chrisjarka
/
en_tm
forked from WycliffeAssociates/en_tm
1
0
Fork 0
Files Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity See in Reader

Update 'checking/authentic-assessment/01.md' 

Issue 131
Pasted  Intro into this page.
Reworded 3rd point of step two.
This commit is contained in:
Susan Quigley 2019-07-29 17:55:41 +00:00
parent c8e26b44be
commit 8154e037dc
1 changed files with 3 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
checking/authentic-assessment/01.md
View File

@ -1,10 +1,12 @@
Translation teams should work together to develop an authentic assessment rubric of at least 10 qualities that must be present for a scripture translation to be considered good. (This is often done during the second day of a translation workshop.) These ten qualities are then defined and a measurement for testing them is created, usually in the form of a question. The translation team is guided through this process and the rubric is written down as a guide which will help translators to assess their quality as they go. Thus, the draft is being tested by the same objectivce criteria from the very start of the project. View additional sample rubrics at v-raft.com.
During the first few days of a MAST workshop, translation teams are guided through the process of developing an authentic assessment rubric for their translation project. Below are the instructions for creating this rubric, which then guides the checking process throughout the project. During the first few days of a MAST workshop, translation teams are guided through the process of developing an authentic assessment rubric for their translation project. Below are the instructions for creating this rubric, which then guides the checking process throughout the project.
1. Ask the translation team to choose a leader/representative of their language group to manage the rubric building process. Also look for an individual who is able to translate this rubric into English (it is possible to need double translation, first into the national language and then into English). 1. Ask the translation team to choose a leader/representative of their language group to manage the rubric building process. Also look for an individual who is able to translate this rubric into English (it is possible to need double translation, first into the national language and then into English).
2. Ask the individuals on the team the following (each one should work on this on their own first.) 2. Ask the individuals on the team the following (each one should work on this on their own first.)
* What is a good translation? * What is a good translation?
* List at least ten qualities. Even twenty if you want to stretch. * List at least ten qualities. Even twenty if you want to stretch.
* Review this list together as a whole group. Combine and condense by having the chosen leader (step 1) merge the sharing into one rubric. Creating groups of categories is okay (see sample rubric). * Work together as a team to make one list that includes all the items from each individual’s list. Combine qualities that are the same and develop one master list of at least 10 qualities that everyone agrees on. The chosen leader will guide this process.
3. Facilitator should review the rubric of "must have skills," determine if anything is missing, and ask questions to lead the group toward discovering and adding those traits. Some sample questions are: 3. Facilitator should review the rubric of "must have skills," determine if anything is missing, and ask questions to lead the group toward discovering and adding those traits. Some sample questions are:
* If missing an expression of checking key words: "When you look at the language of scripture, what are some of the things that give scripture a strong sense of accuracy?" Keep asking until they express the "important words" (in some form) and then ask "should those be checked?" * If missing an expression of checking key words: "When you look at the language of scripture, what are some of the things that give scripture a strong sense of accuracy?" Keep asking until they express the "important words" (in some form) and then ask "should those be checked?"
* If missing a trait on consistency in naming (ie—Jesus, Son of God, Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus), ask "what do you think about the different names of Jesus—are those important to be translated consistently with a good source text? * If missing a trait on consistency in naming (ie—Jesus, Son of God, Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus), ask "what do you think about the different names of Jesus—are those important to be translated consistently with a good source text?