Article published In: Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 37:1 (2024) ► pp.172–199
Teaching listening for interpreting through mind mapping
Students’ attitudes and its effectiveness
Published online: 3 November 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.21037.li
https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.21037.li
Abstract
Interpreting scholars claim that mind mapping can be used pedagogically to enhance trainees’ interpreting-specific listening skills. However, so far relevant empirical studies have been rare. A single-group post and retrospective self-assessment design was used to examine student interpreters’ attitudes towards the use of mind mapping in teaching listening for interpreting and its effectiveness. Eighty-two students were involved as participants. An instruction experience questionnaire was administered at the end of the pedagogical intervention to examine their attitudes towards the mind mapping exercise. Two self-assessments of knowledge and skills were conducted at the end of the pedagogical intervention to investigate their pre-test post-test gains. One was a retrospective self-assessment about their competence before the exercise (then self-assessment) and the other was a post self-assessment about their competence after the exercise (now self-assessment). The results indicate that the participants perceived mind mapping as a positive learning experience and that it was effective in developing students’ interpreting-specific listening knowledge and skills.
Resumen
El uso de mapas mentales en la enseñanza de la escucha para la interpretación: Actitudes estudiantiles y su eficacia
Los académicos de la interpretación afirman que el mapeo mental puede ser usado como una intervención pedagógica para mejorar las habilidades auditivas de los aprendices específicas de la interpretación. Este estudio tiene como objetivo examinar las actitudes de los estudiantes de interpretación hacia la efectividad del uso de los mapas mentales en la enseñanza de la escucha para la interpretación, y su auto-percepción del mismo. Ochenta y dos estudiantes participaron en el estudio. Para examinar sus actitudes hacia el ejercicio de mapeo mental, completaron un cuestionario de experiencia de instrucción al final de la intervención pedagógica. Para investigar sus aumentos como resultado del ejercicio de mapeo mental, al final de la intervención pedagógica realizaron dos autoevaluaciones de sus conocimientos y habilidades. En una, evaluaron retrospectivamente su competencia en los conocimientos y aptitudes objetivo antes del ejercicio; en la otra, evaluaron su competencia actual en los conocimientos y aptitudes objetivo. Una comparación entre las dos autoevaluaciones indicó los logros alcanzados antes y después del ejercicio. Los resultados indican que los participantes percibieron el mapeo mental como una experiencia de aprendizaje positiva y que tiene eficacia para desarrollar los conocimientos y aptitudes de los estudiantes específicamente para escuchar durante la interpretación.
Palabras clave: mapas mentales, escucha, formación de intérpretes, actitudes, eficacia
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Literature review
- 3.Using mind maps in teaching analytical listening for interpreting
- 3.1The listening component in interpreting
- 3.2Listening skills required on the part of interpreters
- 3.3The use of mind mapping to overcome students’ inadequate analytical listening skills
- 4.Contextualisation and instructional design
- 5.Methodology
- 5.1Research questions
- 5.2Participants
- 5.3Research design
- 5.4Instruments
- 5.5Data collection and analysis
- 6.Results and discussion
- 6.1Students’ attitudes
- 6.2Students’ assessment of the effectiveness of mind mapping
- 7.Conclusions
References
References (98)
Akker, E., & Cutler, A. (2003). Prosodic cues to semantic structure in native and nonnative listening. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(2), 81–96.
Ala-Antti, S. (2003). Preparing for an interpreting assignment: An element of an interpreter’s expertise [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Tampere.
Al Naqbi, S. (2011). The use of mind mapping to develop writing skills in UAE schools. Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues, 4(2), 120–133.
Albl-Mikasa, M. (2017). Notation language and notation text: A cognitive-linguistic model of consecutive interpreting. In S. Yasumasa (Ed.), Consecutive Notetaking and Interpreter Training (pp. 71–117). Routledge.
(2013). Developing and cultivating expert interpreter competence. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 181, 17–34.
Alderson, J. C. (2005). Diagnosing foreign language proficiency: The interface between learning and assessment. Continuum.
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.
Arumí Ribas, M. (2012). Problems and strategies in consecutive interpreting: A pilot study at two different stages of interpreter training. Meta, 57(3), 812–835.
Austermühl, F. (2012). Using concept mapping and the web as corpus to develop terminological competence among translators and interpreters. Translation Spaces, 11, 54–80.
Bachman, L., & Palmer, A. (1989). The construct validation of self-ratings of communicative language ability. Language Testing, 6(1), 14–29.
Bacon, S. M. (1992). Authentic listening in Spanish: How learners adjust their strategies to the difficulty of the input. Hispania, 75(2), 398–412.
Ballester, A., & Jimenez Hurtado, C. (1992). Approaches to the teaching of interpreting: Mnemonic and analytic strategies. In C. Dollerup & A. Loddegaard (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting: Training, talent and experience (pp. 237–244). John Benjamins.
Benton, S., Duchon, D., & Pallett, W. (2013). Validity of student self-reported ratings of learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(4), 377–388.
Bhanji, F., Gottesman, R., de Grave, W., Steinert, Y., & Winer, L. R. (2012). The retrospective pre-post: A practical method to evaluate learning from an educational program. Academic Emergency Medicine, 19(2), 189–194.
Blasco Mayor, M. J. (2015). L2 proficiency as predictor of aptitude for interpreting: An empirical study. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 10(1), 108–132.
Brantmeier, C., & Vanderplank, R. (2008). Descriptive and criterion-referenced self-assessment with L2 readers. System, 36(3), 456–477.
Brinkmann, A. (2003). Mind mapping as a tool in mathematics education. The Mathematics Teacher 96(2), 96–101.
Brown, A., Dewey, D., & Cox, T. (2014). Assessing the validity of can-do statements in retrospective (then-now) self-assessment. Foreign Language Annals, 47(2), 261–285.
Carell, P., Devine, J., & Eskey, D. (1991). Interactive approaches to second language reading. Cambridge University Press.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide for language teachers. Cambridge University press.
Cerezo Herrero, E. (2017). A critical review of listening comprehension in interpreter training: The case of Spanish translation and interpreting degrees. Porta Linguarum, 281, 7–22.
Chabasse, C., & Dingfelder Stone, M. (2015). Capacity management in interpretation: Efforts, directionality, and language pair considerations. In D. Andres & M. Behr (Eds.), To know how to suggest…: Approaches to teaching conference interpreting (pp. 75–102). Frank & Timme.
Chernov, G. V. (2002). Semantic aspects of psycholinguistic research in simultaneous interpretation. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader (pp. 99–109). Routledge.
Chmielewski, T. C., & Dansereau, D. F. (1998). Enhancing the recall of text: Knowledge mapping training promotes implicit transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 407–413.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Conrad, L. (1989). The effects of time-compressed speech on native and EFL listening comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(1), 1–16.
D’Antoni, A. V., Zipp, G. P., Olson, V. G., & Cahill, T. F. (2010). Does the mind map learning strategy facilitate information retrieval and critical thinking in medical students? BMC Medical Education, 101, 1–11.
D’Eon, M., Sadownik, L., Harrison, A., & Nation, J. (2008). Using self-assessments to detect workshop success. American Journal of Evaluation, 29(1), 92–98.
Dávila Garibi, A. G., & Lopez Islas, J. (1990). Oral cloze: A backup exercise for interpreting. Meta, 35(3), 647–651.
Degueldre, C. (2005). Determining language proficiency levels for language professionals. Forum, 3(1), 67–101.
Díaz-Galaz, S. (2020). Listening and comprehension in interpreting: Questions that remain open. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 15(2), 304–323.
Dueñas González, R., Vásquez, V. F., & Mikkelson, H. (1991). Fundamentals of court interpretation: Theory, policy and practice. Carolina Academic Press.
Farrand, P., Hussain, F., & Hennessy, E. (2002). The efficacy of the ‘mind map’ study technique. Medical Education, 36(5), 426–431.
Gile, D. (2005). Teaching conference interpreting: A contribution. In M. Tennent (Ed.), Training for the new millennium: Pedagogies for translation and interpreting (pp. 127–152). John Benjamins.
(2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training (rev. ed.). John Benjamins.
(2012, August 27–28). Contribution of research to interpreter training [Seminar presentation]. Research and Implications for Interpreter Training, AIIC Training of Trainers Seminar, Helsinki, Finland.
Goh, C. (2017). Cognition, metacognition and L2 listening. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (volume III1) (pp. 214–228). Routledge.
(2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28(1), 55–75.
Gran, L., & Dodds, J. (1989). The theoretical and practical aspects of teaching conference interpretation. Campanotto Editore.
Hay, D., Kinchin, I., & Lygo-Baker, S. (2008). Making learning visible: The role of concept mapping in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 295–311.
Hild, A. (2015). Discourse comprehension in simultaneous interpreting: The role of expertise and information redundancy. In A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting (pp. 67–100). John Benjamins.
Hill, L. G., & Betz, D. L. (2005). Revisiting the retrospective pretest. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(4), 501–517.
Hönig, H. G. (1997). Using text mappings in teaching consecutive interpreting. In C. Hauenschild & S. Heizmann (Eds.), Machine translation and translation theory (pp. 19–34). De Gruyter.
Ilg, G., & Lambert, S. (1996). Teaching consecutive interpreting. Interpreting, 1(1), 69–99.
Kalina, S. (2000). Interpreting competences as a basis and a goal for teaching. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 101, 3–32.
Ke, Z., & Wang, Y. (2022). Exploring the relationship between aural decoding and listening comprehension among L2 learners of English. System, 1041, 102688.
Khajavi, Y., & Ketabi, S. (2012). Influencing EFL learners’ reading comprehension and self-efficacy beliefs: The effect of concept mapping strategy. Porta Linguarum, 171, 9–27.
Kohn, K., & Albl-Mikasa, M. (2002). Note-taking in consecutive interpreting: On the reconstruction of an individualised language. Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series – Themes in Translation Studies, 11, 257–272.
Kostovich, C. T., Poradzisz, M., Wood, K., & O’Brien, K. L. (2007). Learning style preference and student aptitude for concept maps. Journal of Nursing Education, 46(5), 225–231.
Lappin-Fortin, K., & Rye, B. J. (2014). The use of pre-/post-test and self-assessment tools in a French pronunciation course. Foreign Language Annals, 47(2), 300–320.
LeBlanc, R., & Painchaud, G. (1985). Self-assessment as a second language placement instrument. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 673–687.
Li, X. (2015). Putting interpreting strategies in their place: Justifications for teaching strategies in interpreter training. Babel, 61(2), 170–192.
(2018). Self-assessment as ‘assessment as learning’ in translator and interpreter education: Validity and washback. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 12(1), 48–67.
Liu, P. (2011). A study on the use of computerized concept mapping to assist ESL learners’ writing. Computers & Education, 571, 2548–2558.
Liu, P., Chen, C., & Chang, Y. (2010). Effects of a computer-assisted concept mapping learning strategy on EFL college students’ English reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 541, 436–445.
Luccarelli, L. (2006). Conference preparation: What it is and how it could be taught. Conference Interpretation and Translation, 8(1), 3–26.
Marlsen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K. (1980). The temporal structure ken language understanding. Cognition, 8(1), 1–71.
Murphy, M. L. (2015). Meaning relations in dictionaries: meaning relations in dictionaries: Hyponymy, meronymy, synonymy, antonymy, and contrast. In P. Durkin (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of lexicography (pp.439–456). Oxford University Press.
Ojima, M. (2006). Concept mapping as pre-task planning: A case study of three Japanese ESL writers. System 34, 566–585.
Oliver, K. (2009). An investigation of concept mapping to improve the reading comprehension of science texts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(5), 402–414.
Orlando, M. (2010). Digital pen technology and consecutive interpreting: Another dimension in notetaking training and assessment. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 151, 71–86.
Oscarson, M. (1997). Self-assessment of foreign and second language proficiency. In C. Clapham & D. Corson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, vol. 7: Language testing and assessment (pp. 175–187). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Peng, G. (2009). Using rhetorical structure theory (RST) to describe the development of coherence in interpreting trainees. Interpreting, 11(2), 216–243.
(2017). A case study of knowledge enhancement in undergraduate interpreter training courses in Taiwan. Compilation and Translation Review, 10(1), 121–158.
Phuong Nguyen, T. C., & Tochon, F. V. (1998). Influence comparée de la carte de concepts et du résumé sur la compréhension et la production orales durant l’interprétation consécutive. Meta, 43(2), 220–235.
Pöchhacker, F. (1993). From knowledge to text: Coherence in simultaneous interpreting. In Y. Gambier & J. Tommola (Eds.), Translation and knowledge (pp. 87–100). University of Turku.
Pohl, N. F. (1982). Using retrospective pre-ratings to counteract response-shift confounding. Journal of Experimental Education, 50(4), 211–214.
Pratt, C. C., McGuigan, W. M., & Katzev, A. R. (2000). Measuring program outcomes: Using retrospective pretest methodology. American Journal of Evaluation, 21(3), 341–349.
Ross, S. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 11(10), 1–13.
Russell, D. (2005). Consecutive and simultaneous interpreting. In T. Janzen (Ed.), Topics in signed language interpreting: Theory and practice (pp. 135–164). John Benjamins.
Rütten, A. (2004). Why and in what sense do conference interpreters need special software? Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series – Themes in Translation Studies, 31, 167–177.
Seleskovitch, D. (1989). Teaching conference interpreting. In P. W. Krawutschke (Ed.), Translator and interpreter training and foreign language pedagogy (pp. 65–88). John Benjamins.
Seleskovitch, D., & Lederer, M. (1995). A systematic approach to teaching interpretation (trans. J. Harmer). Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf.
Setton, R. (1999). Simultaneous interpretation: A cognitive-pragmatic analysis. John Benjamins.
Setton, R., & Dawrant, A. (2016). Conference interpreting: A complete course. John Benjamins.
Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Campbell, T. (2001). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Cengage Learning.
Skeff, K. M., Stratos, G. A., & Bergen, M. R. (1992). Evaluation of a medical faculty development program: A comparison of traditional pre/post and retrospective pre/post self-assessment ratings. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 15(3), 350–366.
Sylvia, K. (2015). Comprehension. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 73–74). Routledge.
Takahashi, K. (2009). Identifying the common problems in English-to-Japanese consecutive interpretations performed by Japanese interpreting students: A case of Japanese interpreting students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Sophia University.
(2016). The causes of the problems in CI in a case of Japanese EFL university students and pedagogical suggestions. Forum, 14(1), 144–164.
Thomas, E. V., Wells, R., Baumann, S. D., Graybill, E., Roach, A., Truscott, S. D., Crenshaw, M., & Crimmins, D. (2018). Comparing traditional versus retrospective pre-/post-assessment in an interdisciplinary leadership training program. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 23(2), 191–200.
Tzou, Y., Eslami, Z. R., Chen, H., & Vaid, J. (2012). Effect of language proficiency and degree of formal training in simultaneous interpreting on working memory and interpreting performance. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16(2), 213–227.
Vanderplank, R. (1988). Implications of differences in native and non-native speaker approaches to listening. British Journal of Language Teaching, 26(1), 32–41.
Wakamoto, N., & Rose, H. (2021). Learning to listen strategically: Developing a listening comprehension strategies questionnaire for learning English as a global language. System, 1031, 102670.
Winston, E., & Monikowski, C. (2000). Discourse mapping: Developing textual coherence skills in interpreters. In C. B. Roy (Ed.), Innovative practices for teaching sign language interpreters (pp.15–66). Gallaudet University Press.