will students get negative or positive
point for additions and deletions in their translations?
11. Do
you prefer seen or unseen translation test? Please explain.
Part
B: Please answer the following questions about the theories
of translation.
12. Do
you follow an especial theory of translation? If yes;
what is it and why do you follow it?
13. What
is your idea about beauty of translation? What does it
mean for you?
14. What
types of changes (word equivalent, grammar, style, etc.)
in translation are acceptable to you? Please give some
examples.
15. Would
you please provide us with your general comments regarding
evaluating students’ translations?
Appendix B: Questionnaire No. 2
Part
A: The following are factors instructors consider in evaluating
students’ translations. Please mark the frequency of the
factors as they apply to you when grading students’ translations.
1.
I consider Grammar as a criterion in my evaluation.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
2.
I look for appropriate use of Word Equivalents as a criterion
in my evaluation.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
3.
I attend to Style as a criterion in my evaluation.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
4.
I check Accuracy in rendering the exact message from the
source language in my evaluation.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
5.
I consider Beauty as a criterion that should be kept in
my evaluation.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
6.
The more similarity between students’ translations and
my own translation, the better mark students will obtain.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
Part
B: The following items ask about the things students are required
or allowed to do in their translations.
7. Students must take care of the Registers in their translations.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
8.
Students must take care of the Genres through the translation.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
9.
Students must translate the text exactly according to
the SL culture even though it may not make sense in the
TL.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
10.
Students must observe the differences between TL &
SL cultures and translate the text according to the TL
culture.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
11.
Students have the chance to invent equivalent for the
words that have no proper equivalent in the TL.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
12.
Additions and Omissions on the part of students are acceptable
in translation.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
13. Catford’s* Shifts are acceptable in translation on the part of
the students.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
14.
I think objective assessment of translation is possible.
Always
Usually Often Sometimes Never
Part
C: The following are instructors’ attitudes toward different aspects
of students’ translations. Please select the choice you
use in preparing translation tests.
15.
Students should be informed of my evaluation criteria
before exam.
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
16.
Students are allowed to use dictionary in the exam.
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
17. I think Multiple-Choice is a proper test type to assess students’
translations.
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
18.
I think Essay type is a proper test type to assess students’
translations.
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
19.
I think Completion Test is a proper test type to assess
students’ translations.
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
20.
I think Cloze Test is a proper test type to assess students’
translations.
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
21.
I think T/F statement is a proper test type to assess
students’ translations.
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
22.
I think the test items should be contextualized (put in
a context).
Strongly
agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
*According
to Catford (1956), four kinds of Shifts are possible in
translation; structure-shifts, class-shifts, unit-shifts,
and intra-system shifts.
Read
more articles - Free!
E-mail
this article to your colleague!
Need
more translation jobs? Click here!
Translation
agencies are welcome to register here - Free!
Freelance
translators are welcome to register here - Free!
Subscribe
to TranslationDirectory.com newsletter - Free!
Take
part in TranslationDirectory.com poll - your voice counts!
|