Designated or preferred? A deaf academic and two signed language interpreters working together for a PhD defence: A case study of best practice

In this paper we present an appreciative inquiry case study of our work together in a PhD defence, which we believe demonstrates a best practice in the field of signed language interpreting. We call into question the meaning and relevance of the ‘designated interpreter’ model, examining whether there is a ‘perfect formula’ for deaf academics and interpreters working together, not only in PhD defences, but also in academia more generally. We also challenge the very system for the provision of interpreter services as an institution creating structural inequalities, because it is heavily based on privilege. We argue that what is key is preference (i.e. the ability to exercise real choice) and familiarity, rather than the assignation of a ‘designated’ interpreter, and that simply achieving a degree in interpreting cannot guarantee that an interpreter will be prepared to meet the needs of deaf professionals. We also argue that sign language interpreter education needs to focus more than it does now on training to work into English (and/or other spoken languages in non-English-speaking countries), on performing visibly comfortable language work, and on specific specializations linked to deaf professional access and continuing professional development

Finally free of the interpreter's gaze? Uncovering the hidden labor of gaze work for deaf consumers of interpreter services

© 2024 The Authors. Published by Clemson University Press. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://open.clemson.edu/ijie/vol15/iss1/8The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated a shift towards remote video-mediated sign language interpreting. This has uncovered the hidden labor of gaze work that deaf consumers of interpreting services have been obliged to engage in. We specifically focus on one group of deaf consumers of interpreter services: deaf academics. We consider the role of interpreter education in the context of the backchanneling expectation, the invisibility of gaze work prior to the proliferation of remote video-mediated interpreting, during the COVID era, and then post-COVID. Throughout this chronology, we consider the expectations of interpreters and deaf academics for interaction and feedback between interpreter and academic. While gaze work historically forms part of the wider calculated consumer labor, this is something within the conference setting that deaf consumers are now more resistant to engage in. This is partly because of sensory overload and the need to manage multimodal resources. However, this is also about exercising choices. We highlight the need for sign language interpreters to be educated in more nuanced ways with respect to gaze behaviors. It is clear that deaf consumers want interpreters to provide solutions to ensure that interpreter-mediated access provides access without the problematic addition of consumer labor

On "diversity" and "inclusion":Exploring paradigms for achieving Sign Language Peoples' rights

The use of the concepts “diversity” and “inclusion” are analyzed with regard to deaf people, whom we call Sign Language Peoples (SLPs), specifically in policy discourses (as used by the World Federation of the Deaf and in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) and academic discourses (particularly the concept of Deaf Gain). Discussing such discourses, we evaluate the promises and perils of “diversity” and “inclusion” in policy positions and scholarly analysis. We argue that in order for these concepts to be useful for SLPs in the achievement of rights, we need to foreground a specific understanding of inclusion as societal inclusion, and diversity as needing a group rights-based foundation. As such, we explore different paradigms for understanding how SLPs are part of diversity and how they can be included. As such, we contribute to scholarship and debate on inclusion and diversity beyond the particular case of SLPs

Book Review: Critical perspectives on plurilingualism in deaf education.

Book review of Critical perspectives on plurilingualism in deaf education. Kristin Snoddon and Joanne C. Weber (Eds.), Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 2021. 272 pp