Social (Justice) Issues Education Among American Sign Language/English Interpreters

Name	File Type	Size	Last Modified
1Start_Here_Mayhew_2015_Codebook.doc	application/msword	19.1 MB	03/29/2017 02:43:PM
1Start_Here_Mayhew_2015_Codebook.pdf	application/pdf	10 MB	03/29/2017 02:49:PM
DataMngt-Documentation.xlsx	application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet	185 KB	03/29/2017 02:34:PM
Dataset_Part1_1172ResponsesSPSSDec15_no-demographics-or-open-response.sav	application/x-spss-sav	1.5 MB	03/28/2017 10:58:AM
Dataset_Part2_Demographics_1172ResponsesSPSSDec15.sav	application/x-spss-sav	2.3 MB	03/28/2017 10:47:AM
Dataset_Part3_Opentext_1172ResponsesSPSSDec15.sav	application/x-spss-sav	10.2 MB	03/28/2017 10:45:AM
Informed-Consent--Social-Issues-in-Interpreting-Survey.pdf	application/pdf	154.7 KB	03/25/2017 07:01:PM
Survey-Instrument-A	text/html	144.7 KB	03/25/2017 01:51:PM
Survey-Instrument-A_Social_Issues_in_Interpreting.doc	text/html	144.7 KB	03/25/2017 01:51:PM
Survey-Instrument-B_Supplement_Future-research-volunteers	text/html	5.4 KB	03/25/2017 05:59:PM

Project Citation:

Mayhew, Hilary. Social (Justice) Issues Education Among American Sign Language/English Interpreters. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2017-04-01. https://doi.org/10.3886/E100480V1

Project Description

Summary: Abstract
This exploratory study examined the experiences of American Sign Language interpreters in regards to social justice education (SJE). SJE is a recent trend in the ASL interpreting profession, and one that is not without controversy. This is the largest study to date on social justice in ASL interpreting, and the first specifically on social justice education in the field. For this study, a random sample of members from the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) responded to an anonymous survey (n=1,207, response rate 34%) which asked about educational experiences and interpersonal discussions on social justice issues. Surprisingly, results show that a large majority of respondents (76%) have already had SJE training, and/or have studied SJE topics on their own (84%). Training formats and content varied. Results seem to support literature on SJE in other fields, showing that longer courses correlate with more positive outcomes. Most people also reported that SJE had a positive impact on their work overall. Respondents did report both strong positive and negative reactions, however. Results of this study outline where SJE in interpreting needs to improve to follow “promising practices.” Educators and leaders may use these results to consider which SJ topics most students have already studied, and which are still unfamiliar. Finally, this initial dataset is intended as a possible baseline for future studies, to measure the actual impact of SJE on interpreters and the communities they serve. The dataset is available for secondary research.

Scope of Project

Subject Terms: social justice; pedagogy; Deaf; deaf; helping professionals; American Sign Language; interpreter; education; training ; hard of hearing; allies; cultural competence; sign language; signed language; Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf; RID; interpreter education; power; privilege; oppression; diversity; evidence-based practice; intersectionality; helping professions

Geographic Coverage: National

Time Period(s): 11/10/2015 – 11/23/2015 (Survey was open for 2 weeks in Nov 2015. Participants were asked for their experiences in the preceding 6months, 12 months, or lifetime; respondents also indicated their plans for the subsequent 12 months.); 5/23/2015 – 11/23/2015 (Survey was open for 2 weeks in Nov 2015. Participants were asked for their experiences in the preceding 6months, 12 months, or lifetime; respondents also indicated their plans for the subsequent 12 months.); 11/23/2014 – 11/23/2015 (Survey was open for 2 weeks in Nov 2015. Participants were asked for their experiences in the preceding 6months, 12 months, or lifetime; respondents also indicated their plans for the subsequent 12 months.); 11/10/2015 – 11/23/2015 (Survey was open for 2 weeks in Nov 2015. Participants were asked for their experiences in the preceding 6months, 12 months, or lifetime; respondents also indicated their plans for the subsequent 12 months.); 11/23/1964 – 11/23/2015 (Survey was open for 2 weeks in Nov 2015. Participants were asked for their experiences in the preceding 6months, 12 months, or lifetime; respondents also indicated their plans for the subsequent 12 months. No formal interpreter training was available in the US before the 1960s. )

Collection Date(s): 11/10/2015 – 11/23/2015 (Fall 2015)

Universe: Members of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, 2015; American Sign Language/English interpreters.

Data Type(s): survey data

Methodology

Response Rate: 34% (partial responses included)
30% (Complete responses only).

# of RID members invited: 3,503
Total Responses: 1,207
# of partial surveys: 130
# of completed surveys: 1,042
(# of disqualified surveys): 34
# of responses analyzed and available in dataset: 1,172

Sampling: Random, unstratified sample.

From the entire RID membership database (11,453 individuals at the time of the survey), 3,855 people were randomly selected to receive an email invitation to participate in the survey. Demographics of the sample population are representative of the entire population.

Data Source: Survey results, conducted using SurveyGizmo.

Collection Mode(s): web-based survey

Scales: Several Likert-type scales were used.

Weights: No weighted variables.

Unit(s) of Observation: Individuals

Geographic Unit: State

Related Publications

Download this project

Published Versions

V1 [2017-04-01]

Export Metadata

Dublin Core

DDI 2.5

Report a Problem

Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.

This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.