Connected education and the co-construction of knowledge in a joint course for law and interpreting students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v20i.610Keywords:
connectedness, connected learning, questioning techniques, legal interpretingAbstract
This article raises questions of education sociology with a focus on one of its core concepts: connectedness. It relates the dimensions of the connected curriculum to research on didactic approaches, showing how methods of connected learning and the co-construction of knowledge can be applied at different levels to enable students to gain subject-related, methodological and transdisciplinary communicative competence in addition to building relationships and cooperation among them across fields of study. These dimensions are presented using the example of the course “Questioning techniques from the perspective of criminology and interpreting”. During this course, students of law and interpreting had the opportunity to acquire both core theoretical knowledge of and practical experience in questioning techniques. This they did through role playing the questioning of defendants and witnesses that typically occurs in a courtroom from the perspective of both criminology and interpreting. The evaluation and feedback showed that the law and the interpreting students appreciated the way the course made them aware of issues in both their own and the other field, helped them to connect academic learning to professional competences and gave them insights into interprofessional cooperation in interpreted legal settings.
References
Ahrens, B. (2015). Body language. In F. Pöchhacker, N. Grbi?, P. Mead, & R. Setton (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 36–38). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315678467
Albl-Mikasa, M. (2008). (Non-)sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting, 10(2), 197–231. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.10.2.03alb
Andres, D. (2002). Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation. Lang.
Argyle, M. (2013). Körpersprache & Kommunikation: Nonverbaler Ausdruck und soziale Interaktion (10th ed.). Junfermann.
Artkämper, H., & Schilling, K. (2014). Vernehmungen: Taktik – Psychologie – Recht (3rd ed.). VDP.
Bansal, A., Swann, J., & Smithson, W. H. (2014). Using professional interpreters in undergraduate medical consultation skills teaching. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 5, 439–450. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S71332
Barnett, R. (2016). Understanding the university: Institution, idea, possibilities. Routledge.
Berk-Seligson, S. (1990). The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. The University of Chicago Press.
Berk-Seligson, S. (2017). The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process (2nd ed.). The University of Chicago Press.
Blackledge, A. (2011). Linguistic ethnography. In M. J. Grenfell (Ed.), Bourdieu, language and linguistics (pp. 121–146). Continuum.
Boal, A. (1993). Theatre of the oppressed. Theatre Communications Group.
Creese, A. (2008). Linguistic ethnography. In K. A. King & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, Volume 10: Research methods in language and education (pp. 229–241). Springer.
Crezee, I. (2015). Semi-authentic practices for student health interpreters. Translation & Interpreting, 7(3), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.107203.2015.a04
Dam, H. V. (2004). Interpreters’ notes. On the choice of language. Interpreting, 6(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.1.03dam
Evans, J., Shaffer, S., & Walsh, D. (2020). Interpreters in investigative contexts. In R. Bull & I. Blandón?Gitlin (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of legal and investigative psychology (pp. 133–148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429326530-10
Ewens, S., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., Jo, E., & Houston, K. (2017). The effect of the presence and seating position of an interpreter on eliciting information and cues to deceit. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23(2), 180–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2016.1239100
Fung, D. (2017). A connected curriculum for higher education. UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.14324/111.9781911576358
Gehl, R., & Plecas, D. (2016). Introduction to criminal investigation: Processes, practices and thinking. Justice Institute of British Columbia.
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8
González-Davies, M., & Enríquez-Raído, V. (2016). Situated learning in translator and interpreter training: Bridging research and good practice. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2016.1154339
Grafl, C., & Stempkowski, M. (2017). Lie to me: Wahrheitsfindung im Spannungsfeld divergierender Interessen. Österreichische Juristen-Zeitung, 2, 62–70.
Hale, S. (2001). How are courtroom questions interpreted?: An Analysis of Spanish interpreters’ practice. In I. Mason (Ed.), Triadic exchanges: Studies in dialogue interpreting (pp. 21–50). Routledge.
Hale, S. (2004). The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness, and the interpreter. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.52
Hale, S., & Gibbons, J. (1999). Varying realities: Patterned changes in the interpreter’s representation of courtroom and external realities. Applied Linguistics, 20(2), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/20.2.203
Hale, S., & Gonzalez, E. (2017). Teaching legal interpreting at university level: A research-based approach. In L. Cirillo & N. Niemants (Eds.), Teaching dialogue interpreting: Research-based proposals for higher education (pp. 200–216). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.138.10hal
Hale, S., Goodman-Delahunty, J., & Martschuk, N. (2019). Interpreter performance in police interviews: Differences between trained interpreters and untrained bilinguals. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13(2), 107–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2018.1541649
Herbert, J. (1968). The interpreter’s handbook: How to become a conference interpreter (2nd ed.). Georg.
Jacobsen, B. (2004). Pragmatic meaning in court interpreting: An empirical study of additions in consecutively interpreted question-answer dialogues. HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 17(32), 237–249. https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v17i32.25772
Kadri?, M. (2011). Dialog als Prinzip: Für eine emanzipatorische Praxis und Didaktik des Dolmetschens. Narr.
Kadri?, M. (2014a). Giving interpreters a voice: Interpreting studies meets theatre studies. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer: Special Issue: Dialogue Interpreting in Practice: Bridging the Gap between Empirical Research and Interpreter Education, 8(3), 452–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.971485
Kadri?, M. (2014b). Mission impossible? Training for the institutions and educating for society. In C. Falbo & M. Viezzi (Eds.), Traduzione e interpretazione per la società e le istituzioni (pp. 131–142). EUT.
Kadri?, M. (2015). Role play. In F. Pöchhacker, N. Grbi?, P. Mead, & R. Setton (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 360–361). Routledge.
Kadri?, M. (2017). Make it different!: Teaching interpreting with theatre techniques. In L. Cirillo & N. Niemants (Eds.), Teaching dialogue interpreting: Research-based proposals for higher education (pp. 276–292). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.138.14kad
Kadri?, M. (2019). Gerichts- und Behördendolmetschen: Prozessrechtliche und translatorische Perspektiven. Facultas.
Kadri?, M. (2021). Legal interpreting and social discourse. In M. Ji & S. Laviosa (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of translation and social practices (pp. 501–520). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190067205.013.21
Kelly, D. (2010). Curriculum. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (Vol. 1, pp. 87–93). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.cur1
Klafki, W. (2007). Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik: Zeitgemäße Allgemeinbildung und kritisch-konstruktive Didaktik (6th ed.). Beltz.
Lai, M., & Mulayim, S. (2014). Interpreter linguistic intervention in the strategies employed by police in investigative interviews. Police Practice and Research, 15(4), 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2013.809929
Leins, D. A., Zimmerman, L. A., & Polander, E. N. (2017). Observers’ real-time sensitivity to deception in naturalistic interviews. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(4), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-017-9224-2
Llewellyn-Jones, P., & Lee, R. G. (2014). Redefining the role of the community interpreter: The concept of role-space. SLI Press.
Luciew, D., Mulkern, J., & Punako, R. Jr. (2011). Finding the truth: Interview and interrogation training simulations. In Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC): Vol. 2011: Prepare the force… Secure the future. http://www.iitsecdocs.com/volumes/2011
Nord, C. (2009). Textanalyse und Übersetzen: Theoretische Grundlagen, Methode und didaktische Anwendung einer übersetzungsrelevanten Textanalyse (4th ed.). Groos.
Ott, B. (2011). Grundlagen des beruflichen Lernens und Lehrens. Ganzheitliches Lernen in der beruflichen Bildung (4th ed.). Cornelsen.
Prieto-Velasco, J. A., & Fuentes-Luque, A. (2016). A collaborative multimodal working environment for the development of instrumental and professional competences of student translators: An innovative teaching experience. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 10(1), 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2016.1154344
Prun?, E. (2019). Entwicklungslinien der Translationswissenschaft: Von den Asymmetrien der Sprachen zu den Asymmetrien der Macht (4th ed.). Frank & Timme.
Rennert, S. (2021). Qualität als gemeinsame Verantwortung: Aus- und Weiterbildung für DolmetscherInnen und NutzerInnen im Rechtsbereich. In K. Kaindl, S. Pöllabauer, & D. Miki? (Eds.), Dolmetschen als Dienst am Menschen: Texte für Mira Kadri? (pp. 215–228). Narr Francke Attempto.
Rigney, A. C. (1999). Questioning in interpreted testimony. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 6(1), 83–108. https://doi.org/10.1558/sll.1999.6.1.83
Skaaden, H. (2013). No set answers?: Facilitating interpreter students’ learning in an experiential approach. In C. Wadensjö (Ed.), Training the trainers: Nordic seminar on interpreter education (pp. 11–26). Stockholm: Universitetsservice US-AB.
Soukara, S., Bull, R., Vrij, A., Turner, M., & Cherryman, J. (2009). What really happens in police interviews of suspects?: Tactics and confessions. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15(6), 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160802201827
Stempkowski, M., & Grafl, C. (2021). Dolmetschen und Lügenerkennung. In K. Kaindl, S. Pöllabauer, & D. Miki? (Eds.), Dolmetschen als Dienst am Menschen: Texte für Mira Kadri? (pp. 161–173). Narr Francke Attempto.
The Global Deception Research Team (2006). A world of lies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(1), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022105282295
TransLaw. (2018–2019). Exploring legal interpreting service paths and transcultural law clinics for persons suspected or accused of crime. TransLaw Research Group. https://translaw.univie.ac.at/activities/translaw-project/
Venuti, L. (2018). The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203553190
Vrij, A. (2005). Criteria-based content analysis: A qualitative review of the first 37 studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11(1), 3–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.1.3
Vrij, A. (2006). Challenging interviewees during interviews: The potential effects on lie detection. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160512331331319
Vrij, A., & Mann, S. (2006). Criteria-based content analysis: An empirical test of its underlying processes. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(4), 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160500129007
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., Fisher, R. P., Dalton, G., Eunkyung, J., Shaboltas, A., Khaleeva, M., Granskaya, J., & Houston, K. (2018). Using unexpected questions to elicit information and cues to deceit in interpreter-based interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(1), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3382
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Fisher, R. P., Mann, S., Eunkyung, J. Shaboltas, A. Khaleeva, M., Granskaya, J., & Houston, K. (2019). Eliciting information and cues to deceit through sketching in interpreter-based interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(6), 1197–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3566
Walklate, S. (2007). Understanding criminology: Current theoretical debates (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill/Open UP.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Mira Kadric, Sylvi Rennert, Dalibor Mikic
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 Deed that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. The material cannot be used for commercial purposes.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
