ICCS 2009 Technical Report - IEA

The translation verification feedback was returned to the NRC of each participating country.The NRCs were responsible for reviewing the translation verifiers’ suggestions and revisingthe instruments according to this feedback. NRCs were also asked to complete a translationverification summary form after the field trial verification, and to comment on verifiersuggestions that they had decided not to implement.Results of the translation verificationIn general, the translation verifiers considered the national translations/adaptations to bewell documented and of very high quality, showing a good balance between faithfulness andfluency. Translation verifiers of the main study instruments also noted the great care with whichtheir verification feedback after the field trial was implemented.Some typical language errors identified during translation verification included mistranslations,fluency issues (“free” vs. “word-for-word” translations, Anglicism), inconsistencies, omissions/additions, adaptations of names (fictional vs. real), style (gender agreement, formality), andgrammar. Some verifiers noted the challenge of translating and adapting certain conceptsrelated to civics and citizenship for the particular national context, especially in the case ofnon-existing institutions (e.g., school council, school governing board), as well as in the use ofacronyms and abbreviations (adapted English name vs. translated name). Through the extensivedocumentation collected in the NAF, verifiers could provide meaningful feedback on any issuesarising with the national adaptations, taking into account both the considerations reportedby the national center and the recommendations given by the ISC during the adaptationnegotiation.Layout verificationOnce adaptation and translation verification had been completed, national centers were askedto compile their final set of instruments in PDF format for each test language to be used in themain survey. These documents were uploaded to a secure server, along with an updated NAF(Version III), which contained any changes resulting from translation verification.These files were accessed by staff at the ISC for layout verification. Two independent reviewersat the ISC reviewed each set of materials. All layout issues identified were documented in aworksheet added to the NAF. The layout issues in each set of instruments were grouped as towhether they were general layout issues relating to the set of instruments, or whether theyrelated to a specific question or specific group of questions within an instrument. A wide rangeof layout issues was identified across countries. These included formatting issues (e.g., spacing,font size, margins, consistency across questions), incorrect order of questions, missing text, andthe addition of questions not agreed upon from adaptation review.National centers were provided with a summary of all layout issues. In cases where layoutissues were considered minor, national centers were given feedback and were asked to make theappropriate changes to their materials without need for further verification. In cases where moresubstantial layout issues were identified, national centers were provided with detailed feedbackconcerning all issues and were asked to resubmit their materials for further layout verification.After layout verification was complete and the ICCS instruments were finalized, a final versionof the NAF (Version IV) was prepared and used by the IEA Data Processing and ResearchCenter for data processing.TRANSLATION AND NATIONAL ADAPTATIONS OF ICCS 2009 INSTRUMENTS57