Sign language vocabulary development practices and internet use among educational interpreters.

Sign language interpreters working in schools often face isolation in terms of their sign language vocabulary development opportunities. The purposes of this study were to determine the key demographic characteristics of educational interpreters in British Columbia, to identify the resources they use to learn new vocabulary, and to shed light on their Internet use and access levels, with a view to exploring the viability of this resource as a tool for vocabulary development for interpreters working in educational settings. Key demographics associated with interpreters' access to time and materials in advance of a lesson were job title and graduation from an interpreter training program. Interpreters with job titles that reflected their status as interpreters had more preparatory time each week than interpreters who had job titles focused on their roles as educational assistants. Interpreters overwhelmingly expressed the need for continuing professional development with respect to vocabulary development. In terms of the resources currently used, human resources (colleagues, deaf adults) were used significantly more often than nonhuman (books, videotapes, Internet). The resource use results showed that convenience was more important than quality. Books were used more often than videotapes, CD-ROMs, and the Internet, although the latter three had higher percentages of very satisfied users than did books. The design and content of online vocabulary resources and limited interpreter preparation time were identified as current issues keeping the Internet from reaching its potential as an easily accessible visual resource. Recommendations aimed at enhancing the viability of the Internet as a vocabulary development tool for educational interpreters are discussed.

[1]  R. Pollard,et al.  Application of demand-control theory to sign language interpreting: implications for stress and interpreter training. , 2001, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[2]  Kristen Johnson Miscommunication in Interpreted Classroom Communication. , 1991 .

[3]  S. Salend,et al.  The Roles of the Educational Interpreter in Mainstreaming , 1994 .

[4]  B. Schick,et al.  Skill levels of educational interpreters working in public schools. , 1999, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[5]  Margaret Farren Using the Internet for professional development , 1998 .

[6]  Sharan B. Merriam,et al.  Qualitative research and case study applications in education , 1998 .

[7]  Thomas K. Holcomb,et al.  The Use of Sign Language and Sign Systems in Facilitating the Language Acquisition and Communication of Deaf Students. , 1997, Language, speech, and hearing services in schools.

[8]  G. Clark,et al.  Characteristics and Practices of Sign Language Interpreters in Inclusive Education Programs , 1997 .

[9]  Kristen Johnson,et al.  Miscommunication in Interpreted Classroom Interaction , 2013 .

[10]  David Alan Stewart,et al.  Sign Language Interpreting: Exploring Its Art and Science , 1998 .

[11]  Harry Bornstein,et al.  The comprehensive signed English dictionary , 1983 .

[12]  Loraine J. DiPietro Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. , 1970 .

[13]  Mary V. Compton,et al.  Educational Interpreting and Teacher Preparation: An Interdisciplinary Model , 1994, American annals of the deaf.

[14]  Lisa Holden-Pitt,et al.  Thirty Years of the Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children & Youth: A Glance Over the Decades , 1998, American annals of the deaf.

[15]  James Cox,et al.  Your Opinion, Please!: How to Build the Best Questionnaires in the Field of Education , 1996 .

[16]  E. Babbie Social Research For Consumers , 1982 .