Dennis Cokely

Posted on December 15, 2016 by Dennis Cokely — Leave a comment

[Archives] Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before

Our archives are filled with the generosity of our presenters and contributors. It is often enlightening to look back at the path which leads to the present. To that end, we offer this glimpse into the StreetLeverage archives. This presentation was originally published on March 18, 2014.

Dennis presented Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before at StreetLeverage – Live 2013 in Atlanta, GA. His talk encouraged sign language interpreters to consider that the secret to successful interpretations often rests on “One thing. Just one thing” – remembering “the day before”. He suggests that a sign language interpreter’s failure to remember “the day before” means that they act on assumptions that generally result in a lack of meaning equivalence their interpretations.

You can find the PPT deck for the presentation by clicking here.

[Note from Dennis. What follows is generally based on my presentation at StreetLeverage – Live in Atlanta 2013. It is not a translation of that presentation but uses the presentation as a general outline for this written piece. In places, I have slightly expanded on the ideas presented during that presentation. I suggest that you view the presentation first and then read what follows.]

If you enjoy this presentation and accompanying article, consider going to StreetLeverage – Live 2017.

Challenge Assumptions

I’d like to begin with a brief history lesson. Our lesson begins with Euclid – the Greek philosopher and mathematician who is widely recognized as the first person to demand that we challenge assumptions on which solutions to a problem are based. Throughout history we see examples of assumed realities and assumptions being challenged by direct experience.

Consider the “Day Before Magellan”. In 1544, people who lived in the “Day Before Magellan” believed that the earth rested on the backs of three elephants, which, in turn, rested on the shell of a giant turtle, which swam in a vast sea. In the time of the “Day Before Magellan” people believed that the earth was flat. However, after Magellan and his crew circumnavigated the globe their direct, firsthand experience couldn’t be reconciled with the assumptions of people still living in the “Day Before Magellan”. When Magellan’s crew spoke about the earth, they did so from quite a different reality than those still living in the “Day Before”.

Consider next the astronomer, Nicolas Copernicus. People who lived in the “Day Before Copernicus” believed that the earth was the center of the universe and that the sun, moon, and stars all revolved around the earth. But Copernicus, after thoroughly studying the galaxy proposed a model that placed the sun at the center of the universe. In his model, which was proven to be correct, the assumptions of those believing in the centrality of the earth were shown to be wrong. His model couldn’t be reconciled with the assumptions of people still living in the “Day Before Copernicus”. When Copernicus spoke about the galaxy, he did so from quite a different reality than those in the “Day Before”.

First Contact

Consider now the “Day Before First Contact”. In the past, people of European descent generally believed that those of African descent or those who were Native Americans were decidedly inferior, were subhuman, were savages who had no values, culture or language and thus were essentially worthless. But then, a number of people of European descent began to have firsthand interactions with people of African descent or Native Americans. Those people learned that, indeed, those of African descent and Native Americans did indeed have languages, values, and cultures. When those Europeans spoke of Africans or Native Americans they did so from quite a different reality than those in the “Day Before”.

We all have assumptions and when we communicate with each other we generally do so believing that generally, we share assumptions. Certainly, that is the case when we all use the same words. But when we have new experiences they often challenge and change our prior assumptions.

Our Own Day Before

We each have our own “Day Before” regardless of our identity as coda, IDP, Deaf, or non-deaf. I can’t possible know about your “Day Before” so I can only talk about my own “Day Before”. What follows are reflections on my “Day Before” and the impact of my own “first contact” interactions with Deaf people.

I grew up with absolutely no Deaf people in my life. To me being deaf meant you weren’t intelligent, couldn’t read or write, couldn’t hear. If you were deaf you were disabled and you were to be pitied. And then in 1968 when I was in graduate school I met a Deaf man by the name of Patrick Graybill.

I was stunned – a Deaf man in graduate school???!!! This was most definitely not in keeping with my life-long assumptions about people who were deaf.

In the time of the “Day Before Pat” I assumed that Deaf people communicated by gesturing, pointing or using mime. But then I learned that Deaf people had a complex, structured, rule-governed language, which meant many of my assumptions in the time of the “Day Before Pat” were wrong.

In the time of the “Day Before Pat”, the notion that Deaf people had a culture was simply unthinkable because they had no language. The idea that they had values was also meaningless and preposterous. But through firsthand interactions I learned that Deaf people do have a rich and vibrant culture. My firsthand experiences and my long-held assumptions were radically different. And I had to reconcile my assumptions from the time of the “Day Before Pat” with my firsthand experience.

I thought that all of my long-standing assumptions when I lived in the time of the “Day Before Pat” were totally correct – being deaf means you can’t hear; being deaf is all about how a person’s hearing is defective. And then I learned that to be Deaf means, “to be one of us”; I learned that there is a Deaf Community. And again, I had to reconcile my assumptions from the “Day Before Pat” with my firsthand experience. And then another of my assumptions was shattered when I learned that Deaf people don’t see themselves as handicapped; they just see themselves as having a different language and culture. Again I had to reconcile my assumptions from the “Day Before Pat” with my firsthand experience. And when I spoke about Deaf people, I did so from quite a different reality than those who still lived in the time of the “Day Before Pat”.

And yet another long-standing and self-evident assumption that Deaf people were abnormal was also destroyed. That assumption was destroyed when firsthand experience showed me that Deaf people see themselves as “normal”. After all, Deaf people do have a language, a culture, a community, values, traditions, etc. Those who still lived in the time of the “Day Before Pat” had their assumptions, assumptions that I had once shared. But I now had Deaf friends and firsthand experiences that stood in contrast to those assumptions. And so again, I had to reconcile my assumptions from the “Day Before Pat” with my firsthand experience.

Another assumption held by those who still lived in the time of the “Day Before Pat” was that Deaf people couldn’t possibly be linguistically oppressed because they have no language. After all, they have to be taught to speak and lipread, they have to be trained to use their hearing. But from my Deaf friends I learned that their language, ASL, wasn’t taught or used in schools, that there were few Deaf teachers and that there were many other ways in which they were linguistically oppressed.

Like most people who still live in the time of the “Day Before Pat”, I grew up with quite a list of assumptions about Deaf people that were rooted in fiction and what passed for “common sense”; but those assumptions were not based in facts. But after interacting with Deaf people, my new set of assumptions was rooted in reality and experience. And so how could I possibly communicate that with those who still lived in the time of the “Day Before Pat”? My interactions with Deaf people had changed my life and definitely had changed my perspectives on Deaf people.

New Assumptions

But although I now had a new set of assumptions about Deaf people, the language and spoken words I used remained the same as they had all my life, my life in the time of the “Day Before Pat”. So, for example, I continued to use the word “deaf” and when I said that word, those who still lived in the time of the “Day Before Pat” thought I meant “can’t hear”, “disabled” “defective”, “inferior” and “less than”. Although my new assumptions, perspectives, and firsthand experiences had changed, my language and words did not change to reflect those new assumptions, perspectives, and experiences. Because my words and language in talking about Deaf people remained unchanged, those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat” thought that we continued to share the same assumptions. It seemed logical to them – our words and language, the language of the “Day Before Pat”, were the same, so surely our assumptions must be the same. But my assumptions were clearly quite different than theirs. But because I still talked like those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat” their assumptions were not and could not be challenged and opportunities to confront or discuss their assumptions were missed. Those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat” continued to think that because we talked the same we must think the same and have the same assumptions.

The Same Old Words

Imagine interpreting for a Deaf person addressing a group of people who aren’t Deaf. The Deaf person begins by signing the following [see the videotape at 9:46 — 9:59]. In the past, my spoken English interpretation would have been something like “My name is Pat. I’m deaf [and then there would be the typical and sometimes audible response of pity from those in the time of the “Day Before”] and you are hearing [to which there would be a quizzical or puzzled reaction].” That would have been what I said in my interpretation, but what I said is clearly not what Pat meant.

How could I accurately reflect what Pat meant by using words that were so deeply attached to the flawed assumptions held by those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat”? Those words (“deaf”, “hearing” and others) had taken on new meanings for me but those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat” had not yet acquired those new meanings. Using the same old words that I used in the time of the “Day Before Pat” meant that my spoken English interpretations could not possibly be successful. Those same old words simply reinforced the flawed assumptions of those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat”; those words continued to reinforce a devalued view of Deaf people.

For many years Deaf people have been trying to tell those who are not deaf that Deaf people have a language, a culture, a community, values, traditions, etc. and have assumed that sign language interpreters were accurately conveying their meaning and intent. But my spoken English interpretations (and I daresay those of most other interpreters) do not always accurately reflect the intended meanings of Deaf people. My interpretations that used the same old words as those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat”, merely reinforced their negative view of Deaf people. I couldn’t possibly expect those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat” to understand my experiences or to appreciate how my interactions with Deaf people had changed my perspective on Deaf people. Absent interaction and firsthand experience, those still living in the time of the “Day Before Pat” had not and could not attach my new meanings to “the same old words”.

For decades Deaf people, proud members of a Community, have been trying to tell those still living in the time of the “Day Before” about their proud Community, language, and culture. But when we interpreters use the word “deaf” the only thing that those still living in the time of the “Day Before” hear is “can’t hear”, “can’t hear”, “can’t hear”. But I believe that’s not what Deaf people mean or intend and as a result of our interpretations that use the same old words, Deaf people suffer.

Change Words and Change Assumptions

And so I have decided to change my words and my language. By changing my words and language, the assumptions of those still living in the time of “Day Before” can be challenged. Changing my words and language does not in any way change the meaning or intent of Deaf people, not at all. On the contrary, I believe that my changed words much more accurately reflect their intent and meaning.

Rather than automatically using the word “deaf”, I have decided to use the phrase “member of the Deaf Community” unless it is clear that what is meant is “can’t hear” (which I believe is rare). Thus those still living in the time of the “Day Before” are presented with a different framing of Deaf people and one that, I believe, more accurately represents what Deaf people have been trying to say to those still living in the time of the “Day Before”. That new framing is one that does not fit with the assumptions of those still living in the time of the “Day Before”. And gradually the assumptions about Deaf people of those still living in the time of the “Day Before” begin to change.

Thus I believe Deaf people’s meanings and intentions can finally and more accurately be conveyed to those still living in the time of “Day Before”. And Deaf people’s meanings and intentions are more clearly conveyed precisely because I have changed my oppressive language. And when we, as sign language interpreters, understand Deaf people’s meaning and intent and when we change our language accordingly, Deaf people’s true meaning and intent can finally be understood by those still living in the “Day Before”. Failure to change our language means that the assumptions of those still living in the tome of the “Day Before” will persist and Deaf people will continue to be oppressed and continue to be viewed as abnormal, defective and inferior.

One Thing. Just One Thing.

If you’ve seen the movie “City Slickers” you know one of the dramatic high points of the story – Curly, a tough, weather-beaten old cowboy asks Mitch (who is from the city) a question: “Mitch, do you know what the secret of life is?” Mitch says he doesn’t, and asks Curly to tell him. Curly replies that the secret to life is “One thing. Just one thing.” Unfortunately, in one of the worst possible cases of bad timing, Curly dies and so we never learn the one thing that is the secret to life.

And so, in memory of Curly, I’d like to suggest that for sign language interpreters the secret to successful interpretations might be “One thing. Just one thing”. But unlike Curly, I do plan to live long enough to tell you the secret. That one thing is — never forget living in the time of the “Day Before”. Those who are still living in the “Day Before” are usually one-third of the interpreting triad. As interpreters, remembering the assumptions of those still living in the time of the “Day Before” will help us better frame our interpretations. Remembering when we lived in the time of the “Day Before” will help us better craft our interpretations to more accurately reflect the meanings and intentions of Deaf people.

In closing, StreetLeverage – Live is all about change and becoming a change agent. I suggest that one very doable change each of us can make on a personal level is to change our words, change our language so that our interpretations more accurately represent the meanings and intentions of Deaf people. Remembering the time we spent living in the time of the “Day Before” and the assumptions we held at that time, helps us avoid oppressive language and words that merely reinforce the assumptions of those still living in the “Day Before”. And so I encourage you to find and hold near your own “Day Before Pat”.

Enjoy this talk and accompanying article? Consider going to StreetLeverage – Live 2017.

Posted on October 11, 2016 by Joseph Featherstone — Leave a comment

IEP: Faculty Composition Impacts Sign Language Interpreter Readiness

By investing in a faculty rich in diversity, skills and experience, Joseph Featherstone believes Interpreter Education Programs can enhance sign language interpreting students’ readiness while upholding high standards of practice.

There’s been a lot of focus on interpreter readiness, especially for recent graduates of Interpreter Education Programs (IEP). As a Deaf person who often uses sign language interpreting services, as an educator teaching university-level ASL courses, and as a CDI, I want to share some observations and insights that will increase the likelihood that an IEP will turn out graduates who are ready to function as effective interpreters.

[View post in ASL]

Identifying Gatekeepers

I remember once getting a call from a friend who teaches ASL. She had a question about a former student of mine.

“Should I accept her into the program? Or is she going to waste a spot for a potential interpreter?”

It hadn’t occurred to me how my ASL classes impact the Deaf community by feeding ITPs and educating prospective interpreters.

At that moment, I realized, as an ASL instructor, I was a gatekeeper.

Historically, Deaf community members acted as exclusive gatekeepers and chose who would become interpreters (Ball, 2013., Cokely, 2005., & Fant, 1990). In the 1960s and ‘70s, sign language interpreters were most often those who were already connected to the Deaf Community – children of Deaf parents, close friends, siblings, and pastors of congregations (Cokely, 2005). With time, though, government support for sign language interpreting grew, new trends emerged, and the mode of gatekeeping shifted.

Nowadays, the most common way to become an interpreter is via classroom education through schools and interpreter training programs (Ball, 2013). Due to this change, the role of gatekeeper has now expanded to include a variety of instructors from these schools and programs.

In his article, It Takes a Village to Raise a Sign Language Interpreter, Brian Morrison says, “Rather than viewing interpreter education programs negatively or putting the sole onus on them for having not taught students all they need to know, we can shift our focus to building on their existing foundation.”

I couldn’t agree more.

After the phone call from my friend, my epiphany snowballed. I realized that as an instructor and a gatekeeper, I had the unique opportunity to prepare my students to connect into the Deaf community. I wasn’t on just one side anymore; I had a responsibility to set high standards and teach my students to these standards.

And I’m not the only one. Every instructor along a student’s journey, from those teaching introductory ASL to those teaching the most advanced IEP courses, have a dual role—teaching and gatekeeping. Everyone.

As Morrison says, it takes a village.

For that reason, I encourage IEP directors to evaluate their faculty’s backgrounds and experiences. It does take a village to raise a sign language interpreter, and it takes a village to keep the standards of sign language interpreting high.

The Village

The village, like the gatekeeper, is a metaphor. Village members represent members of the Deaf community in all their variety. In earlier times, the village helped mentor and nurture a budding interpreter to grow in language and cultural fluency.

Today, sign language interpreters are graduating and passing certifications without being immersed in that surrounding village, leaving a gap between them and the Deaf community.

As an interpreter, instructor, and Deaf individual, I’ve seen how this gap affects all of us involved in the IEP student’s journey and how it affects our roles as gatekeepers.

In addition to more and more encouragement (or a requirement) to go out and spend precious time participating in the Deaf community, I propose that IEP directors and boards bring a little bit of the village to the interpreter—for preparation and evaluation.

This sampling of the village cannot replace the knowledge, skills, and experience interpreting students gain by spending time in the Deaf community. But, a faculty that reflects the diversity of the village can help students more quickly build their knowledge, skills, and cultural fluency. And time is short to prepare interpreters to reach graduation.

Who, then, do we bring in from the village?

I’d like to introduce you to four of what I call the village elders: the Native English-Speaker, the Native ASL Signer, the Bilingual Native, and the CDI.

The Village Elders

The Native English-Speaker:

Instructors who are English natives, for whom ASL is an acquired language, aren’t difficult to find. These are hearing instructors. Because they are common, their role in the village can become ambiguous without the context of the other faculty.

As a Native English-Speaker, this elder has the distinct trait of native fluency in English. They share this English first language acquisition with most of their interpreting students. The depth of their understanding of the nuances of English can only help as they interpret in situations rich with jargon or cultural queues (e.g., a hospital visit).

In large part, Native English-Speakers can identify with their interpreter students’ journey because it is one they had to make themselves: they once had to pass by gatekeepers and gain entrance to the Deaf community and the village.

The Native ASL Signer:

Typically a deaf teacher with native ASL fluency, having a Native ASL Signer teaching ASL or ITP classes cannot be undervalued. It’s always preferable in terms of language acquisition to have a native speaker teaching the mother tongue rather than someone who learned it later. Often, the ASL native not only has a primary language learner’s understanding of ASL but also can share their experience and knowledge as a member of the Deaf community.

In the classroom, they represent the Deaf perspective on sign language interpreting. Through their instruction, IEP students can gain a better appreciation for the Deaf community and can develop a basic cultural fluency to build on outside of class.

Many IEPs do not employ Native ASL Signers for classes other than ASL. There are classes that could benefit from a Deaf native’s perspective, like ethics and translation. Wouldn’t it be amazing if each of these village elders could teach an ethics course each semester and offer their different perspectives?

The Bilingual Native:

Bilingual Natives have native fluency in both ASL and English, such as Children of Deaf Adults (CODA). Because they most likely grew up with ASL as their first language, the Bilingual Native more intimately understands the Deaf way. That’s not to say that that they are more invested in the Deaf community than those who learned ASL in school, but that their relationship with the Deaf community is more direct, and as such, they are greatly impacted by the state of the Deaf community.

Bilingual Natives also have a strong understanding of English and can teach on the intersection between the Deaf and Hearing communities, especially as it relates to interpreting.

The CDI:

This may be the most under-utilized Village Elder. A CDI can be instrumental in the holistic development of an interpreting student. Their experience as a Deaf community member and a certified interpreter helps them bridge the perspective gap between ITP students and the Deaf community. They understand the feelings of being a client, and they understand the pressures of being a sign language interpreter.

Sometimes interpreting students view Deaf teachers as skilled in the language but less able to identify with the mechanics of interpreting. CDIs like myself are able to relate on both levels. We are Deaf. We are also not just interpreters, but interpreters who are more often called in for extreme, high-stress, high-stakes interpreting situations. We typically have more experience in the trenches where interpreting mistakes can be disastrous.

The unique CDI role provides us with a distinct perspective and understanding of the interpreting process, the Code of Professional Conduct established by RID, as well as the feelings of interpreters and the recipients of interpreting services—not to mention, CDIs know firsthand the best practices for team interpreting with other CDIs and hearing interpreters.

CDIs have a lot to offer IEP students. It’s been my experience that recent graduates from programs with a CDI on faculty exhibit a more refined situational awareness.

In The End

To rephrase Morrison: “Imagine the outcomes when the new student and the [Village Elders] learn and grow from sharing their knowledge with each other.” Skill development is quickest when in the community. For our students, that means taking every opportunity to encourage their interaction with allies, advocates, and members of the Deaf community and providing them with a faculty that reflects the strength and diversity of our community.

* 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!”

Questions For Consideration

What skills or perspectives do you and your faculty have that contribute to the sense of the village in your program? What additional skills or perspectives could benefit your program?
How do you think IEPs can better build a sense of the village and gatekeeping?
Why do you think it takes a village to raise a sign language interpreter?

References

Ball, C. (2013). Legacies and legends: History of interpreter education from 1800 to the 21st century. Edmonton, AB: Interpreting Consolidated.
Cokely, D. (2005). Shifting positionality: A critical examination of the turning point in the relationship of interpreters and the deaf community. In M. Marshcark, R. Peterson & E.
Fant, L. (1990). Silver threads: A personal look at the first twenty-five years of the registry of interpreters for the deaf. Silver Spring, MD: RID Publications.
Morrison, B. (2013). It Takes a Village to Raise a Sign Language Interpreter. Retrieved September 28, 2016, from https://www.streetleverage.com/2013/09/it-takes-a-village-to-raise-a-sign-language-interpreter/

Posted on February 24, 2016 by Brandon Arthur — Leave a comment

6 Presentations That Will Make You a Better Sign Language Interpreter

Sign language interpreters constantly strive to be better practitioners. Often it is a flash of perspective that gives context to the challenges they face and assists them in moving along their path to actualization.

Let’s admit it, being a sign language interpreter can be tough. Sometimes a little sprinkle of perspective can contextualize the challenges we face as practitioners. From language fluency to connecting with the community, from confronting social justice issues and inaccurate assumptions to maintaining our integrity and leaving a legacy, these flashes of insight can lead us to becoming the interpreters we aspire to be. What follows are sprinkles of goodness that will, in fact, make you a better sign language interpreter.

1. Dennis Cokely | Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before

In his StreetLeverage – Live | Atlanta presentation, Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before, Dennis Cokely discusses the dangers of unchallenged assumptions and the “one thing” sign language interpreters must always remember in order to render more effective, meaningful, and culturally appropriate interpretations.

View the ASL, English and PPT here.

2. Deb Russell | Sign Language Interpreters: Discover & Recover an Enduring Legacy

Deb Russell’s StreetLeverage – Live | Atlanta presentation, Sign Language Interpreters: Discover & Recover an Enduring Legacy, recognizes the importance of uncovering and acknowledging the contributions and traits of leaders who have significantly impacted the field of interpreting. In order to move forward, we must first understand where we have come from.

View the ASL, English, and PPT here.

3. Betty Colonomos | Sign Language Interpreters: Fostering Integrity

In her presentation, Sign Language Interpreters: Fostering Integrity, from StreetLeverage – Live | Atlanta, Betty Colonomos defines integrity and highlights the critical need for accountability in the field of sign language interpreting.

View the ASL, English and PPT here.

4. Doug Bowen Bailey | Transforming Perspectives: The Power of One-to-One Conversations For Sign Language Interpreters

Doug Bowen-Bailey’s StreetLeverage – Live | Austin presentation, Transforming Perspectives: The Power of One-to-One Conversations for Sign Language Interpreters, explores the concept of one-to-one conversations as a means of connecting with the Deaf community and other interpreters.

View the ASL, English, and PPT here.

5. Trudy Suggs | Deaf Disempowerment and Today’s Interpreter

Trudy Suggs’ StreetLeverage – Live | Baltimore presentation, Deaf Disempowerment and Today’s Interpreter, powerfully explores both financial and situational disempowerment within the Deaf Community.

View the ASL, English and PPT here.

6. MJ Bienvenu | Bilingualism: Are Sign Language Interpreters Bilinguals?

MJ Bienvenu’s StreetLeverage – Live | Austin presentation, Bilingualism: Are Sign Language Interpreters Bilingual?, explores the deeper questions involved in determining whether sign language interpreters are, in fact, bilingual.

View the ASL, English and PPT here.

The Whole is More than the Sum of its Parts

While these presentations represent a small part of the wisdom and insight shared at StreetLeverage – Live events, we hope this retrospective provides you with some tools, ideas and information to support your journey to becoming the sign language interpreter you’ve imagined yourself to be.

* Enjoy these presentations? Join us at StreetLeverage – Live 2016.

* 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 left-hand side of this page) and click “Sign Me Up!”

Posted on January 6, 2016 by Jean Miller — Leave a comment

StreetLeverage: The 2015 Posts that Moved Us

As a way to welcome 2016, we handpicked 10 posts that inspired reflection, demonstrated courageous thinking, or generated spirited conversation. It is our guess that you were moved by some of these 2015 gems as well. If you missed one, take a moment to enjoy the goodness. * Posts not listed in any particular order.

1. Sign Language Interpreters and the “F” Word

One Headline We Wish We had Created Ourselves

Provocative headline aside, Jackie Emmart brings forward the art of asking for and receiving feedback. While the jury is still out on whether “feedback” is a four-letter word or not, it’s a topic that isn’t going away.

2. Recognizing Polite Indifference: Sign Language Interpreters & Power

A Personal Story that Resonated

Michele Vincent’s willingness to open up about a work experience gone sideways in order to share her own journey of self-discovery and shine a light on an important issue had staying power for many.

3. Missing Narratives in Interpreter Education

A Post We Thought Worthy of Even More Attention

Looking back in our history and comparing the statistics shared in Erica West Oyedele’s StreetLeverage – X presentation, not much has changed in the demographics of the profession. Hopefully, as we extend our vision and open our hearts to truly understand, we can invite and support interpreters from underrepresented groups which, in turn, supports the Deaf community in all its diversity.

4. Station Meditation: VRS, Compassion and Sign Language Interpreters

A Positive Outlook on VRS Interpreting

While not as uncommon as one might think, it was refreshing to read a post about VRS that displayed some of the positive aspects of interpreting in video relay. Judi Webb’s long-term experience as a video interpreter shows that longevity in VRS is possible with the right attitude and practice.

5. Do Sign Language Interpreter “Accents” Compromise Comprehension?

A Post that Made Me Conscious of My “Accent” In a Good Way

Carol Padden’s StreetLeverage – Live presentation on sign language interpreter accent will likely resonate for many readers, particularly non-native second language learners. Rather than perpetuating signing errors and disfluent language use, this is an opportunity for interpreters to reflect on their own accent and how they might remedy some of the issues with a little concentrated effort.

6. Self-Awareness: How Sign Language Interpreters Acknowledge Privilege and Oppression

I Wanted to Call the Presenter So We Could Have Coffee and Talk

Powerfully, Stacey Storme reminds sign language interpreters that while the situations we enter into as interpreters have nothing to do with us, “Our work has everything to do with us.” The interpreter is the third context in an interpreted communication and it behooves us never to forget that fact.

7. Horizontal Violence: Can Sign Language Interpreters Break the Cycle?

The Most Popular Post This Year

Clearly, many sign language interpreters have had negative experiences with colleagues which could fall into categories like bullying, harassment or intimidation. Kate Block explores how reflective practice might positively impact the interpreting field. It appears that people agree.

8. Deaf Interpreters: Shaping the Future of the Sign Language Interpreting Profession

A New Paradigm Emerging for Hearing Interpreters

Eileen Forestal’s StreetLeverage – Live presentation explores the dissonance many hearing interpreters feel about working with Deaf Interpreters and encourages practitioners to come to the table open to the possibility that both groups have something to offer as professionals.

9. 10 Lessons from my First Year as a Freelance Sign Language Interpreter

There is Encouragement and Positivity in the Field of Interpreting Today

Brittany Quickel’s 10 lessons illustrate the power of self-determination and positivity. Sign language interpreters everywhere can benefit from these simple, but sage, tips.

10. National Treasure

Those Who Inspire

While this wasn’t a post, our 2015 list of goodness would not be complete without one important addition. StreetLeverage was proud to honor Patrick Graybill at StreetLeverage – Live 2015 as the first StreetLeverage – National Treasure honoree.

Our Hope

Join us for another year of discovery, vulnerability, and meaningful conversation. We look forward to the magic of the journey that will be 2016.

* 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 left-hand side of this page) and click “Sign Me Up!”

Posted on October 14, 2015 by admin — Leave a comment

Trends Report: Aligning Interpreter Education & Tomorrow’s Challenges

StreetLeverage had a great time providing coverage of the 2015 RID Conference in New Orleans, LA August 8-12, 2015. If you attended or watched the conference live-stream feed, you’ll remember that on Saturday, August 8, 2015, Dennis Cokely and Cathy Cogen presented, “Preparing Interpreters for Tomorrow: Report on a Study of Emerging Trends in Interpreting and Implications for Interpreter Education.” It was one of the standout presentations at the conference to be sure.

Greater Insight on the State of Interpreting

To our good fortune, both Dennis and Cathy were willing to sit down with Brandon Arthur, StreetLeverage founder and curator, to discuss their findings and their visions for the future of sign language interpreting and sign language interpreter education.

* To view the conversation with Dennis Cokely or read the English transcript, click here.

* To view the conversation with Cathy Cogen or read the English transcript, click here.

RID Trends Presentation Summary

If you missed the presentation, you can find the PPT deck used by Dennis and Cathy here.

Their presentation focused on three main areas:

Trends impacting current and future interpreting services
Current Issues in Interpreter Education and the dynamics at play within the field which may impede or facilitate efforts to address interpreter education and professional development needs
Recommendations for aligning Interpreter Education with the challenges of tomorrow, including some significant departures from the status quo in interpreter education.

Finally, they issued a call to action for conference participants to commit to partnerships, practices and policies which will support the creation of a better future.

* 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 left-hand side of this page) and click “Sign Me Up!”

Posted on January 21, 2015 by Dennis Cokely — Leave a comment

Interpreter Education: History is a Relentless Master

We are realizing that this huge shift from one cohesive community into two separate communities has had a direct impact on interpreter education.

Dennis Cokely and Anna Witter-Merithew presented, Interpreter Education: History is a Relentless Master as part of StreetLeverage’s Interpreter Education Month celebration. This presentation focused on the critical lessons that the field of interpreter education continues to grapple with, the contribution of federal funding to the growth and development of interpreter education, and the lingering questions that need to be answered.

You can find the PPT deck for their presentation here.

[Note from StreetLeverage: What follows is an English translation of Dennis and Anna’s presentation. We would encourage each of you to watch the video and access the presentation in ASL directly.]

[Click here to view presentation in ASL]

Interpreter Education: History is a Relentless Master

Wing Butler:

Hello to all of you joining us from your computers, laptops, mobile devices, etc. Welcome to this StreetLeverage webinar. We are thrilled that you are all able to join us! We truly have participants from around the globe today, which is amazing to see. We are delighted to have you all here. My name is Wing Butler and I’m a part of the StreetLeverage “Street Team” providing and supporting social media, advising and a variety of other endeavors. Brandon Arthur has tasked me today to facilitate today’s webinar. I’m thrilled and grateful to Brandon for his confidence in allowing me to facilitate today’s exciting event.

I want to give special thanks to the National Interpreter Education Center (NIEC) for hosting today’s webinar. They are providing technical and staff support, as well as coordination for this event. We are grateful for their participation and assistance in making today’s webinar possible.

I would also like to express our gratitude to our two speakers, Dennis Cokely and Anna Witter-Merithew, for joining us today. It’s an honor to have you both here. As an interpreter, I’ve had the opportunity to observe your work, read your writings, etc. Though you may not be fully aware, you have both educated me from my start as a new interpreter. As I was up and coming in the field, reading your books and articles, as well as seeing some of your presentations on video, influenced and formed me in my interpreter life. I’ve been interpreting for about 17 years and your work has had a profound impact on my career thus far. So today, I’m especially excited to have the opportunity to be here for your presentation, “Interpreter Education: History is a Relentless Master.” We’ve got quite an event ahead of us. In today’s webinar, you’ll be looking back on our history and the impacts that history has had on the present, in hopes that this reflection can empower us as we consider our path into the future. Thank you both so much for being here.

Obviously, I could provide an extensive description of each of your backgrounds, but I’ll suffice to say that you are both incredibly accomplished individuals and simply pass the presentation into your capable hands. Thank you for your time for today’s presentation. I’m eagerly anticipating this webinar. Thank you! On to you.

Anna and Dennis:

Thank you.

Anna:

Thank you, Wing, for your introduction. In preparation for today, Dennis and I have met several times to talk and reflect on this topic. I think the biggest takeaway for us after all of that is realizing the number of changes which have occurred, as well as realizing how many amazing people we’ve had the opportunity to meet in the course of our careers. Many of those wonderful individuals were Deaf people who taught us, led us, provided support and helped us to progress in our careers. It’s been a wonderful opportunity for us to reflect on the past, both professionally and personally – to remember parts of our own history and, at the same time, look at the broader history of interpreter education.

Both Dennis and I became involved in interpreting via invitations from the Deaf Community. Our lives have been rooted in the Deaf Community for many years. Dennis has been a teacher of Deaf children, a linguist, a sign language interpreter, a researcher, an interpreter educator, a program developer and has taken on so many other roles. As a leader, Dennis served two terms as the President of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. (RID) as well as serving on the RID board prior to his service as President. There are many other roles he has taken on in the course of his career. As for the roles I have had in my career, I’ve been daughter, sign language interpreter, interpreter educator, program developer, and a leader, as well. I’ve been involved with the Conference of Interpreter Trainers (CIT) as well as serving on the RID board at various times.

We are thrilled to have this opportunity to discuss our view of interpreter education from a historical perspective. As our topic indicates, “Interpreter Education: History is a Relentless Master”, we’ve come to realize that history does repeat itself, relentlessly, to teach us important lessons. We both feel there are lessons we have not learned as a profession and we see the same recurring issues which means those issues require more study, consideration and analysis. We have to determine what, if we have identified these as recurring issues, we need to do to unpack the issues and give them a more thorough examination and more reflection. We also need to use the findings from these reflections to help determine our pathway into the future of interpreter education.

Next slide please.

Webinar Goal and Objectives

Anna:

I want to talk about the webinar goal and some of our objectives today.

First, when we look at interpreter education, we must look at the context in which interpreter education exists and has developed. We are going to discuss factors that impact the context of interpreter education. We will also discuss one of the biggest influences – the contribution of federal funding and how federal law has impacted the development of interpreter education. Finally, we will be identifying reoccurring issues and lingering questions impacting interpreter education. That’s our plan for today.

Next slide.

Socio-Political Context in Which Interpreter Education Exists

Anna:

The slide depicts a series of overlapping circles. There are many factors which influence interpreter education, but for the purposes of our discussion today, we’re going to focus on three of those factors. Education is often very insular. By the same token, interpreter education tends to be very insular, as well – isolated from other disciplines and influences and those who work in this arena often stay in that realm without venturing outside it on a regular basis.

Often, overworked teachers, program administrators, etc., do not have the bandwidth to network and get involved in other aspects of their field. They are often focused on their own program needs, keeping up with their own specialty, etc., rather than taking the opportunities to observe others and reflect on their own practice or how to apply what’s happening in the classroom to the outside world.

When we compare interpreter education at its inception to the state of interpreter education currently, we see that they are vastly different. In earlier times, Deaf people were very engaged in screening for and selecting future interpreters. That happened with both Dennis and me, Deaf Community members recognized, invited and encouraged us to get involved in interpreting, even providing guidance about the kinds of interpreting work we did in the early days. I remember feeling I was ready to take on a variety of interpreting jobs, but often, Deaf Community members would steer me in another direction, letting me know which jobs I was ready to take and which jobs I was still not qualified to do. That role in the process that existed in the early days no longer exists in the current state of interpreter education.

Dennis, did you want to say something?

Dennis:

You are right. I think Deaf people often had a mental roadmap for the progression of a sign language interpreter – which jobs were appropriate and when. This didn’t apply to only specific Deaf people – it was almost like this interpreter roadmap was part of a shared consciousness among Deaf people. In that way, Deaf people still had a modicum of control and could lead interpreters slowly through the progression from beginner to experienced interpreter. You are right about that.

Anna:

Yes. At that time, the Deaf Community had more authority to select interpreters, more involvement in the screening of interpreters. More of the decision-making power regarding interpreters fell to the Deaf community in those early days. Now, the roles have shifted dramatically. Sign language interpreting is more agency-based. Many of those agencies do not involve Deaf people and most are run by hearing people, some of whom do not even have a working knowledge of ASL. Still other agencies are foreign language agencies now tasked with hiring sign language interpreters. We’ve seen a huge shift. In the past, the Deaf Community was very involved with interpreters. For interpreters, there was involvement with and from the Deaf Community. At that time, it was one community working together. Now, it doesn’t feel like one single community. It feels as if there are two separate groups – the interpreters in their own community and the Deaf Community in theirs.

As more new interpreters gain entry into the field, there are no longer those deep bonds with the Deaf Community, with Deaf people. Some of these newer interpreters don’t have those ties, and don’t even know many Deaf people. They may have seen Deaf people on video for practice, but many have never socialized in the Deaf Community or developed deep relationships with the Deaf people in their community. We are realizing that this huge shift from one cohesive community into two separate communities has had a direct impact on interpreter education. Did you want to add something, Dennis?

Dennis:

Yes, I did. In addition to what you’ve described, we’ve seen even more detrimental results of this shift. There are interpreter education programs in the U.S. today which prohibit interpreting students from socializing or interacting in the Deaf Community. They prohibit it. One program requires the students to sign a contract indicating their agreement to avoid any social contact with the Deaf Community citing the small size of the community as their rationale. They believe that socializing in the community could create a conflict of interest if the student later had to interpret for someone they had met in the community. In my mind, that type of logic makes no sense. How can you learn the language of a group of people without interacting with them? And prohibiting that kind of interaction? It defies logic.

Anna:

Right. In addition, if I don’t interact with users of the language, how will I learn to make adaptations in my own language usage or how to set boundaries? How do I learn to negotiate in that language? Yes in this circumstance we are friendly and open, but in another role, another situation is may be different – how does one learn to navigate and put on the proper persona to represent various individuals while interpreting? If we prohibit social contact, we are limiting students’ ability to learn and develop coping skills which are a critical part of the interpreting world.

Dennis:

Right. Yes.

Anna:

So, that’s one layer of influence on interpreter education. In comparing our current situation with the early days in interpreter education, that’s a big change. Another huge shift also occurred. In earlier times, student interpreters had a much easier time finding and meeting Deaf people. They could go to the Deaf Club, attend Deaf events – there were often weekly or regular events where the community came together. The interactions between Deaf people and interpreters occurred regularly and easily. Now, Deaf people come together less regularly and rather than large-group events, gatherings tend to be in smaller groups defined by shared interests like sports, like ski clubs, or poker games, golf, etc. Many Deaf Clubs have closed which is another big change. Even if there are students who are highly motivated and want to go out into the community, where are they going to go? How will they find Deaf people now? In the past, it wasn’t as difficult. That’s another influence we have to consider as interpreter educators.

Another layer of influence is the general social attitude or social trends. When interpreter education programs were first being established, we didn’t have general societal support for ASL as a language, for the users of ASL to sign openly in public spaces, etc. When I was growing up, I remember when going out to do errands and things with my parents. They usually cautioned me not to sign openly in public. They were concerned that people wouldn’t like it, or may perceive it as being rude or that they would be dismissive. We’ve seen a big change in social attitudes and ASL is much more welcome and accepted by the general public. There are even opportunities for hearing people to learn ASL, but it is still rare to see ASL taught to Deaf people in any formal way. Colleges and universities, for the most part, don’t offer Deaf adults the opportunity to learn about their own language, its grammar and structure, etc. It remains a struggle for Deaf individuals to learn ASL as they are left to learn via social avenues only, from peers, etc., rather than in a formal classroom setting supplemented by social exposure.

Dennis:

And it is ironic because more and more hearing people are learning about ASL grammar and structure while many Deaf Community members don’t have access to that information. Hearing individuals often study linguistics and take formal ASL courses while Deaf people have not been afforded those opportunities. It creates an odd situation.

Anna:

There is a dichotomy there. These issues create a unique kind of tension. I see now…well, in the past, it seemed, because interpreters came from within the community, they already knew how to or had learned how to show respect, to know that it is inappropriate and impolite to criticize a Deaf person’s signing, even if they use a sign that is not the one you would have expected. It is respectful to accept the language as it is used, incorporate it in the interaction and move on. As we see more and more people taking linguistics classes, people assume they know more and often communicate that idea to the Deaf people through criticism and correcting a Deaf person’s signs. This is a serious faux pas. Again, this creates a difficult dynamic between the interpreting community and the Deaf Community. So, again, general society is more accustomed to seeing sign language interpreters, accustomed to encountering and interacting with them, used to seeing people use ASL in public places, even unexpected ones. In fact, sign language interpreters are becoming a more frequent topic of conversation. There was an emergency situation where a sign language interpreter was televised to provide access. Within a few days, there were a plethora of vlogs and articles from hearing people, with no knowledge about Deaf people, discussing what they saw, even to the extent that interpreters have become a part of late night comedy routines. This is a huge shift in attitude about interpreters, but at the same time, the same underlying attitudes of oppression persist. The oppression of Deaf people, their language, and their language rights continues, even in the face of these other shifts. There is still a lack of understanding of the Deaf perspective.

Another strong influence on interpreter education is legislative outcomes. In the early years of the interpreting profession, almost no one paid for interpreting services. The larger percent of interpreting, if not 100% of all our work as interpreters, was volunteered time. Most people who worked as interpreters in those early years also worked other jobs to support ourselves, but our passion, our heart was with interpreting and in supporting the Deaf Community and their right to participate fully in society.

Another factor was that American society was more attuned to human rights issues.

In the 1970s and 80s, Deaf people and people with disabilities were heavily involved in fighting for their human rights which created more legal cases and resulted in the passage of a variety of legislation. Today, we have the Americans with Disabilities Act (A.D.A.). This was one way to provide amazing levels of access and, at the same time, it has introduced new challenges, creating new issues which impact our work as interpreters, as well as the work of interpreter educators.

One example of these challenges is the creation of video relay services (VRS). What are the implications of the implementation of VRS? Providing interpreters without in-person contact? Meeting and conducting interpreted interactions through technology without traditional forms of interaction. How does that impact what our work looks like? How do Deaf people feel about it? This doesn’t only apply to VRS, but also to video remote interpreting (VRI), as well. The use of VRI services in hospitals, in courtrooms, etc. We are seeing VRI used in increasing numbers of settings and yet, it is still a new avenue. The technology itself has presented new challenges for the profession to address.

So, we’ve talked about the three largest factors which influence interpreter education. Dennis, you wanted to add some comments?

Dennis:

Yes, I did. It’s been interesting to watch the progression of VRS. Interpreters have become a part of the machine of VRS. The traditional warming up, “getting to know you” part of the interpreting interaction is gone from this form of interpreting. A call comes on screen and it’s, “Go!” That gives me pause. We spent so many years convincing people that we needed to have information about the players, the goals of the interaction, the context, in order to interpret effectively. Now, all of that is reversed in an instant. VRS interpreters take call after call without any of that information. It’s something to think about. VRS has had a major influence on both the work we do and on Deaf people’s view of interpreters as a group. Now, interpreters are seen as machines that can just roll through anything without pause. VRS has had been a major influence on the field.

Anna:

And at the same time, we haven’t seized some opportunities in this. The really experienced VRS interpreters have their own strategies for gathering and finding the pertinent information to create a fluid communication event. They’ve developed unique ways to find the goal of an interaction and ways to connect with the Deaf person in the moment. Some of those skills and abilities require a deep connection to Deaf people, to ASL and to Deaf culture. We haven’t discovered what all of that looks like yet, but we need to take the opportunity to document those skills and abilities and incorporate them into our educational strategies for future interpreters so that they can use them as they start to participate in video interpreting environments.

When VRS began, I saw many highly skilled interpreters, people who had many certifications and years of experience, go into VRS as a way to help balance the system. As time went by, those highly skilled people were pushed out in favor of hiring newer, less qualified, less experienced interpreters because the pay for those newer interpreters was significantly cheaper, making it easier to manage the costs of processing calls. That change alone has greatly impacted the quality of the experience for Deaf people using VRS. The level of job satisfaction for VRS interpreters has also been impacted. The level of connection and the feeling of accomplishment via video interaction just isn’t the same. It is also interesting to consider how VRS interpreters have impacted the hearing users of the service, as well. On occasion, I use VRS to conduct meetings or other business. When I’m acting as a hearing consumer of VRS services, I often find myself feeling frustrated. I can’t imagine how a hearing person with no knowledge about Deaf people must feel. How do they feel about the communication? About Deaf people? What assumptions do they make about Deaf people, their language, etc., based on these interactions? It’s a profound question. This is a huge challenge.

Next slide.

Interpreter Education: Early Mindset

Anna:

Lou Fant. I hope all of you watching today know about Lou Fant. Lou was a renowned writer, actor, interpreter and well-loved leader in our field. When RID celebrated their 25^th anniversary, Lou wrote a book describing the history of interpreting and a history of RID. Lou incorporated some of his own personal experiences as one of our profession’s founding fathers and one of the founding members of RID. He had an incredible ability to reflect on the past and extract ideas that were relevant and applicable to the present day. The quote we’ve presented on the slide gives you some idea of the thinking of the time when RID was in its infancy. At the time, no one could predict what the interpreting world would eventually look like. No one could predict the future. When we look at it now, their vision for the future was a bit narrow in scope. Still, they expected to find people who had strong ties in the Deaf community, people who already knew how to sign, who only needed formal training to learn the process of interpreting, the cognitive processing required. They expected to continue to draw from that very specific pool of people. At the time, there was no expectation that they would eventually deal with people who had no prior experience in the community or with the language. They really had little insight into how much demand there would eventually be for sign language interpreters.

It really took us three or four generations of interpreters, as described in Lou’s quote, before we had a large enough pool of interpreters to start gathering data about what our work looked like, what a career in interpreting might look like. I consider myself third generation. Lou was a first generation interpreter, there was a generation between us, and then I’m third generation. I only worked full-time as an interpreter for a short period of time before I got involved in interpreter education. Back then, the demand for interpreters was so great – they needed people who could communicate their ideas and could show people how to develop interpreting skills. Many of us were plucked from the ranks of interpreters to become educators, even though we had little or no background or training as teachers. I was called to be an interpreter educator. It was a bumpy road for us, as educators, and, I believe, for the students, as well. At the same time, those of us who were teaching had a strong internal sense of what the work should look like, a sense that it was important to maintain a connection with Deaf people, etc. That fourth generation, they finally became the full-time interpreters and the pool of career interpreters started to expand. Even still, that group continues to grow. We need more time to really assess what this looks like in our every day lives as sign language interpreters. It’s important to continue to have theory, but it’s also important to compare the theoretical with what’s really happening in the daily lives of working interpreters who are on the job day in and day out.

Next slide.

Early Recruitment

Anna:

This slide is what I was just talking about. That’s what those who created RID expected. They recognized training was critical and envisioned drawing in people who already knew ASL. Presently, we are recruiting many individuals who know no ASL. They may have an interest in the language or want to get involved, but they basically have no prior experience, which is a big shift.

In the past, in terms of norms, interpreters usually possessed more native-like competence – either they were native and had grown up in a Deaf family or they were called…I never thought of myself as a “native” signer. I always saw myself as bilingual because I was raised with two languages simultaneously. I never used one language exclusively – both ASL and English influenced me and were a part of who I am. So, near-native competence in ASL as the norm for interpreters no longer exists. Today, there are possibly 15-20% of us who possess near-native competence in ASL. The rest of the interpreters are second language learners, most of whom have only a few ASL classes under their belt before they start learning to interpret. Even after certification, many of these interpreters still do not possess what we would label as native-like competence in ASL.

I’ll give you an example. I still have conversations with many interpreters regarding conferences such as the RID conference, etc. In these conversations, they object to the use of ASL because they don’t feel comfortable signing for themselves. It’s such an odd response. If I don’t feel comfortable expressing myself in ASL, how can I interpret other people’s language usage? The concept is foreign to me.

Next, we will be focusing more on legislative influences on interpreter education. I’m going to turn this portion of the presentation over to Dennis to talk about some of the critical outcomes. Dennis?

Next slide.

Program Expansion

Dennis:

As you can see on the slide, there are several boxes below which outline the rapid expansion of interpreter education programs. There was an explosion of programs, yes, but we weren’t ready for it. In the beginning, we knew very little about the cognitive processes involved in interpreting, still, programs proliferated. One of the reasons for that was legislation. Various laws mandated the provision of sign language interpreters. Another reason for this proliferation was the number of ASL students who took classes until they were maxed out and wondered what was next in the process. People in the field were equally perplexed but eventually decided that interpreting was the next logical step for those people. Thus, more and more interpreting courses were offered. Often, the provision of those courses was very spontaneous – very little planning and care was involved.

Currently, we have approximately 100 interpreter education programs which are based in community college settings. In the early days, we viewed interpreting in terms of vocational training. We hadn’t honed in on the cognitive processing involved in interpreting work at the time. It was considered an easy skill to pick up and, traditionally, vocational training is housed in our community colleges. So, program expansion was a critical issue.

It’s interesting to look at present day trends. We are seeing a decrease in community college programs – they are closing due to dwindling enrollment. The number of interpreting students is decreasing while the number of ASL classes is increasing. Enrollment numbers are critical for college and university programs. They aren’t able to afford a student teacher ratio of 5:1. We are seeing that struggle in more and more programs across the country.

Also interesting – we now have graduate programs in interpreting when, in the past, there were none. I should say that there was a graduate program at Western Maryland College – they housed two different tracks. One track was for teaching ASL and one was for teaching interpreting. That program opened around 1986 or so, but it was very short-lived and only lasted three to four years. In the present day, we see master’s and doctorate programs in interpreting. Hopefully, that trend will continue, but it remains to be seen.

Next slide.

Federal Funding for Interpreter Education

Dennis:

It’s important to recognize that the federal government has contributed more than thirty million dollars to interpreter education over the years.

Anna:

That’s amazing.

Dennis:

This started in 1965, when the federal government provided funding to the NAD. NAD then created and supported RID in its infancy. That same year, RID hired an executive director who was Deaf. At the time, RID was housed inside of NAD. The money they received in 1965 ended and at the time, they weren’t sure how to pay the rent they were paying to NAD. They weren’t able to afford the executive director any longer and had to lay them off. It was a struggle. RID didn’t have sufficient funds and ended up moving to Gallaudet in a tiny office space. Eventually, RID moved closer to NAD again until they purchased their own building but the first federal money was really given to NAD.

As you can see, in 1978, the federal government provided the first support for interpreter training. There were 10 regional centers established. The money was provided for shorter trainings – one to two day workshops. In 1979, there was a meeting in Atlanta. Interpreters came together to discuss the state of affairs in interpreting. That meeting ultimately resulted in a publication called, “Interpreter Training: The State of the Art”. That was published through Gallaudet.

The following year, 1980, there was meeting in Tucson, AZ. This particular meeting consisted of about 50 interpreters from around the United States who came together to discuss and document 100 critical questions that required answers. Once we had answered these questions, we believed we would be ready to create interpreter education programs and evaluate interpreters. We requested funding from the federal government – the 10 RSA regional centers requested specific funding for the creation of a center solely focused on research in the field. The request was denied. Out of the 100 questions we asked all those years ago, I believe we have successfully answered two. Ninety-eight of those original questions from 1980 remain unanswered.

Next slide.

Anna:

Dennis, I’m wondering…now we’ve jumped to the year 2000, but I’d like to go back to the 1980s. You were a part of a group known as “The Magnificent Seven” – seven interpreters who collaborated to analyze the cognitive aspects of the work. “The Magnificent Seven”, as they were called, were the first group to do a task analysis of interpreting. Was that work funded by the federal government? How was the group’s work funded – with federal money or was it funded in some other way?

Dennis:

That was in 1983. I guess you could say it was federally funded, but indirectly. At the time, Ken Rust, from Madonna College, and Jan Kanda, who was from Kansas at Johnson County Community College, agreed to fly me, Ken, Jan, Betty Colonomos, Theresa Smith, Don Renzulli and Sharon Neumann Solow to meet.

Anna:

Were there seven or eight of you?

Dennis:

Seven – there were seven of us.

Anna:

Right. Seven – I remember it so clearly- the seven of you. “The Magnificent Seven” – I remember that time.

Dennis:

Ken and Jan’s grants funded our travel to the two sessions we had. One was at Madonna – the first session. A few months later, we had the second session at the Johnson County Community College. Once those two sessions were over, we presented our findings at the 1985 CIT conference.

Anna:

Yes, I remember that. And you also published that work, as well as developing curriculum, etc.

Dennis:

Yes, right. That’s right.

So, you can see on the current slides – in 2000, there was a change. Originally, we had 10 regional centers and one national center. In 2000, the regional centers were reduced from ten to five. However, the five centers received an increase in funding. In essence, the funding for each of the five regions doubled. So, again, there were the five regional centers plus one national center. In 2005, the national center was tasked with the oversight of the regional centers’ grants. It had to take responsibility for coordinating and evaluating the effectiveness of each of the programs. Again, that started in 2005 and is still true today. The national center surveys of interpreters, Deaf community members, interpreter education programs, referral agencies, etc. to analyze the evolution of the field, projections for the future, to determine future needs and so on.

So, you can clearly see that federal funding has played a major role in interpreter education. There has been significant financial support for many years. This included the changes in RID certification tests – the first of which came about in 1988 or 1989…1988. The first change occurred in 1988-1989 and they did receive federal money to redesign the test at that time. Federal funds were also provided for the Conference of Interpreter Trainers (CIT) for their accreditation project. The federal government also provided money to establish master’s level programs at Western Maryland College in teaching ASL and teaching interpreting. That money was from the FIPSE program – the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education. So, over the years, interpreter education has received a vast amount of money from the federal government.

Anna:

But, Dennis, the federal government still doesn’t really support the idea of establishing a center that is devoted solely to research, right?

Dennis:

No, they don’t.

Anna:

How do we change that thinking? Is there anything that we can do to encourage a change in perspective?

Dennis:

Well, all of our funding and support has come from the Department of Education. We have to start looking at other agencies and other sources for funding. For example, the National Science Foundation (NSF) – is more supportive of research.

Anna:

Yes – NSF or maybe NIDRR.

Dennis:

Yes – it feels like there are some important agencies. The Department of Education just doesn’t seem to be supportive of research, so…it is what it is. And now, our current RSA five-year grant expires in September of 2015. We don’t know if the government will renew the grant, if the structure will change, etc. We just don’t have any idea. But in 2015, we hope the grant will be renewed for another 5 years, but there’s no way of knowing at this point.

New slide.

Federal Funding for Interpreter Education Cont.

Dennis:

This slide summarizes some of the points Anna and I have just described – some of the takeaway points regarding federal funding for interpreter education.

One of the issues is that, without governmental funding for research, we have pockets of isolated research but there’s no cohesive effort. Obviously, Anna and I can collaborate on a small scale, but if we were all able to come together on a national level, we could create a national agenda, a national curriculum for educating interpreters, and develop a national plan. We haven’t been able to do that.

Anna:

What are the implications of that? You’ve already talked about that a bit, but I’m wondering if you could expand on this a little more. It seems like, with all this federal funding, we’ve been able to develop some terrific products and projects – we could mention the Multi-cultural curriculum, the DeafBlind curriculum – there are a number of products we’ve developed, but there’s no systematic approach to meeting our needs. So, people develop products, but we don’t have information about which programs incorporate them, which don’t. We don’t have any information – it’s up to the individual program. There’s no systematic approach to creating the products and materials we need to educate interpreters.

Dennis:

That’s right. Many interpreter education programs have one full time instructor and maybe a part time person or two or adjunct faculty which means their time is at a premium. Things like curriculum development and candidate screening really take a back seat to satisfying immediate program needs.

Anna:

And a high percentage of interpreter educators are quickly approaching retirement. Many interpreter educators like me have been in education for 40 years and getting closer to our retirement. Luckily, for the next generation, we have a few graduate programs and a doctorate program for interpreter educators. I guess I’m curious to see if the next generation is really interested in pursuing interpreter education or if they are interested in other arenas. I wonder what will happen to many of the programs as this occurs.

Dennis:

Yes. That’s right. There was a recent survey that said that 26% of interpreter educators were slated to retire in the next 2-3 years.

Anna:

Wow. That’s amazing. I will be. Will you, Dennis? You’re pretty stubborn. I can see you staying for the long haul.

Dennis:

You are a third or fourth generation interpreter – I feel like I’m a sixth or seventh generation interpreter.

Next slide.

Market Disorder

Anna:

Now, Dennis was talking about some amazing things. Today we have 147 interpreter education programs. It’s pretty amazing.

We have a certification process. We have programs. We have CIT’s accreditation program, however, the larger percentage of interpreter education programs are not accredited. It’s really a small percentage even today. We have certification, but we still don’t really understand what it is supposed to look like. Most members of RID – and this is another big shift in the field – in the past, the RID membership was primarily certified interpreters. RID didn’t really start to grow the associate membership until the late 1980s, so there was a really small number of RID members who were not certified. That translated to conferences and other RID events focusing in on the needs of certified members to maintain and develop their skills. There has been a radical shift in the RID membership since that time. Currently, the largest number of RID members today are not certified. In many ways, it seems strange that the membership of our professional organization is mostly comprised of interpreters who are not certified.

So that has really had a large impact. It creates a lot of market disorder. There are very few standards. We don’t have certification standards or even agree on what a certified interpreter looks like or what it means to be certified. We see varying skill levels from certified interpreters and variation in what the work looks like. There are no standards for hiring interpreters, for interpreter wages. There is so much market disorder. We have a lot we can be proud of, but we are also impacted by many variables which impact the stability of the market.

We know how to create programs and projects and implement them. We know how to found an organization like CIT and work on projects like accreditation. That project required years of effort by numerous people – more than 20 years, in fact, to finally implement accreditation. After all the work and energy to create the accreditation program, for example, very few programs have taken advantage of it. These kinds of imbalances create a level of destabilization. We are so far behind. Our work is far from complete.

Dennis:

Still, 50 years later…RID has been around for 50 years. CIT has been around for a long time. But these two organizations are still volunteer-run organizations. Obviously, we have the national office for RID with paid staff and the executive director, but the leaders in our field, in these professional organizations, still volunteer their time. Our leaders are volunteering to serve as presidents and vice presidents of RID and CIT. I think it is something we need to think about. Can we successfully continue with this kind of model? Can we continue to progress when we are led by volunteer organizations? It’s something to consider.

Next slide.

Behind the Eight Ball

Anna:

One thing has always struck me – we are always playing catch up. We are never in a position to be proactive, rather, we are always reacting. We always seem to be behind the eight ball instead of getting ahead. One example of this happened in the late 1970s with the passage of PL 94-142, the mainstreaming legislation at that time. Deaf children were moved from the schools for the deaf and started attending schools in their local, home district. We certainly had concerns and opinions about the implementation of the law, but we discussed these issues within our own community rather than voicing our concerns to the powers that be. We weren’t successful in creating change or coming up with an approach that was successful. We haven’t caught up with that. This is really a critical issue. Our inability to be proactive has been detrimental. It feels like the Deaf community has suffered at our hands – that’s certainly not the only cause, but the Deaf community has been at our mercy, in large part, because we haven’t figured out how to come to the table and join the discussion outside of our own ranks. We haven’t been successful on a federal level, we haven’t been able to advocate, to participate in creating legislation. We haven’t done a great job of educating society about interpreting, what it looks like, why it is necessary. We just haven’t done a good job with that and we’re still behind the eight ball. We haven’t caught up and it feels like we sort of missed the boat in a lot of ways. There’s no way for us to really catch up. We’re certainly trying our best, but we’re sort of making progress on the fly. Ultimately, the results of this inability to be proactive are really devastating.

Dennis:

I think one of the things that has happened over the last 30 years or so is that the interpreters, as a profession, have lost control of the work. We’ve lost control of who defines our work. VRS defines our work, the FCC defines our work, hiring entities – people who hire K12 interpreters, all these external forces are controlling our work – spoken language referral agencies, etc. As sign language interpreters, we have to try to fight back to regain control of our work for ourselves and not allow external forces define the work that we do.

Anna:

Yes. That’s a really good example. We are so behind in that area. We have been so internally focused, so insulated that we haven’t really lifted our heads out of interpreter-world to use our efforts and energy in appropriate places. There are so many things we can’t agree on in our own community – we’ve been so consumed with the test, the certification test…we’ve lost sight of other critical areas that need our attention.

Next slide.

Deaf Community Involvement in Interpreter Education

Anna:

One huge impact is the decreased involvement of Deaf people’s involvement in interpreting. As Dennis mentioned earlier, in the beginning, RID and NAD worked together. NAD helped to found RID and maintained a level of involvement afterwards. Deaf people used to be involved in the screening and recruiting of interpreters, but now there is a completely different approach. It is extremely rare to have Deaf teachers involved in interpreter education. I still feel it is critical. I hope that if we grow the field of Deaf Interpreters, that’s one way to reintegrate Deaf people into the roles of gatekeeping. By having Deaf interpreters there, in the assignments, in the process, with other Deaf people, so that they can see what is required and what the process looks like, so they can feel empowered and have a better understanding of their roles. Hopefully, people can benefit from working with Deaf interpreters rather than just trying to get through an assignment.

Next slide.

Recurring Issues in Interpreter Education

Anna:

These are some of the recurring issues we see. If you read StreetLeverage posts, Cindy Volk posted an article, Sign Language Interpreter Education: Time for a National Call to Action, in October during Interpreter Education month. Her article addresses some of these recurring issues. These are issues that have not been resolved. They aren’t going away because we haven’t learned the lessons yet. We haven’t learned how to, as Dennis mentioned earlier, we haven’t learned how to be accountable and take control of what is happening within our field and in our work.

We have to be more creative and find ways to involve the Deaf community in our work and in the education of interpreters. We have to find ways to empower Deaf people to self-advocate, to fight for their language rights, to ask for qualified interpreters, to empower Deaf people so that they feel they can rejoin that gatekeeping process and join in the screening and selection of future interpreters.

We have to look at what we call “the gap”. We have to start using what we already know. We already know that graduating students isn’t enough. They don’t have sufficient skills when they graduate. The interpreter education programs say they can’t do outreach to students after they have graduated and have been in the field for three years. But the students aren’t ready. They need more time and more language exposure prior to interpreting. Perhaps that is the role of the community college, then. Perhaps they provide the language program that would feed into an interpreter education program on the college/university level. If students have two, three, perhaps even four years of completely focused language exposure – maybe you get a degree in ASL and then you do your graduate studies in interpreting. Who knows? But we have to figure out how to close that gap.

There have been a large number of lawsuits related to specific settings – courtrooms, etc., but they are really focused in the wrong direction. These places are stuck with the products we provide them. If we haven’t figured out how to consistently graduate competent interpreters, then we, and by “we” I mean the collective “we” – aren’t doing a good job. There are programs here and there which are doing a good job, but overall, there are so many graduates who enter the field who just aren’t prepared. So, they graduate, they have no supervision, no support. They are left alone to learn on the job and they aren’t prepared. They aren’t ready to work independently – they don’t have sufficient experience or knowledge. They don’t have the ability to manage what they are doing. They are still learning the language. The programs just aren’t sufficient. They don’t have the depth or breadth of skill development to prepare students for the work they are going to do on their own. I think those are some of the examples we’ve been talking about.

The next slide has a few of the many questions that need to be answered. Dennis, did you want to say something?

Dennis:

Yes. These are some of the questions related to the topic Anna was just discussing – what outcomes are necessary for graduates, etc. So, these are some of the lingering questions we have in the field. If we don’t look at these questions and we continue to move forward without answers, nothing will change in interpreter education or interpreting, in general. We have to confront some of these very difficult questions.

Anna:

Yes, Dennis. Do you have any idea where that discussion starts? Where do we begin? At what point?

Dennis:

I think some of the conversations have already started in places like StreetLeverage, both the posts online and at the StreetLeverage Live events. The conversation has started. We have to start talking about these things at RID, at CIT. We have to make a place, we have to create a space for these discussions. When you look at the RID conference schedule, we see the list of presenters, but where are the discussions? Where are we having this conversation? Where are we making the time to debate and discuss these issues? Certainly, RID has committees and there are people having these conversations on a smaller scale, but we need more people involved in it. I still think we need to include more voices – we need more people involved in the conversation.

Anna:

Yes. I’m thinking about that. RID – we’ve been involved there. I also think community forums are a great starting place, but once that happens, how do we continue to spread the word? There are multiple levels we need to be working on – state, local and national levels.

Laughter as the slide in the presentation returns to the beginning.

Dennis:

Well, I guess that’s it.

Anna:

Our last slide got skipped. The closing point…oh. Go back. Back up. One more…oh! No? Nevermind.

That’s fine. We’re good.

I just want to leave you with one final thought. We have to remember Deaf people in all of this. Deaf people depend on the decisions we make about interpreter education and what it will look like into the future, as well as future interpreters and how we move forward. Remember why you are here and who we serve. Think of these things with deep respect, reverence and humility.

Dennis:

Yes. Respect, reverence and humility. We have to remember to be humble. The decisions we make – we don’t make them alone. We make them in our partnership with Deaf people. We are all in this together.

Anna:

Agreed.

Wing:

As we are closing this webinar today, I’d like to share a piece of my own heart. As I watched you both tonight, there was so much of yourselves in your presentation. It was really amazing. The wealth of knowledge you shared tonight was so rich, I only hope that we all can take some of that wealth of knowledge to share with others. Your years of experience and your valued perspectives are something we can gather and store and grow over time. Honestly, I feel humbled by your willingness to take time out to share your knowledge, experience and perspectives with us today. We are very fortunate – interpreting as a profession is fortunate – to have benefitted from your service all of these years. Hopefully, we can all come together to work towards a shared vision of the future. Thank you both so much.

Anna:

As we said in our opening – we both feel indebted. We are indebted to the Deaf Community. They have given so much to us in our lives. We’ll never be able to repay it. This is how we repay that debt.

Dennis:

Absolutely. We are indebted.

Wing:

In some ways, my little crayon box had a few colors, but tonight added another color. Something I can take to use and write with on my own.

Anna:

What color is it? What color did we add?

Wing:

I don’t know – something new and different.

Anna:

Something old? The color of old?

Wing:

No, no. Just something different and inspiring.

Dennis:

No, no, no.

Anna:

I know what your are thinking – I’m the old one.

Laughter all around.

Dennis:

Old and feeling old are two different things.

Wing:

Many of the participants, as they were joining, expressed their thanks via AIM, email, etc. They are grateful for your work. They all say that this presentation is so relevant. So now, for all the participants tonight – your job is to share this information. Go to www.streetleverage.com. This presentation will be posted on the blog and you can share the link with your interpreter friends. Share it with Deaf people and the Deaf Community. Hopefully, people will be moved by this conversation and be able to contribute and help us support the Deaf Community in whatever ways that we can.

Anna:

Thank you for allowing Dennis and I to take a look back on our history. It’s been a wonderful experience.

Dennis:

Thank you so much. I’ve really enjoyed this opportunity. I agree with Anna.

Anna:

Thank you so much. I’ve really enjoyed this opportunity.

Wing:

Thanks everyone! Take care! Bye now!

* 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 2, 2014 by Brandon Arthur — Leave a comment

October is Sign Language Interpreter Education Month

StreetLeverage is pleased to present October as Interpreter Education Month (IEM) on StreetLeverage.com. The aim of Interpreter Education Month is to showcase insights, perspectives, considerations and dynamics impacting the education and training of sign language interpreters.

We are delighted to share that StreetLeverage is partnering with the Conference of Interpreter Trainers (CIT) to focus this year’s IEM on the work and history of interpreter educators. This collaboration endeavors to spotlight the insights and perspectives of interpreter educators on the dynamics they encounter bringing up the next generation of practitioners.

Highlights

StreetLeverage is excited about IEM and we want you to be a part of it! You can find a schedule of activities below.

Weekly Curated Articles. The month of October will bring weekly articles authored by interpreter educators asking questions about the work, challenges, and successes experienced in the classroom.

CIT Conference Coverage. StreetLeverage will provide coverage of the 2014 CIT conference being held in Portland, OR. October 29^th – November 1st. Coverage will include:

Live Streaming. StreetLeverage will be providing complimentary remote access to the plenary and business meeting sessions of the CIT conference. Click here for the details.

Interviews. StreetLeverage will be doing interviews with event organizers, VIPs, speakers and attendees.

Micro-blogging. StreetLeverage will be micro-blogging various educational sessions via Facebook and Twitter. Be sure to connect with us here.

Historical Reflection. Anna Witter-Merithew will share a special presentation on the history of interpreter education and review the important milestones that have shaped today’s interpreter education. Details here.

StreetLeverage – Live Giveaway. StreetLeverage will be giving away a complimentary registration to StreetLeverage – Live 2015 being held in Boston/Newton, MA April 17th-19th. StreetLeverage will be accepting entries until October 28, 2014 at 5p ET. Enter to Win.

More. More. More. In addition to what has been listed above, StreetLeverage will be extending additional opportunities like an exclusive CIT membership and a suggested reading list of StreetLeverage articles for educators. More here.

We hope you’ll take opportunity to join the discussion on the dynamics and history of interpreter education in the field of sign language interpreting.

Posted on May 8, 2013 by Brandon Arthur — Leave a comment

Sign Language Interpreters: Embody the Change You Want to See

In the afterglow of StreetLeverage – Live | Atlanta the words of Seth Godin resonate strongly, “The art of moving forward lies in understanding what to leave behind.” As I have contemplated the myriad of questions asked and the rich diversity of perspectives shared, it occurs to me that there was consensus around one singular idea—to leave behind the current definition of what it means to be a successful sign language interpreter.

Success Reframed

This was repeatedly evidenced in the many sentiments shared urging one another, and every practitioner in the field, to return to the artistry of our craft and refocus on the fundamentals that the profession was founded upon—permission, trust, humility, and level of connectedness to the Deaf Community.

Simply, the only sustainable determination of success for a sign language interpreter is intrinsically tied to the real world experience they have both with and within the Deaf Community.

The ‘I am Change’ Manifesto

I am Change in Sign Language Interpreting — Angela Herbert

If positioned to do so, I believe those who attended StreetLeverage – Live | Atlanta would collectively invite every sign language interpreter to be the change they want to see in the profession.

To dare to stand in contrast to the iterative adjustments to the meaning of success that have replaced the permission, humanity, and applause of the community we serve with a preoccupation with proscribed practices, specialization, and financial reciprocity.

Will you stand with them?

Change-Makers

StreetLeverage – Live, and streetleverage.com for that matter, would not be possible without the daring contributions of people willing to make a difference in the field by contributing their time, resources, perspectives, and ideas.

Speakers

I would like to extend my appreciation to each of the inspiring speakers at StreetLeverage – Live | Atlanta for their thought provoking talks and calls to action.

Nancy Bloch

Talk | Marginalization Within the Sign Language Interpreting Profession: Where is the Deaf Perspective?

* Find the PPT deck for her talk here.

Dennis Cokely

Talk | Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before

* Find the PPT deck for his talk here.

Betty Colonomos

Talk | Sign Language Interpreters: Fostering Integrity

* Find the PPT deck for her talk here.

Dave Coyne

Talk | Social Justice: A New Model of Practice for Sign Language Interpreters?

* Find the PPT deck for his talk here.

Shane Feldman

Talk | Where Does Advocacy Fit in the Sign Language Interpreting Profession?

* Find the PPT deck for his talk here.

Stephanie Feyne

Talk | Authenticity: The Impact of a Sign Language Interpreter’s Choices

* Find the PPT deck for her talk here.

Debra Russell

Talk | Sign Language Interpreters: Discover and Recover an Enduring Legacy?

* Find the PPT deck for her talk here.

Anna Witter-Merithew

Talk | Stepping out of the Shadows of Invisibility: Toward a Deeper Conceptualization of the Role of Sign language Interpreters

* Find the PPT deck for her talk here.

We will be releasing videos of these talks here on streetleverage.com in the coming weeks and months. Stay tuned. The first release is next week!

Volunteers

It is difficult to express the profound sense of gratitude I have for the many people who volunteered their time to ensure our time in Atlanta was enjoyable and productive. I would like to thank the following people for their immeasurable contribution to the success of StreetLeverage – Live | Atlanta.

Tara Arthur

You are the reason StreetLeverage is possible. Thank you for allowing me to chase big dreams. Words cannot capture the gratitude I have for your encouraging smile and unwavering support. Thank you for coordinating the hospitality efforts at the event. Mwah!

Hayley Baccaire

Your command of registration was impressive, appreciated and noted by all in attendance. Thank you. Also, thanks for supporting the social web coverage of the event.

Wing Butler

You are a social web giant! Thank you for leading the social media coverage of the event and for lending your incredible talent to the StreetLeverage effort.

Diane Lynch

Your work to coordinate the volunteers and continuing education components of the event were masterful. Thank you for engendering a pay-it-forward perspective.

Jennifer Maloney

Your utility was amazing. Thanks for being everywhere support was needed. Badging and registration were better because you came. You are wise beyond your years. Thank you.

Students

Special thanks to Jarvis Avery, Henry Bruce, Brittany Gailey, Julie Garbison, Desiree Hines, Brandi Meriwether, Venise Nichole Niles, Erin Powell, Emma Jane Rozenzweig, and Jillian Wright for your support of the event and reminding us of the importance of the coming generation of industry stewards.

Paul Tracy

Your AV muscle and vision for room set-up were incredible. Thank you for leading the thankless work that is facility and technology management. Your comedic tendencies are only surpassed by your abundant generosity.

Our Legacy

As we work to leave behind the current definition of what it means to be a successful sign language interpreter, let us continue to be inspired by the importance of leaving a legacy of generosity for those who follow. It is only our generous contribution to the betterment and advancement of the field that will endure. Lets be the change we want to see in the profession.

Thanks again to everyone who participated. See closing comments here.

We have already begun preparing for next year. Mark your calendars! We will be holding next year’s StreetLeverage – Live May 1 – 4, 2014.

Join us?

* 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 site) and click “Sign Me Up!”

asdf

Posted on March 10, 2013 by Dennis Cokely — Leave a comment

Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before

Dennis suggests that the secret to successful interpretations often rests on “One thing. Just one thing” – remembering “the day before”. Our failure to remember “the Day Before” means that we act on assumptions that generally result in lack of meaning equivalence in our interpretations.

Pre-event Dialogue

Please take opportunity to dialogue with Dennis on these topics prior to the event by submitting comments below.

Workshop | Deaf Community Health Quotient

The session will focus on the nature of our connectedness with the Deaf Community. Clearly the field of interpreting has changed dramatically over the past forty years and many of the changes have significantly altered the relationship between interpreters and Deaf people. As a field we have sometimes remained silent while individuals and entities that know little or nothing about the Deaf Community and even less about our work as interpreters create the circumstances that have altered our relationship with the Community. At other times our professional organization, the RID, has created the circumstances that alter our connectedness with the Community. An example of this is the Code of Professional Conduct that seems to place greater emphasis on mandating common behavior rather than on cultivating ethical decision-making.

Posted on February 26, 2013 by Betty Colonomos — 62 Comments

Sign Language Interpreters and the Quest for a Deaf Heart

A recurrent phrase that has been appearing in frequent discussions is “Deaf heart.” Our national interpreter organization, RID, has long been characterized as needing a Deaf heart. Recently, changes have been made to move RID to a more Deaf-centered perspective on the field of interpretation. The most recent evidence of this is the addition of Shane Feldman, who is Deaf, as the new Executive Director. Although institutional shifts are possible with changes in policies and practices, there is much misunderstanding of the concept as it applies to practicing interpreters.

Early Discovery

In the 1990’s there were many efforts to address this concern. New England states held a series of Ally Conferences that focused on the Deaf view of interpreters and their behaviors. This resulted in many discussions and workshops to clarify the meaning of an interpreter-as-ally. There was–and still is—debate about the fine line between ethical practices and ally responses. Today, it is considered acceptable and even desirable to provide information to hearing and Deaf consumers regarding accommodations, cultural differences, and resources. The emergence of Deaf Interpreters in our profession has contributed to the dissemination of information about accessibility and Deaf people, and has helped to educate the Deaf Community about their own power.

Deaf Activists & Social Dynamics

In the 21^st century we looked to models from minority groups that view societal privilege and oppression to explain and understand the relationship between interpreters and the Deaf Community. Deaf activists are helping the community of interpreters and Deaf people to understand the social dynamics that create marginalization, audism, and racial/ethnic prejudices.

These robust and healthy discussions about privilege are paving the way for a change in the way we think about minority communities and cultures that goes beyond the medical and pathological view of Deaf people.

Internalization of Deaf Heart

But what about ‘Deaf heart’? In my travels and conversations with many interpreters, codas, and members of the Deaf Community it has become clearer that we still are not adequately capturing the qualities and behaviors of Deaf-heart interpreters. It is not about laws, services, ethics (at least from majority/privilege perspective), or training. It is something that can’t be taught. It is difficult to explain, yet palpably absent.

The internalization of a Deaf heart must come from the interpreter’s own sense of justice and morality.

A number of contributors to StreetLeverage have expressed this quality in different ways.

Dennis Cokely, in his article, Sign Language Interpreters: Complicit in a Devil’s Bargain?, provides a historical context that demonstrates the shift from earlier times when having ‘Deaf heart’ was intrinsic for interpreters to the indicators that this has significantly diminished. He explains:

How do we justify learning their language and profiting from it without giving back? In becoming a “profession” have we simply become parasites?”

and

What are we willing to do as individuals to become reconnected with Deaf people? Are we willing to adjust our work choices to accommodate the rhythm of Deaf people’s lives?”

Trudy Suggs illustrates this clearly in, A Deaf Perspective: Cultural Respect in Sign Language Interpreting

This type of knowledge (schools for the deaf) is an important element of Deaf culture for many people. Not recognizing its importance, or dismissing it when someone shares this information speaks volumes to cultural (il) literacy.

A participant from that group suddenly said with an incredulous look, “I don’t understand why you’re so upset that video interpreters don’t know city names? That’s really ridiculous. It’s such a small thing.” I was momentarily caught off-guard by her flippant response. I quickly clarified that I wasn’t upset, saying, “Quite the contrary. It’s just one of those things that Deaf people have to live with. It does become cumbersome if you have to make several calls a day and each video interpreter you encounter doesn’t know a city sign or town where a deaf school is.”

In Sign Language Interpreters: Stepping Out of the Shadow of Invisibility, Anna Witter-Merithew asks us to examine the human side of the interpreter.

“Do we think of ourselves as bystanders—present from a distance, and therefore, not involved? Have we internalized the neutrality we are to bring to our task as non-involvement and disinterest [versus objectivity and emotional maturity]?

What do we believe about ourselves, our work and our contribution to the good of the Deaf society? As we explore the answer to this and other hard questions, we must consider the implications of our history of behaving as if invisible and its potential contribution to the diffusion of responsibility.”

Overcoming Inertia

Part of having a Deaf heart is caring enough about the well being of Deaf people and their communities to put them above ego, pride, and unwillingness to fight for what is right. For example, I have interpreted in Juvenile Court many times and have come across several instances when parents/guardians should have the services of Deaf interpreters. It is obvious at the first meeting that the consumers have limited education, cognitive deficits, idiosyncratic language, or some combination of these. I inform their attorneys of this and find out that this case has been ongoing (sometimes up to three years) and the attorneys had no idea about this. Often these lawyers and social service personnel indicate that they “felt that something was not right” about their interactions with clients. Numerous interpreters have been working on these cases. They are deemed qualified to work in court; they are certified; all have had some degree of legal training. Why didn’t they recognize this? Intervene? Advocate for Deaf Interpreters?

Absence of Context

Betty Colonomos - Sign Language Interpreters and the Quest for a Deaf Heart — Betty Colonomos

My professional experiences are replete with markers of the lack of “Deaf heart.” I have heard English interpretations of texts where Deaf people are proudly sharing their generational Deafness (e.g. fifth generation Deaf) conveyed as a matter-of-fact piece of information about having deaf children in each generation. The critical meaning of Deaf “royalty” is absent, leaving the possibility that the non-deaf audience might see this as a genetic flaw or “problem.”

In workshops I see many interpreters–student and experienced alike—who do not recognize ASL discourse that is representing a community’s point of view. For example, Deaf people often convey narrative that on the surface seems to be about them (an “I” Deaf text) when in fact the message is about the “We” Deaf story. The consequence is that the Deaf person appears to be discussing an isolated event, when the issue is really about a community with shared experiences. Which do you think has a greater impact on the audience? Being around Deaf people often allows interpreters to know how to distinguish “I” from “We” Deaf texts.

Interpreters who have no interactions with Deaf people outside of work miss much of the collective history and current burning issues that show up in interpreted interactions and collegial discussions. How can interpreters who hide behind their interpretation of the Code of Professional Conduct–instead of taking responsibility to intervene–employ strategies that are culturally appropriate to solve problems?

Accountability is the Beginning

Interpreters who demonstrate the qualities of Deaf heart are those who reflect on how their choices and decisions affect the Deaf Community; they question their practices that seem to be oppressive or damaging to the lives of Deaf people; they own their mistakes and share them with others. Most importantly, they seek input and advice from Deaf people and are not afraid to be uncomfortable with Deaf people’s responses and viewpoint.

A number of authors on Street Leverage have also shared what it is to have a Deaf heart. In Aaron Brace’s piece, The Duality of the Sign Language Interpreter, he digs deep and exposes some of the demons we face.

“…my customers are not well served by a quasi-messianic philosophy that valorizes my role far above theirs. It’s also simply inaccurate; customers often communicate effectively despite my excellent service rather than because of it.”

“I’m not sure I’ll ever fully understand my duality as both ally and enemy in the lives of Deaf people without some measure of guilt. Like many members of privileged groups, I hope to learn the right way to behave toward an oppressed group—once— and never again have to feel unsure of myself or guilty about my privilege.

When I demonstrate a fuller understanding of both what I give and what I take, it is returned by Deaf people, not with a sneering pleasure at my knowing my place, but with greater trust, friendship, and welcome.”

Gina Oliva, in her challenge to us in, Sign Language Interpreters in Mainstream Classrooms: Heartbroken and Gagged, boldly brings forth the role played by sign language interpreters in mainstream education and the significant impact this has on future generations of Deaf people. We have remained silent for too long about our part in harming deaf children and their potential for successful lives. We have allowed interpreters to present themselves as adequate language models and carriers of negative views of Deaf people. We have done little to admit to this injustice and have put our needs for employment above the lives of innocent children.

There are things we can do to correct this major injustice in our field. Anna Witter-Merithew in, Sign Language Interpreters: Breaking Down Silos Through Reflective Practice, emphasizes the need for us to look inside and seek guidance from our consumers:

“ It is important to find opportunities to talk with Deaf consumers about our work as sign language interpreters and to ask them to help us consider the implications of role implementation for their experiences.”

And in Deaf Disempowerment and Today’s Interpreter by Trudy Suggs, we see a Deaf view on how we can move forward.

“…remember that if a deaf person expresses frustration at disempowerment, it doesn’t necessarily mean she or he is angry, divisive or separatist. Rather, take a look at the situation, and figure out how, if at all, you or other interpreters might have contributed to the situation. “

Important Enough to Act?

The only question that remains is whether or not the practitioners in our field care enough about this to want to do something about it. Do we need to bring these discussions to the forefront of our public professional discourse? Should we insist that our programs for training interpreters address this issue and involve Deaf people much more in educating future interpreters? When will we uphold the integrity of our profession by supporting novices and by renouncing those who cast a pall over us?

When will we appreciate the valuable insights of codas to help us nurture the Deaf heart in us? Why do we vigorously debate whether a permanent seat on RID’s Board for an IDP (interpreter with Deaf Parents) is necessary when we know how much it will enhance the Deaf heart perspective in the organization? When will we acknowledge that Deaf Studies courses and programs are helpful in understanding, but they do not replace the need for feeling the stories?

We have a wonderful opportunity before us. Deaf people and codas are more aware of their own Deaf hearts and they are willing to talk about it and to help others recognize their own unconscious anti-Deaf heart actions. Why aren’t we eagerly seeking their input and guidance? Why aren’t we thankful for how they enrich us?

It is hard to walk in another’s shoes, but our work depends on the ability to see the world through the lenses of our consumers and clients. Without this, how can we become the noble profession we envision?

There is always room for a Deaf Heart…you are invited.

* 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 site) and click “Sign Me Up!”

asdf

Challenge Assumptions

First Contact

Our Own Day Before

New Assumptions

The Same Old Words

Change Words and Change Assumptions

One Thing. Just One Thing.

Identifying Gatekeepers

The Village

The Village Elders

In The End

Questions For Consideration

References

1. Dennis Cokely | Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before

2. Deb Russell | Sign Language Interpreters: Discover & Recover an Enduring Legacy

3. Betty Colonomos | Sign Language Interpreters: Fostering Integrity

4. Doug Bowen Bailey | Transforming Perspectives: The Power of One-to-One Conversations For Sign Language Interpreters

5. Trudy Suggs | Deaf Disempowerment and Today’s Interpreter

6. MJ Bienvenu | Bilingualism: Are Sign Language Interpreters Bilinguals?

The Whole is More than the Sum of its Parts

1. Sign Language Interpreters and the “F” Word

One Headline We Wish We had Created Ourselves

2. Recognizing Polite Indifference: Sign Language Interpreters & Power

A Personal Story that Resonated

3. Missing Narratives in Interpreter Education

A Post We Thought Worthy of Even More Attention

4. Station Meditation: VRS, Compassion and Sign Language Interpreters

A Positive Outlook on VRS Interpreting

5. Do Sign Language Interpreter “Accents” Compromise Comprehension?

A Post that Made Me Conscious of My “Accent” In a Good Way

6. Self-Awareness: How Sign Language Interpreters Acknowledge Privilege and Oppression

I Wanted to Call the Presenter So We Could Have Coffee and Talk

7. Horizontal Violence: Can Sign Language Interpreters Break the Cycle?

The Most Popular Post This Year

8. Deaf Interpreters: Shaping the Future of the Sign Language Interpreting Profession

A New Paradigm Emerging for Hearing Interpreters

9. 10 Lessons from my First Year as a Freelance Sign Language Interpreter

There is Encouragement and Positivity in the Field of Interpreting Today

10. National Treasure

Those Who Inspire

Our Hope

Greater Insight on the State of Interpreting

RID Trends Presentation Summary

Interpreter Education: History is a Relentless Master

Webinar Goal and Objectives

Socio-Political Context in Which Interpreter Education Exists

Interpreter Education: Early Mindset

Early Recruitment

Program Expansion

Federal Funding for Interpreter Education

Federal Funding for Interpreter Education Cont.

Market Disorder

Behind the Eight Ball

Deaf Community Involvement in Interpreter Education

Recurring Issues in Interpreter Education

Highlights

Success Reframed

The ‘I am Change’ Manifesto

Change-Makers

Speakers

Volunteers

Sponsors

Our Legacy

Sign Language Interpreters: The Importance of the Day Before

Pre-event Dialogue

Workshop | Deaf Community Health Quotient

Early Discovery

Deaf Activists & Social Dynamics

Internalization of Deaf Heart

Overcoming Inertia

Accountability is the Beginning

Important Enough to Act?