Bilingualism and Identity in Deaf Communities

Educational Policy and Signed Language Interpretation

161 1. “Interpretation refers to the process of changing messages produced in one language immediately into another language” (Frishberg 1990, 19). Signed language interpreting is distinct from spoken language interpreting in that the former involves a natural sign language. In signed language interpreting, messages are transposed between a signed and a spoken language or between two signed languages . The term educational settings refers to classrooms found at the kindergarten -through-senior high school level (K–12) in which hearing children are the mainstream population. 2. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94–142) regards placement that provides the “least restrictive environment” as the appropriate educational placement for students with disabilities. Educational Policy and Signed Language Interpretation Earl Fleetwood Signed language interpreting in educational settings has seen more than twenty-five years of concerted effort.1 As a result of laws intended to provide deaf children a greater variety of educational opportunities (e.g., PL 94–142, PL 101– 476), signed language interpreters have enjoyed increased employment opportunities in educational settings. Educational interpreting is evidently motivated by a real need, the education of deaf children . At the same time, the educational opportunity theme has become increasingly synonymous with placing deaf children in mainstream educational settings. Given the outcomes of most mainstream placements, this trend appears to disregard the intent of a “least restrictive environment” provision of the law (Commission on Education of the Deaf 1988).2 Whereas circumstances surrounding the advent of educational signed language interpreting are well documented, goals and processes defining the practice are not. Since its inception, educational interpreting has taken on a “try everything” attitude resulting in a practice that is highly unstable with regard to the nature and scope of its responsibilities and, consequently, the outcomes it yields. A variety of contrived signing systems , an acquiescent and vacillating role, and inconsistency with regard to 162 : e a r l f l e e t w o o d aims and processes have come to define the practice of educational signed language interpreting. Furthermore, efforts to codify educational interpreting are founded in descriptive rather than prescriptive processes. Such efforts serve to denote and promulgate a practice without its propriety ever having been demonstrated. Patrie (1993) raises serious questions about the effectiveness of educational interpreting, concluding that it is important to “step back and see in which settings and for what ages an interpreted message is effective (and in which settings it is not). To date we have no empirical basis from which to operate in making these decisions” (30). Moreover, Patrie states, “we may have been pouring millions of dollars into a practice which, in fact, may have no theoretically defensible basis” (31). This chapter explores the notion that the current state of educational signed language interpreting is a product of the cyclically reinforcing process of resting educational interpreting job descriptions on descriptive data (and vice versa). It examines the nature of educational interpreting policy as well as responsibilities expected of practicing educational signed language interpreters. LITERATURE REVIEW As one outcome of changes in public law (e.g., Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; PL 94–142 [the Education for All Handicapped Children Act]), the early 1970s saw an increase in the number of deaf/ hard of hearing students placed in public mainstream schools. One result of this demographic change was an increase in the demand for signed language interpreters to work in elementary, secondary, and postsecondary educational settings. Research on educational signed language interpreting began as well. Sociohistorical Background: Adult versus Child Consumers Signed language interpreting as a profession was born in deference to the service requests of deaf adults who utilize a signed language to communicate . The beginnings as well as the history of signed language interpreting do not presume that mainstream integration of deaf people into hearing society is a functional goal (Frishberg 1990). Instead, signed language Educational Policy and Signed Language Interpretation : 163 3. The terms access-oriented and integration-oriented denote the perspective of deaf consumers regarding their relationship with the mainstream group. Access -oriented consumers attend interpreted events for reasons that are a function of the events and without the goal of establishing a mainstream group identity. Integration-oriented consumers are motivated by both goals. interpreting has developed as a profession in response to requests of deaf adults to have access to, rather than integrate with, the mainstream. The nature of this genesis...