Liaising with students: evaluation of liaison interpreting training practices in the Spanish context

Abstract

Background: with the implementation of the EAHE the Spanish translator and interpreter undergraduate training curriculum has experienced considerable changes. As far as the interpreting component of the curriculum is concerned, a shift from a nearly exclusive focus on conference interpreting towards other interpreting genres (including PSI) has been identified (Martin, 2015). That has allowed for the consolidation of liaison interpreting (LI) as a teaching methodology in the initial stages of interpreter training, at least in the 3 universities surveyed (UA, UGR, UPO). Against this backdrop, the authors have conducted an evaluation of their own LI teaching methods and tools among students enrolled in different interpreting modules. These modules include LI training in a variety of communicative encounters, including, but not limited to, trade, legal and healthcare settings. Methods: a GoogleForm questionnaire was designed to allow subjects evaluate three variables on a 0-4 Likert scale. Items (each one representing a given teaching methodology/format) were measured in terms of: 1) degree of motivation/interest when confronted with different teaching formats; 2) degree of perceived utility for their training process; and 3) degree of perceived difficulty. Data collected is currently being processed and analyzed using the SPSS statistical software package. Findings: data analysis is still being conducted. Partial preliminary results for just one student cohort from UA seem to confirm slightly greater preference towards dynamic face-to-face interdisciplinary approaches (including high fidelity simulations and the involvement of field professionals other than just the instructors). However, these students also consider that non dynamic language laboratory practice is appropriate during early training stages. Discussion: even though LI seems to be widely used in interpreter training, we still lack a solid LI pedagogical model. Despite the validity and usefulness of some of the existing proposals (amongst others, McFall & Sproule, 2001; Abril-Martí & Collados, 2001), these were drafted within a different curriculum approach and, more importantly, with different market needs in mind. Our ongoing project intends to help identify room for improvement in LI teaching practices and to give students the opportunity to become involved in the identification of meaningful and suitable teaching tools.