Methodological and Quality Assurance Guide for Course Development

In this Guide you will find quality requirements for course development in the field of translation. For your orientation a summary of the requirement structure in form of course development stages is provided. At the end a reference for further reading is given.

Summary

1. CONTEXT ANALYSIS

The basis of professional teaching practice is to clarify the institutional conditions. The legal framework for the concrete arrangement of the courses is provided through the respective curriculum. In the curriculum, study objectives are formulated through learning outcomes which describe the students’ competences. Information is also available, how the module relates to other modules within the overall programme.

ECTS credits indicate the amount of work required by students to achieve learning outcomes / specific study goals. Depending on the country, one ECTS credit point can equal on average between 25 and 30 study hours. Thus, for a course with 5 ECTS, a workload of 125-150 hours is estimated, including contact hours, e-learning[1], preparation and follow-up of the course and the exam.

Other information should be obtained regarding learning situation, nature of the subject, students’ and teacher’s capabilities.  The context analysis is the basis for important decisions about the course.  Following worksheet (1) supports you in reflection of the course context information.

Worksheet 1: Context analysis (Pierce College 2015)

2. COURSE DESIGN

A popular approach for course design is the backward approach (Wiggins & McTighe 2005). Simply put, backward design consists of three stages (Worksheet 2):

1. Identify desired learning goals and outcomes.

2. Determine how students will demonstrate what they know and can do.

3. Plan instructional strategies, resources, and learning experiences (activities) that best helps students reach learning goals and outcomes.

Worksheet 2: Course design

For transparency reasons following information should be announced due time: objectives, content and method of the course, participation requirements, examination conditions, incl. minimum requirements for students for a positive assessment and assessment criteria.

3. ICT and the Quality of Teaching – on the basis of teaching practises and research results

Educational innovations, especially the introduction of information and communication technologies into the teaching practices of Higher education training institutions are among the highest and most important challenges and topics of all the European countries.

Following the conclusions of the OECD study on ‘ICT and the quality of learning’, for the successful implementation of ICT it is prerequisite to have an adequate technical infrastructure to ensure that trainers do not lose interest when they are repeatedly confronted with breakdowns, or long servicing times and to ensure that they can use a computer in a lesson according to their own ideas and wishes.  Acting as a partner to the students and making use of their knowledge can fill considerable gaps in the technical expertise of the teacher. Teacher competence, however, is most decidedly sought after in issues concerning the integration of ICT in lessons and in the creation of learning scenarios. This however does not depend on the teacher’s EDP skills but on his ability to put the specific qualities of ICT to full pedagogic use, integrating it into his lesson.

4. CONDUCTING COURSE

Methodology

Problem-based Learning (PBL): An active learning approach focusing on the process of solving real and meaningful problems through asking and refining questions, debating ideas, making predictions, designing plans and/or experiments, collecting and analysing data, drawing conclusions, communicating ideas and findings to others, asking new questions, and creating artefacts. Therefore, PBL is the art of problem solving. The approach is also inquiry-based when students are active in creating the problem.

Inquiry-based Learning (IBL): An active learning approach where students follow methods and practices similar to those of professional scientists in order to construct knowledge (Keselman, 2003). It can be defined as a process of discovering new causal relations, with the learner formulating hypotheses and testing them by conducting experiments and/or making observations. Often it is viewed as an approach to solving problems and involves the application of several problem solving skills (Pedaste & Sarapuu, 2006). Inquiry-based learning is gaining popularity in teaching due to the recent technical developments that allow the inquiry process to be supported by electronic learning environments.

Both learning processes[2] follow a structured working order consisting of nine phases, all of them crucial for a successful learning process (Table 1):

Table 1: Working phases (Pedaste et al. 2015 and Li et al. 2015 adapted by Krajcso 2018)

Assessment

Current pedagogical tendencies advocate assessment that revolves around competences rather than only contents. Assessment is a means of verifying whether established objectives have been fulfilled, and whether and to what extent students have acquired the relevant competences (Galán-Mañas & Hurtado 2015). Further, assessment refers to obtaining information on the learning process with a view to making grading-related decisions, identifying students’ needs or establishing how the process is progressing.  Assessment is characterised by a range of aspects, thus, it is advisable to design an assessment plan. Answering the checklist’s questions will support your planning procedure (Worksheet 4).

Worksheet 3: Assessment plan (Campbell & Hale 2003 and Galán-Mañas & Hurtado 2015 adapted by Krajcso 2018)

QUALITY EVALUATION

Quality or academic quality is a way of describing how well the learning opportunities available to students help them to achieve their qualification. Quality is about making sure that appropriate and effective teaching, support, assessment and learning resources are provided for students.

The following worksheets are aimed to support you in self-reflection (Worksheet 4) and independent reflection (Worksheet 5) about your course. The questions apply to intensive courses delivered over a week, or those that are delivered over the course of a semester or a year.

Worksheet 4: Self-evaluation of a course (Kneale et al. 2016 adapted by Krajcso 2018)

Worksheet 5: Independent course evaluation (Vanderbilt University 2018 adapted by Krajcso 2018)

5. COURSE IMPROVEMENT THROUGH ACTION RESEARCH

Action research is a multifaceted approach to seeking answers to local problems. AR follows a spiral: observe – reflect – plan – act – evaluate – modify in ever repeated cycles. In AR students take an active role in their learning process and learn to ‘think’ and question rather than to ‘know’. Students and teachers become partners, members of a mutually supportive learning team by carrying out “living inquiry”. Worksheet 6 helps you to design your action research (project).

Worksheet 6: Action research design

Reference[3]

Vanderbilt University (2018): In-class feedback form https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/student-feedback/

Kneale P., Winter J., Turner R., Spowart L. and Muneer R., (2016) Evaluating teaching development activities in higher education: A toolkit https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/evaluating_teaching_development_in_he_-_toolkit1.pdf

Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015)  Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational research review, 14, 47-61.

Pedaste, M., & Sarapuu, T. (2006). Developing an effective support system for inquiry learning in a Web-based environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(1), 47–62.

Pierce College 2015 Worksheet: Situational Factors to Consider https://pierce.instructure.com/courses/1210608/assignments/6351448?module_item_id=14686580

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2005) Understanding by Design, 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall.

Keselman, A. (2003) Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 898–921.

Action research in Translation Studies:

Massey, G., Jud, P., & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2015) Building competence and bridges: The potential of action research in translator education. In: P. Pietrzak & M. Deckert (Eds.), Constructing translation competence (pp. 27-48). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Nicodemus, B. & Laurie S. (2015) Action Research. In: : Angelelli, C. V. & Brian JB (eds.) 2015 . 'Researching Translation and Interpreting. 157-167

Whitfield, A. (2017) Action Research in Translation Studies: Building Relationships with Education Science, Library Science and Literary Translator Communities. In: Taivalkoski-Shilov, K.; Liisa T. & Maarit K. (eds.) 'Communities in Translation and Interpreting.'

Implementation of PBL and IBL into translation training:

Bernardini, S. (2016) Discovery learning in the language-for-translation classroom: Corpora as learning aids, Cadernos de traduçao, 2016, Issue 1, 14-23

Biel L. (2011) Professional Realism in the Legal Translation Classroom: Translation Competence and Translator Competence. Meta, 56(1), 162–178

Galán-Mañas A. (2011) Translating Authentic Technical Documents in Specialised Translation Classes. The Journal of Specialised Translation 16:109–125 http://www.jostrans.org/issue16/art_manas.php

García González M. & Díaz M. T. V.(2015) Guided Inquiry and Project-Based Learning in the field of specialised translation: a description of two learning experiences, Perspectives, 23:1, 107-123

Kerkkä, K. (2009) Experiment in the application of problem-based learning to a translation course. Vakki:n julkaisut, 36, pp. 216–227. Retrieved from http://www.vakki.net/publications/2009/VAKKI2009_Kerkka.pdf

Kiraly, D. (2005) Project-Based Learning: A Case for Situated Translation. Meta, 50(4), 1098–1111.

Li D., Zhang Ch. & He Y. (2015) Project-based learning in teaching translation: students’ perceptions, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 9:1, 1-19

Liu J. X. (2014) Task-based Teaching of Computer-aided Translation in a Progressive Manner, Translating and The Computer, 36, 235-242

Mitchell-Schuitevoerder, R. (2013) A project-based methodology in translator training  In: Way, C.; Vandepitte S.; Meylaerts R. & Bartlomiejczyk M. (eds.) 'Tracks and Treks in Translation Studies.' 127-142

Robinson-Fryer, B.-J.; María Dolores O. L. & Juncal Gutiérrez Artacho (2016) After Bologna: Learner- and Competence-Centred Translator Training for 'Digital Natives'" In: Martín de León, Celia & Víctor González Ruiz (eds.) 'From the Lab to the Classroom and Back Again. Perspectives on Translation and Interpreting Training.'

Schmitt H. (2008) Translator Competence through Project-Based Translatory Praxis” in “Learning Theories and Practice in Translation Studies“ Frank Austermühl and Joachim Kornelius (eds.) Lighthouse Unlimited – Band 138, 63-85

Assessment

Campbell S. & Hale S.(2003) Translation and interpreting assessment in the context of educational measurement. In: Gunilla Andermann and Margaret Rogers (eds.) Translation today: trends and perspectives pp. 205 – 224.

Galán-Mañas A. & Hurtado Albir A. (2015) Competence assessment procedures in translator training, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 9:1, 63-82