New RID test--is it passable???

T

timmie

New Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2006
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I know of two people, (one NAD level five) who failed the test. How can this be ?
Has anyone else heard about the new test and why it is so difficult? I dont want to waste my money if there is no chance of passing..... :tears:
 
from what i know its the written test thats consisited of plms left and right :-X
 
I took the old RID written test so I don't know specifics (and wouldn't say anything even if I did!) but I did find that getting the practice test from RID was the best preparation I could have had. It showed me exactly what areas I was weak in. I'm pretty sure they have one for the new NIC written test so I'd recommend getting it, doing it, and then studying whatever you don't do well in. Good luck!
 
Interpretrator said:
I took the old RID written test so I don't know specifics (and wouldn't say anything even if I did!) but I did find that getting the practice test from RID was the best preparation I could have had. It showed me exactly what areas I was weak in. I'm pretty sure they have one for the new NIC written test so I'd recommend getting it, doing it, and then studying whatever you don't do well in. Good luck!
Click to expand...
I agree. I took the "old" RID written test, and the practice written test and bibliography were great helps. Same for the performance test; the practice tapes were very helpful.

I don't know much about how the "new" test compares. :dunno:
 
No, I am talking about the performance part........People with NAD certification were not required to take the written part if the took the performance by a certain date I think........
Have yall heard of anyone else who has taken the new version and received their results yet?

Just wondering if this is a fluke...... :Ohno: because I have to take it soon....
 
timmie said:
...Have yall heard of anyone else who has taken the new version and received their results yet?
Click to expand...
No, I don't personally know anyone who has taken the new test.
 
I know a terp in Baltimore who was one of the first to receive his results; he passed.
 
Interpretrator said:
The written part or the performance part?
Click to expand...

What about the 'social part' ? I seen it be able to overide both the written and performance part on a few occaisons.

Richard
 
Leaving aside Richard's always charming, useful, on-topic, and positive contribution and returning to the subject, I just found out that one of the best interpreters I know just failed this test. This person interprets complicated, abstract English into beautiful clear ASL and I am learning a lot just from working with this person. I was dumbfounded to learn that they (along with a number of colleagues at a different institution that has its own rigorous testing practices) did not pass the performance part of the new test.
 
I dont mean disrespect to RID, but is it possible that it has all gone to their heads and they have lost sight of their true mission, which was to certify that persons were capable of "passing on the message"?

If someone is considered an excellent interpreter by the deaf community and other interpreters, yet totally fails the RID, this tells me the test is not truly measuring that which it is claiming to measure........
 
Some people do experience "test anxiety" or freeze up in front of a camera.
 
timmie said:
I dont mean disrespect to RID, but is it possible that it has all gone to their heads and they have lost sight of their true mission, which was to certify that persons were capable of "passing on the message"?

If someone is considered an excellent interpreter by the deaf community and other interpreters, yet totally fails the RID, this tells me the test is not truly measuring that which it is claiming to measure........
Click to expand...

I agree with your second statement, but not with the first one. I think the problem lies with the test itself, being brand-new, and even though it's gone through all the psychometric evaluation etc. etc., it probably will have to go through a few "live" changes before it's a good measure of interpreter performance. I don't think it's because of any conscious change in mission or outlook on the part of RID. I hope this is the case, anyway.

That said, it really sucks for the well qualified interpreters who didn't pass and will have to pay to retake it.

Reba said:
Some people do experience "test anxiety" or freeze up in front of a camera.
Click to expand...

That never happens to me. :D Seriously, I am really good at taking any kind of test EXCEPT a videotaped interpreting test. I breezed through the RID written test but I keep putting off the CI...
 
Personally, I have no intention of taking the NIC performance anytime soon. (I don't know if CI/CT-certified terps have to take the NIC written - I don't think so...) I don't like the idea of taking something that is so unknown. Like Interpretrator says, there's a lot that remains to be seen regarding the new test. The CI and CT have been around for years, many people have taken them, there's study materials available...it's a known commodity. The NIC test, on the other hand, is brand new, and I don't want to take it yet.

That, plus I don't like "levels" - I think there will be discrimination based on the level system. Jobs will be limited based on levels - for example, a job can insist that a NIC Master is required to work there. This will limit the number of terps available for that position. NIC Masters will be seen as "better" than plain NIC or NIC Advanced, even if it's that "test anxiety" issue that keeps someone from getting a NIC Master. And sure, those certified below Master can always retest, but that takes money and effort and time and may not be worth it. I much prefer the "you're certified or you're not" system, which allows interpreters to prove their skills on an individual basis rather than being chosen based solely on their certification level.
 
Etoile said:
That, plus I don't like "levels"
Click to expand...

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I've seen interpreters who passed their CI or CT but my suspicion is they barely squeaked through, and yet because they are "certified" they are presumed to be qualified for all kinds of jobs. (I'm sure Richard will be thrilled to leap in here and confirm.)

On the other hand, I agree with you about the difficulty that can arise when people are assigned levels, especially when test rating is so subjective. (They say it's an objective system but come on...to paraphrase my teacher, "it all depends on what the rater had for breakfast that morning.") I'm sure we'll see level 2's who are much more skilled than level 5's, or however the levels go. And I thought the point of the CI/CT was to work differently from the NAD's test. Strange that they went back to levels when they designed the NIC.
 
Interpretrator said:
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I've seen interpreters who passed their CI or CT but my suspicion is they barely squeaked through, and yet because they are "certified" they are presumed to be qualified for all kinds of jobs. (I'm sure Richard will be thrilled to leap in here and confirm.)
Click to expand...
Oh, you're absolutely right. There are definitely certified terps out there who are not qualified. Unfortunately this is all entirely subjective. I interpret for gay leather contests in Baltimore and DC, and I assure you I am well-qualified for those jobs. Why? Well, not only am I certified, but I also don't mind being onstage with nearly naked men! But I am nowhere near qualified for an algebra class (barely passed Algebra II myself in high school), and I would hate to be thrown into one. (Though as you mentioned elsewhere, sometimes emergency subs get stuck in that situation.) So as we all know, "qualified" depends on a lot more than sign skill...and yet all certification tests will, out of necessity, barely test sign skill. (Of course, it's based on the terp's performance in front of a camera, and based on what the rater had for breakfast, etc.)

I guess there are good and bad sides to levels, but I tend to think it's better to leave them out than to use them.
 
Interpretrator said:
And I thought the point of the CI/CT was to work differently from the NAD's test. Strange that they went back to levels when they designed the NIC.
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm resurrecting an old post, but I couldn't help myself.

The CI & CT wasn't developed to work differently from the NAD's test. At the 1986 NAD Conference held in Salt Lake City, the board voted to investigate different interpreter evaluation tools. After an exhaustive search, including the RID system, they chose a model used by the California Association of Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (CAASDHH). While most interpreters prefer pass/fail tests, it seems Deaf people prefer a tiered system. That is why the NAD test had levels. That is also why the new NIC test has levels. I spoke to a member of the NCI (National Council on Interpreting) who stated that a recurring request from Deaf people involved in the development of the test is that they wanted levels. They were tired of "certified" interpreters not being able to cut the mustard (not all, but some). So now we have a tiered system.

I took the NAD test in 1997, and just took the NIC on Friday. I have to say the new test is AMAZING in quality. I think it does a great job of simulating a day in the life of an interpreter. I'll keep you posted when I get my results in 8-12 weeks. :)
 
I think it's time to attack RID.

California's ODA funding still require RID certification for agencies that use and subcontract interpreters as evidenced on their RFP released last friday.

I've picked up many instances in which a person 'social status' takes preference over skills needed to 'pass the messages'. They dont get RID certification if they dont pass the 'social muster'. A very notable reference would be to Paulette Caswell's difficulties in getting a level 5 certification. She signed perfectly as a level 5 while she's hated by deaf society for her pro-audist positions.

Its pretty much hallmarks what we recently saw at Gallaudet University rejecting a president because of her social status. That many say she dont socialize with the students. They boot her because she didnt pass the student's social muster.

The same thing we see with RID certification.

Richard
 
I have taken and passed the written NIC test, as have many people I know. I have not taken the performance.
 
timmie said:
I dont mean disrespect to RID, but is it possible that it has all gone to their heads and they have lost sight of their true mission, which was to certify that persons were capable of "passing on the message"?

If someone is considered an excellent interpreter by the deaf community and other interpreters, yet totally fails the RID, this tells me the test is not truly measuring that which it is claiming to measure........
Click to expand...

That's why I dont believe in standardized tests for anything from certifications to testing children's knowledge. Too biased.

We have the same issues with the Praxis tests for teaching certifications. I suck at calculus so I kept failing it until I finally pulled my reading scores up high enough to bypass the math tests. I teach elementary school and why do I need to have to be skilled in calculus? I know some teachers who have passed the test but are not good teachers themselves so what does say about the validity of the tests? I am sure there are same issues with the RID?
 
Back
Top