支持口译高质量研究的广泛获取

M. Stern, R. Powell
{"title":"支持口译高质量研究的广泛获取","authors":"M. Stern, R. Powell","doi":"10.1177/10925872211058604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Having worked intensively (primarily as outside researchers and consultants) with interpreters and other nonformal educators for the past two decades, we have become accustomed to calls by managers at all levels for evidence that clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of different interpretive approaches as well as the value of the field’s collective work to various stakeholders. Oftentimes, these calls are based on the perceived needs to base training and programmatic decisions on the best available science as well as justify budget allocations, to generate sustainable financial support, or to make inroads or strengthen commitments with new or existing audiences. The research literature is littered with empirical articles and reviews that can speak to the value of various educational experiences (see Ardoin et al., 2018, 2020; Stern et al., 2014; Stern and Powell, 2021 for key reviews in the fields of environmental education and heritage interpretation). Within the field of interpretation, the most recent systematic literature review identified 41 articles published within the Journal of Interpretation Research (JIR) alone that measured outcomes of specific interpretive interventions between 2010 and 2019 (Stern and Powell, 2021). So why are managers still asking for evidence when it already exists? We believe one answer lies in the accessibility of the research. Accessibility can be both physical, in terms of ability to obtain reports and articles, and cognitive, in terms of the ability of researchers and practitioners to effectively communicate evidence. JIR is available to all members of the National Association for interpretation. Moreover, authors are always at liberty to share their articles directly with anyone who asks for them. This latter element of physical accessibility is often unknown by practitioners in the field. While authors cannot broadly re-publish a peer-reviewed journal article (e.g., on a website of their own), they can share their manuscripts directly with individuals and make pre-prints (unformatted versions) of their manuscripts available elsewhere.","PeriodicalId":364431,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interpretation Research","volume":"255 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supporting Broad Access to High Quality Research in Interpretation\",\"authors\":\"M. Stern, R. Powell\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10925872211058604\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Having worked intensively (primarily as outside researchers and consultants) with interpreters and other nonformal educators for the past two decades, we have become accustomed to calls by managers at all levels for evidence that clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of different interpretive approaches as well as the value of the field’s collective work to various stakeholders. Oftentimes, these calls are based on the perceived needs to base training and programmatic decisions on the best available science as well as justify budget allocations, to generate sustainable financial support, or to make inroads or strengthen commitments with new or existing audiences. The research literature is littered with empirical articles and reviews that can speak to the value of various educational experiences (see Ardoin et al., 2018, 2020; Stern et al., 2014; Stern and Powell, 2021 for key reviews in the fields of environmental education and heritage interpretation). Within the field of interpretation, the most recent systematic literature review identified 41 articles published within the Journal of Interpretation Research (JIR) alone that measured outcomes of specific interpretive interventions between 2010 and 2019 (Stern and Powell, 2021). So why are managers still asking for evidence when it already exists? We believe one answer lies in the accessibility of the research. Accessibility can be both physical, in terms of ability to obtain reports and articles, and cognitive, in terms of the ability of researchers and practitioners to effectively communicate evidence. JIR is available to all members of the National Association for interpretation. Moreover, authors are always at liberty to share their articles directly with anyone who asks for them. This latter element of physical accessibility is often unknown by practitioners in the field. While authors cannot broadly re-publish a peer-reviewed journal article (e.g., on a website of their own), they can share their manuscripts directly with individuals and make pre-prints (unformatted versions) of their manuscripts available elsewhere.\",\"PeriodicalId\":364431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interpretation Research\",\"volume\":\"255 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interpretation Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10925872211058604\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interpretation Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10925872211058604","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的二十年里,我们(主要是作为外部研究人员和顾问)与口译员和其他非正式教育工作者密切合作,我们已经习惯了各级管理人员的呼吁,要求他们提供证据,清楚地证明不同口译方法的有效性,以及该领域集体工作对各种利益相关者的价值。通常情况下,这些呼吁是基于人们所认识到的需要,即将培训和方案决定建立在现有的最佳科学基础上,以及证明预算分配的合理性,以产生可持续的财政支持,或与新的或现有的受众取得进展或加强承诺。研究文献中充斥着经验主义文章和评论,可以说明各种教育经历的价值(见Ardoin等人,2018,2020;Stern et al., 2014;Stern和Powell, 2021年在环境教育和遗产解释领域的关键评论)。在口译领域,最近的系统文献综述确定了仅在《口译研究杂志》(JIR)上发表的41篇文章,这些文章衡量了2010年至2019年期间具体口译干预措施的结果(Stern和Powell, 2021)。那么,既然证据已经存在,为什么管理者还在要求证据呢?我们认为一个答案在于研究的可及性。可获得性可以是物理上的,即获取报告和文章的能力,也可以是认知上的,即研究人员和从业人员有效交流证据的能力。JIR面向全国口译协会的所有成员开放。此外,作者总是可以自由地直接与任何要求他们的人分享他们的文章。物理可达性的后一个要素通常是该领域的从业者所不知道的。虽然作者不能广泛地重新发表同行评议的期刊文章(例如,在他们自己的网站上),但他们可以直接与个人分享他们的手稿,并在其他地方提供手稿的预印本(未格式化的版本)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Supporting Broad Access to High Quality Research in Interpretation
Having worked intensively (primarily as outside researchers and consultants) with interpreters and other nonformal educators for the past two decades, we have become accustomed to calls by managers at all levels for evidence that clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of different interpretive approaches as well as the value of the field’s collective work to various stakeholders. Oftentimes, these calls are based on the perceived needs to base training and programmatic decisions on the best available science as well as justify budget allocations, to generate sustainable financial support, or to make inroads or strengthen commitments with new or existing audiences. The research literature is littered with empirical articles and reviews that can speak to the value of various educational experiences (see Ardoin et al., 2018, 2020; Stern et al., 2014; Stern and Powell, 2021 for key reviews in the fields of environmental education and heritage interpretation). Within the field of interpretation, the most recent systematic literature review identified 41 articles published within the Journal of Interpretation Research (JIR) alone that measured outcomes of specific interpretive interventions between 2010 and 2019 (Stern and Powell, 2021). So why are managers still asking for evidence when it already exists? We believe one answer lies in the accessibility of the research. Accessibility can be both physical, in terms of ability to obtain reports and articles, and cognitive, in terms of the ability of researchers and practitioners to effectively communicate evidence. JIR is available to all members of the National Association for interpretation. Moreover, authors are always at liberty to share their articles directly with anyone who asks for them. This latter element of physical accessibility is often unknown by practitioners in the field. While authors cannot broadly re-publish a peer-reviewed journal article (e.g., on a website of their own), they can share their manuscripts directly with individuals and make pre-prints (unformatted versions) of their manuscripts available elsewhere.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信