Connected education and the co-construction of knowledge in a joint course for law and interpreting students




connectedness, connected learning, questioning techniques, legal interpreting


This article raises questions of education sociology with a focus on one of its core concepts: connectedness. It relates the dimensions of the connected curriculum to research on didactic approaches, showing how methods of connected learning and the co-construction of knowledge can be applied at different levels to enable students to gain subject-related, methodological and transdisciplinary communicative competence in addition to building relationships and cooperation among them across fields of study. These dimensions are presented using the example of the course “Questioning techniques from the perspective of criminology and interpreting”. During this course, students of law and interpreting had the opportunity to acquire both core theoretical knowledge of and practical experience in questioning techniques. This they did through role playing the questioning of defendants and witnesses that typically occurs in a courtroom from the perspective of both criminology and interpreting. The evaluation and feedback showed that the law and the interpreting students appreciated the way the course made them aware of issues in both their own and the other field, helped them to connect academic learning to professional competences and gave them insights into interprofessional cooperation in interpreted legal settings.


Ahrens, B. (2015). Body language. In F. Pöchhacker, N. Grbi?, P. Mead, & R. Setton (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 36–38). Routledge.

Albl-Mikasa, M. (2008). (Non-)sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting, 10(2), 197–231.

Andres, D. (2002). Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation. Lang.

Argyle, M. (2013). Körpersprache & Kommunikation: Nonverbaler Ausdruck und soziale Interaktion (10th ed.). Junfermann.

Artkämper, H., & Schilling, K. (2014). Vernehmungen: Taktik – Psychologie – Recht (3rd ed.). VDP.

Bansal, A., Swann, J., & Smithson, W. H. (2014). Using professional interpreters in undergraduate medical consultation skills teaching. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 5, 439–450.

Barnett, R. (2016). Understanding the university: Institution, idea, possibilities. Routledge.

Berk-Seligson, S. (1990). The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. The University of Chicago Press.

Berk-Seligson, S. (2017). The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process (2nd ed.). The University of Chicago Press.

Blackledge, A. (2011). Linguistic ethnography. In M. J. Grenfell (Ed.), Bourdieu, language and linguistics (pp. 121–146). Continuum.

Boal, A. (1993). Theatre of the oppressed. Theatre Communications Group.

Creese, A. (2008). Linguistic ethnography. In K. A. King & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, Volume 10: Research methods in language and education (pp. 229–241). Springer.

Crezee, I. (2015). Semi-authentic practices for student health interpreters. Translation & Interpreting, 7(3), 50–62.

Dam, H. V. (2004). Interpreters’ notes. On the choice of language. Interpreting, 6(1), 3–17.

Evans, J., Shaffer, S., & Walsh, D. (2020). Interpreters in investigative contexts. In R. Bull & I. Blandón?Gitlin (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of legal and investigative psychology (pp. 133–148). Routledge.

Ewens, S., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., Jo, E., & Houston, K. (2017). The effect of the presence and seating position of an interpreter on eliciting information and cues to deceit. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23(2), 180–200.

Fung, D. (2017). A connected curriculum for higher education. UCL Press.

Gehl, R., & Plecas, D. (2016). Introduction to criminal investigation: Processes, practices and thinking. Justice Institute of British Columbia.

Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. John Benjamins.

González-Davies, M., & Enríquez-Raído, V. (2016). Situated learning in translator and interpreter training: Bridging research and good practice. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 10(1), 1–11.

Grafl, C., & Stempkowski, M. (2017). Lie to me: Wahrheitsfindung im Spannungsfeld divergierender Interessen. Österreichische Juristen-Zeitung, 2, 62–70.

Hale, S. (2001). How are courtroom questions interpreted?: An Analysis of Spanish interpreters’ practice. In I. Mason (Ed.), Triadic exchanges: Studies in dialogue interpreting (pp. 21–50). Routledge.

Hale, S. (2004). The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness, and the interpreter. John Benjamins.

Hale, S., & Gibbons, J. (1999). Varying realities: Patterned changes in the interpreter’s representation of courtroom and external realities. Applied Linguistics, 20(2), 203–220.

Hale, S., & Gonzalez, E. (2017). Teaching legal interpreting at university level: A research-based approach. In L. Cirillo & N. Niemants (Eds.), Teaching dialogue interpreting: Research-based proposals for higher education (pp. 200–216). John Benjamins.

Hale, S., Goodman-Delahunty, J., & Martschuk, N. (2019). Interpreter performance in police interviews: Differences between trained interpreters and untrained bilinguals. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13(2), 107–131.

Herbert, J. (1968). The interpreter’s handbook: How to become a conference interpreter (2nd ed.). Georg.

Jacobsen, B. (2004). Pragmatic meaning in court interpreting: An empirical study of additions in consecutively interpreted question-answer dialogues. HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 17(32), 237–249.

Kadri?, M. (2011). Dialog als Prinzip: Für eine emanzipatorische Praxis und Didaktik des Dolmetschens. Narr.

Kadri?, M. (2014a). Giving interpreters a voice: Interpreting studies meets theatre studies. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer: Special Issue: Dialogue Interpreting in Practice: Bridging the Gap between Empirical Research and Interpreter Education, 8(3), 452–468.

Kadri?, M. (2014b). Mission impossible? Training for the institutions and educating for society. In C. Falbo & M. Viezzi (Eds.), Traduzione e interpretazione per la società e le istituzioni (pp. 131–142). EUT.

Kadri?, M. (2015). Role play. In F. Pöchhacker, N. Grbi?, P. Mead, & R. Setton (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 360–361). Routledge.

Kadri?, M. (2017). Make it different!: Teaching interpreting with theatre techniques. In L. Cirillo & N. Niemants (Eds.), Teaching dialogue interpreting: Research-based proposals for higher education (pp. 276–292). John Benjamins.

Kadri?, M. (2019). Gerichts- und Behördendolmetschen: Prozessrechtliche und translatorische Perspektiven. Facultas.

Kadri?, M. (2021). Legal interpreting and social discourse. In M. Ji & S. Laviosa (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of translation and social practices (pp. 501–520). Oxford University Press.

Kelly, D. (2010). Curriculum. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (Vol. 1, pp. 87–93). John Benjamins.

Klafki, W. (2007). Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik: Zeitgemäße Allgemeinbildung und kritisch-konstruktive Didaktik (6th ed.). Beltz.

Lai, M., & Mulayim, S. (2014). Interpreter linguistic intervention in the strategies employed by police in investigative interviews. Police Practice and Research, 15(4), 307–321.

Leins, D. A., Zimmerman, L. A., & Polander, E. N. (2017). Observers’ real-time sensitivity to deception in naturalistic interviews. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(4), 319–330.

Llewellyn-Jones, P., & Lee, R. G. (2014). Redefining the role of the community interpreter: The concept of role-space. SLI Press.

Luciew, D., Mulkern, J., & Punako, R. Jr. (2011). Finding the truth: Interview and interrogation training simulations. In Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC): Vol. 2011: Prepare the force… Secure the future.

Nord, C. (2009). Textanalyse und Übersetzen: Theoretische Grundlagen, Methode und didaktische Anwendung einer übersetzungsrelevanten Textanalyse (4th ed.). Groos.

Ott, B. (2011). Grundlagen des beruflichen Lernens und Lehrens. Ganzheitliches Lernen in der beruflichen Bildung (4th ed.). Cornelsen.

Prieto-Velasco, J. A., & Fuentes-Luque, A. (2016). A collaborative multimodal working environment for the development of instrumental and professional competences of student translators: An innovative teaching experience. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 10(1), 76–91.

Prun?, E. (2019). Entwicklungslinien der Translationswissenschaft: Von den Asymmetrien der Sprachen zu den Asymmetrien der Macht (4th ed.). Frank & Timme.

Rennert, S. (2021). Qualität als gemeinsame Verantwortung: Aus- und Weiterbildung für DolmetscherInnen und NutzerInnen im Rechtsbereich. In K. Kaindl, S. Pöllabauer, & D. Miki? (Eds.), Dolmetschen als Dienst am Menschen: Texte für Mira Kadri? (pp. 215–228). Narr Francke Attempto.

Rigney, A. C. (1999). Questioning in interpreted testimony. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 6(1), 83–108.

Skaaden, H. (2013). No set answers?: Facilitating interpreter students’ learning in an experiential approach. In C. Wadensjö (Ed.), Training the trainers: Nordic seminar on interpreter education (pp. 11–26). Stockholm: Universitetsservice US-AB.

Soukara, S., Bull, R., Vrij, A., Turner, M., & Cherryman, J. (2009). What really happens in police interviews of suspects?: Tactics and confessions. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15(6), 493–506.

Stempkowski, M., & Grafl, C. (2021). Dolmetschen und Lügenerkennung. In K. Kaindl, S. Pöllabauer, & D. Miki? (Eds.), Dolmetschen als Dienst am Menschen: Texte für Mira Kadri? (pp. 161–173). Narr Francke Attempto.

The Global Deception Research Team (2006). A world of lies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(1), 60–74.

TransLaw. (2018–2019). Exploring legal interpreting service paths and transcultural law clinics for persons suspected or accused of crime. TransLaw Research Group.

Venuti, L. (2018). The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Vrij, A. (2005). Criteria-based content analysis: A qualitative review of the first 37 studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11(1), 3–41.

Vrij, A. (2006). Challenging interviewees during interviews: The potential effects on lie detection. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(2), 193–206.

Vrij, A., & Mann, S. (2006). Criteria-based content analysis: An empirical test of its underlying processes. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(4), 337–349.

Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., Fisher, R. P., Dalton, G., Eunkyung, J., Shaboltas, A., Khaleeva, M., Granskaya, J., & Houston, K. (2018). Using unexpected questions to elicit information and cues to deceit in interpreter-based interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(1), 94–104.

Vrij, A., Leal, S., Fisher, R. P., Mann, S., Eunkyung, J. Shaboltas, A. Khaleeva, M., Granskaya, J., & Houston, K. (2019). Eliciting information and cues to deceit through sketching in interpreter-based interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(6), 1197–1211.

Walklate, S. (2007). Understanding criminology: Current theoretical debates (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill/Open UP.




How to Cite

Kadric, M., Rennert, S., & Mikic, D. (2021). Connected education and the co-construction of knowledge in a joint course for law and interpreting students. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies, 20.



Articles - Interpreter Research and Training - The Impact of Context