Overview of Interpreter Education

The Interpreter Education Program (IEP) prepares interpreters for the A.A. degree (entry level) and the B.A. degree (mid- to advanced level). Students are educated in the practical application of the theories of second language learning and interpretation, and develop the competencies necessary to interpret between individuals who are hearing and individuals who are deaf, deaf-blind, or hard of hearing. Interpreter education is accomplished through a learning model that is developmental, sequential and spiral within a task-analysis approach to the study of interpretation in preparation of interpreters as cross-cultural mediators. The study of interpretation is based upon major underlying tenets and assumptions, some of which are derived from interpretation models, while others are derived from, and supported by, theoretical and empirical studies in sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, discourse analysis, cultural anthropology, and interpretation.

The program combines the goals and objectives of the A.A. and B.A. degree programs into one unified and sequential document that details the differential competencies under the two degrees. The Curriculum Map and Assessment Matrix delineate the requisite knowledge, values, competencies and practical applications so that degree candidate proficiencies are aligned with national, professional and state standards. Program faculty members continually monitor, seek and share feedback from stakeholders, and modify and enhance courses toward program improvement. In 2004, the Curriculum Map was revised to reflect program improvements that included the addition of two new courses, one deletion of a course and revision of nine courses.

Assessment is conducted through a continuous feedback loop starting with Program Goals through Program Improvement: Program Goals – Student Learning Goal and Objectives – Assessment of Student Learning – Interpretation of Results of Assessment – Student Focus Groups – Stakeholder and Faculty Involvement – Program Improvements.

Program Goals

Goal #1: To increase the supply of skilled oral, sign language, and tactile interpreters who are fluent in American Sign Language and English for Arkansas, the region, and the nation for persons who are deaf, deaf-blind, or hard of hearing.

Goal #2: To serve as a regional and national resource center for the provision of consultation and inservice training regarding interpreting, deafness, and accessibility issues.

Goal #3: To develop and disseminate instructional materials to interpreting programs in the region, and explore research opportunities that address global concerns of interpreter education such as developing transference of language skills to interpretation skills and identifying predictors of successful visual language acquisition.

Student Learning Goals and Objectives

Five Student Learning Goals are Linked to Eight Central Student Learning Objectives

The five student learning goals and eight central student learning objectives are aligned with the Conference of Interpreter Trainers (CIT) National Interpreter Education Standards. Objectives are written with the expected competencies and observable outcomes and are sequenced to allow students to progress from: 1) ASL language acquisition and English proficiency to 2) mastery of entry level interpreting skills (A.A. degree) and to 3) mastery of mid-advanced level interpreting skills (B.A. degree).

Student Learning Goal #1: Acquire language proficiency in conversational American Sign Language (ASL), in written, spoken and signed English, and in the contact language varieties used by persons who are hearing, deaf, deaf-blind, or hard of hearing.

Objective #1: Language Competency in American Sign Language (ASL) and English. Upon completion of ASL IV, students will meet the Program standard of an Intermediate rating level on the Sign Communication Proficiency Interview (SCPI).

Student Learning Goal #2: Assess and apply different modes of simultaneous and consecutive interpreting/ transliterating, and different target language forms (e.g., ASL, spoken or signed English, tactile language) to transfer a message from the source language into the target language without distortions, additions, omissions or undue influence from the source language for multicultural consumers of varying ages in a variety of community and governmental settings.

Objective #2: Transfer Competency. Upon graduation, students will be able to apply the skills, knowledge and attitudes to meet the program standard at the Beginners Level (I / II) on the Mid-America Quality Assurance Screening Test (QAST) for interpreters.

Student Learning Goal #3: Demonstrate the knowledge and application of the unique body of knowledge related to the field of sign language interpretation including the history of current practices, interpreter role and responsibilities, theories and models of interpretation, ethics, certification, business practices, management of physical settings and commitment to and use of technology.

Objective #3: History and Theory of Interpretation. Upon graduation, students will be able to apply their knowledge to pass the Written portion of the QAST assessment.

Objective #4: Methodological Competency. Upon graduation and the completion of the interpreting courses and the practicum experience with a “C” or better, students will demonstrate the ability to assess and then apply different modes of interpreting and different target language forms.

Student Learning Goal #4: Will demonstrate the ethical and cultural competence and multicultural sensitivities when interpreting between and among users of ASL and English in one-on-one, small group, and large group settings and cross-cultural interactions.

Objective #5: Bicultural/Multicultural Competency. Upon completion of the Deaf Culture, Practicum and Internship courses with a “C” or better, students will demonstrate cultural and ethical competence.

Objective #6: Subject Matter Competency. Upon completion of prerequisite subject matter courses with a “C” or better, students will demonstrate a broad general knowledge in several fields, and a specialized knowledge in one or more disciplines.

Objective #7: Techniques and Logistics. Upon graduation, and completion of advanced interpreting courses and the internship with a “C” or better, students will be able to apply the skills, knowledge and attitudes to meet the Program standard at the Intermediate-Advanced level on the QAST assessment.

Student Learning Goal #5: Demonstrate the attitudes, dispositions and skills expected of professionals including knowledge of research protocol, ability to analyze research studies and apply results to interpretation practice, ability to plan for lifelong learning, and participation in professional organizations.

Objective #8: Research. Upon graduation and the completion of the advanced interpreting and transliterating courses, the educational interpreting minor, and internship with a “C” or better, students will demonstrate the ability to use ASL with children, youth, and adults who are deaf or deaf-blind.

Objective #9: Practicum and Internship. Upon graduation and completion of fieldwork, students will demonstrate the competencies, specialized knowledge and dispositions expected of professional interpreters.

Assessment of Student Learning

Testing Instruments for A.A. and B.A. Student Learning Objectives #1, #2, #3 and #7

The learning objectives are congruent with the knowledge base and competencies tested by the Sign Communication Proficiency Interview (SCPI) and the Mid-America Quality Assurance Screening Test (QAST). In addition, the curricula content of the degree program is congruent with the national interpreter education standards (NIES) established by the Conference of Interpreter Trainers (CIT) for the field of interpreter education.

  • The SCPI assesses American Sign Language competencies
  • The QAST for interpreters assesses Interpretation and Transliteration competencies

Results

Objective #1: A.A. & B.A. Degree Graduates: ASL Competencies @ SCPI Intermediate Level

10 students: 100% met the SCPI Program standard of Intermediate. Of that number, an amazing 40% exceeded the Program standard (2 @ Intermediate Plus, one @ Advanced, and one @ Superior).

Objectives #2 and #3: A.A. Degree Graduates: Interpreting Competencies @ QAST Beginner-Intermediate Level

9 A.A. Degree Graduates: 100% achieved the minimum standard and 22% (2/9) exceeded the standard (1 @ NAD 3 and 1 @ QAST Level IV).

Objective #7: B.A. Degree Graduates: Interpreting Competencies @ QAST Intermediate-Advanced Level

11 B.A. Degree Graduates: 73% achieved the minimum standard, 18% exceeded the standard and 27% remained at the A.A. degree level standard, but scored higher within the level thus indicating some improvement in skills (1 @ RID certified; 2 @ QAST Level IV; 4 @ QAST Level III; 2 @ Level II; and 1 @ Level I).

Analysis of Results

Objective #1: American Sign Language Competencies

100% of students met the minimum standard expected for initial employment in the state of Arkansas, and by the Arkansas Rehabilitation Services, Arkansas Department of Education and the Arkansas School for the Deaf for employment in school districts serving children who are deaf, deaf-blind or hard of hearing.

  • These results reflect an increase from 54% in 1996 to 88% in 2003 and to 100% in 2004 who met or exceeded the standard

Objectives #2, #3, and #7: Interpreting Competencies

QAST Performance Assessment Results and Interpretation:

85% of the 20 graduates (9 A.A & 11 B.A.) achieved the differential standards under the two degrees; 20% exceeded the standards. Interpreting credentials allowed for full and/or part-time work in- and out-of-state. B.A. degrees enhanced employment opportunities, and employers were very satisfied with the competencies of the graduates, especially with regard to disposition, professionalism and ethics.

  • 100% of A.A. graduates met the benchmark to enter the B.A. phase of programming
  • 22% of A.A. graduates exceeded the standard for graduation
  • 18% of B.A. graduates exceeded the standard for graduation

Stakeholder and Program-Wide Faculty Involvement

The program has an extensive assessment feedback loop with program-wide faculty involvement with a variety of stakeholders. Assessment results and corresponding interpretation are shared with all appropriate stakeholder audiences such as faculty, students, alumni, and employers, as well as interpreter educators from across the region and nation. As appropriate, they are involved in assessment activities and a continuous feedback loop whereby assessment results, interpretations and decisions are shared through a variety of channels to enhance program planning, review, and responsiveness toward program improvement and decision-making. Students participated in a variety of assessment activities (e.g., standardized regional and national testing), while other stakeholders such as the Arkansas School for the Deaf provided trained SCPI raters for the SCPI assessment process, and practicum and internship supervisors oversaw the field experiences and provided input and recommendations regarding student learning experiences and competencies.

  • Internship and practicum sites include employers of former graduates such as the Arkansas School for the Deaf, Arkansas Rehabilitation Services, the Pulaski County Special School District, North Little Rock School District, the Benton School District, and UALR-DSS.
  • Two annual Advisory Councils were convened, one at the regional level and one at the national level, comprised of employers, interpreter educators, interpreters, current students, and alumni.
  • Faculty members and students participated in assessment activities.
  • Program and assessment information was shared with interpreter education programs across the country at a national three-day meeting held in March 2004 in Washington, DC.
  • Dissemination of information included quarterly state and national newsletters for professionals, interpreter educators, employers, and students; and through program brochures revised in 2004.

Program Improvements

To provide for more effective student learning experiences across the curriculum, the program added benchmarks, prerequisites and/or co-requisites to eight existing interpreting courses, and addition of two new courses. Some of the major improvements included the addition of: 1) benchmark of the SCPI Intermediate, completion of all prior A.A. degree courses and core requirements prior to enrolling in the beginning interpreting (INTR 3362, 2264, 3366) courses in the A.A. degree phase of the program, and 2) benchmark of a QAST Level I/I or equivalent and an A.A. degree in Interpretation or equivalent prior to enrolling in the intermediate interpreting course (INTR 3268) in the B.A. degree phase of programming.

Revision of A.A. and B.A. Degree Requirements. The addition of two new courses, deletion of one course, revision of eight courses, and required benchmarks as prerequisites.

Two New Courses. Two new courses were developed in response to assessment findings, student focus groups and student needs.

  • Interpreting Theory and Process (INTR 3344) and
  • Ethical Standards and Practices for Interpreters (INTR 3370).

Benchmark Added for Admission to the B.A. Degree. Prerequisites of QAST Level I/I or equivalent, A.A. degree in Interpretation or equivalent prior to enrollment in the B.A. degree.

Prerequisites Added to Internship Course. Prerequisites of QAST Level I/I or equivalent, A.A. degree in Interpretation or equivalent, and completion of all prior B.A. degree courses and core requirements prior to enrollment in Internship.

Application of Self-Regulation Theory Infused in the B.A. Level Intermediate and Advanced Interpreting Courses. Research information in the areas of language availability to perform the task and in self-monitoring (self-regulation theory) gained from the University of Graz’ spoken language interpreting program were infused to assist students in becoming proficient in self-monitoring their accuracy and thus become less dependent on faculty to direct their learning.

English Language Competencies and a Monitoring Process. In keeping with “writing across the curriculum,” literature reviews are required at both degree levels (A.A. and B.A) with a semester long monitoring process.

  • The monitoring process for both degree levels assisted students in preparing more successful papers.
  • A revised rubric at the B.A. level was used for evaluating the students’ literature review.

ASL 1 through ASL 4 Revisions. To improve student attainment of second language competencies, extensive revisions were incorporated throughout the ASL 1 to ASL 4 curriculum.

  • A prerequisite of a “C” or better was added to the ASL 1 to ASL 3 (INTR 1320, 1321, 2320) sequence.
  • A prerequisite benchmark of the SCPI Intermediate level was added to the three beginning interpreting courses (INTR 3362, 3364, 3366).

ASL Placement Test. The program offers a placement test to assess candidates’ competencies for appropriate placement in the ASL course sequence. Of 19 candidates assessed, 79% were recommended for placement in ASL 1 or ASL 2, 5% in ASL 3, 11% in ASL 4, and 5% met ASL requirements; and 88% earned a “B” or better and were eligible for credit validation.

Revision of the Educational Interpreting Minor. As a part of the minor, students take a total of six courses: three courses from other departments, one each from Early Childhood Education, Educational Leadership (Foundations of Education for Students who are Deaf/Hard of Hearing) and Audiology and Speech Pathology, and three courses offered by the program. In academic year 2003-2004, the three courses offered by the program for this minor were revised to improve upon the attainment of subject matter interpreting competencies for interpreters. These courses included, Principles of Educational Interpreting (INTR 3346), Artistic Interpreting in Educational Settings (INTR 3350) and Interpreting Academic Subjects (INTR 4382).