4022015 teaching sign language interpreters ch 1

8/9/2019 4022015 Teaching Sign Language Interpreters Ch 1

1/27


2/27


3/27


4/27


5/27


6/27


7/27


8/27


9/27


10/27


11/27


12/27


13/27


14/27


15/27


16/27


17/27


18/27


19/27


20/27


21/27


22/27


23/27

(exposition); the speaker may conclude by describing exactly what steps the listeners should take to recruit additional supporters forthe candidate (procedure). With a discourse focus, students begin tounderstand the function of particular discourse types within theoverall goal(s) of a given interaction.

Third, a discourse-focused curriculum has positive implicationsfor assessing students overall skill development. For example, dur-ing classroom activities in the Inquiry Interaction course, studentsanalyze and practice program-produced videotapes of interpretedtelephone interactions. However, students are given only the rst two-thirds of each inquiry interaction; assessments then consist of the students interpreting an entire interaction. Students are thusplaced in situations in which they begin with maximum opportunity for success; the critical assessment point occurs when students areconfronted with the novel one-third. It is precisely this juncturethat becomes critical in engaging students in analysis and discussionof their skill development. They enter this novel segment of the in-teraction maximally prepared to succeed: they know the overallpurpose of the interaction; they are familiar with the interactants;

they have specic background information with which to frame theremainder of the interaction; they have developed ways of commu-nicating specic information; and they are in a position to maximizetheir predictive skills. This level of preparedness allows student andinstructor to focus on the critical issues that arise when studentstruly must interpret.

Fourth, a discourse-focused curriculum has positive implicationsfor the types of audio and video materials we both collect and de-

velop ourselves for our extensive resource library. Because of thisnew focus, we have begun to view and allocate materials differently.In the past the temptation was to use the same materials twice, oncein the consecutive course and again in the simultaneous course. Theassumption (not unique to our program), not based on any empiri-cal data, was that since the curriculum focus should be on control of time, the actual text or discourse material was secondary, and infact, repetition of the same material was benecial to the students.

Using audio and video material twice (once in consecutive and once

Curric ulum Rev ision in the Twenty-First C entury 17


24/27

in simultaneous courses) was acceptable because temporal relationto source input was the primary curriculum focus. With a curricu-lum focus on discourse, however, material selection and use withincourses is approached quite differently. Now we are more easily able to categorize the materials in our resource library. We havedeveloped a database that categorizes our materials according todiscourse type and can now choose video materials on the basis of the specic discourse characteristics they exhibit.

In addition to the changes in the skill-development courses, wemade other adjustments to our curriculum. We reduced Introduc-tion to the Interpreting Profession to a two-credit course, whichenabled us to add another two-credit course, Ethical Fieldwork.

This course is designed to pair students with certied interpretersin various settings (freelance, agency, and educational) in what canbe described as an ethical practicum course. The intent of thiscourse is not for students to interpret but rather to shadow theirsenior colleagues for a semester and engage in analytic discussionsregarding the range of practical, ethical pressures and decisions that must be made in the course of their work. This practical, real-world

experience serves to inform the Ethical Decision Making course. We have also introduced a Research Capstone course. Although

students receive credit for this course in the fall semester of theirsenior year, the course actually spans 3 1 2 semesters. In the fall of their junior year, students are paired with a faculty member to iden-tify and select a research topic or question that is of interest to thestudent. During the next year or so the student will gather and ana-lyze data and prepare a research report. Our intent is to hold an an-

nual research symposium during the spring, to which interpreters inthe area (including those interpreters who work with our studentsin their Ethical Fieldwork and Practicum courses) will be invited.Students will present their research ndings, and our current plan isthat students will interpret for their classmates as they present theirresearch.

We have also taken the somewhat unusual step of introducing askill-set course (Interpreting Persuasive Interactions) that is de-

18 Dennis Cokely


25/27

signed to be taken while students are on practicum. Although weappreciate the scheduling difculties this course may impose onstudents trying to fulll their practicum requirements, we believethe new course will enhance our students development. Not only

will it provide a structured setting for students to continue to de- velop their skills, but more important, it will provide an opportunity for students to focus on their own personal, practical successes andchallenges as experienced in the workplace environment.

Finally, we have altered the requirements for our practicumcourse. In the past we required students to log a specied number of hours in order to meet their practicum requirements. With our new curriculum focus on discourse rather than time, we adjusted our

practicum requirements. We now require students to log a speciednumber of jobs in order to complete their practicum requirements. This requirement is in keeping with how interpreters actually ap-proach (and bill for) their work, and it reinforces the focus on dis-course. Thus students must log a minimum number of jobs per

week. We have dened a job as any interpreted interaction lastingthirty minutes or longer. Although some interpreting assignmentslast fewer than thirty minutes (e.g., interpreted phone calls), the


Table 1. Revised Interpreting Course Curriculum

Year Fall semester Spring semester

Junior The Interpreting Profession (2)

Interpreting InquiryInteractions (4)

Advanced ASL 1 (2)

Senior Interpreting Expository Interpreting PersuasiveInteractions (4) Interactions (4)

Ethical Decision-Making (4) Practicum (4)

Ethical Fieldwork (2)Research Capstone Course (4)

Interpreting NarrativeInteractions (4)

Advanced ASL 2 (2)


26/27

majority of interpreting assignments in our analysis lasted thirty minutes or longer.

Although we made other adjustments in our interpreting knowl-edge courses, none was as signicant as the paradigm shift in our in-terpreting skill courses. We believe that this shift has resulted in amore integrated developmental approach to our students skill de-

velopment and better prepares them for the world of work they willface as interpreters. Table 1 illustrates the courses in the revised in-terpreting portion of our curriculum. The numbers in parenthesesindicate the number of credits awarded for each course.

Conclusion

We used the semester conversion opportunity to examine the theo-retical underpinnings of our interpreting curriculum. This exami-nation, coupled with data from a study of the assignments in whichrelatively inexperienced interpreters were placed, led us to shift thefocus of our coursework. Rather than organize our curriculum

around the time available to produce a piece or work, we haveorganized our courses around the type of interactions students aremost likely to encounter in the workplace after graduation. A signif-icant benet of this curriculum revision is that we are able to pro-

vide students with an overall theoretical and analytical framework with which they can begin to assess interaction types during theirpracticum experiences and beyond. By applying the various skill sets(translation, consecutive interpretation, and simultaneous interpre-

tation) within each of the skill-set courses, our students will come tosee each of them as practical strategies that can be employed in various work settings rather than as stepping-stones to interpretingsimultaneously.

We believe that this new curriculum not only offers a more theo-retically satisfying organizational foundation for interpreter educa-tion but also prepares our students to better serve the needs of thecommunities they will work in.

20 Dennis Cokely


27/27

References

Cokely, D. 2000. Exploring ethics: A case for revising the code of ethics. Journal of Interpretation.

. Forthcoming. Shifting positionality: A critical examination of theturning point in the relationship of interpreters and the Deaf commu-nity. In Sign language interpreting and interpreter education: Directions for research and practice,ed. M. Marschark, R. Peterson, and E. A. Winston.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McIntire, M., ed. 1984. New dialogues in interpreter education.Proceedingsof the Fourth National Conference of Interpreter Trainers. SilverSpring, Md.: RID Publications.

. 1987. New dimensions in interpreter education: Curriculum & instruc-tion. Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference of Interpreter Trainers. Silver Spring, Md.: RID Publications.


4022015 teaching sign language interpreters ch 1

Documents