Sources of Data

In order to gather the necessary data, two research methods were chosen: a corpus of transcribed feedback and a survey. The combination of these methods is very enriching because while the corpus is based on observation, the survey is based on the students’ perception of their feedback. The comparison of the two gives us a unique opportunity to look at peer feedback from two different points of views and to draw conclusions based on the similarities and the differences in the results.

Their combined results will make it possible to carry out the desired analysis of the peer feedback in a set group of conference interpreting students.

4.4.1. Corpus

In this case, the speech material in question is a transcription of the oral feedback given amongst a group of interpreting students of the University of Geneva during their second semester ES sessions after consecutive training, from February 2015 until May 2015. However, some technical issues that persisted during the months of February, March and April, mean that there was no usable data from the first month and that the feedback samples that could be salvaged from the months of March and April are limited. Thus, the bulk of the feedback was recorded during May 2015.

Mar 5 (2) Apr 1 (2)

May 1 (2) 5 (4) 14 18 (3)

Table 2 - Transcriptions sorted by feedback date

In total, by the end of the semester, there were 16 usable, non-corrupt audio files, of varying sizes, containing peer feedback from speeches in a wide array of topics and language combinations, as shown in table 3.

27

After this selection process, all the recordings were transcribed omitting names and off-topic conversation to preserve the privacy of the participants. When possible, they have been split into different separate transcriptions to be able to analyse one piece of given feedback at a time. By the end of the process, the corpus contained 14 pieces of feedback of varying length that have been transcribed and examined using the peer feedback analysis sheet.

The language combinations for the peer feedback transcribed are very varied, as can be seen in table 2, with interpretations from and into French, English, German and Spanish, as the table below shows.

English Spanish French German

Source 4 0 6 4

Target 3 5 3 4

Table 3 - Feedback divided by source and target languages in corpus

In addition, the feedback analysed corresponds to 11 different speeches, 8 of them original and 3 relay interpretations, in which the students are faced with different difficulties and styles and must adapt to them.

Speech titles

Économie formelle et informelle à la CIT

EPU

Famille Le Pen Kolumbien

Kolumbien (relay) Health care workers

Health care workers (relay)

28

Shadow economy Informal economy Human Rights Council

Human Rights Council (relay)

Table 4 - Titles of corpus speeches

Based on this material, it is possible to examine how the student’s feedback relates to the expected levels of progress set by the Interpreting department. Although the transcriptions of the recordings are objective and only based on real examples of peer feedback, its interpretation could be subjective.

To try to reduce the risk of bias, an analysis sheet based on the expected levels of progress was created to ensure that all recordings are judged and analysed following the same criteria. Under the section

“Data Analysis Strategies”, an annotated blank version of said analysis sheet can be found; moreover, the transcription of the recordings used to fill it is included in appendix 1.

The peer feedback analysis sheets were completed following the categories set out in appendix 9 and following the models of appendix 2 and 3. As with the transcriptions, 14 analysis sheets (see appendix 2) were input into a Google Form document to be able to analyse them jointly using the same format as in the questionnaire. A summary of the results generated with Google Forms technology is available in appendix 3. The following section contains a detailed analysis of the results broken down by category and subcategory as specified in the aforementioned tables.

4.4.2. Survey

The survey will take the form of a questionnaire answered by the same students whose feedback was recorded, transcribed and analysed. This way, it will provide an insight in how the students perceived their training sessions and the feedback given, as well as how they think it helped them develop their interpreting skills. The results of the survey, the responses to the questionnaire, are based on the subjects’ experiences, memories and opinions. These answers are born of the participant’s point of view and they provide a better understanding of their reasoning and learning experience, reflecting their opinion, which will always be subjective.

29

The questionnaire is composed of 12 questions that address how students regard the feedback they give and receive and how they perceive the impact it has in how they learn. It aims to do so by asking them what their general approach is to feedback (question 1), what aspects they consider more or less important in feedback (questions 2 and 5), how they adapt peer feedback to the receiver (question 3), how it influences the way they learn (question 4 and 8), how they react to it (questions 9 and 10), how they feel it has changed during the course of their studies (questions 11 and 12) and how they think peer feedback compares to feedback from other sources (questions 6 and 7).

30