FR Doc 05-15252
[Federal Register: August 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 148)]
[Notices]
[Page 44833-44841]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03au05-234]
[[Page 44833]]
Download: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Education
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Training of Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard of
Hearing and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind--Priorities and Definitions
and Notice of Availability; Notices
[[Page 44834]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Training of Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard of
Hearing and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priorities and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services announces three priorities and definitions
under the Training of Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard
of Hearing and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind program. The Assistant
Secretary may use these priorities and definitions for competitions in
fiscal year (FY) 2005 and later years. We take this action to focus on
training and education as an identified area of national and regional
need. We intend for the priorities to improve the quality of
interpreters in the field by providing quality educational
opportunities with consumer involvement throughout the process and with
a specific focus on interpreters working with consumers of vocational
rehabilitation (VR) services.
EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities and definitions are effective
September 2, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Annette Reichman, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 5032, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-7489 or via Internet:
Annette.Reichman@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call (202) 205-8352.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 302(f) of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended (Act), and the regulations for this program in 34 CFR
396.1 state that the Training of Interpreters for Individuals Who Are
Deaf or Hard of Hearing and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind program is
designed to establish interpreter training programs or to assist
ongoing training programs to train a sufficient number of qualified
interpreters in order to meet the communications needs of individuals
who are deaf or hard of hearing and individuals who are deaf-blind. The
Training of Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard of
Hearing and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind program provides financial
assistance to pay part of the costs to--
(1) Train manual, tactile, oral, and cued speech interpreters;
(2) Ensure the maintenance of the skills of interpreters; and
(3) Provide opportunities for interpreters to raise their level of
competence.
Federal statutes, such as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the
Americans with Disabilities Act established the legal requirements for
communication and language access. These requirements led to an ever-
increasing demand for qualified interpreters, outstripped the available
pool of qualified interpreters, and created a serious ongoing national
shortage. In addition, many States have passed, or are now proposing,
licensure laws for interpreters, requiring interpreters working in
these States to meet specific qualifications. In the last several years
the shortage of qualified interpreters has been exacerbated by the
establishment of ``Video Relay Services'' call centers throughout the
country. These centers actively recruit interpreters from surrounding
communities and postsecondary institutions to work as video relay
interpreters in these call centers.
Simultaneously, deaf consumers of interpreting services are
demanding higher quality interpreting services that meet their
individual needs. Consumers and consumer organizations have expressed
interest in being substantively involved in the identification,
development, and delivery of the educational opportunities provided
through these priorities.
In order to train qualified interpreters to better meet the demand
from consumers and consumer organizations, interpreter educators must
be sufficient in number and knowledgeable of current best practices.
There are, however, very few programs that prepare interpreter
educators to teach the interpreting process and the skill of
interpreting. Consequently, many educators teaching at approximately
137 interpreter training programs throughout the country have had
little or no opportunity to study how to teach interpretation.
To address these issues and to contribute toward the education and
training of a sufficient number of qualified interpreters to meet the
communications needs of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and
individuals who are deaf-blind, the Assistant Secretary proposed to
establish priorities for a National Interpreter Education Center and a
coordinated Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers working
with and through Local Partner Networks.
We published a notice of proposed priorities and definitions for
this program in the Federal Register on November 3, 2004 (69 FR 64240).
That notice included a discussion of significant issues and analysis
used in the development of the priorities and definitions.
Except for minor editorial and technical revisions, there are four
differences between the notice of proposed priorities and definitions
and this final notice. They are:
1. We have established a new priority within the existing priority
from 34 CFR 396.33 to support applications from postsecondary
institutions that offer and have awarded at least a bachelor's degree
in interpreter education.
2. The National Interpreter Education Center and the Regional
Interpreter Education Centers will be required to reserve 10 percent of
their annual budgets to cover the costs of specific collaborative
efforts between the centers.
3. A special focus on training opportunities for trilingual deaf
and hearing interpreters, particularly those who are Spanish and
English speaking and fluent in both American Sign Language and Mexican
Sign Language or other sign languages used by Spanish-speaking
communities has been added to Priority 2.
4. In deciding whether to continue the projects for the fourth and
fifth years, a review of the National Interpreter Education Center and
the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers will be conducted
by a team consisting of experts selected by the Secretary during the
first half of the projects' third year, instead of the last half of the
projects' second year as originally proposed.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
In response to our invitation in the notice of proposed priorities
and definitions, 60 parties submitted comments. An analysis of the
comments and of any changes in the priorities and definitions since
publication of the notice of proposed priorities and definitions
follows.
Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes--and
suggested changes that we are not authorized to make under the
applicable statutory authority.
[[Page 44835]]
Comments: Three commenters stated that the priorities should
promote the accreditation process for interpreter training programs as
a mechanism to document the quality of their outcomes. The commenters
suggested that the National Interpreter Education Center partner with
the accreditation body under the Conference of Interpreter Trainers as
a coordinated effort to strengthen the field of interpreter education.
Discussion: Section 302(f) of the Act and the regulations for this
program in 34 CFR 396.1 state that the purpose of grants awarded under
this program is to train a sufficient number of qualified interpreters
to meet the communications needs of individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing and individuals who are deaf-blind. To accomplish this, grants
may be awarded to public and private nonprofit agencies and
organizations to pay part of the costs for the establishment of
interpreter training programs or to assist those agencies or
organizations to conduct training at existing interpreter training
programs. The statute and regulations, however, do not provide
authority for the program to become directly involved with
accreditation of interpreter training programs. The National
Interpreter Education Center and the Regional Interpreter Education
Centers nonetheless could choose to use the rigors of the accreditation
process as one mechanism to document the quality of their educational
outcomes.
Change: None.
Comments: Seven commenters suggested that we limit eligibility for
the National Interpreter Education Center grant to postsecondary
institutions that offer bachelor's degrees or master's degrees in
interpreter training. These commenters also suggested that we include
interpreter education programs that offer, or that are able to
demonstrate that they are well on their way to establishing, a
bachelor's degree in interpreter education as eligible applicants for
the Regional Interpreter Education Centers grants. Another commenter
suggested that one of the functions of the National Interpreter
Education Center should be to provide guidance to interpreters who are
transitioning from associate's degree level training programs to
bachelor's degree level training programs, as part of demonstrating
effective practices in interpreter education.
Discussion: The Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. (RID),
a national and professional organization that certifies interpreters,
has recently passed a mandate requiring candidates for certification to
have an academic degree. Effective June 30, 2012, candidates for RID
certification must have a minimum of a bachelor's degree, and effective
June 30, 2016, deaf candidates for RID certification must have a
minimum of a bachelor's degree. (See http://www.rid.org/ntsnews.html
for the text of the motion that passed.) National Association of the
Deaf (NAD), another national and professional organization that
certifies interpreters, continues to work closely with RID in blending
the two certifying organizations into one entity with the same
requirements just outlined.
While RID and NAD do not specify a particular discipline for the
bachelor's degree, it is generally recognized that the effectiveness of
the message rendered by an interpreter directly correlates with the
level of education of the interpreter. We agree that it is important
that projects supported by the Rehabilitation Services Administration
(RSA) reflect standards currently being established by the field.
The regulations for this program in 34 CFR 396.33 state that the
Secretary gives priority to public or private nonprofit agencies or
organizations with existing programs that have demonstrated their
capacity for providing interpreter training services, including
institutions of higher education that meet these criteria.
Within the priority as currently written, the National Interpreter
Education Center can choose to provide a special focus on developing
guidance for interpreters who are transitioning from associate's degree
level training programs to bachelor's degree level training programs,
as part of demonstrating effective practices in interpreter education.
Change: We are establishing a new priority within the existing
priority from 34 CFR 396.33 to support applications from postsecondary
institutions that offer and have awarded at least a bachelor's degree
in interpreter education.
Comments: Three commenters stated that we should require that the
proposed National Interpreter Education Center and the Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers become directly involved with
the national interpreter certification testing and certification
maintenance programs that are provided jointly through NAD and RID.
Discussion: While we recognize the importance of national
interpreter certification organizations, including NAD and RID, in
clearly defining the parameters of a qualified interpreter, the Act
requires that this program train a sufficient number of interpreters
through grant awards to pay part of the costs for the establishment of
interpreter training programs or to assist existing interpreter
training programs. The statute and regulations do not provide
authorization for the program to become directly involved with the
certification of interpreters.
Change: None.
Comments: Two commenters suggested that 10 percent of the projects'
annual budgets be reserved to support the collaboration between the
National Interpreter Education Center and the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers including travel, communications, materials
development, Web site development, and other collaborative efforts.
Discussion: The National Interpreter Education Center will be
required, in part, to coordinate the activities of the Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers and to ensure the effectiveness
of the educational opportunities offered by the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers. We agree that the budgets of the National
Interpreter Education Center and the Regional Interpreter Education
Center or Centers should allow for these collaborative efforts.
Change: We are revising the priorities to require that 10 percent
of the annual budget for the National Interpreter Education Center and
the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers be reserved for
specific collaborative efforts.
Comments: One commenter suggested that the Regional Interpreter
Education Centers specifically incorporate opportunities for informal
interaction with the community at large, as a required part of the
training opportunities.
Discussion: We concur with the suggestion that opportunities for
informal interaction with the community at large should be provided. We
believe that the requirement for the use of language immersion
experiences in American Sign Language, Conceptually Accurate Signed
English, oral communication, tactile communication, and cued speech as
written would include this informal interaction with deaf consumers in
the local communities.
Change: None.
Comments: Eight commenters emphasized the importance of using
distance technologies, including videoconferencing capabilities, to
deliver interpreter services from remote locations and to enable
interpreter education programs to offer distance education
opportunities. One commenter stated that the National
[[Page 44836]]
Interpreter Education Center should focus on emerging videoconferencing
technologies as a resource.
Discussion: The priorities explicitly require the Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers to use ``state-of-the-art''
technologies for training on how to deliver interpreter services from
remote locations and in handling various technologies during
interpreter assignments. In addition, the priority states that the
delivery of educational opportunities may not be limited to traditional
methods, and distance technologies and delivery are included in the
list of innovative practices to be used.
Change: None.
Comments: Three commenters stated that improvements in interpreting
skills should be evaluated by alternative measures of qualitative and
quantitative data rather than pre- and post-assessment. Assessment
measures should be flexible to allow for the development of an
individualized training plan based on a person's unique abilities.
Discussion: The National Interpreter Education Center is required
to collect, analyze, and report to RSA the pre- and post-assessment
data of the educational activities conducted through the Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers. The National Interpreter
Education Center also is required to collect, evaluate, and report to
RSA both the qualitative and quantitative data on the educational
activities provided by the Regional Interpreter Education Center or
Centers, based on clear, measurable goals that are linked to results
demonstrating overall program effectiveness. The Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers are required to provide qualitative and
quantitative data on the educational activities conducted, pre- and
post-assessments, portfolios produced, participant demographics, and
other pertinent information to the National Interpreter Education
Center for the purpose of evaluating and reporting program
effectiveness. These priorities allow for considerable flexibility with
assessment measures to be used and at the same time clearly stress the
importance of demonstrating measurable program results.
Change: None.
Comments: Three commenters stated that the primary focus of the
National Interpreter Education Center on training for interpreter
educators should either be eliminated from the final priorities, due to
the unrealistic scope of activities, or be limited to in-service
training opportunities. In addition, one of the commenters stated that
the investment in a pre-service interpreter educator program would not
see dividends for several years.
Discussion: One critical issue in the field of interpreter
education is that very few programs are available to prepare
interpreter educators to teach the interpreting process. As a result,
many educators teaching at the approximately 137 interpreter training
programs have had few opportunities to study how to teach
interpretation or to learn about the current best practices in the
field. To address this issue, Priority 1 focuses on the role of the
National Interpreter Education Center to provide state-of-the-art
educational opportunities to interpreter educators. Priority 1
specifically states that the National Interpreter Education Center must
provide educational opportunities to working interpreter educators who
need to obtain, enhance, or update their training on effective
practices in interpreter education and to new interpreter educators.
Priority 1 does not impose limitations on how training, in-service or
pre-service, should be or can be offered to interpreter educators,
except that the National Interpreter Education Center must identify and
promote effective practices in interpreter education. Thus, the scope
of required activities for training interpreter educators is realistic.
While the initial investment in training interpreter educators may not
see dividends for several years, we believe that the long-term return
on investment will demonstrate a positive gain and considerable impact
on improving the quality of interpreters.
Change: None.
Comments: Four commenters stated that the focus on training
interpreters to provide better services to VR consumers, while
worthwhile, does not fully encompass the different settings, including
postsecondary programs, in which interpreters work, and that this focus
would lead to different types of training than currently exist.
Discussion: The Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers,
with all of their training activities, must include cooperative efforts
with consumers, consumer organizations, community resources, and
service providers, especially VR agencies. The Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers also must focus on interpreting in
specialized environments such as rehabilitation, legal, medical, mental
health, or multicultural. While Priority 2 emphasizes that the primary
focus of the educational opportunities must be on interpreting for
consumers of VR services, the training activities outlined in Priority
2 are not limited solely to rehabilitation settings, but encompass the
broader range of environments that participants in the VR process may
encounter.
Change: None.
Comments: Eight commenters, while supportive of the emphasis on the
Local Partner Networks under the Regional Interpreter Education Center
or Centers priority, stated that the requirements for the Local Partner
Networks should be expanded to include formal agreements with pertinent
stakeholders and partners, including educational institutions and
organizations that have similar goals, and should allow for the unique
needs of each geographical area. One additional commenter, while also
supportive of the emphasis on the Local Partner Networks under this
priority, stated that the requirements for the Local Partner Networks
were excessively formal and may be too difficult and expensive to
achieve.
Discussion: The Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers
must develop formal relationships with Local Partner Networks as
defined in the notice of final priorities and definitions. The Local
Partner Networks are expected to work with the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers to implement effective practices in
interpreter education, implement program quality indicators, and
provide education activities to interpreters. The mechanism that each
Regional Interpreter Education Center chooses to develop the required
formal relationships among the specific parties is left to the
discretion of the Center to allow for differing geographic and
demographic needs.
Change: None.
Comments: Three commenters stated that, while they are supportive
of the emphasis on mentoring as an important training component under
this project, the priorities need to specifically define ``mentoring,''
since mentoring is not a substitution for the pre-service training that
beginning interpreting students need. In addition, one of the three
commenters stated that a framework for an ``induction system'' should
be included, in which the students of pre-service interpreter training
programs have the opportunity to become mentees and to work with
qualified mentors, while being inducted as novice professionals into
the field of interpreting.
Discussion: The Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers
are required to educate deaf individuals and practicing deaf and
hearing interpreters on how to serve as effective mentors, in addition
to providing mentoring to novice and working interpreters who
[[Page 44837]]
need additional feedback and experience to become qualified
interpreters. When training mentors, grantees are expected to use the
materials already developed by the current national project or by other
existing mentoring programs. The current national project on Training
Interpreter Educators and Mentors has developed a master mentor
training program curriculum and an on-line program teaching experienced
interpreters how to mentor novice interpreters. (A description of this
project can be found at the following Web site:
http://www.asl.neu.edu/tiem.online/.
The materials will also be available at the National
Clearinghouse of Rehabilitation Training Materials at Oklahoma State
University, 206 W. Sixth Street, Stillwater, OK 74078-4080, upon
completion of the national project at the end of September 2005.) While
not a requirement, the National Interpreter Education Center and the
Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers may also use this
opportunity to establish the framework for an induction system in which
the students of pre-service interpreter training programs have the
opportunity to become mentees and to work with qualified mentors, while
being inducted as novice professionals into the field of interpreting.
Change: None.
Comments: Six commenters stated that these priorities needed to
place a greater emphasis on educating individuals who are deaf and
individuals who are deaf-blind on how to become effective mentors for
deaf sign language interpreters and hearing sign language interpreters.
This will give the deaf community a more meaningful and genuine role in
the training of novice and working interpreters.
Discussion: The priorities highlight the importance of involving
deaf consumers in every aspect of the National Interpreter Education
Center and the importance of educating deaf individuals and practicing
deaf and hearing interpreters to serve as mentors to novice and working
interpreters. In addition, the definition of ``deaf'' includes all
individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, late deafened, and deaf-
blind. Through the priorities we have also emphasized the importance of
training not only individuals who are deaf, but also individuals who
are deaf-blind, on how to become effective mentors for deaf sign
language interpreters and hearing sign language interpreters.
Change: None.
Comments: One commenter stated that spoken Spanish and American
Sign Language interpreter training should be included as a priority for
those areas serving a large Spanish-speaking population.
Discussion: The Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers
are required to provide training specific to the needs of the
population in their regions. This may include a focus on interpreting
in specialized environments, including multicultural and multilingual
environments. We agree that the demand for qualified interpreters who
are fluent in spoken Spanish, spoken English, and American Sign
Language is increasing, particularly in those regions with a large
Spanish-speaking population. Training tailored for Spanish-speaking
individuals who are also fluent with spoken and written English, and
with both American Sign Language and Mexican Sign Language or other
sign languages used by Spanish-speaking communities, is increasingly
needed.
Change: In the priority for the Regional Interpreter Education
Center or Centers, we have added a special focus for training
opportunities for trilingual deaf and hearing interpreters who are
fluent in spoken Spanish and English and fluent in both American Sign
Language and Mexican Sign Language or other sign languages used by
Spanish-speaking communities.
Comments: Two commenters stated that the objectives for the
National Interpreter Education Center were too broad, lacked specific
focus, and would not produce significant, long-term outcomes. These
commenters also questioned whether the focus was on the training of
interpreters, on interpreter-educators, or on research.
Discussion: The Act specifically requires that we focus on training
a sufficient number of qualified interpreters. In order to meet the
need for training increasing numbers of interpreters throughout the
country, the priority for the National Interpreter Education Center was
developed to focus on collaborating with the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers to offer quality interpreter training
programs that can show measurable outcomes and develop new and
effective practices in interpreter education. The National Interpreter
Education Center will also focus on training working and new
interpreter educators on effective practices in interpreter education.
Thus, while the National Interpreter Education Center is not conducting
research, the center will have a specific focus on promoting quality
interpreter education and on training interpreter educators with the
clear expectation of producing significant long-term outcomes in
improving the skills and qualifications of new and working
interpreters.
Change: None.
Comments: Five commenters stated that clarification is needed on
the specific responsibilities of the National Interpreter Education
Center, including this center's oversight of and authority over the
Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers, especially as related
to expectations on budget, personnel, and activities. Two of these five
commenters also stated that the National Interpreter Education Center
would add another, unnecessary level of oversight.
Discussion: The National Interpreter Education Center will not have
direct oversight of or authority over the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers, in respect to budget, personnel, and
activities. Priorities 1 and 2 require collaboration between the
National Interpreter Education Center and the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers, including--(a) development and
implementation of ``Program Quality Indicators,'' (b) collection,
analysis, and reports to RSA of the pre- and post-assessment results
and the qualitative and quantitative data of the educational activities
conducted through the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers,
and (c) coordination of activities to ensure effective use of resources
and consistency of quality interpreter educational opportunities.
Budget expenditures to support these activities will be developed
independently by the National Interpreter Education Center and each of
the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers based on relevant
cost principles and any instructions provided by the Department. RSA
project officers will maintain the necessary direct oversight of, and
authority over, the National Interpreter Education Center and the
Regional Interpreter Education Centers in determining appropriate
collaborative efforts.
Change: None.
Comments: Six commenters stated that there is great value in the
role of the National Interpreter Education Center in developing and
applying performance measures and in providing coordination and input
for the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers based on
assessment of needs and outcomes. However, two of these six commenters
also cautioned that the effectiveness of the project should not be
exclusively based on ``numbers'' as the primary measuring tool in the
provision of
[[Page 44838]]
educational opportunities and cautioned that one set of standards will
be insufficient to meet the needs of a variety of individuals from
different cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
Discussion: To demonstrate the effectiveness of the Training of
Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and
Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind program, the U.S. Department of
Education requires that grantees provide qualitative and quantitative
data based on clear and measurable goals. The measures that will be
used for this program are included in the application notice.
Change: None.
Comments: Six commenters stated that these priorities represent a
significant change from the projects funded in the past under this
program and that the first 18 to 24 months of the project are a
critical period of time. As such, an 18-month period before the
intensive one-day programmatic review is not enough time for the
National Education Interpreter Center to be able to demonstrate
evidence of the project's contributions to changed practices and the
quality of interpreter education provided.
Discussion: We agree that the first 18 to 24 months of the project,
particularly for the National Interpreter Education Center, will be
critical, and that additional time will be needed to demonstrate the
impact of the project's contributions to changed practices by
interpreter training programs and the quality of interpreter education
opportunities.
Change: We have modified the priority language to provide that the
programmatic review of the National Interpreter Education Center and
the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers will be conducted
during the first half of the projects' third year instead of the last
half of the projects' second year.
Comments: Four commenters stated that the priorities must state
clearly whether the National Interpreter Education Center and the
Regional Interpreter Education Centers will fund interpreter training
through either pre-service programs or in-service training activities.
While one commenter supported the use of funding solely for in-service
training opportunities for those working interpreters without any prior
training, the other commenters wanted these funds to be used solely for
pre-service educational opportunities.
Discussion: In general, ``pre-service'' and ``in-service'' training
activities, particularly in postsecondary education settings, are not
clearly differentiated. For example, a local college may offer a course
over four consecutive weekends, either for working interpreters (in-
service) or for undergraduate or graduate credit (pre-service). The
intent of these priorities is to support the provision of innovative
training opportunities that meet the needs of the field, such as
longer-term training of significant scope and sequence that directly
result in increasing the number of qualified interpreters. Therefore,
grantees have the flexibility to provide training that addresses both
pre-service and in-service educational opportunities.
Change: None.
Comments: Thirty commenters stated that the proposed Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers are a critical component in the
structure for providing educational and training opportunities for
interpreters. Of these, four commenters stated that there should be a
minimum of four to six Regional Interpreter Education Centers. Twenty-
six commenters recommended maintaining the current structure of 10
regional projects. The latter commenters expressed concern that the
diversity from region to region may not be adequately addressed if the
number of regional programs is reduced.
Discussion: In FYs 2000 to 2004, each of the 10 regional
interpreter training projects received an average of $150,000 per year.
At the same time, there were approximately 137 interpreter training
programs throughout the country, which suggests that the national
impact of these 10 regional interpreter training projects on enhancing
the quality of interpreter educational opportunities has been limited.
The diversity within regions will be addressed through the
establishment of the Local Partner Networks by the Regional Interpreter
Education Centers. We will consider these comments and factors in
developing any notice inviting applications for awards under this
program.
Change: None.
Comments: Eight commenters stated that to improve the education of
interpreters a research component should be added to the priorities
through the collection, analysis, and reports to RSA. This research
could incorporate the pre- and post-assessment data of the education
activities conducted in the Regional Interpreter Education Center or
Centers and other data already available in the field.
Discussion: While we understand the need for research related to
interpreter education and practice, RSA does not have the authority to
conduct research through this program. The data collection, analysis,
and reporting that is required under these priorities is for the
purpose of ensuring accountability for program performance and results.
The comments related to the need for research in the area of
interpreter training and services will be forwarded to the National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research for their
consideration.
Change: None.
Comments: Four commenters stated that the National Interpreter
Education Center should set up a national dissemination effort through
the creation and maintenance of an electronic resource center that is
accessible via the World Wide Web, so that resources are available for
interpreter educators as well as practitioners.
Discussion: RSA already maintains a national dissemination center
for all training grants, the National Clearinghouse of Rehabilitation
Training Materials (NCRTM), at this Web site, http://www.nchrtm.okstate.edu/
The National Interpreter Education Center will be responsible for
providing all materials to the NCRTM.
Change: None.
Comments: Three commenters stated that training with specialized
focus should be emphasized as one of the most important activities of
the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers, as the field of
interpreting is becoming increasingly specialized.
Discussion: We agree that interpreting in specialized environments
is a critical component of interpreter education, and this is
emphasized in Priority 2--Regional Interpreter Education Center or
Centers.
Change: None.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use these priorities and definitions, we invite
applications through a notice in the Federal Register. When inviting
applications, we designate each priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational. The effect of each type of priority
follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by either
(1) awarding additional points, depending on how well or the extent to
which the application meets the competitive preference priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the
competitive
[[Page 44839]]
preference priority over an application of comparable merit that does
not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the invitational
priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the
invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other
applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Priorities
Definitions: For the purposes of these priorities, we use the
following definitions:
Deaf means individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, late
deafened, or deaf-blind. The term makes no reference or judgment of
preferred mode of communication or language preference.
Interpreter means individuals, both hearing and deaf, who provide
interpreting or transliterating, or both, for deaf, hard of hearing,
and deaf-blind individuals using a variety of languages and modes of
communication including, but not limited to, American Sign Language,
Conceptually Accurate Signed English, other forms of signed English,
oral communication, tactile communication, and cued speech.
Local Partner Network means a formal network of individuals,
organizations, and agencies including consumers, consumer
organizations, community resources, service providers (especially VR
agencies), VR State coordinators for the deaf, rehabilitation
counselors for the deaf, and other appropriate entities with whom the
Regional Interpreter Education Center will have Memoranda of
Understanding or other recognized mechanisms for the provision of
educational activities for interpreters.
National Interpreter Education Center means a project supported by
RSA to--(1) coordinate the activities of the Regional Interpreter
Education Centers; (2) ensure the effectiveness of the educational
opportunities offered by the Regional Interpreter Education Centers;
(3) ensure the effectiveness of the program as a whole by evaluating
and reporting outcomes; (4) provide technical assistance to the field
on effective practices in interpreter education; and (5) provide
educational opportunities for interpreter educators.
Novice interpreter means an interpreter who has graduated from an
interpreter training program and demonstrates language fluency in
American Sign Language and in English, but lacks experience working as
an interpreter.
Qualified interpreter means an interpreter who is able to interpret
effectively, accurately, and impartially both receptively and
expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary. This
definition, which is mentioned in the Senate Report for the
Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998, Senate Report 105-166 (Second
Session 1998), is one way for States to determine if interpreters are
sufficiently qualified and is based on the standard specified in the
regulations implementing titles II and III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990.
Regional Interpreter Education Center means a coordinated regional
center to provide quality educational opportunities for interpreters at
all skill levels.
Training and education will be used interchangeably.
Priority 1--National Interpreter Education Center
The purpose of this priority is to support a National Interpreter
Education Center (National Center) to coordinate the activities of the
Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers, to ensure the
effectiveness of the educational opportunities offered by the Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers, to ensure the effectiveness of
the program as a whole by evaluating and reporting outcomes, to provide
technical assistance to the field on effective practices in interpreter
education, and to provide educational opportunities for interpreter
educators. In conducting its activities, the National Center must
ensure the provision of quality educational opportunities with
substantial consumer involvement throughout the process and with a
specific focus on interpreting for consumers of VR services.
The National Center funded under this priority must do the
following:
(a) Identify and promote effective practices in interpreter
education and provide technical assistance to the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers and the field on effective practices in
interpreter education.
(b) Provide educational opportunities (based on the model
curriculum developed for interpreter educators under Grant Number
H160C030001) to working interpreter educators who need to obtain,
enhance, or update their training on effective practices in interpreter
education and to new interpreter educators.
(c) Promote improved education of interpreters and coordinate the
interpreter education activities of the Regional Interpreter Education
Center or Centers by--
(1) Developing ``Program Quality Indicators'' for this program,
including the Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers, and
measuring performance against these indicators;
(2) Conducting education needs assessments and, based on the
results, developing educational activities for delivery through the
Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers;
(3) Collecting, analyzing, and reporting to RSA the pre- and post-
assessment data of the educational activities conducted through the
Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers;
(4) Ensuring that educational opportunities are available to
individuals from a variety of cultural and linguistic backgrounds and
are sensitive to the needs of those audiences; and
(5) Ensuring that deaf consumers are involved in every aspect of
the project.
(d) Develop effective products for use by the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers in support of their educational activities
for interpreters (e.g., CDs, DVDs, Web-based materials, etc.).
(e) Promote the educational activities of the Regional Interpreter
Education Center or Centers and disseminate information to the field
through activities such as-- developing and maintaining a program Web
site; providing materials to the RSA-sponsored National Clearinghouse
on Rehabilitation Training Materials; developing and using Web-based
activities such as e-newsletters, interpreter forums, consumer forums,
events calendars, etc.; making presentations on results of project
activities at national conferences related to interpreting and
interpreter education; and making presentations on results of project
activities at consumer conferences.
(f) Collect, evaluate, and report to RSA on qualitative and
quantitative data on the educational activities of the Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers. Data must be based on clear,
measurable goals that are clearly linked to results.
(g) Use the data about the individual educational activities to
demonstrate overall program effectiveness. Data must be based on clear,
measurable goals that are clearly linked to results.
(h) Coordinate all activities conducted under this program,
including the activities of the National Center and the Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers, to ensure effective use of
resources and consistency of quality interpreter educational
opportunities to individuals in all geographic areas of the country.
(i) Set aside 10 percent of the project's annual budget submitted
to RSA to
[[Page 44840]]
cover the costs of specific collaborative activities between the
National Center and the Regional Interpreter Education Center or
Centers including, but not limited to, travel, communications,
materials development, Web site development, and other collaborative
efforts.
Fourth and Fifth Years of Project:
In deciding whether to continue this project for the fourth and
fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR
75.253(a) for continuation awards.
The Secretary will also consider the following:
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts
selected by the Secretary. The team will conduct its review in
Washington, DC, during the first half of the project's third year. A
project must budget for the travel associated with this one-day
intensive review.
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the award have been or are being met by the project.
(c) Evidence of the degree to which the project's activities have
contributed to changed practices and improved the quality of
interpreters.
Priority 2--Regional Interpreter Education Center or Centers
The purpose of this priority is to support a coordinated Regional
Interpreter Education Center or Centers to provide quality educational
opportunities for interpreters at all skill levels. The educational
opportunities provided by a Regional Interpreter Education Center,
through collaboration with Local Partner Networks and with substantial
involvement from deaf consumers, must be of sufficient scope and
sequence to demonstrate an increased skill and knowledge base of the
participants through the use of pre- and post-assessments. The pre- and
post-assessments will measure the knowledge and skill base of the
participants, both when first entering the training program and when
exiting the training program, to demonstrate their enhanced knowledge
and skills as interpreters as a result of the training opportunity. In
addition, the primary focus of the educational opportunities must be on
interpreting for consumers of VR services. Consequently, this means
educating hearing and deaf interpreters to work with consumers from
diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds in diverse environments
(i.e., urban, rural, low socioeconomic, territories, etc.) and within a
variety of contexts (i.e., employment, job training, technical,
medical, etc.).
Further, the educational opportunities must encompass both skill-
based and knowledge-based topics, provide for both hearing interpreters
and deaf interpreters, and focus on interpreting for a variety of
individuals who have communication skills along the full spectrum of
language from those with limited language skills to those with high-
level, professional language skills. Educational opportunities must be
provided for interpreters from all skill levels from novice to
advanced, and the skill level of the training must be clearly
identified. All training activities must involve cooperative efforts
with consumers, consumer organizations, community resources, and
service providers, especially VR agencies, VR State coordinators for
the deaf, and rehabilitation counselors for the deaf. Delivery of
educational opportunities may not be limited to traditional methods.
Distance technologies and delivery, use of teams of deaf and hearing
presenters, assignment of mentors, immersion experiences, intensive
institutes, and other innovative practices must be used.
A Regional Interpreter Education Center funded under this priority
also must do the following:
(a) Develop formal relationships with Local Partner Networks as
defined in this notice.
(b) In collaboration with the National Center, Local Partner
Networks, and consumers, implement effective practices in interpreter
education.
(c) In collaboration with the National Center, Local Partner
Networks, and consumers, implement the ``Program Quality Indicators''
for this program.
(d) Coordinate with existing interpreter training programs to
identify and conduct outreach activities with recent and new graduates
in order to provide training, including mentoring, to make them work-
ready.
(e) In collaboration with the National Center, Local Partner
Networks, and consumers, provide skill-based, context-based, and
knowledge-based interpreter education activities of significant scope
and sequence to interpreters in the identified region. Products
developed by the National Center must be incorporated into the
educational activities to the greatest extent appropriate. Educational
opportunities must include, but not be limited to--
(1) Educating deaf individuals and practicing deaf and hearing
interpreters to serve as mentors and provide mentoring to novice and
working interpreters who need additional feedback and experience to
become qualified;
(2) Addressing the various linguistic and cultural preferences
within the deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf-blind communities through
strands of specialized interpreter education;
(3) Focusing on interpreting in specialized environments such as
rehabilitation, legal, medical, mental health, or multicultural
environments, working with specific populations such as deaf-blind,
oral, trilingual (including those who are fluent in spoken English and
spoken Spanish along with both American Sign Language and Mexican Sign
Language or other sign languages used by Spanish-speaking communities),
or cued speech users, and improving specific skill sets such as sign-
to-voice interpreting, team interpreting, sight translation, or ethical
decisionmaking and professionalism;
(4) Developing interpretation and transliteration competencies for
interpreters working with deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf-blind
individuals with differing modes of communication, including, but not
limited to, the use of language immersion experiences in American Sign
Language, Conceptually Accurate Signed English, oral communication,
tactile communication, and cued speech;
(5) Using state-of-the-art technologies for training on how to
deliver interpreter services from remote locations and in handling
various technologies during interpreter assignments (e.g., microphones,
assistive listening devices, cameras, lights, etc.); and
(6) Educating consumers on skills related to self-advocacy and
working effectively with interpreters.
(f) In collaboration with the National Center, Local Partner
Networks, and consumers, implement and deliver the specific educational
activities identified in the education needs assessments.
(g) Provide information to the National Center for the purpose of
promoting the educational activities of the National Center.
(h) Provide qualitative and quantitative data on the educational
activities conducted, pre- and post-assessments, portfolios produced,
participant demographics, and other pertinent information to the
National Center for the purpose of evaluating program effectiveness.
(i) Coordinate and collaborate with the other Regional Interpreter
Education Centers funded by RSA and funded through this priority.
(j) Set aside 10 percent of the project's annual budget submitted
to RSA to cover the costs of specific collaborative activities between
the National Center and the Regional Interpreter Education
[[Page 44841]]
Center or Centers including, but not limited to, travel,
communications, materials development, Web site development, and other
collaborative efforts.
Fourth and Fifth Years of Project:
In deciding whether to continue a project for the fourth and fifth
years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a)
for continuation awards.
The Secretary will also consider the following:
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts
selected by the Secretary. The team will conduct its review in
Washington, DC, during the first half of the project's third year. A
project must budget for the travel associated with this one-day
intensive review.
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the award have been or are being met by the project.
(c) Evidence of the degree to which the project's activities have
contributed to changed practices and improved quality of interpreters.
(d) Evidence of the degree to which the project's activities have
served each State within its designated geographic region.
Priority 3--Programs Offering at Least a Bachelor's Degree in
Interpreter Education
Within the existing priority from 34 CFR 396.33, we are
establishing a priority to support applications from postsecondary
institutions that offer and have awarded at least a bachelor's degree
in interpreter education.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive
order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State
and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal
financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR parts 385 and 396.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.160 Training of
Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and
Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind)
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 772(f).
Dated: July 28, 2005.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 05-15252 Filed 8-2-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P