MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393854771 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v14n4p154

Breaking Traditional Boundaries in Translation Pedagogy; Evaluating How Senior Lecturers Have Incorporated Digital Tools to Enhance Translation Teaching

2024· article· en· W4393854771 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Khalid University
KeywordsTranslation (biology)Computer scienceMathematics educationMultimediaPedagogySociologyPsychologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital technology has brought significant transformation in translation pedagogy, mainly in helping lecturers integrate digital tools in teaching translation courses. However, it is significant to gain insights from the experiences of the senior lecturers who are gradually accepting the integration of technology in translation pedagogy. The focus of this paper is to gain insights from Professors in translation pedagogy on their challenges in transiting from traditional teaching systems to digital technological systems, also sharing their solutions to the challenges. Through the use of both survey questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, data was gathered from 93 extensively experienced professors in translation. The gathered data was analyzed using thematic analysis and statistical measures. The results of the data from the interviews showed four main themes, including the theme of transition challenges, the theme of assessment and evaluation challenges, the theme of inclusion and accessibility in digital technology, and the theme of actions the professors had taken in digital technology. The professors confirmed actions such as “finding appropriate online platforms that allowed for real-time cooperation" (Professor 2), "using virtual translation technologies that enabled real-time collaboration on documents" (Professor 5), and "encouraging collaborative translation exercises in real-time Google Docs" (Professor 2)”. The data from the survey questionnaire unveiled specific ways in which digital tools have assisted the senior lecturers in teaching translation courses, including teaching materials for translation courses are now prepared more quickly due to AI technologies, and automated grading systems driven by AI have reduced assessment time and generated feedback for students' translation projects. The Professors generally accepted the impacts of technological advancements, mainly AI tools, in teaching translation and improving the general performance of the learners.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it