Effective Assessments for Interpreter Education Programs to Increase Pass Rates for Certification
- 1 University of Texas at Rio Grande Valley, Brownsville, TX, USA
- 2 Department of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, Lamar University, Beaumont, TX, USA
Abstract
In the United States, students enrolled in an American Sign Language (ASL) Interpreter Education Program (IEP) are encouraged to achieve interpreter certification upon completion of the program. Obtaining the certification ensures employers they are hiring qualified personnel. A critical examination of assessments used by IEPs may result in formulating strategies that prepare students to pass the state-based assessments by graduation. A review of Program Learning Outcomes (PLO) and the way in which these are assessed should be undertaken in order to ensure that effective Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) are created to parallel appropriate stages of language development. Knowledge of Language Assessment Literacy (LAL) will assist in the development of well-defined and accurately-based objective assessments that are both valid and reliable. Targeting specific linguistic components combined with the usage of the cognitive domain of Bloom’s Taxonomy for teaching and assessing learning outcomes will provide a clear means for developing assessments. Utilizing Bloom’s Taxonomy, the development of assessments start at lower order cognitive processing and progressively moves to higher order (Marzano & Kendall, 2006). An examination of how using Bloom’s Taxonomy assists in the development of assessments is outlined.
- Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s Taxonomy of Cognitive Learning Objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103, 152-153. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010
- Damian, S. (2011). Spoken vs. Sign Languages—What’s the Difference? Cognition, Brain, and Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 251-265. https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-2386683691/spo ken-vs-sign-languages-what-s-the-difference
- Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services (2012). BEI General Study Guide. https://hhs.texas.gov/sites/default/files//documents/doing-busi ness-with-hhs/providers/assistive/bei/bei_study_guide.pdf
- Fulcher, G. (2012). Assessment Literacy for the Language Classroom. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9, 113-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.642041
- Gile, D. (1995). Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreting and Translation Training. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8(1st)
- Golos, D. B., & Moses, A. M. (2015). Supplementing an Educational Video Series with Video-Related Classroom Activities And Materials. Sign Language Studies, 15, 103-125. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2015.0005
- Kasilingam, G., Ramalingam, M., & Chinnavan, E. (2014). Assessment of Learning Domains to Improve Student’s Learning in Higher Education. Journal of Young Pharmacists, 6, 27-33. https://doi.org/10.5530/jyp.2014.1.5
- Lam, R. (2015). Language Assessment Training in Hong Kong: Implications for Language Assessment Literacy. Language Testing, 32, 169-197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214554321
- Macnamara, B. N., Moore, A. B., Kegl, J. A., & Conway, A. A. (2011). Domain-General Cognitive Abilities and Simultaneous Interpreting Skill. Interpreting, 13, 121-142. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.1.08mac
- Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2006). The New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
- Poehner, M. E. (2011). Validity and Interaction in the ZPD: Interpreting Learner Development through L2 Dynamic Assessment. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21, 244-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2010.00277.x
- Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (2014). Interpreter Education Program. https://myaccount.rid.org/Public/Search/Organization.aspx
- Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (2015). The Field of Interpreting—Opportunities and Growth. https://www.rid.org/about-rid/about-interpreting/