Process Research Methods and Their Application in the Didactics of Text Production and Translation Shedding Light on the Use of Research Methods in the University Classroom

Teaching of translation and writing in the university classroom tends to focus on task knowledge by practicing text production and analyzing and discussing the quality of products. In this article, we will argue that the outcome of teaching may be increased if students are taught to see themselves not only as learners, but also as thinkers and problem solvers. This can be achieved by systematically applying knowledge from process research as this can give insight into mental and physical processes of text production. This article provides an overview of methods commonly used in process research and discusses the pros and cons of their application in teaching of translation and writing at university levels.

[1]  E. Jakobs,et al.  Schreiben am Arbeitsplatz , 2005 .

[2]  Gideon Toury,et al.  Descriptive translation studies and beyond , 1995 .

[3]  Kirk P. H. Sullivan,et al.  Keystroke logging : an introduction , 2006 .

[4]  Fabio Alves,et al.  A Relevance Theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in translation , 2003 .

[5]  Gyde Hansen.  Retrospection methods in translator training and translation research , 2005 .

[6]  Rachel Segev-Miller.  Writing-To-Learn: Conducting A Process Log , 2005 .

[7]  J. McNally.  Self-Directed Learning, A Guide for Learners and Teachers , 1976 .

[8]  Arnt Lykke Jakobsen,et al.  Effects of think aloud on translation speed, revision, and segmentation , 2003 .

[9]  Miriam Shlesinger,et al.  Comparing Modalities: Cognates as a Case in Point , 2005 .

[10]  Susanne Göpferich.  Popularization from a cognitive perspective: Whath thinking aloud and long files reveal about optimizing reverbalization processes , 2006 .

[11]  Gert Rijlaarsdam,et al.  Learning to Read and Write Argumentative Text by Observation of Peer Learners , 2005 .

[12]  J. Hayes.  A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. , 1996 .

[13]  Daniel Gile,et al.  Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting as a Translator Training Tool , 2004 .

[14]  Paul R. Pintrich,et al.  THE ROLE OF SELF-EFFICACY BELIEFS INSTUDENT ENGAGEMENT AND LEARNING INTHECLASSROOM , 2003 .

[15]  Gyde Hansen,et al.  Experience and Emotion in Empirical Translation Research with Think-Aloud and Retrospection , 2005 .

[16]  Åsa Wengelin,et al.  Examining Pauses in Writing: Theory, Methods and Empirical Data , 2006, Computer Key-Stroke Logging and Writing.

[17]  Hayes.  identifying the organization of wi iiing processes , 1980 .

[18]  Riitta Jääskeläinen,et al.  Focus on Methodology in Think-aloud Studies on Translating , 2000 .

[19]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis and Expert Thought: Concurrent Verbalizations of Thinking during Experts' Performance on Representative Tasks , 2006 .

[20]  Irena Kovačič.  Thinking-aloud Protocol — Interview — Text Analysis , 2000 .

[21]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[22]  Andrew T. Duchowski,et al.  Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice , 2003, Springer London.

[23]  Robert J. Crutcher,et al.  The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. , 1993 .

[24]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[25]  Hans P. Krings,et al.  Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of Machine Translation Post-Editing Processes , 2001 .

[26]  J. Ireson.  Learners, learning and educational activity , 2008 .

[27]  Carmen Heine.  Modell zur Produktion von Online-Hilfen , 2010 .

[28]  K. Kirsner,et al.  Beyond the Learning Curve: The Construction of Mind , 2005 .

[29]  O'Brien Sharon,et al.  EYE‐TRACKING AND TRANSLATION MEMORY MATCHES , 2007 .

[30]  Hans P. Krings.  Wege ins Labyrinth – Fragestellungen und Methoden der Übersetzungsprozessforschung im Überblick , 2005 .

[31]  Riitta Jääskeläinen.  Think-aloud protocol studies into translation: An annotated bibliography , 2002 .