In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

175 Appendix A Categories and Definitions for CodingVideo Data 1. Interpreting—It was often difficult to distinguish when an interpreter stopped interpreting and provided more “fine-tuned, individualized instruction” (perhaps aligned with and essential to achieving instructional objectives). Interpreting was eventually operationalized as the interpreter being in place, poised and ready to interpret whenever there was some discourse (usually spoken) to be interpreted. The general expectation would be that if the teacher is talking, the interpreter is interpreting what the teacher is saying (although that was not always the reality). 2. Social interactions—This distinction was also somewhat ambiguous . It was difficult to determine what was social in nature, as opposed to scaffolding learning, promoting participation/inclusion and independence, or enhancing self-esteem. Social interactions was eventually operationalized as any interaction besides interpreting that occurred between the interpreter and a Deaf or hard of hearing student. 3. Tutor/help—During designated tutoring time or seat work, it was easy to identify tutoring and helping; however, the line of demarcation between interpreting and tutoring/helping was not always distinct. “Social interactions” were easier action to identify. 4. Other tasks—This category was another catch-all for tasks beyond interpreting. The category of other tasks intended to provide a means to examine all the tasks that make up the interpreter ’s role. These included instances such as when interpreters accessed available resources (e.g., asked the teacher for clarification of objectives, located and obtained handouts/textbooks or other materials, moved furniture to facilitate access to resources or optimize visual access, etc.). 5. DHH student participation—This category was reserved for those instances in which a Deaf or hard of hearing student participated publicly (for the benefit of peers and the teacher) in class activities. More Than Meets the Eye_Appendix A.indd 175 More Than Meets the Eye_Appendix A.indd 175 10/11/13 7:23 AM 10/11/13 7:23 AM 176 : appendix a 6. Peer/teacher interaction—This category was used to indicate direct interactions between Deaf or hard of hearing students and their peers or teachers (with or without interpretation). 7. Visual access/overlap—This category was selected whenever students were asked to look at one or more sources of visual input while there was discourse to be interpreted (e.g., look at a graphic as the teacher explained what they were seeing). 8. New lesson/transitions—It was important to demarcate transitions between topics and activities for the purpose of finding particular discourse types (e.g., lecture vs. discussion). 9. Different track—This category indicated instances during which the interpreter deliberately chose to stop interpreting (deliberate omission) or in some other way deviate from the interpretation (to varying degrees) in order to respond to a more immediate student need. Examples of more immediate needs include meeting the student where he/she is at the moment (ahead of or behind the rest of the class), scaffolding language/content or general/cultural/social knowledge, troubleshooting problems with assistive listening devices, attempting to redirect off-task students, etc. 10. Timing issues—For this study, timing issues were eventually incorporated into either different track/deliberate omission or visual access/overlap. This coding category would be useful for an in-depth look at group interactions as well as question and answer discussion formats. 11. English or sound-based content—Homophones and other sound-based, English-specific content (e.g., puns and plays on words) proved to be problematic for some interpreters (especially for one who declined participation from the study after being videotaped because of the sound-based nature of the lesson content). I chose to keep this category as a feature of interest for video analysis, but I did not include it as an area of focus for this study. 12. Numbers and spatial orientation—This designation was included because of interviews with and observations of the three interpreters who were excluded in narrowing the study. All three of these interpreters stated that they were taught to flip the number line (breaking rules of ASL) so that Deaf and hard of hearing students’ view of the number line would More Than Meets the Eye_Appendix A.indd 176 More Than Meets the Eye_Appendix A.indd 176 10/11/13 7:23 AM 10/11/13 7:23 AM Appendix A : 177 correspond to the interpreted representation of the number line. Although three interpreters interpreted for the same student, a tremendous degree of variability was observed in actual practice (rhetoric vs. practice inconsistencies). One...


Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.