Evaluating the Context of Translation Courses in the Departments of English in Kurdistan Region, Iraq
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v10i1p209Keywords:
CIPP Model, Context Evaluation, Context of Translation Course, Departments of English, EvaluationAbstract
Evaluation plays an essential role in the educational process of colleges and universities since it is vital to the continuous improvement of education quality. Many models have been used to evaluate institutes’ programs, courses, and projects, but Stuffelbeam’s CIPP (2003) is mainly applied in curriculum evaluation. Based on this model, this study aims at evaluating the context of translation courses offered in the Departments of English, Colleges of Languages at Salahaddin University-Erbil, University of Sulaimani, and University of Duhok. This paper adopted a quantitative method. A Likert scale questionnaire was designed based on the C component of Stuffelbeam’s CIPP (2003) evaluation model. The translation teachers and fourth-year students represented the sample of the study. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS 24). Findings show that the context of translation courses in the Departments of English has gotten little attention in designing these courses. Thus, it is recommended to reconsider the context in designing translation courses in the Departments of English at Colleges of languages in Kurdistan universities.
References
Allen, M. (2017). The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc doi: 10.4135/9781483381411
Al-Faifi, A. (2000). Teaching translation at the undergraduate level in Saudi Arabia: The case of Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic university (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from: https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/10323
Amer, W. M. (2013). Teaching translation at Gaza universities: problems and solutions. Retrieved from: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12358/25561.
Birjandi, P., & Nosratinia, M. (2009). The qualitative program evaluation of the postgraduate English translation major in Iran. The Journal of Modern Thoughts in Education, 4(4), 37–58.
Gabr, M. (2001). Program evaluation: A missing critical link in translator training. Translation Journal, 5 (1).
Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Boston, MA, Heinle & Heinle.
Hussain, A., Dogar, A. H., Azeem, M., & Shakoor, A. (2011). Evaluation of curriculum development process. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(14), 263-271.
Kellow, J. T., & Willson, V. L (2008). Setting standards and establishing cut scores on criterion-referenced assessments some technical and practical considerations. In: J. Osborn (Ed.). Best practices in quantitative methods(pp. 15-28). Los Angeles, SAGE Publications.
Ketlhoilwe, M. J. (2006). Course evaluation in adult education programmes: In support of environmental and sustainability education processes. Howick: Southern African Development Community.
Lewy, A. (1977). Handbook of curriculum evaluation. Paris: Unesco.
Mahasneh, A. (2013). Translation training in the Jordanian context: Curriculum evaluation in translator education (Doctoral dissertation). New York, Binghamton University.
Mehrens, W. A., & Lehmann, I. J. (1991). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology. Belmont CA, Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
Omer, Y. A. (2012). Reassessing translation training programmes in Kurdistan universities at undergraduate level: Towards a new model of translator training programmes (Doctoral dissertation). England, Aston University.
Peverati, C. (2014). Translation in university foreign-language curricula: an analysis of teachers’ attitudes, with reference to vocational and transferability criteria (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from: https://tdx.cat/handle/10803/292368
Rezvani, R., & Vakilinejad, M. (2014). An evaluation of translation quality assessment course: voices from instructors. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1563-1571.
Saldanha, G., & O’Brien, Sh. (2013). Research methods for translation studies. London, Routledge.
Scriven, M. (1967) The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler (Ed.) Perspectives of Curriculum Evaluation (pp.39-83). Chicago: Rand McNally
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2002). The CIPP model for evaluation. In: D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F. Madaus, T.Kellaghan (Eds.).Evaluation models:Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation. 2nd ed. (pp. 279-317). New York, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). The CIPP model for evaluation. In: T. Kellaghan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), The international handbook of educational evaluation.(pp.31-62). Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A., J. (1985). Systematic evaluation: A self-instructional guide to theory and practice. Boston, Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies
International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies applies the
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic Licence (CC BY-NC 2.0)
