DODHH - Public Comment c/o Director Sheryl D. Emery 201 N. Washington Square Lansing, MI 48913 March 18, 2013 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS – DIVISION ON DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING – QUALIFIED INTERPRETER – GENERAL RULES Jointly Filed Comments of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. (RID) and the Michigan Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (MiRID) These Comments are in response to the Public Notice released February 15, 2013 by the Michigan Department of Civil Rights - Division on Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DODHH) seeking comment on the proposed regulations implementing the Michigan Deaf Persons’ Interpreters Act, 393.501 et seq. RID was established in 1964 and incorporated in 1972 as a 501 (c)(3) non-profit membership organization promoting the welfare and growth of individual interpreters as well as the profession of interpretation of American Sign Language and English. MiRID, established in 1970, is a state affiliate chapter of RID. MiRID assists interpreters in improving their skills, promotes professionalism in the interpreting field, and helps increase public awareness. First, RID and MiRID commend DODHH for its work on the proposed rules. It is clear that DODHH has invested, and continues to invest, a lot of time and energy into raising the bar for interpreters in Michigan. We strongly believe that high standards are necessary to ensure that interpreters are prepared to meet the linguistic needs of the Deaf community. To be sure, adherence to high standards benefits professional interpreters, the Deaf community, and all consumers of interpreting services. In order to promote excellence in interpreting, all interpreters should demonstrate skill, knowledge, and ability through the attainment of certification. We recognize that state regulation of interpreting is a mechanism through which this goal can be more fully realized and applaud the efforts of DODHH to open dialogue around communication access in Michigan. It is in the spirit of promoting our shared goal of excellence in interpreting that RID and MiRID ask DODHH to consider the following suggestions and recommendations, which aim to strengthen the impact of the proposed rules. DODHH Should Maintain High Standards for Educational Interpreters by Requiring that K-12 interpreters hold an Ed:K-12 (Educational Certificate: K-12) It is imperative that DODHH maintains high standards for professionals interpreting in the classrooms of deaf and hard of hearing students. RID and MiRID fully support the requirement that educational interpreters receive a score of 4.0 or higher on the Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA). However, we believe 333 Commerce St., Alexandria, VA 22314 ■ 703.838.0030 V ■ 703.838.0459 TTY ■ 703.838.0454 Fax ■ www.rid.org ________________________________________________________________________________________________

education  standards  excellence

that requiring the Ed:K-12 credential will go further to prepare educational interpreters for the classroom setting while better serving the needs of deaf and hard of hearing students. Individuals who passed the EIPA written and performance tests at the level of 4.0 or higher are able to obtain the Ed:K-12 credential through RID. As of July 1, 2012, individuals must possess a bachelor’s degree to attain the Ed:K-12. The bachelor’s degree educational requirement is a measure to promote a strong educational foundation for the interpreters working with deaf and hard of hearing children. (From July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2012, a hearing candidate was required to hold an associate’s degree for NAD-RID certification.) RID and MiRID strongly believe that the pre-certification education requirements for the Ed:K-12 gives this credential even further weight in skill, ability, and knowledge. Furthermore, NAD-RID certification requires a commitment to life-long learning through the Certification Maintenance Program (CMP) as well as adherence to a code of professional conduct through the Ethical Practices System (EPS). The Ed:K-12 not only represents demonstrated skill level, but indicates professionalism and commitment to achieving excellence in interpreting beyond the credential an individual holds. RID and MiRID remain steadfast in our commitment to excellence in interpreting, including excellence in educational interpreting. RID’s Educational Interpreting Task Force is focused on the needs of educational interpreters and identify and promote best practices in the field of educational interpreting in order to advocate for highly qualified practitioners for students who are deaf and hard of hearing. RID and MiRID respectfully suggest that the proposed rule for educational interpreters should be changed to require that all interpreters working in a K-12 setting hold an Ed:K-12 credential. By adopting the Ed:K-12 credential as the minimum standard for non-post-secondary interpreters, DODHH will ensure that educational interpreters have a minimum of an EIPA score of 4.0 or higher, meet educational degree requirements, demonstrate commitment to professional development, and adhere to strict ethical standards. DODHH Should Maintain High Standards for Level 3 – Legal Environments by Requiring that Interpreters fulfilling these assignments hold an SC:L or a CLIP-R RID and MiRID believe that becoming a highly qualified interpreter begins with attaining appropriate credentials. We believe that in the area of legal interpreting, the proposed rules have not gone far enough to prepare professional interpreters and protect Deaf consumers. While the legal endorsements required under R 393.5028 recognize the SC:L as one of two paths to the legal endorsement, RID and MiRID strongly believe that the SC:L and the CLIP-R are the highest standard currently available to evaluate an interpreter's legal acumen and thus should be the only means to achieve the legal endorsement under the Michigan proposed rules. Best Practice: Using an SC:L in Legal Situations RID and MiRID representatives attended all three public hearings and it is clear the Deaf community expects a level of quality assurance once these rules are promulgated. In a 2003 Wisconsin Law Review Article, Michelle Lavigne and McCay Vernon observed, “Just as a law license ensures that a lawyer has at least a minimal level of competence, as attested by her law school and the bar examiners, so too does the certification of an interpreter.” 1 In order for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to access the judicial system in a free and unimpaired manner, Lavigne and Vernon suggest that there be a “rebuttable presumption that if an interpreter is not certified, the interpretation was not adequate. This rebuttable presumption may seem harsh, but the potential for miscommunication and harm is so great that, on balance, it is worth whatever inconvenience or discomfort it 1

Lavigne, Michele and Vernon, McCay, An Interpreter Isn't Enough: Deafness, Language, and Due Process (2003). Wisconsin Law Review, No. 844, 2003; Univ. of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1744291

2

may cause.”2 RID and MiRID agree with their observation that “requiring the appointment of a certified interpreter will bring a measure of rationality and dependability to the process.” 3 Notably, Lavigne and Vernon emphasize, “In complex proceedings, the appointment of an interpreter who has an additional certification in Legal Interpreting (SC:L) is strongly encouraged. In an ideal world, the best practice would be the use of a legally certified interpreter only.”4 (Emphasis added.) By promulgating these rules, the Michigan DODHH is in the unique position to assure that only highly qualified interpreters are placed in legal settings, as advocated for by Lavigne and Vernon. A generalist certificate, even an NAD-RID generalist certificate, is not adequate to prepare an interpreter for the complex nature of communications in the courtroom, police stations, and prisons. The notion that a generalist certification, even if quasi-legal scenarios are used in the testing process, is sufficient to test an interpreter's ability to effectively communicate is simply inaccurate and is harmful to both interpreters and the Deaf community. The requirements to receive a legal endorsement through the proposed rules rightly mandate additional education and experience under R 393.5028(4)(e)(i-iii). As written, the proposed rules would allow interpreters without an SC:L to work in high risk, legal settings if they are able to pass the written Michigan state court legal interpreting test and complete an educational and mentoring selection under R 393.5028 (4)(e). If the purpose of these rules is to promote excellence in interpreting, then specialized testing developed to measure a sign language interpreter’s ability to establish effective communication with a Deaf consumer in a legal setting should be the only acceptable testing mechanism for a legal endorsement. Furthermore, we want to emphasize that interpreters with an SC:L certification must meet the requirements under R 393.5028 prior to sitting for this exam. If DODHH requires an SC:L certification to interpret in legal proceedings, RID would bear the operational burden of assuring that interpreters meet or exceed the education and experience necessary for the legal endorsement as outlined in R 393.5028(4)(e)(i-iii). Certified Deaf Interpreters in Legal Settings RID and MiRID disagree with the proposed classification of CDIs as qualified to interpret in the high risk, legal situations as outlined in Level 3 without additional experience or credentials. While a CDI has specialized training and/or experience in the use of gesture, mime, props, drawings and other tools to enhance communication, the certification is a generalist certification and is not indicative of an interpreter's ability to facilitate effective communication in complex legal settings. We urge Michigan to adopt the CLIP-R (Conditional Legal Interpreting Permit-Relay) as the means by which CDIs are able to obtain their legal endorsement. Holders of this conditional permit have completed an RID-recognized training program designed for interpreters and transliterators who work in legal settings and who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Generalist certification for interpreters/transliterators who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (RSC or CDI) is required prior to enrollment in the training program. This permit is valid until one year after a legal written and performance test for deaf interpreters becomes available nationally. CLIP-R holders will be required to take and pass the new legal certification examination to maintain certification in the specialized area of interpreting in legal settings. As we have explained, the SC:L should be the standard for hearing interpreters working in complex legal 2

Id.

3 4

Id. Id.

3

environments. We want to emphasize that CDIs should be held to the same high standards. A CDI should be required to possess the CLIP-R. Meeting the Demand for Interpreters with the SC:L Credential RID and MiRID are committed to working with the Michigan DODHH over the next two years, and beyond, to address the number of Michigan interpreters holding an SC:L or a CLIP-R to meet the needs of the Deaf community. Lavigne and Vernon remark that “the scarcity of legally certified interpreters makes [requiring an SC:L] impractical for the foreseeable future." 5 This statement certainly applies to the CLIP-R as well. However, it is imperative that RID, MiRID, and DODHH work together to create opportunities for interpreters to become qualified in their specialties, instead of lowering standards in response to increased demand. We recognize that it may take time to increase the pool of interpreters in Michigan qualified to interpret in legal settings. We look forward to a continued partnership with DODHH to establish a timeline, if necessary, to meet the increased demand for SC:L and CLIP-R interpreters. It is our goal to work together to increase the availability of highly qualified SC:L and CLIP-R interpreters for legal work in Michigan. Interpreters Holding an IC/TC Certification should be Classified as Level 2 RID and MiRID ask DODHH to include those interpreters holding an IC/TC certification on the list of interpreters able to interpret in Standard Level 2. Someone with the IC/TC credential has demonstrated competency in both transliterating and interpreting. We want to emphasize that IC/TC is a different credential from IC and TC. Anyone who still holds the IC/TC credential has been a working interpreter for at least 25 years and has been maintaining that certification through professional development since the inception of RID’s Certification Maintenance Program (CMP) in 1993. Since DODHH is listing each credential individually, then it should also include the IC/TC designation under Level 2. The National Association of the Deaf (NAD)-RID Certification System Strengthens the Impact of the Regulations within the State of Michigan Possessing an NAD-RID certification is a highly valued asset for an interpreter reflecting a commitment to lifelong learning and adherence to high ethical standards. RID and MiRID agree with the proposed rules that interpreters with a generalist certificate, any generalist certificate, are not adequately prepared for the complex, high risk situations outlined in Level 3 without additional, post-certification experience. While we have ad dressed standards for legal interpreters, we want to emphasize that post-certification experience should be applied equally across the various acceptable credentials under level 3. NAD-RID certified interpreters should be held to the same standards as other certified interpreters in level 3 because of the distinct benefits of the creden tial as outlined below. NAD-RID National Interpreter Certification is a Partnership between the Deaf Community and Interpreters The NAD-RID National Interpreter Certification (NIC) exam is a result of the recommendations made by the NAD-RID NIC Task Force comprised of RID and NAD subject matter experts representing a cross-section of the interpreter and Deaf communities. The Task Force was convened in 2009 to assist the RID and NAD Boards of Directors in a thorough review of the NIC paradigm. In the initial stages of their work, Task Force members received feedback from RID members, the Deaf community, and a variety of other stakeholders before developing their recommendations. The process that began in 2009 continues today through the implementation 5

Id.

4

of the task force’s recommendations that utilize best practices in the testing industry. Furthermore, the NAD has representation on key committees that govern RID's Certification Programs, including the Ethics Committee, which advises the RID Board of Directors on the education, enforcement and review of the NAD-RID Code of Professional Conduct, as well as the Professional Development Committee, which provides oversight of the policies and standards for the Certification Maintenance Program (CMP) and the Associate Continuing Education Tracking (ACET) program. Additionally, RID and NAD have a standing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from 2009 that commits to a number of items, but of relevance to this matter include the following: 1. Continue to partner on joint oversight of administration and upgrades to the NAD-RID National Interpreter Certification test; 2. Continue to partner on joint oversight of and updates to the NAD-RID Code of Professional Conduct; and 3. Encourage collaborative agreements between state association affiliates of NAD and affiliate chapters of RID. The RID Certification Process Employs a Nationally-recognized Standard of Competence RID's Certification Programs maintain strict adherence to nationally recognized, testing industry standards of validity, reliability, equity, and legal defensibility. RID has developed a certification process that involves passing a series of exams. In order to attain certification, an interpreter must pass a multiple-choice knowledge exam that measures an understanding of a variety of areas from linguistics to English proficiency to ethics to influences on the interpreting process. The main tasks performed are: 1. Assess each interpreting situation to determine if qualified for the assignment. 2. Prepare for assignment by determining logistics and purpose of interaction for all parties involved. 3. Maintain competence in the field of interpreting (e.g., attending workshops and classes, reading professional literature, working with a mentor). 4. Apply the Code of Professional Conduct for the interpreting profession. 5. Provide interpreting services that reflect awareness and sensitivity to culturally and ethnically diverse groups. 6. Facilitate the flow of communication during the interpreting process. 7. Apply the appropriate communicative mode and language register. 8. Construct equivalent discourse in the target language while monitoring message comprehension and feedback to modify interpretation accordingly. 9-A. Use ASL proficiently within expressive interpreting tasks, including choice of sign vocabulary, use of sign modification to show variation in meaning and grammatical function, and appropriate use of space, facial expression, and body movement. 9-B. Comprehend ASL proficiently during the interpreting task, including sign vocabulary choice and sign modification to show variation in meaning and grammatical functions. 10-A. Use English proficiently to construct an equivalent message in the target language, including appropriate vocabulary choice, tone, grammar, and syntax, with appropriate use of register, pausing, rhythm, intonation, pitch, and other supra-segmental features. 10-B. Comprehend English proficiently to construct an equivalent message in the target language, including appropriate vocabulary choice, tone, grammar, syntax, appropriate use of register, pausing, rhythm, intonation, pitch, and other supra-segmental features. An interpreter must then pass a performance exam in which interpreting and ethical decision-making skills are

5

assessed according to a nationally-recognized standard of competence by a group of professional peers who are trained and monitored throughout their rating history. If the candidate meets or exceeds the national standard, they are awarded national certification. Over the course of the three public hearings hosted by DODHH, one of the recurring concerns was the ethical standards to which interpreters hold themselves. The current NIC tests the ability of an interpreter to think critically about the Code of Professional Conduct (CPC). Since all NADRID certified interpreters agree to uphold the CPC, and we test for their understanding and knowledge thereof, we can be assured that they have an appreciation of the ethical situations that interpreters will encounter. RID Certification Benefits Michigan by Broadening the Pool of Qualified Interpreters in the State Nearly every state across the country is faced with the issue of regulating the interpreting profession and practice within its borders. This is an issue of great importance considering the impact these decisions can have on the quality of service Deaf consumers receive, as well as the state of the profession. RID maintains high standards for its members–above and beyond that required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Through RID’s three-pronged approach to certification, which includes the attainment of the national credential as well as the maintaining of that credential through professional development requirements and the adherence to the code of professional conduct, RID certification sets the expectation for interpreting services throughout the profession. As a result, Michigan is able to attract a pool of interpreters who can enter the state and serve the community because interpreters who hold an RID certification have demonstrated competency in the field of interpreting and are able to work across the varying state regulations and licensure laws. Furthermore, RID's Certified Maintenance Program (CMP) is an avenue through which a commitment to life-long learning and continued skill development of certified interpreters/transliterators is monitored and nourished. RID has an in-house Ethical Practices System to Enforce the NAD-RID Code of Professional Conduct (CPC) It is affirming to see the NAD-RID CPC included as the standard for professionalism within the Michigan proposed rules. MiRID and RID appreciate that DODHH recognizes the value of the NAD-RID CPC, and we are committed to upholding it and ensuring that it reflects current practices and needs of Deaf consumers. MiRID and RID recognize that adherence to the CPC is critical in supporting the rights of the Deaf community while maintaining professionalism among certified interpreters. Furthermore, RID’s Ethical Practices System (EPS), which seeks to bring accountability to the field of interpreting, is part of the tri-fold approach to establishing the standards RID maintains for its membership. It provides guidance and enforcement to professionalism and conduct while offering a complaint filing and review process to address concerns regarding the ethical decision-making of interpreters. The goal of RID’s EPS is to uphold the integrity of ethical standards among interpreters. In keeping with that goal, the system includes a comprehensive process whereby complaints of ethical violations can be thoroughly reviewed and resolved through mediation or complaint review. RID has recently demonstrated further commitment in the area of ethical decision making by supporting a dedicated Director of Ethical Practices System to focus on education and outreach of the program goal and vision. This effort will further strengthen the CPC and focus of professionalism within the field. Enforcement of the CPC depends on a strong partnership between the Deaf community, interpreters, DODHH, and RID. It is through this partnership that we as a community will come together to promote excellence in interpreting. We look forward to further dialogue on how we can work together with DODHH to ensure that interpreters are held accountable and ethical standards are enforced.

6

The Future of Interpreting "Standards" or the "norm" for interpreters 15 years ago are no longer relevant today. All professions go through maturation phases. In nursing, there are delineated differences between an orderly, nurse’s aide, LVN and RN; in law, the same holds true between a legal secretary, a paralegal and an attorney. In many professions, such as nursing and law, states have implemented clear-cut requirements and standards for that profession, including timelines and an organizational structure for when and how these requirements would be met. We are at a point in the interpreting profession to not only witness, but impact the progress and journey down this path. Ensuring that generalist certifications employ rigorous testing mechanisms to appropriately evaluate a candidate’s knowledge, skills, and abilities is the first step in preparing and credentialing professional interpreters. The second step is providing adequate training opportunities and corresponding credentials to support an interpreter’s skill development, particularly in the high risk environments outlined the level 3. RID and MiRID stand committed to pursuing excellence in interpreting. Since the first interpreter certification was awarded in 1972, not only has the profession changed dramatically, but so have the needs of the Deaf community. The number of interpreters has grown. The need to certify practitioners has become more widely recognized at the state and federal levels, and within public and private practice. The processes and practices underlying certification have evolved. When the NAD-RID National Interpreter Certification (NIC) was introduced in 2004, it was state-of-the-art, with a test that “raised the bar” for ASL/English interpretation and transliteration. Over the years, we have learned a great deal about how the NIC is adopted within the profession by interpreters, regulators and hiring entities, as well as how it is perceived by consumers. The RID certification exams were never intended to be a static evaluation of interpreters. Instead, RID has planned regular review and revision of this certification program. Most recently, we have completed a revision that better ensures that NIC Certified Interpreters are able to serve their clients needs and provides swifter and more valuable score results. With that process completed, RID is now in the beginning phases of re-establishing the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities for interpreters at all levels. This process will begin with a series Job Task Analysis Studies that will be used as the foundation for a more complete revision of our credentials. Furthermore, we look to the future with the possibility of adding additional specialty certifications to augment our current offerings. With reliable medical, mental health, trilingual, and other specialty certifications, RID, in cooperation with NAD, will continue to be a leader in establishing standards for all interpreters. Promoting Our Shared Goal of Excellence in Interpreting The field of interpretation is currently in an exciting period of growth as a career profession. As we work to eliminate the perception of interpretation as just a “job” that any individual with an interest can undertake, we are seeing the field gain a momentum in reputation that encompasses quality and respect. With supply not meeting the current demand, interpreters have become an invaluable tool in communication access between Deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals. Despite the DODHH's publication “The REAL FACTS!!!” assertion that the number of certified interpreters are up in the state, several credible sources predict an increased demand for ASL interpreters is on the horizon. The U.S. Department of Labor predicts that “employment of interpreters and translators is expected to grow 42 percent from 2010 to 2020, much faster than the average for all occupations,” and continues, “Demand for American Sign Language interpreters is expected to grow rapidly, driven by the increasing use of video relay services, which allow people to conduct online video calls and use a sign language

7

interpreter.”6 According to the Interpreting Practitioner Needs Assessment 2012: Final Report published by the National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers (NCIEC), 53% of interpreters who responded to the survey reported an increase in the demand for their services. 7 Notably, of the 15% who reported a decrease in demand, respondents indicated “work is going to less experienced/less expensive interpreters” as the primary factor impacting a decrease in demand. 8 According to the NCIEC needs assessment, of the 59 Michigan interpreters who responded, 42 reported increased demand, 15 reported no change, and 2 reported decreased demand. 9 However, RID and MiRID emphasize that a projected increased demand for interpreters should not undercut the promulgation of the highest standards in Michigan. Instead, this is an opportunity for collaboration to advance the interpreting profession while protecting the rights of the Deaf community. RID and MiRID ask that the credentials achieved through national certification and maintained through nationally established standards be properly categorized by the promulgated rules. We understand that in some instances, it may be appropriate to phase in changes so that interpreters have an opportunity to obtain appropriate credentials without creating gaps in services to the Deaf community. RID and MiRID are committed to partnering with DODHH to facilitate a smooth transition under the rules. RID and MiRID support the regulation of interpreters to ensure excellence in services delivered to the Deaf community and hope that DODHH will reconsider the standards set forth in the proposed rules as related to K12 interpreters, High Risk/Legal situations, CDIs, IC/TCs, and the post-certification experience required for interpreters working in level 3. As these rules are promulgated, RID and MiRID urge DODHH to recognize the value of RID certification and the many and varied contributions RID certified interpreters have made and will continue to make to the State of Michigan and the Deaf community. We also echo and support the NAD’s comments about the bachelor's degree requirement; providing training for deaf-blind interpreting; bringing SC:Ls in from out of state, rather than limiting the geographical boundary in which SC:Ls can be located; potentially undermining Federal law through the proposed regulations, which is also not in compliance with the NAD-RID Code of Professional Conduct tenet 2; requiring that the levels under the proposed rules, rather than the EIPA, apply to interpreting for deaf parents for an IEP meeting or meeting with a child's educational professionals; and allowing complaints to be filed against agencies, which is consistent with RID’s work on our reputable agency task force which is a joint effort with the NAD. We applaud DODHH for holding open and inclusive hearings to receive feedback from a broad range of stakeholders on the proposed rules. The comments given over the course of the three public hearings allowed RID and MiRID to learn more from our members and the Deaf community and formulate our comments accordingly. The impetus is now on us to work together to implement high standards that meet the professional needs of interpreters and the linguistic needs of the Deaf community.

6

Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2012-13 Edition, Interpreters and Translators, on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/ooh/media-and-communication/interpreters-and-translators.htm (visited March 15, 2013).

7

National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers, Interpreting Practitioner Needs Assessment 2012: Final Report, on the Internet athttp://www.interpretereducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2012-PractitionerFINAL-Report_Published_011713.pdf (visited March 15, 2013) 8 Id. 9 Id.

8