Literature Review
In this section，we review relevant literature in relation to the concept of self-efficacy，including its definitions，sources and influencing factors，as well as the research on self-efficacy in academic settings and the gap of the research in interpreting training.We also review relevant research on situated learning and cognitive apprenticeship in a multimedia-based interpreting teaching and learning environment.
Self-efficacy has been proposed as one of the most important concepts in social cognitive theories and it is defined as concerning“people’s beliefs in their capabilities to mobilize the motivation，cognitive resources，and courses of action needed to exercise control over events in their lives”(Wood and Bandura，1989:364).Self-efficacy is concerned not only with the skills one has，but with the judgments of what one can do with the skills acquired.Bandura(1994)suggests that having a strong sense of efficacy enhances human accomplishment and personal well-being in many ways.People with high assurance in their own capabilities approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than threats to be avoided.In distinguishing an individual with a strong sense of efficacy and an individual who does not possess such efficacy，Bandura(1994:72)further notes that“an efficacious outlook fosters intrinsic interest and deep engrossment in activities”.Self-efficacy is not merely a general belief in one’s ability，and should not be considered as a synonym of confidence as it is much larger in scope and is an assessment of one’s capabilities in three complex and crucial areas:motivation，resources，and action(Bandura，1986).
Over the years，the concept of self-efficacy has been widely applied to studies involving behavioural changes in the areas of academic performance，cognitive functioning，athletic performance，career choices and mental health issues.In a number of recent studies，the concept has been revisited，e.g.，Petersdotter，Niehoff，and Freund(2017:175)suggest that self-efficacy includes“the facilities of goal setting，effort investment，persistence in the face of barriers，and recovery from setbacks”.Lockwood et al.(2017:655-656)redefine self-efficacy as“one’s perceived capability to organize and execute actions to attain some level of performance”and self-efficacy“determines whether certain behaviours will be initiated，the amount of effort that will be expended on these behaviours and how long this effort will be sustained.Selfefficacy also determines the goals that individuals will pursue，as well as their ability to persist in the face of obstacles”.As far as“student self-efficacy”in the educational context is concerned，Vancouver and Purl(2017:599)suggest“selfefficacy，which is one’s belief in one’s capacity，has been found to both positively and negatively influence effort and performance”.In the same vein，Olivier et al.(2019:326)contend that“student self-efficacy，behaviour engagement，and emotional engagement are key factors for academic achievement”.In addition，they regard student self-efficacy as“a situationspecific belief that students have on their ability to organize and execute the actions required to learn and master tasks and assignments at a satisfactory level”(Olivier et al.，2019:327).
As far as major sources of self-efficacy are concerned，Bandura(1997)has theorized that self-efficacy can be developed from four main sources，namely，mastery experience，vicarious experience，verbal persuasion and physiological state.Mastery experience refers to judgments of competence of one’s own previous attainment in a related task(Usher and Pajares，2006).Performance accomplishments have proven to be the most influential source of efficacy information because they are based on and supported by one’s own mastery experiences(Bandura，1997).As Bandura(1997:80)explained，“successes raise mastery expectations;repeated failures lower them，particularly if the mishaps occur early in the course of events”.“Mastery experiences are the most influential source of efficacy information because they provide the most authentic evidence of whether one can master whatever it takes to succeed.Success builds a robust belief in one’s personal efficacy.Failures undermine it，especially if failures occur before a sense of efficacy is firmly established”.Vicarious experience refers to the observation of actions of someone’s attainment in a related task(Usher and Pajares，2006).Bandura(1977)has hypothesized that，as compared to mastery experience，vicarious experience has weaker effects on self-efficacy expectancy，but is still believed to be the second most effective way to develop self-efficacy.People can develop high or low selfefficacy vicariously through other people’s performances.A person can watch another performance and then compare his own competence with the other individual’s competence(Bandura，1977).Verbal persuasion refers to feedback，judgments and appraisals from significant others about engaging in a related task(Usher and Pajares，2006).It is another way to increase people’s beliefs in their efficacy(Bandura，1977，1986，1997;Wood and Bandura，1989)and is a means to change efficacy beliefs through constructive suggestions.Using verbal persuasion in a positive light generally leads individuals to put forth more effort;therefore，they have a greater chance at succeeding.Physiological state refers to emotion or physical sensation(e.g.anxiety，fatigue and composure)that one experiences while performing a particular task(Usher and Pajares，2006).People experience sensations from their body and how they perceive this emotional arousal influences their beliefs of efficacy(Bandura，1977).In a more recent research，Petersdotter，Niehoff，and Freund(2017:175)have termed the four major sources as“people’s experiences of their past performance;observation of others;verbal encouragement;and the interpretation of others’emotional reactions”.
As far as self-efficacy measurement is concerned，there are two orientations.One is domain-specific self-efficacy measurement and the other is perceived general self-efficacy measurement.The development of the measurement of self-efficacy over time has paved the way to identify a type of stable self-efficacy known as“generalised self-efficacy”(Bäßler and Schwarzer，1996).However，task-specific self-efficacy is a distinct construct(Stajkovic and Luthans，1998)differentiated from generalised self-efficacy.Furthermore，as proposed by Pajares and Schunk，instead of being evaluated in general，research regarding self-efficacy should be assessed at a domain-specific or task-specific level because such measures may have greater validity and predictive relevance，for example，self-efficacy on the performance of trainee interpreters.In other words，domain-specific self-efficacy assessment，such as asking students to state their confidence in learning specific subjects is more“explanatory and predictive than omnibus measures and preferable for making general academic judgments”(Pajares，1996:547).More recent research on self-efficacy has also indicated the relevance of this domain-specific self-efficacy.For example，Olivier et al.(2019:335)argue that“domain-specific self-efficacy can produce desirable results for student academic development and，in return，also be positively influenced by past achievement”.In addition，Grether，Sowislo，and Wiese(2018:131)suggest that“task-specific，domain-specific and general self-efficacy differ with respect to the extent to which individuals regard themselves to be efficacious，i.e.，across activities，situations or domains of functioning”.In academic settings，particularly in skills training programs，research on selfefficacy shows that“environments，including educational structures，also affect self-efficacy and academic outcomes.Therefore，training programs that cultivate a strong sense of collective efficacy have the potential to empower and ultimately create more successful trainees and instructors”(Lockwood et al.，2017:666-667).
Another area that warrants a review of the literature is situated learning，as the interpreting training class under investigation for this chapter is situated in an MBL environment，more specifically a SmartClass+classroom.Situated learning is described as an emerging and evolving model of instruction.Brown，Collins，and Duguid(1989)have derived key elements from observations of successful learning environments，such as apprenticeship，collaboration，reflection，coaching，multiple practice，and articulation of learned skills.The situated learning theory calls for the merging between“knowing”and“doing”by suggesting that learning should be situated in the context where knowledge is applied.In this sense，knowledge can be regarded as a product of the activity and context(Brown，Collins，and Duguid，1989;Brown and Duguid，1996).The major elements in the situated learning include content，context，community，and participation.In terms of“content”，situated learning places the learner in the centre of an instructional process，as it emphasizes higherorder thinking processes rather than the acquisition of facts independent of the real lives of the participants(Choi and Hannafin，1995).In terms of“context”，learning in context refers to building an instructional environment sensitive to the tasks that learners must complete.Context comprises notions of interpersonal relationships，power structure，and the learner’s interaction with the cultural norms and values of a community.In terms of“community”，learners interpret，reflect，and form meaning through“community”.Community provides the setting for the social interaction needed to engage in dialogue with others to see various and unique perspectives on any issue(Lave and Wenger，1991).In terms of“participation”，it can be understood as the process by which learners work together with each other and with experts in a social organization to solve problems related to everyday life circumstances(Brown，Collins，and Duguid，1989).Learning becomes a social process of reflecting，interpreting，and negotiating meaning among the participants of a community.Stein(2001:422)argues that the main elements of situated cognition，i.e.，content，context，community and participation，offer“intriguing opportunities for trainers to interact with trainees in more meaningful ways.Situated learning reminds us that learners and master performers are a rich and diverse source of stories for learning how the workplace works”.
The learning environment can be transformed from a source which traditionally transfers knowledge from instructor to learners，to a resource for interpreting，challenging and creating new knowledge.In this aspect，Xu’s(2012:3)research on blended teaching in an MBL environment shows that the traditional roles of the classroom teacher and students have been changing.“While the traditional roles of the teachers as information providers，knowledge transmitters，supervisors and assessors，and the students as learners，participants，and respondents are still dominant，the teachers are also increasingly putting on new‘hats’as expert learners，facilitators，course designers and organizers.Apart from being learners，the students are also taking on new roles as topic contributors，meaning negotiators，information providers，strategic communicators and monitors.”Such changing roles are also reflected in the interpreting training class under investigation for this chapter.
As far as situated learning is concerned，one important practical concept is cognitive apprenticeship.Cognitive apprenticeship can be defined as“learning through guided experience on cognitive and metacognitive，rather than physical，skills and processes”(Collins，Brown，and Newman，1989:456).Cognitive apprenticeship is a means of learning-by-doing where the thinking process of underlying complex，problem-solving skills is made visible through mindful teaching.Learning，in this view，as in traditional craft apprenticeships，needs to be situated in activity-based social contexts.Learners may not engage in cognitive apprenticeships alone，but rather they are dependent on expert demonstration or modelling，guidance and coaching in the initial phases of learning.Learners are challenged with tasks slightly more difficult than they can accomplish on their own and must rely on assistance from and collaboration with others to achieve these tasks.In other words，learners must work with more experienced others and with time move from a position of observation to one of active practice(Dennen and Burner，2008:427).In terms of interpreting training，Sawyer(2004:76-77)argues that“although leading interpreter education programs are situated in an academic environment，interpreter training has never truly left the realm of apprenticeship”，and that cognitive apprenticeship focuses on“authentic learning environments in which the cognitive demands in learning are qualitatively the same as the cognitive demands of the environment for which the instruction was preparatory”.
The acquisition of new knowledge and the sharpening of existing skills can be enhanced through MBL instructional designs that provide a platform for efficient teaching and learning.An MBL environment provides a relatively safe learning methodology that caters for varying learner needs and learning processes.There is increasing awareness that computer-based virtual worlds provide a powerful and accessible vehicle for the critical characteristics of the traditional apprenticeship to be located in the classroom environment.For example，Collins and Brown(1988:3)argue that“computers give us enormous power to create situated learning environments where students are learning about reading，writing，math，science and social studies in ways that reflect the kinds of activities they will need these for”.Harley(1993)supports the potential of educational technology to bring situated learning within the reach of the student in the classroom，particularly through developments in virtual reality and hypermedia.
The combination of MBL resources creates an interactive learning environment that stimulates learning.The learning process is maximized when training descriptions are given as demonstration，which can be given physically or digitally.Computer-assisted interactive environments offer a richer working platform for interpreter training，incorporating elementssuch as multimedia and online resources，and enabling a more authentic setting for interpreting practice，and such interactive events would help learners participate actively and result in increases in knowledge retention and class participation.In this sense，multimedia and interactive learning environments can be systematically programmed to support cognitive apprenticeship processes.However，empirical research evaluating the relationship between student self-efficacy in interpreting and interpreting performance has been limited，and how the implementation of interpreting training in situated learning approach under an MBL environment may affect the students’self-efficacy in interpreting has yet to be fully explored.
This literature review has focused on the concept of self-efficacy and situated learning，and how these affect teaching and learning in an MBL environment.Its major aim is to elaborate on the roles of learners’self-efficacy in interpreting training，and to seek a theoretical and practical grounding for exploring issues of self-efficacy in technology-enhanced learning and training，and the extent to which different sources of self-efficacy influence interpreting training.