The following text was published in Poland in the volume Język trzeciego tysiąclecia II, by Tertium in Krakow in 2002 (in Polish) and in 2007 in French by CRATIL at ISIT. The English version was delivered as a presentation in Cracow in 2002 but not published. All three versions are below.
Introduction
In the article below I will try to describe how the methodology used in management training and in the teaching of English as a foreign language can be applied to the training of conference interpreters.
When we think about teaching methods, schools, universities and the like we probably see the same image. The teacher stands at the front of the class with the students sitting in rows before them and talks either to the whole group, to individual students or gives them instructions for exercises which students complete individually.
This model is call LOCKSTEP, meaning that the pace of the lesson is defined by the teacher and each student must work at that same pace. Harmer (1991:237) notes the following advantages of Lockstep:
- Students are concentrated on what the teacher is saying, and can hear clearly what he says
- The teacher is a good model of the target skill
- The teacher can check the accuracy of what the students say
This model is now though something of a rarety in language schools and corporate training schemes for the reasons outlined below.
Towards the end of the 70’s private schools and firms began teaching on a large scale for the first time, influenced heavily by anglosaxon schools and teachers, languages and management skills started being taught outside university and normal school buildings. Language schools and corporate training firms had clearly defined goals and worked under different conditions than did public educational institutions and this led to a fundametnal change in the approach to teaching (see Brundage, McKeracher, 1980; Nunan, 1984; Harmer, 1991) and training management skills (De Bono, 1970; Sun Tzu, 1981; Heron, 1999). The Lockstep model became a thing of the past.
Changes in teaching methodology
I will look at changes in teaching methodology with respect of 4 areas: skills transfer, how we learn, dealing with mistakes, and the way we treat learners.
1. Skills transfer
The realisation that the Lockstep method was useful for the transfer of information but less well suited ot the transfer of skills led to fundamental changes in the teaching methods. The aim of the exercise, for example in language learning, management skills, (and now conference interpreting) was that the student be able to apply the skills learnt in the classroom in practice outside the classroom.
Skills are learnt not because the teacher explains them but rather through the students’ practice of those skills. Knowing how to, and being able to are not the same thing. This process, through which theoretical knowledge is tranformed, through repeated practice, into practical ability is called internalisation. One example of this process canbe found in our mastery of our mother tongues. We cannot necessarily explain why something is right, but we know that it is. We internalise the grammatical rules of the languages unconsciously because we hear and use examples of them thousands of times as children. A mark of the importance of internalisation is that almost all Europeanlanguages have a saying along the lines of,
„practice makes perfect”. I don’t know any language with a saying, „theory makes perfect”.
If we want to increase the time students spend practising, so that they can internalise principles and rules the teacher’s role changes: it is no longer to pass on information as it has been up until now but rather it is to allow the students the maximum amount of time to practise their skills in the lesson. The student is to become the centre of attention of the teaching process where in the Lockstep the teacher was the focus of attention and only one student was in direct interaction with them at any given time, the rest are not directly involved, they are passive.
Figure 1. Model lockstep
The fundamental change introduced saw students able to talk to one another within the framework of an exercise planned by the trainer and under his supervision. In this way more students can be active for more of the lesson time. Since the goal of the lesson is for the students to apply the skills learnt themselves outside the classroom it would seem logical to offer them the chance to practise autonomously in the classroom first. Work in smaller sub- groups within the larger group is now the mainstay of modern teaching. (See Harmer, 1991; Lewis, 1993; Margolis, Bell, 1996). Below we can see that students can be active simultaneously and for a longer proportion of the time.
Figure 2. Pairwork
2. How we learn
Teachers also looked at the ways in which students acquire skills and how the trainer can apply this knowledge in the classroom. The following are 3 of the many different elements that help people learn more effectively,
- Use of external stimuli
- Group psychology
- Student motivation.
I will not discuss here internalisation as it is mentioned above.
It is known that people learn better if visual, kinesthetic or other sensory stimuli are used, this means by using pictures, movement or calling on the other senses during the exercises completed in class time. (See Harmer, 1981; Puchta, 1992; Savage, 1993).
The way students interact with each other and the teachers understanding of that interaction will also influence learning. The trainer considers psychological aspects in the planning phase to ensure for example that the less extrovert are involved to an equal extent. The way the trainer behaves also has a significant effect on the learning process. (Margolis, Bell, 1996).
Motivation is also important for the learner – it is now the trainer’s task to help motivate students (See Brundage, MacKeracher, 1980). Motivation levels can be increased by using the methods described above and by using a variety of different activities during lessons. Motivation is also increased if the course is transparent, that is if the student can see what and why he is doing and what progress he is making and by involving students in decisions about the content of the course (asking them what they want to learn).
The trainer’s behaviour is also a significant factor. Respect for and courtesy towards the learner should go without saying but the trainer must also take care not to hinder learning, for example by intimidating, deliberately or otherwise, the learners (for how to avoid doing this see Sun Tzu, 1981; Margolis and Bell, 1986; Quirke, 1996)) .
Bringing together these ideas the following chinese proverb has become something of a mantra for teachers,
Tell me and I will forget
Show me and I will remember
Involve me and I will understand
Unfortunately that means that readers will probably forget what I have written here!
3. The approach to mistakes
Traditionally if the student makes a mistake the teacher corrects it by giving the correct version which the student then repeats.
The aim of the exercise is that the student not repeat the error in the future but we should be aware that this type of correction is not effective. In addition it can often be perceived as negative and discouraging by the student. Normally a student will first learn some theoretical rule or pattern there then follows a communicative situation or exercise in which the rule has to be applied. So the student recalls the pattern or rule and speaks or completes a task accordingly. If what they say is correct we see the following,
Figure 3.
Pattern ® Analysis ® Correct version
If not, as we see below there follows a mechanical procedure in which the teacher „corrects” the error but in which the student’s arriving at the correct version and saying it requires no further intellectual effort from them.
Figure 4.
Pattern -> Analysis -> Student’s version -> Correction by teacher -> Student repeats correct version
It is not only the correct version that is important but also the way in which it is arrived at. Has the learner understood the rule or pattern and can they apply it? (Bartram and Walton, 1991). If a correct answer is not arrived at immediately the teacher no longer corrects but rather draws the learner’s attention to the mistake. The learner then thinks back to the pattern they are trying to apply and tries to answer again.
Figure 5.
Pattern -> analysis -> Student’s version -> trainer reacts -> Analysis [student] -> Correct version from student
If the student still answers incorrectly then we must return to the pattern itself which the student has clearly not understood.
Figure 6.
Pattern -> Analysis -> Student’s version -> Trainer reacts -> Analysis [student] -> Incorrect version from student-> relearn rule
4. Student as customer
As I said above the environment surrounding teaching has changed radically. Schools have become companies with a product to sell and are subordinate to the same rules of the market as any other company. Teaching is a product and the customer has to like the product. The customer has to know why they are devoting time and money to this product and that they are getting something out of paying for this product. The approach taken by teachers and directors of schools changed fundamentally a result and the following quote from Mahatma Gandhi best illustrates this if we substitute the word „student” for the word „customer”
A customer is the most important visitor on our premises. He is not an interruption of our work, he is the purpose of it. We are not doing him a favour by serving him. He is doing us a favour by giving us an opportunity to do so.
Taking this approach means also finding out from students what they need. The information gathered is used to createour product, that is the lesson or course. At every stage the learner is informed or is able to see why a given activity is useful to their learning, and that they and their views are being taken seriously. Professional preparation of classroom materials, punctuality and the like also demonstrate that the learners are being taken seriously. Students are asked for their feedback on the quality of these measures at regular intervals. [This should result in the following virtuous circle]
Figure 7.
Product -> Transparency of teaching -> Professionalism -> Learners’ feedback -> (improved) Product
Training Conference Interpreters
The methods described above can also be applied to the training of conference interpreters since they are principles which apply irrespective of the subject being taught. It is worth noting that in teaching conference interpreting we are no longer acting in the role of interpreters but in that of teachers. Using the changes in teaching methods described and assuming that our goal is for students to autonomously interpret to a professionally adequate level these ideas can be incorporated as follows. Again I will take the four areas described above as my basis, they are skills transfer, how we learn, dealing with mistakes, and the way we treat learners.
1. Skills transfer
Interpreters do not often agree but they do agree that conference interpreting is a skill, it is not a theoretical subject area and its mastery requires practice. In this respect interpreting is like learning a foreign language or acquiring management skills. The theory is interesting but the fact that a student has written a good MA thesis does not mean they can interpret. The need for practice is discussed at length by Heine (2000): practice time for the student interpretercan be increased in the same way as in the group work mentioned above while at the same time making the students the centre of attention.
Imagine that in the diagram below the capital letters denote students in the booths, the small letters are listening to them.
Figure 8.
In this model the students are interpreting for and listening to one another, the material for interpretation being provided either by an invited speaker, one of the students or a recording. In this way each interpreter has a listener for the whole time they are working and the listener has the opportunity to practise evaluating interpretation. The importance of this skill for the student interpreter should not be underestimated, since as a working interpreter one must evaluate one’s own work all the time (Schjoldager 1996).
During this activity the trainer can listen to all the students in turn. When we come to the feedback part of the lesson we use the same model. Thus the trainer doesn’t comment on students in turn (see Fig 1) but rather first asks the students to discuss the interpretation in pairs. The trainer can listen in while they do this and only afterwards briefly sums up the points which are most relevant to all or most students. In this way students spend less time listening to comments that don’t apply to them and more of them are active for more of the time.
In pair work the students are the focus of an activity and are active for longer. Sainz (1993) uses the same approach in training translators – and in this way students practise for longer which helps them internalize the skills more quickly. The advantages of quicker internalization in interpreter training are discussed in, i.a., Weber (1989), Kalina (1992), Heine (2000) and Gillies (2001).
2. How we learn
The same model (Figure 8) is also effective if we look at the three elements discussed above that promote better learning. They are the use of external stimuli, group psychology and student motivation.
Varying the activities – listening then interpreting (and perhaps also giving the speeches) – promotes learning and gives the lesson a certain dynamism, students have to move about. This may seem trivial but even the fact of changing seats alone will increase attention levels in the classroom. The students are also active for longer, see Harmer (1991) i Altman (1989).
Visual and sensory stimuli are more difficult to apply but not impossible. Imagine we wish to demonstrate that interpreting the ideas is more important than the individual words (Jones, 1998). Gile (1995) does this using one picture and showing how many ways its contents can be rendered in words. One can go further though – instead of asking students to interpret a text we can show a series of pictures, which indicate the content of the speech; for example the following series of photographs: the Heads of Government of Austria and the Czech Republic, a meetingroom, a nuclear power station with a large „X” could in effect give a number of renderings, for example:
- The Prime Ministers of Czech Republic and Austria met to discuss the closure of a nuclear power station…….
- Miloš Zeman and Wolfgang Schuessel were both present at a meeting on the future decommissioning of nuclear power stations…..
There are of course many other possibilities. The interpreter is conveying the same information in a number ofdifferent ways thus demonstrating the freedom to reformulate in
interpreting and thus avoid source language interference. Because we are using pictures the students’ attention levels are higher and they will remember the point of this lesson longer [„show me”]
The principles of group dynamics and psychology also apply. In Figure 8. the less outgoing students can translate in the knowledge that critical feedback will be given in a smaller group (pairs), while the more extrovert do not monopolize the lesson or the trainer’s time. The interpreter-trainer should also be aware of the effect their person has on studentsand adjust it accordingly (Margolis, Bell, 1996).
Motivation is increased through varying the activities in the classroom. [In figure 8] Students interpret for each other, give feedback to each other while the trainer monitors but is not directly involved. Students may also be asked to give the speech to be interpreted. In this way they are involved in creating the substance of the lesson, and are the focusof it. They feel responsible for what happens in the lesson which increases motivation and thus promotes learning. Similar ideas about interpreter training can be found in Bowen (1993).
3. The approach to mistakes
Correction in interpretation classes is on the one hand desirable, as the trainer gives good examples of the target skill (trainer as model – Harmer, 1991:237 and Altman 1989). On the other hand the aim is for the student to find thesolution for themselves since as we have seen that in giving the correct answer the trainer actually hinders the learning process (see figure 4.). Neff says as much, „Par les fautes commises, le professeur revient sur les mecanismes d’analyses a l’origine de ces erreurs” (Neff 1989:232). Gile (1993) also favours focus on the learning process rather than the end product.
Let us look at the following example. Jones (1998) suggests the following principle:
„Do not start a sentence with a conjunction even if the speaker does”, and notes that doing so may cause problems for the interpreter especially if the sentence is long and if the speaker himself forgets how it began. Imagine the student interpreter starts a sentence as follows,
- Despite the ruling of the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg….
But the speaker then digresses after the word „Strasbourg”adds extra information leading both him and the interpreter to forget how they started the sentence and therfore not complete it gramatically. The trainer can suggest a correct version but it would be more useful to apply the methods described above (See Figure 5), and simply make the student aware of the error. The student will recall the difficulties they had and can consider how they might have been avoided.A student who is familiar with Jones’ principle can arrive at a solution on the basis of it and one who doesn’t may arrive at a solution [and Jones’ principle] themselves. If not the principle should be presented in a seperate lesson.
4. Student as customer
Despite the fact most intepreting schools are part of universities we are actually training professionals, who will workin and be subject to the rules of the market. The school too is
subordinate to the laws of the market. Students can choose where they go to train their skills and so there is competition between schools.
Here we can use Figure 7 as a model –
Product -> Transparency of teaching -> Professionalism -> Learners’ feedback -> (improved) Product.
Because the price of courses generally being set by the universities it is the quality of the product on which schools compete and because our customers should be happy with the product they buy it needs to be continually improved. To involve students in decisions about the course content we ask about their expectations and explain what each part of the course is designed to achieve (transparency). The course and lessons can be made more transparent and the learning process more effective if the trainer presents and organises practise for each of the component skills individually. For example spending several weeks on each element of consecutive interpreting – speaking skills, memory training, discourse analysis, note-taking, (including the use of margins for example) and note-reading. Such a break down will show the student that the course has a clear structure and allow them to follow their own progress more clearly.
The product should be prepared properly, meaning that the course and each lesson is planned in advance and has a clear set of goals, that the materials are presentable, and that the teacher be dressed appropriately, punctual (the university lecturers’ habit of turning up 10 minutes late is not acceptable), and polite (all students should be treated as equals and not in proportion to their abilities or lack of). Remarks of a personal nature directed at students are unacceptable (See Margolis, Bell, 1996). At the end of the course we ask the students what they thought of it – formally, for example in the form of an anonymous questionnaire. On the basis of the replies it may be necessary to change some elements of the course from one year ot the next.
Conclusions
Drawing from the methods used in the teaching english as a foreign language and management training I have described in brief the fundamentals of contemporary teaching methodolody. I hope to have demonstrated that theseuniversal principles can also be applied to the training of conference interpreters.
Improving one’s abilities as a teacher, like improving one’s abilities as an interpreter, requires talent and a certain amount of effort. Teaching is a skill, like interpreting, and in order to improve the teacher must practice, alot, applying tried and tested principles and continually evaluating their own performance. Some interpreters like Pöchhacker (1993 ), Seleskovitch (1989) and Kalina (1992) lament their colleagues’, interpreter-trainers’, lack of familiarity with the theoretical literature of the field and call on them to read more of it. They are quite right to do so, but intepreter-trainers should also make themselves familiar with the newest training literature and methods. My call,to colleagues, as much as myself, is
Explore! the teacher training methods and literature around.
Experiment! with new teaching methods and techniques.
Exchange! experience and ideas with colleagues.
This will help us to constantly improve the effcetiveness of our teaching and the quality of our „product”.
Bibliography
Altman, J., 1989, „The role of tutor demonstration in teaching interpreting”, [w:] The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching ConferenceInterpreting, red. L. Gran, J. Dodds, Udine, s. 237-241.
Bartram, M, Walton, R., 1991, Correction – A Positive Approach to Language Mistakes, Hove.
Bowen, M., 1993, „Teaching and learning styles”, [w:] Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2. Insights, Aims, Visions, red. C. Dollerup, A. Lindegaard, Amsterdam, s. 175-182.
Brundage, D. H, MacKeracher, D., 1980, Adult Learning Principles and Their Application to Programme Planning, Ontario.
Burgess, G., 2000, Sayings of Mahatma Gandhi, Singapur. De Bono, E., 1970, Lateral Thinking, Londyn.
Gile, D., 1991, „Basic theoretical components in interpreter and translator training”, [w:] Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent, Experience, red. C. Dollerup, A. Loddegaarde, Amsterdam, s. 185-194.
Gile, D., 1995, Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training, Amsterdam. Gillies, A. J., 2001, Conference Interpreting: A Students Companion, Kraków.
Harmer, J., 1991, The Practice of English Language Teaching, Londyn.
Heine, M., 2000, ,,Effektives Selbststudium – Schluessel zum Erfolg in der Dolmetscherausbildung“, [w:]
Dolmetschen: Theorie – Praxis – Didaktik, red. S.Kalina i in., s. 213-230.
Heron, J., 1999, The Complete Facilitator’s Handbook, Londyn. Jones, R., 1998, ConferenceInterpreting Explained, Manchester. Kafka, F., 1979, Der Prozess, Frankfurt n. Menem.
Kalina, S., 1992, „Some views on the theory of interpreter training and some practical suggestions”, [w:] Translation Studies – An Interdiscipline, red. M. Snell-Hornby, F. Pochhaecker, K. Kaindl, Amsterdam, s. 219-226.
Kalina, S., 2000, ,,Zu den Grundlagen einer Didaktik des Dolmetschens“, [w:] Dolmetschen: Theorie – Praxis
– Didaktik, red. S. Kalina i in., s. 162-189. Lewis, M., 1993, The Lexical Approach, Londyn. Savage, K. L., 1993, Total Physical Response, Londyn.
Margolis, F., Bell, C., 1986, Instructing for Results, Minneapolis.
Neff, J., 1989, ,,Pour une méthologie dans l’enseignement de l’interprétation consécutive’’, [w :] The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpreting, red. L. Gran, J. Dodds, Udine, s. 229-237.
Nunan, D., 1984, The Learner-Centred Curriculum, Cambridge.
Poechhacker, F., 1991, „The role of theory in simultaneous interpreter training”, [w:] Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent,Experience, red. C. Dollerup, A. Loddegaarde, Amsterdam, s. 211-220.
Puchta, H., 1992, Do and Understand, Hove.
Quirke, B., 1996, Communicating Corporate Change, Londyn.
Sainz, J-M., 1993, „Student-centred corrections of translations”, [w:] Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2.
Insights, Aims, Visions, red. C. Dollerup, A. Lindegaard, Amsterdam, s. 133-142.
Schjoldager, A., 1996, „Assessment of simultaneous interpreting”, [w:] Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3, red. C. Dollerup, V. Appel, Amsterdam, s. 187-197.
Seleskovitch, D., 1989, „Teaching conference interpreting”, [w:] Translator and Interpreter Training and Foreign Language Pedagogy, red. P. Krawutschke, Binghamptom, s. 65-88.
Sun Tzu, 1981, The Art of War, Londyn.
Sun Tzu, 2001, The Art of War for Managers – 50 Strategic Rules, Avon.
Weber, W., 1989, „Improved ways of teaching consecutive interpretation”, [w:] The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpreting, red. L. Gran, J. Dodds, Udine, s. 161-167.