| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | "P" symbol - WHO makes the decision about competence? Thread poster: MariusV
|
|---|
MariusV 
Lithuania
Local time: 17:04
English to Lithuanian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Does anyone know such an organization (except for Proz) where its members certify each other? For example, an architect need to pass a certification procedure as he needs to become a certified architect. Imagine that architects create architectspros.com, they submit each other drawings of bridges and on an anonymous basis their "qualified colleagues" decide if the bridge on the basis of the drawings can be "commercially viable" - if so, the architect gets a star or "A" letter on his profile and ... See more Does anyone know such an organization (except for Proz) where its members certify each other? For example, an architect need to pass a certification procedure as he needs to become a certified architect. Imagine that architects create architectspros.com, they submit each other drawings of bridges and on an anonymous basis their "qualified colleagues" decide if the bridge on the basis of the drawings can be "commercially viable" - if so, the architect gets a star or "A" letter on his profile and it means he can make drawings for construction of technically sophisticated bridges? All countries (at least in the EU, as far as I know) have their own laws, very strict, exact and detailed criteria which the architect shall meet and pass. And their "competence" is tested by a certain Board of Specialists upon established methodology, and so on... ▲ Collapse
| | | | sarandor
United States
Local time: 10:04
English to Russian
+ ...
| I did put my mind to it, I can assure you, | Mar 14, 2009 |
and I didn't pass the exam with minimal error points. I've been checking the list of translators who passed the exam (published in every issue of The ATA Chronicle), and I've seen only two translators who passed the exam in the EN-RU pair in about 18 months. A whopping two translators. If 20% of exam takers pass it, then it means that only 10 EN-RU translators took the exam in 18 months. I think in reality the passing rates are lower, or they vary depending on the language pair.
Kim Metzger wrote: Galia Williams wrote:
In my case, without the certification ATA membership is useless, and since to get certified is next to impossible, I let the membership expire. I wouldn't say getting certified is next to impossible. It's a tough test, but it's doable if you put your mind to it.
[Edited at 2009-03-15 16:04 GMT]
Edited for typos
[Edited at 2009-03-15 16:05 GMT]
| | | |
only two Italian translators pass the ITI exam (member, not associate) every 3 months... if at all... hundreds passed the "P program" in my language combination... does that tell you anything about the "P certification" criteria? I think it does...
| | | | | Lying withy numbers | Mar 15, 2009 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
only two Italian translators pass the ITI exam (member, not associate) every 3 months... if at all... hundreds passed the "P program" in my language combination... does that tell you anything about the "P certification" criteria? I think it does...
I took the exam in Nashville, TN. There were about 25 to 30 people taking the exam. At least half were taking it from English into Spanish. The exam was taken in more than one city at the same time. When the results came and were published in the ATA Chronicle, only two, maybe three, people in the pair EN>ES had passed it. 20% seems to be an upper bound for the passing rate in the populated EN>ES pair.
[Edited at 2009-03-15 00:26 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-03-15 00:27 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-03-15 00:27 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| Maturing, Paul | Mar 15, 2009 |
I will try to answer you, as straightforwardly as I can, within the limited amount of time I have, Paul. My objections (unstated to ProZ management) to becoming part of the "core group”, objections which certainly can be cure as the project matures, were:
1. An apparent (emphasis on apparent) conflict of interest between ProZ acting as a service provider (benefitting from an increase in membership) and ProZ acting as a certifying body. Exams are costly, even if some or all the rev... See more I will try to answer you, as straightforwardly as I can, within the limited amount of time I have, Paul. My objections (unstated to ProZ management) to becoming part of the "core group”, objections which certainly can be cure as the project matures, were:
1. An apparent (emphasis on apparent) conflict of interest between ProZ acting as a service provider (benefitting from an increase in membership) and ProZ acting as a certifying body. Exams are costly, even if some or all the reviewers are volunteers. ProZ does not charge for the exams and will profit only if either applying non-members (users) are approved and become paying members or failing members do not let their membership expire. In short, ProZ's apparent economic interest is to have the lowest possible number of failing applicants. I insist, it is a question of perception only, and by no means I imply that that is what ProZ does. This can be cure by many means, for example charging for taking an exam, or allowing passing users to get the certification without having to become paying members.
2. Difficulties to establishing an adequate and fair screening procedure. If ATA cannot yet get graders to fairly certify translators from Chinese into English, should we expect that ProZ could?
3. Potential misrepresentation to consumers about the abilities of the certified professionals. Consumer protection is the main objective of all certification programs. (Of course, protecting turf is what really motivates organizations such as ABA, AMA.)
4. Abuse by the certified Ps of the scope of the certification. One example is many certified P-members who accept the letter P, but do not bother to include its limitations on their profile. P-certifications, or any translation cert., are for a single pair and in a single direction (EN to ES, or viceversa, but not both). However, there are P-members who are certified, in a single pair and in a single direction, yet they translate in several pairs. They use the P, but do not bother to limit the scope in their profiles. Certified ATA members who do this, for example, would be found as misrepresenting their credentials.
All this is curable. That’s what I call maturing, learning from errors. ▲ Collapse
| | | | heikeb
Member (2003)
English to German
+ ...
| legitimate question | Mar 15, 2009 |
MariusV wrote:
My (naive) questions:
1. "this sample may be evaluated by PRO peers" - OK, have nothing against my colleagues - there are many competent and really professional people, but does it mean that my "sample translation" will be evaluated by another translator? From the formal side, at least from what is written, the conclusion can be simple - translators evaluate each other's "sample translations" (i.e. a colleague evaluates another colleague) and if this evaluation is positive, it means the one evaluated will become a "professional"?
2. "it should be an error-free, gramatically correct and natural sounding translation."
Does it mean that if the translation does not contain errors, grammar mistakes and "sounds natural" (well, who and upon what criteria decises about that "natural sounding"?), it already means that the evaluated one is a real professional? Are these the real criteria for "professionalism in translations"?
Sorry for being straghtforward, but this sounds like a complete nonsense for me. I'd understand that there should be a competent body or very experienced translators who can decide about the professionalism - how can one, being in the same shoes as his/her colleague, carry out any decisions? Same nonsense would be examinations at the university on a certain subject (following the same logics) - one student examines another student and after the examination they award each other with diplomas having convinced each other that they are able to read, write (without grammar mistakes), and look like "viably sophisticated"?
I find these are completely legitimate questions in theory and in practice.
When the P program was first announced, I picked a couple of "peed" translators in the Eng>Ger pair randomly, and I was appalled by the low quality of the sample translations of the first three I picked (some later picks were impeccable).
- apparently not even proofread as there were duplications of words or phrases
- typos
- translation mistakes
- punctuation mistakes
- non-idiomatic, faulty translation into non-native target language
How can somebody who submits qualitatively unacceptable sample translations be labeled "professional" according to Proz standards, particularly since you would think anybody posting sample translations would make double and triple sure that they are top notch? If I had received those translations as test translations, I would not have allowed these translators to work for me!
Who decided in those cases that the translators deserved to be qualified as "P"???
What a (sad) joke!
| | | | MariusV
Lithuania
Local time: 17:04
English to Lithuanian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | no standards as such | Mar 15, 2009 |
Fairly speaking, WHERE and WHAT standards do we have to get the "P" sign? These requirements cannot even stand for criteria. Let alone for standards. Can such a definition as "commercially viable" be considered as a standard or, at least, a criterion? Also - "sample translations". Who and how these anonymous colleagues can know which source one copy-pasted the translation sample? It can be taken from anywhere and it CAN NOT be the translation of the one seeking to get the "P" sign. A good real l... See more Fairly speaking, WHERE and WHAT standards do we have to get the "P" sign? These requirements cannot even stand for criteria. Let alone for standards. Can such a definition as "commercially viable" be considered as a standard or, at least, a criterion? Also - "sample translations". Who and how these anonymous colleagues can know which source one copy-pasted the translation sample? It can be taken from anywhere and it CAN NOT be the translation of the one seeking to get the "P" sign. A good real life situation Heike provided. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Heinrich Pesch
Finland
Local time: 17:04
Member (2003)
Finnish to German
+ ...
| Ask the tax office | Mar 15, 2009 |
You don't need any translation samples. Just get the opinion of the tax office. If I have earned my living and paid tax and social insurance these last eight years by freelance translating I'm a professional translator, no matter how good or bad my services have been.
Regards
Heinrich
| | |
|
|
|
| But I'll need a confidentiality agreement | Mar 15, 2009 |
Heinrich Pesch wrote:
You don't need any translation samples. Just get the opinion of the tax office. If I have earned my living and paid tax and social insurance these last eight years by freelance translating I'm a professional translator, no matter how good or bad my services have been.
Regards
Heinrich
Hear, hear, Heinrich.
Maybe it is time to stop fighting for the best chairs in the Titanic.
Luis
| | | | Williamson
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:04
Flemish to English
+ ...
| Chambres of Commerce | Mar 15, 2009 |
[quote]Uldis Liepkalns wrote:
No “body” in the whole World (including ATA and like), nor anybody in our 3 countries does certify translators in our language pairs.
[quote]
I get your point. True for the smaller languages, not true for the bigger languages.
State Insitutions and Brussels and Luxembourg recognise degrees from official authorities, not from a private company in the virtual world or associations. In multilingual countries an M.A. is the minimum to participate in competitions at the higher government level or at international institutions in Brussels, Luxembourg, Geneva, New-York and Vienna.
What about certificates from your Chambres of Commerce?
[Edited at 2009-03-15 08:48 GMT]
| | | | diana bb
Lithuania
Local time: 17:04
English to Lithuanian
+ ...
| re. Chambers of Commerce | Mar 15, 2009 |
They are not involved in such activities in Lithuania.
Actually, I've just opened their website and was appalled by the level of the Lithuanian language. Most of 'grave errors of Lithuanian usage' are there, nothing to speak of typos.
So probably we are lucky that they don't have anything to do with verification of translations into Lithuanian.
[Redaguota 2009-03-15 08:55 GMT]
| | | |
MariusV wrote:
Does anyone know such an organization (except for Proz) where its members certify each other? For example, an architect need to pass a certification procedure as he needs to become a certified architect. Imagine that architects create architectspros.com, they submit each other drawings of bridges and on an anonymous basis their "qualified colleagues" decide if the bridge on the basis of the drawings can be "commercially viable" - if so, the architect gets a star or "A" letter on his profile and it means he can make drawings for construction of technically sophisticated bridges? All countries (at least in the EU, as far as I know) have their own laws, very strict, exact and detailed criteria which the architect shall meet and pass. And their "competence" is tested by a certain Board of Specialists upon established methodology, and so on...
In IEEE the members evaluate the articles of other members...I'm not familiar with the process but I do know that my professor always gets a bunch of articles to evaluate furthermore the paying members who are evaluating are professionals, I don't really see why one would pay a membership if he isn't already working and getting a revenue from it !
Now I agree that some are worse than others, but that's the way it is...And if architects have created an architectproz.com I'm sure that the seniors will evaluate the new members (at least the articles) that's the way it works in most of the technical associations !!!
| | |
|
|
|
Nikki Graham
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:04
Spanish to English
| Ongoing review should take care of this problem | Mar 15, 2009 |
Heike Behl, Ph.D. wrote:
When the P program was first announced, I picked a couple of "peed" translators in the Eng>Ger pair randomly, and I was appalled by the low quality of the sample translations of the first three I picked (some later picks were impeccable).
- apparently not even proofread as there were duplications of words or phrases
- typos
- translation mistakes
- punctuation mistakes
- non-idiomatic, faulty translation into non-native target language
How can somebody who submits qualitatively unacceptable sample translations be labeled "professional" according to Proz standards, particularly since you would think anybody posting sample translations would make double and triple sure that they are top notch? If I had received those translations as test translations, I would not have allowed these translators to work for me!
Who decided in those cases that the translators deserved to be qualified as "P"???
What a (sad) joke!
I don't know whether people are aware of this or not, but just because you have a P Badge now doesn't mean you will keep it forever. There will be ongoing review of translation quality and business reliability (among other factors). So, those people who have slipped through the net and shouldn't be there according to many in these forums will presumably be weeded out at some stage in the future (unless, of course, their skills improve...).
| | | | Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 16:04
Italian to English
In memoriam | Setting the bar | Mar 15, 2009 |
From the number and intensity of the postings to this thread, it is clear that whatever its limitations, the Proz certification/registration scheme has identified a gap in the market.
The comparison with existing professional examinations, though, is perhaps not the right level on which to pitch the scheme, at least not initially. A more achieveable goal might be the kind of basic testing carried out by agencies with new translators. This would make it easier for testers to reach a ... See more From the number and intensity of the postings to this thread, it is clear that whatever its limitations, the Proz certification/registration scheme has identified a gap in the market.
The comparison with existing professional examinations, though, is perhaps not the right level on which to pitch the scheme, at least not initially. A more achieveable goal might be the kind of basic testing carried out by agencies with new translators. This would make it easier for testers to reach a decision, although it would still be useful if test texts were accompanied by a brief statement of purpose and there were a "(not) fit for purpose" box to tick on the assessment sheet.
An entry-level scheme is also in line with the reputation Proz has established as one - if not the - way into the profession for newbies, wannabes and mid-life career changers without specific training, to whom it would offer an affordable (as part of the membership package?) first indication of whether they could actually earn a living by translating.
What do LSPs think about replacing or flanking their existing systems with a Proz scheme, or collaborating with Proz in fine-tuning the procedure? I imagine that a pool of eager, pretested translators might well come in handy when an urgent (aren't they all?) project turns up on a Friday afternoon.
Just a thought,
Giles ▲ Collapse
| | | | PRen (X)
Canada
Local time: 11:04
French to English
+ ...
Nikki Graham wrote: Heike Behl, Ph.D. wrote:
When the P program was first announced, I picked a couple of "peed" translators in the Eng>Ger pair randomly, and I was appalled by the low quality of the sample translations of the first three I picked (some later picks were impeccable).
- apparently not even proofread as there were duplications of words or phrases
- typos
- translation mistakes
- punctuation mistakes
- non-idiomatic, faulty translation into non-native target language
How can somebody who submits qualitatively unacceptable sample translations be labeled "professional" according to Proz standards, particularly since you would think anybody posting sample translations would make double and triple sure that they are top notch? If I had received those translations as test translations, I would not have allowed these translators to work for me!
Who decided in those cases that the translators deserved to be qualified as "P"???
What a (sad) joke!
I don't know whether people are aware of this or not, but just because you have a P Badge now doesn't mean you will keep it forever. There will be ongoing review of translation quality and business reliability (among other factors). So, those people who have slipped through the net and shouldn't be there according to many in these forums will presumably be weeded out at some stage in the future (unless, of course, their skills improve...).
Don't you think it would be preferable to weed them out in the beginning?
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » "P" symbol - WHO makes the decision about competence? | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
