Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The accuracy of self-assessment has long been examined empirically in higher education research, producing a substantial body of literature that casts light on numerous potential moderators. However, despite the growing popularity of self-assessment in interpreter training and education, very limited evidence-based research has been initiated to shed insight into the formative assessment of language interpretation. This longitudinal study was therefore conducted to investigate to what extent student self-assessments of English-Chinese interpretation are accurate and how the accuracy level would change over time. Major findings are: (1) in general self-assessment accuracy improved over time for both interpreting directions; (2) regarding the three scoring dimensions of information completeness, fluency of delivery and target language quality, there was greater self-assessment accuracy for English-to-Chinese interpretation than in the other direction; (3) while information completeness was most accurately self-assessed in English-to-Chinese direction, the pattern was reversed in the opposite direction; and (4) the students tended to over-score the three quality dimensions for Chinese-to-English interpretation at each time point. These results are discussed in the light of the accuracy issue, its longitudinal trend and potential factors affecting the self-assessment of bidirectional interpretation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Han et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: