Uploaded September 2024 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
Find out more at https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/internationalperspectives
"Sign Language Interpreting: Education and Professionalization in Norway" | Chapter summary in Norwegian Sign Language (NTS)
Chapter authors: Hilde Haualand and Anna-Lena Nilsson
From “International Perspectives on Sign Language Translator and Interpreter Education”
Edited by Jemina Napier, Stacey Webb, and Robert Adam
Published by Gallaudet University Press
**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.**
Visual description: A blonde gray gray-haired white woman with glasses, wearing a light blue shirt standing in front of a blue background. There are headings indicating the topic of each sequence she signs in Norwegian Sign Language. The headings are sign language interpreters as a professional group, signed language interpreters vs spoken language interpreters, the early years: collaboration between deaf people and interpreters, sign language interpreting as an individual right for deaf people, and sign language interpreter education and future needs.
Transcript:
Sign language interpreters constitute a profession in Norway. Their work is regulated by laws. There is a mandatory three-year bachelor level education. There are ethical guidelines for the profession. Many sign language interpreters are members of a union. All in all, this makes it a profession.
Sign language interpreting and spoken language interpreting have developed differently in Norway. Sign language interpreting has links to legislation related to disability. Spoken language interpreting has links to people using different spoken languages and the need for interpreting in the public sector, for example in hospitals and with the police. Therefore, the services have developed differently.
Sign language interpreting services started to develop in the 1970s and have continued to do so up until now. Before 1970, it was often people who knew sign language who would volunteer to "help" interpret. Then, the Norwegian National Association of the Deaf and the newly established Norwegian Association of Interpreters joined forces and lobbied for proper, professional interpreting services.
Today in Norway, sign language interpreting services are an individual right. This means that deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf blind persons themselves can decide when they need interpreting. The Norwegian Labor and Welfare Administration is responsible for providing interpreters and they also pay for the service. There are a few exceptions to this, but in general it can be said that they have a monopoly on providing sign language interpreting services.
Today, sign language interpreters are trained in three places in Norway: OsloMet, in Oslo; Høgskulen på Vestlanded, in Bergen; and NTNU, in Trondheim. They all offer three-year educations. In Oslo, students must have basic signing skills before entering the program. In all programs, the first year is dedicated to improving students' signing skills and learning about deaf culture and deaf history. The second and third years are more focused on practical interpreting skills and learning how to interpret. Having completed a program, you can then enter the work force as a sign language interpreter. Though there is a mandatory three-year education, there is a lack in variation, and a lack of further and higher education for interpreters. For example, there is no MA program for interpreters. So, interpreters interested in further education need to find their own way. And if they complete further education, this does not give them better pay. So, there is not really that much to motivate them to pursue further studies.
As for future needs, the Norwegian National Association of the Deaf and organizations for sign language interpreters are lobbying for improvements such as more user involvement and more influence from the profession on the organization of services.
Find out more at https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/internationalperspectives
"Sign Language Interpreting: Education and Professionalization in Norway" | Chapter summary in Norwegian Sign Language (NTS)
Chapter authors: Hilde Haualand and Anna-Lena Nilsson
From “International Perspectives on Sign Language Translator and Interpreter Education”
Edited by Jemina Napier, Stacey Webb, and Robert Adam
Published by Gallaudet University Press
**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.**
Visual description: A blonde gray gray-haired white woman with glasses, wearing a light blue shirt standing in front of a blue background. There are headings indicating the topic of each sequence she signs in Norwegian Sign Language. The headings are sign language interpreters as a professional group, signed language interpreters vs spoken language interpreters, the early years: collaboration between deaf people and interpreters, sign language interpreting as an individual right for deaf people, and sign language interpreter education and future needs.
Transcript:
Sign language interpreters constitute a profession in Norway. Their work is regulated by laws. There is a mandatory three-year bachelor level education. There are ethical guidelines for the profession. Many sign language interpreters are members of a union. All in all, this makes it a profession.
Sign language interpreting and spoken language interpreting have developed differently in Norway. Sign language interpreting has links to legislation related to disability. Spoken language interpreting has links to people using different spoken languages and the need for interpreting in the public sector, for example in hospitals and with the police. Therefore, the services have developed differently.
Sign language interpreting services started to develop in the 1970s and have continued to do so up until now. Before 1970, it was often people who knew sign language who would volunteer to "help" interpret. Then, the Norwegian National Association of the Deaf and the newly established Norwegian Association of Interpreters joined forces and lobbied for proper, professional interpreting services.
Today in Norway, sign language interpreting services are an individual right. This means that deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf blind persons themselves can decide when they need interpreting. The Norwegian Labor and Welfare Administration is responsible for providing interpreters and they also pay for the service. There are a few exceptions to this, but in general it can be said that they have a monopoly on providing sign language interpreting services.
Today, sign language interpreters are trained in three places in Norway: OsloMet, in Oslo; Høgskulen på Vestlanded, in Bergen; and NTNU, in Trondheim. They all offer three-year educations. In Oslo, students must have basic signing skills before entering the program. In all programs, the first year is dedicated to improving students' signing skills and learning about deaf culture and deaf history. The second and third years are more focused on practical interpreting skills and learning how to interpret. Having completed a program, you can then enter the work force as a sign language interpreter. Though there is a mandatory three-year education, there is a lack in variation, and a lack of further and higher education for interpreters. For example, there is no MA program for interpreters. So, interpreters interested in further education need to find their own way. And if they complete further education, this does not give them better pay. So, there is not really that much to motivate them to pursue further studies.
As for future needs, the Norwegian National Association of the Deaf and organizations for sign language interpreters are lobbying for improvements such as more user involvement and more influence from the profession on the organization of services.


![Ch 8. Deafness, the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, and the Juvenile Delinquency System
Shaw, D. (2021). Deafness, the Individuals With Disabilities Act, and the juvenile delinquency system. In D. Guthmann, G. I. Lomas, D. Goff Paris, & G. A. Martin (Eds.), DEAF PEOPLE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM (pp. 167-180). Gallaudet University Press. https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/Books/D/Deaf-People-in-the-Criminal-Justice-System
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 author.
Transcript:
Daniel Shaw, J.D., is the author of this chapter, which focuses on the IDEA and the Juvenile Delinquency System. Mr. Shaw has spent years representing hundreds of children and families in special education, civil rights, and personal injury cases and has extensive experience litigating at the administrative level, district and state court, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As a parent of a child with profound hearing loss, Mr. Shaw has sat on all sides of the table and his daughter has helped shape his passion for the law and the families he serves.
Mr. Shaw begins his chapter with a brief history of special education and the IDEA. He feels that the greatest catalyst toward educating children with special needs in public school came in a U.S. Supreme Court decision dealing with racial segregation in America’s public schools in Brown v. Board of Education, 1954 when they recognized that segregation had no place in public education. Mr. Shaw states that Brown also inspired individuals with disabilities, parents, teachers, and others to begin to advocate for the desegregation of children with special needs from public education. Mr. Shaw also discusses other important legislation that was essential in the development of IDEA. The author goes on to describe a brief history of the juvenile delinquency system and how it began with the presumption that children were worthy of rehabilitation and that society had an obligation to assist youth offenders in becoming productive members of society. He states that there are few juvenile detention facilities, if any, prepared to meet the needs of deaf youth. Mr. Shaw points out that it is important to remember that incarcerated deaf youth are still entitled to their IDEA services. He says that despite the IDEA, there has been little done to ensure incarcerated deaf youth get the services they are entitled to. Mr. Shaw continues in his chapter with a description of the IDEA related to the Delinquency System. He indicates that the greatest tool preventing deaf youth from being swallowed up by the delinquency system is the IDEA and that whether incarcerated or not, they continue to have a right to special education designed to meet their unique communicative needs.
Many delinquent youths may suffer from mental health issues and many juvenile delinquency facilities are not prepared to meet the needs of these youth. Mr. Shaw discusses why it is imperative that the IDEA rights of delinquent deaf youth be protected. These procedures mandate compliance with the IDEA as the juvenile court determines what to do with incarcerated special education students. Mr. Shaw points out that many states do not have specific legislation to create an interplay between the juvenile delinquency system and the IDEA and that for deaf youth, this is critical in meeting their unique needs and preventing recidivism.
Mr. Shaw feels that an unintended consequence of highly mobile deaf youth is that there is no specificity in the IDEA as to how incarcerated deaf youth are treated under IDEA and how those rights happen provided the complexities of being in a state delinquency system. Mr. Shaw uses California as an example and indicates that when deaf youth are incarcerated in that state, the responsible educational agency changes from the entity where the parent or guardian resides to the county office of education where the juvenile detention facility is located so a deaf student arrested for criminal conduct and incarcerated becomes the legal responsibility of an entirely new entity. Under California law, the county office of education where the juvenile detention facility is housed also becomes financially responsible for the student’s IDEA services. Mr. Shaw discusses how this creates a financial burden on these entities when dealing with the complexities of meeting the needs of deaf youth. For example, a deaf youth might require (besides specialized academic instruction using their preferred form of communication) cognitive behavioral therapy or some other form of mental health intervention. It is much costlier to provide such services to deaf youth because they require a clinician fluent in their form of communication who has experience serving that population.
[transcript continued in comments] Ch 8. Deafness, the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, and the Juvenile Delinquency System](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/smAhTebyQe0/mqdefault.jpg)







