Structured peer feedback in simultaneous interpreting training
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 29 November 2025
https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v5i2.124
https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v5i2.124
Abstract
This study examines the implementation of peer feedback as an assessment-as-learning tool in simultaneous interpreting (SI) training within interpreter education. While instructor feedback remains indispensable, peer feedback offers potential to enrich students’ learning experiences. However, its adoption in SI has been limited due to the signifi ant cognitive demands of the task, novices’ underdeveloped assessment skills, and students’ reluctance to critique their peers. This study sought to overcome these challenges by implementing a structured three-level feedback framework with targeted training and multimodal technological support. Conducted over 16 weeks in an introductory SI course at a graduate institute in Taiwan, the study involved eight first-year students participating in four structured rounds of asynchronous peer feedback activities. The framework comprised three levels: the product level (evaluating accuracy, fluency, and delivery of interpreting output), the process level (diagnosing underlying strategies and cognitive management in interpreting), and the future-plan level (offering actionable suggestions for improvement). Using a video assessment platform with crucial features like dual-track audio control and time-stamped commentary, students provided balanced commentary across accuracy, language quality, and delivery dimensions. Findings revealed benefits for both feedback providers and recipients. Providers developed deeper analytical skills and enhanced metacognitive awareness through evaluating peers’ work, while recipients gained valuable insights into their blind spots, received motivation from explicit positive commentary, and discovered alternative strategic approaches. Students particularly valued future-plan level feedback, indicating a preference for solution-oriented commentary that directly guided subsequent practice. The structured feedback framework and technological support enabled students to move beyond surface-level observations to analyze complex underlying processes and propose targeted improvements. These findings suggest that peer feedback can transform assessment into a powerful, collaborative learning experience in SI training when properly structured and supported, thereby creating opportunities for students to develop essential self-regulation and evaluative skills vital for professional growth within a collaborative learning environment.
摘要
本研究旨在探討在同步口譯訓練中，如何透過同儕回饋培養學生的分析和 評估能力，以達到「評估即學習」的效果。儘管教師回饋在口譯教育中不可或 缺，同儕回饋亦能豐富學生的學習經驗。然而，由於同步口譯的認知負荷較重、 初學者的評估能力往往不足，學生對批評同儕的翻譯產出也有疑慮等因素，導致 同儕回饋在同步口譯教學中的應用仍受限。本研究透過實施三個層級的回饋框架 並結合多模式的影音評估平台，企圖克服上述挑戰。研究在臺灣一所翻譯研究所 的同步口譯入門課程中進行，為期十六週，研究參與者為八位碩士班一年級學 生，共進行四個回合的非同步同儕回饋。研究者設計了三個層級的回饋框架：產 出層級（評估口譯成果的訊息準確度、表達流暢度和語言品質）、過程層級（診 斷口譯過程中的策略運用和認知管理）和未來計劃層級（提出具體可行的改進建 議）。課程使用支援多模式的影音評估平台，讓學生利用該平台的雙軌音訊控制 和時間戳記評論等功能，提供涵蓋準確性、語言品質和表達層面的全方位回饋。 研究結果顯示，提供回饋者與接受回饋者都在同儕評估過程中獲益良多。提供回 饋者藉由評估培養了更深入的分析能力與後設認知意識；而接收回饋者則藉由同 儕的意見察覺自身盲點，從明確的正面評論中獲得學習動力，並發掘更多元的口 譯策略。學生特別重視「未來計畫」層級的回饋，顯示其偏好獲得以解決方案為 導向的評語類型，以助於後續練習。透過系統化的回饋架構和技術上的支援，學 生得以超越對於口譯產出的表面觀察，深度分析口譯過程並提出具體改進建議。 本研究結果顯示，若能提供適當的架構與充分的支援，在同步口譯教學中運用同 儕回饋，可以將同儕評估過程轉化為有效的合作學習體驗，培養學生的自我調節 與評估能力，不僅有利其專業成長，也能在教室中營造合作學習的環境。
References (28)
Bartłomiejczyk, Magdalena. (2007). Interpreting quality as perceived by trainee interpreters: Self-evaluation. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 1(2), 247–267.
Earl, Lorna M. (2013). Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.
Flanagan, Marian and Carmen Heine. (2015). Peer-feedback as a translation training tool in web-based communication. HERMES-Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 27(54), 115–136.
Fowler, Yvonne. (2007). Formative assessment: Using peer and self-assessment in interpreter training. In Wadensjö Cecilia, Dimitrova Birgitta Englund & Nilsson Anna-Lena (Eds.), The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of Interpreting in the Community (pp. 253–262). John Benjamins.
Garrison, D. Randy, Terry Anderson and Walter Archer. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 5–9.
Gile, Daniel. (2009). Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training (Revised ed.). John Benjamins. [URL]
Han, Chao and Qin Fan. (2020). Using self-assessment as a formative assessment tool in an English-Chinese interpreting course: Student views and perceptions of its utility. Perspectives, 28(1), 109–125.
Hattie, John and Helen Timperley. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Holewik, Katarzyna. (2020). Peer feedback and reflective practice in public service interpreter training. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 2(6), 133–159.
Kaufman, Julia H. and Christian D. Schunn. (2011). Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 387–406.
Kuo, Tien-chun Gina. (2018). An exploratory examination of naturally-generated oral peer feedback in interpreting classes using Hattie and Timperley’s feedback model. Studies of Translation and Interpretation, 221, 67–82.
Lee, Jieun. (2018). Feedback on feedback: Guiding student interpreter performance. Translation & Interpreting, 10(1), 152–170.
. (2008). Rating scales for interpreting performance assessment. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 2(2), 165–184.
Lee, Yun-Hyang. (2005). Self-assessment as an autonomous learning tool in an interpretation classroom. Meta, 50(4).
Li, Xiangdong. (2018). Self-assessment as ‘assessment as learning’in translator and interpreter education: Validity and washback. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 12(1), 48–67.
Lundstrom, Kristi and Wendy Baker. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43.
McConlogue, Teresa. (2015). Making judgements: Investigating the process of composing and receiving peer feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 40(9), 1495–1506.
Min, Hui-Tzu. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), 293–308.
Nicol, David, Avril Thomson and Caroline Breslin. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102–122.
Patchan, Melissa M. and Christian D. Schunn. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 431, 591–614.
Schellekens, Lonneke H., Harold G. J. Bok, Lubberta H. De Jong, Marieke F. Van der Schaaf, Wim D. J. Kremer and Cees P. M. Van der Vleuten. (2021). A scoping review on the notions of Assessment as Learning (AaL), Assessment for Learning (AfL), and Assessment of Learning (AoL). Studies in Educational Evaluation, 711, 101094.
Setton, Robin and Andrew Dawrant. (2016). Conference Interpreting: A Trainer’s Guide. John Benjamins.
Sippel, Lieselotte. (2021). Maximizing the benefits of peer interaction: Form-focused instruction and peer feedback training. Language Teaching Research, 28(2), 413–439. (Original work published 2024)
Su, Wei and Axian Huang. (2022). More enjoyable to give or to receive? Exploring students’ emotional status in their peer feedback of academic writing. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(7), 1005–1015.
Topping, Keith. (2018). Using Peer Assessment to Inspire Reflection and Learning (1st ed.). Routledge.
. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.
Wu, Wen-Chieh. (2019). Táiwān Fānyìsuǒ Xuéshēng Kǒuyì Huíkuì Kànfǎ Chūtàn [An exploration of performance feedback from student interpreter perspectives] [Master’s thesis]. National Taiwan Normal University.