Abstracts
Abstract
The social constructivist approach to translator training represents a clear statement on the importance of directing university teachers towards a student-centered, learning centered mode. By acknowledging the fundamental role of Vygotsky in determining his approach, Kiraly brought translator training in line with the established, broad-based humanistic approach to Foreign Language Learning; by drawing on Stevick and Schön, among others, he made this debt explicit.
In this article, we apply the social constructivist approach through blended e-learning environments in courses offered to final year undergraduate students of translation. Our objective is to determine the success of combining technology and social constructivist pedagogy in promoting effective learner-centered learning. In Kiraly’s terms, we have “scaffolded” our instruction by applying instruments such as rating scales of criterion-referenced descriptors; textual and visual aids; and learner generated corpora. Our qualitative data is drawn from a variety of interactive formats: whole group online discussions, team-based online discussions, e-mail exchanges and specific “reflective” activities. We conclude that the quality of the “scaffolding” is essential to success in stimulating learning and that the e-learning environment is an excellent medium for the social constructivist approach.
Keywords:
- Spain,
- translator training,
- blended e-learning,
- social constructivism,
- learner-centred learning
Résumé
L’approche socio-constructiviste dans la formation de traducteurs permet de mettre en évidence l’importance d’orienter la formation universitaire vers un modèle axé sur l’étudiant et l’apprentissage. Tout en reconnaissant le rôle fondamental de Vygotsky comme point de départ de sa démarche, Kiraly attribue à la formation du traducteur une dimension humaniste caractéristique de l’enseignement des langues étrangères et c’est, entre autres, sur la base des travaux de Stevick et Schön qu’il rend explicite son approche.
Dans cet article, nous appliquons la démarche socio-constructiviste au domaine de l’enseignement semi-présentiel (blended e-learning) dans les matières de dernière année de la licence de traduction. Notre objectif est de déterminer le succès dans la conjonction de la technologie et la pédagogie socio-constructiviste afin de favoriser l’enseignement axé sur l’apprenant. À l’instar de Kiraly, nous avons développé un « échafaudage » pour la formation à l’aide d’instruments tels qu’un barème de descripteurs, d’aides visuelles et textuelles, ainsi que de corpus constitués par les apprenants. Les données qualitatives sont extraites de différents moyens interactifs : forums, débats en ligne par groupes, échanges de messages de courrier électronique et activités spécifiques de réflexion. Nous concluons que la qualité de « l’échafaudage » est une condition essentielle visant à stimuler l’apprentissage et que le domaine de l’enseignement semi-présentiel constitue une excellente voie pour développer la démarche socio-constructiviste dans la formation des traducteurs.
Mots-clés:
- Espagne,
- formation en traduction,
- enseignement semi-présentiel,
- constructivisme social,
- enseignement axé sur l’apprenant
Appendices
References
- BOWKER, Lynne (1998). “Using Specialized Monolingual Native-Language Corpora as a Translation Resource: A Pilot Study.” Meta, 43, 4, pp. 631-651.
- BOWKER, Lynne (2000). “Towards a Methodology for Exploiting Specialized Target Language Corpora as Translation Resources.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 5, 1, pp. 17-52.
- CÓZAR SIEVERT, Ramón de (2003). Tuning Educational Structures in Europe.
- ESTAIRE, S. and J. ZANÓN (1994). Planning Classwork. A Task Based Approach. Oxford, Heinemann.
- FABER, P., C.I. LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ and M.TERCEDOR (2001). “La utilización de técnicas de corpus en la representación del conocimiento médico.” Terminology, 7, 2, pp. 167-197.
- FABER, P.B. and M. TERCEDOR (2001). “Codifying Conceptual Information in Descriptive Terminology Management.” Meta, 50, 4, pp. 192-204.
- JOHNSON, D.W., R.T. JOHNSON and E. JOHNSON HOLUBEC (1986). Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the Classroom. Edina, Minnesota, Interaction Book Company.
- JOLLY, D. (1990). Writing Tasks: An Authentic-Task Approach to Individual Writing Needs. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- KIRALY, Donald C. (1999). “From Teacher-Centered to Learning-Centered Classrooms in Translator Education: Control, Chaos or Collaboration?” Online Symposium on Innovation in Translator and Interpreter Training. Intercultural Studies Group. Tarragona, Spain, Universitat Rovira I Virgili.
- KIRALY, Donald C. (2000). A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice. Manchester, St. Jerome.
- KIRALY, Donald C. (2003). “From Instruction to Collaborative Construction: A Passing Fad or the Promise of a Paradigm Shift in Translator Education?” in B.J Baer, and G.S. Koby, eds., Beyond the Ivory Tower: Rethinking Translation Pedagogy. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, pp. 3-27.
- KIRALY, Donald C. (2005). “Project-Based Learning: A Case for Situated Translation.” Meta, 50, 4, pp. 1098-1111.
- LAUSCHER, S. (2000). “Translation Quality Assessment: Where Can Theory and Practice Meet?” The Translator, 6, 2, pp. 149-168.
- LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ, C.I. (2003). “Electronic Resources and Lexical Cohesion in the Construction of Intercultural Competence.” Lebende Sprachen, 4, pp. 152-156.
- LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ, C.I. and M. TERCEDOR (2004). “Problemas, evaluación y calidad en traducción científica y técnica.” Sendebar, 15, pp. 29-43.
- LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ, C.I. and M. TERCEDOR (2008). “Corpora and Students’ Autonomy in Scientific and Technical Translation Training.” JoSTrans (Journal of Specialised Translation) 9. 2008. http://www.jostrans.org/issue09/art_lopez_tercedor.pdf (Consulted 31.03.2008), pp. 1-19.
- LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ, C.I., B.J. ROBINSON and M. TERCEDOR (2007). “A Learner Generated Corpus to Direct Learner-Centered Courses,” in M. Thelen and B. Lewandowska-Tomaszcyk, eds., Translation and Meaning. Part 7. Maastricht, Zuyd University, Maastricht School of International Communication, pp. 197-211.
- NUNAN, D. (1995) Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- OLVERA LOBO, M.D., M.R. CASTRO PRIETO, R. MUÑOZ MARTÍN, E. MUÑOZ RAYA, M. MURILLO, E. QUERO, B.J. ROBINSON, J.A. SENSO, B. VARGAS and C. DOMÍNGUEZ-LÓPEZ (2005). “Translator Training and Modern Market Demands.” Perspectives: Studies in translatology, 13, 2, pp. 132-142.
- OLVERA LOBO, M.D., B.J. ROBINSON, M.R. CASTRO PRIETO, R. MUÑOZ MARTÍN, E. MUÑOZ RAYA, E. QUERO, M. MURILLO, J.A. SENSO, B.VARGAS and J.L DÍEZ LERMA (2007). “A Professional Approach to Translator Training (PATT).” Meta, 52, 3, pp. 517-528.
- PACTE (2000). In A. Beeby Lonsdale, D. Ensinger and M. Presas, eds., Acquiring Translation Competence. Hypotheses and Methodological Problems of a Research Project; Investigating Translation. Selected Papers from the 4th International Congress on Translation, Barcelona (1998). Amsterdam, John Benjamins.
- ROACH, M.P., P. BLACKMORE and DEMPSTER. (2001). “Supporting High Level Learning Through Research-Based Methods: A Framework for Course Development.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38, 4, pp. 369-382.
- ROBINSON, B.J. (1996). “La evaluación de la traducción,” in W. Lozano and J.L. Vázquez Marruecos, eds.. Granada, University of Granada.
- ROBINSON, B.J. (1998). “Traducción transparente: métodos cuantitativos y cualitativos en la evaluación de la traducción.” Revista de Enseñanza Universitaria (Número extraordinario), pp. 577-589.
- ROBINSON, B.J., C.I. LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ and M. TERCEDOR (2006). “Self-Assessment in Translator Training.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 14, 3, pp. 115-138.
- ROBINSON, P. and S. ROSS (1996). “The Development of Task-Based Assessment in English for Academic Purposes Programs.” Applied Linguistics, 17, 4, pp. 455-476.
- SCHÄFFNER, C. (2004). [Review of] Don Kiraly. A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice. Manchester, St. Jerome. Target, 16, 1, pp. 157-189.
- SCHÖN, D.A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
- STEVICK, E.W. (1990). Humanism in Language Teaching. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
- STEVICK, E.W. (1980). Teaching Languages: A Way and Ways. Longman ELT.
- TERCEDOR, M., C.I. LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ and B.J. ROBINSON (2005). “Textual and Visual Aids for E-Learning Translation Courses.” Meta, 50, 4, CD-Rom.
- TERCEDOR, M., C.I. LÓPEZ RODRÍGUEZ and B.J. ROBINSON (2006). “Traducción científica y técnica en entornos de enseñanza virtual: propuesta de actividades.” Traducción, lengua y cultura en los albores del siglo XXI. X Jornadas Hispanorrusas de traducción e Interpretación. Granada, Jizo Ediciones, pp. 325-341.
- TIRKKONEN-CONDIT, S, and J. LUKKANEN (1996). “Evaluations: a Key Towards Understanding the Affective Dimension of Translational Decisions.” Meta, 41,1, pp. 45-59.
- VYGOTSKY, L. (1994). “Extracts from Thought and Language and Mind in Society,” in B. Stierer and J. Maybin, eds., Language, Literacy and Learning in Educational Practice. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters, pp. 45-58.
- ZANETTIN, F. (1998). “Bilingual Comparable Corpora and the Training of Translators.” Meta, 43, 4, pp. 616-630.
- ZANETTIN, F. (2001). “Swimming in Words: Corpora, Language Learning and Translation,” in G. Aston, ed., Learning with Corpora. Houston, TX, Athelstan, pp. 177-197.
- ZANETTIN, F. (2002). “DIY Corpora: The WWW and the Translator,” in B. Maia, J. Haller, and M. Ulrych. http://www.federicozanettin.net/DIYcorpora.htm (consulted 19.07.2007), pp. 239-248.
- ZANETTIN, F., S. BERNARDINI and D. STEWART, eds. (2003). Corpora in Translator Education. Manchester-Northampton, St. Jerome.