论文部分内容阅读
1. Introduction
This paper aims to discuss and critique the translation session in Shanghai Gaokao English paper. Translation here refers to translating a Chinese sentence into corresponding English versions and students are required to use given key words or expressions in their translation. For example，
雖然现代社会物资丰富，给予消费者更多的选择，但也使不少人变成购物狂。（turn）
Though abundant supplies give more choices for the customers in modern society， they also turn many people into a shopaholic.
（Shanghai Municipal Educational Examinations Authority，2014）
Translation has been adopted as a test format since 1998 and the number of sentences to be translated is four from the year 2017. Not only does the translation format test the basic skills of translation， but also it tests the ability to comprehensively use vocabulary， grammar and sentence structures and furthermore， it involves students’ proficiency in differentiating the difference between Chinese and English， especially when dealing with the translation of Chinese proverbs （Shanghai Municipal Educational Examinations Authority，2015）.
Therefore， it is not hard for us to realize that the effectiveness of translation as a test can exert significant influence in English teaching and learning because as long as a test is considered important， like Goakao， the preparation for it is prone to dominate and guide all teaching and learning activities （Hughes， 2003）. However， the research into translation as a test format on the secondary school level is rare， which may be attributed to the fact that it seems only Shanghai tests translation in Gaokao so far， which is worth critical discussion， though.
2. Discussion
2.1 Reliability
In any translation test， reliability is the first and significant aspect to be taken into account and guaranteed. （Li， 2013）. Reliability concerns the ‘consistency of test judgments and results’ （Davies， 1990， p. 21） and according to Hughes （2003）， the reliability of a test can be quantified by analyzing its reliability coefficient， which enables us to compare the reliability of different tests. In other words， if a reliability coefficient of a test is 1， to great extent， it shows that the test can offer identical results for a particular group of candidates in spite of when it happened to be carried out （Hughes， 2003）. Since the overall scores of the translation session have varied a bit， the passing rate is used to compare in the present study and the passing rate of the translation session seems quite stable （around 0.6）， therefore in this case， the current translation test appears reliable. However， it is not convincing to judge the reliability of a test only from one perspective， so Li （2001） asserts that the reliability of a translation test can be judged from the quality and quantity of the test， the implementation of the test and assessment of the test.
2.1.1 Test contents
It is acknowledged that the test contents should be consistent to the language skills to be tested （Li， 2013）. Unfortunately， it is true that the current translation session is to test students’ ability to translate correct and fluent sentences by using the language knowledge they have acquired， which is clarified by Shanghai Municipal Educational Examinations Authority （2015）， but the test contents lack variety as only sentences are required to be translated. Also， sentence translation restricts students in bringing their translation proficiency into play （Li， 2013）. Since translation is to test students’ compressive use of language as mentioned above， accordingly， the test contents need diversity as well， which， to some extent， can ensure the objectivity and consistency in the assessment of the test （Zou， 2005）. Based on the students’ language proficiency and practicability of the test， it is suggested to add short paragraph translation here because any language teaching and learning activities cannot separate from the context. As Shao （2003） points out that translating a passage can better reflect students’ ability to use language and to tell the difference between Chinese and English in terms of semantics， sentence meaning， rhetoric and cultural understanding. In short， in terms of test contents， current translation testing seems not that reliable.
2.1.2 Test assessment
The reliability of the test assessment involves the test-rater’s consistency and inter-raters’ consistency. In other words， every test-rater has to follow the assessment criteria in a constant and strict manner （Li， 2013）. Translation， as an objective testing， can be assessed through mechanical method， impression method and analytical method （Liu， 1991） and the mechanical method is used to assess the current translation testing， in which marks are reduced related to the quantity of errors in the translation. Let’s look at the translation session in 2014 as an example. The score for 5 sentences is 4， 4， 4， 5， 5， respectively. Test raters will be classified into several groups and each group will mark specified one or two sentences. Furthermore， each group has a leader， who is responsible for setting the detailed assessment criteria based on the reference answers provided by test-makers， and before setting the detailed criteria， test-raters and the leader randomly pick up several papers to mark and discuss. Also， every sentence is marked by two raters on the computer， which is delivered automatically and confidentially and the mean score of the two raters is the final score for the student. However， if the score gap between the two markers is over 1， this sentence will be delivered to the group leader to mark again. Although this kind of marking is considered to reflect atomistic view of language， which separates the language patterns unnaturally （Li， 2001）， considering the testing contents and stake of Gaokao， the present assessment seems to be fair and reliable. It is true that after repeated practices， most of students manage to translate sentences quite fluently and correctly but the elegance of the translation fails to show up and the score lacks discrimination if applying mechanical method （Li， 2013）. Therefore， it is advised to combine synthetic approach and analytic approach to assess （Li， 2001）. But it is impossible to assess only one test pattern by using different assessment approaches and thus test contents need variety. To sum up， test contents and assessment are indispensible and intertwined to each other.
2.2 Validity
Language testing is an approach to measure one’s language proficiency in different situations and for different purposes （Allison， 1990）. That is to say， if the score of a test can indicate one’s language proficiency， that score has to be reliable and valid as well. Hence， reliability and validity are interlocked as reliability is not a sufficient but essential component of validity （ibid.） Also， Alderson， Clapham
This paper aims to discuss and critique the translation session in Shanghai Gaokao English paper. Translation here refers to translating a Chinese sentence into corresponding English versions and students are required to use given key words or expressions in their translation. For example，
雖然现代社会物资丰富，给予消费者更多的选择，但也使不少人变成购物狂。（turn）
Though abundant supplies give more choices for the customers in modern society， they also turn many people into a shopaholic.
（Shanghai Municipal Educational Examinations Authority，2014）
Translation has been adopted as a test format since 1998 and the number of sentences to be translated is four from the year 2017. Not only does the translation format test the basic skills of translation， but also it tests the ability to comprehensively use vocabulary， grammar and sentence structures and furthermore， it involves students’ proficiency in differentiating the difference between Chinese and English， especially when dealing with the translation of Chinese proverbs （Shanghai Municipal Educational Examinations Authority，2015）.
Therefore， it is not hard for us to realize that the effectiveness of translation as a test can exert significant influence in English teaching and learning because as long as a test is considered important， like Goakao， the preparation for it is prone to dominate and guide all teaching and learning activities （Hughes， 2003）. However， the research into translation as a test format on the secondary school level is rare， which may be attributed to the fact that it seems only Shanghai tests translation in Gaokao so far， which is worth critical discussion， though.
2. Discussion
2.1 Reliability
In any translation test， reliability is the first and significant aspect to be taken into account and guaranteed. （Li， 2013）. Reliability concerns the ‘consistency of test judgments and results’ （Davies， 1990， p. 21） and according to Hughes （2003）， the reliability of a test can be quantified by analyzing its reliability coefficient， which enables us to compare the reliability of different tests. In other words， if a reliability coefficient of a test is 1， to great extent， it shows that the test can offer identical results for a particular group of candidates in spite of when it happened to be carried out （Hughes， 2003）. Since the overall scores of the translation session have varied a bit， the passing rate is used to compare in the present study and the passing rate of the translation session seems quite stable （around 0.6）， therefore in this case， the current translation test appears reliable. However， it is not convincing to judge the reliability of a test only from one perspective， so Li （2001） asserts that the reliability of a translation test can be judged from the quality and quantity of the test， the implementation of the test and assessment of the test.
2.1.1 Test contents
It is acknowledged that the test contents should be consistent to the language skills to be tested （Li， 2013）. Unfortunately， it is true that the current translation session is to test students’ ability to translate correct and fluent sentences by using the language knowledge they have acquired， which is clarified by Shanghai Municipal Educational Examinations Authority （2015）， but the test contents lack variety as only sentences are required to be translated. Also， sentence translation restricts students in bringing their translation proficiency into play （Li， 2013）. Since translation is to test students’ compressive use of language as mentioned above， accordingly， the test contents need diversity as well， which， to some extent， can ensure the objectivity and consistency in the assessment of the test （Zou， 2005）. Based on the students’ language proficiency and practicability of the test， it is suggested to add short paragraph translation here because any language teaching and learning activities cannot separate from the context. As Shao （2003） points out that translating a passage can better reflect students’ ability to use language and to tell the difference between Chinese and English in terms of semantics， sentence meaning， rhetoric and cultural understanding. In short， in terms of test contents， current translation testing seems not that reliable.
2.1.2 Test assessment
The reliability of the test assessment involves the test-rater’s consistency and inter-raters’ consistency. In other words， every test-rater has to follow the assessment criteria in a constant and strict manner （Li， 2013）. Translation， as an objective testing， can be assessed through mechanical method， impression method and analytical method （Liu， 1991） and the mechanical method is used to assess the current translation testing， in which marks are reduced related to the quantity of errors in the translation. Let’s look at the translation session in 2014 as an example. The score for 5 sentences is 4， 4， 4， 5， 5， respectively. Test raters will be classified into several groups and each group will mark specified one or two sentences. Furthermore， each group has a leader， who is responsible for setting the detailed assessment criteria based on the reference answers provided by test-makers， and before setting the detailed criteria， test-raters and the leader randomly pick up several papers to mark and discuss. Also， every sentence is marked by two raters on the computer， which is delivered automatically and confidentially and the mean score of the two raters is the final score for the student. However， if the score gap between the two markers is over 1， this sentence will be delivered to the group leader to mark again. Although this kind of marking is considered to reflect atomistic view of language， which separates the language patterns unnaturally （Li， 2001）， considering the testing contents and stake of Gaokao， the present assessment seems to be fair and reliable. It is true that after repeated practices， most of students manage to translate sentences quite fluently and correctly but the elegance of the translation fails to show up and the score lacks discrimination if applying mechanical method （Li， 2013）. Therefore， it is advised to combine synthetic approach and analytic approach to assess （Li， 2001）. But it is impossible to assess only one test pattern by using different assessment approaches and thus test contents need variety. To sum up， test contents and assessment are indispensible and intertwined to each other.
2.2 Validity
Language testing is an approach to measure one’s language proficiency in different situations and for different purposes （Allison， 1990）. That is to say， if the score of a test can indicate one’s language proficiency， that score has to be reliable and valid as well. Hence， reliability and validity are interlocked as reliability is not a sufficient but essential component of validity （ibid.） Also， Alderson， Clapham