口譯學校的評量考試為一複雜的議題，一方面必須能夠衡量學生表現、檢視教學成效，另一方面還必須與市場接軌，採用符合專業標準的評量規準。有鑑於過去對此議題的討論為數不多，且缺乏實證研究的檢驗，本研究欲打破變以往口譯界慣用的研究習慣，改採跨領域的方式，尋找可供口譯評量參考學習的對象。

研究選定音樂表演作為對照的對象，首先就兩者的活動特質、活動概況以及活動要素逐一比較，歸納出兩者共同具有的活動基本特性，以奠定後續比較兩者評量制度的基礎。之後分別就其教學評量的研究進展作一回顧，並進行統整、分析與比較。結果顯示，口譯評量與音樂教學評量的發展過程中皆討論了類似的議題，可就評分人、評量規準、評分訓練及評分作業各面向切入。綜觀比較結果，音樂表演在各個議題層面的討論與研究皆比口譯來得豐富，本研究提出以下建議：
一、 口譯界可參考音樂評量流程模型，制定屬於口譯評量的流程模型，以全面檢視口譯評量過程中的各個影響要素。
二、 音樂評量研究中所使用的實證檢驗方式及統計工具可供口譯參考，以發展更具科學實驗精神、信效度兼具的研究方法。
三、 口譯界有關評量規準的討論似有朝音樂界模式發展的趨勢，研究人員可思索影響口譯評量的因素，是否也如同音樂表演一般，除了技術性的元素之外，個人特質或風格也占有一定的比重。

Interpreter assessment is a complicated subject faced by many interpretation training schools. On one hand, the assessment must clearly evaluate student performance and educational attainment, yet, at the same time, it must not ignore the expectations of the marketplace while actively striving to meet professional standards. However, past research into this topic has been scant and research methods lacking. As such, this present study will use an interdisciplinary approach in hopes of finding an assessment model that may be used within the context of interpreter educational training.
This study first compares two activities: musical performance and interpretation. Their respective general characteristics, performance processes, and role of agents are compared. Results show both activities share some commonalities, which serve as ground for further comparisons – regarding performance assessment. Developments in interpretation and musical performance assessments are then analyzed and compared. Results indicate that the two fields occupy common ground on several issues, from assessment judges, performance criterion, to training of judges and assessment procedures. This study also finds that research into music performance assessment has been taken to a greater depth than corresponding research in the filed of interpretation. Based on above findings, this study proposes the following suggestions for future development in interpretation assessment:
1. Based on the music performance assessment process model, an interpretation assessment model can be established. This model is comprehensive enough to take into account the many factors that might influence assessment results.
2. Research methods and statistical tools used in musical performance assessment are tools that can be used in the field of interpretation assessment in future experiments and studies.
3. Discussions concerning the selection of criterion in interpretation assessment often parallel their counterparts in the filed of music performance. Interpretation research can look into whether factors affecting assessment results are similar to that of a musical performance, i.e. whether there exists influences outside of purely technical factors – such as individual characteristics and styles – which influence judges’ perception and performance assessment.

中文書目
中華民國行業分類標準(第八次修訂) (2006)。行業標準分類。民98年6月26日，取自：http://www.stat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=16333&ctNode=1309 。
江建良 (1998)。服務業品質觀念與策略作法之探討。商學學報, 6, 1-21。
邱麗綺 (2003)。從傳統到變通：談評量的變遷。教育趨勢導報, 3, 8-12。
施彥如 (2004)。會議口譯員之人格特質與焦慮程度初探。國立臺灣師範大學翻譯研究所碩士論文，臺北。
柯雅琪 (2003)。聽眾對同步口譯忠實度之感受初探。天主教輔仁大學翻譯學研究所碩士論文，臺北。
焦元溥 (2007)。遊藝黑白 (上) (下)。台北市：聯經。
廖柏森 (2007)。台灣口譯研究現況之探討。翻譯學研究集刊, 10, 191-219。
彭森明 (1996)。實作評量理論與實際。教育資料與研究, 9, 44-48。
葉舒白、劉敏華 (2006)。口譯評分客觀化初探：採用量表的可能性。國立編譯館館刊, 34(4), 57-78。
劉敏華 (2005)。從描述翻譯學到建構主義：口譯研究與教學的新思維。國立編譯館館刊, 33(4), 42-50。
劉敏華、張嘉倩、吳紹銓 (2008)。口譯訓練學校之評估作法：臺灣與中英美十一校之比較。編譯論叢, 1(1), 1-42。
盧雪梅 (1998)。實作評量的應許、難題和挑戰。教育資料與研究, 20, 1-5。
英文書目
Abeles, H. F. (1973). Development and validation of a clarinet performance adjudication scale. Journal of Research in Music Education, 21(3), 246-255.
Aiello, R. & Williamon, A. (2002). Memory. In R. Parncutt & G. Mcpherson (Eds.), The Science and Psychology of Music Performance: Creative Strategies for Teaching and Learning (pp. 167-182). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Altman, J. (1994). Error analysis in the teaching of simultaneous interpretation: A pilot study. In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation (pp. 25-38). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Anderson, L. (1994). Simultaneous interpretation: Contextual and translation aspects. In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation (pp. 101-120). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Barik, H. C. (1994). In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation (pp. 121-137). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Barry, N. H. & Hallam, S. (2002). Practice. In R. Parncutt & G. Mcpherson (Eds.), The Science and Psychology of Music Performance: Creative Strategies for Teaching and Learning (pp. 151-166). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bergee, M. J. (1987). An application of the facet-factorial approach to scale construction in the development of a rating scale for euphonium and tuba music performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence.
Bergee, M. J. (1988). The use of an objectively constructed rating scale for the evaluation of brass juries: A criterion-related study. Missouri Journal of Research in Music Education, 5(5), 6-25.
Bergee, M. J. (1993). A comparison of faculty, peer and self-evaluation of brass juries: A criterion-related study. Missouri Journal of Research in Music Education, 5, 6-25.
Bergee, M. J. (1995). Primary and higher-order factors in a scale assessing concert band performance. Bulletin of the Council for Research for Music Education, 126, 1-14.
Bergee, M. J. (2003). Faculty interjudge reliability of music performance evaluation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(2), 137-150.
Bergee, M. J. (2007). Performer, rater, occasion, and sequence as sources of variability in music performance assessment. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(4), 344-358.
Bergee, M. J. & Platt, M. C. (2003). Influence of selected variables on solo and small-ensemble festival ratings. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(4), 342-353.
Bergee, M. J. & Westfall, C. R. (2005). Stability of a model explaining selected extramusical influences on solo and small-ensemble festival ratings. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(4),358-374.
Blom, D. & Poole, K. (2004). Peer assessment of tertiary music performance: Opportunities for understanding performance assessment and performing through experience and self-reflection. British Journal of Music Education, 21(1), 111-125.
Brandon, S. N. (2004). Heifetz, Shaw, & a Blueprint for teaching the arts. http://www.educationupdate.com/archives/2004/august/html/mad_haifetz.html (accessed 26 June 2009).
Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua, 5(4), 231-235.
Burrack, F. (2002). Enhanced assessment in instrumental programs. Music Educators Journal, 88(6), 27-32.
Cantor, J.R. & Zillman, D. (1973). The effect of affective state and emotional arousal on music appreciation. Journal of General Psychology, 89, 97-108.
Cantwell, R. H. & Jeanneret, N. (2004). Developing a framework for the assessment of musical learning: Resolving the dilemma of he “parts” and the “whole”. Research Studies in Music Education, 22(1), 2-13.
Cartellieri, C. (1983). The inescapable dilemma: Quality and/or quantity in interpreting. Babel, 29(4), 209-213.
Catell. R. B. & Anderson, J. C. (1953). The measurement of personality and behavior disorders by the IPAT Music Preference Test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 37, 446-454.
Clifford, A. (2005). Putting the exam to the test: Psychometric validation and interpreter certification. Interpreting, 7(1), 97-131.
Cope, C. O. (1996). Steps toward effective assessment. Music Educators Journal, 83(1), 39-42.
Cross, I. (2004). Music and meaning, ambiguity and evolution. In D. Miell, R. M MacDonald, & D. Hargreaves (Eds.), Musical Communication (pp. 27-44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Daniel, R. (2001). Self-assessment in performance. British Journal of Music Education, 18(3), 215-226.
De Poli, G. (2004). Methodologies for expressiveness modeling of and for music performance. Journal of New Music Research, 33(3), 189-202.
Dixon, S. (2000). Assessing the performer.
Drake, C. & Palmer, C. (2000). Skill acquisition in music performance: Relations between planning and temporal control. Cognition, 74(1), 1-32.
Dreyfus, H. L. & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of Computer. New York: The Free Press
Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49(8), 725-747.
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, T., & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363-406.
Fink, K. E. (2006). Perceptual acoustic assessment of singing. Journal of Singing, 63(1), 35-43.
Finney, S. A. & Palmer, C. (2003). Auditory feedback and memory for music performance: Sound evidence for an encoding effect. Memory & Cognition, 31(1), 51-64.
Fiske, H. E. (1975). Judge-group differences in the rating of secondary school trumpet performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 23(3), 186-196.
Fiske, H. E. (1977). The relationship of selected factors in trumpet performance adjudication. Journal of Music Education Research, 25(4), 256-263.
Fiske, H. E. (1983). Judging musical performances: Methods or madness? Update, 7-10.
Flores, R. G. & Ginsburgh, V. A. (1996). The Queen Elisabeth musical competition: How fair is the final ranking? The Statistician, 45, 97-104.
Friberg, A. & Battel, G. U. (2002). Structural communication. In R. Parncutt & G. Mcpherson (Eds.), The Science and Psychology of Music Performance: Creative Strategies for Teaching and Learning (pp. 199-218). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gabrielsson, A. (2003). Music performance research at the millennium. Psychology of Music, 31(3), 221-272.
Gerver, D., Longley, P., Long, J., & Lambert, S. (1984). Selecting trainee conference interpreters: A preliminary study. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 57(1), 17-31.
Gile, D. (1995a). Communication and quality in interpretation and translation. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training, Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. (1995b). Fidelity assessment in consecutive interpretation: An experiment. Target, 7(1), 151-164.
Goolsby, T. W. (1995). Portfolio assessment for better evaluation. Music Educators Journal, 82(3), 39-44.
Goolsby, T. W. (1999). Assessment in instrumental music. Music Educators Journal, 86(2), 31-35.
Gozzi, R. (2005). Communication as making music. ETC.: A Review of General Semantics, 62(2), 207-209.
Hartley, A., Mason, I., Peng, G., & Perez, I. (2003). Peer- and Self-assessment in conference interpreter training. http://www.llas.ac.uk/projects/1454 (accessed 3 March 2009).
Heijink, H., Desain, P., Honing, H., & Windsor, L. (2000). Make me a match: An evaluation of different approaches to score-performance matching. Computer Music Journal, 24(1), 43-56.
Herbert, J. (1952). The Interpreter’s Handbook: How to Become a Conference Interpreter. Geneva: Georg.
Inskip, C. & MacFarlane, A. (2008). Meaning, communication, music: Towrads a revised communication model. Journal of Documentation, 64(5), 687-706.
Isham, W. P. (1994). Memory for sentence form after simultaneous interpretation: Evidence both for and against deverbalization. In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation (pp. 191-212). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Johnson, P. (1997). Performance as experience: the problem of assessment criteria. British Journal of Music Education, 14(3), 271-282.
Jones, H. (1986). An application of the facet-factorial approach to scale construction in the development of a rating scale for high school vocal solo performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oklahoma.
Juslin, P. N. (2000). Cue utilization in communication of emotion in music performance: Relating performance to perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 26(6), 1797-1813.
Juslin, P. N. & Persson, R. S. (2002). Emotional communication. In R. Parncutt & G. Mcpherson (Eds.), The Science and Psychology of Music Performance: Creative Strategies for Teaching and Learning (pp. 219-236). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kahane, E. (2000). Thoughts on the quality of interpretation. http://www.aiic.net/ ViewPage.cfm?page_id=197 (accessed 18 December 2008).
Kalina, S. (2000). Interpreting competences as a basis and a goal for teaching. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 10, 3-32.
Kalina, S. (2005). Quality assurance for interpreting process. Meta, 50(2), 768-784.
Kalina, S. (2007). Microphone off – Application of the process model of interpreting to the classroom. Kalbotyra, 57(3), 111-121.
Kane, M., Crooks, T., & Cohen, A. (1999). Validating measures of performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(2),5-17.
Kinney, D. W. (2009). Internal consistency of performance evaluations as a function of music expertise and excerpt familiarity. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(4), 322-337.
Kopczynski, A. (1994). Quality in conference interpreting: Some pragmatic problems. In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation (pp. 87-99). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kurz, I. (1989). Conference interpreting: User expectations. In D. L. Hammond (Eds.), Coming of Age. Proceedings of the 30 th Annual Conference of the American Translator Association (pp.143-148). Medford: NJL Learned Information, Inc.
Kurz, I. (1993). Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The Interpreting Studies Reader. (pp.313-324). London and New York: Routledge.
Kurz, I. (2001). Conference interpreting: Quality in the ears of the user. Meta, 46(2), 394-409.
Lehmann, A. C., Sloboda, J. A., & Woody, R. H. (2007). Psychology for Musicians: Understanding and Acquiring the Skills. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lerdahl, F. & Jackendoff, R. (1983). A Generative Theory of Tonal Music, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Linell, P. (1997). Interpreting as communication. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile, & C. Taylor (Eds.), Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What Do We Know and How? (pp.49-67). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Liu, M., Schallert, D. L., & Carroll, P. J. (2004). Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting, 6(1), 19-42.
Livingstone, S. R., Muhlberger, R., & Brown, A. (2005). Playing with affect: Music performance with awareness of score and audience. In T. Opie & A. R. Brown (Eds.), Australasian Computer Music Conference. (pp.92-98). Brisbane: ACMA.
Maugars, C. (2006). Attitudes of music teachers towards final examinations in the French music conservatoires. International Journal of Music Education, 24(1), 43-55.
McPherson, G. E. (1995). The assessment of musical performance: Development and validation of five new measures. Psychology of Music, 23, 142-161.
McPherson, G. E. & Schubert, E. (2004). Measuring performance enhancement in music. In A. Williamon (Eds.), Musical Excellence. (pp. 61-82). New York: Oxford University Press.
McPherson, G. E. & Thompson, W. F. (1998). Assessing music performance: Issues and influences. Research Studies in Music Education, 10(1), 10-24.
Mills, J. (1991). Assessing musical performance musically. Educational Studies, 17(2), 173-181.
Moser, P. (1995). Survey on Expectations of Users of Conference Interpretation: Final Report. Geneva: AIIC.
Moser, P. (1996). Expectations of users of conference interpretation. Interpreting, 1(2), 145-178.
Moser-Mercer, Barbara (1996). Quality in interpreting: Some methodological issues. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 7, 43-55.
Moser-Mercer, B. (1997). Skill components in simultaneous interpreting. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile, & C. Taylor (Eds.), Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What Do We Know and How? (pp. 133-148). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Nakamura, T. (1987). The communication of dynamics between musicians and listeners through musical performance. Perception & Psychophysics, 41(6), 525-533.
Palm, T. (2008). Performance assessment and authentic assessment: A conceptual analysis of the literature. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 13(4), 1-11.
Palmer, C. (1997). Music performance. Annual Review of Psychology, 48(1), 115-138.
Palmer, C. (2005). Sequence memory in music performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(5), 247-250.
Palmer, C. & Drake, C. (1997). Monitoring and planning capacities in the acquisition of music performance skills. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51(4), 369-384.
Parasurama, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41-50.
Peng, K. C. (2006). The development of coherence and quality of performance in conference interpreter training. Doctoral dissertation, University of Leeds.
Pöchhacker, F. (2001). Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta, 46(2), 410-425.
Pöchhacker, F. (2004). Introducing Interpreting Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
Repp, B. H. (1992). Diversity and commonality in music performance: An analysis of timing microstructure in Schumann’s “Träumerei”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92(5), 2546-2568.
Repp, B. H. (1995). Expressive timing in Schumann’s “Träumerei”: An analysis of performances by graduate student pianists. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 98(5), 2413-2427.
Ryan, C., Wapnick, J., Lacaille, N., & Darrow, A. (2006). The effects of various physical characteristics of high-level performers on adjudicators’ performance ratings. Psychology of Music, 34(4), 559-572.
Saunders, C. T. (1993). The assessment of music performance: Techniques for classroom and rehearsal. Newsletter of the Special Research Interest Group in Measurement and Evaluation (MENC). In R. Colwell & R. Ambrose (Eds.), 15, 7-11
Sawyer, D. B. (2004). Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Scott, S., (2004). Evaluating tasks for performance-based assessments: Advice for music teachers. General Music Today, 17(2), 17-27.
Seleskovitch, D. (1986). Comment: Who should assess an interpreter’s performance? Multilingua, 5(4), 326.
Shlesinger, M., et al. (1997). Quality in simultaneous interpreting. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile, & C. Taylor (Eds.), Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What Do We Know and How? (pp. 123-131). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Sloboda, J. A. (1985). The Musical Mind: The Cognitive Psychology of Music. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sloboda, J. A. (2000). Individual differences in music performance. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(4), 397-403.
Smith, B. P. & Barnes, G. V. (2007). Development and validation of an orchestra performance rating scale. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(3), 268-280.
Stanley, M., Brooker, R., & Gilber, R. (2002). Examiner perceptions of using criteria in music performance assessment. Research Studies in Music Education, 18(1), 46-52.
Swanwick, K. (1996). Teaching and assessing. Newsletter of the Special Research Interest Group in Measurement and Evaluation (MENC), R. Colwell & J. Roberts (Eds.), Winter, 18, 6-9.
Thompson, S. (2007). Determinants of listeners’ enjoyment of a performance. Psychology of Music, 35(1), 20-36.
Thompson, W. F., Bella, S. D., & Keller, P. E. (2006). Music performance. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2(2-3), 99-102.
Thompson, W. F. & Cuddy, L. (1997). Music performance and the perception of key. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 23(1), 116-135.
Tijus, C. A. (1997). Understanding for interpreting, interpreting for understanding. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile, & C. Taylor (Eds.), Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What Do We Know and How? (pp. 29-48). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Torsello, C. (1997). Linguistics, discourse analysis and interpretation. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile, & C. Taylor (Eds.), Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What Do We Know and How? (pp. 167-186). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Tsui, Amy B. M. (2003). Understanding Expertise in Teaching: Case Studies of ESL Teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
van Galen, G., & Wing, A.M. (1984). The sequencing of movements. In M.Smyth, & A. M. Wing, The Psychology of Human Movement, (pp.153-182). London: Academic Press.
Viaggio, S. (1991). Teaching beginners to shut up and listen. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, No. 4, 45-58
Vianna, B. (2005). Simultaneous interpreting: A relevance-theoretic approach. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2(2), 169-190.
Vuorikoski, A. R. (1998). User responses to simultaneous interpreting. In L. Bowker, M. Cronin, D. Kenny, & J. Pearson (Eds.), Current Trends in Translation Studies (pp. 187-194). Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.
Wapnick, J., Flowers, P., Alegant, M., & Jasinskas, L. (1993). Consistency in piano performance evaluation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 282-292.
Wapnick, J., Ryan, C., & Lacaille, N. (2004). Effects of selected variables on musicians’ ratings of high-level piano performances. International Journal of Music Education, 22(1), 7-20.
Weaver, W. (1949). Recent contributions to he mathematical theory of communication. In C. Shannon, & W. Weaver (Eds.), The Mathematical Theory of Communication (pp. 1-28). Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Wells, R. (1998). The student’s role in the assessment process. Teaching Music, 6(2), 32-33.
Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2(2). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=2&n=2 (accessed 27 November, 2008).
Winter, N. (1993). Music performance assessment: A study of the effects of training and experience on the criteria used by music examiners. Interntional Journal of music Education, 22(1), 34-39.
Wolak, R., Kalafatis, S., & Harris, P. (1998). An Investigation into four characteristics of services. Journal of Empirical Generalisations in Marketing Science, 3(2), 22-41.
Woody, R. (2000). Getting into their heads. The American Music Teacher, 49(3), 24-27
Zdzinski, S. F. & Barnes, G. V. (2002). Development and validation of a string performance rating scale. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(3), 245-255.
Zwischenberger, C., Pöchhacker, F., & Kurz, I.(2008).
Quality and role: The professionals’ view. Communicate!,
http://www.aiic.net/ViewPage.cfm/page3044.htm (accessed 13
January 2009).