Using an Interpreter's Rendering in a Research Task
For a school assessment research task, a student investigates a community language event and interviews an elder who speaks the target language and limited English. The student conducts the interview with a relative acting as interpreter. The final report quotes the elder extensively in the target language, with English translations. The teacher later learns that the interpreter paraphrased and sometimes summarised rather than translating closely, and that some quoted material may not match what the elder said. The student did not know this. The report otherwise shows strong analysis and appropriate referencing of written sources.
1. How should the teacher treat the quotations in the report when awarding marks?
Read the worked answer
The teacher must separate the student's analytical work from the reliability of the source material.
The quotations: They cannot be treated as verified primary evidence. The student relied in good faith on an interpreter, but the report presents the material as direct quotation, which overstates its reliability. This is a methodological weakness, not necessarily dishonesty.
The analysis: If the analysis draws on the quotations, parts of the argument rest on uncertain evidence. The teacher should assess how far the conclusions depend on the unreliable quotes versus the written sources.
Marking approach: Award marks for the skills actually demonstrated - research planning, analysis, use of sources - while applying the criteria relating to accuracy and appropriate use of evidence. The teacher should give feedback on verifying translations and acknowledging interpretation as a methodological limitation.
Do not: Accuse the student of fabrication or reduce the mark to zero; there is no evidence of intent to deceive.
2. What should the teacher do procedurally, and what should change for future tasks?
Read the worked answer
Procedural steps:
- Speak with the student to establish what happened, without accusation.
- Ask whether the interpreter's role was disclosed in the report. If not, note it as a gap in methodology.
- Adjust the mark only against the published criteria, and document the reasoning.
- If the issue affects other students using interpreters, apply the same standard to all.
Future task design: Provide guidance on working with interpreters - that interpretation should be acknowledged, that paraphrased speech should be reported as paraphrase, and that students should seek confirmation of key quotations. This turns a fairness problem into a teachable research-skills point.
Moderation note: Record the issue and response so an external moderator can see the judgement was principled and consistent.