Thursday, July 5, 2012

Certification: Looking back and looking ahead

As I am re-read Lou Fant's Silver Threads, I am continually amazed at how much has changed in the interpreting field, but in some ways we are still facing the same challenges.  I first read Silver Threads last fall and I am now go through the book again and taking notes for my research on the RID Codes of Ethics.  As an organization, our Codes of Ethics have changed as the field evolved from occupation to profession, yet there is one thing that we have not gotten right.

Certification has been a controversial issue within our field and organization for numerous years- and escalating within the past year following the rating scandal and test changes.  Published in 1990,  Lou Fant recounts the first twenty-five years of RID's history.  Now, twenty-two years later, we are facing the same challenges in 2012. As I read the chapter of certification, several points jumped out at me:

"Most of us were not oriented to look at interpreting from a scientific point of view, a condition of thinking that is still all too prevalent today." (41)

"Our history, with regard to certification, has been one of trial and error, hit or miss, rather than one based one research." (47)

"We have made it something it was never intended to be, indeed, can never be, a panacea for our ills.  We seem to believe that if only we can vaccinate interpreters with the serum of certification, they will be forever immune to errors, bad judgement, poor signing, and lapses of competency." (48)

"Somehow, we have failed to convey to our consumers a clear understanding of what RID certification means.  As a result, consumers have unrealistic expectations of RID certified interpreters." (49)

"The historical evolution of professional certification in the United States has followed a course of beginning as a national certification, then metamorphosing into state and local certification or licensing." (53)

"If certification becomes less the responsibility of RID, and more the function of states, it will present a true measure of professionalism.  No longer will we be motivated to get RID certification just so we can work, but rather as a way to express our dedication to the profession." (55)


At last year's RID conference, I spoke at a forum, expressing my concerns about allowing states to control certification and my inability imagine what it would look like if RID was not responsible for certification.  However, I am open to the possibility where certification is separated from professional affiliation.  I am still very much conflicted about state licensure- it can certainly be done right to protect consumers and interpreters- or it can be done wrong with only the state's bottom line benefiting.  There is no magic bullet or quick fix, but we must be open to all possibilities.

However, there is one more perspective to consider.  As I work on my directed reading, I found an interesting distinction between occupations and professions.  Besides having an organization and Code of Ethics, according to the Theory of Control, self-regulation is a key function that separates professions from occupations (see Mikkelson's article in the 1999 Journal of Interpretation).

I do believe that certification signifies a individual's commitment to the profession.  Collectively, we do need to maintain our autonomy and self-regulation to maintain our professional status.  However, we also need to clarify and standardized what it means to be a "RID Certified interpreter"in order to better serve our consumers and ourselves.