An Exploratory Examination of Naturally-generated Oral Peer Feedback in Interpreting Classes using Hattie and Timperley's Feedback Model

逐步口譯課堂同儕回饋類型層級分析初探

郭恬君(Tien-chun (Gina) Kuo)

peer feedback ； Hattie & Timperley's Feedback Model ； interpretation training ； 同儕回饋 ； Hattie & Timperley回饋模型 ； 口譯訓練

翻譯學研究集刊

22輯（2018 / 12 / 01）

67 - 82

英文

Feedback in interpreter training is defined as information provided by the trainer, peer, or the trainee himself/herself, etc. regarding the interpretation performance of the trainee in order to identify the gap between the trainee's current performance and learning goal, and to explore ways to narrow that gap. In the field of interpreting study, there is currently a lack of systematic empirical investigation on the content and nature of feedback that occurs during interpreter training. This paper is an exploratory attempt to analyze naturally-generated peer feedback in consecutive interpretation training setting with the Feedback Model proposed by Hattie & Timperley (2007). A total of 5 hours and 44 minutes of oral peer feedback recorded from five sessions of consecutive interpreting classes for first year interpreting trainees in a conference interpreting MA program in Taiwan was analyzed to provide a picture of the level of peer feedback generated in class. In addition, ideas for improving peer feedback design in interpretation training informed by these results are proposed.

口譯訓練中的回饋（feedback）指的是教師、同儕或學生本人針對學生在課堂上的口譯表現提供資訊，以說明該學生目前的表現與學習目標間的差距，以及探索縮短此一差距的方法。有鑑於目前針對口譯訓練時學生所收到回饋內容及性質之系統性實證研究甚少，本研究嘗試採用Hattie & Timperley (2007)所提出的回饋模型（Feedback Model）分析在逐步口譯課堂上自然產生的同儕回饋內容。本研究的資料為台灣某翻譯研究所一年級逐步口譯課堂的上課錄音，總共分析五堂課共5小時44分鐘的回饋內容，以系統性的說明在口譯課堂上同儕回饋的層級（level）分佈，並根據分析結果提出改善口譯課堂同儕回饋活動的想法。

1. Lee, Z.-y.(2016).Reflective practice for student interpreters: A Case Study.Studies of Interpretation and Translation,20,75-96.
   連結：
2. S., J. M.(Ed.)(2014).Handbook of research on educational communications and technology.New York, NY:Springer Science & Business Media.
   連結：
3. Blom, D.,Poole, K.(2004).Peer assessment of tertiary music performance: Opportunities for understanding performance assessment and performing through experience and self-reflection.British Journal of Music Education,21(1),111-125.
4. Boud, D.(Ed.),Molloy, E.(Ed.)(2013).Feedback in Higher and Professional Education: Understanding it and Doing it Well.New York, NY:Routledge.
5. Carless, D.(2006).Differing perceptions in the feedback process.Studies in Higher Education,31(2),219-233.
6. Cho, Y. H.,Cho, K.(2011).Peer reviewers learn from giving comments.Instructional Science,39,629-643.
7. Evans, C.(2013).Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education.Review of Educational Research,83(1),70-120.
8. Fowler, Y.(2004).Formative assessment: Using peer and self-assessment in interpreter training.Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of Interpreting in the Community. Selected Papers from the 4th International Conference on Interpreting in Legal, Health, and Social Service Settings,Stockholm, Sweden:
9. Gan, M. J. S.,Hattie, J.(2014).Prompting secondary students' use of criteria, feedback specificity and feedback levels during an investigative task.Instructional Science,42,861-878.
10. Harris, L. R.,Brown, G. T. L.,Harnett, J. A.(2015).Analysis of New Zeland primary and secondary student peer-and self-assessment comments: Applying Hattie and Timperley's feedback model.Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice,22(2),265-281.
11. Hattie, J.(1999).Hattie, J. (1999, August 2, 1999) Influences on student learning: Professor of education inaugural lecture. Auckland, New Zealand: University of Auckland..
12. Hattie, J.,Timperley, H.(2007).The power of feedback.Review of Educational Research,77(1),81-112.
13. McMillan, J. H.(Ed.)(2013).Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment.California, USA:Sage Publications.
14. McMillan, J. H.(Ed.)(2013).Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment.Thousand Oaks, California:SAGE Publications.
15. Mulder, R. A.,Pearce, J. M.,Baik, C.(2014).Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation.Active Learning in Higher Education,15(2),151-171.
16. Nelson, M. M.,Schunn, C. D.(2009).The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance.Instructional Science,37,375-401.
17. Nicol, D. J.,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.
18. Nicol, D. J.,Thomson, A.,Breslin, C.(2014).Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education,39(1),102-122.
19. Poverjuc, O.,Brooks, V.,Wray, D.(2012).Using peer feedback in a Master's programme: A multiple case study.Teaching in Higher Education,17(4),465-477.
20. Reitbauer, M.,Vaupetitsch, R.(2013).Corrective feedback in the constructivist classroom.Feedback matters: Current feedback practices in the EFL classroom,Frankfurt am Main, Germany:
21. Renninger, K. A.(Ed.),Sigel, I. E.(Ed.)(2006).Handbook of Child Psychology: Child Psychology in Practice.Hoboken, New Jersey:John Wiley & Sons.
22. Sadler, D. R.(1989).Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems.Instructional Science,18,119-144.
23. Wang, K.,Han, C.(2013).Accomplishment in the multitude of counsellors: Peer feedback in translation training.Translation & Interpreting,5(2),62-75.
24. Wang, M.-y.(2009).Taipei, Taiwan,National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.