AHA! Moments (and why it's not enough to go to workshops...)

As  I contemplate the ethics workshop that I want to develop (and potentially present at the VRID bi-annual conference), I started thinking about to one of those "AHA!" moments that I had last spring.

I was assigned to interpret a two hour training- alone.  While this is fairly standard policy with this particular interpreting agency, I feel that it goes against standard practice and puts me at risk for injury. In my initial email to coordination, especially considering my unfamiliarity with that particular government agency and Deaf consumer.  However, this is where I was proud of myself.  As I thought about this situation, I started too dig deeper and apply the demand-control schema. In a follow-up discussion with my supervisor, I was able to articulate my concerns about the main demand- working two hours alone- as well as the concurrent demands that I was facing.  Since this was a training, I was predicting a faster pace and dense information on top of the unfamiliar vocabulary and acronyms that are always present when working with a new consumer and/ or setting.  I also knew that I would be transliterating and voicing for this consumer.

While the resolution was not ideal, I was able to apply lessons learned from both the demand-control schema and "Sign Safely, Interpret Intelligently."  Perhaps, the biggest lesson that I have learned this year is self-advocacy- which has been a recurring theme at several workshops that I have attended.  That week was an interesting week, albeit a rough one.  It was the first time that I truely applied the demand-control schema to my work pro-actively, in real time, rather than retrospectively.  Later that week, I was faced with another dilemma when I woke up with excruciating shoulder pain.  Although I was scheduled for two on-call assignments, I called out sick last-minute.  As I told my husband, I felt silly calling out when I had on-calls, but unfortunately, you never know- I could have been sitting for four hours or interpreting for four hours.  While I have become a better self-advocate, I still need to work on taking care of myself.

At the end of the day, it is great to go to workshops to network and CEUs, but we also need to learn and apply those lessons learned on a  daily basis.  There will always be room for improvement and AHA! moments.

Food for thought: Is RID a certifying body or a professional organization?

Is RID a certifying body or a prefessional organization?

This was the question that the RID Board of Directors presented to the membership at the 2011 National Conference.  While I appreciated the forum as well as the format that allowed extensive audience participation, I was rather disappointed at the relatively small turnout.  The forum was held on the last day of the conference and concurrently with workshops that offered CEUs.  I suspect that the combination for these two factors hindered attendance despite much discussion in the field about the state of RID.

After introductions from the Board of Directors and National Office staff, they presented the RID Philosophy, Mission, and Goal Statements as well as an introduction to the forth-coming Diversity Statement.  The Diversity Council is working on the Diversity Statement, however it is undecided whether it should be a stand-alone statement

After concluding their presentations, the Board of Directors solicited member comments through a series of questions:

-Should RID mention certification in PMGD (Purpose, Mission, Goals, & Diversity Statement)?
-If you had three wishes for RID that could be incorporated in the PMGD statement, what would they be?
-Does the the PMG include room for formalized recognition of the various types of interpreting that occur?
-What do you value about being a member of RID?

Through the course of this discussion, I spoke twice.  Following the first questions, I expressed my concerns that RID was trying to be a certifying body and a professional organizational organization but unfortunately was not doing it well.  During my ITP, I was taught that RID certification was "end all and be all."  While I cannot imagine what it would look like to no longer have RID as the certifying body and professional organization, I am worried that at some point the states will step in and take contol of credentialing interpreters- and in my mind, that is not a step in the right direction.

As we discussed the PMGD statement and how to make the Diversity statement as inclusive as possible, particularly regarding the different modalities we work between (Spoken English, Spoken Spanish, ASL, Signed English, oral transliteration...), I suggested a term that I have repeatedly heard in our profession- "communication facilitators."  Admitedly, I was a little stunned that the next speaker immediately shot down and criticized my suggestion because "faciliate means easy and our job is not easy."  I did not have a chance to respond, however I was thinking about her comment.  Facilitate does mean "to make easy."  While our job is not easy, our job is to make communication easier for our consumers.

For me the most interesting discussion revolved around what we value about being a member of RID.  Our shared history, introspection, relationships, colleagues, unity, support, and networking were consistent themes, with members noting:
     "Iron sharpens iron."
     "As a united front, we have a voice."
     "...opportunity to let our voice shine through."
     "....being apart of something bigger than I am."

Of course the big question still remains: Are we a certifying body? Should we be a credentialing organization?

In time, as our organization grows and evolves, we will be able to answer that question.

RID National Conference: Business Meeting Updates

Better late, than never...

Here is a summary from the 2011 RID Business Meeting:

[Day 1]

•Motion A: “That RID adopt the Region V Communication Policy for National Conferences of RID beginning in 2013.”

▫Withdrawn by motion maker- “spirit” of motion is being implemented at the current conference

▫Will be in communication with the National Office Staff

•Motion B: “That RID enter into negotiations with Texas Department of  Assistive and Rehabilitative Services/ Office of Deaf & Hard of Hearing/ Board of Evaluation of Interpreters (DARS/DHHS/BEI) for the purpose of RID recognizing BEI certification as an appropriate credential for certified membership in RID.”

▫Amended Motion: “That RID enter into dialogue […] for the purpose of RID potentially recognizing BEI certification as an appropriate credential for certified membership in RID after the guidelines of the motion passed in 2007 are approved by the members and are implemented.”

▫Amended Motion B Failed

•Motion C: “That RID research a mechanism for the endorsement of reputable agencies and organizations providing sign language interpretations services in community settings & report back to membership by 2013 National Conference.”

▫Amended: “identification of reputable agencies…”

▫Carried as amended

•Motion D: “That all RID National Conference sessions be accessible in ASL, English, and Spanish.”

▫Amended: “…but not necessarily all in open microphone.”

▫Carried as amended

[Day 2]

•Motion E: “That a new position on the RID Board of Directors be created as the CODA Member-At-Large.”

▫Substitute Motion: “Move that the Board of Directors charge the Bylaws Committee, in consultation with the leadership of the IDP member section, to develop bylaws amendments that establish a position on the Board of the Directors to represent RID members who were raised by a Deaf parent or Deaf parents, together with appropriate qualifications & duties for this position.  The Bylaws Committee is to present these bylaws amendments to the RID membership for a vote no later than December 15, 2012, but no earlier than the conclusion of all the 2012 Regional Conferences.”

▫Substitute motion was accepted by a vote

▫Substitute motion amended: “to the RID Board of Directors, and then the membership…”

▫Substitute Motion E passed as amended

•Motion F: “For RID to create a committee to investigate the feasibility of, and procedures to implement, a system of specialization recognition.  This paradigm is an expansion of RID’s current CMP and would be to encourage interpreters to develop specialization skills and to have those skills officially recognized within the field of interpreting for the Deaf.  Said committee must include a specialist in interpreter education, national office personnel experienced in RID’s Certification Maintenance Program and other interested and affected stakeholders.

▫Withdrawn by motion maker

•Motion G: “That RID establish an ad hoc committee to develop a position paper addressing the role of interpreters in the specialized setting of performing arts.”  Carried

•Motion H: “That the RID National Office maintains continuing education transcripts for all certified interpreters for a period not less than 35 years.

▫Motion to refer to the National Office and Professional Development Committee for Feasibility Study- Carried

•Motion I: “To allow Puerto Rico RID (PRRID) to participate in the development of a Spanish/ Sign Language test for Puerto Rico (PR) by participating as a stakeholder with representation and vote capacity in the Committee for the Development of  a Screening Rest for PR Spanish/ Sign Language Interpreters.”

▫Withdrawn pre-conference by motion makers

•Motion J: “That RID provide group rate comprehensive health insurance options for members to be implemented by the 2013 RID National Conference.”

▫Amended: That RID conduct a new feasibility study […] and report back to the membership by the 2013 National Conference.”   Carried as amended

•Motion K: “That RID request the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) set-up compensation for certified deaf interpreters in the video relay services industry.”  Carried unanimously

•Motion L: “That RID work, in collaboration with appropriate stakeholders, on the development of a standard practice paper for Trilingual (Spanish-English-ASL) Interpreting.”  Carried unanimously

•Motion M: “That the RID national office investigate how to improve the visual accessibility to viewing ASL content by creating minimum specifications standards to be met within region conferences by the 2012 regional conferences and in the workshop rooms in the national conferences by 2013.   Carried

Motions from the floor:

•Motion N: [my paraphrase] If your fail one portion of the NIC exam (interview or performance), you can re-take the failed portion at a pro-rated rate.

▫Motion ruled out of order since this is a certification issue and motion was made by an association member

Please note that there has been substantial debate post-conference about whether this motion was out of order.  While the bylaws clearly state that associate members cannot vote on certification issues, it is not clear if that by extension, associate members are also prohibited to make motions regarding certification issues.

•Motion O [re-wording of Motion F]: “That RID create a committee to investigate the feasibility of, and procedures to implement, a system to recognize specialized skills not requiring a specialist certification.” Failed

•Motion P: “That all future National and Regional conferences include a philanthropic initiative that benefits the Deaf community as part of their respective conferences.” Carried

All in all, I am pleased with the results of the business meeting and very impressed that sufficient time remained to accept motions from the floor (When I attended in 2007 and 2009, we weren't even able to get through the motions submitted pre-conference).  I was very happy that the motion makers of Motion E (CODA Member-At-Large) made a substitute motion that allowed for more specificity and member involvement, which I believed allowed us to vote on the motion and move on to discuss additional issues.  I was surprised that Motion J (health insurance) ended up being one of the more contentious issues.

That being said, I am immensely disappointed that the business meetings were scheduled concurrently to workshops, and as a result we wasted precious time trying to establish and maintain quorum.  I think that as members we have a responsibility to be involved in OUR organization, but that RID should be encouraging member involvement as well.  Given the debate about the timing of the business meetings and workshops, I am very curious how business meetings will be handled at the 2013 conference.