Reflection-in-action: Measuring ‘context’ in medical interpreting
Keywords:medical interpreting, healthcare interpreting, ethical sensitivity, ethics, reflective practices, interpreter education, interpreter training
Community interpreting scholarship has solidly established the importance of appreciating the nuances of context to effective interpreting practice (Angelelli, 2004; Wadensjo?, 1998). Several frameworks for identifying and articulating the way context affects interpreting work have been articulated (Dean & Pollard, 2011). What is less well documented is the way interpreters learn to develop an understanding of context and how that subsequently informs their practice. This article describes the development and implementation of a tool to assess interpreters’ facility in identifying and articulating context – specifically in healthcare settings. The activities and the assessment tool are grounded in the educational theories of Donald Schön and his foregrounding of the intuitive practice abilities of professionals. The resulting assessment tool was refined through its use in postgraduate courses in healthcare interpreting, where various aspects of the healthcare context were explained using videos of provider–patient interactions. Through reflective practice activities, students analysed their practical knowledge and skills and improved their context-based insight. Currently designed for signed language interpreters in medical settings based in the United States, this multi-component assessment tool can be adapted to various contexts in community interpreting.
Angelelli, C. V. (2004). Revisiting the interpreter's role: A study of conference, court, and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.55
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. Jossey-Bass.
Barrows, H. S. (1994). Practice-based learning: Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
Bebeau, M. J. (2002). The defining issues test and the four component model: Contributions to professional education. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 271¬–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724022000008115
Bindels, E., Verberg, C., Scherpbier, A., Heeneman, S., & Lombarts, K. (2018). Reflection revisited: How physicians conceptualize and experience reflection in professional practice: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Education, 18(105), 1¬–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1218-y
Corsellis, A. (2008). Public service interpreting: The first steps. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230581951
Davidson, B. (2001). Questions in cross-linguistic medical encounters: The role of the hospital interpreter. Anthropological Quarterly, 74, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1353/anq.2001.0035
Dean, R. K. (2014). Condemned to repetition?: An analysis of problem-setting and problem-solving in sign language interpreting ethics. Translation & Interpreting, 6(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.106201.2014.a04
Dean, R. K. (2015). Sign language interpreters’ ethical discourse and moral reasoning patterns [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Heriot-Watt University.
Dean, R. K. (2018). Over the tipping point: Using the diagnostic discourse of standardized patients to educate medical interpreters. Bakhtiniana. Revista de Estudos do Discurso, 13(3), 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1590/2176-457336495
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2001). Application of demand-control theory to sign language interpreting: Implications for stress and interpreter training. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 6(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/6.1.1
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2005). Consumers and service effectiveness in interpreting work: A practice profession perspective. In M. Marschark, R. Peterson, & E. A. Winston (Eds.), Sign language interpreting and interpreter education: Directions for research and practice (pp. 259–282). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof/9780195176940.003.0011
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2009). Effectiveness of observation-supervision training in community mental health interpreting settings. REDIT E-journal on the Didactics of Translation and Interpreting, 3, 1–17.
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2011). Context-based ethical reasoning in interpreting: A demand control schema perspective. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 5(1), 155–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10798816
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2012). Beyond “interesting”: Using demand control schema to structure experiential learning. In K. Malcolm & L. Swabey (Eds.), In our hands: Educating healthcare interpreters (pp. 77–104). Gallaudet University Press.
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2013). The demand control schema: Interpreting as a practice profession. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
Farrell, T. S. (2012). Reflecting on reflective practice: (Re)Visiting Dewey and Schön. Tesol Journal, 3(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.10
Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. Little Brown.
Hale, S. B. (2007). Community interpreting. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230593442
Hill, A. L. (2004). Ethical analysis in counseling: A case for narrative ethics, moral visions, and virtue ethics. Counseling and Values, 48(2), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-007X.2004.tb00240.x
Howard, C. (2018). Fittingness. Philosophy Compass, 13(11), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12542
Hsieh, E. (2006). Conflicts in how interpreters manage their roles in provider–patient interactions. Social Science & Medicine, 62(3), 721–730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.029
Hsieh, E. (2007). Interpreters as co-diagnosticians: Overlapping roles and services between providers and interpreters. Social Science and Medicine, 64(4), 924–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.10.015
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Penguin Books.
Kinsella, E. A. (2010). The art of reflective practice in health and social care: Reflections on the legacy of Donald Schön. Reflective Practice, 11(4), 565–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2010.506260
Major, G., Napier, J., & Stubbe, M. (2012). What happens truly, not textbook!: Using authentic interactions in discourse training for healthcare interpreters. In K. Malcolm & L. Swabey (Eds.), In our hands: Educating healthcare interpreters (pp. 27–53). Gallaudet University Press.
Namy, C. (1978). Reflections on the training of simultaneous interpreters: A metalinguistic approach. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (Eds.), Language interpreting and communication (pp. 25–33). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9077-4_4
Napier, J. (2004). Interpreting omissions: A new perspective. Interpreting, 6(2), 117–142. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.02nap
Pöchhacker, F. (2004) Introducing interpreting studies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203504802
Rest, J. R. (1984). The major components of morality. In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Morality, moral behavior, and moral development (pp. 556–629). John Wiley.
Roy, C. B. (2000). Interpreting as a discourse process. Oxford University Press.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.
Smith, A. (2014). Think aloud protocols: Viable for teaching, learning, and professional development in interpreting. Translation & Interpreting, 6(1), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.106201.2014.a07
Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. Routledge.
Winston, E. A. (2005). Designing a curriculum for American Sign Language/English interpreting educators. In M. Marschark, R. Peterson, & E. Winston (Eds.), Sign language interpreting and interpreter education: Directions for research and practice (pp. 208–234). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof/9780195176940.003.0009
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).