Katalog Plus
Bibliothek der Frankfurt UAS
Bald neuer Katalog: sichern Sie sich schon vorab Ihre persönlichen Merklisten im Nutzerkonto: Anleitung.
Dieses Ergebnis aus ERIC kann Gästen nicht angezeigt werden.  Login für vollen Zugriff.

Rubricizing the Assessment Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Rubrics in Rater-Mediated Assessment of Language Interpreting

Title: Rubricizing the Assessment Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Rubrics in Rater-Mediated Assessment of Language Interpreting
Language: English
Authors: Chao Han (ORCID 0000-0002-6712-0555); Mengting Jiang (ORCID 0000-0002-6575-0721); Qionglu Chen (ORCID 0009-0007-4976-4086)
Source: Language Testing. 2026 43(2):197-232.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 36
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles; Information Analyses; Reports - Research
Descriptors: Scoring Rubrics; Translation; Language Tests; Evaluation Criteria; Scores; Reliability; Validity; Design; Evaluators
DOI: 10.1177/02655322251391233
ISSN: 0265-5322; 1477-0946
Abstract: Assessment rubrics have increasingly been developed and deployed to evaluate the quality of language interpreting, yet understanding of rubric-based interpreting assessment remains limited. This systematic review aims to: (a) catalog rubrics, (b) examine rubric design features, (c) understand rubric use, and (d) evaluate rubric utility. A rigorous review process, involving database searching, citation tracking, and targeted review of core literature, identified 80 unique rubrics comprising a total of 265 (sub-)scales. A comprehensive analysis revealed that: (a) among 11 potential sources informing rubric development, test-external sources (e.g., literature review) were primarily used, whereas test-internal sources (e.g., performance samples) were much less consulted; (b) assessments primarily used analytic and task-type rubrics with an average of five performance levels and four scoring criteria. Rubric descriptors generally incorporated observable indicators of interpreting quality, employing both descriptive and evaluative rubric language; (c) rubrics were used by three main types of raters--interpreting practitioners, trainers, and students--to assess primarily spoken-language interpreting; and (d) rubric-based scores demonstrated moderate-to-high reliability and validity overall, though meta-analysis identified three significant moderators, including correlation coefficient type, assessment criterion, and rubric length. These findings are expected to provide guidance for assessment practice and research in interpreting.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1501921
Database: ERIC