Content strategies of translators’ training in colleges

Forward design is based on the assumption that content, methodology (process) and course learning outcomes are related in a linear fashion (decisions about how to teach are taken after the content has been selected, and decisions about learning outcomes follow the decisions on methodology). It is necessary to focus on content, which will influence the process and the outcomes. In case of professional disciplines the linguistic input can be based on corpus analysis as well as discourse analysis that studies different text types, their usage, lexical, grammatical, textual features that should influence translation [10, p. 8-13].

Central design presupposes focus on teaching methods, techniques, activities after which content and learning outcomes are dealt with [10, p. 13-14]. J. L. Clark's states that it: 1) focuses more on learning process than predertemined outcomes; 2) is learner-centered as it provides relevant learning experiences that develop learners' ability to study on their own and involves learners in shaping their skills acquisition; 3) emphasizes the role of teaching-learning context and the role of the teacher in shaping the curriculum [4, p. 49-90].

Backward design begins with diagnosis of needs (the idea emerged in 1960s) and formulating the learning objectives. The content and methodology are derived from the results. In other words, the planning process starts with a clear understanding of the final results. However, the design requires clear criteria to prove that the objectives have been achieved as well as clear decision on what activities and procedures will lead to such results [10, p. 20-23].

The analysis of the three strategies of syllabus design enabled the following conclusions. A forward design approach may be suggested in the situations where teachers [10, p. 29]: 1) are limited in their choice on what and how to teach; 2) rely more on published metarials (textbooks etc.) than on teacher-designed ones; 3) have to teach large classes; 4) prefer or have to use centrally developed tests and assessments rather than teacher-designed ones; 5) have little experience and are willing to rely on generally established requirements, published materials etc.

A backward design option: 1) is preferable when the focus is on the achievement of learning outcomes; 2) requires thorough needs analysis; 3) demands for clear (both for teachers and students) assessment criteria and procedures that link to the learning outcomes, not the tasks to prove that learning outcomes have been achieved; 4) requires regular feedback to let students understand how close they are to the expected learning outcomes [10, p. 29].

The teachers were free to choose the syllabus design option, which seemed the most relevant for them. The survey showed that the most preferable was forward design, which starts with the content, and backward design that focuses on the needs analysis and course learning outcomes, which should correlate with curriculum learning outcomes. The results of the survey are consistent with the mentioned characteristics of the three design options.

Another important question is the methodology that will he lp to provide high level of students' language and translation skills development, appropriate knowledge acquision that will allow the graduates to fulfil their professional duties efficiently. Taking into account the peculiarities of the students and specificity of college training, which focuses on intensive development of language proficiency as well as students' mastery of subject matter, it was supposed that Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) should be employed with reasonable use of authentic scenarios, activities and immersion in professional situations.

CLIL is an educational approach that presupposes teaching content and the target language via the target language [7, p. 1]. It is a fusion of both language and subject education [7, p. 1], which in our case can substantially intensify skills mastering by college students.

CLIL approach development has been considerably affected by language acquisition theories, which contributes to language learning and teaching perspectives [6, p. 548-549]. Besides, the more proficient students' language level is, the less attention should be paid to linguistic aspect [8]. However, in case of college students, whose level of language proficiency is below B2, linguistic aspect remains an important issue and focus.

Do Coyle developed the 4Cs Conceptual Framework of CLIL, which brought together four domains: 1) content (subject); 2) communication (language); 3) cognition (thinking); 4) culture (intercultural understanding) [6, p. 549]. Content (subject) focuses not only on acquiring knowledge and skills, but also on the learners building their knowledge and developing skills being provided with the necessary level of autonomy [9, p. 47]. Acquiring subject knowledge and skills requires learning and thinking (cognition). The learners will be able to construct their knowledge and develop skills only if cognitive and linguistic demands are accessible, appropriate (neither too high nor too low) and increase gradually [6, p. 549]. High level cognitive and linguistic demand involves generalizing, comparing and contrasting, summarizing, planning, classifying, transforming, reviewing, problem solving, developing ideas, justifying opinions, evaluating critically, making deductions, predicting consequences, analysing suggesting solutions, etc. [5, p. 210]. The role of culture in translator's training is indisputable and crucial as the relation between languages and cultures [6, p. 551], language and thought [2, p. 138] is complex. Interpreters should know cultural nuances, cultural connotations and context, societal norms, develop cultural sensitivity, be able to facilitate communication between individuals from different cultures, avoid cultural misunderstanding, manage culturally challenging situations, handle cultural nuances of specific industries.

All in all, the analysis of professional translator training in colleges led to the following conclusions: 1) backward design seems to be the most appropriate for education program development since it focuses on the skills and abilities graduates should demonstrate to fulfil their professional duties appropriately; 2) forward and backward designs can be recommended for syllabus development;

3) Content and Language Integrated Learning with reasonable use of authentic scenarios, activities and immersion in professional situations proved to be effective.

References