Exploring a relationship between students’ interpreting self-efficacy and performance: triangulating data on interpreter performance assessment

References

• Alderson, J. C., C. Clapham, and D. Wall. 1995. Language Test Construction and Evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade, H., and Y. Du. 2005. “Student Perspectives on Rubric-Referenced Assessment.” Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 10 (3): 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F. 2004. Statistical Analyses for Language Assessment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F., and A. Palmer. 2010. Language Assessment in Practice: Developing Language Assessments and Justifying Their Use in the Real World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. 1986. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Bartłomiejczyk, M. 2007. “Interpreting Quality as Perceived by Trainee Interpreters: Self-Evaluation.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 1 (2): 247–267. doi:10.1080/1750399X.2007.10798760.
   Google Scholar
• Bilash, O. 2011. “Triangulation in Assessment.” Accessed February 1 2014. http://www.educ.ualberta.ca/staff/olenka.bilash/best%20of%20bilash/Triangulation.html
   Google Scholar
• Bolaños-Medina, A. 2014. “Self-Efficacy in Translation.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 9 (2): 197–218. doi:10.1075/tis.9.2.03bol.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, H. D., and P. Abeywickrama. 2010. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. 2nd ed. New York: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Chabasse, C., and S. Kader. 2014. “Putting Interpreting Admissions Exams to the Test: The MA KD Germersheim Project.” Interpreting: International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 16 (1): 19–33. doi:10.1075/intp.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung, A. K. F. 2013. “Non-Native Accents and Simultaneous Interpreting Quality Perceptions.” Interpreting: International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 15 (1): 25–47. doi:10.1075/intp.15.1.
   Google Scholar
• Chiaro, D., and G. Nocella. 2004. “Interpreters’ Perception of Linguistic and Non-Linguistic Factors Affecting Quality: A Survey through the World Wide Web.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 49 (2): 278–293. doi:10.7202/009351ar.
   Google Scholar
• Choi, J. 2013. “Assessing the Impact of Text Length on Consecutive Interpreting.” In Assessment Issues in Language Translation and Interpreting, edited by D. Tsagari and R. van Deemter, 85–96. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Dancey, C. P., and J. Reidy. 2007. Statistics without Maths for Psychology. 4th ed. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, C., and C. Leung. 2009. “Current Issues in English Language Teacher-Based Assessment.” TESOL Quarterly 43: 393–415. doi:10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00242.x.
   Google Scholar
• de Grez, L., M. Valcke, and I. Roozen. 2012. “How Effective are Self- and Peer Assessment of Oral Presentation Skills Compared with Teachers’ Assessments?” Active Learning in Higher Education 13 (2): 129–142. doi:10.1177/1469787412441284.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K. 1970. Research Act in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• Dörnyei, Z. 2003. Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Erdosy, M. U. 2004. “Exploring Variability in Judging Writing Ability in A Second Language: A Study of Four Experienced Raters of ESL Compositions.” TOEFL Research Report No. 70. Accessed April 11 2013. http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-03-17.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Falchikov, N. 1995. “Peer Feedback Marking: Developing Peer Assessment.” Innovation in Education and Training International 32: 175–187. doi:10.1080/1355800950320212.
   Google Scholar
• Falchikov, N., and J. Goldfinch. 2000. “Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks.” Review of Educational Research 70: 287–322. doi:10.3102/00346543070003287.
   Google Scholar
• Fowler, Y. 2007. “Formative Assessment: Using Peer and Self-Assessment in Interpreter Training.” In The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of Interpreting in the Community, edited by C. Wadensjö, B. Englund Dimitrova, and A.-L. Nilsson, 253–262. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, M. 1995. “Peer Assessment by Groups of Group Work.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 20 (3): 289–300. doi:10.1080/0260293950200305.
   Google Scholar
• Genesee, F., and J. A. Upshur. 1996. Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, M., A. Milanowski, and J. Miller. 2012. “Measuring and Promoting Inter-Rater Agreement of Teacher and Principal Performance Ratings.” Center for Educator Compensation Reform. Accessed February 10 2014. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED532068.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Green, A. 2014. Exploring Language Assessment and Testing: Language in Action. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Green, R. 2013. Statistical Analyses for Language Testers. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hamidi, M., and F. Pöchhacker. 2007. “Simultaneous Consecutive Interpreting: A New Technique Put to the Test.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 52 (2): 276–289. doi:10.7202/016070ar.
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, A., I. Mason, G. Peng, and I. Perez. 2003. “Peer and Self-assessment in Conference Interpreter Training.” Accessed April 7 2013. http://www.lang.ltsn.ac.uk/prf.aspx#lang1
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, J. 1998. Learning and Studying. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Holden, G., T. Meenaghan, J. Anastas, and G. Metrey. 2002. “Outcomes of Social Work Education: The Case for Social Work Self-Efficacy.” Journal of Social Work Education 38: 115–133.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez Ivars, A., D. Pinazo Catalayud, and M. Ruiz I Forés. 2014. “Self-Efficacy and Language Proficiency in Interpreter Trainees.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (2): 167–182. doi:10.1080/1750399X.2014.908552.
   Google Scholar
• Judd, C. M., and G. H. McClelland. n.d. “Measurement.” Accessed July 7 2014. http://psych.colorado.edu/~mcclella/measchap.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kalina, S. 2005. “Quality Assurance for Interpreting Processes.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 50 (2): 768–784. doi:10.7202/011017ar.
   Google Scholar
• Kearney, S. 2013. “Improving Engagement: The Use of ‘Authentic Self-And Peer-Assessment for Learning’ to Enhance the Student Learning Experience.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38 (7): 875–891. doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.751963.
   Google Scholar
• Kurz, I. 2001. “Conference Interpreting: Quality in the Ears of the User.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 46 (2): 394–409. doi:10.7202/003364ar.
   Google Scholar
• Kwan, K.-P., and R. W. Leung. 1996. “Tutor versus Peer Group Assessment of Student Performance in a Simulation Training Exercise.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 21 (3): 205–214. doi:10.1080/0260293960210301.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J. 2008. “Rating Scales for Interpreting Performance Assessment.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (2): 165–184. doi:10.1080/1750399X.2008.10798772.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S.-B. 2014. “An Interpreting Self-Efficacy (ISE) Scale for Undergraduate Students Majoring in Consecutive Interpreting: Construction and Preliminary Validation.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (2): 183–203. doi:10.1080/1750399X.2014.929372.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S.-B. 2015. “Developing an Analytic Scale for Assessing Undergraduate Students’ Consecutive Interpreting Performances.” Interpreting: International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 17 (2): 226–254. doi:10.1075/intp.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S.-B. 2016. “University Students’ Experience of ‘Scale-Referenced’ Peer Assessment for a Consecutive Interpreting Examination.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 1–15. doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1223269.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, M. 2013. “Design and Analysis of Taiwan’s Interpretation Certification Examination.” In Assessment Issues in Language Translation and Interpreting, edited by D. Tsagari and R. van Deemter, 163–178. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, M., and Y.-H. Chiu. 2009. “Assessing Source Material Difficulty for Consecutive Interpreting: Quantifiable Measures and Holistic Judgment.” Interpreting 11 (2): 244–266. doi:10.1075/intp.11.2.07liu.
   Google Scholar
• Lumley, T. 2002. “Assessment Criteria in a Large-Scale Writing Test: What Do They Really Mean to the Raters?” Language Testing 19 (3): 246–276. doi:10.1191/0265532202lt230oa.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, B. K. 2001. “The Ethical Potential of Alternative Language Assessment.” In Experimenting with Uncertainty: Essays in Honour of Alan Davies, edited by C. Elder, A. Brown, E. Grove, K. Hill, N. Iwashita, T. Lumley, T. McNamara, and K. O’Loughlin, 228–239. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCay, P. 2006. Assessing Young Language Learners. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, P. J. 2003. “The Effect of Scoring Criteria Specificity on Peer and Self-Assessment.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 28 (4): 383–394. doi:10.1080/0260293032000066218.
   Google Scholar
• Mills, N., F. Pajares, and C. Herron. 2007. “Self-Efficacy of College Intermediate French Students: Relation to Achievement and Motivation.” Language Learning 57 (3): 417–442. doi:10.1111/lang.2007.57.issue-3.
   Google Scholar
• Moser-Mercer, B. 1996. “Quality in Interpreting: Some Methodological Issues.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 7: 43–55.
   Google Scholar
• Multon, K. D., S. D. Brown, and R. W. Lent. 1991. “Relation of Self-Efficacy Beliefs to Academic Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Investigation.” Journal of Counseling Psychology 38 (1): 30–38. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.38.1.30.
   Google Scholar
• NCDPI (North Carolina Department of Public Institution). 1999. “Assessment, Articulation and Accountability 1999.” Accessed March 3 2014. http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/curriculum/worldlanguages/…/aaa.pdf
   Google Scholar
• O’Sullivan, B. 2012. “Assessing Speaking.” In The Cambridge Guide to Second Language Assessment, edited by C. Coombe, P. Davidson, B. O’Sullivan, and S. Stoynoff, 234–246. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oppenheim, A. N. 1992. Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. London: Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Orsmond, P., S. Merry, and K. Reiling. 1996. “The Importance of Marking Criteria in the Use of Peer Assessment.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 21 (3): 239–250. doi:10.1080/0260293960210304.
   Google Scholar
• Pajares, F. 1996. “Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings.” Review of Educational Research 66: 543–578. doi:10.3102/00346543066004543.
   Google Scholar
• Pajares, F., and J. Kranzler. 1995. “Self-Efficacy Beliefs and General Mental Ability in Mathematical Problem-Solving.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 20: 426–443. doi:10.1006/ceps.1995.1029.
   Google Scholar
• Patri, M. 2002. “The Influence of Peer Feedback on Self- and Peer Assessment of Oral Skills.” Language Testing 19 (2): 109–131. doi:10.1191/0265532202lt224oa.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. 1987. How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. Beverly Hills: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Paulhus, D. L., and S. Vazire. 2007. “The Self-Report Method.” In Handbook of Research Methods in Personality Psychology, edited by R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, and R. F. Krueger, 224–239. New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Pöchhacker, F. 2001. “Quality Assessment in Conference and Community Interpreting.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 46 (2): 410–425. doi:10.7202/003847ar.
   Google Scholar
• Pond, K., R. Ul-Haq, and W. Wade. 1995. “Peer Review: A Precursor to Peer Assessment.” Innovation in Education and Training International 32 (4): 314–323. doi:10.1080/1355800950320403.
   Google Scholar
• Popham, W. J. 1997. “What’s Wrong–And What’s Right–With Rubrics.” Educational Leadership 55 (2): 72–75.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, L. K., and S. Nathenson-Mejia. 1992. “Anecdotal Records: A Powerful Tool for Ongoing Literacy Assessment.” The Reading Teacher 45 (7): 502–509.
   Google Scholar
• Riccardi, A. 2002. “Evaluation in Interpretation: Macrocriteria and Microcriteria.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4: Building Bridges, edited by E. Hung, 115–125. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Robbins, B. 2006. “An Empirical, Phenomenological Study: Being Joyful.” In Qualitative Research Methods for Psychologists: Introduction through Empirical Studies, edited by C. T. Fischer, 173–212. London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Russo, M. 2014. “Testing Aptitude for Interpreting: The Predictive Value of Oral Paraphrasing, with Synonyms and Coherence as Assessment Parameters.” Interpreting 16 (1): 1–18. doi:10.1075/intp.16.1.01rus.
   Google Scholar
• Russo, M., and P. Salvador. 2004. “Aptitude to Interpreting: Preliminary Results of a Testing Methodology Based on Paraphrase.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 49 (2): 409–432. doi:10.7202/009367ar.
   Google Scholar
• Saito, H. 2008. “EFL Classroom Peer Assessment: Training Effects on Rating and Commenting.” Language Testing 25 (4): 553–581. doi:10.1177/0265532208094276.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, D. B. 2004. Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education: Curriculum and Assessment. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Schunk, D. H. 1989. “Self-Efficacy and Achievement Behaviors.” Educational Psychology Review 1: 173–208. doi:10.1007/BF01320134.
   Google Scholar
• Schunk, D. H., and F. Pajares. 2009. “Self-Efficacy Theory.” In Handbook of Motivation at School, edited by K. R. Wentzel and A. Wigfield, 35–53. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Setton, R., and M. Motta. 2007. “Syntacrobatics: Quality and Reformulation in Simultaneous-With-Text.” Interpreting 9 (2): 199–230. doi:10.1075/intp.9.2.04set.
   Google Scholar
• Skaaden, H. 2013. “Assessing Interpreter Aptitude in a Variety of Languages.” In Assessment Issues in Language Translation and Interpreting, edited by D. Tsagari and R. van Deemter, 35–50. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Szarkowicz, D. L. 2006. Observations and Reflections in Childhood. South Melbourne: Thompson Social Science Press.
   Google Scholar
• Topping, K. 1998. “Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities.” Review of Educational Research 68: 249–276. doi:10.3102/00346543068003249.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, C. E. 2012. “Classroom Assessment.” In Routledge Handbook of Language Testing, edited by G. Fulcher and F. Davidson, 65–78. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Weigle, S. C. 2002. Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, E. W. 1997. “The Relationship between Essay Reading Style and Scoring Proficiency in a Psychometric Scoring System.” Assessing Writing 4 (1): 83–106. doi:10.1016/S1075-2935(97)80006-2.
   Google Scholar
• Zareai, M. 2010. “Self-Efficacy and Interpretation Quality.” Interpreting and Translation Studies 14 (1): 325–342.
   Google Scholar
• Zwischenberger, C. 2010. “Quality Criteria in Simultaneous Interpreting: An International Vs. a National View.” Interpreters’ Newsletter 15: 127–142.
   Google Scholar