Using notepad and voice recorder technology (audionote) in teachers’ feedback to improve the classroom interpreting performance of university students majoring in translation and interpreting at a university in hanoi

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES NGUYỄN THỊ THUỲ TRANG USING NOTEPAD AND VOICE RECORDER TECHNOLOGY (AUDIONOTE) IN TEACHERS’ FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE THE CLASSROOM INTERPRETING PERFORMANCE OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS MAJORING IN TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETING AT A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI (Sử dụng công nghệ ghi âm đồng thời với ghi (phần mềm Audionote) việc đưa nhận xét giảng viên để cải thiện kĩ dịch nói sinh viên chuyên ngành Biên phiên dịch trường Đại học Hà Nội) M.A MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 8140231.01 HÀ NỘI - 2020 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES NGUYỄN THỊ THUỲ TRANG USING NOTEPAD AND VOICE RECORDER TECHNOLOGY (AUDIONOTE) IN TEACHERS’ FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE THE CLASSROOM INTERPRETING PERFORMANCE OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS MAJORING IN TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETING AT A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI (Sử dụng công nghệ ghi âm đồng thời với ghi (phần mềm Audionote) việc đưa nhận xét giảng viên để cải thiện kĩ dịch nói sinh viên chuyên ngành Biên phiên dịch trường Đại học Hà Nội) M.A MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 8140231.01 Supervisor: Dr Huỳnh Anh Tuấn HÀ NỘI - 2020 DECLARATION I hereby certify that the thesis entitled “Using Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in teachers’ feedback to improve the classroom interpreting performances of university students majoring in translation and interpreting at a university in Hanoi" was carried out and submitted in partial fulfilment of the Degree of Master of Arts at the Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi I also declare that this work is original and all the sources used in the paper were comprehensively documented in the Reference list i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For the accomplishment of this research study, I owe my profound indebtedness to a lot of people who have given me tremendous support and valuable advice throughout the process of conducting my thesis First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr Huỳnh Anh Tuấn for his enlightening guidance and constant encouragement which were the decisive factors for the fulfilment of this paper Secondly, my sincere thanks go to Ms Trần Thị Lan Anh, a senior lecturer in the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, ULIS - VNU Not only did she help me come up with the initial research ideas and plan, but her enthusiastic and intellectual guidance and consultancy also supported me a lot in the accomplishment of the whole study Thirdly, I am deeply grateful to my two colleagues in my department, Ms Vương Thanh Nhàn and Mr Lê Hải Phong who kindly accepted to collaborate with me in the research procedure Ms Nhàn was the senior interpreter trainer who observed my class and took part in the interview for comments on the use of Audionote feedback Mr Phong collaborated with me in the rating process for the preintervention and post- intervention tests which were of pivotal importance to find out the answers to the research questions Fourthly, I would like to thank all the lecturers at the Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies, ULIS – VNU for their valuable lectures which provide a solid base for my research I also sincerely thank all the students in my Advanced Interpreting class who have actively taken part in the action research Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my beloved family members for their tremendous love and support during the implementation of my thesis ii ABSTRACT Teachers‘ feedback is of great importance in both language teaching and interpreter training Though many studies have been carried out to enhance the quality of teachers‘ feedback for language learners especially with the aid of technology, little has been done regarding feedback for interpreting students Besides, there has been a consensus among social scientists that computer-assisted feedback (including feedback through Audionote app) is likely to yield various merits in language classrooms; however, none has been written about the efficiency of this technology in interpreting classes To find a tool that helps giving feedback in interpreting classes more feed-forward, I conducted this action research study, aiming at shedding light on 1/ the students’ responses towards the use of Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in teachers’ feedback for students’ simultaneous interpreting performance, 2/ the students’ actual improvement level in their interpreting skills with the aid of Audionote feedback and 3/ possible hardships for the teacher in the process of using the app In this study, four data collection instruments, namely questionnaire, interview, pre-intervention and post- intervention tests and teaching journal were used The research results showed the students‘ remarkably positive responses to and high evaluation of Audionote in improving the teacher‘ s feedback quality thanks to a variety of advantages including real-time comments which provided linguistic contexts for the teacher‘s feedback especially when the students encountered enormous cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting practices On the other hand, the students‘ actual interpreting skill enhancement from the pre-intervention and postintervention tests was not as highly positive as the students‘ responses regarding their interpreting skill improvement in the survey and interview More notably, the teacher also encountered various challenges hampering the procedure of applying the new technology in class iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION……………………………………………………………….… …i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………….ii ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………… iii TABLE OF CONTENTS.………………………………………………………… iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ………………………………………………… …vii LIST OF TABLES, CHARTS AND FIGURES….………………………………viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Statement of research problems and rationale for the study 1.2 Educational context and participants 1.3 Aims and objectives of the study 1.4 Scope of the study 1.5 Significance of the study 1.6 Structure of the thesis CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Feedback 2.1.1 Definition of feedback 2.1.2 Types of feedback 2.1.3 Importance of feedback 10 2.1.4 Methods of giving feedback 10 2.1.5 Characteristics of effective feedback 11 2.2 Interpreting 12 2.2.1 Definition of interpreting 12 2.2.2 Rubrics for assessing interpreting performances 13 2.2.2.1 Assessment criteria for interpreting performances 13 2.2.2.2 Marking rubrics for interpreting performances 16 2.2.2.3 Feedback rubrics for interpreting performances 22 2.3 Audionote and its application in giving feedback for speaking classes 23 2.4 Review of related studies 24 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 26 3.1 Research questions 26 iv 3.2 Research approach 26 3.3 Data collection instruments 29 3.3.1 Pre-intervention tests and post-intervention tests 29 3.3.2 Pre-intervention survey and post-intervention survey 30 3.3.3 Pre-intervention interviews and post-intervention interviews 30 3.3.4 While-intervention classroom observer interview 31 3.3.5 While-intervention teaching journals 31 3.4 Data collection procedure 34 3.5 Data analysis procedure 41 3.5.1 Pre-intervention tests and post-intervention tests 41 3.5.2 Pre-intervention survey and post-intervention survey 42 3.5.3 Interviews (Pre-intervention and post-intervention interviews with the students and while-intervention interview with the classroom observer) 43 3.5.4 While-intervention teaching journals 48 CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 49 4.1 Answer to research question 1: What were the opinions of the students about the use of Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in the teacher‘s feedback for the students‘ classroom interpreting performances? 49 4.1.1 The students‘ opinions on advantages of Audionote feedback as opposed to disadvantages of traditional feedback 49 4.1.1.1 Disadvantages of traditional feedback and the learners‘ expectations before the intervention 50 4.1.1.2 Advantages of Audionote in the teacher‘s feedback 54 4.1.1.2.1 Improving the teacher‘s feedback quality 54 4.1.1.2.2 Helping the students‘ reflection after their practice 60 4.1.1.2.3 Reducing the burden of cognitive load 61 4.1.1.2.4 Saving time 62 4.1.2 Disadvantages of Audionote 63 4.1.3 The students‘ suggestions and expectations after the intervention 64 4.2 Answer to research question 2: To what extent did the application of Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in the teacher‘s feedback improve the v students‘ interpreting performances? 68 4.2.1 Results of pre-intervention and post-intervention tests 68 4.2.2 The students‘ responses from the post-intervention survey and interview 74 4.2.2.1 The students‘ explanations for their high evaluation of using Audionote 75 4.2.2.2 Remaining problems of using Audionote 77 4.3 Answer to research question 3: What were the difficulties of the teacher when applying Notepad and Voice Recorder technology (Audionote) in giving feedback for the students‘ classroom interpreting performances (if any)? 79 4.3.1 Lack of a standardized feedback rubric 79 4.3.2 Lack of in-class time for the students‘ feedback 81 4.3.3 Lack of a standardized interpreting test for the pre-intervention and postintervention test 81 4.3.4 The student‘s reluctance to review Audionote files at home for self-reflection 82 4.4 Summary of the chapter 82 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 83 5.1 Recapitulation 83 5.2 Pedagogical implications 85 5.2.1 For teachers 85 5.2.1 For learners 87 5.3 Limitations of the study 87 5.4 Further research 88 REFERENCES 90 APPENDICES I vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS SL : Source language TL : Target language Ss : Students T : Teacher RQ : Research question ULIS : University of Languages and International Studies, VNU : Vietnam National University, Hanoi vii LIST OF TABLES, CHARTS AND FIGURES Page TABLES Table Marking criteria for Vietnamese – English simultaneous 20 interpreting performances Table Feedback rubric for Vietnamese – English simultaneous 22 interpreting performances Table An extract of the teaching journal 32 Table Intervention phase in Cycle 38 Table Intervention phase in Cycle 39 Table The students‘ evaluation of traditional feedback in the pre- 51 intervention surveys and interviews vs their evaluation of Audionote feedback from the post-intervention surveys and interviews Table Paired Samples Statistics (Improvement level) 70 Table Paired Samples Correlations (Improvement level) 70 Table Paired Samples Test (Improvement level) 70 Table 10 Paired Samples Statistics (Version and Version 2‘) 72 Table 11 Paired Samples Correlations (Version and Version 2‘) 72 Table 12 Paired Samples Test (Version and Version 2‘) 72 viii + Continued to use + The teacher had more the app together with the time for students‘ practice feedback rubric (S7-10); + Replayed recordings the and gave comments more selectively; + Invited one senior interpreter trainer where + very good for the English researcher lecturer‘s to responses: observe the interpreting class Senior language used classrooms Audionote in giving + Helped students to feedback; interviewed reflect better on the him/ her for comments on performance the use of Audionote S11-13 + But: - A little bit timeconsuming if the teacher tries to replay all the recordings in-class - Can be monotonous if repeated from weeks to weeks  just choose 4-6 weeks per semester to feedback + Continued to use the app together with the VI focus on More selective feedback feedback rubric (S14-16); + Continued to use the app together with the feedback rubric (S16-20); MID-TERM TESTS + Surveyed students + late for students about the effectiveness of follow-up interviews revealed using very positive responses from Audionote improving for teacher‘s the students + Interview  Phone feedback interview + invited Students interviews about effectiveness of Students the using Audionote for improving teacher‘s feedback  invite Students to stay after class for to enable more flexible time and space for to take part in follow-up the interview + The questionnaire and Phone interviews VII Appendix 3: PAIRED SAMPLES T-TEST (Ross & Willson, 2017) BRIEF DESCRIPTION A paired-samples t-test compares the mean of two matched groups of people or cases, or compares the mean of a single group, examined at two different points in time If the same group is tested again, on the same measure, the t-test is called a repeated measures t-test As with the independent-samples t-test, the data is assumed interval for nominal groups The assumption of normal distribution is required for a standard t-test, although evidence suggests nonnormality is not a problem unless skewness and kurtosis are extreme, say over ±3 in magnitude Possible paired samples include husbands and wives, twins, the same group of students in two classes, the same cadre of teachers evaluated fall and spring, the same group of professionals at different points in their career, a group of students taking both a pretest and a posttest, or a group of subjects taking a body mass index assessment before and after an exercise regime Let‘s look at a couple of examples Example You want to compare the salaries of a group of college graduates, one year after graduation and again five years after graduation One Year After: 23000, 24500, 25000, 28000, 30500, 32000, 34000, 36000, 38500, 39000, 42000, 45000 Five Years After: 24000, 25000, 26500, 29000, 31000, 33700, 36200, 38500, 40200, 40000, 43750, 48000 Using Excel, the test, ―t-test: Paired Two Sample for Means‖ may be used to perform the two-sample t-test In order to perform this test, using a TI-83, enter the salaries into lists and 2, and then highlight list (L3) and enter L2 – L1 (This is done by selecting the lists from the Edit menu.) L3 will now show all of the differences in salaries from one year after graduation to five years after graduation Next, choose the t-test function, but choose ―Data‖ for the input type The null hypothesis (Ho) should be The list should show ―L3.‖ Since the salaries are expected to increase, a one-tailed test may be used Thus, choose ― ,‖ for the type of hypothesis to test Click ―Calculate.‖ Note SPSS may also be used to compute a paired-samples t-test using the Analyze dropdown tab with Compare Means option, Paired Samples T Test VIII The summary statistics are shown below: t ≈ 6.8 p < 0.001 Since the p-value is less than 0.05 (< 0.001, in this case), we may declare there is a significant difference in the salaries of this group, for the times of one year, and five years, after graduation Example You want to compare the final exam scores of a freshman class for the subjects of U.S History and Calculus U.S History scores: 94, 67, 95, 65, 72, 60, 85, 86, 78, 76, 62, 85, 98, 72, 68, 81, 91, 92, 86, 93 Calculus scores: 100, 64, 95, 89, 75, 84, 90, 82, 79, 100, 88, 73, 83, 75, 86, 76, 83, 98, 75, 73 The summary statistics are shown below: t ≈ 0.999 p > 0.05 Since the p-value is greater than 0.05, we may declare there is not a significant difference in final exam scores for the two subjects, for this freshman class WRITING A RESULTS SECTION Scenario Used We compared the means of males (same group) for scores on interpersonal relations and social stress Let’s now look at a sample results section write-up for the scenario described above First, let’s look at the data analysis The steps we used in SPSS were: Analyze Compare Means Paired-Samples T Test Enter paired variables (interpersonal relations and social stress) Filter for just for sex to get only males IX Appendix 4: [PRE-INTERVENTION SURVEY] Senior university students’ opinions about previous teachers’ feedback on interpreting performance I am Nguyen Thi Thuy Trang, a lecturer at the University of Languages and International Studies I am conducting a research study to improve lecturers‘ in-class feedback for students‘ interpreting performance in Advanced Interpreting courses I would like to hear from you about your opinions towards previous interpreting lecturers‘ feedback on your interpreting performance This will help me to find out any remaining problems and possible solutions to improve lecturers‘ future feedback, thus hopefully enhancing students‘ interpreting performance Thank you for taking the time to fill in this questionnaire The survey should only take minutes, and your responses are completely anonymous If you have any questions about the survey, please email me: cotrang.ulis@gmail.com In the past, how did your interpreting lecturers usually give you feedback about your interpreting performance? (please tick one)  The teacher(s) usually took notes and spoke to me with advice on my speaking in class  The teacher(s) usually wrote comments on paper and/or gave me a score  The teacher(s) usually only gave me a score but no other comments  The teacher(s) usually didn‘t give me any advice about my speaking  Other? (Please describe) _ _ _ _ When did your teachers usually give you advice about your speaking? (please tick one) Before and after (tests) Only before Only after Not before and not after Generally, how would you rate your teacher‘s advice for improving your interpreting ability? (please tick one) X Excellent Very good OK/Average Bad/Poor Very bad Please briefly explain your choice for question 3: _ _ _ _ What are your suggestions to improve the quality of teachers‘ feedback in interpreting lessons? _ _ _ _ XI Appendix 5: [POST-INTERVENTION SURVEY] Senior university students’ opinions about the use of audio and note-taking technology (Audionote) in teacher’s feedback for students’ interpreting performance How would you rate the Audionote app for improving the quality of your teacher‘s feedback for your interpretation? Please briefly explain your choice Excellent Very good Average Bad/ Poor Very bad Explanation: _ _ _ How would you rate the Audionote app for improving your interpretation skills? Please briefly explain your choice Excellent Very good Average Bad/ Poor Very bad Explanation: _ _ _ Generally, how would you rate your teacher‘s advice for improving your interpreting ability with the use of Audionote? (Tick) Excellen t Very Average good Bad/ Poor Very bad In general, how would you prefer your teacher to use feedback for your interpreting performance? A Using the traditional note-taking method and give feedback after the students' performance (not using Audionote) XII B Recording the interpreting performance and feed-forward comments in the app and show the feedback on the app after the students‘ performance (using Audionote WITHOUT students self-reflection) C Recording the interpreting performance and feed-forward comments in the app, show the feedback on the app after the students' performance and send the feedback file back to students via email for further self-reflection (using Audionote WITH students self-reflection) How often did you listen to the feedback files on Audionote at home for self-reflection after in-class lessons? Always Often Sometim Rarely Never es How would you rate the importance of having a marking rubric (specific criteria) when teachers give feedback using Audionote? Very important importa nt averag e Quite important Not important at all What are your expectations/ suggestions for better exploitation of Audionote in teachers‘ feedback for interpreting students? _ _ _ XIII Appendix 6: POST-INTERVENTION INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Senior university students’ opinions about the use of audio and note-taking technology (Audionote) in teacher’s feedback for students’ interpreting performance How you evaluate the effectiveness of Audionote app for improving the quality of your teacher‘s feedback for your interpretation? Please explain in details How you evaluate the effectiveness of Audionote app for improving your interpretation skills? Please explain in details How often did you listen to the feedback files on Audionote at home for self-reflection after in-class lessons? Do you think self-reflection with feedback files on Audionote is important for student interpreters? How would you evaluate the importance of having a marking rubric (specific criteria) when teachers give feedback using Audionote? Please explain in details What are the shortcomings in the exploitation of Audionote for teachers‘ feedback in the previous lessons (if any)? What are your expectations/ suggestions for better exploitation of Audionote in teachers‘ feedback for interpreting students? XIV Appendix 7: SAMPLE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT (Interviews with Student 7) Interview transcript conventions: Symbol Explanation (?) talk too obscure to transcribe Hhhhh audible out-breath hhh in-breath (.) silence, less than half a second ( ) silence, less than one second (2.8) silence measured in 10ths of a second ? rising intonation I Pre-intervention interview with student R (Researcher): Linh Ừ nói chuyện với em xíu liên quan đến survey lần trước em làm nhá S7 (Student 7): Dạ R: Ừ Thế Hhhhh có nói mục đích buổi vấn mà nói chuyện nho nhỏ để nghe trực tiếp suy nghĩ nguyện vọng em Để cải thiện chất lượng dạy học làm nghiên cứu để tốt cho hệ sau Đó (.)có em tự nhiên em nói thơi Thứ hai, buổi nói chuyện ngày hôm (.) cô muốn hỏi em Hhhhh tập trung vào trải nghiệm suốt trình mà em học dịch với thầy cô khác nhau, dịch nói với thầy khác sử dụng phương pháp feedback truyền thống (.) tức chưa có ứng dụng cơng nghệ ý Là hỏi trải nghiệm phương pháp feedback truyền thống thường giáo viên thường có sổ để note lại mà em dịch Sau giáo viên nhận xét phần dịch em sau em kết thúc Có khơng? XV S7: Dạ R: Ừ Thì câu hỏi thứ em có hài lịng với phương pháp feedback truyền thống cho dịch nói khơng? Giáo viên take notes sau nói lại phần comment trên ( ) cho em khơng? Đặc biệt, em thấy có phù hợp áp dụng dịch song song Việt Anh hay không? Tại sao? Hhhhh S7: À (.).à Đầu tiên cách truyền thống mà thầy cô hay dùng để nhận xét bọn em ý ( ) Hhhhh à thật em khơng biết dùng cơng nghệ có khác Nhưng mà em thấy cách Bởi bọn em biết mắc lỗi đâu sửa Nhưng mà à Hhhhh ( ) à cảm giác mà nghe lần mà mà nghe Như cô gọi lên nghe tinh ý Cô gọi lên nghe mới, xong chưa Hhhhh nghe hết, xong khơng có thời gian thảo luận với bạn .hhh Hhhh Lúc phải dịch ln, dịch trước lớp khơng cảm giác (.) bị thất bại ý S7: Em muốn kiểu trước thầy cô gọi thi thầy cho thời gian trao đổi Ít phải nghe tầm lần với Cho bọn em đỡ bị sợ Hhhhh R: Như phần Việt Anh cô cho nghe trước lần để dịch trước bên trước, không? S7: Vâng S7: Không em thấy là, kiểu học khơng bị áp lực mà nhiều thầy cô ý Gọi thẳng lên sau sai, bị áp lực Hhhhh Khi mà Hhhhh R: Ừ cô hiểu nên thường cô cho em chuẩn bị kĩ bên trước Hì hì ừ S7: Nhưng mà R: Nhưng lại không liên quan đến feedback đâu nhá S7: Vâng R: Cái liên quan đến q trình dạy Rồi Đó ừm ( ) em chưa biết ứng dụng cơng nghệ khác không? S7: Vâng R: Thế ( ) hỏi nhá Trong lúc dịch song song em hình dung não căng lên khơng? XVI S7: Vâng R: Tại em học dịch Thì em thấy Hhhhh em dịch song song giáo viên nhận xét miệng Dựa mà giáo viên take notes ý có đủ cho em để hiểu tất thứ giáo viên nói hhh giáo viên comment khơng S7: Ừ Hhhhh đủ khơng đủ Bời vì, ( ) mà nhận xét thơi Và khơng biết Hhhhh không ghi âm dịch vừa xong ý Tức khơng thể mà nghe lại được, sau phải sửa đoạn (0.2) Nói chung em nghĩ mà có thời gian mà ghi âm lại dịch, xong ghi chép lại phần ghi chép thầy cô tốt R: Ừ S7: Vâng R: Thế đề xuất em không Mong muốn em không? S7: Vâng R: Em nói lại cụ thể ( ) mong muốn cụ thể em nào? S7:.hhh mong muốn em giống em vừa nói cụ thể tý, có hẳn dịch xong có phần chữa Xong umm ( ), nhà nghe lại đối chiếu xong sửa lên R: Ừ Ok Rồi Ờ Linh Linh có học buổi gần khơng? Linh có khơng? S7: Có R: Có không em Ừ S7: Em nghỉ học buổi đâu R: Thế R: hhh Tại cô để list danh sách tên bạn xong với số điện thoại nên cô khơng (.)có hình dung bạn gắn với bạn cô gọi S7: Dạ R: Đấy S7: Dạ XVII R: Ừ Thế tức em mong muốn feedback giáo viên phải liền với context S7: Vâng R: Đúng không? R: Rồi Tại em lại muốn thế? S7: Hhhhh (0.2) bời lúc mà mình, lúc mà em Lúc mà dịch ý khơng biết ummmm (0.2) Ví dụ lần trước cô nhận xét em từ affect em biết em dùng từ mà em không nghĩ em dùng từ sai nên phát âm sai lúc em dùng động từ hay tính từ lẫn lộn ý R: Ừ S7: Thì mà nhận xét em chưa tin Hay Đấy em ( )nghĩ cần có để nghe lại tin R: Ừ lần cô làm theo kiểu cũ không? Là lần mà cô take notes xong cô nói lại với em khơng? Ừ S7: Vâng R: Tức lúc em khơng hình dung em lúc em nói mà lại comment không? S7: Dạ R: Ok Cơ hiểu Đó ( ) ok Rồi thank you Linh nhá S7: Dạ R: Cô hỏi S7: Dạ em chào cô Em cảm ơn R: Ừ II Post-interview with student R (Researcher): Như nói lớp ý cô muốn nghe thêm ý kiến sâu bạn đánh giá việc sử dụng Audionote để làm feedback cho cho sinh viên kì vừa Đó Hhhhh có câu hỏi em trả lời thoải mái S7 (Student 7): Vâng XVIII R: Ừ Câu số là: em đánh hiệu Audionote việc nâng cao chất lượng feedback giảng viên phần dịch nói song song sinh viên S7: Tốt R: Ừ Tốt nào? Cười S7: À Hhhhh( )là lúc tải vể Hhhhh có kèm với lời nhận xét biết Hhhh đoạn hay sai từ hay Nói chung song song với phần viết cơ, phần nghe nên kiểm tra lại R: Ừ Cịn khơng em? Đối với dịch song song mà so với kiểu feedback truyền thống em dịch song song xong cô giáo take note à Hhhh giấy ( ) xong cô giáo nói lại cho em ln ý với việc sử dụng Audionote vừa comment miệng sau lại gửi lại comment qua notes có khác nhiều khơng? S7: Umm Hhhhh( ) tức em ( ) nghe nghe lại nhiều lần kiểu trao đổi với bạn dễ ý R: Ừ S7: Vâng R: Thế trình mà em học dịch Audionote có giúp em để để cải thiện kĩ dịch em không? Khi mà em nghe nhận xét giáo viên qua Audionote S7: Umm ( ) em vừa nói em khơng biết xác đoạn nên em mà khơng có thời gian nhiều tua tua lại trình Mình cần nghe Hhhh đoạn mà cô bảo R: Tua đến chỗ khơng? Em có S7: Dạ Vâng Nhưng mà em chưa sử dụng nhiều nên em (0.2) Vâng em tiếp xúc nên em R: Ừ Em có xem lại file nghe feedback nhà không theo em phần selfreflection nhà có quan trọng khơng? XIX S7: Em có xem lại nhà Em xem lại vài lần À ( ) em thấy nó (.) hiệu để dùng để feedback mà dịch ý R: Ừ Cái việc mà em self-reflected lại ( ) sau mà nghe feedback giáo viên xem lại feedback có quan trọng khơng? S7: Có Hhhhh R: Tại sao? S7: Ờ ( ) biết … biết lỗi xong selfreflected lại sửa lỗi có version tốt ý R: Ok Hhhh Thế lúc feedback có sử dụng marking rubric chia làm tiêu chí để đánh giá Thì theo em việc có quan trọng khơng, có cần thiết khơng? S7: Em nghĩ có cần thiết Mình chia dễ um ( ) chia theo mục để đánh giá Em dễ theo dõi mục ( ) Về từ vựng hay dễ theo dõi R: Um S7: Cịn viết chung lại đơi Thực ra, mà khơng có Nhưng mà em nghĩ tách riêng dễ để theo dõi R: Ừ, cuối em có thấy hạn chế việc sử dụng Audionote kì vừa có đề xuất hay mong muốn để việc thiện để sử dụng hiệu khơng (0.1) lúc học? S7: Em thấy (0.3) em chưa nghĩ R: Ừ Em mong muốn S7: Dạ R: Ừ Rồi cô cảm ơn Linh nhá S7: Vâng R: Xong Bye bye Linh S7: Vâng Em chào cô XX ... performances of university students majoring in translation and interpreting at a university in Hanoi" was carried out and submitted in partial fulfilment of the Degree of Master of Arts at the. .. TECHNOLOGY (AUDIONOTE) IN TEACHERS’ FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE THE CLASSROOM INTERPRETING PERFORMANCE OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS MAJORING IN TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETING AT A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI (Sử dụng công... Therefore, at least, the research results are likely to be applicable for other students majoring in Translation and Interpreting in my university or Translation and Interpreting students with the same