Translation Technology in English Studies Within the System of Higher Education in Poland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is focused on translation technology within the system of higher education in Poland, specifically English Studies offering translation specialization at BA and MA level, as well as postgraduate studies aimed at translators of English. The conducted analysis of translation curricula of Polish universities investigates the presence of courses devoted to the use of translation technology and seeks to determine whether such courses are offered at a given level of higher education, where in the system most of the courses are placed, and when they are mostly organized. First, however, a brief overview of different aspects determining the inclusion of translation technology in curricula are discussed. Here, the main stress is placed on its importance for the translation markets, the skills and knowledge obtained by students entering the market which are desired by translation agencies, elements affecting the selection of given translation software, the necessary infrastructure to run such courses, the costs of the programmes, ‘human resources’, the policies of universities, etc. The short discussion is followed by an analysis of the available courses, with each section devoted to one of the levels of the Polish higher education system, namely BA, MA and postgraduate studies. The courses within each level are briefly compared to provide some general tendencies for each type of studies. The final, concluding part of the study summarizes the results and stresses the need for further introduction of translation technology into translation curricula.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".