Using notepad and voice recorder technology (audionote) in teachers’ feedback to improve the classroom interpreting performance of university students majoring in translation and interpreting at a university in hanoi

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYỄN THỊ THUỲ TRANG

USING NOTEPAD AND VOICE RECORDER TECHNOLOGY
(AUDIONOTE) IN TEACHERS’ FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE
THE CLASSROOM INTERPRETING PERFORMANCE OF
UNIVERSITY STUDENTS MAJORING IN TRANSLATION
AND INTERPRETING AT A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI

(Sử dụng công nghệ ghi âm đồng thời với ghi chú (phần mềm Audionote)
trong việc đưa nhận xét của giảng viên để cải thiện kĩ năng dịch nói của
sinh viên chuyên ngành Biên phiên dịch tại một trường Đại học ở Hà Nội)

M.A. MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 8140231.01

HÀ NỘI - 2020


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYỄN THỊ THUỲ TRANG

USING NOTEPAD AND VOICE RECORDER TECHNOLOGY

(AUDIONOTE) IN TEACHERS’ FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE
THE CLASSROOM INTERPRETING PERFORMANCE OF
UNIVERSITY STUDENTS MAJORING IN TRANSLATION
AND INTERPRETING AT A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI

(Sử dụng công nghệ ghi âm đồng thời với ghi chú (phần mềm Audionote)
trong việc đưa nhận xét của giảng viên để cải thiện kĩ năng dịch nói của
sinh viên chuyên ngành Biên phiên dịch tại một trường Đại học ở Hà Nội)

M.A. MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 8140231.01
Supervisor: Dr. Huỳnh Anh Tuấn

HÀ NỘI - 2020


DECLARATION
I hereby certify that the thesis entitled “Using Notepad and Voice Recorder
technology (Audionote) in teachers’ feedback to improve the classroom
interpreting performances of university students majoring in translation and
interpreting at a university in Hanoi" was carried out and submitted in partial
fulfilment of the Degree of Master of Arts at the Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies,
University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University,
Hanoi. I also declare that this work is original and all the sources used in the paper
were comprehensively documented in the Reference list.

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
For the accomplishment of this research study, I owe my profound indebtedness
to a lot of people who have given me tremendous support and valuable advice
throughout the process of conducting my thesis.
First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr.
Huỳnh Anh Tuấn for his enlightening guidance and constant encouragement which
were the decisive factors for the fulfilment of this paper.
Secondly, my sincere thanks go to Ms. Trần Thị Lan Anh, a senior lecturer in the
Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, ULIS - VNU. Not only did she help
me come up with the initial research ideas and plan, but her enthusiastic and
intellectual guidance and consultancy also supported me a lot in the accomplishment
of the whole study.
Thirdly, I am deeply grateful to my two colleagues in my department, Ms.
Vương Thanh Nhàn and Mr. Lê Hải Phong who kindly accepted to collaborate with
me in the research procedure. Ms. Nhàn was the senior interpreter trainer who
observed my class and took part in the interview for comments on the use of
Audionote feedback. Mr. Phong collaborated with me in the rating process for the preintervention and post- intervention tests which were of pivotal importance to find out
the answers to the research questions.
Fourthly, I would like to thank all the lecturers at the Faculty of Post-Graduate
Studies, ULIS – VNU for their valuable lectures which provide a solid base for my
research.
I also sincerely thank all the students in my Advanced Interpreting class who
have actively taken part in the action research.
Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my beloved family members for
their tremendous love and support during the implementation of my thesis.

ii

ABSTRACT
Teachers‘ feedback is of great importance in both language teaching and
interpreter training. Though many studies have been carried out to enhance the quality
of teachers‘ feedback for language learners especially with the aid of technology, little
has been done regarding feedback for interpreting students. Besides, there has been a
consensus among social scientists that computer-assisted feedback (including
feedback through Audionote app) is likely to yield various merits in language
classrooms; however, none has been written about the efficiency of this technology in
interpreting classes. To find a tool that helps giving feedback in interpreting classes
more feed-forward, I conducted this action research study, aiming at shedding light on
1/ the students’ responses towards the use of Notepad and Voice Recorder technology
(Audionote) in

teachers’

feedback

for

students’

simultaneous

interpreting

performance, 2/ the students’ actual improvement level in their interpreting skills with
the aid of Audionote feedback and 3/ possible hardships for the teacher in the process
of using the app. In this study, four data collection instruments, namely questionnaire,
interview, pre-intervention and post- intervention tests and teaching journal were
used. The research results showed the students‘ remarkably positive responses to and

high evaluation of Audionote in improving the teacher‘ s feedback quality thanks to a
variety of advantages including real-time comments which provided linguistic
contexts for the teacher‘s feedback especially when the students encountered
enormous cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting practices. On the other hand, the
students‘ actual interpreting skill enhancement from the pre-intervention and postintervention tests was not as highly positive as the students‘ responses regarding their
interpreting skill improvement in the survey and interview. More notably, the teacher
also encountered various challenges hampering the procedure of applying the new
technology in class.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION……………………………………………………………….…..…i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………….ii
ABSTRACT...………………………………………………………………………..iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.…………………………………………………………...iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS …………………………………………………..…vii
LIST OF TABLES, CHARTS AND FIGURES….………………………………viii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1
1.1.

Statement of research problems and rationale for the study ............................... 1

1.2

Educational context and participants ................................................................... 3

1.3.

Aims and objectives of the study ........................................................................ 4

1.4.

Scope of the study ............................................................................................... 5

1.5.

Significance of the study ..................................................................................... 6

1.6.

Structure of the thesis .......................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................... 8
2.1. Feedback .................................................................................................................. 8
2.1.1. Definition of feedback ...................................................................................... 8
2.1.2. Types of feedback ............................................................................................. 9
2.1.3. Importance of feedback .................................................................................. 10
2.1.4. Methods of giving feedback ........................................................................... 10
2.1.5. Characteristics of effective feedback .............................................................. 11
2.2. Interpreting ............................................................................................................ 12
2.2.1. Definition of interpreting ................................................................................ 12
2.2.2. Rubrics for assessing interpreting performances ............................................ 13
2.2.2.1. Assessment criteria for interpreting performances .................................. 13
2.2.2.2. Marking rubrics for interpreting performances ........................................ 16
2.2.2.3. Feedback rubrics for interpreting performances ...................................... 22
2.3. Audionote and its application in giving feedback for speaking classes ................ 23
2.4. Review of related studies ....................................................................................... 24
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..................................................... 26

3.1. Research questions ................................................................................................ 26

iv


3.2. Research approach ................................................................................................. 26
3.3. Data collection instruments ................................................................................... 29
3.3.1. Pre-intervention tests and post-intervention tests ........................................... 29
3.3.2. Pre-intervention survey and post-intervention survey .................................... 30
3.3.3. Pre-intervention interviews and post-intervention interviews ........................ 30
3.3.4. While-intervention classroom observer interview .......................................... 31
3.3.5. While-intervention teaching journals ............................................................. 31
3.4. Data collection procedure ...................................................................................... 34
3.5. Data analysis procedure ......................................................................................... 41
3.5.1. Pre-intervention tests and post-intervention tests ........................................... 41
3.5.2. Pre-intervention survey and post-intervention survey .................................... 42
3.5.3. Interviews (Pre-intervention and post-intervention interviews with the
students and while-intervention interview with the classroom observer) ................ 43
3.5.4. While-intervention teaching journals ............................................................. 48
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION .................... 49
4.1. Answer to research question 1: What were the opinions of the students about the
use of Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in the teacher‘s feedback
for the students‘ classroom interpreting performances?............................................... 49
4.1.1. The students‘ opinions on advantages of Audionote feedback as opposed to
disadvantages of traditional feedback ....................................................................... 49
4.1.1.1. Disadvantages of traditional feedback and the learners‘ expectations
before the intervention .......................................................................................... 50
4.1.1.2. Advantages of Audionote in the teacher‘s feedback ................................ 54
4.1.1.2.1. Improving the teacher‘s feedback quality ......................................... 54
4.1.1.2.2. Helping the students‘ reflection after their practice .......................... 60

4.1.1.2.3. Reducing the burden of cognitive load.............................................. 61
4.1.1.2.4. Saving time ........................................................................................ 62
4.1.2. Disadvantages of Audionote ........................................................................... 63
4.1.3. The students‘ suggestions and expectations after the intervention................. 64
4.2. Answer to research question 2: To what extent did the application of Notepad and
Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in the teacher‘s feedback improve the

v


students‘ interpreting performances? ........................................................................... 68
4.2.1. Results of pre-intervention and post-intervention tests .................................. 68
4.2.2. The students‘ responses from the post-intervention survey and interview .... 74
4.2.2.1. The students‘ explanations for their high evaluation of using Audionote
............................................................................................................................... 75
4.2.2.2. Remaining problems of using Audionote ................................................ 77
4.3. Answer to research question 3: What were the difficulties of the teacher when
applying Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in giving feedback for
the students‘ classroom interpreting performances (if any)? ....................................... 79
4.3.1. Lack of a standardized feedback rubric .......................................................... 79
4.3.2. Lack of in-class time for the students‘ feedback ............................................ 81
4.3.3. Lack of a standardized interpreting test for the pre-intervention and postintervention test ......................................................................................................... 81
4.3.4. The student‘s reluctance to review Audionote files at home for self-reflection
................................................................................................................................... 82
4.4. Summary of the chapter ......................................................................................... 82
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION .................................................................................. 83
5.1. Recapitulation ........................................................................................................ 83
5.2. Pedagogical implications ....................................................................................... 85
5.2.1. For teachers ..................................................................................................... 85
5.2.1. For learners ..................................................................................................... 87

5.3. Limitations of the study ......................................................................................... 87
5.4. Further research ..................................................................................................... 88
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 90
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... I

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
SL

: Source language

TL

: Target language

Ss

: Students

T

: Teacher

RQ

: Research question

ULIS

: University of Languages and International Studies,

VNU

: Vietnam National University, Hanoi

vii


LIST OF TABLES, CHARTS AND FIGURES
Page

TABLES
Table 1

Marking criteria for Vietnamese – English simultaneous

20

interpreting performances
Table 2

Feedback rubric for Vietnamese – English simultaneous

22

interpreting performances
Table 3

An extract of the teaching journal

32

Table 4

Intervention phase in Cycle 1

38

Table 5

Intervention phase in Cycle 2

39

Table 6

The students‘ evaluation of traditional feedback in the pre-

51

intervention surveys and interviews vs their evaluation of
Audionote feedback from the post-intervention surveys and
interviews
Table 7

Paired Samples Statistics (Improvement level)

70

Table 8

Paired Samples Correlations (Improvement level)

70

Table 9

Paired Samples Test (Improvement level)

70

Table 10

Paired Samples Statistics (Version 2 and Version 2‘)

72

Table 11

Paired Samples Correlations (Version 2 and Version 2‘)

72

Table 12

Paired Samples Test (Version 2 and Version 2‘)

72

viii


CHARTS
Chart 1

Page

The students‘ rating of their previous teachers‘ feedback for

52

improving their interpretation
Chart 2

The students‘ evaluation of Audionote in improving the

56

quality of their teacher‘ feedback for their interpreting
performances
Chart 3

The students‘ evaluation of the teacher‘s advice quality in

57

improving their interpreting skills with the aid of Audionote
Chart 4

The students‘ preferable teachers‘ feedback method for their

65

interpreting performances
Chart 5

The students' improvement with and without the intervention

69

of Audionote in feedback
Chart 6

Comparison of the students' marks for version 2' in the post-

71

intervention test with that for version 2 in the preintervention test
Chart 7

The students‘ evaluation of the efficiency of using Audionote

74

feedback in improving their interpreting performances
Chart 8

The students' evaluation of the importance of having a

feedback rubric (specific criteria) when teachers give
feedback using Audionote

ix

80


FIGURES

Page

Figure 1 Cyclical action research model (Kemmis and mc Taggart,

36

1988)
Figure 2 Coding examples for open-ended questions in the surveys

43

Figure 3 Process of analyzing data from the interviews

45

Figure 4 Examples of the coding process

45

Figure 5 Set of codes and color-coding system for the interviews

48

x


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This chapter generally introduces the whole research, leading the readers
from a general to a specific field of research. The section establishes the context
and significance of the study by summarizing current background knowledge of
the topic and stating the aims of the work. The research problem, rationale,
objectives, and importance as well as the organization of the study are presented
one by one.
1.1.

Statement of research problems and rationale for the study
Giving feedback for students is of great significance in formative

assessment. Informative and constructive feedback will contribute a lot to
students‘ skill enhancement. As suggested in a book entitled "Giving feedback
on speaking" by Kerr (2017), evidence tends to prove that feedback can improve
language learning indeed.
However, giving comments on students' real-time interpreting is stressful.
As an interpreter trainer, I am not satisfied with the rushed, hand-written
feedback notes. I want to find a tool to help giving feedback in interpreting
classes more feed-forward, thus improving the students‘ interpreting
performance more efficiently.
To date, there is a consensus among social scientists that computer-assisted
feedback is likely to bring about a variety of advantages. Smith and Harris
(2014) pointed out the role of advanced technology in empowering interpreter

trainers by ―providing a superior experience for tech-savvy students over
recordings on physical media" (p.120). Smith and Harris also gave an insight
into particular improvements regarding "time-coded feedback and commentary"
(p.120) between students and interpreter trainers who used new technology
(GoREACT, in this case) in giving comments for students.
Dodd and Kusaka (2014) conducted another action research study about
―Using Web 2.0: Synchronizing technology to improve feedback on spoken
academic texts‖ which described the process of applying Notepad and Voice
Recorder technology (Audionote) in teacher‘s feedback for students‘ speaking
1


activities in their own institution. Various merits of the app have been revealed
as it can record and synchronize spoken and written ‗texts‘ into a digital file
which can be used on computers and smart devices including computers, phones
and tablets. According to Dodd and Kusaka (2014, p.44), with the aid of this
technology, teachers are able to capture students‘ speaking activities along with
any feedback notes and send those files to them after the lessons. It is easy for
the students to replay the digital files and see their teacher‘s feedback comments
written on their device at the corresponding moments in the speaking activity.
This will definitely help them to locate the context in which the feedback
applies. ―This visual and auditory inter-textuality is likely to appeal to students
of varying learning styles, and to teachers who want their feedback to be retained
in its original context‖ (Dodd & Kusaka (2014, p.44).
More importantly, as the nature of simultaneous interpreting task makes the
amount of information being processed become overwhelming especially for
new interpreters and students, it is a real challenge for them (Seeber, 2011).
Under great time pressure and cognitive stress of advanced interpreting courses
which involve both consecutive and simultaneous modes of interpreting, the
students have a tendency to forget a lot of things in their performance right after

they finish interpreting. Therefore, it is quite hard for them to match what the
teacher comments with what they have said. It is even more challenging for them
to remember details such as their mistakes in pronunciation or grammar, and
word choice. To put it differently, decontextualized feedback has become a
headachy issue in my interpreting course. With the help of Audionote, I can
easily replay the recordings and let my students see my feedback typed on
Audionote files at corresponding moments in the students' speaking activity.
Audionote is likely to help me provide more contextualized feedback for my
students, thus supporting them more effectively in their learning process.
These findings were really appealing to me as an interpreter trainer who has
encountered several difficulties in giving effective feedback for my students in
interpreting lessons. Nevertheless, there has limited research body on the use of
Audionote in giving feedback for interpreter trainees.

2


Those findings and arguments are the main reasons triggering my research
study.
1.2.

Educational context and participants

1.2.1. Setting of the chosen class
The research was undertaken at the Interpreter and Translator Training
Division of a foreign language university in Vietnam. A class of twenty
participants was chosen. All the participants are senior university students
majoring in English translation and interpreting. They have learnt at least one
interpreting practice course before so that they have got some experience about
how traditional interpreter trainers give feedback in interpreting lessons. This

semester, the participants took their Advanced Interpreting course – the students‘
second interpreting course in the curricula. The intervention phase took place
during this course.
In terms of setting and available teaching facilities, the classroom is
equipped with a projector, a speaker, two interpreting booths, one interpreting
tool kit, and internet connection. Teachers and students had smartphones and/ or
laptops that could record audio files and read basic digital files.
1.2.2. Identification of the problems in the class
It is apparent that with a large class size of 20 students, it is hard for the
teacher to give all students chances to practice in-class with traditional individual
activities. Usually, during a three-period session, only about 10 students can be
given chances to practice and receive detailed comments. Indeed, large class size
is a burden for the teacher as it reduces the opportunities for students to speak up
in class.
More seriously, giving comments on students' real-time interpreting is
stressful. As an interpreter trainer, I think that the rushed, hand-written feedback
notes are not satisfactory enough. Given the importance of formative feedback
for the skill development process of interpreting students, a tool to help giving
feedback in interpreting classes more contextualized and feedforward is of great
necessity.

3


Most importantly, due to the great deal of stress that student interpreters
suffer from during their advanced interpreting courses, it is hard for them to
recall what they have interpreted and do reflection when listening to teachers‘
feedback after their performances. This even worsens the fact that teachers‘
traditional feedback often lacks necessary contexts for each point of their
comments.

In short, large class size which hinders students from practising in-class,
and no chance to give feed-forward contextualized feedback for students'
interpreting performance are the two main problems in my simultaneous
interpreting class.
1.3.

Aims and objectives of the study
Not only did the thesis aim at shedding light on the influence of Audionote

on students‘ interpreting performance improvement, and their reaction to the
teacher‘s use of Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in giving
feedback for students’ classroom interpreting performance but it also sought for
any possible problems and difficulties the teacher might encounter when
applying this technology in the class and possible solutions (if any). More
specifically, my research study addressed the following three questions:
Research question 1: What were the opinions of the students about the use
of Audionote in the teacher’s feedback for the students’ classroom interpreting
performances?
Research question 2: To what extent did the application of Audionote in
the teacher’s feedback improve the students’ interpreting performances?
Research question 3: What were the difficulties of the teacher when
applying Audionote in giving feedback for the students’ classroom interpreting
performances (if any)?
It should be noted that all the research questions only aimed at finding
answers to the specific problems in my own interpreting class with very
particular contexts. No generalization was intended to be made for other classes
with different contexts and different students‘ features. The results of the study
4

are used to offer solutions to the current problems in the chosen class, thus
building the basis and input for future research in similar issues.
1.4.

Scope of the study
This action research study only focuses on investigating the use of

Audionote (Notepad and Voice Recorder) in giving feedback for the students‘
interpreting performance.
Firstly, in terms of the intervention tool, I only used Audionote – an
application that provides notepad and voice recorder technology in the
intervention stage. Other applications that also provide notepad and voice
recorder technology but may have different features will not be discussed in this
paper.
Secondly, the type of feedback mentioned and examined in this research is
the teacher‘s formative feedback in the classroom setting. Hence, other types of
feedback in other settings are not expected to be discussed here.
Thirdly, in terms of interpreting types, this action research study set out to
investigate the students‘ Vietnamese – English simultaneous interpreting at an
introductory level. As a result, this study did not discuss the use of Audionote in
providing feedback for other types of student interpreters in other types of
interpreting with dissimilar educational contexts.
Finally, in this study, the term ―performance‖ was used instead of
―competence‖ as more emphasis was put on the students‘ practice and their
ability to perform interpreting skills rather than their underlying knowledge of
interpreting. Chomsky (1969) first drew the distinction between ―performance‖
and ―competence‖ by pointing out that ―competence is the knowledge of the
language‖ while performance is the ―actual use of the language in concrete
situations‖. Likewise, the idea was echoed by Bachman (as cited in Brown,
Malmkjær & Williams, 2004). In other words, competence refers to the

―unobserved, underlying knowledge‖ of the language, meanwhile ―performance
reflects overt behaviours, dependent on tasks and rating scales‖ (Brown,
Malmkjær & Williams, 2004). In my action research, as more focus was put on
practice and the students‘ actual interpreting speeches and skills, I chose to use
5


the term ―performance‖ consistently throughout the paper instead of
―competence‖.
1.5.

Significance of the study
On completion, the study brought about certain benefits to interpreting

students, interpreter trainers, researchers and the entire society in general who
share the same interest in this topic.
In the first place, to the interpreting students‘ side, the findings of the
research helped them to raise their voice in evaluating their own interpreter
trainers‘ feedback which directly influences their learning process. So far, little
research has been carried out to delve into this aspect while it is obviously
critical to listen to such reflection from students – users of the feedback. This
paper sought to explore student interpreters' opinions about trainers' feedback
and its perceived effects on their learning. The research findings are expected to
provide insights into interpreter trainers' everyday teaching and learning and
guide the teachers in how they can further assist the students in a more efficient
way that is constructive to their learning and skill development.
In the second place, to interpreter trainers' side, due to the limited number
of studies about assessing and improving quality of their in-class feedback for
students, hardly can interpreter trainers find ways to enhance the quality of their
comments on students‘ performance. The idea from this action research may

help interpreter trainers to think of applying a new promising method in their
own classes. Hopefully, this will contribute to the enhancement of interpreting
training in general.
In the third place, as for researchers who take interest in the same topic,
they can refer to this paper as a source of updated and reliable information.
Last but not least, as this is an action research paper, the researcher does
not aim at generalizing the effectiveness of using Audionote in every single
interpreting class. Rather, the study focuses on solving the current problems in
the chosen class, thus building the basis and input for further large-scale
research.
6


1.6.

Structure of the thesis
The study has five major chapters. In Chapter 1 – Introduction, a big

picture of the research problem, rationale, aims and scope of the study is
depicted. Chapter 2 is Literature Review which provides a theoretical
framework, encompassing all major concepts of the research. Chapter 3 –
Methodology describes the research design, answering how the data was
collected and analyzed. Chapter 4 – Data Analysis, Findings and Discussion presents the main findings of the research accompanied by the researcher‘s
discussion. The last chapter is Conclusion, grasping all the main points of the
research, including its findings, limitations and suggestions for further studies.

7


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

As the theoretical framework for the whole research, this chapter mainly
introduces and discusses different concepts related to the study such as
feedback, interpreter training, criteria for assessing interpreting, and Audionote.
2.1. Feedback
2.1.1. Definition of feedback
It is essential to start with the concept of feedback in this study. According
to Kerr (2017, p. 2), feedback is defined as any kind of information that students
receive about their performance. This can be in the forms of either corrective
feedback which focuses a learner‘s attention on errors, or non-corrective
feedback, such as praise or encouragement. Besides, the feedback can also be
about the performance of peers. Information provided via feedback may include
―not only answer correctness, but other information such as precision, timeliness,
learning guidance, motivational messages, lesson sequence advisement, critical
comparisons, and learning focus‖ (Hoska, 1993).
Different scholars have different viewpoints about the aims of formative
feedback. According to Shute (2008, p.156), formative feedback is supposed to
foster students' knowledge, skills, and comprehension in particular content areas
or general skills such as problem-solving. The objective of giving feedback is to
bridging the gaps between the current students' performance and a particular goal
or standard (Hattie & Timperley; 2007). Two major purposes of feedback, as
claimed by Shute (2008, p.157), are directive (telling learners what needs to be
corrected and revised), and facilitative (giving comments and suggestions to
orient students in their own revisions and conceptualization). Each opinion
touches upon particular aspects of formative feedback. However, most of the
above-mentioned scholars agreed that formative feedback aims at improving
learners' knowledge or skills in accordance with specific learning objectives.

8

2.1.2. Types of feedback
A search of the literature reveals several ways of categorizing feedback:
formal and informal feedback, qualitative and quantitative feedback, teacher
feedback and peer feedback, etc. However, considering the relevance to this
study, the researcher will just focus on two main ways of categorization.
Firstly, feedback can be generally divided into qualitative and quantitative
one. Qualitative feedback includes (textual) comments, meanwhile, quantitative
feedback is given in forms of "numerical marks" (Hamer et al., 2015, p. 152).
Formative feedback touches upon the "accuracy or adequacy of a student'
performance or response" and may deal with specific errors and misconceptions
(Shute, 2008, p. 154).
Secondly, based on its source, feedback is categorized into peer feedback,
teacher feedback and self-feedback. External feedback from peers and teachers
plays an important role in augmenting students' competence since it often offers
an objective viewpoint and constructive advice for the learners. Besides, internal
feedback or self-feedback generated by the students themselves help them to
reflect on their own performance and figure out their strengths and weaknesses
(Lee, 2018, p. 154). Therefore, learners are more self-oriented to work on those
particular points and build up their skills.
In this research study, the researcher refers to feedback as any kind of
comments that the interpreter trainer gives his or her students in interpreting
lessons to help the students build up their interpreting competence. In other
words, the feedback that is of interest in this study concerns more about
qualitative and formative feedback rather than quantitative one. However, during
the interpreter training course that the research study took place, the interpreter
sometimes used both numerical marks and textual information in her comments.
Additionally, within the scope of this study, more focus was drawn to teachers‘
in-class feedback on Audionote. Nonetheless, in some specific stages of the
action research projects, the students' self-reflection on the teacher feedback
were made use of, given their great benefits when appropriately combined with

teacher feedback.
9


2.1.3. Importance of feedback
The significance of giving feedback in both English language teaching and
interpreter training has been repeatedly asserted by many researchers of the field.
In his book entitled ―Giving feedback on speaking‖, Kerr (2017, p.2) claimed
that ―Evidence is now pointing towards the idea that feedback can indeed
promote language learning‖. Feedback is ―one of the most powerful influences
on learning and achievement‖ (Hattie & Timperley; 2007). Moreover, Lee
(2018) also emphasized the importance of giving feedback for any types of
learning, and ―interpreter training is no exception‖. In real English teaching
practice, teachers‘ feedback can be considered one of the most efficient ways of
helping students to correct their mistakes and building up language skills.
Though feedback is such an integral aspect of interpreter training, there has been
limited research body on feedback in interpreting courses, let alone ways of
enhancing feedback quality for trainers in the field. Additionally, given the
remarkable technology advancement that is taking place day by day, it is of great
necessity to explore how advanced technology can support interpreter trainers in
improving the quality of their feedback for student interpreters.
2.1.4. Methods of giving feedback
In terms of mode, feedback can be provided either face-to-face or mediated
by technology. Teachers can facilitate the students‘ performance and take notes
then deliver the feedback afterwards or give students written or oral feedback
after listening to recordings of student performance (Lee, 2018).
Research studies have pointed out several advantages of technologyassisted feedback. It is claimed that "technology-enhanced feedback, which
enables flexible feedback provision, does seem to hold promise for the future"
(Yang & Carless, 2013, p.292). More importantly, research has also reflected
students' positive reception and reaction to technology-mediated feedback (Dodd

and Kusaka, 2014). Finally, applying ―web-based learning management systems
in interpreter training helps facilitate feedback and interactions between teacher
and learners and thus enhances the benefits of collaborative learning‖ (Lee et al.
2015, p.137).
10


A newly emerged mode of giving feedback for speaking classes is using
audio and note-taking technology. Recent research has proved several benefits
that this kind of synchronizing technology can bring about in the process of
giving in-class feedback. Some applications which have been used are
GoREACT (Smith & Harris, 2014) and Audionote. This enables teachers to
record and take notes or comments at the same time, thus providing time-coded
and feed-forward feedback for students while not disturbing their fluency
practice (Dodd and Kusaka, 2014). This new trend has drawn my considerable
attention since the aid of this technology can be the answer to remaining
problems with decontextualized feedback in most interpreting classes.
2.1.5. Characteristics of effective feedback
To produce effective feedback, it is advised that teachers pay attention to
its ―function‖, ―content‖, and modes of ―presentation‖ together with students‘
characteristics and instructional factors or context such as learning goals and
learning tasks (Shute, 2008, p.173). Although timely and regular feedback is
considered beneficial, the content of feedback seems to play a more important
role in the effectiveness of giving feedback (Bangert-Drowns et al. 1991; Scott
2014, p.50). More notably, research has shown that effective feedback should be
specific and goal-related (Voerman et al. 2014). Feedback with detailed
suggestions to improve students‘ performance will be more useful than the one
which merely points out accuracy and adequacy (Bangert-Drowns et al. 1991;
Scott 2014). Shute (2008) agreed with this viewpoint, stating that vague
feedback without specificity may result in little positive effects on learners. In

short, a thorough search of the literature has revealed several important qualities
of effective feedback: specific, goal-related, timely, and regular.
A great deal of previous research into feedback has focused on
characteristics of formative feedback for English language teaching in general,
yet there is a relatively small body of literature that is concerned with feedback
for interpreter training. Among just a few studies in this field, Lee (2018)
attempted to investigate student interpreters‘ responses to feedback in interpreter
training courses. His findings revealed that learners in interpreting courses seek
11


teachers‘ attention and support in terms of both academic and emotional needs in
their provision of feedback given the excessive stress and constraint students
have to suffer during their interpretation training. This piece of information was
a valuable input to the researcher in planning for this particular research study
about enhancing feedback quality in her own interpreting course.
2.2. Interpreting
2.2.1. Definition of interpreting
According to AIIC — the International Association of Conference
Interpreters (2012), interpreters work with spoken language in a specific context,
conveying a message from one language (the source language – SL) to another
(the target language – TL), meanwhile translation is defined as the process of
transferring a written text from one language to another. Jones (2002, p.3)
emphasized that interpreting is all about ―communication‖. It exists mainly
because of the ―language barriers‖ between speakers of the SL and TL that
require the interpreters to help explaining ideas to both sides. Besides the
linguistic barrier, people from different countries also have different bodies of
knowledge, different cultural background, and therefore "different intellectual
approaches" (Jones, 2002, p. 3). This adds to the communication difficulties
between speakers of the TL and SL. Consequently, according to Jones (2002):

The interpreter's task is to instil meaning into the text for the target audience, if
necessary (and if possible) by providing the requisite explanations or even
changing the original speaker's references, provided this conveys to the audience
precisely what the speaker wanted to say. (p.3)

In the interpreting process, "communication is immediate, involving
interaction between speakers, listeners, and interpreters‖ (AIIC, 2012). As a
result, in interpreting practice, specific linguistic resources are made use of: "the
original speaker's ideas are transmitted as spoken words, with a particular
rhythm and intonation, making use of rhetorical devices and gestures" (AIIC,
2012).
Two major modes of interpreting are simultaneous interpreting in which
interpretation is carried out in real-time when the speaker is speaking, and
12


consecutive interpreting in which interpreters listen to speakers and then renders
the message when the speakers pause (Gillies, 2014).
Simultaneous interpreting can be defined as the procedure of "crosslinguistic transfer of meaning in real-time (Seeber, 2011). The term
―simultaneous‖ does not refer to ―the simultaneity of the comprehension and
production of one and the same sentence constituent, but the general temporal
overlap of language comprehension and language production‖ (Seeber, 2011).
As

simultaneous

interpreting

involves

the

combination

of

language

comprehension task and language production task, so it becomes a very stressful
work for interpreters. According to Seeber (2011), ―in cognitive processing
terms, the real-time combination of the two means that they compete for
available resources‖.
2.2.2. Rubrics for assessing interpreting performances
Given the context of this paper about quality of feedback for interpreter
training, it is essential to investigate different criteria for interpreting quality
assessment as it may help to build up a framework for the researcher in giving
feedback for the students. Also, a detailed marking rubric for simultaneous
interpreting was also needed in the process of marking the pre-test and post-test
to answer question 1 of the research. To put it differently, this part of the
literature review will analyze dissimilar theories to come up with both a detailed
marking rubric and a simplified feedback rubric for Vietnamese – English
simultaneous interpreting.
2.2.2.1. Assessment criteria for interpreting performances
In the growing body of research on interpreting quality, very few papers
have been written about criteria for interpreting quality assessment. To date,
some papers have discussed quality assessment criteria for interpreting
performance, yet hardly has there been consensus on what quality is.
Firstly, in his paper on the International Association of Conference
Interpreters (AIIC) website, Kahane (2000) mentioned initiative research results
of Bühler (1986), and Kurz (1989) regarding several major criteria for

interpreting assessment which included ―Sense consistency with original
13