Interpreters for deaf kids lag on test

Language interpreters for deaf children in Idaho schools may seem like they know what they’re doing, but according to a recent study, chances are high they don’t.

Using a grant from the Idaho Department of Education, the Educational Interpreter Interagency Consortium found that more than one-third of the interpreters who work in K-12 schools failed to interpret nearly half of the classroom content.

The study’s findings have prompted state Sen. Mike Jorgenson to push for legislation requiring minimum standards for K-12 interpreters. No standards currently exist in Idaho, and the consortium’s study has shown the problems that poses for deaf children seeking a quality education, the Hayden Lake Republican said.

“It only puts them further behind,” Jorgenson said, adding that the proposed law is in tune with the federal No Child Left Behind law.

The law as currently drafted would require interpreters to score at least a 3.5 out of 5 on the national assessment for educational interpreters. According to the consortium’s study, 42 of the 67 Idaho interpreters who have taken the assessment failed to score above a 3.5. About 80 interpreters work in Idaho, Jorgenson said. The state employed 71 last year to help the nearly 100 deaf or hard-of-hearing students throughout its 114 school districts, according to the study.

Passing the assessment is required in 20 states to earn certification, and 10 states including Idaho are in the process of making it a requirement.

Jorgenson plans to introduce the bill when the legislative session begins in January.

The bill also would require that all K-12 interpreters spend at least 80 hours every five years in continuing-education classes.

Those without a degree in interpretation would have 2 1/2 years to meet the standard; interpreters with a degree would have one year.

One selling point of the bill is that the standards won’t cost the state anything to implement, Jorgenson said.

School districts could continue subsidizing their interpreters’ training, according to the study, and grants from the state Department of Education and the Idaho School for the Deaf and the Blind would still be available.

Interpreters would pay to take the test, and, according to the study, plenty of training opportunities exist for interpreters in Idaho, but they haven’t been utilized, something the study attributed to low pay interpreters in Idaho receive and the lack of standards to use in measuring their performance.

“Combine the nonexistence of a statewide minimum standard with no remuneration for professional development, and one can clearly understand why more than 60 percent of Idaho’s K-12 interpreters scored poorly on the (assessment),” the study reads.

Boise resident Lesa Coleman, a parent of two hard-of-hearing children enrolled in the public school system, said setting minimum standards in Idaho would benefit everyone involved – students, parents, interpreters and everyone else in society.

“I personally have seen some very difficult situations without appropriate interpreter standards,” Coleman said.

Interpreters want to do a good job, Coleman said, but without any standards to measure their performance against, improving can be especially difficult.

“By and large, it’s a really important move,” Coleman said.

Gooding resident Beth Cram’s two deaf sons attend the Idaho School for the Deaf and the Blind but could enroll in a regular public school if the specialty school closes or moves to a larger city as is currently being discussed. She said it’s good to know that if that happens and the bill passes, her sons are more likely to receive the same type of quality education and attention from an interpreter that they receive at the specialized state school.

Harvey Lyter, interim superintendent at the school, supports the bill and said the availability and cost of training is crucial to its success.

“It would be counterproductive to require a minimum level of training capability from someone and either not provide the ability for them to get the training or put an undue economic burden on them in the process of doing so,” Lyter said.

Sue Bassiri, an interpreter in Boise, also backs the bill. While she said most interpreters she knows are dedicated and open to developing on their own, mandatory standards are needed to ensure everyone is motivated to improve.

The consortium’s study wasn’t all bad news, with nearly one-fifth of interpreters scoring a 4 or 5 on the assessment, meaning they can interpret 80 percent to 100 percent of classroom content.