Uploaded August 2022 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Witter-Merithew, Anna, Taylor, Marty M., Johnson, Leilani, & Bonni, Elizabeth. (2022). Response: Deaf Language Mentoring: Case Studies, Outcomes, and Looking Forward. In Laurie Swabey & Rachel E. Herring (Eds.), SIGNED LANGUAGE INTERPRETING PEDAGOGY: INSIGHTS AND INNOVATIONS FROM THE CONFERENCE OF INTERPRETER TRAINERS (pp. 259-280). Gallaudet University Press.
https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/Books/S/Signed-Language-Interpreting-Pedagogy
****This video may not be repurposed or incorporated into other works in any way without the express written consent of the signer and the chapter authors.****
Hello! I am Marty Taylor. Along with Anna Witter-Merithew, Leilani Johnson, Betti Bonni, and Rachel Naiman we wrote an article in 2002 related to Deaf mentors. That article explained the EICP, Educational Interpreting Certificate Program: a three-year, online program that hired Deaf mentors to work together with students using the online platform Web-CT. Deaf mentors developed a learning community, focused on teaching students how to self-assess their work.
Deaf mentors were trained using a foundation of specific theories and philosophies in order to work with each other and the students. The program was a success! The Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA) scores increased by almost one full score on a 5-point scale.
For example, an interpreter student entered the program with an EIPA score of 3.0. After the three-year EICP, that same interpreter received a score of 3.9, an increase of almost one full point, a successful outcome.
Of particular note was that when the Deaf mentors interacted online with the students and each other, it was noticeably different from how the hearing mentors worked with the students. The article explains these differences in more depth.
A second article published in 2022 describes the significance of involving Deaf mentors using three examples: the EICP, and programs in Utah state and New Brunswick, a province in Canada. Each program addressed the “gap” that interpreters face after graduating from an interpreting program, navigating the real world of interpreting, and then over time eventually becoming certified…or not. These three examples focused solely on that gap of graduates trying to attain certification.
All three programs were successful! They all used Deaf mentors who were taught the same philosophy and theoretical approach. Shortening the “gap”, the time it takes from graduation to certification, is definitely possible. All three programs used Deaf mentors; the Deaf mentors were trained to use a standardized approach and theoretical foundation in working with students. And it worked!
The significance of Deaf people’s involvement in teaching interpreting students within interpreting programs is evident. The authors recognize the decrease in Deaf peoples’ involvement in interpreting programs compared to the initial involvement of Deaf people who were the gatekeepers, supporting signers, providing feedback and motivation for them to become interpreters, good interpreters, who knew the Deaf community and Deaf culture. Over time Deaf people’s involvement with interpreters has diminished. It is crucial that interpreting programs increase the involvement of Deaf educators in interpreting programs. In addition, interpreting programs must become accredited, CCIE accredited.
The three programs described in this article received funding from the government and were offered to new graduates. The government-funded these programs to decrease the length of time interpreters required to meet specific outcomes that they were not able to achieve from their interpreting programs.
Deaf mentors were key to the success of all three programs!
Witter-Merithew, Anna, Taylor, Marty M., Johnson, Leilani, & Bonni, Elizabeth. (2022). Response: Deaf Language Mentoring: Case Studies, Outcomes, and Looking Forward. In Laurie Swabey & Rachel E. Herring (Eds.), SIGNED LANGUAGE INTERPRETING PEDAGOGY: INSIGHTS AND INNOVATIONS FROM THE CONFERENCE OF INTERPRETER TRAINERS (pp. 259-280). Gallaudet University Press.
https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/Books/S/Signed-Language-Interpreting-Pedagogy
****This video may not be repurposed or incorporated into other works in any way without the express written consent of the signer and the chapter authors.****
Hello! I am Marty Taylor. Along with Anna Witter-Merithew, Leilani Johnson, Betti Bonni, and Rachel Naiman we wrote an article in 2002 related to Deaf mentors. That article explained the EICP, Educational Interpreting Certificate Program: a three-year, online program that hired Deaf mentors to work together with students using the online platform Web-CT. Deaf mentors developed a learning community, focused on teaching students how to self-assess their work.
Deaf mentors were trained using a foundation of specific theories and philosophies in order to work with each other and the students. The program was a success! The Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA) scores increased by almost one full score on a 5-point scale.
For example, an interpreter student entered the program with an EIPA score of 3.0. After the three-year EICP, that same interpreter received a score of 3.9, an increase of almost one full point, a successful outcome.
Of particular note was that when the Deaf mentors interacted online with the students and each other, it was noticeably different from how the hearing mentors worked with the students. The article explains these differences in more depth.
A second article published in 2022 describes the significance of involving Deaf mentors using three examples: the EICP, and programs in Utah state and New Brunswick, a province in Canada. Each program addressed the “gap” that interpreters face after graduating from an interpreting program, navigating the real world of interpreting, and then over time eventually becoming certified…or not. These three examples focused solely on that gap of graduates trying to attain certification.
All three programs were successful! They all used Deaf mentors who were taught the same philosophy and theoretical approach. Shortening the “gap”, the time it takes from graduation to certification, is definitely possible. All three programs used Deaf mentors; the Deaf mentors were trained to use a standardized approach and theoretical foundation in working with students. And it worked!
The significance of Deaf people’s involvement in teaching interpreting students within interpreting programs is evident. The authors recognize the decrease in Deaf peoples’ involvement in interpreting programs compared to the initial involvement of Deaf people who were the gatekeepers, supporting signers, providing feedback and motivation for them to become interpreters, good interpreters, who knew the Deaf community and Deaf culture. Over time Deaf people’s involvement with interpreters has diminished. It is crucial that interpreting programs increase the involvement of Deaf educators in interpreting programs. In addition, interpreting programs must become accredited, CCIE accredited.
The three programs described in this article received funding from the government and were offered to new graduates. The government-funded these programs to decrease the length of time interpreters required to meet specific outcomes that they were not able to achieve from their interpreting programs.
Deaf mentors were key to the success of all three programs!
