October 2013 – StreetLeverage

Posted on October 29, 2013 by Tammy Richards — Leave a comment

#Doable: How Sign Language Interpreters Restore Relationships With The Deaf Community

I was privileged enough to serve as a full-time conference interpreter at the 2013 RID Conference in Indianapolis, Indiana. I was, as always, thrilled to have the opportunity to work with incredible colleagues, meet new people, and reconnect with old friends. After nearly 25 years in the field of sign language interpreting it is like a delicious treat to revisit those with whom you have created history, and to re-imagine the future that could be.

One of the unique features of this conference was the Community Forum. While this forum may have been a difficult process for many of the participants, the critical take-away message that I found quite heartening was: “The Deaf Community wants you and misses you and wonders where things broke down.” The “you” in this observation is “sign language interpreters,” all interpreters.

The #Doable Challenge

The challenge extended by leaders of the Community Forum was to find actions that were “doable” in our quest to reunite the Deaf and interpreting communities. The challenge included using these actions as a jumping-off point from which to fortify these relationships and the profession that all of us have worked so hard to build. The Twitter hashtag used during the conference was #doable.

Finding #Doable Actions

There are four primary ways you can uncover #doable actions:

1. Look Inward

It is a harsh reality, but despite one’s best intentions, even the most vigilant interpreters (and I count myself among them) can engage in audism. This unwitting participation in what has become the most insidious type of oppression is hard to take once you realize you have, and may still be, engaged in it. Take a look at your own internal beliefs and practices. Are you doing something as “innocuous” as choosing the Deaf participant’s seat at an event at which you are providing interpreting services? Are you answering questions from a hearing participant that would be better answered by the Deaf participant?

Are you collaborating with the Deaf participant or dictating to them instead? Look for the opportunities to work as an ally and collaborator rather than persisting in maintaining a hierarchical relationship.

2. Look Outward

What opportunities are there to create change in your immediate geographic area or community? How can you show your commitment to the field of sign language interpreting while simultaneously showing your gratitude for the Deaf Community and the career it allows you to have? What kinds of things can you do to outwardly express the richness that ASL and the Deaf Community have brought to your life?

3. Look Backward

Since the 2013 RID Conference was RID’s 50th year anniversary event, history was a critical component of celebrating what is still a relatively young field. I was inspired to see some of the original founders of RID at this convention and to feel their passion as they shared experiences from their journey over the last half-century. You can see some of it via the StreetLeverage social media coverage of the conference.

One of the things that struck me was the passion of those CODAs who spoke about their earliest experiences interpreting for their parents, and what the changes in the field of sign language interpreting (in which they must feel so much ownership) has meant to them and their families. I have so much respect for CODAs who never “leave” the Deaf Community and “go home.” The Deaf Community, for them, is home. Small wonder why they are so protective of it. There is so much value in learning from those who have come before you. Spend time with these members of your community. Ask them to share their experiences. Take advantage of the opportunity to learn from what they share: both the successes and trials.

4. Look Forward

One of the things that excites me more than anything else is student interpreters and recent interpreter program graduates. These folks are excited, energized, and ready to be the next communication bridges between the Deaf and hearing worlds. There is nothing more inspiring to me than watching a new sign language interpreter suddenly become a colleague. Get involved in the future of the interpreting field. Try to find ways to help impact the future of the field for the better. As shared in the StreetLeverage – Live 2013 | Atlanta I am change video and to quote an often used adage, “Be the change you would like to see in the world.” While learning from and valuing our past is important, not dwelling on it is also good advice.

Tammy Richards

Taking #Doable Action

There are so many things that we can choose to engage in to both support one another as colleagues and to support the Deaf Community as Allies. I couldn’t hope to list them all here, but I wanted to give you a short list of actions we can all take to begin to repair the seeming void that has fragmented our shared world:

1. Patronize Deaf Businesses/Service Providers

Support the folks who are in the Community that gives you business by giving some back to them! A few ways you can do this are to:

Encourage the use of CDIs
Patronize Deaf businesses where possible
Refer people seeking resources back to the Deaf Community

As Trudy Suggs suggests in her StreetLeverage – Live talk, Deaf Disempowerment and Today’s Interpreter, this reciprocity–choices to patronize deaf businesses–empowers the deaf community while fortifying the relationship between the two communities.

2. Get Involved in the Local Deaf Community

This can seem daunting in the age of fewer and fewer Deaf clubs, and fewer and fewer regular gatherings of Deaf people. However, there are always opportunities to volunteer at Deaf events like theatrical productions, residential school programs, Deaf group homes for the elderly, Deaf Sports teams, or other organizations that cater to whatever facet of Deaf society you might find compelling. Don’t let technology get in the way of real, 3-D interaction. Find a way to make it happen!!

3. Engage in Pro-Bono Work

This idea is often met with contention. Many sign language interpreters believe if they engage in pro-bono work that requesting entities will assume all interpreters will work “for free” and that ultimately doing such work will undermine the efficacy of such laws as the Americans with Disabilities Act. However, there are opportunities to donate your services to organizations that are well-deserving or otherwise not covered under the various accommodations laws we have in place. Think about things like Oxford House meetings (for recovering substance abusers), AA or NA meetings, religious services or events, non-profit events such as Race for the Cure (Breast Cancer). Find what speaks to you and donate a few hours of service. More on how pro bono work can enhance your work can be found in Brandon Arthur’s article, 5 Easy Career Enhancers for Sign Language Interpreters.

4. Define the Future

Be a resource not only to Deaf Community members who seek information, but also to those up-and-coming sign language interpreters who strive to do right by serving the Deaf Community and the field of interpreting admirably. Volunteer to speak at your local interpreter training program about a topic that you are passionate about. Host a Q&A of veteran interpreters, giving new interpreters opportunity to ask their burning questions. Host a Deaf Community Panel where Deaf panelists can speak about the qualities they look for when hiring an interpreter, as well as those qualities they don’t find so desirable. Mentor new interpreters whenever you can. The idea that mentoring someone new is somehow putting oneself out of a job is ludicrous. It is our responsibility as veteran interpreters to ensure that when we are gone, there are other incredible interpreters out there to take our places, as Brian Morrison so eloquently stated in his post, It Takes a Village to Raise a Sign Language Interpreter.

In order to preserve our legacy, we must leave positive impressions on the lives of the next generation.

5. Leave Your Ego at the Door

It is hard to receive criticism (constructive or otherwise), and it is even harder to do so without being defensive. Work on ways to accept such feedback without defending yourself. Kendra Keller’s article, Case Discussion: Sign Language Interpreters Contain Their Inner “What the …!!!?”, helps us consider ways to think about what is being expressed as a genuine gift and something that can be used to improve future interactions. Even if, after reflecting on a situation, you decide that you still disagree with the criticism, consider the perception of the person who gave you the feedback and realize that something in the setting compelled them to give you that feedback. Figure out if there is anything you can do to improve the situation for the next time.

6. Gratitude

Remember to express your gratitude.

I am so lucky. I fell into the field of interpreting by chance. I am grateful to have been accepted into an incredible new culture while learning a completely new language. Here it is, 25 years later, and I can’t begin to count the people, both Deaf and hearing, who have guided me on this path. In keeping with Brandon Arthur’s article, Sign Language Interpreters and the Karma of Gratitude, I offer my thanks to those who have shared in my journey.

To all of you who taught me: thank you. To all of you who helped me grow: thank you. For all the unique and incredible experiences: thank you! To all of you who will graciously teach me new things each day: thank you.

Let’s always remember where we came from, how we got to where we are today, and those who have shared in our journeys.

In Conclusion

This is our profession and, as such, we need to commit to being actively engaged in shaping the future in order to preserve a legacy of which we can be proud. It starts by individually leaving positive impressions with every interaction. When I look back at the impressions I have left on my field and the Deaf Community, I want to see that in some way I have helped to improve the profession while empowering the community in which I work. It isn’t money, status, or recognition that makes someone a good interpreter– it is integrity, respect for the language and culture, and a commitment to betterment of oneself while empowering the community.

Make these ideals your mission and become another ally in the quest to build sign language interpreter/Deaf Community relationships.

* Interested in receiving StreetLeverage posts in your inbox?

Simply enter your name and email in the field above the green “Sign Me Up!” button (upper right-hand side of this page) and click “Sign Me Up!”

Posted on October 22, 2013 by Gina Oliva — Leave a comment

K-12: A Call to Arms for Sign Language Interpreter Training Programs

K-12 interpreting* has been around for quite some time, at least since the precursor of today’s IDEA was passed in 1975. In the early years after this law was passed, we saw the development of what were called “self-contained classrooms,” where Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) students attended a mainstream school, but congregated in special classes with a teacher of the deaf (TOD). As years and decades passed, the percentage of DHH students in self-contained classrooms slowly decreased and the percentage placed in regular classrooms for at least part of the school day increased.

It is no secret that professionals schooled in the overall needs of DHH children, including numerous sign language interpreting professionals, have felt that this trend has not been in the best interests of DHH children. Many such individuals learned about those overall needs in teacher training programs, from Deaf individuals themselves, and from CODAs. Much effort has been expended over the years to stem this tide, unsuccessfully.

Yes, concerned individuals, groups, and organizations have been working against the wholesale mainstreaming of DHH children for the last 4 decades. Yes, they have been researching, writing, publishing, presenting — attempting to educate the powers that be of the pitfalls in general education settings for DHH children. Gina Oliva and Linda Lytle’s book, Turning the Tide: Making Life Better for Deaf and Hard of Hearing School Children (published by Gallaudet University Press in February 2014), includes two chapters uniquely highlighting the efforts of these scholar-advocates. Sadly, despite the clamoring of knowledgeable and passionate individuals and groups, the push towards “full inclusion” of DHH children has continued. With each passing year we find more and more of these children in their neighborhood schools, separated from each other. And that is why this phenomenon has become an issue for the sign language interpreting community.

The Impact is Important

The increasing numbers of DHH children in general education settings has coincided with a related trend in how much experience educational interpreters have. Many, if not most, interpreters fresh out of their training find initial work in K-12 settings. Interpreters with limited training find work in these settings, also, though this fact may be slowly changing as a result of the development of the EIPA and its subsequent adoption in numerous states. The EIPA and the people behind it, both as an instrument and as a requirement, is but one example of the work of advocates for DHH children. At the same time, however, the fact that so many new interpreters work in K-12 settings is all the more reason for Interpreter Preparation Programs (IPPs) to develop more focus on preparing students for this kind of work.

Dr. Oliva’s February 2012 article, “Sign Language Interpreters in Mainstream Classrooms: Heartbroken and Gagged,” spoke to the issue of K-12 interpreters being actual eyewitnesses of the exclusion that results from “full inclusion.” Ironic, yes. Doug Bowen-Bailey, in “Ethical Choices: Educational Sign Language Interpreters as Change Agents,” says that “for interpreters working in schools, we clearly need to find new role space to lead to more success.” He offers several suggestions for how K-12 interpreters can find this new role space in their K-12 workplaces.

One way to address issues raised by Oliva, Bowen-Bailey, and others is for IPPs to solicit input from working K-12 interpreters and from DHH adults who have used interpreters in K-12 settings in recent years. Since things are changing so rapidly (economics, cochlear implants, to name a few influences), we suggest that this be done at least every 3-5 years. Oliva and Lytle’s book also reports what their research participants (in focus groups and an online survey) conveyed about their K-12 years. Not surprisingly, even without direct prompting, they had a lot to say about their interpreter(s).

Did these focus groups and survey participants, all between the ages of 18 and 34 in 2012, talk about their sign language interpreter’s interpreting skills? To a point, yes. In one glaring example, a then 9 year old’s interpreter was using the sign for a coin, a 25-cent piece, in conveying to the young deaf child that she could work on her assignment until “quarter to 12” (as in the time on a clock). Chaos ensued, admittedly. But significantly more frequent were remarks about the behavior, misbehavior, and overall cultural knowledge of the interpreters. As such, in the remainder of this article we describe four learning targets and associated projects that we suggest for IPPs. The topics are based on both the experience of Petri and her fellow working K-12 interpreters and on the reports from Oliva and Lytle’s research participants. These suggested projects should result in providing interpreting students with knowledge, options, and confidence to explore the “new role space,” as Bowen-Bailey suggests.

Gina Oliva

Where to Start

We recognize that IPPs may already be assigning projects similar to these. We also recognize that IPP coursework, particularly for K-12 interpreter specialization, necessarily follows any and all policy guidelines provided by the respective states to which they are responsible. We wish to set forth an opinion that, where such policy dictates for coursework do not reflect the real life experiences of working K-12 sign language interpreters and their now-grown consumers, IPPs have a responsibility to do whatever is needed to educate state-level personnel about this conundrum. Interpreters and interpreter trainers are uniquely positioned to educate everyone one concerned about the unique needs of DHH children. Dave Coyne’s recent Street Leverage article, “Social Justice: A New Model of Practice for Sign Language Interpreters,” certainly is aligned with the need for sign language interpreters to employ leadership tactics in partnership with DHH adults/professionals.

Everyone knows that something needs to change vis a vis the experience of DHH students in general K-12 educational settings. Maybe more than something: much needs to change. Let’s all take part and be the change – let’s share, collaborate, and grow a new role, turning the tide together.

Recommendations

Here are some specific recommendations for Interpreter Training Programs to consider adopting:

Learning Target 1

Understand Incidental Learning – how it informs and empowers all humans, how Deaf students in a hearing school are at risk for limited access to incidental learning, and a variety of ways interpreters can respond to this risk.

Instructor to lecture on the dissertation “Positioned as Bystanders: Deaf Students’ Experiences and Perceptions of Informal Learning Phenomena” (Hopper, M. 2012) – her methods, findings, and recommendations.

1. Students to consider where and how incidental learning has occurred in their own lives – through reflection and discussion on how they acquired language, knowledge, and insight by overhearing peers – slang, obscenities, vicarious learning.

2. Students to spend time in public spaces (coffee shops, bars, gyms, etc.) listening and (unobtrusively) taking notes on what is learned incidentally (e.g. overheard). Students to report on how what was overheard did or could inform their decisions or other elements of life, and on the potential impact of not overhearing particular bits of information.

3. Students to observe at the local school for the Deaf and report on how incidental learning naturally occurs in this environment.

4. Students to observe in a regular education setting with DHH student(s), list the incidental learning opportunities they witness (before class, in the hall, in the cafeteria), and make estimations about whether or not the information was accessible to and/or absorbed by the DHH student(s).

5. Students discuss the above observations and reports with classmates and develop ideas for strategies that sign language interpreters can employ to reduce the lack of access to incidental learning. Students should consider strategies aimed at all levels – hearing peers, the DHH student(s), teachers, administrators.

Learning Target 2

Have a solid understanding of the nebulous issues regarding the role of a sign language interpreter in general education settings.

1. Students to investigate and report on various sources for information on interpreting ethics in general education settings.

2. Students to interview working K-12 interpreters to learn about various situations that have challenged thinking about ethical behavior for interpreters in K-12 settings.

3. Students to prepare a report on situations where the interpreter’s role may be blurry and debatable. For each of these, students should report varying responses and the repercussions of each. Some examples might be:

a. Interpreters monitoring behavior or performing disciplinary actions: Give examples of why this is an issue, give numerous examples of situations where other adults might expect an interpreter to take some kind of action, and identify the options open to interpreters in each example.

b. Interpreters are bound by safety policies (“life, limb, or liability”) that apply to all adults in the school settings. Give examples of student actions that would clearly require interpreter intervention, student actions that would clearly not be bound by safety policies, and student actions that would fall into a gray area. Discuss various options for responding to the latter.

c. In matters of instruction, sign language interpreters have some flexibility. Students should come up with numerous situations that typically need to be decided case by case. Students should include extreme situations to illustrate flexibility within certain boundaries.

4. Teachers and other school personnel often expect and/or request an interpreter to assist with instruction. Students should give examples of requests for assistance from teachers/staff that they deem reasonable, unreasonable, and ambiguous.

Learning Target 3

Understand how DHH youth and adults feel about their experiences in general education classrooms.

1. Develop questions and interview DHH adults about sign language interpreting services during the K-12 years.

a. Which of their interpreters’ practices were/weren’t empowering?

b. What recommendations do they have for K-12 interpreters?

2. Develop questions and interview currently working K-12 interpreters and/or former working K-12 interpreters about interpreting services during the K-12 years.

a. In what ways did they empower and advocate for their students?

b. What insights do they have for you?

3. Discuss findings with classmates.

a. What were common problems/issues cited by the Deaf adults/Interpreters?

b. What solutions were commonly deemed effective?

c. What recommendations do they have for currently working K-12 interpreters and for IPPs?

4. Use this information to develop fact sheets for general education settings – develop one fact sheet for adult staff, and one for hearing classmates.

Learning Target 4

Be able to function as an effective advocate for DHH students in general education settings – learn how to establish oneself as an approachable, trustworthy, and knowledgeable ‘local expert’ on issues related to DHH students.

1. Students to compose a one-page letter introducing him/herself and explaining the sign language interpreter’s role. Include a brief description of the interpreting process, your training and experience, and what services you provide.

2. Students to prepare an in-depth inservice presentation for general education staff members.

3. Provide a practice inservice session by doing one of the following:

a. Do a ‘mock inservice’ with current educators in local school.

b. Present to a college class of future K-12 educators.

In the end

We have offered some specific student learning objectives and associated assignments or projects that will provide interpreters-in-training an opportunity to learn about and discuss issues regarding interpreting in K-12 settings. This is particularly important because so many newly-trained interpreters find themselves working in such settings for at least a few years. We further emphasize the responsibility that IPPs have for considering the impact of the “end product” of their programs, which is the education of deaf and hard of hearing children, for better or for worse. In particular, they must be involved in educating state-level officials about the kind of training these children deserve their interpreters to have.

Do you have Learning Target that you might suggest?

* Interested in receiving StreetLeverage posts in your inbox?

Simply enter your name and email in the field above the green “Sign Me Up!” button (upper right-hand side of this page) and click “Sign Me Up!”

Jenee Petri

Co-Author – Jenee Petri

Jenee worked as a K-12 Interpreter for 10 years. She is currently a staff interpreter at the University of Minnesota. In addition to freelance work, she has been a Video Interpreter at Sorenson Communications for 5 years. Jenee has been nationally certified since 2003. She is also a national certified Cued Language Transliterator. Growing up in Faribault, Minn., Jenee studied ASL in high school, which lead her to pursue a degree from Saint Paul College’s Interpreter Training Program in 2001. She currently lives in Minneapolis with her boyfriend, Steve, and their dog, a 9 y/o English Springer Spaniel, Henry.

asdf

*We use the term “K-12 interpreting” for the sake of precision. Issues involved with interpreting for K-12 students differ from those involving college students and adults. We think that the term K-12 interpreting allows us (and other writers) to be more precise.

Posted on October 15, 2013 by Betty Colonomos — Leave a comment

Betty Colonomos | Sign Language Interpreters Fostering Integrity

Betty presented “Sign Language Interpreters Fostering Integrity” at StreetLeverage – Live 2013 | Atlanta. Her talk explored how sign language interpreters operate with integrity and the professional measures needed to ensure the highest standards are, in fact, upheld.

You can find the PPT deck for is presentation here.

The Power of Integrity

First, let me thank Dave Coyne for my opening. His talk about Transactional Leadership presented several traits (e.g. inspiration, idealization, intellectualism) that are present in leaders. My talk adds another to the list: “Integrity.”

My talk this morning looks at the concept of Integrity as it applies to our society in general. I hope you will join this afternoon’s workshop, where we will be taking a deeper look at integrity as it applies to our field and our relationships with the Deaf community.

The Meaning of Integrity

“Integrity is when what you say, think and do are in harmony.”
– Mahatma Gandhi

This quote from Gandhi captures the essence of the meaning of integrity. Perhaps an example from my experience will illustrate this further. As a woman born during World War II, I clearly remember the prevalent racist beliefs of that time. Although we haven’t yet eradicated racism from our country, we have made progress. Many of us value equality among all people regardless of differences. Yet we have been in social environments where racist comments were made and we kept quiet. This behavior contradicts our values. Many of us now openly express disapproval at overt racist speech because we want to maintain our integrity.

Here is another way to capture the concept of Integrity using slightly different language. It relates to Shane Feldman’s talk about RID’s mission and the beliefs it communicates: welcoming membership involvement, creating policies through interaction, and making sure that our By-Laws are actions that express these beliefs. He pointed out that there is a disconnect between actions and beliefs. This state of affairs impacts perceptions about RID’s integrity.

I am so grateful to my mother who, despite suffering great hardships, fostered my love of truth. As a child I was often reminded: “when in doubt, tell the truth.” Of course my truths then (which were, no doubt, always the “right” truths) were based solely on feelings and opinions. Now, the benefit of education, observable data collection, observation, and my wealth of experience contribute to what I consider to be more credible truths. This also means that there may be other truths that are accepted by others as norms. Living one’s life with integrity is difficult and complicated. We see behaviors and opinions that do not fit with our professed beliefs every day.

Integrity Requires Sacrifice

We know that mainstream Americans value success, and that is demonstrated by the accumulation of materialistic symbols such as a big(ger) house, a fancy car, a degree from a prestigious university, and a highly paid job. The actions, language, and beliefs about being successful do show certain congruence; however, the question we may want to consider here is how this may or may not fit our definition of integrity.

There is inherent conflict in a culture of privilege that purports to cherish freedom, equality, morality, and the Golden Rule. The pressures and stresses that confront us in our daily lives mean that “doing the right thing” often competes with meeting our needs. There are sacrifices that must be made.

There are challenging decisions we must make to live with integrity.

The Faces of Integrity

With regard to people and how integrity interfaces with their lives, there are three distinct groups: Individuals with Integrity (Congruous Integrity), Individuals who believe they have Integrity (Fractional Integrity), and Individuals for whom Integrity is not a priority (Absent Integrity).

Congruous Integrity

The first group, people who have integrity, feel good about themselves. They have a sense of purpose and are optimistic about life. There are many such people and I could point out the actions, behaviors, and beliefs that make them our heroes, but my time is limited here and I will only mention two such people. Rosa Parks took the bold action of sitting in the front of the segregated bus despite the hostile climate. Her brave actions had a profound impact on the Civil Rights movement that has led us to our continuing dialogue today in America and elsewhere.

Abraham Lincoln, who was a man who believed that no one should live as a slave, paid a high price to uphold his integrity. The country endured a Civil War that took thousands of lives to uphold the right of people who were enslaved to be free; he continued acting out his beliefs through his actions and speeches despite great suffering, both personal and political.

Fractional Integrity

The second group consists of people whose expressed beliefs are not consistently congruent with their actions. These are people who advocate good deeds and kindness to others, but use words and display actions that are viewed as “hateful” by others. Similarly, in our community, we advocate for equality and access for Deaf people, yet we say and do things that are hypocritical and oppressive.

Anna Witter-Merithew, in her presentation, illustrated this point very well. The interpreter who makes an error in her interpretation and hides it from consumers is concerned with embarrassment or negative judgments, and allows those concerns to take precedence over disclosure. When interpreters are accountable for their interpretations by being honest and resolving the issue with consumers, they are much more likely to be trusted and respected. In other words, they demonstrate their integrity.

Absent Integrity

The third group of people we readily identify: they do not care about integrity. This is evident with those who would bilk people out of their life savings with no remorse. They are the con artists, those who prey on uninformed and powerless people.

Let us briefly examine how other professions strive to maintain agreed-upon standards and maintain their integrity. This list is not comprehensive, as time does not permit a thorough review.

Integrity Requires Accountability

If we look at the medical profession, we see that there is a mechanism of peer review that addresses questionable or poor practices. There are serious consequences for those who repeatedly violate standards, including suspension of hospital privileges and revocation of one’s license to practice. These review procedures are conducted by other doctors (colleagues), rather than patients (consumers). Patients seek recourse in the legal system. This is in sharp contrast to our field, where we expect consumers to initiate grievances and do not encourage colleagues to protect the profession.

Many interpreters have recounted their experiences with colleagues committing serious violations of the CPC. Upon questioning their reluctance to file a complaint, they may justify their inaction by expressions of fear (of reprisal, of being blacklisted, etc.), discomfort, and the amount of effort needed. How does this speak to our perceptions of integrity in our field?

Another form of professional monitoring is seen in the system of licensure.

Licenses are often awarded on the basis of other credentials, such as a medical degree and completion of residency requirements. For us, a license is often a rubber stamp given to someone who has received certification. Enforcement by the licensing entity is difficult, so the legal system is used. We can sue for malpractice and other offenses; however, we don’t hear much about this in the interpreting arena.

We do employ a form of supervision, using the term “mentorship” to identify a range of mechanisms for giving feedback and support to novice interpreters. The mentorship protocols offered to mentees vary within and across communities. Mentoring can mean assessing vocabulary production and selection, in-depth dialogue focusing on internal processes, and everything in between. It might serve us well to identify the most beneficial forms of mentoring for our profession and ourselves.

Just a few words here about the afternoon session:

The workshop will analyze numerous scenarios where decisions are made; we will talk about how interpreters with integrity might handle these challenges.

We will not look at poor decisions or failures — we have enough of those recounted every day. Let’s move beyond the “horror stories” and share viable options. We want to learn from each other what actions, beliefs, and words reflect our integrity. We want to fill ourselves with possibilities and things we can do.

Operating With Integrity

Really, the concept of integrity is woven throughout the entire weekend in presentations, workshops, conversations, and the environment. In a way, I see “integrity” as the umbrella that embraces the beliefs we hold, the decisions we make, and the processes that bring them to life.

We cannot police everyone. We can work together to make this a reality.

Contrary to popular belief, leaders and people with integrity are not perfect. They make mistakes because they are human.

We need to think about our integrity now more than ever: our field is in dire need of change. We know that it will take a long time to get there, but we can get through these growing pains if we are honest and operate with integrity.

Not everyone will become the best interpreter around; not everyone will sign like a native. But we all can strive to be the best interpreters we can be.

With a common goal and effort we uphold our integrity, and with that we can succeed together.

Thank you.

* Interested in receiving StreetLeverage posts in your inbox?

Simply enter your name and email in the field above the green “Sign Me Up!” button (upper right-hand side of this page) and click “Sign Me Up!”

Posted on October 8, 2013 by Stephanie Criner — Leave a comment

The Five Step Path to Resiliency for Sign Language Interpreters

One of the strengths of our community of practice is our diversity of thought, background, and belief systems – it is also is what poses the greatest challenge when we come together to create positive change. The potential outcome in deepening our abilities and our commitment to dialogue is that while alone we don’t have the ‘answers’, together we can create them. I believe we’ve taken some first steps toward a true dialogic exchange, and we still have some challenges to overcome in understanding what dialogue is, how we must create the space to really have honest exchanges of perspectives, and talk to each other instead of talking past each other.

The Goal of Understanding

Dialogue is both the act of expressing ones thoughts and, equally importantly, the act of listening with the goal of understanding what’s at the heart of the discussion. The hazard of not placing an emphasis on understanding is that we get closer to debate than dialogue. Debate is zero sum—one right answer/one winner, either/or, pro/con—this isn’t to say there isn’t a place for debate but is it our ‘default’? If the goal is to transcend diverse perspectives and include a myriad of ‘voices’, we need a way to expand our conversations not to restrict them.

Creating ‘Other’

What can complicate our ability to understand is the creation of the ‘other.’ It prevents us from suspending judgment and ‘hearing’ perspectives or values that we perceive as negative. It is easy to fall into creating ‘stories’ that allow us to alienate and separate – they are certified/they aren’t certified; they have a degree/they don’t have a degree; they have deaf parents/they don’t have deaf parents—the ‘vilified other’ makes it easier to marginalize and discount those views that clash with our own. Perhaps we’ve had a bad experience with a member of ‘the other’, how is it we can stop reacting to our ‘ghosts’ and spring back as individuals and as a community of practice and move upstream?

People Not Villains

In the weeks after 9/11, I was involved in a series of resiliency dialogues to bring together members of our very diverse community in a safe space to share feelings, values, and perspectives. In a time of national pain and violence, I was struck by the power of listening to, what was at that time, ‘the other’. During one of these dialogues, several Muslim women shared their experiences–their dread in hearing that Muslims were involved, their experience of being verbally insulted, and their fear for their personal safety, because they wore a ḥijāb. Those exchanges didn’t erase the differences between us–it did, however, serve as a powerful antidote to the ‘poison’ of the time—a reminder that there were people behind those differences, not villains.

5 Steps to Beyond Otherness

One: Ask Real Questions

How do we get past this ‘otherness’? One of the most powerful tools in dialogue are questions–real, curious, inquiring questions—the kind that lead to deeper understanding of the ‘heart’ of an issue, why it is important to that person, and gets to the values underpinning their dialogue. Questions that come from a place of curiosity and discovery allow for movement in what might have been considered an irreconcilable difference. What do they believe to be true to have that view of the issue? Being curious also frees us from our debate ‘default’ where we have the tendency to listen for points of disagreement, where the person’s logic is faulty, or have an ad hominem type of thinking where we disagree with ‘who’ the person is and then are unable to process what they are saying. The result is we end up talking past each other and not to each other.

Two: Re-make the Map

Kuhn in this book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, suggested that ‘revolutions’ and leaps forward in progress are created when new questions are asked of previously-held beliefs and the result is a totally different ‘map’ for future directions—a true paradigm shift (he actually coined the phrase). The potential for ‘remapping’ exists for our professional organization in the motion that was recently passed to establish an ad hoc committee to ‘review the RID philosophy, Mission, Goals, Diversity Statement, and Strategic Priorities.’ This group will make recommendations to the membership and Board. How can we ensure that we engage the largest number stakeholders in these reviews and recommendations? How can we create an organizational culture of dialogue around this effort? The larger the number of voices that contribute to re-making the map, the more powerful the buy-in, and the more indelible the progress.

Three: Contribute More Than Criticize

Stephanie Criner

The challenge then becomes how to include large numbers of individuals in the dialogue and how do we create a space that is engaging and safe for this multitude of ‘voices’? While most of us would agree that it is an RID members’ personal responsibility to be engaged, there is also the reality that without a safe space within which to offer those views, it won’t happen.

Volunteering your opinion is an act of courageous engagement.

Brené Brown who presented a Ted talk on vulnerability and listening to shame said this, ‘I don’t think engagement can happen without vulnerability, and I definitely don’t think it can happen in the midst of shame.’ How is it that we, as a collective,’ can take responsibility for the creation of safe dialogue spaces?’ Brené may also have the answer when she said her goal, ‘at the end of every day, and at the end of every week, and at the end of my life, I want to be able to say I contributed more than I criticized.’

Four: Allow for Difference

As Laura Wickless mentioned in her article, Vulnerability: A Collaboration Killer, ‘so many of us fear being mocked, criticized, and torn to shreds by fellow practitioners that we avoid taking worthwhile risks.’ If we want positive change and to make engagement less risky, we must find ways to value experience and personal narrative and the expression of those experiences in ways that are not critical or attacking. It will be a space that allows for difference and actively seeks perspectives from those that may feel disenfranchised—interpreters with deaf parents, faith-based interpreters, interpreters of color, educational interpreters, and others.

Five: Create a Space

It will be important that the space that’s created, whether virtual or physical, be one that can absorb multiple views and ways of engagement. Not all of us are comfortable with external processing and formulating thoughts ‘on the fly’. There are personality types who process internally and need a moment before they are ready to share their views. Can we purposefully create some silence in our dialogue space that allows for everyone to feel confident in participating? Not all of us feel confident in our public speaking or writing abilities, which may chill our level of participation. Can we create spaces that are inviting and patient that allow for everyone regardless of linguistic aptitude to share their ideas?

Mini-Mindfulness

Ultimately, we can each make small, every day contributions to larger, system-wide transformations. The nuggets that I receive from colleagues and friends—some from an in-person conversation, some through an IM, or a Facebook post—all create bits of mini-mindfulness that ultimately help make me resilient, open to dialogue with others, and growth. True, often we work in physical isolation, how is it we can ask new questions of old paradigms and overcome that isolation? Many of us work in settings where there are numerous colleagues; do we make the most of those interactions or miss opportunities to participate in dialogue that can move us all forward?

Revolutions of Thought and Practice

It is safe to say that most of us have no desire, either individually or as a professional organization, to mirror the current political environment of debate and polarization. It is destructive, the opposite of engaging, and disheartening. Dialogue that creates conversations that respect and appreciate a multitude of contributions, that are inquisitive and curious, and that allow for revolutions of thought and practice is the path forward.

Perhaps we can’t change the world, but we can certainly change our footprint.

* Interested in receiving StreetLeverage posts in your inbox?

Simply enter your name and email in the field above the green “Sign Me Up!” button (upper right-hand side of this page) and click “Sign Me Up!”

References

Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Asking new questions of old data on pages 139, 159. Moving beyond “puzzle-solving” on pages 37, 144. Change in rule sets on pages 40, 41, 52, 175. Change in the direction or “map” of research on pages 109, 111.