In the Hands of the Interpreter

loml · 12-23-2007, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Did you know that the average hearing-impaired student graduates high school with a fourth grade reading level? Whether someone is born hearing-impaired or they experience hearing loss at an early age, hearing-impaired people often opt to communicate visually using a mode of communication other than spoken words. However, they must still learn English in order to read, resulting in much debate over which method of communication is more effective. In addition, there is little quantitative research available to examine the effectiveness of either the communication option used or the interpreter’s intelligibility in that mode when signing at any speed. Since the variable of speed is controlled by the speaker and not the interpreter, it is important to examine this scientifically in order to ensure that hearing-impaired people have full access to the information that they receive through interpreters. Jean Krause, Ph.D., assistant professor, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, is collecting empirical data that will support the certification process for interpreters. In particular, she is conducting research to determine what degree the accuracy and speed of an interpreted message can vary and still be understandable. Currently, most hearing-impaired students are educated in their local schools through an interpreter.The interpreters use various modes of communication, including American Sign Language (ASL), which was recognized as a language in the 1960s, has its own grammar and rules, and is completely different from English. Oralism is another means of communication available to hearing-impaired people that trains the student to lip-read and teaches them to speak with repetitive grammar tasks and by reinforcing pronunciation. In between these modalities exists a variety of other systems including Signed English, which use ASL signs following English grammar rules, and Cued Speech,which uses lip reading combined with manual cues to distinguish certain sounds that are visually similar—for example,“mat” and “pat.” In order to evaluate the accuracy of interpreters at various speeds, Krause is taping interpreters using Cued Speech and two different forms of Signed English
as they follow three speaking speeds: slow, moderate and fast. Using computer software, she views each interpreter frame by frame and assesses the accuracy of each cue or sign.This information is recorded in terms of percentage of correctness at each speed level to identify how fast an interpreter can communicate while retaining accuracy. The second step is evaluating what degree of accuracy is necessary for a hearing-impaired person to receive the message correctly while still considering speed as a variable. Hearing-impaired people watch the recorded videos of the interpreters and transcribe what they see to determine how many of the “inaccuracies” significantly affect the hearing-impaired person’s ability to understand and how speed factors into the equation. For example, if an interpreter is signing or cueing slowly, the hearing-impaired person may be able to tolerate many errors and still understand, but if the interpreter is signing or cueing quickly, the hearingimpaired person may not be able to tolerate as many errors before intelligibility breaks down. Krause suggests that the results of this study could help parents when deciding which mode of communication they want their child to learn. If a child will attend a traditional school and use an interpreter, it is important to know if any modality is more effective in retaining accuracy and intelligibility at certain speeds. She says that, to date, she has not seen any compelling research that answers this question.
Krause earned her Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where she participated in research involving hearing aids. She served as an interpreter for a high school student while writing her dissertation and discovered her interest in the effectiveness of different forms of communication for hearing-impaired people and the variables that affect the clarity of an interpreted message. Krause hopes her research will help contribute to the improvement of the certification process for interpreters. She says applying “an engineering approach to a communications question” is tricky but provides a different perspective, which will cultivate an improved understanding of visual communication through empirical research.

—By Jenny Bunch

http://www.research.usf.edu/files/rr...chFall2006.pdf

Interpretrator · 12-23-2007, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Krause suggests that the results of this study could help parents when deciding which mode of communication they want their child to learn.

As long as it's Cued Speech or two forms of Signed English.

loml · 12-23-2007, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interpretrator

As long as it's Cued Speech or two forms of Signed English.

No where in this article does Krause make that statement.

Interpretrator · 12-23-2007, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loml

No where in this article does Krause make that statement.

Quote:

In order to evaluate the accuracy of interpreters at various speeds, Krause is taping interpreters using Cued Speech and two different forms of Signed English....

How can the results include the possibility of ASL when the research does not?

jillio · 12-24-2007, 01:21 AM

How about applying a deaf perspective to communication rather than an engineering perspective? Or a psychological, or an educational perspective?

jillio · 12-24-2007, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interpretrator

How can the results include the possibility of ASL when the research does not?

Exactly. Which is why this is completely invalid when applied to ASL and interpreted messages. And I would question who she has determing the accuracy of the signing. There is the use of that term, "hearing impaired". That alone raises a red flag.

Etoile · 12-24-2007, 10:22 AM

This study also seems to assume that any mistake means the child won't understand. Everybody makes mistakes, no matter what language they are signing/speaking/cueing. And we understand anyway.

But yeah, they're only focusing on transliteration, not interpretation. Two very different animals.

jillio · 12-24-2007, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

This study also seems to assume that any mistake means the child won't understand. Everybody makes mistakes, no matter what language they are signing/speaking/cueing. And we understand anyway.

But yeah, they're only focusing on transliteration, not interpretation. Two very different animals.

Yes, indeed. And one is more likely to understand through interpretation than through transliteration.

deafskeptic · 12-24-2007, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Exactly. Which is why this is completely invalid when applied to ASL and interpreted messages. And I would question who she has determing the accuracy of the signing. There is the use of that term, "hearing impaired". That alone raises a red flag.

Yeah. You'd think she'd know better seeing that she's a former terp.

It was difficult to read the paper as it wasn't broken into several paragraphs but from what I see, ASL is not included in the research. I also question the bias as the paper seems biased against ASL.

Ariakkas · 12-24-2007, 02:08 PM

i assumed "2 forms of sign language" were ASL and SEE, since both were mentioned by name in the article.

the part the puzzled me was how they were going to analyze frame by frame to gauge accuracy....

jillio · 12-24-2007, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafskeptic

Yeah. You'd think she'd know better seeing that she's a former terp.

It was difficult to read the paper as it wasn't broken into several paragraphs but from what I see, ASL is not included in the research. I also question the bias as the paper seems biased against ASL.

Yes, it does. And this is only an article written about research that is currently being designed. The research hasn't even been done yet, so quite frankly, no one knows what will be found. All Krause has at this point in time is an idea.

Likewise....she served as a terp while writing her dissertation.....oral, ASL, or MCE? And is her only terping experience in this one istance? Is she certified? Too many unanswered questions here for me to give this any degree of validity.

deafskeptic · 12-24-2007, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ariakkas

i assumed "2 forms of sign language" were ASL and SEE, since both were mentioned by name in the article.

the part the puzzled me was how they were going to analyze frame by frame to gauge accuracy....

That is what I assumed at first but the paper doesn't indicate that ASL is being included in the research.

PSE and SEE were most likely included in this research.

Etoile · 12-24-2007, 02:38 PM

I did a little research. She seems to be very interested in cueing. She is doing research on including a cued speech portion on the EIPA (testing for educational interpreters). Ah yes, I just found an article that refers to her as "a cueing advocate" too.

Aha! I just found her CV. Jean Krause is a self-employed Cued Speech Transliterator. She has the Instructor of Cued Speech certificate from the National Cued Speech Association, and the Oral Transliterating Certificate from RID.

So, basically, she's not an interpreter. I'm not saying this invalidates her research, but it does tell me that she has no basis from which to state that it is "in the hands of the interpreter" (ie, the interpreter's fault) that a deaf student hasn't developed grade-appropriate reading skills.

jillio · 12-24-2007, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ariakkas

i assumed "2 forms of sign language" were ASL and SEE, since both were mentioned by name in the article.

the part the puzzled me was how they were going to analyze frame by frame to gauge accuracy....

It says CS and 2 forms of signed English. That rules out ASL.

jillio · 12-24-2007, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

I did a little research. She seems to be very interested in cueing. She is doing research on including a cued speech portion on the EIPA (testing for educational interpreters). Ah yes, I just found an article that refers to her as "a cueing advocate" too.

Aha! I just found her CV. Jean Krause is a self-employed Cued Speech Transliterator. She has the Instructor of Cued Speech certificate from the National Cued Speech Association, and the Oral Transliterating Certificate from RID.

So, basically, she's not an interpreter. I'm not saying this invalidates her research, but it does tell me that she has no basis from which to state that it is "in the hands of the interpreter" (ie, the interpreter's fault) that a deaf student hasn't developed grade-appropriate reading skills.

Ah, another one of loml's compatriots, and fellow member of NCSA.

And her research quite oblviously is not done out of intellectual curiousity nor concern over deaf students' literacy rates, but as a platform for promoting her methodology of choice. Biased going into the research. I wonder if her grant money for the research came from NCSA?

And you are correct. She is not an interpreter.

Aren't CV's just a wealth of information?

Etoile · 12-24-2007, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Ah, another one of loml's compatriots, and fellow member of NCSA.

And her research quite oblviously is not done out of intellectual curiousity nor concern over deaf students' literacy rates, but as a platform for promoting her methodology of choice. Biased going into the research. I wonder if her grant money for the research came from NCSA?

And you are correct. She is not an interpreter.

Aren't CV's just a wealth of information?

Cueing is funny in that regard. I have no problem with cued speech, personally. I think it benefits many of the kids who use it. I think more parents need to be aware of cueing, it is not that well-known, and some families might benefit greatly from being able to communicate easily with their deaf children. It's not for everybody, but it helps some people, and anything that helps can't be all bad.

However...I have noticed an extreme tendency for cueing advocates to be REALLY strong pushers for cueing. And like you noted, it's not just motivated by finding the best solution for deaf students...it's because she thinks cueing is the best method and wants to develop research to support that.

Again: cueing can be great. Cueing advocates, though, can be a little too high-pressure.

deafskeptic · 12-24-2007, 03:02 PM

Ah so she's a cuer? Cued speech did help me but I also recall that it had no meaning to some of my classmates in the oral program. The reason why it didn't help them is that they had limited language skills. I dunno why I was able to pick up English and why many of my classmates couldn't.

shel90 · 12-24-2007, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafskeptic

Ah so she's a cuer? Cued speech did help me but I also recall that it had no meaning to some of my classmates in the oral program. The reason why it didn't help them is that they had limited language skills. I dunno why I was able to pick up English and why many of my classmates couldn't.

Just like with the oral-only environment..I was able to pick up on spoken language and make meaning out of it by lipreading alone but for my brother, he couldnt and nobody has the answer to that.

Interpretrator · 12-24-2007, 03:09 PM

"In the Hands of the Transliterator" would have been a much better title. It would explain away the three billion uses of the word "hearing impaired" as well as the lack of mention of ASL.

loml · 12-24-2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

I did a little research. She seems to be very interested in cueing. She is doing research on including a cued speech portion on the EIPA (testing for educational interpreters). Ah yes, I just found an article that refers to her as "a cueing advocate" too.

Aha! I just found her CV. Jean Krause is a self-employed Cued Speech Transliterator. She has the Instructor of Cued Speech certificate from the National Cued Speech Association, and the Oral Transliterating Certificate from RID.

So, basically, she's not an interpreter. I'm not saying this invalidates her research, but it does tell me that she has no basis from which to state that it is "in the hands of the interpreter" (ie, the interpreter's fault) that a deaf student hasn't developed grade-appropriate reading skills.

Etoile - All research is biased. Interpretor/transiltorator are used interchangably terms. Not something that I necessarily agreed with, but currently, it is what it is.

Simply because Dr. Krause appears to be focusing on SEE and CS does not change the fact that the intent is to provide empirical research and data. I imagine that she is looking at SEEand CS, because they are both systems to relay English, thus not including ASL.

Are you suggesting that she need to be an ASL interpretor for her research?

Interesting that you view this article as her attempting to find fault in an interpretor.

jillio · 12-24-2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

Cueing is funny in that regard. I have no problem with cued speech, personally. I think it benefits many of the kids who use it. I think more parents need to be aware of cueing, it is not that well-known, and some families might benefit greatly from being able to communicate easily with their deaf children. It's not for everybody, but it helps some people, and anything that helps can't be all bad.

However...I have noticed an extreme tendency for cueing advocates to be REALLY strong pushers for cueing. And like you noted, it's not just motivated by finding the best solution for deaf students...it's because she thinks cueing is the best method and wants to develop research to support that.

Again: cueing can be great. Cueing advocates, though, can be a little too high-pressure.

Agreed....just like the oral only advocates. I see a possible application of CS in teaching literacy, and that is what Dr. Cornett intended the system to do when he invented it. However, this push to use CS as a communication method, and to restrict deaf children to its use only, particularly in the very early years, is just as dangerous as any other oral method.

jillio · 12-24-2007, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interpretrator

"In the Hands of the Transliterator" would have been a much better title. It would explain away the three billion uses of the word "hearing impaired" as well as the lack of mention of ASL.

LOL! I picked up on that one immedicately when reading the article, too. That turn of phrase is very telling, isn't it?

jillio · 12-24-2007, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loml

Etoile - All research is biased. Interpretor/transiltorator are used interchangably terms. Not something that I necessarily agreed with, but currently, it is what it is.

Simply because Dr. Krause appears to be focusing on SEE and CS does not change the fact that the intent is to provide empirical research and data. I imagine that she is looking at SEEand CS, because they are both systems to relay English, thus not including ASL.

Are you suggesting that she need to be an ASL interpretor for her research?

Interesting that you view this article as her attempting to find fault in an interpretor.

Interpreter/transliterator are not interchangable terms. An interpretor and a transliterator perform to different functions.

Her intent is quite obvious, given what was reported in the article, and what her CV revealed. And the empirical data that she is attempting to provide is in support of CS.

Since you are both members of the NCSA, perhaps you can answer whether the grant money for her research came from that organization.

Interpretrator · 12-25-2007, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loml

Interpretor/transiltorator are used interchangably terms.

Perhaps among the general public but I would expect a researcher to know that those terms have completely different definitions. An interpreter transmits between two different spoken or signed languages. A transliterator transmits between two forms of the same language. A translator transmits between written forms of languages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by loml

Are you suggesting that she need to be an ASL interpretor for her research?

No, I am suggesting that these three sentences

Quote:

Krause suggests that the results of this study could help parents when deciding which mode of communication they want their child to learn. If a child will attend a traditional school and use an interpreter, it is important to know if any modality is more effective in retaining accuracy and intelligibility at certain speeds. She says that, to date, she has not seen any compelling research that answers this question.

are extremely misleading if ASL is not considered a factor. First, the results of this study will only help parents decide which of the communication modes used in this study they want this child to learn. Secondly, again with the incorrect use of "interpreter." Thirdly, what research has she been reading and has it included ASL? Because "any modality" would imply just that, any communication modality and last I checked, ASL was still an option for deaf kids.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the purpose or results of the study; I'm saying that by omitting any mention of ASL -- even acknowledging that it was not a factor -- it implies that only the English codes studied are beneficial for parents to know about.

loml · 12-25-2007, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafskeptic

Ah so she's a cuer? Cued speech did help me but I also recall that it had no meaning to some of my classmates in the oral program. The reason why it didn't help them is that they had limited language skills. I dunno why I was able to pick up English and why many of my classmates couldn't.

deafskeptic - You state cued speech helped you, in what regard? Reading, writing, speaking??? How old were you and your classmates at this time? Were they provided the opportunity to learn CS? Did you cued at home and at school? Did other members of your family cue? How old were you when you learned to cue?

There are many variables to developing language skills. We are all products of our enviroment.

12-24-2007, 03:02 PM	#17 (permalink)
deafskeptic AAACCK! I got BORGED! Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 2,452	Ah so she's a cuer? Cued speech did help me but I also recall that it had no meaning to some of my classmates in the oral program. The reason why it didn't help them is that they had limited language skills. I dunno why I was able to pick up English and why many of my classmates couldn't. __________________ Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007. Activated on May 9th.

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

12-24-2007, 01:21 AM	#5 (permalink)
jillio Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,197	How about applying a deaf perspective to communication rather than an engineering perspective? Or a psychological, or an educational perspective?

12-24-2007, 10:22 AM	#7 (permalink)
Etoile HOH terp Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Washington DC Posts: 926	This study also seems to assume that any mistake means the child won't understand. Everybody makes mistakes, no matter what language they are signing/speaking/cueing. And we understand anyway. But yeah, they're only focusing on transliteration, not interpretation. Two very different animals.

12-24-2007, 02:08 PM	#10 (permalink)
Ariakkas Registered User Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 237	i assumed "2 forms of sign language" were ASL and SEE, since both were mentioned by name in the article. the part the puzzled me was how they were going to analyze frame by frame to gauge accuracy....

12-24-2007, 02:38 PM	#13 (permalink)
Etoile HOH terp Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Washington DC Posts: 926	I did a little research. She seems to be very interested in cueing. She is doing research on including a cued speech portion on the EIPA (testing for educational interpreters). Ah yes, I just found an article that refers to her as "a cueing advocate" too. Aha! I just found her CV. Jean Krause is a self-employed Cued Speech Transliterator. She has the Instructor of Cued Speech certificate from the National Cued Speech Association, and the Oral Transliterating Certificate from RID. So, basically, she's not an interpreter. I'm not saying this invalidates her research, but it does tell me that she has no basis from which to state that it is "in the hands of the interpreter" (ie, the interpreter's fault) that a deaf student hasn't developed grade-appropriate reading skills.

12-24-2007, 03:09 PM	#19 (permalink)
Interpretrator Crime fighter Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,425	"In the Hands of the Transliterator" would have been a much better title. It would explain away the three billion uses of the word "hearing impaired" as well as the lack of mention of ASL.