







































Education, Language and Sociology Research 
ISSN 2690-3644 (Print) ISSN 2690-3652 (Online) 

Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 
www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr 

Original Paper 

Self-assessment of Consecutive Interpreting by MTI Interpreting 

Students 
Yifei Zhang1* & Xiaodan Liu2 

1 School of Foreign Languages, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China 
2 School of Foreign Languages, Zhejaing Ocean University, Zhoushan, China 
* Yifei Zhang, School of Foreign Languages, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China 

 

Received: September 8, 2021    Accepted: October 1, 2021   Online Published: October 11, 2021 

doi:10.22158/elsr.v2n4p10        URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/elsr.v2n4p10 

 
Abstract  

Assessing the quality of interpreting practice and conducting targeted training is the key to improving 

interpreting ability of MTI student interpreters. By reviewing literature on interpreting assessment and 

self-assessment, the research has decided the parameters for self-assessment of consecutive 

interpreting practice, developed a self-assessment form and conducted self-assessment of MTI 

interpreting students for fifteen weeks. Research results show that students have developed awareness 

of autonomous quality monitoring and improved their overall interpreting ability. 

Keywords  

MTI interpreting, self-assessment parameters, self-assessment form, self-assessment practice 

 

1. Introduction 

It is clearly stipulated in China’s Guiding Educational Program for Master of Translation and 

Interpreting that MTI interpreting teaching should stress interpreting practice and interpreting practice 

of no less than 400 tape-hours for students is required during their school years. This shows adequate 

interpreting practice is the prerequisite for the cultivation, improvement and automation of interpreting 

competence. However, assessing practice of such a big amount is rather tricky for teachers. On the one 

hand, there are not enough interpreting teachers since only two to four teachers are staffed for an 

interpreting class of around ten students. On the other hand, the staffed interpreting teachers still have 

tasks of teaching undergraduate students and doing research. But if students’ practice is not timely 

guided or evaluated, it is difficult for them to find out their problems and make progress in interpreting. 

Although MTI interpreting students are not required to pass the CATTI (China Accreditation Test for 

Translators and Interpreters) Level 2, this exam is included in the MTI quality monitoring system for 

10 
 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

teaching management by China National Committee for Translation and Interpreting Education. The 

pass rates of students in CATTI are important indicators of the universities’ achievement in translation 

and interpreting education. The official pass rates of the CATTI in November 2019 shows pass rates of 

English Simultaneous Interpreting (one subject), English Simultaneous Interpreting, English 

Consecutive Interpreting Level 2 (one subject) and English Consecutive Interpreting Level 2 are 7.39%, 

2.45%, 13.12% and 9.36% respectively. The official pass rates of CATTI in November 2020 are 3.36% 

for English Simultaneous Interpreting (one subject), 9.41% for English Simultaneous Interpreting, 8.63% 

for English Consecutive Interpreting Level 2 (one subject) and 9.70% for English Consecutive 

Interpreting Level 2 (Catti Center, 2021) (Note 1). With the popularity of CATTI attendance among 

MTI interpreting students, low pass rate not only shows the high difficulty and high demand of the 

exam, more importantly, it exposes the poor interpreting abilities of many MTI students.  

If MTI students, who take major responsibility for their own learning process, are trained to assess their 

own interpreting practice, understand interpreting competence and assessment parameters better, they 

will be able take up some assessment tasks formerly borne by interpreting teachers and select adequate 

training materials, thus the problems of insufficient teachers and untargeted training are to some extent 

solved. Moreover, self-assessment enables students to see more clearly their problems and the right 

way forward. Appropriate and targeted training will help students achieve their learning goals, which 

may lead to the reduction of the anxiety and pressure caused by high-intensity interpreting practice, so 

that students’ learning motivation can be maintained.  

 

2. Current Researches on Self-Assessment of Interpreting Quality 

Looking at the interpreting industry and related researches on interpreting quality, there are more 

researches on conference interpreting and simultaneous interpreting from the perspectives of 

researchers, customers and interpreting users, and the research on interpreters’ self-assessment has 

received less attention. However, self-assessment of quality is a process by which learners self-evaluate 

the language skills and knowledge, which can improve learners’ self-awareness and learning autonomy 

(Bulter & Lee, 2010). “In view of the particularity of the thinking process of interpreting, the 

differences in personal knowledge and cognition, self-assessment under the guidance of correct skill 

awareness is a very effective training promoter (Cai, 2007)”. The research on self-assessment of 

interpreting quality is mainly divided into the self-assessment by interpreters and the self-assessment 

by interpreting students. The interpreter’s self-assessment is a reflective and summative assessment, 

and there are few relevant documents at home and abroad. A search on CNKI (China National 

Knowledge index) for studies on interpreting self-assessment in the past ten years reveals that Lian Luo 

from Hunan University conducted an empirical study on the impact of self-assessment ability on 

interpreting quality in 2014. Luo found that the self-assessment ability of MTI interpreting students has 

advanced after eight weeks. Moreover, their memory has improved significantly, and the quality of 

students’ interpreting has also developed (Luo, 2014). The parameters in the research are actually 
11 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

elements which constitute interpreting competence and interpreting errors are very broadly classified, 

students might find it hard to decide which category of error an error may fall into. Huan Li, through 

interviews and the experiment method, conducted a one-month self-assessment study on ten MTI 

interpreting students. A comparison between the experiment group and the control group shows that 

four students in the experiment group have improved their interpreting competence and reduced the 

frequency of similar mistakes (Li, 2015). However slight changes exist in the weight of parameters in 

the test before the experiment and that after the experiment, and the point deduction items under each 

parameter are also slightly different. In 2018, the China Standards of English Language Ability 

(Self-Assessment Scale of Interpreting Competence) was released, and it explicitly defines the 

corresponding interpreting competence of level 5 to level 9 (Ministry of Education of China & National 

Language Commission, 2018). In the same year, Man Luo from Shanghai International Studies 

University developed a self-assessment scale of requisite consecutive interpretation competence for 

interpreting students in China’s universities by using a combination of qualitative and quantitative 

methods, specifically questionnaires and interviews. For the advanced level, there are 24 descriptions in 

the two aspects of analytical listening and target language production. For the elementary level, there 

are 37 descriptions in pre-interpreting preparation, analytical listening, target language production, the 

entire operational process and post-interpreting reflection (Luo, 2018). The China Standards of English 

Language Ability (Self-Assessment Scale of Interpreting Competence) and the aforementioned scale can 

help students know their level, but they still can’t know what deficiencies they have. Sicheng Cao from 

Beijing Foreign Studies University proposed 21 self-assessment parameters for simultaneous 

interpreting based on the framework of content, target language delivery and communicative effects in 

the China Standards of English Language Ability (Interpreting Scale) and Bühler’s criteria for 

assessing interpreting quality. The study shows that subjects are able to evaluate simultaneous 

interpreting competence and interpreting quality in a systematic way (Cao, 2019). However, the study 

is not diachronic, and it does not explore whether self-assessment is positively correlated with 

improvement of interpreting competence. 

Therefore, the present study intends to conduct diachronic self-assessment of consecutive interpreting 

practice of MTI interpreting students, with the teacher designing the assessment tool and serving as 

assessment guide and the students themselves playing as judges. The research aims to help students 

locate their own shortcomings and deficiencies, improve their self-assessment ability and consecutive 

interpreting competence so as to inspire them to continuous self-assessment of interpreting quality and 

finally improving their interpreting competence.  

 

 

 

 

 
12 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

3. Development of a Self-assessment Form for Consecutive Interpreting 

3.1 Assessment Method 

Assessment can be divided into summative and formative assessments. “The purposes and methods in 

different periods may differ, for there are a few factors that may exert influence such as the 

development of students’ ability and course focus (Wang, 2017)”. The summative assessment aims at 

distinguishing good students from the rest, rating grades, and determining whether they are qualified or 

not. The formative assessment intends to help teachers catch up with the progress of students’ learning, 

obtain continuous teaching feedback, and then adjust teaching plans and improve teaching methods 

based on the feedback. Scoring can be divided into holistic scoring and analytical scoring. The former 

scores the overall competence of students according to certain standards, and there are problems with 

the interpretation of the scores, and it is difficult to locate the specific problems of the students. The 

latter scores competence from different dimensions, which helps students discover their own 

shortcomings and orient themselves towards future improvement. Assessment in interpreting teaching 

aims to understand the development of students’ interpreting skills, diagnose and discover specific 

problems in students’ interpreting training, provide feedback to students and teachers so as to promote 

interpreting training and teaching. Therefore, formative assessment based on analytical scoring better 

suits the present research. 

Assessment in interpreting teaching includes qualitative assessment, quantitative assessment and a 

combination of the two. Chengshu Yang holds the view that “reliability and validity of qualitative and 

quantitative assessment show complementary effects of mutual confirmation. The figures represented 

by quantifiable indicators tend to represent more negative assessments and therefore need to be 

corrected by qualitative indicators. The results assessed by the qualitative indicators tend to be lenient 

because not all the details are reflected, so the quantitative indicators can be used to supplement the 

overall judgment…Quantitative assessment justifies itself as it makes full use of specific data” (Yang, 

2005). Qualitative judgment requires many years’ experience in interpreting teaching and interpreting 

practice, which students are short of. The addition and subtraction of data and the conversion of 

weights are more operable and easy for students to master. And the results are straightforward and 

highly pertinent. Therefore, the quantitative method supplemented by the qualitative method can be 

taken for the research. 

3.2 Assessment Parameters 

Xiaohong Cai considers assessment of interpreting quality to be “a measurement of the interpreting 

activity…The components of interpreting quality are very complex, and they include not only the 

quality of output, transmission of the target language, but also the feedback of the on-site audience and 

the resulting communicative effect. Furthermore, different purposes and methods of assessment will 

also change the proportion of each component (Cai, 2007).” It is almost impossible and unscientific to 

obtain comprehensive and accurate assessment of interpreting quality. The assessment should not be 

made rigidly uniform, for there exist differences in communication context, communication setting, 
13 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

communication mode and discourse structure in different interpreting tasks. Therefore, the assessment 

parameters of interpreting teaching should not only reflect the characteristics and requirements of 

interpreting, but also be adjusted according to the specific scenarios of students’ interpreting practice, 

and be close to teaching and students’ practice. The interpreting practice of MTI students is not real life 

interpreting, thus is with weak communicative attributes. Moreover, mental, physical and professional 

qualities are not obvious in students’ interpreting practice. Therefore, the researchers believe that the 

product of MTI self-assessment is interpretation in teaching. What needs to be evaluated is students’ 

interpreting competence rather than interpreter’s competence, including language ability (bilingual 

ability and oral expression), knowledge (encyclopedic knowledge and professional knowledge) and 

interpreting skills (transformation skills and interpreting skills) (Wang, 2007). 

The Scale of Typical Characteristics of Interpreting in the China Standards of English Language Ability 

is closely related to the quality assessment of interpreting products in interpreting teaching. Six level 3 

parameters are set in the scale including accuracy, information completeness, fluency, appropriateness, 

logical coherence and communication effectiveness under three the level 2 parameters of expression, 

content and interaction. The present study is based on the results of relevant researches of interpreting 

assessment over the years, the components of interpreters’ competence, the aforementioned scale 

framework and the characteristics of consecutive interpreting. The following indicators are extracted 

under each level 3 parameter: accuracy includes sense accuracy (misinterpreting is regarded as 

inaccurate), grammar, terminology, numbers as well as clear pronunciation. Information completeness 

means the absence of obvious omissions and absence of addition of information. Fluency refers to 

smooth delivery (numbers of pauses over two seconds and fillers like “en” and “ah” will be counted), 

back interpreting and speed. Appropriateness refers to register and style. Communication effectiveness 

means the interpreting should be easy to understand for the audience and the clients. Logic coherence 

requires coherence in meaning.  

To avoid mistakes or to make as few mistakes as possible while interpreting is the basic requirement for 

a qualified interpreter. Hence, this study carried out self-assessment by counting the numbers of errors 

made during interpreting. In doing so, students didn’t need to analyze and mark the source language in 

detail, so the process was relatively simple and the assessment was easy to operate. After the draft of 

the self-assessment form was finished, out-of-campus experts and fellows in the university were invited 

to review the form and give suggestions for improvement. The final revised form is represented below. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
14 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

Table 1. Self-assessment Form of Consecutive Interpreting 

Quality standard Qualitative rectification Number 

of errors 

 (self-assessment)  

 

Content 

Accuracy 

Sense accuracy 
Equivalence is the standard.    

Grammar    

Terminology    

Numbers 

Approximate numbers are 

acceptable in case of complex 

numbers. 

  

Clear 

pronunciation 

Both British and American accents 

are acceptable. 

  

Information 

completeness 

Information 

omission 

   

Information 

addition 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expression 

Fluency 

Fluent delivery 

(pauses over two 

seconds and 

fillers like “en” 

and “ah”.) 

holistic assessment 

 

  

Back interpreting    

Speed holistic assessment 

(too fast/moderate/too slow) 

  

Appropriateness 

Register 

holistic assessment 

（not consistent/basically 

consistent/consistent） 

  

Style 

holistic assessment 

（not consistent/basically 

consistent/consistent） 

  

Logic 

coherence 

Meaning 

coherence 

holistic assessment 

(not coherent/basically 

coherent/coherent) 

  

15 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

Interaction 
Communication 

effectiveness 
Understandability 

holistic assessment 

(ununderstandable/basically 

understandable /easily 

understandable) 

  

How do you feel about the practice? 

 

4. Interpreting Self-assessment 

4.1 The Implementation of Interpreting Self-assessment 

The self-assessment form was applied for the courses of E-C Consecutive Interpreting and C-E 

Consecutive Interpreting in China Three Gorges University and seven MTI interpreting students 

participated in these courses from March 2020 to June 2020. For each course, there were two periods in 

every week, 32 periods for the whole semester. The courses lasted for 16 weeks. But students attended 

the courses only for 15 weeks, for the final examination was held in the last week. Self-assessment was 

carried out every three weeks and five times of results were counted for each course. Interpreting tests 

were conducted before and after the self-assessment. The test materials of EC interpreting and those of 

CE interpreting were basically the same in style, structure, speed and length. The student score was the 

average of the sum of the scores given by the authors. Before the formal implementation of 

self-assessment, the training for students on assessment parameters, the weight of each parameter, 

qualitative rectification and other relevant assessment matters, supplemented by specific examples, 

were instructed in great detail. The teacher gave timely guidance to the students in the first 

self-assessment, and the students carried out the self-assessment independently. For the rest 

self-assessments, the teacher behaved as a helper to students when they were confronted with difficult 

problems. The courses were mainly instructed through the app Tencent Meeting because of the 

epidemic, and materials for self-assessment for the students were prepared by the teacher. There was 

one E-C and one C-E interpreting material each time. The students themselves played the materials and 

finish the self-assessment forms. Although this mode was less intense than on-site interpreting and 

lacked the training of how to deal with emergencies, it was more like students’ independent after-class 

interpreting practice. After the self-assessment practice, students submitted their forms online, and the 

teacher would interview them on the scores. 

4.2 The Results and Analysis of the Self-assessment 

The study has found out that the students’ ability in E-C and C-E interpreting has been greatly 

improved after the self-assessment. Students’ scores in E-C and C-E interpreting before and after the 

self-assessment are shown in the table below. 

 

 

16 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

Table 2. Interpreting Test Scores Given by Teachers 

Student number S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 

Before 

self-assessment 

EC:45 

CE:50 

EC:46 

CE:49 

EC:50 

CE:50 

EC:44 

CE:45 

EC:55 

CE:50 

EC:44 

CE:48 

EC:40 

CE:44 

After 

self-assessment 

EC:73 

CE:72 

EC:61 

CE:65 

EC:67 

CE:70 

EC:63 

CE:66 

EC:70 

CE:68 

EC:55 

CE:62 

EC:68 

CE:63 

 

Because of the length restriction, the paper won’t go into details regarding each indicator of students’ 

self-assessment. Generally: 

(1) The scores of students’ self-assessment and teachers’ assessment have been greatly raised. There is 

a sharp drop in the number of errors or problems for each indicator in the second assessment practice. 

Conversations with students find that before the self-assessment, students are less aware of quality and 

focus more on the aggregate of materials they have interpreted. However, after the first self-assessment, 

students’ awareness of improving the quality awakens. And students’ understanding of quality 

standards has deepened and they begin to independently monitor their production, thus boosting their 

motivation in interpreting training.’ 

(2) There is significant reduction in the numbers of “back interpreting” and “grammatical errors”. In 

terms of the former one, because of the awareness of monitoring, once they notice their problems, they 

make remedies by adding information, explaining or activating other remedies. The seven students 

participating in this study have all passed TEM-8 (Test For English Majors, Band 8—the highest level) 

and are equipped with basic language skills. At the beginning of the study, the main grammatical errors 

in their interpretations often occur in tense, singular and plural forms, personal pronouns, etc. because 

the students have treated interpreting practice too casually. As the study progresses, the nervousness of 

test makes the students pay more attention to their language production and speed. According to the 

results of the self-assessment forms, grammatical errors have almost been eradicated. Although some of 

the more complex grammatical errors might have not been found out by students, the research proves 

that students have the ability to correct simple grammatical errors through self-assessment and begin to 

be responsible for the quality of language production in the target language. 

(3) “Fluency” has tended to be “moderate” since the third self-assessment. The part of “how do you 

feel about the interpreting practice” shows that students have recognized the characteristics of their 

own language. As long as students are trying to monitor their interpreting, problems like slow speed, 

mispronunciation, frequent use of fillers can be solved gradually. “Information addition” mainly 

includes the addition of conjunctions, prepositions, articles and necessary polishing for the sake of 

complete sentences. Interviews with students indicate that students are making great efforts not to 

affect the accuracy and completeness of the information. 

17 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

(4) As for “register”, “style”, “meaning coherence” and “understandability”, students’ scores are 

basically “basically consistent”, “basically coherent” or “basically understandable”. The reason may be 

that students are not able to evaluate these parameters, leading to their assessment being higher or 

lower than real level. Moreover, coherence and understandability are easily affected by accuracy and 

information completeness, which are difficult problems that students have yet to solve.  

(5) The numbers of “misinterpreting” and “information omission” are in the tendency to decline. 

Although major sense errors are significantly reduced, small errors like the omission of examples in 

listing are still obviously seen. This is because firstly, analytical listening remains a prominent blocker, 

especially in E-C interpreting; secondly, individual skills such as note-taking and memory are not 

adequately internalized. In comprehensive training, an individual skill might take up too much 

processing capacity, thus affecting capacity allocation for other skills. 

 

5. Shortcomings of the Research and Suggestions for Future Researches 

Self-assessment of interpreting quality in consecutive interpreting can help students improve their 

interpreting competence and identify their shortcomings and the right way forward. Assessing the 

quality of interpreting in a scientific and comprehensive way is rather hard, therefore, the researchers 

adopt an assessment tool that is suitable only for the interpreting practice of MTI students. In doing so, 

the psychological quality and communicative effectiveness of interpreters are not addressed in the 

assessment, but their impact on the quality of interpreting should not be ignored. Moreover, data 

analysis of indicators under level 3 parameters is relatively simple, further studies can explore the 

calculation of data and data analysis. Due to the special nature of interpreting courses, the number of 

students in this study is small and the sample size is also small. The results of this study need to be 

further tested on larger samples. 

 

Acknowledgements 

This research has been supported by the 2020 Postgraduate Teaching Reform Project of China Three 

Gorges University (SDYJ202026) and the university-level academic program of Zhejiang Ocean 

University (11075060317). 

 

Reference 

Bulter, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2010). The effect of self-assessment among young learners of English. 

Language Testing, 27(1), 5-31.  

CATTI Center. (2021, March 21). Official Announcement: Catti Pass Rates in 2020. Retrieved April 22, 

2021 from Catti Center (Weichat official account). 

Cai, X. H. (2007). Interpretation and Evaluation. Beijing: China Publishing Group, China Translation 

& Publishing Corporation. 

18 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 2, No. 4, 2021 

Cao, S. C. (2019). Student Self-assessment of Simultaneous Interpreting Practice under the Framework 

of Interpreting Competence Scale (Unpublished master’s thesis). Beijing Foreign Studies University, 

Beijing. 

Li, H. (2015). Study on Self-assessment of Consecutive Interpreting Quality—Based on Case Analysis 

of MTI (Interpreting). Journal of Shangluo University, 29(3), 46-51. 

Luo, L. (2014). An Empirical Study on the Influences of Self-assessment Competence of Interpreting on 

the Quality of Interpreting (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hunan University, Changsha. 

Luo, M. (2018). Self-assessment Scale of Requisite Consecutive Interpretation Competence for 

Interpreting Students in China’s Universities (Unpublished doctor’s thesis). Shanghai International 

Studies University, Shanghai. 

Ministry of Education of China & National Language Commission. China Standards of English Ability. 

(2018 April 12). Retrieved March 3, 2021 from 

http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A19/s229/201804/t20180416_333315.html 

Wang, B. H. (2007). Assessment of “Interpreting Competence” and “Interpreter’s Competence”—A 

Preliminary Study on the Objective Assessment Model of Interpreting. Foreign Language World, 3, 

48-49. 

Wang, W. W. (2017). Construction and Application of Interpreting scale——Taking Formative 

Assessment in Interpreting Teaching as an Example. Foreign Language World, 6, 5. 

Yang, C. S. (2005). Interpreting Teaching Studies: Theory and Practice. Beijing: China Translation & 

Publishing Group. 

 

Note  

To pass CATTI Level 2, ordinary exam attendees have to pass exams on two 

subjects——Comprehensive Ability and Translation. MTI students don’t need to attend the exam for 

Comprehensive Ability and they only have to attend the exam for translation. 

 

 

 

19 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A19/s229/201804/t20180416_333315.html

	Original Paper

