La evaluación de la usabilidad de un sistema de memoria de traducción

  1. Vargas Sierra, Chelo 1
  1. 1 Universitat d'Alacant
    info

    Universitat d'Alacant

    Alicante, España

    ROR https://ror.org/05t8bcz72

Journal:
Quaderns de filología. Estudis lingüístics

ISSN: 1135-416X

Year of publication: 2019

Issue Title: Educar en la traducción y enseñar desde la traducción: estado de la cuestión y evolución diacrónica

Issue: 24

Pages: 119-146

Type: Article

DOI: 10.7203/QF.24.16302 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Quaderns de filología. Estudis lingüístics

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

The use of Computer-Assisted Translation tools in translation classes has become a common practice for a little more than a decade. Even so, for students nowadays, the so-called digital natives, the teaching experience with this type of software is still far from being as easy as one would expect. This led us to ask ourselves what the real students’ attitudes were regarding the usability of software of this kind. This paper presents a usability evaluation for a leading desktop-based translation environment tool from the end user’s point of view. More specifically, the aim of the study was to assess the students’ perception of usability. For this purpose, at the end of two academic years, 95 senior students completed the Software Usability Measurement Inventory questionnaire, which is considered as a proven method for evaluating the usability of a software product. It measures five scales, i. e., Efficiency, Affect, Usefulness, Control, and Learnability. The analysis of the results obtained suggests that the students’ opinion about the global usability of the tool under evaluation is within the average, but not so much with regard to its learnability, which is the worst-rated scale. The only scale above average was Affect. These results show that greater emphasis is needed on the design of the tool evaluated in order to adapt to the real needs of users and actually improve the technological savvy of our translation students.

Bibliographic References

  • Abran, Alain; Khelifi, Alain; Suryn, Witold & Seffah, Ahmed. 2003. Usability Meanings and Interpretations in ISO Standards Software. Quality Journal 11(4): 325-338. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025869312943
  • Alnanih, Reem; Ormandjieva, Olga & Radhakrishnan, T. 2013. A New Quality-in-Use Model for Mobile User Interfaces. In Joint Conference of the 23rd International Workshop on Software Measurement and the 8th International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement. IEEE.
  • Álvarez, Susana; Cuéllar, Carmen; López, Belén; Adrada, Cristina; Anguiano, Rocío; Bueno, Antonio & Comas, Isabel. 2011. Actitudes de los profesores ante la información de las TIC en la práctica docente. Estudio de un grupo de la Universidad de Valladolid. EDUTEC, Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa 35. http://edutec.rediris.es/revelec2/ revelec35/ [Accessed 26/04/2019].
  • Arh, Tanja & Blažič, Borka Jerman. 2008. A Case Study of Usability Testing the SUMI Evaluation Approach of the EducaNext Portal. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science & Applications 2(5): 175-181.
  • Asare, Edmund K. 2011. An Ethnographic Study of the Use of Translation Tools in a Translation Agency: Implications for Translation Tool Design (Ph. D. Thesis), Kent State University.
  • Bevan, Nigel. 1995. Usability is Quality of Use. Advances in Human Factors/Ergonomics 20: 349-354. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921- 2647(06)80241-8
  • Candel-Mora, Miguel Ángel. 2011 Computer-Assisted Translation and Terminology Management: Tools and Resources. In Suau-Jiménez, Francisca & Pennock Barry (ed.) Interdisciplinarity and Languages: Current Issues in Research, Teaching, Professional Applications and ICT. Bern: Peter Lang Publishing, 145-160.
  • Covella, Guillermo J., & Olsina, Luis A. 2006. Assessing Quality in Use in a Consistent Way. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Web Engineering ICWE ’06. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1145581.1145583 [Accessed 24/04/2019].
  • Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Sharon O’Brien. 2015. Ergonomics of the Translation Workplace: Potential for Cognitive Friction. Translation Spaces 4(1): 98-118.
  • Davies, Patricia M. & Brailsford, Tom J. 1994. New Frontiers of Learning: Guidelines for Multimedia Courseware Developers in Higher Education; Volume 1: Delivery, Production and Provision.
  • Deraniyagala, Rohan, Robert J. Amdur, Arthur L. Boyer & Scott Kaylor. 2015. Usability Study of the EduMod ELearning Program for Contouring Nodal Stations of the Head and Neck. Practical Radiation Oncology 5(3): 169-175. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/J.PRRO.2014.10.008.
  • Dillon, Andrew. 2001. The Evaluation of software usability. In Karwowski, Waldemar (ed.) Encyclopedia of Human Factors and Ergonomics. London: Taylor and Francis. https://repository.arizona.edu/ handle/10150/105344 [24/04/2019]
  • Dzida, W., Wiethoff, M. & Arnold, A. 1993. ERGOguide: the Quality Assurance Guide to Ergonomic Software. Delft University of Technology.
  • EEC, EMT EXPERT GROUP. 2009. Competences for professional translators, experts in multilingual and multimedia communication. http://goo.gl/ N6Fwya [Accessed 27/04/2019].
  • González, Jose Luis; García, Roberto; Brunetti, Josep Maria & Gil, Rosa. 2012. SWET-QUM: A Quality in Use Extension Model for Semantic Web Exploration Tools. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Interacción Persona-Ordenador. doi: https://doi. org/10.1145/2379636.2379651
  • Göpferich, Sussane. 2009. Towards a Model of Translation Competence and its Acquisition. The Longitudinal Study TransComp. In Göpferich, Susanne; Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke & Mees, Inger M. (ed.) Behind the Mind: Methods, Models and Results in Translation Process Research. Copenhagen: Samfundsliteratur, 12-37.
  • Fu, L, & Schmidt, K. 2006. Usability Evaluation. International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors 2019-2022.
  • ISO. International Standard 9241-1998:11. 2008. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) – Part 11: Guidance on usability.
  • ISO. International Standard ISO/IEC 25022. 2016. Systems and Software Engineering – Systems and Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – Measurement of Quality in Use.
  • Kenny, Dorothy. 1999. CAT Tools in an Academic Environment: What Are They Good For? Target 11.1: 65-82.
  • Khalid, Md Saifuddin & Hossan, Md Iqbal. 2016. Usability Evaluation of a Video Conferencing System in a University’s Classroom. 19th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (ICCIT). North South University, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 184-190. doi: 10.1109/ ICCITECHN.2016.7860192
  • Kirakowski, Jurek. 1996. The Use of Questionnaire Methods for Usability Assessment. Unpublished manuscript. https://bit.ly/2LkoSUi
  • Krüger, Ralph. 2016. Contextualising Computer-Assisted Translation Tools and Modelling Their Usability. Trans-Kom Journal of Translation and Technical Communication Research 9(1): 114-148. https://cutt.ly/ Sw5a5Dl.
  • Lagoudaki, Pelagia Maria. 2008. Expanding the Possibilities of Translation Memory Systems. From the Translator’s Wishlist to the Developer’s Design (Ph. D. Thesis), Imperial College London.
  • LeBlanc, Matthieu. 2013. Translators on Translation Memory (TM). Results of an Ethnographic Study in Three Translation Services and Agencies. Translation and Interpreting 5(2): 1-13. doi:10.12807/ti.105202.2013. a01.
  • Merino, Jorge; Caballero, Ismael; Rivas, Bibiano; Serrano, Manuel & Piattini, Mario. 2016. A Data Quality in Use Model for Big Data. Future Generation Computer Systems 63: 123-130. doi: 10.1016/j.future.2015.11.024
  • Nielsen, Jakob. 1993. Usability Engineering. London: AP Professional Academic Press Ltd.
  • O’Brien, Sharon, Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Marcel Hasler & Megan Connolly. 2017. Irritating CAT Tool Features That Matter to Translators. Hermes 56: 145-62. doi:10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97229.
  • PACTE. 2005. Investigating Translation Competence: Conceptual and Methodological Issues. Meta 50(2): 609-619.
  • Preece, Jenny; Rogers, Yvonne; Sharp, Helen; Benyon, David; Holland, Simon & Carey, Tom 1994. Human Computer Interaction. Essex, England: Addison-Wesley.
  • Ramírez Polo, Laura & Ferrer Mora, Hang. 2010. Aplicación de las TIC en Traducción e Interpretación en la Universidad de Valencia: experiencias y reflexiones. Redit: Revista Electrónica de Didáctica de la Traducción y la Interpretación 4: 23-41.
  • Vargas-Sierra, Chelo. 2011. Translation-oriented terminology management and ICTs: present and future. In Suau Jiménez, Francisca & Pennock, Barry (ed.) Interdisciplinarity and languages: Current Issues in Research, Teaching, Professional Applications and ICT. Bern: Peter Lang Publishing, 45-64. http://goo.gl/dN93hH.
  • Vargas-Sierra, Chelo & Ramírez-Polo, Laura. 2011. The Translator’s Workstations revisited: A new paradigm of translators, technology and translation. Tralogy: Translation Careers and Technologies: Convergence Points for the Future, Paris, 3-4 March 2011. http://goo.gl/in0Jmp.
Data source: Dialnet