Designing a Rubric for the Summative Evaluation of Students’ Translation at University Level


  • Shadiya S. Mohammed S. Mohammed Department of Translation, University of Duhok, Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.
  • Alya' M. H. A. Al-Rubai'I Department of Translation, University of Duhok, Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.



This quantitative and qualitative study aims to determine the extent to which translation teachers accept the proposed criteria for evaluating their students' translation according to academic rank and the differences between translation teachers' viewpoints on the proposed criteria according to years of experience for the purpose of designing a rubric for the summative evaluation of students' translation at the university level. The study addresses the following questions: To what extent the university translation teachers accept the proposed criteria for the summative evaluation rubric according to academic rank? Do the translation teachers view the proposed criteria for the summative evaluation rubric distinctly according to teaching experience? Eight translation teachers completed the Pilot Study questionnaire, and 45 translation teachers received the Main Study questionnaire. The data were statistically analysed to test the study's validity and reliability. The study found out that the reliability and validity were generally acceptable; translation teachers' acceptance of the suggested criteria varied. However, there were no appreciable discrepancies in their opinions about the criteria based on the latter variables. The most important conclusions were as follows:

  • Translation teachers’ approval of the suggested criteria for evaluating their students’ translation varies according to academic rank and years of experience in teaching.
  • No significant discrepancies in the translation teachers’ perspectives on their application of the proposed criteria according to academic rank and years of experience in teaching.
  • Summative evaluation of translation can be effectively accomplished using a rubric including criteria for Equivalence, Translation Method, Mechanics of Writing, Naturalness, and Readability.


Download data is not yet available.


Al-qinai, J. (2000). Translation quality assessment: strategies, parameters and procedures. Meta, 45(3), 497-519.

Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Arter, J. & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom: Using performance criteria for assessing and improving student performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Asgari, M. (2021). Relationship between two translation quality assessments: Holistic rating and Waddington’s model of assessment. International Journal of Language and Translation Research, 1(2), 27-46.

Baker, M. (2018). In other words: A coursebook on translation (3rd ed.). London and New York: Routledge.

Cruse, D. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Elmgrab, R. (2014). Possible criteria for evaluating students’ translation errors. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 1(3), 131-145.

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, speech acts, (3, pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.

Hady, A. (2015). Assessing translation quality of polemical texts (Master’s Thesis). Faculty of the American University of Sharjah, College of Arts and Sciences.

Haryadi, A. (2019). An analysis of scoring rubric use to assess the student translation at D3 English Department, Politeknik Negeri Malang [Malang State Polytechnic] (Master’s Thesis). University of Muhammadiyah Malang.

Karimnia, A. & Shahraki, A. (2011). Waddington’s model of translation quality assessment: A critical inquiry. Elixir Ling. & Trans, 40, 5219-5224.'s_model_of_translation_quality_assessment_a_critical_inquiry

Khanmohammad, H. & Osanloo, M. (2009). Moving toward objective scoring: A Rubric for translation assessment. Journal of English language Studies, 1(1), 131-153.

Koller, W. (1979). Einführung in die Ũbersetzungswissenschaft [Introduction to the study of translation]. Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer.

Medadian, G. & Mahabadi, D. (2015). A summative translation quality assessment model for undergraduate student translations: Objectivity versus manageability. Studies about Languages, 40-54.

Martínez Melis, N. (1997). Évaluation et Traduction: Cadre de Recherche sur L’évaluation dans la Didactique de la Traduction [Evaluation and translation: A research framework on evaluation in translation didactics (Doctoral Dissertation)]. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona [Autonomous University of Barcelona].

Popham, W. J. (1997). What’s wrong - and what’s right – with rubrics. Educational leadership, 55, 72-75.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (n.d.). What are rubrics?

Riazi, A. M. (2003). The invisible in translation: The role of text structure in translation. Journal of Translation, 7, 1-8.

Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (2011). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Routledge.

Rockin Resources. (n.d.). Five different types of rubrics.

Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. (2004). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning. Stylus Pub LIC.

Straight, H. S. (2002). The difference between assessment and evaluation: Teaching assistant orientation, (PowerPoint slides).

Taras, M. (2005). Assessment, summative and formative: Some theoretical reflections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(3), 466-478.

TeachersFirst. (n.d.). Important characteristics of rubrics.

University of Sussex (n.d.). Principles of rubrics and grading forms.

Waddington, C. (2001). Should translations be assessed holistically or through error analysis? Hermes, Journal of Linguistics, 26, 15-38.

Williams, M. (2009). Translation quality assessment. Mutatis Mutandis, 2(1), 3-23.



How to Cite

S. Mohammed , S. S. M. ., & M. H. A. Al-Rubai’I , A. . (2024). Designing a Rubric for the Summative Evaluation of Students’ Translation at University Level. Academic Journal of Nawroz University, 13(1), 216–235.