The aim of this article is to identify the limitations of traditional methods in training simultaneous interpreters and evaluate their effectiveness in the context of modern educational demands. The study focuses on key issues such as the overemphasis on theoretical instruction, insufficient practical training, and the limited integration of modern technologies into the learning process. The problem statement highlights that traditional teaching approaches do not fully meet current market requirements and fail to adequately develop real-time decision-making skills in trainee interpreters.

The methodology of the study includes analytical review, comparative analysis, and pedagogical observation. In further stages, statistical data will be incorporated to ensure a more precise and evidence-based evaluation of the findings. The main findings indicate that traditional methods often neglect cognitive load factors and are insufficient in developing rapid processing and response skills required for simultaneous interpretation. The discussion emphasizes the need to adopt innovative, technology-enhanced, and interactive teaching approaches.

In conclusion, the study suggests that traditional methods should be reconsidered and supplemented with modern pedagogical strategies to improve the overall quality of interpreter training.

simultaneous interpreting, traditional methods, interpreter training, cognitive load, practical training, educational effectiveness, innovative approaches, pedagogy

Albl-Mikasa, M. (2013). Developing and cultivating expert interpreter competence. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 7(1), 17–34.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.

González-Davies, M., & Enríquez-Raído, V. (2018). Situated learning in translator and interpreter training: Bridging research and good practice. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 12(1), 1–11.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Fantinuoli, C. (2018). Interpreting and technology: The upcoming technological turn. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 13(1), 152–170.

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

Hubscher-Davidson, S. (2013). Emotional intelligence and translation studies. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 7(2), 211–225.

Kiraly, D. (2015). Occasioning translator competence: Moving beyond social constructivism. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 10(1), 84–99.

Li, D. (2022). Translator and interpreter training in the digital age: Challenges and opportunities. Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 30(1), 55–72.

Mellinger, C. D., & Hanson, T. A. (2017). Quantitative research methods in translation and interpreting studies. Routledge.

Orlando, M. (2019). Training 21st century translators and interpreters: At the crossroads of practice, research and pedagogy. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13(3), 231–243.

Pöchhacker, F. (2016). Introducing interpreting studies (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Risku, H. (2014). Translation process research as interaction research. Translation Spaces, 3(2), 331–353.

Sawyer, D. B. (2019). Fundamental aspects of interpreter education. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Setton, R., & Dawrant, A. (2016). Conference interpreting: A complete course. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Seeber, K. G. (2017). Multimodal input in simultaneous interpreting: An experimental study. Interpreting, 19(1), 1–26.

Zarrina, S., Uktam, K., Fakhriddin, B., & Bakhodir, A. (2024). Bridging Gaps in Translation Studies: Implementing European Union Standards in Uzbekistan. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation,