assessment practice, translation classroom, online survey, translation teachers, teachers’ attitudes towards assessment, Ukraine


Purpose. The article is aimed at the studies of the assessment practices currently applied in translation training at Ukrainian universities in the context of cutting-edge trends and dispositions in translator’s education observed worldwide. They include the synergism of both evaluative and formative assessment, the extensive use of diverse assessment methods and tools, including alternative ones, the rational involvement of self- and peer-assessment procedures. Method. A mixed research method was designed and employed with that end in view. It involved 41 translation teachers from 16 Ukrainian universities, who were asked to answer an online survey of 30 close and open-ended questions regarding their background, attitude to assessment and its different aspects such as functions, procedures and tools used for different types of tests in translation, assessment objects and agents, grading methods and associated problems. The obtained results were processed with the help of statistical methods and contrasted  with the data received by relevant studies conducted abroad within the last twenty years. Findings. The findings of this research allowed us to compile the aggregated profile of Ukrainian translation teachers in terms of assessment practice, define the most common ways to conduct monitoring, borderline and summative assessment in teaching translation to undergraduate students in Ukraine, and claim that the teachers’ subjective evaluation of translation assessment efficiency depends on their teaching experience.  Implications for research and practice. The obtained results should boost further theoretical and practical development in the field of translation assessment as well as in the area of translation teachers’ training.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Tetiana Korol, Kyiv National Linguistic University,National University “Yuri Kondratyuk Poltava Polytechnic”

PhD in Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of General Linguistics and Foreign Languages, National University “Yuri Kondratyuk Poltava Polytechnic”;  Doctoral student at the Department of Pedagogy, Foreign Languages Teaching Methodology and Information and Communication Technologies, Kyiv National Linguistic University


  1. Abdel Latif, M. M. M. (2018). Towards a typology of pedagogy-oriented translation and interpreting research, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 12(3), 322-345.
  2. Al-Jarf, R. (2021). Critical analysis of translation tests in 18 specialized translation courses for undergraduate students. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 2(3), 1-7.
  3. Amini, M. (2018). How to evaluate the TEFL students’ translations: through analytic, holistic or combined method? Language Testing in Asia, 8(10).
  4. Garant, M. (2009). A case for holistic translation assessment. AFinLA-e Soveltavan kielitieteen tutkimuksia, 1, 5-17.
  5. Ge, Sh., & Pi, X. (2021). Research on construction of translation self-assessment activity for self-regulated learning in Chinese EFL context. Emerging Technologies for Education: 6th International Symposium, SETE 2021, Zhuhai, China, November 11-12, 390-402.
  6. Han, Ch. (2021). Interpreting testing and assessment: A state-of-the-art review. Language Testing.
  7. Heidari Tabrizi, H. (2021). Evaluative practices for assessing translation quality: A content analysis of Iranian undergraduate students’ academic translations. International Journal of Language Studies, 15(3), 65-88.
  8. Huang, Z., & Napier, J. (2015). Perceptions of Teachers and Students on the Qualities of an Effective Translation Teacher. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 1, 1-23.
  9. Huertas Barros, E. & Vine, J. (2018). Current trends on MA translation courses in the UK: changing assessment practices on core translation modules. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 12(1), 5-24.
  10. Hurtado Albir, A. (2019). Research on the didactics on translation. Evolution, approaches and future events. In: Tolosa Igualada, Miguel & Álvaro Echeverri (eds.), Porque algo tiene que cambiar. La formación de traductores e intérpretes: Presente & futuro / Because something should change: Present & Future Training of Translators and Interpreters (pp.47-76). MonTI 11trans.
  11. Klimkowski, K. (2019). Assessment as a communicative activity in the translation classroom. inTRAlinea Special Issue: New Insights into Translation Training.
  12. Korol, T. (2018). Assessment Peculiarities of Future Philologists’ Translation Competence. Education – Technology – Computer Science, 2(24), 189-194,
  13. Korol, T. (2019). Contemporary research state of the problem of translation competence assessment (Suchasnyi stan doslidzhenosti problemy kontroliu sformovanosti perekladatskoyi kompetentnosti). Collection of Research Papers “Pedagogical Sciences”, LXXXVIIІ(88), 54–60.
  14. Korol, T. (2020). Translation assessment: is there anything to be tested objectively? Advanced Education, 15, 32-40.
  15. Korol, T. (2021). Digital teacher feedback as a translation assessment tool. Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 9(4), Special Issue, 575-586.
  16. Li, D. (2006). Making Translation Testing More Teaching-oriented: A Case Study of Translation Testing in China. Meta : journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators' Journal, 51(1), 72-88.
  17. McAlester, G. (2000). The evaluation of translation into a foreign language. In C. Shäffner & B. Adab (eds.), Developing Translation Competence (pp.229-241). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins Translation Library 38.
  18. Orlando, M. (2019). Training and educating interpreter and translator trainers as practitioners-researchers-teachers. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13(3), 216-232.
  19. Pavlović, N., & Antunović G. (2019). A desirable profile of translation teacher: perceptions and needs in the Croatian context. inTRAlinea. Special Issue: New Insights into Translator Training. Retrieved 25 July 202 from:
  20. Robinson, B. J., Olvera Lobo, M. D. & Gutiérrez-Artacho, J. (2013). The professional approach to translator training revisited. VI Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de la Traducción e Interpretación, 1-29.
  21. Rowley, J. (2014). Designing and using research questionnaires. Management Research Review, 37(3), 308-330.
  22. Şahin, M. & Dungan, N. (2014). Translation testing and evaluation: A study on methods and needs. Translation & Interpreting, 6(2), 67-90. doi:106202.2014.a05
  23. Sharififar, M., Beh-Afarin, S. R., & Younesi, H. (2018). Classroom translation assessment techniques: How can we tell what/how our students are translating? International Journal of Language testing, 8(2), 44-53.
  24. Waddington, C. (2001). Different methods of evaluating student translations: the question of validity. Meta: Translator’s Journal, 46(2), 311-325.
  25. Wang, G. F. (2022). Formative assessment system of VR teaching in English translation classroom. Open Access Library Journal, 9, 1-7.
  26. Yan, J. X., Pan, J., Wang, H. (2018). Research on Translator and Interpreter Training. A Collective Volume of Bibliometric Reviews and Empirical Studies on Learners. Singapore, Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.




How to Cite