臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討口譯課程使用檔案評量之可行性。結合檔案評量與品質評量之特性，設計出適用於口譯課程之另類評量方式。採取行動研究法，研究與觀察台灣某大學英語研究所「視譯訓練」課程之一位口譯教師與七位學生；以問卷、前測與後測、課堂實作口譯成績、課堂觀察、訪談及學生繳交之訓練歷程檔案，記錄與彙整口譯訓練課程中，學生之口譯學習歷程以及教師與學生對於口譯課程使用檔案評量之態度、反應、心得與建議。
研究發現，結合品質評量法的檔案評量方式，有益於師生雙方觀察與呈現實際學習歷程以及評估學生個別口譯表現之品質。口譯課程使用檔案評量之優點如下：(1)減輕學生對於課堂實作口譯測試的壓力；(2)使學生實際體驗口譯前之準備工作的重要性；(3)提供學生檢視與保存老師與同學所給之建議，以瞭解自己的優、缺點，並進而提升口譯品質。
然而，由於檔案評量是較為費時的評量方式，師生雙方皆需花費時間閱讀與製作檔案，因此口譯教師須先清楚說明與規範學生製作訓練歷程檔案之目的及要求，以減輕教師之工作負擔與指引學生之製作方向。再者，由於大量文件所組成之訓練歷程檔案，造成師生雙方繳交與分發上的負擔與不便，因此建議口譯教師要求學生運用電子作業資料夾，如磁片、光碟片或部落格等數位化之資料保存方式來取代實體的檔案夾。此外，考量教師之實際工作量與學生之學習能力，檔案評量較適用於小型班級與初級的口譯訓練課程。
本文僅為口譯課程使用檔案評量之初步研究，未來期望能針對大型班級、限用電子作業資料夾、與教師獨立完成課程設計與評量過程三方面做進一步之研究，以期建立實際可行並有益於口譯課程師生雙方教學與學習之另類評量方式。

The purpose of the study is to investigate the feasibility of integrating portfolio assessment with quality assessment as an alternative evaluation method in an interpreter training course. Based on the theories of Smith and Tillema’s training portfolio and Riccardi’s interpretation quality evaluation sheet, an action research project was conducted at a sight translation class in an extension MA program at a university in Taiwan. The participants consisted of seven students, one teacher, and the researcher herself.
The data were collected from questionnaires, a pre-test and a post-test, grades of in-class role-play activities, class observations, interviews, and the students’ training portfolios. The results of the existing study confirm that process-oriented portfolio assessment, integrated with performance-based quality assessment, benefits both teachers and students in evaluating and presenting actual learning process and in identifying oral interpreting quality of each student in interpretation course.
The major benefits of applying portfolio assessment in interpretation courses are summarized as follows: (a) Portfolio assessment makes students feel less threatened than quality assessment. (b) Portfolio assessment impels students to witness and experience the importance of preparatory work as professional interpreters would do in real working situations. (c) Portfolio assessment allows students to review and maintain feedbacks provided by teachers and classmates in order to inspire further improvements.
Nevertheless, portfolio assessment is a time-consuming evaluation method because both students and teachers have to invest more time in coordinating and reviewing their portfolios; therefore, clear criteria and guidelines relating to the requirements of students’ portfolios should be designed well in advance. Additionally, it might prove to be a “heavy” assessment approach caused by the bulky portfolios; thus, the use of digital containers, such as floppy disks or CDs, or the technology of web blogs, is suggested to be instead of A4-size folders or ring binders. Moreover, portfolio assessment is recommended to be applied at elementary interpretation courses with minimal-sized classes in consideration of the workload of teachers and the academic pressures on students.
The present study may well be regarded as a pilot study in the implementation of portfolio assessment in interpretation studies. Further extensive and objective experiments are required to probe into larger-sized classes with digital devices, and without the assistance of any third party for collecting ample detached results and findings in order to establish a constructive and applicable alternative evaluation method for both interpreting educators and learners.

List of Tables and Figures v
中文摘要 vii
ABSTRACT viii
Chapter One INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Statement of the Problem 2
1.2 Purpose of the Study 3
1.3 Definition of Terms 4
Chapter Two LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1 Curriculum Design in Interpretation Studies 8
2.1.1 The Milestone in Interpreter Training 8
2.1.2 The Demand of Systematic Training Curricula 9
2.1.3 The Curriculum Design for Interpretation Courses in Taiwan 11
2.2 Assessment in Interpretation Studies 13
2.2.1 The Relationship between Curriculum Design and Assessment 13
2.2.2 The Dominant Performance and Quality Assessment in Interpretation Studies 14
2.2.3 The Demand of Alternative Assessment in Interpretation Courses 16
2.3 The Implementations of Portfolio Assessment in Language Arts 17
2.3.1 The Advantages of Portfolio Assessment 19
2.3.2 The Disadvantages of Portfolio Assessment 20
2.4 The Theoretical Framework of the Study 21
2.4.1 Smith and Tillema’s Training Portfolio 21
2.4.2 Riccardi’s Interpretation Quality Evaluation Sheet 23
2.4.3 The Structure of the Proposed Alternative Assessment in the Study 24
2.4.4 The Issue of Reliability and Validity 25
Chapter Three RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 27
3.1 The Research Method and Design 27
3.2 The Participants 30
3.2.1 The Students 31
3.2.2 The Teacher 31
3.2.3 The Researcher 32
3.3 The Teaching Environment 32
3.4 The Curriculum Design and Teaching Materials 33
3.5 Evaluation Methods 34
3.5.1 Process-oriented Portfolio Assessment 35
3.5.2 Performance-based Quality Assessment 36
3.6 The Instruments 36
3.6.1 The Checklist 37
3.6.2 The Evaluation Sheet 37
3.6.3 The Self-evaluation and Reflection Sheet 39
3.6.4 The Interview Questions after Role-play I 39
3.6.5 The Interview Questions after Role-play II 39
3.6.6 The Table of the Proposed Contents 39
3.6.7 The Pre-implementation Questionnaire 40
3.6.8 The Post-implementation Questionnaire 40
3.7 The Data Collection 40
3.7.1 The Questionnaires 41
3.7.2 The ST Pre-test and the ST Post-test 42
3.7.3 The Grades of the Three Role-play Activities 42
3.7.4 The Class Observations 42
3.7.5 The Interviews 42
3.7.6 The Students’ Training Portfolios 43
3.8 The Data Analysis 43
Chapter Four RESULTS AND FINDINGS 45
4.1 The Results of the Questionnaires 45
4.1.1 The Results of the Pre-implementation Questionnaire 45
4.1.1.1 Students’ Personal Backgrounds vs. Teacher’s Curriculum Designs 45
4.1.1.2 Experienced Learners with More Specific Goals 46
4.1.1.3 Explanation before Application 46
4.1.2 The Results of the Post-implementation Questionnaire 47
4.1.2.1 Acceptable Teaching Materials 49
4.1.2.2 More Diverse In-class Activities Required 50
4.1.2.3 Constructive Evaluation Methods Preferred 50
4.1.2.4 Positive Learning Experiences 51
4.2 The Results of the ST Pre-test and the ST Post-test 52
4.2.1 Progress on Content but Regress on Delivery 52
4.2.2 Higher Speech Rates and More Accurate Wordings 56
4.3 The Results of the Students’ Grades for the Role-play Activities 56
4.3.1 From the Point of View of the Teacher 56
4.3.2 From the Point of View of the Peers 57
4.3.3 From the Point of View of the Student Interpreters 58
4.3.4 Performance-based Quality Assessment Seem Subjective 59
4.3.5 The Presence of an Invited Guest Effects Students’ Performance 59
4.4 The Summaries of the Class Observations 60
4.4.1 The Warm-up Activity as a Buffer Zone for Tardy Students 60
4.4.2 The Role-play Activity Regarded as Mid-term and Final Exams 61
4.4.3 Impromptu Interpreting Activities Causes Anxiety 61
4.4.4 Classmates Regarded Each Other as Partners not Competitors 62
4.5 The Findings from the Interviews 63
4.5.1 Students Rely on Internet for Preparatory Work 63
4.5.2 More Challenges for Role-play Activities 64
4.5.3 Problems about the Evaluation Sheet 65
4.5.4 Positive Feedbacks for Portfolio Assessment 66
4.5.5 Suggestions for Portfolio Assessments 67
4.6 The Findings from the Students’ Training Portfolios 70
4.6.1 Portfolios to Monitor their Self-learning Processes After School 70
4.6.2 Portfolios to Show their In-class Participations 72
4.6.3 Portfolios to Record their Preparatory Work 73
4.6.4 Portfolios to Illustrate their Tactics on Note-taking 75
4.6.5 Portfolios to Post their Self-reflections 76
Chapter Five CONCLUSION 81
5.1 Portfolio Assessment in Interpretation Course 82
5.1.1 The Advantages and Disadvantages 82
5.1.2 The Reactions of the Teacher and Students 84
5.1.3 The Problems and Solutions 85
5.1.4 The Implications for Professional Practice 86
5.2 Limitations 87
5.3 Suggestions for Future Research 88
References 90
Appendix A The List of Universities of Science and Technology in Taiwan Offering Interpreting-related Courses 97
Appendix B The Tentative Syllabus of the Study 98
Appendix C The Schedules and the Selected Speeches of the Three Role-play Activities 99
Appendix D The Curriculum Design and Teaching Materials 103
Appendix E The Checklist of the Student’s Training Portfolio for Submission I and II 107
Appendix F The Evaluation Sheet 122
Appendix G The Evaluation Sheet for CI Examination 123
Appendix H The Evaluation Form for Informative Speech 125
Appendix I The Self-evaluation and Reflection Sheet 126
Appendix J The Interview Questions after Role-play I 127
Appendix K The Interview Questions after Role-play II 128
Appendix L The Table of the Proposed Contents 129
Appendix M The Pre-implementation Questionnaire 130
Appendix N The Post-implementation Questionnaire 131
Appendix O The Transcriptions of the Students’ Interpretations at the Pre-test and the Post-test 135
Appendix P The Work from Becky’s Portfolio 143
Appendix Q The Example of Anita’s Note-taking Notes 149
Appendix R The Example of Kelly’s Note-taking Notes 150
Appendix S The Examples of Elsa’s Note-taking Notes 151
Appendix T The Teaching Environment 152

Aarup, H. (1993). Theory and practice in the teaching of interpreting. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 2, 167-174.
AIIC Training Committee. (1999). Setting up a conference interpreting training programme. Retrieved August 16, 2005, from http://www.aiic.net/ViewPage.cfm?page_id=60
American Education Service. (2005). Glossary of Admission Terms. EducationPlanner. Retrieved July 15, 2005, from www.educationplanner.com/education_planner/applying_article.asp
Baker, D. (1989). Language testing. A Critical Survey and Practical Guide. London: Edward Arnold.
Barrow, D.A. (1992/1993). The use of portfolios to assess student learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 22(3), 148-153.
Borowski, M. C., Thompson, C., & Zaccaria, K. (2001). Portfolios: Authentic Assessment. Master of Arts action research project, Saint Xavier University and SkyLight Professional Development Field Based Master’s Program, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A..
Castiglione, L. V. (1996). Portfolio assessment in art and education. Arts Education Policy Review, 97(4), 1063-2913. Retrieved May 7, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.
Chen, S. J. (2005, July). Interpreter training with video materials. Paper presented at the 1st Cross-Strait Conference on Translation and Intercultural Communication, Beijing, China.
Chen, T. T. (2004, December). Lesson plan for consecutive interpretation of journalism from English to Chinese. Paper presented at the 9th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Tainan, Taiwan, R.O.C..
Chen, T. W. (2003, December). 經貿題材之演說於口譯教學之應用 [Jing-Mao Ti-Cai Zhi Yan-Shuo Yu Kou-Yi Jiao-Xue Zhi Ying-Yong]. Paper presented at the 8th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C..
Chen, Y. H. (2003). A design of testing and assessment mechanism of the CI pedagogy for the English persuasive speeches. Studies of Interpretation and Translation, 8, 153-194.
Daiker, D. A., Sommers, J., Stygall, G., & Black, L. (1996). Portfolio writing assessment in student placement. Retrieved August 20, 2006, from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/fipse/lessons3/miami.html
Dale, P., & Wolf, J. C. (2000). Speech communication made simple: A multicultural perspective. New York: Pearson Education.
Dick, B. (1993). You want to do an action research thesis? How to conduct and report action research. Retrieved August 6, 2005, from http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/art/arthesis.html
Dodds, J. M. (1989). Linguistic theory construction as a premise to a methodology for teaching interpretation. In. L. Gran & J. Dodds (Eds.), The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation (pp. 27-33). Udine: Campanotto.
Dutt-Doner, K. & Gilman, D. A. (1998). Students react to portfolio assessment. Contemporary Education, 69(3), 159-167. Retrieved May 7, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.
French, R. L. (1992). Portfolio assessment and LEP students. Proceedings of the Second National Research Symposium on Limited English Proficient Student Issues: Focus on Evaluation and Measurement. Retrieved August 20, 2006, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/symposia/second/vol1/portfolio.htm
Gagliano, K., & Swiatek, L. (1999). Improving Student Assessment through the Implementation of Portfolios in Language Arts. Master of Arts action research project, Saint Xavier University and IRI/Skylight, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A..
Gaiba, F. (2001). Interpretation at the Nuremberg Trial. Interpreting, 4:1, 9-22. Retrieved December 31, 2003, from EBSCOhost database.
Genesee, F. & Upshur, J. A. (1998). Classroom-based evaluation in second language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gile, D. (1995). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. (2001). Interpreting Research: What you never wanted to ask but may like to know. Retrieved August 16, 2005, from http://www.aiic.net/ViewPage.cfm?page_id=341
Hamp-Lyon, L. (1994). Interweaving assessment and instruction in college ESL writing classes. College ESL, 4, 1, 43-55.
Hartley, A., Mason, I., Peng, G., & Perez, I. (2004). Peer- and self-assessment in conference interpreter training. Research project, Pedagogical Research Fund in Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, The Higher Education Academy, Heslington, United Kingdom. Retrieved May 7, 2005, from http://www.llas.ac.uk/prf.aspx#lang1
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. London and New York: Routledge.
Hoy, C. & Gregg, N. (1994). Assessment: The special educator’s role. CA: Brook/Cole Publishing Company.
Hsieh, Y. F. (2000). Implementation of Portfolio Assessment in a Sixth Grade EFL Classroom. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C..
Johnson, C. S. (2006). Online portfolio assessment for technical writing programs. Retrieved January 3, 2007, from http://web.njit.edu/~cjohnson/twassess/index.html
Kahane, E. (2000). Thoughts on the quality of interpretation. Retrieved August 16, 2005, from http://www.aiic.net/ViewPage.cfm/article117
Katula, A., Ray, S., & Sherrill, C. (1999). Improving Student Motivation, Parent Communication, and Assessment While Implementing a Portfolio Program. Master of Arts action research project, Saint Xavier University and IRI/Skylight, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A..
Kozloff, M. A. (2003). Portfolio assessment of teachers: a critical examination. Retrieved August 20, 2006, from http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/portfolios.html
Krueger, B. & Wallace, J. (1996). Portfolio assessment: Possibilities and pointers for practice. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 42(1), 26-34. Retrieved May 7, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.
Kurz, I. (2000). Theory and practice in the training of interpreters. International Journal of Translation, 12, 173-194.
Liao, P. S. & Chiang, M. Y. (2004, December). The use of portfolios to teach translation. Paper presented at the 9th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Tainan, Taiwan, R.O.C..
Lin, J., Davis, C., & Liao, P. (2004, December). The effectiveness of using international mock conference in interpretation courses. Paper presented at the 9th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Tainan, Taiwan, R.O.C..
Liu, M. (2003, January). From empiricism to constructivism: researching and teaching interpretation. Paper presented at the 7th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C..
McAlpine, D. (2000). Portfolio assessment. G&T Related Reading for School Policies and Programmes. Retrieved August 20, 2006, from http://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/reading/assessment/portfolio_e.php
Melis, N. M., & Albir, A. H. (2001). Assessment in translation studies: research needs. Meta, XLVI (2), 272-287.
Moya, S. S., & O'Malley, J. (1994). A portfolio assessment model for ESL. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 13, 13-36.
Munday, J. (2001). Introducing translation studies: theories and applications. London: Routledge.
Murphy, S. M. (1997). Designing portfolio assessment programs to enhance learning. Clearing House, 71(2), 81-84. Retrieved May 7, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.
Niska, H. (1997, October). Testing community interpreters: a theory, a model and a plea for research. Lecture given at the Symposium on Community Interpreting in Bloemfontein, South Africa. Retrieved August 15, 2005, from http://lisa.tolk.su.se/00TEST.HTM
PALS guide. (2005). Glossary. Performance assessment links in science. Retrieved July 15, 2005, from http://pals.sri.com/pals/guide/glossary.html
Paulson, L. F., Paulson P. R., & Meyer C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60-63.
Pilot Productions Ltd. (2002). New Orleans [Global Trekker DVD series]. UK: London.
Pilot Productions Ltd. (2002). San Francisco [Global Trekker DVD series]. UK: London.
Pöchhacker, F. (2001). Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta, XLVI (2), 410-425.
Riccardi, A. (2002). Evaluation in interpretation: Macrocriteria and microcriteria. In. E. Hung (Ed.), Teaching Translating and Interpreting 4: Building Bridges (pp. 115-126). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Sawyer, D. B. (2004). Fundamental aspects of interpreter education: curriculum and assessment. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Schjoldager, A. (1996). Assessment of simultaneous interpreting. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3, 187-195.
Short, D. J. (1993). Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 627-656.
Smith, K., & Tillema, H. (2003). Clarifying different types of portfolio use. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(6), 625-648.
The Department of Technological and Vocational Education. (2005). A list of universities of science and technology. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://www.tve.edu.tw/new/index.asp
Wang, C. H. (2003, January). Application teaching methods on interpretation. Paper presented at the 7th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C..
Weber, K. W. (1984). Training translators and conference interpreters. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Wu, S. C. (2003, December). Assessment scales and descriptors for simultaneous interpreting. Paper presented at the 8th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C..
Yang, C. S. (2003, January). Web-based interpreter training: Interaction between the physical and virtual classrooms. Paper presented at the 7th Conference on the Teaching of Translation and Interpretation, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C..