Article published In:
FORUMVol. 11:1 (2013) ► pp.77–97
A Jury of Your Peers
Peer assessment in consecutive interpretation pedagogy
Keywords: Peer assessment, consecutive interpretation, critique, questionnaire, feedback
References (13)
Bartlomiejczyk, M. (2007). Interpreting quality as perceived by trainee interpreters: Self-evaluation. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 1(2), 247–267. 
Bouzidi, L., Jaillet, A. (2009). Can online peer assessment be trusted? Educational Technology and Society, 12(4), 257–268. Retrieved from [URL]
Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua, 5(4), 231–235.
Clifford, A. (2001). Discourse, theory, performance-based assessment: Two tools for professional interpreting. Meta, 46(2), 365–378.
De Grez, L., Valcke, M. & Roozen, I. (2009). How effective are self- and peer assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teachers’ assessments? Computers & Education, 53(1), 112–120. Retrieved from [URL]
Falchikov, N. & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322. Retrieved from [URL]
Gile, D. (2001). Quality assessment in conference interpreting: Methodological issues. In Angela Collados Ais, Maria Manuela Fernandez Sanchez & Daniel Gile (eds.) La evaluacion de la calidad en interpretacion: Investigacion, 109–123. Granada: Editorial Comares.
Kurz, I. (1993). Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 51, pp. 13–21. Retrieved from ([URL])
Liu, N-F & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3),.279–290.
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. Retrieved from [URL]
Pöchhacker, F. (2010). The role of research in interpreter education. Translation & Interpreting, 2(1). Retrieved from [URL]
Pöchhacker, F. & Zwischenberg, C. (2010). Survey on quality and role: Conference interpreters’ expectations and self-perceptions. Retrieved from [URL]
Sluijsmans, D., Dochy, F. & Moerkerke, G. (1998). Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer- and co-assessment. Learning Environments Research, 1(3), 293–319. Retrieved from [URL]
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Han, Chao & Xiao Zhao
2021. Accuracy of peer ratings on the quality of spoken-language interpreting. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 46:8 ► pp. 1299 ff. 
Han, Chao
2018. A longitudinal quantitative investigation into the concurrent validity of self and peer assessment applied to English-Chinese bi-directional interpretation in an undergraduate interpreting course. Studies in Educational Evaluation 58 ► pp. 187 ff.
Han, Chao
2019. Conceptualizing and Operationalizing a Formative Assessment Model for English-Chinese Consecutive Interpreting. In Quality Assurance and Assessment Practices in Translation and Interpreting [Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies, ], ► pp. 89 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.