On the Colorado Translators Association e-mail list, we recently had a lively discussion about ATA certification, which got me thinking about some of the pros, cons and issues associated with the ATA certification exams. In the spirit of disclosure, I am both ATA-certified (failed the practice test, passed the real exam) and an active volunteer for ATA so I’m not entirely impartial, but I’ll try to give a balanced view of the topic.
For those unfamiliar with the ATA certification process, here are some of the roots of the controversy
- ATA certification exams are still handwritten and no electronic reference materials are allowed. Candidates have to bring their own (paper) dictionaries and reference books; when I took the exam, the woman next to me brought a rolling suitcase full of dictionaries.
- The only feedback that you receive from the ATA exam is a letter notifying you whether you passed or failed; you don’t receive your marked-up exam unless you pay a separate review fee.
- In order to refer to yourself as ATA-certified and to use the CT designation, you must remain a member of ATA. Technically, your certification lapses if you don’t renew your ATA membership, and ATA could require you to retake the certification exam.
- ATA does not release pass/fail rates for specific language combinations, only an approximate overall pass rate of “less than 20%.”
To open the discussion, here are some gripes about the exam that I disagree with:
- “It’s too expensive.” At $300, the exam certainly isn’t cheap. But ATA actually loses money on the certification program; and when you consider that the $300 fee includes the exam sitting plus having your exam graded by at least two reviewers (and a third reviewer comes in if the first two disagree on your result), I actually think it’s amazing that ATA doesn’t need to charge more.
- “The grading process is unfair.” I agree that the grading process is a little opaque (we’ll get to that later…), but if you fail, it means that at least two reviewers agree that you failed. You can never fail the ATA exam based on only one person’s review.
- “The passing rate is ridiculously low.” The passing rate on the ATA exam is, according to all of the published statistics I could find, roughly equivalent to the passing rate on the Federal Court Interpreter written exam, and *much higher* than the 4-5% pass rate on the Federal Court Interpreter exam as a whole.
- “No one cares if you’re certified anyway.” I think that certification is not a must, but it’s certainly a plus. I do a brisk business translating official documents for individuals, and most of that work requires a certified translator. If a client is blindly searching the ATA directory, I think that they’re likely to contact the certified people first. And I think that clients in general feel safer when they use certified translators because they feel that there’s some guarantee of competence there.
Moving on, here are some gripes about the exam that I believe have at least a shred of merit:
- The whole handwritten exam/paper dictionary situation. I can sympathize with the reasons behind this (exam security, expense, finding appropriate testing centers, dealing with non-Roman-alphabet languages, etc.) but it’s still a major deterrent for many translators. When I took the exam in 2002, I don’t think I had spent three hours handwriting anything since I was in college in the early 90s. If I were to take the exam today, I would have to purchase or borrow paper dictionaries just for that purpose since I’ve converted to electronic resources almost exclusively. This format just doesn’t mesh with the way most translators work in 2012.
- The lack of prep materials. At present, the only official prep materials that ATA offers are practice exams which cost $50.00 each. Considering that you do receive your marked-up practice exam, I think the cost is very reasonable. However, I think ATA should offer more prep materials than this in order to make the grading standards more transparent. How about a book of old exams for each language combination with sample translations, including the error markings for each one? How about language-specific prep courses led by graders and including practice exam sessions with feedback? Right now, I think that if you fail the practice test it’s hard to know what you need to work on in order to pass. More prep materials could help remedy this.
- The opacity surrounding the exam grading and release of results, which ties into the cost of the exam. To my knowledge, ATA does not publish the names of the exam graders. Many people do identify themselves as exam graders, for example on their websites or LinkedIn profiles, but ATA itself does not identify them. I think it would contribute to the legitimacy of the exam if ATA made a concerted effort to recruit graders who are seen as the top translators in their language combinations. Undoubtedly, some or even most graders already meet this criterion, but ATA could benefit from publishing their names on its website. In addition, I think that ATA should pay its graders more (in order to recruit and retain the most respected translators in each language combination), even if this leads to an increase in the exam fee. I also think that ATA should release specific pass/fail figures each year and for each language combination. Right now ATA publishes the names of newly certified members in the Chronicle, but I think it would contribute to the exam’s legitimacy if ATA published the number of people who took each language combination and the number who passed and failed.
In sum, I think that ATA does a good job of administering the certification program with the resources that it has. With a budget of $300 per candidate spread over renting an exam room, paying an exam proctor, paying at least two graders and dealing with the administrative aspects of the exam, I think that ATA does pretty admirably. However, I think that increasing the exam fee in order to finally get the exam computerized, plus offering more prep materials and possibly prep courses would help make the exam process more transparent and legitimate in the eyes of ATA members.
As you probably know, Corinne, the examination for ITI qualified membership (in the UK) is sat in “real working” circumstances. From the examination guide: ‘The examination takes the form of an “assignment” to be completed at home within a specified period of time, using the dictionaries, reference materials and
equipment that the translator would normally use. Candidates are also required
to prepare a glossary of 10-15 terms from the passage.’ This seems to me to be the only fair and accurate way to assess the ability of a modern translator. Who uses handwriting these days? I once decided not to sit the exam at the end of a law course mainly because it was to be handwritten, thereby having to forego the qualification. I regret that this decision was forced on me.
Interesting post and good points, Corinne! I agree with most of the gripes. As an insider, i.e. developing the English-Swedish certification program, I can say that ordering the practice exam is the easiest and most economical way to see how the tests are graded. Apart from seeing the graded test, with comments, you also get a “rubric” that shows how the graders have reasoned. All exams are graded by two graders, independently and anonymously.
Many language combinations also offer workshops for the certification exam, either during the ATA conference, or in the local chapter/association.
Both the pass/fail rates and grading system are, as far as I know, equivalent to corresponding certifications in other organizations.
Last but not least, I think that even the graders and certification board think that the handwritten tests and paper dictionaries are outdated and have been working on an electronic exam during the past years. Since ATA is such a large organization, plus that the exam is given multiple times and in multiple locations during a year, the security issue is still the main road block. For Swedish it would be no problem to implement the electronic exam right now, but for languages such as Spanish, that have so many test takers during one year or in one sitting, the problem is just to find enough new, anonymous passages often enough.
I definitely feel that one of the biggest negatives of the ATA certification is how unrealistic the test is. Even the exams for my Master’s degree allowed online resources. I, like you, don’t have enough print resources to get me through even a paragraph of the exam I’m sure. I’m putting off my certification in the hopes that soon they will implement a more realistic testing situation. After all, if they can do it in the UK surely we could manage it here, too?
Regarding handwriting — couldn’t the ATA let translators bring their own laptops and disable any internet connections so that the translators can use their own electronic dictionaries? I don’t think it’s that complicated to disable any electronic communication.
Or at least buy a bunch of outdated old laptops with basic word processing software only and no other software installed, and let the translators use those during the exam. That would eliminate the handwriting issue which deters me personally from taking the exam (my handwriting is nearly illegible due to an injury, but I type just fine).
We all know how I feel about the exam… I’ve failed it three times but did very well on the Federal Language Exam to become a FBI linguist. Based on my status as an overworked translator I know for a fact that I am a good translator and that most clients really don’t care whether or not a translator is certified. For what it’s worth… the colleague I wrote about in Deadlines, deadlines, deadlines is a certified translator. Certification is not the only indication of quality. I even heard a rumor that a machine translation passed the exam, but I can’t say who started it or if it is true.
That MT from Portuguese to English passed the ATA exam was stated many times by an anonymous troll who calls himself Jeb and lives in Japan – he seems to be a native English speaker, but his English is full of grammatical mistakes that a seventh grader should not be making.
He kept using it as an argument of superiority of machines to humans when it comes to translation. In his esteemed opinion, it is only a matter of time before all human translators are converted by market forces to post-editors of MT products.
I tried to have a normal discussion many times with this malicious troll as he kept bugging me with this kind of nonsense even if it had nothing to do with the subjects of my posts, but in the end I told him that I would not be responding to his tirades anymore and he finally stopped disrupting the discussion on my blog.
My guess is that he is now trolling another blog about translation.
Paula Gordon, http://www.dbaplanb.com/frame.html, who is an ATA grader, explained in one of her comments on my blog what exactly happened with this MT translation but I am not sure where exactly her comment is on my blog.
But apparently this is not just a rumor, it is a rumor that is in part based on truth.
Maybe she could explain it again if she reads this blog.
I think many people will agree that the certification exam is not necessarily an indication of a translator’s abilities. Certification does, however, have one very important function, and that is, it signals a certain level of commitment to the profession. If you take the time to learn about the exam, pay for and use the practice materials, travel for and take the exam, etc., it is likely that you have made the other necessary investments for being a professional translator, and are in this for the long term. Clients who don’t know the first thing about translation make the safe bet by choosing the translator who is certified.
I know the ATA is working quite hard towards moving away from the handwritten test, which – quite apart from the comments that you yourself make, Corinne, as well as the perfectly legitimate criticism of the other commenters – also discriminates against people like myself who basically cannot produce legible prose handwriting, however hard we try, for medical reasons. The ATA is probably very fortunate that nobody has challenged the exam on those grounds (or maybe they have – I just don’t know. Perhaps there are facilities for people who are totally blind to take the exam). Of course it’s going to be difficult to build sufficient flexibility into an computer-based test environment (think of the different keyboards and operating system languages you’ll need!), so that’s why I think that the ITI approach (based as it is on relatively realistic working conditions and a healthy dose of honesty) would be a far more worthwhile strategy to pursue. It would also allow the ATA to offer the exam worldwide without any additional administrative effort.
As far as cost is concerned, I’m somewhat astonished to learn that my ATA membership fees (I’m an associate member) are being used to subsidise the certification exam (which will, ultimately, probably benefit the candidates financially if they pass). I do think that the exam should be self-supporting financially.
I’ll stay away from the minefield of grading. But a pass rate below 20% sounds perfectly reasonable to me. It seems to be that one of the problems in today’s world is that many people seem to think that “doing sort of OK” is enough to get you through an exam. At many universities today, it probably is. But translators have to understand that, while 90% in an exam at college (and the ATA exam pass mark is below that) will get you a summa cum laude, a starred first class, or a 1++, and the academic staff will remember you for years as a shining example to hold up to other students – in the real world, 90% is a fail.
Very interesting entry, Corinne. I’ve always thought “Why would I take the exam Very interesting entry, Corinne. I’ve always thought “Why would I take the exam if I have a degree in Translation and have spent 4 years at college?” I know several colleagues from Argentina who tend to think alike. I think having such ATA certification may imply a certain degree of commitment, as the previous poster states, but from my POV, this is only valid if you do not have a degree in Translation. Since studying translation at a university level in the US is rather uncommon (the program is quite new in most universities/colleges) –as opposed to Spain or Latin American countries– then I guess that taking the exam may make a difference if you live there. An engineer/lawyer/friend that moved from Argentina to the US several years ago took the exam and told me that he uses it exclusively as a marketing tool. Most of his US-based clients have found him through the ATA Directory and have hired him exclusively because he’s certified. I’ve never been “ruled out” by an agency/client for not having the certification but perhaps I’m missing other opportunities through direct contact. In sum: I may consider taking the exam in the future but do not think it’s essential to succeed as a translator 🙂
Cheers from Buenos Aires,
Lorena
I think that considerable improvement could be made in the training materials available for the exam. Instead of providing one practice exam for $50, why not provide access to a forum where translators could view decades of old exams? They could provide feedback to each other or a detailed critique for a set fee. Why not show examples (with permission) of successful and unsuccessful solutions for various problems?
Hi Jenn and thanks for your message. I agree that more prep materials are really needed. I would have to go back and look at my practice exam from 2003, but I believe that the corrections do not give *the correct/preferred way* to translate the part that you missed. That would be a big help too!
I saw one of these tests once, and it was talking about “West Germany”. i.e. the source text was at least 20 years old.
Hi John and thanks for your comment. Wow! Interesting!
My random thoughts on this:
– I do not think it is expensive for a national exam. (Compare to some others and you will see!)
– I am waiting for the electronic version. I have taken practice and did fine, but just cannot see myself taking a handwritten exam. Too many distractions from how I really work.
– I want to point out to people (not to be rude, but), the ATA is not a SCHOOL for translation. It is a professional organization. I personally think they have no obligation to provide specific feedback other than to make sure the exam was reviewed by the several graders (if appealed, etc.).
– A big issue is, many people greatly overestimate their skill level and what it takes to be a translator. Trust me…I have seen a lot in my years in this business. Most people who fail (sorry) probably deserve to fail, but also, their are certainly special cases from time time. My two cents!
Thanks Eve! As always, your comments bring up some important issues 🙂 I definitely agree that a test of professional competence does not have to be a developmental tool: for example presumably if people fail the CPA exam or the Bar exam or the medical boards, the testing entity does not give them suggestions for improvement. However, all of those exams and even tests like the SATs release old exams, study guides, etc. which ATA does not. Also a friend of ours who is a grader reports that most people fail the exam *by a lot*, not by a small margin, indicating that most people don’t prepare adequately or just don’t have the language skills (but I’ve worked with Marianne and I can attest that neither of those is true of her!). Also I know at least one federally certified interpreter who failed the exam, Jill Sommer is an awesome translator and she failed the exam, and so on. So I think there’s room for improvement in the process.
I would like in turn to add my 2 cents.
I agree with several of the points you are making, Corinne.
However, my biggest pet peeve with the ATA certification exam is the lack of transparency surrounding it. I would like to see yearly statistics published about how many people took the test in each language combination and how many passed. I think it would be a big improvement.
I am not certified and for full disclosure purposes I have failed the exam twice. I don’t intend to take it again at this time.
However, in my case, not being certified has not prevented me from being successful in the profession I have chosen.
As a legal translator, trained initially as a lawyer, I mainly have direct clients. My clients don’t know the ATA nor the certification exam. They are repeat clients.
I think there are other ways to indicate our dedication and seriousness to our profession. Some of my work is published. I consider this a form of “signing” my work as one of our best known colleague advocates.
We all know of some very successful and well-known translators who are not certified.
Sure, The ATA is a professional organization and not a school for translation. But I would add a caveat to the word “professional”.
The ATA is there to represent us, the translators and interpreters and to advocate on our behalf.
As such, I see a conflict of interest and thus a possible hindrance in its role as a “professional organization” when the ATA also welcomes Translation Companies.
(Does the American Medical Association welcome health insurance companies?)
Food for thoughts or a future debate?
Finally, I think the beauty of our profession is its background diversity. We all took different paths to become translators but we all share a love for words. Let’s embrace this rather than create a certification segregation.
Thanks Marianne! Yes, lots of food for a future debate! So many meaty topics here… I wholeheartedly agree with you about releasing statistic, I do think that everyone would benefit if ATA released the total candidates and pass/fail ratios for each language combination. As far as allowing companies to be members of ATA, I kind of go back and forth on that. I do think that a) many similar associations do not allow companies to be members (for example I know that companies cannot be members of the SFT in France) and b) in certain ways, freelancers and companies have opposing objectives: freelancers want to be paid more, whereas agencies benefit from keeping freelance rates flat. Agencies want to request or require volume discounts and repetition discounts, whereas freelancers want to resist. However, I do think that in such a small industry, we need each other more than practitioners and companies in other industries do. For example ATA has about 11,000 members and the American Bar Association says that it has 400,000 (!!), so I think that in many ways, freelancers and companies benefit from working together. Good material for a future post!!
I would like to qualify my earlier comments. When I was referring to people who don’t pass that don’t “deserve” it, I certainly did not mean people like Jill and Marianne. I was not looking at the bigger picture when I typed that part out and I know there are issues with this exam (and probably other national exams) where people slip through who should not. I was thinking of people who really have know idea what they are doing and take the exam without any professional preparation and then get upset. I have seen this in my “past life” working for agencies, that some “tests” are so awful the people hardly seem literate and then get upset they didn’t pass. But, I know many of our wonderful colleagues like Marianne and Jill are also frustrated and that shows gaps in the system.
It seems we have a logic puzzle here:
Some good translators pass the ATA certification exam.
Some good translators do not pass the ATA certification exam.
….
Some poor translators do not pass the ATA certification exam.
The key question comes down to the missing line. Do some POOR translators PASS the ATA certification exam? I have heard the occasional muttering from agencies that use their own internal testing methods because they do not feel that the ATA exam is enough.
The foremost goal of the ATA certification exam must be to insure that as few POOR translators are ATA certified as possible. Certainly none would be preferable. The 20% pass rate shows that the ATA is serious about this. I have taken, and not passed the ATA certification exam, but I believe (and have enough positive feedback to justify my opinion) I am in the second category.
Perhaps you have to be not just good, but exemplary, or maybe you have to be not just good, but good *in the same way* as the judges. I do not know which is the truth or even know how to get to the truth. Even to my ears it sounds like sour grapes, but I have heard this theory bandied about a lot.
I do know this: while the potential existence of poor translators who are ATA certified causes significant harm to the certification process, ATA certification cannot be considered as a standardized “seal of approval” unless MOST good translators pass the ATA certification exam. For this to happen, most good translators have to TAKE the ATA certification exam. I believe that this is not happening now because:
1. They have taken the exam before, perhaps before they were ready, and do not wish to spend the time, money, and stress to take it again.
2. They are so busy with doing actual translations that it seems a waste of time to get certified and invite even more work. (see lack of “seal of approval” status)
3. They have physical conditions which make it difficult to take a handwritten exam. (I am hoping there is some type of accommodation possible as otherwise it is only a matter of time before the ATA has an ADA lawsuit on its hands)
4. They are unaware or uninterested in even being a member of ATA. Translation is a solitary profession. I can imagine many translators, particularly literary translators or those in rare languages, that simply have no interest in a professional organization.
Only #3 would be fixed with a computerized test. I think the ATA has been doing a good job of working on #4 in recent years. Greater transparency would help with #1 and eventually, solving the problem in #4 might put pressure on those in situation #2. I am not sure if that would be correct, but it could happen. Translation has few entry barriers. It’s one reason we struggle so much with reputation and quality, but… do we really want to be like the Bar or other professions in which you simply cannot practice without taking a test?
Just wanted to say thanks to everyone for your comments, and sorry that I ran out of steam on the replies…I really appreciate all of your perspectives on the exam and it will definitely be interesting to see if ATA announces any changes or updates in the future. Robin, ATA does have a provision that people with a medical need can write the exam on a non-memory typewriter, but to me, that would almost be worse than handwriting because it’s so hard to go back and change things. And I do think that the “take-home test” that some other countries use is interesting; personally I think that there could be a high risk of dishonesty, i.e. people telling themselves “I know I’m a good translator, so what does it hurt if I ask my friend who’s been in corporate finance for 20 years to help me…”, etc. Very interesting conversation, thank you!!
Hi Corinne,
One last comment: I think that if a translator has the initiative and common sense to ask a friend who’s been in corporate finance for 20 years to help them, I’m all for it. After all, it reflects reality (or at least I hope that it reflects reality). As far as I’m concerned, an open book exam should be really open, though of course I draw the line at getting somebody else to actually write the translation for you. But I really don’t see any problem in asking an expert for help. Additionally, all candidates should be required to disclose all sources they used for terminology and subject area research.
And I’d agree that a non-memory typewriter (where would you get one of those nowadays?) is an unacceptable substitute for people with eye problems. In fact, it’s positively insulting!
There is a blog article and comment thread here from 2011 that may interest some of your readers. It includes a response by the current Chair of the ATA Certification Committee, Geoff Koby.
http://ata-sci-tech.blogspot.com/2011/04/is-there-better-way.html
Thanks Karen! Very interesting perspective, definitely worth reading if you commented on this post.
Is it really too expensive? Is it worth keeping the price (artificially) high to retain an element of ‘prestige’ or should the profession be opened up by making the exam cheaper? Or perhaps price is not important at all?
Great discussion here on one of my favorite topics! I am more than willing to take the exam — flaws and all — once it’s offered on a computer. My handwriting is atrocious and I just don’t write by hand often enough to practice, so throwing handwriting into the mix is an additional burden that I am not willing to deal. After all, this is 2012 and not 1992. Many smaller exams, including recently developed health care interpreting exams, have very quickly figured out how to offer these exams on computers at national testing centers, so it’s a bit disappointing that the ATA has not followed suit. I know efforts have been underway for a long time, and I am applaud my colleagues’ volunteer efforts to get it done, but unfortunately, we have yet to see results.
In general, any translation/interpreting exam is prone to come under attack one way or another. In general, it’s difficult to assess the quality of translation, so it’s a tricky subject for sure.
I do think that some other T&I exam, such as the Consortium court interpreter exam (which I took and passed on the first try) more accurately measure the skills needed in a more true-to-life setting.
Hi Corrine,
Can I post a link to this on the SLD LinkedIn group? We have someone asking about the benefits of certification.
Many thanks!
Hi Lucy! Yes, of course, feel free to repost!
Does anyone have a name or an address one could write to regarding the certification exam and how it is administered?
I took the exam for the 2nd time at the beginning of May and fully expect to fail again. After reading all the prep material and the recurring warning about literal translation, I encountered a term in my elective text (central to the passage) that was not to be found in most dictionaries. A simple Google search would have turned it up, had I encountered it professionally. But without specific experience in fermentation, one wouldn’t know whether to go literal or to infer from context. And yes, the correct answer was literal.
I’ll avoid offering an extended list of grievances, for fear of being labeled a ‘ranter’ (it seems to be a common defense at the ATA), and will only say that I find the lack of transparency to be most troubling. A reputable examiner would publish regular statistics on the number of registrants and the pass rates by language by year. I also don’t see that there is a 3rd party auditor brought in to ensure the integrity of the process or that there is any meaningful attempt to improve the process based upon feedback from those who take the exam. Anything so cloaked in secrecy is cause for suspicion.
In short, I believe the ATA has opted for arbitrary exclusivity over credibility in their certification exam program. I seriously doubt that I will write this exam again, and I am even leaning toward allowing my membership in the ATA to lapse. I can’t help feeling like I’m being given an Amway-styled pitch to keep me coming back and spending money on something in which I have increasingly less confidence.
I always appreciate when this topic is raised. I thank you for raising it, again. First, the lack of transparency is discouraging, as noted above. And that only 3 practice exams–one per topic–are available, well, it is bewildering. Even the qualifying exams for my doctorate, well, we were provided with a book of sample questions–real questions given in previous years. The grading of the sample exams I paid for and took from the ATA contained errors, meaning the grader counted wrong the number of what s/he deemed errors per page. How would I know if this was not the case were I to take the certification exam? I would have to pay the two or three hundred dollars to find out. Finally, that the exam itself–handwritten with hard copy dictionaries–does not even resemble real world practice of translation strikes me as ludicrous. And so I am waiting for the changes to be made, and in the meantime have ceased paying membership dues to an organization that makes it so hard to become a voting member.
Mirko, I agree with you on many of your points regarding the certification exam, however I would like to recommend another option to you. The ATA has recently streamlined the process for “Active Membership Review.” This is an alternate path to voting status. It is free, online, and takes less than 5 minutes of your time. I wrote up a quick account of my experiences here: http://www.jennmercer.com/translation-2/the-new-online-ata-active-membership-review-process-a-firsthand-account/
I cannot emphasize enough how simple this process is. I still intend to get certified and am waiting for the next keyboarded exam that will fit my schedule. But in the meantime, I believe that the ATA will only improve by having a greater proportion of its members as voting members.
Corinne, out of curiosity, at what point in your career did you take the ATA exam? Were you just starting out, or did you wait a while before pursuing certification?
My approach and thinking is in line with Lorena Vicente’s above (see her post dated March 6, 2012). In Germany most translators either have a university degree in translation studies or passed an accredited translation exam. Having an MA degree in translation studies from a German university, I felt that I did not need ATA certification to proof my credentials as a translator. That is why I refused to take the ATA certification exam for many years. As a ‘real’ professional with a T&I university degree I do not feel well represented by the ATA because the ATA does not seem to honor and promote T&I degrees, the real credential for our profession. In their database they only distinguish between “ATA certified” and “all members”, which means that the real professionals among its members (i. e. the ones with T&I degrees) are in the same category of “all members” as someone who has no credentials whatsoever. When I very diplomatically (!) voiced that concern in a public meeting with the ATA board at a former ATA conference, I got booed, which confirmed my assumption that there is no interest in changing this.
My main concern about taking the ATA certification exam was the graders’ credentials. When considering that about 75% of ATA members have no linguistic training (according to an ATA survey a couple of years ago), I had to assume that I would be graded by people who are not qualified for this job. I think the only requirement to be a grader is to have passed the ATA certification exam. How can you be qualified to grade if you have never dealt with things like lexis, semantics, comparative linguistics, coherence, cohesion, functionalism in translation etc.? After learning that most of the graders in my language combination (EN to GER) now have a T&I degree from a German university, I decided to take the exam last year. I did it merely for marketing purposes so that I am better positioned in the ATA database.
Here some comments and observations regarding the exam itself:
Preparation: The best preparation in my opinion is the graded practice test. People who take the exam should know how to translate, that should not be their main issue. In exams, however, it is also important to know what the graders are looking for and how literal you have to translate, or, how much freedom you have to rephrase certain thoughts. I also saw how and what the graders corrected. Since I always feel much more confident in exams when I come well prepared, I practiced taking the test in a simulated exam setting, i. e. copied some general passages and some technical passages in subjects that are not my specialties from online newspapers and magazines. I set the clock and translated one or two passages of approx. 250-275 words each at a time, practicing writing by hand and dealing with correction tape to make changes (no Internet allowed!). I have a terrible handwriting that I cannot even read myself at times, by the way. That practice really, really helped me a great deal in the exam!
Exam (I can only speak for English to German): I found the general and technical exam passages very fair and “doable”, and well suited for exam purposes. Neither passage contained any major linguistic difficulties. The challenge was to phrase them well so they did not sound translated (as in all translation exams). The general passage was about a general subject of which you did not need to have any special knowledge. I passed the exam the first time. I found the ATA certification exam to be the least challenging of the three translation exams I have taken.
Pass rate: Geoff Koby published an article about pass rates by language combination in one of the last ATA Chronicles. Also, here are two links to interesting articles by Geoff Koby and others regarding translator certification: http://www.trans-int.org/index.php/transint/article/view/183 and http://www.trans-int.org/index.php/transint/issue/view/21.
Being a grader myself (for another association), I have to agree with Eve’s first comment above. In my experience, most people who take these types of exam lack the necessary skill level. And those people normally do not fail by a little, many of them are lacking even the basics. There will also always be people who fail although they are good and skilled translators. They might have problems dealing with the exam setting, with being too nervous, or another reason. That is why it helped me a lot to practice in a simulated exam setting. That way you do not lose valuable time dealing with non-translation related nuisances (because your handwriting is better, you are already “skilled” in using correction tape etc.) and can better concentrate on translating during the exam. That might make the difference between passing and failing.
I would not call the ITI exam a real exam but rather a translation test. Doing the test in their home or office environment, candidates can easily cheat by getting help from others. IMO, anybody can pass this test. Also, since candidates can choose the subject matter themselves, they will most likely choose one of their areas of specialization. Thus, they will most likely not be required to prove their translation skills, only their subject matter knowledge since technical texts normally are not very challenging linguistically. A suitable general text usually is more challenging and delivers a much better proof of someone’s translation skills.
The ITI exam is a real test of how professional translators perform in their own environment using their own resources – and yes, these resources can include consulting colleagues, as this is what they do in their daily working practice. It’s not cheating any more than consulting others is cheating when you’re producing a paid translation for a client.
Similarly, what better proof of a professional translator’s competence could there be than asking them to produce a translation in their area of specialisation?
Finally, not everyone can pass this test; the pass rate is just over 50%.
Clients can therefore be assured that translators qualified as MITI really can produce a good, polished translation with correct terminology and good style, appropriate to the context, in the fields in which they profess to specialise.
Watching this renewed discussion, I think that Gillian has a very interesting point. The ITI test sounds like it shows what “real world” conditions will render, and it doesn’t mean that everyone will pass either! I think that is very interesting. It does not mean that the ATA exam does not have its own merits, but it is a valuable insight into certification and testing as well.
I agree with Gillian and Eve that it is a valid credential when passed complying with the rules. I did not mean to devalue the credential. Thanks to Gillian for the detailed explanation. What I meant (but did not elaborate) was that people who really want/need to cheat in order to get this credential, will be able to cheat, e. g. by paying someone else to do the translation for them. The ITI does not have any control over that.
Yes, Eve, the ATA certification certainly has its own merits. It is a test of your translation skills in an exam setting, i. e. under time pressure and under test conditions of “the old days” without Internet, which is, of course, more challenging. It prevents you from constantly looking up things that you actually know but can retrieve faster from the Internet than from your brain. That is why practicing under exam conditions really helped me. I practiced finding solutions fairly quickly without the Internet, completing the translation within a limited time and making corrections with correction tape. The more you practice finding solutions without the Internet, the more independent your brain becomes of the Internet, which will save you valuable time in the exam that you might need to proofread your translation.
Hi, May I ask a question? I just knew about this exam today and even if it is expensive, I think it is worth the try. But I post this in case you can help me with this question:do you have to be an American citizen to be eligible for the exam, or can other nationalities take the exam, too?
It’s open to any ATA member, regardless of where you live. The only issue is finding a sitting that you can attend in person.