Teachers’ Feedback and Trainees’ Confidence: Do They Match?

María del Mar Haro Soler

doi:10.18778/1731-7533.19.2.06

Authors

María del Mar Haro Soler University of Granada, Spain

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.19.2.06

Keywords:

translator education, online learning, blended learning, teachers’ feedback, self-efficacy beliefs

Abstract

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, traditional face-to-face learning was suddenly replaced by online learning in universities all over the world. This sudden switch posed a wide variety of challenges to teachers and students. This paper focuses on one teaching practice, teachers’ feedback, and on a students’ form of self-perception, self-efficacy beliefs, both inherent to the teaching-learning process, whether it occurs in the classroom or a virtual environment. An action-research mixed-method study was performed to analyze how teachers’ feedback can impact translation students’ self-efficacy beliefs in three educational modes: face-to-face lessons, blended learning and online learning. This study was performed in two phases. Firstly, a quasi-experimental field study was performed before the outbreak of the pandemic in three groups of the same course: one offered traditional classes, whereas the other two included blended learning. Following the essence of action-research, the results of this first phase were implemented in an online translation course during the pandemic. After comparing and contrasting the results obtained in these two phases, we can conclude that indirect, elaborate and dialogic feedback fostered the students’ self-efficacy beliefs, irrespective of the educational mode.

References

Area, M. and Adell, J. (2009). E-learning. Enseñar y aprender en espacios virtuales. In J. De Pablos (coord.), Tecnología Educativa. La formación del profesorado en la era de Internet (pp. 391-424). Málaga: Aljibe.
Google Scholar

Atkinson, D. P. (2014). Developing psychological skill for the global language industry: An exploration of approaches to translator and interpreter training. Translation Spaces, 3(1), 1-24.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.3.01atk

Atkinson, D. P. and Crezee, I. H. M. (2014). Improving psychological skill in trainee interpreters. International Journal of Interpreter Education, 6(1), 3-18.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.3.01atk

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: Freeman.
Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares and T. Urdan (eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Google Scholar

Baron, R. A. (1988). Negative effects of destructive criticism: Impact on conflict, self-efficacy, and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 199-207.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.73.2.199

Biju, S.M. (2010). E-learning and blended learning in the Gulf region. In M. Iskander, V. Kapila, M. Karim (eds.), Technological Developments in Education and Automation (pp. 7-9). Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3656-8_2

Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to Give Effective Feedback to Your Students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Google Scholar

Butler, D. L. and Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245-281.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245

Clark, R. C. and Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the Science of Instruction. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119239086

Czura A. and Baran-Łucarz M. (2021). “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment in an In-Class and Online English Phonetics Course. Íkala, 26(3), 623-641.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v26n3a09

Dam-Jensen, H. and Heine, C. (2009). Process research methods and their application in the didactics of text production and translation. Trans-kom, 2(1), 1-25.
Google Scholar

Dollerup, C. (1994). Systematic feedback in teaching translation. In C. Dollerup and A. Lindegaard (eds.), Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2. Insights, Aims and Visions (pp. 121-132). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.5.19dol

Gholami, K. and Tirri, K. (2012). Caring teaching as a moral practice: an exploratory study on perceived dimensions of caring teaching. Education Research International, 2012, 1-8.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/954274

Glackin, M. and Hohenstein, J. (2017). Teachers’ self-efficacy: Progressing qualitative analysis. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 41(3), 271-290.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2017.1295940

Haro-Soler, M. M. (2017). Teaching practices and translation students’ self-efficacy: A qualitative study of teachers’ perceptions. Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning E, 4(1), 198-228.
Google Scholar

Haro-Soler, M. M. (2018a). Las creencias de autoeficacia del estudiantado de Traducción: una radiografía de su desarrollo (Doctoral Thesis). Universidad de Granada, Granada.
Google Scholar

Haro-Soler, M. M. (2018b). Self-confidence and its role in translator training: The students’ perspective. In I. Lacruz and R. Jääskeläinen (eds.), Innovation and Expansion in Translation Process Research (pp. 131-160). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.18.07har

Haro-Soler, M. M. (2021). How can translation teachers care for their students? A case study on verbal persuasion and translation students’ self-efficacy beliefs. New Voices in Translation Studies, 24, 46-71.
Google Scholar

Haro-Soler, M. M. (2022/forthcoming). A proposal for a translator’s self-efficacy beliefs scale: Spanish and English version. Tonos Digital.
Google Scholar

Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Hawkins, S. (2021). The digital translation classroom: Another day at the computer for the burgeoning translator. New Voices in Translation Studies, 24, 72-81.
Google Scholar

Huxham, M. (2007). Fast and effective feedback: Are model answers the answer? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(6), 601-611.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930601116946

Isenbarger, L. and Zembylas, M. (2006). The emotional labour of caring in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(1), 120-134.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.07.002

Krueger, R. A. (1991). El grupo de discusión: Guía práctica para la investigación aplicada. Madrid: Pirámide.
Google Scholar

Krueger, R. A. and Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. Los Angeles, CA/London/New Delhi/Singapur/Washington DC: Sage.
Google Scholar

Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Self-efficacy in the Workplace: Implications for Motivation and Performance. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, 14(1), 1-6.
Google Scholar

McKimm, J. (2009). Giving effective feedback. British Journal of Hospital Medicine, 70(3), 158-161.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2009.70.3.40570

Neunzig, W. and Tanqueiro, H. (2005). Teacher feedback in online education for trainee translators. Meta, 50(4).
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/019873ar

Nicol, D. J. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090

Nunan, D. (2007). Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Tapia, J. A. and Huertas, J. A. (2012). Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in Secondary Education. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 806-813.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.04.007

Pietrzak, P. (2014). Towards effective feedback to translation students: Empowering through group revision and evaluation. Intralínea, Special Issue.
Google Scholar

Spada, N. (1990). Observing classroom behaviors and learning outcomes in different second language programmes. In J. Richards and D. Nunan (eds.), Second Language Teacher Education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Tivyaeva, I. (2021). Exploring new ways in translator and interpreter training: A student adaptation perspective. New Voices in Translation Studies, 24, 104-117.
Google Scholar

Torre, J. C. (2007). Una triple alianza para un aprendizaje universitario de calidad. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia Comillas.
Google Scholar

Washbourne, K. (2014). Beyond error marking: Written corrective feedback for a dialogic pedagogy in translator training. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(2), 240-256.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.908554

Way, C. (2009). Bringing professional practices into translation classrooms. In I. Kemble (Ed.), The Changing Face of Translation (pp. 131-142). Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth.
Google Scholar

Yang, X., Guo, X. and Yu, S. (2016). Effects of cooperative translation on Chinese EFL student levels of interest and self-efficacy in specialized English translation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3), 477-493.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.991794