1 / 24

Borislava Erakovi ć University of Novi Sad

Third IATIS Regional Workshop on Translator and Interpreter Training C onstructivist Experience in the Translation Classroom. Borislava Erakovi ć University of Novi Sad. Constructivist Philosophy. epistemological assumptions:

rupali
Download Presentation

Borislava Erakovi ć University of Novi Sad

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Third IATIS Regional Workshop onTranslator and Interpreter TrainingConstructivist Experience in the Translation Classroom BorislavaEraković University of Novi Sad

  2. Constructivist Philosophy • epistemological assumptions: knowledge is based on experience and insight and is a unique and essentially personal in nature Vygotsky (1896-1934), Social Development Theory • Social interaction precedes development • Cognition is the end product of socialization and social behaviour, therefore: • students have an active role in learning • T should collaborate with S in order to FACILITATE meaning construction in S • Learning as a reciprocal experience for the S and theT

  3. Social-Constructivist Classroom Cooperative, task based method (Nord, Gonzales-Davies, Li) • Gradual reduction of T control • Simulated Tasks, reduced complexity Collaborative method (Kiraly 2000) • Scaffolding – empowerment • Development of intuition

  4. Constructivist approaches

  5. Case Study • 2 groups (x35) of 4th year students of English Language and Literature • All see themselves as future translators • G1 (2008) cooperative approach, G2 (2009) collaborative • Course on Translation of Scientific Texts from English into Serbian

  6. Authentic Project • Client: Department of Psychology • Translation assignment: a chapter from the book on developmental psychology • Target audience: Students of Psychology • Deadline: end of semester, 12 weeks • Contact hours: 2:15 weekly • Renumeration: none

  7. Instruments • Translations of 3 texts • S diaries • Questionnaires (group work, quality of the course) • T diary • PACTE Measuring Instrument for the Acquisition of TC, pre-& post- test

  8. Results of the Case Study into Acquisition of T C (PACTE 2011) in the 2 Learning Environments • Subcompetences: • Bilingual (pragmatics, sociolinguistics aspect, textual knowledge, grammatical & lexical knowledge) • Extralinguistic • Instrumental • Theoretical (1) • Strategic

  9. Participant perspective • Students’ view on the benefits and drawbacks of the cooperative and collaborative learning environments? • What objections they raise? • How much they feel they have learned? • Self-esteem? • + • Teacher’s side of the coin?

  10. Scenarios

  11. Preliminary doubts • Are authentic assignments overwhelming for the students (subject matter, target register)? • Students’ idea of the teacher’s role? • Institutional constraints • dominant teaching approaches, • percieved teachers’ role, • organisation into lectures and practice classes, • assessment

  12. Targeted: • Subjective impressions of the participants: • Working conditions and the atmosphere in the classroom • Interpersonal relations • The quality of teacher’s input • How much the students progressed • Students’ self-esteem after the course • Teacher’s reflections on the atmosphere in the classroom, workload, unresolved issues

  13. Results: Attendance High for both groups Reasons for absence: sickness, jobs

  14. How demanding was the project assignment?

  15. How the students of the two groups feel about the role of the teacher? • Instructional scenario

  16. Were the teacher’s comments on your translatons & diaries informative enough?

  17. Are you satisfied with the amount and quality of new information you acquired during the course from the sources that were available (textbooks on psychology, dictionaries, internet, experts)?

  18. What did you think of the atmosphere in the classroom?

  19. Is self-esteem higher of the students in the collaborative approach? • Do you think you will be able to keep learning and improving your abilities to translate scientific and technical texts on your own in the future?

  20. Conclusions: Student perspective • no significant difference in the students’ reactions to the teacher’s role, • Even in an overwhelmingly transmissionist educational context, the majority of students do not mind the ‘absence of direct teaching’ • The collaborative group seems to be more confident in their ability to keep progressing in the future • 1/3 of the collaborative group feels that the project is too demanding (not relevant?)

  21. Conclusions: Teacher’s perspective Remaining challenges in the collaborative approach: • students learning styles • what does the teacher do in the classroom when everybody is absorbed in the translation task? • the teacher’s workload between the contact hours – 30-45 min per diary (40 students?)

  22. Conclusions: what needs to be factored in? • Educational context as an important factor: Is there a dominant teaching style in the educational institution? • Students attitude toward learning? Are they used to be autonomous? Do they expect to be autonomous? • The composition of a particular group: How many students in the group? Is the group dominantly extrovert, introvert? • Promotion of learner autonomy within 1 course?

  23. References • Gile, Daniel (1995). Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsteradm/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 123-124. • Gile, Daniel (2004). "Integrated problem and decision reporting as a translator training tool". The Journal of Specialised Translation 2: 2-20. http://www.jostrans.org/issue02/art_gile.php • Gojkov, Grozdanka (2002). „Od konstruktivizma do alosteričnog modela učenja“. Zbornik Instituta za pedagogiju 17:30-41. • Gojkov, Grozdanka (2006). Metateorijske koncepcije pedagoške metodologije: Uvod u pedagošku metodologiju. Vršac: Tuli. http://www.uskolavrsac.edu.rs/KnjigeGG/Metateorijske%20koncepcije%20pedagoske%20metodologije.pdf • Gonzalez-Davies, Maria. (2004). Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 67-81. • Hansen, Gyde (2006). "Retrospection methods in translator training and translation research". Journal of Specialised Translation 5.http://www.jostrans.org/issue05/art_hansen.pdf • Ivić, Ivan i dr. (2001). Аktivno učenje. Beograd: Institut za psihologiju. http://www.see-educoop.net/education_in/pdf/active-learning-yug-ser-srb-t03.pdf • Kelly, Dorothy (2005). A Handbook for Translator Trainers: a guide to reflective practice. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. • Kiraly, Donald (2000). A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. • Kovačević, Zorica (2004). „Kooperativni oblici učenja u nastavi koja traži i daje više“. Pedagogija 42/1: 104-110. • Li, Defeng (2002). "Translator Training: What Translation Students Have to Say". Meta, 47/4: 513-531. http://www.erudit.org/revue/meta/2002/v47/n4/008034ar.pdf • Li, Defeng (2013). “Teaching Business Translation. A Task-basedApproach”. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 7(1),1-26 • Nord, Chrstiane (1996). "Wer nimmt denn mal den ersten Satz? Überlegungen zu neuen Arbeitsformen im Übersetzungsunterricht". U: A. Lauer, H. Gerzymisch-Arborgast, J. Haller, E. Steiner (ur.) Übersetzungswissenschaft im Umbruch. Tübingen: Gunter-Narr, 313-28. • Nord, Christiane (1991, 2005). Text Analysis in Translation. Amsterdam: Rodopi. • Panitz, Ted (1997). "Collaborative versus Cooperative Learning: comparing the Two Definitions Helps Understand the Nature of Interactive Learning". Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, V 8/2. http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/coopdefinition.htm • Pavlović, Branka (2004). "Partnerski odnosi u nastavi kao faktor podsticanja učenja i kognitivinog razvoja". Zbornik Instituta za peadgoška istraživanja. Beograd: Institut za pedagoška istraživanja, 36:151-167. http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0579-6431/2004/0579-64310436151P.pdf

More Related