Effective Teaching Strategies and Behaviors of Legal Translation Lecturers in Spain

Robert Martínez-Carrasco

doi:10.17533/udea.ikala.v26n2a10

Autor/innen

Robert Martínez-Carrasco Universitat Jaume I https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2148-8637

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v26n2a10

Schlagworte:

legal translation, translation teaching, teaching strategies, higher education

Abstract

Framed within the current accountability policies in higher education, under the strains of global competition and the internationalization of universities worldwide, this article examines effective teaching as a pillar of teaching quality in higher education among legal translation lecturers. By linking certain teaching and learning styles to the different dimensions of effective teaching (instructional, organizational, and emotional), the teaching profile of legal translation lecturers in Spain at undergraduate level is analyzed. In addition, student-centered teaching approaches are connected to the use of classroom strategies and methodological resources that characterize effective teaching. The findings of this study, obtained through the distribution of the tamufq questionnaire (Teaching and Assessment Methodology of University Faculty Questionnaire) among legal translation lecturers at undergraduate level in Spain, suggest that those lecturers who adopt a post-positivist approach in their classroom display a greater variety of teaching behaviors and strategies associated with both effective curriculum implementation and higher quality teaching than those who are closer to traditional, positivist approaches. These findings may be particularly useful in the design and implementation of continuous professional development courses and pedagogical training of lecturers.

|Abstract

= 818 veces | PDF (ENGLISH)

= 457 veces| | HTML (ENGLISH)

= 14 veces| | VISOR (ENGLISH)

= 7 veces|

Downloads

Keine Nutzungsdaten vorhanden.

Autor/innen-Biografie

Robert Martínez-Carrasco, Universitat Jaume I

Ph. D., in Applied Languages, Literature & Translation, Universitat Jaume i, Spain.
Assistant Professor, Department of Translation and Communications, Translation and Interpreting, Universitat Jaume I, Spain.
rcarrasc@uji.es

Literaturhinweise

Aguilera, E. (2012). Los estilos de enseñanza, una necesidad para la atención de los estilos de aprendizaje en la educación universitaria. Journal of Learning Styles, 5(10), 79–87.

Álvarez Morán, S., Carleos Artime, C., Corral Blanco, N., & Prieto Rodríguez, E. (2018). Metodología docente y rendimiento en pisa 2015: Análisis crítico. Revista de Educación, (379), 85–113. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2017-379-370

Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.32712626

Biesta, G. (2013). Interrupting the politics of learning. Power and Education, 5(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.2304/power.2013.5.1.4

Biesta, G. (2015). The duty to resist: Redefining the basics for today´s schools. RoSE -Research on Steiner Education, 6, 1–11.

Boysen, G. A., Richmond, A. S., & Gurung, R. A. R. (2015). Model teaching criteria for psychology: Initial documentation of teachers’ self-reported competency. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000023

Buskist, W., Sikorski, J., Buckley, T., & Saville, B. K. (2002). Elements of master teaching. In S. Davis & W. Buskist (Eds.), The teaching of Psychology: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie and Charles L. Brewer (pp. 27–39). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410603586

Cohen, J. (2015). Challenges in identifying high-leverage practices. Teachers College Record, (117), 1–41.

Day, C. (2012). New lives of teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 39(1), 7–26.

De Courcy, E. (2015). Defining and measuring teaching excellence in higher education in the 21st Century. College Quarterly, 18(1). http://collegequarterly.ca/2015-vol18-num01-winter/decourcy.html

Dorgu, T. E. (2015). Different teaching methods: A panacea for effective curriculum implementation in the classroom. International Journal of Secondary Education, 3(6–1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsedu.s.2015030601.13

ehea Ministerial Conference. (2018). Paris Communiqué. http://www.ehea2018.paris/Data/ElFinder/s2/Communique/EHEAParis2018-Communique-final.pdf

Feldman, K. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching. In R. Perry & J. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 93–143). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5742-3

Feldman, K. A. (1996). Identifying exemplary teaching: Using data from course and teacher evaluations. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, (65), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966509

Fuller, F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American

Educational Research Journal, (6), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312006002207

García Ramos, J. M. (1998). Análisis de estructuras de covarianza en el estudio de la Competencia Docente del Profesor Universitario. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 16(1), 155–184.

Gargallo, B., Sahuquillo Mateo, P. , Verde, I., & Almerich, G. (2018). What happens when teachers use learning-centered methods? Effects on learning approaches, on students’ capacities and on their perception of learning environment. Revista de Educación, (382), 163–197. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2018-382-396

Gargallo, B., Suárez Rodríguez, J., Garfella Esteban, P. , & Fernández March, A. (2011). El cuestionario cemedepu. Un instrumento para la evaluación de la metodología docente y evaluativa de los profesores universitarios. Estudios Sobre Educacion, (21), 9–40.

González-Peiteado, M., & Pino-Juste, M. (2016). Los estilos de enseñanza: construyendo puentes para transitar las diferencias individuales del alumnado. Revista Complutense de Educación, 27(3), 1175–1191. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_RCED.2016.v27.n3.47563

Gurung, R. A. R., Richmond, A. S., & Boysen, G. (2018). Studying excellence in teaching: The story so far. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, (156), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20312

Holzberger, D., Praetorius, A.-K., Seidel, T., & Kunter, M. (2019). Identifying effective teachers: The relation between teaching profiles and students’ development in achievement and enjoyment. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34, 801–823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-018-00410-8

Jorgensen, M., Havel, A., Fichten, C., King, L., Marcil, E., Lussier, A., & Budd, J. (2018). “Simply the best”: Professors nominated by students for their exemplary technology practices in teaching. Education and Information Technologies, (23), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9594-1

Keeley, J., Smith, D., & Buskist, W. (2006). The teacher behavior checklist: Factor analysis of its utility for evaluating teaching. Teaching of Psychology, (33), 84–91. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top3302_1

Kiraly, D., & Hofmann, S. (2016). Towards a postpositivist curriculum development model for translator education. In D. Kiraly (Ed.), Towards authentic experiential learning in translator

education (pp. 67–87). V&R Press. https://doi.org/10.14220/9783737004954.67

Marsh, H. W. (1987). Students evaluation of university teaching. Research findings, methodological issues and directions for future research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(3), 255–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(87)90001-2

Martínez-Carrasco, R. (2017). Epistemological approaches to legal translation education: A situated account. Ph. D. Dissertation. Universitat Jaume i, Spain.

Martínez-Carrasco, R. (2021). Exploring the pedagogical beliefs of legal translation lecturers in Spain: Observations on classroom methodology and teaching philosophy. Innovaciones Metodológicas con tic en Educación. Dykinson.

Muñoz Raya, E. (Ed.). (2004). Libro blanco. Título de Grado de Traducción e Interpretación. Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea. https://www.ehu.eus/documents/1690128/1704927/libro_blanco_Traduccion_Interpretacion_ANECA.pdf

Nie, Y., & Lau, S. (2009). Complementary roles of care and behavioral control in classroom management: The self-determination theory perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(3), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.03.001

Postareff, L., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Nevgi, A. (2007). The effect of pedagogical training on teaching in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 557–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.013

Saroyan, A., & Trigwell, K. (2015). Higher education teachers’ professional learning: Process and outcome. Studies on Educational Evaluation, (46), 92–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2015.03.008

Spooren, P., Brockx, B., & Mortelmans, D. (2013). On the validity of student evaluation of teaching: The state of the art. Review of Educational Research, (83), 598–642.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870

Van der Lans, R., van de Grift, W., & van Veen, K. (2018). Developing an instrument for teacher feedback: Using the Rasch Model to explore teachers’ development of effective teaching strategies and behaviors. Journal of Experimental Education, 86(2), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1268086

Wagner, W., Göllner, R., Werth, S., Voss, T., Schmitz, B., & Trautwein, U. (2015). Student and teacher ratings of instructional quality: consistency of ratings over time, agreement, and predictive power. Journal of Educational Psychology, (118), 705–721. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000075