INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS

Interpreting needs of Deaf Immigrant and Refugee Students

Ashley McMullen
Rochester Institute of Technology
Email: agp5732@rit.edu
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
2
Abstract
This proposal will examine interpreters' experiences when working with Deaf immigrant/
refugee students and the challenges that present themselves. There is currently a deficit of
literature on how interpreters can facilitate language acquisition for deaf immigrant/refugee
students and that is the gap this research is hoping to fill. For this paper, research on language
acquisition and deprivation of deaf children will be reviewed, as well as how hearing immigrant
students are taught English upon arriving in America, and the challenges of having an interpreted
education for D/HH students born in America. The few existing publications on interpreting for
Deaf immigrant/refugee students will be reviewed as well.
I am proposing to collect qualitative data through interviews of interpreters who have had
experience interpreting for Deaf immigrant/refugee students. The interview questions will focus
on the background of the interpreters as well as their experiences working with this population in
regards to what has been successful and unsuccessful when working with these students.
Commonalities and differences between the interviewees' responses will be analyzed and
eventually shared with the public to help empower and encourage other interpreters who are
currently in a setting with an immigrant/refugee student, or those who are preparing to enter into
the educational setting and need to be prepared for encounters with immigrant/refugee children.

Keywords: Deaf Immigrant and Refugee ,English Language Learners, Language acquisition,
Language Deprivation, First Language- L1, Second language- L2, K-12 education setting
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
3
Introduction
The number of immigrant and refugee children entering America has increased over the
years. As a result, the number of Deaf children has increased as well (Fischbeck, 2018).
However, there is limited research on ways for interpreters to provide language access to this
population. As these families enter America, there are varying levels of language comprehension
among the families and especially among the Deaf children (Akamatsu & Cole, 2000). Some
families might have a very strong language foundation, while other families might have a
culturally rooted, negative view of Deaf people. This might result in the Deaf child being left
with a very weak first language (L1), if any at all (ibid). Consequently, interpreters might
struggle to provide adequate access to language for their education. Language is how students
access information and is how their education will succeed.This project aims to fulfill the gap
identified in the literature by answering the following research question:

What interpreting needs do interpreters identify for Deaf immigrant/refugee children to

support their language acquisition in the school setting?

By gathering empirical data through interviews, I hope to empower and encourage

educational interpreters with the information and provide avenues to develop the tools necessary
for them to successfully interpret for this population.
In the literature review, I will discuss the current literature available on language
acquisition and deprivation of deaf children as it pertains to this topic, how hearing immigrant
and refugee children are taught English upon arrival in the United States, and issues around
receiving an interpreted education. Lastly, I will summarize the limited research available on
educating Deaf immigrant and refugee children. I propose to conduct semi-structured interviews
of educational interpreters who have experience working with deaf immigrant and refugee
children, and will ideally find commonalities between the interpreters’ experience to find best
practices for interpreters in similar situations who might not yet be equipped to meet this
particular challenge.

Literature Review
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
4

Language Acquisition of Deaf Children

Language is a crucial component of our lives. We need it to communicate with others,
read, write, and learn. When a child is not exposed to language at birth, they can be at a
significant disadvantage compared to children who were exposed early (Mayberry, 2007). A
hearing baby is exposed to language in the womb, then immediately after they are born they are
fully immersed in spoken language, making language develop naturally for most children. In
contrast, children born with severe or profound hearing loss have highly variable experiences in
regards to first exposure to an accessible L1. Reasons for this can be the age when the hearing
loss is first detected, as well as the age when the child receives intervention (ibid). Currently in
the United States, less than 10% of Deaf children are born to Deaf parents. Meaning the majority
of Deaf children are born to hearing, non signing parents (Mitchell & Karchmer, 2004). Failure
to acquire a language in early life can have lasting negative effects on the child's life. It can
produce a delay or disruption in the development of cognitive skills that are crucial to the
development of the child's linguistic ability (Humphries et al., 2012; Humphries et al., 2014).
Examples of these negative effects are trouble with verbal memory organization (Ronnberg,
2003, as cited in Humphries et al., 2014, p. e32); mastery of numeracy and literacy (MacSweeny,
1998, as cited in Humphries et al., 2014, p. e32), and higher-order cognitive processing such as
executive function and theory of mind (Courtin 2000; 2010, as cited in Humpries et al., 2014, p.
e32).

Language Deprivation of Deaf Children

As previously stated, language is a crucial component of life, necessary for most aspects
of it. In the United States, 96% of Deaf children are born to hearing parents (Moores, 2001, as
cited in Humphries et al., 2014, p. e31) These parents are typically advised to raise their children
in a non-signing environment, because it is argued that this is the best way for their child to
acquire a spoken language. If the child is taught sign language then it is hypothesized that it will
hinder their ability to speak (Humphries et al., 2012; Humphries et al., 2014). In developed
countries, over 80% of Deaf children receive cochlear implants (CIs) (Boyes Braem and
Rathmann 2010, as cited in Humpriesh et al., 2014, p. e32). However, Humphries et al. (2014, p.
e32) caution:
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
5
“[E]ven under optimal conditions, CI implantation does not guarantee language
acquisition. Many implanted children who are born deaf or become deaf in the first few
years of life experience little to no success in language acquisition with a CI, and only
turn to sign language after the early critical period. Unfortunately, this means the children
run the risk of never having completely fluent use of either a spoken or a sign language.”

The critical period of language acquisition is the first five years of a child’s life. During
these years, their brain has the most plasticity, meaning during this period it is at its peak ability
to take in information and be molded, making language easier to learn (Hall, 2017). Without
language access during these early years, a fundamental and irreversible biological impact is
placed on the brain, as well as a decline in healthy development for the child (ibid).

Immigrant and Refugee- English Language Learners

Immigrant and refugee children are faced with a difficult task when coming to America.
That task is learning English. As of November 2021, the total number of immigrants in the
United States equaled 46.2 million people (Camarota & Zeigler, 2021) and in the fiscal year
2021, a total of 11,411 refugees had entered the U.S. (Rush, 2021). “A Growing number of
children- 18.2 million children live in immigrant families in the United States” (The Annie E.
Casey Foundation, 2022, para. 1). Prior to arriving in the United States children have highly
varied experiences. Some children’s families have the resources and ability to strategically plan
their move to America while others flee persecution and oppression, have to leave their lives
behind, and bring only the most basic necessities with them (Akamatsu & Cole, 2000 as cited in
Fischbeck 2018). This means that the academic, linguistic and social needs for each child will be
different. For a teacher to provide a successful learning environment for these immigrant/refugee
English language learners (ELLs), they need to understand six important concepts according to
Hayes (2013):
(1) culture shock
(2) comprehensible input and output,
(3) language acquisition versus language learning,
(4) the optimum age for learning a second language,
(5) the affective filter
(6) the silent period .
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
6

It is important to understand that students who are surrounded by a new language do not
simply acquire that language. There has to be some form of basic understanding of the
communication for them to be able to interact with the language. Haynes (2013) cites Krashen's
research from 1981 that shows that:

English language learners acquire language by hearing and understanding messages that
are slightly above their current English level… To do this, the teacher must provide new
material that builds on the learners prior knowledge. .. If teachers use a lecture style for
instruction the ELL will not receive as much comprehensible input.” (Krashen 1981, as
cited in Haynes 2013, p. 5)

Along with this research, it was noted that cooperative learning groups are a great way
for ELL students to learn English in a more effective way. In a small group setting, there are
more opportunities for oral practice and there is often more repetition as peers are willing to help
the ELL students (Haynes, 2013). Overall, for teachers of English language learners to be
effective, it is important to understand that:

1. “A newcomer who exhibits disruptive behavior may be suffering from culture shock
2. ELLs need comprehensible input. They cannot learn English by “soaking up” language in
a mainstream classroom.
3. To acquire a new language, children need a source of natural communication.
Memorizing grammar rules will not help them learn to speak and write English quickly.
4. Children do not learn a second language faster and easier than adults. Their only
advantage is in pronunciation.
5. The emotional state of ELLs affect how they acquire a new language. ELLs need a
comfortable environment in which to learn.
6. Newcomers will go through a silent period during which they will not speak. They should
not be forced to speak until they are ready”.
(Haynes, 2013, p.11)

Interpreted Education
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
7
There is an increasing number of Deaf / HOH students being educated in their local
public schools. A common accommodation made for these students is providing an educational
interpreter for them (Seal, 2000). Research has found, however, that around 60% of these
educational interpreters have inadequate qualification or skill to be providing full access to these
students (Schick et al,. 2006, Langer, 2007, Fischbeck, 2018). Schick et al. 's (2006) study
showed that the inadequacy of the interpreting services will seriously hinder the student’s access
to the curriculum as well as social interactions with their peers, leaving them at a major
disadvantage as compared to their hearing peers.

One challenge that arises while interpreting is the discourse style in a K-12 classroom.
Most classrooms are not just a lecture style environment, instead there tends to be
communication that is distributed between many speakers. For the student to understand the
content fully, it is necessary for them to have access to all of this information. However, this can
be extremely challenging for the interpreter to represent this type of discourse effectively
(Schnick et al., 2006). Another difficult aspect of K-12 interpreting is to convey the tone and
prosody in which a teacher or classmate might be speaking. Many directions and expectations
are conveyed through tone and intonation and not having access to this information could put the
Deaf student at a disadvantage (ibid). “The fact that learning through an interpreter might be
more difficult highlights the need to have highly qualified professionals, qualified to work in a
K-12 setting” (Schnick et al., 2006, p.4). Thankfully, states are starting to realize the need for
qualified K-12 interpreters and it has become more common for states to require interpreters to
have a certification in educational interpreting (Schnick et al., 2006).

Education of Deaf immigrant/ refugee children

Currently, there is minimal research on best practice for interpreting for Deaf immigrant
and refugee children. However, Fischbeck (2018) recently wrote her Master’s thesis highlighting
the lack of research on this subject. She quotes Akamatsu & Cole (2000, as cited in Fischbeck,
2018, p. 10) who concluded that

“Those who work with these students must carefully consider the background
experiences as well as the needs of these students when working with them, as their
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
8
cultural and linguistic experiences are unique from hearing refugee students and from
non-refugee and - immigrant DHH students.”
Akamatsu & Cole (2000, as cited in Fischbeck 2018, p. 46) continue late in the paper to report
“These experiences may include inconsistent or no formal education, a lack of family
awareness or information regarding deafness and special education services, and
language deprivation due to lack of access or exposure to signed or spoken language.”

Another factor to consider is how the family's perception of deafness can impact the
choices they make in regards to education. “It is well-documented that specific family responses
to deafness can impact on an immigrant or refugee deaf child's educational process and mental
health” (Akamatsu & Cole, 2000, p.3). When a deaf immigrant or refugee child enters a new
country with an L1 that is not fully developed, it is crucial to immerse the child in a
comprehensible, language rich environment in the new language they are learning. (Akamatsu &
Cole 2000). Marshark (1993) and Moores (1996) conclude that Deaf children who are born to
deaf parents and who are exposed to sign language from birth, are much more likely to succeed
in their academic studies as well as their psycho-social adjustment upon arriving in a new
country. Deaf children born to hearing parents tend to not succeed as well in their new
environments (see Akamatsu & Cole, 2000). Overall, much more study is needed on this group
of students, especially as the number of immigrants and refugees continue to grow.
Understanding what options are available to students and having teachers and interpreters who
are well versed in teaching this group of children will only benefit their educational journey.

Summary
Research has shown that the school-age Deaf immigrant and refugee population is highly
under-researched (Fischbeck, 2018). There are many factors to take into consideration when
thinking about the educational needs of this population. For an interpreter to be successful in
facilitating language access to Deaf immigrant and refugee children, the interpreter must be well
versed in what supports are available to them through the school district and take into account
the Deaf students’ language skills and cultural background. It is possible for a Deaf immigrant
student to enter the U.S with some competency in English, or to have been fully immersed in a
language in their home country. These students might be able to apply these foundational skills
and use that knowledge to learn an L2. Whether that would be English or ASL would be child
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
9
and family dependent. However, it is possible that a student will arrive with no L1 and have no
background in any language. That student will present the educational interpreters with particular
challenges with regard to both English and ASL acquisition.

Method

Research approach
The aim of this research project is to find commonalities and strategies that interpreters in
the K-12 setting use while interpreting for Deaf immigrant and refugee children. In an effort to
do this, the participants will be asked to participate in a semi-structured interview in which they
will be asked questions about their background in interpreting, their experiences with language
deprived students, and their experience with refugee and immigrant students. Particular focus
will be on the interpreting strategies that they use with immigrant and refugee children. The
interpreters’ answers will provide qualitative data of their experience and identify strategies that
can inform interpreters in similar situations.

Participants
Between six and eight interpreters who have worked with Deaf immigrant and refugee
children for a minimum of one year will be asked to participate. More experience is preferred.
The interpreters will also be required to be EIPA certified and to have passed with a minimum of
3.5. This is to ensure the quality of the interpreter and their work in the k-12 setting. Since it has
been shown that many interpreters are not qualified to be working in this setting (Fischbeck,
2018), it is important to maintain as high a standard as possible. Participants will be recruited by
network sampling, through personal contacts and the BOCES list of interpreters as well as using
snowball sampling through the RID list of interpreters.

Data Collection
Semi-structured interviews will be conducted over 1Zoom in an effort to reach
geographically diverse interpreters. The goal of using a semi structured approach to the
interview process is to allow for flexibility during the interview, such as anecdotal stories from

1
https://zoom.us
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
10
the interpreters or any other information that might be useful to the research, at the discretion of
the interviewer. While Zoom is a useful tool, there are some disadvantages to conducting
interviews through the internet, such as not being able to fully observe non-verbal cues such as
body language. Body language could be useful to the interviewer in navigating the interview.
Another possible complication is poor internet connection which could hinder the flow of the
interview. This could result in questions not being asked or answered as fully as they might be if
the interview was in person. However, in this case, the advantage of being able to include
interpreters from a variety of locations overrides these concerns.

Tools for Analysis

The interviews will be recorded and transcribed. Content Analysis will be used to
analyze similarities and differences between the answers given. The goal is to identify strategies
that the interpreters use while interpreting for immigrant and refugee students that could help
other interpreters as they might find themselves in similar situations one day.

Ethical considerations
Names and school locations of the students will not be included in the study to protect
their identity. The interpreters will not be required to share their name or location either to
further protect all of the participants as well as the students. The interpreters will be required to
give their full consent to being recorded on Zoom and after the interviews are transcribed they
will be destroyed. Names of participants and any identifying information will be anonymized.

Conclusion
While there is an abundance of literature on language acquisition and deprivation of Deaf
children and on receiving education through an interpreter, there is a scarcity of literature on
Deaf immigrant and refugee children and how their language acquisition and deprivation can
impact their education. There are no studies to date on the role of interpreters in the classroom
experience and language acquisition of Deaf immigrant and refugee children. Given the
linguistic and cultural diversity of this group, it becomes difficult to identify just one way of
providing education to them. This means that interpreters need to become well versed in what it
means to be language deprived, how to best support language acquisition in an L2 or late
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
11
learners of an L1, as well as have the understanding of culture and to be able to analyze the
students’ background. Based on this information and the new data from the interviews
interpreters will hopefully be able to decide which interpreting strategies or tools best facilitate
language acquisition for the student. It is my hope that the findings of these interviews will help
empower and encourage interpreters to make decisions when in the classroom, interpreting for a
deaf immigrant/refugee student. It is important for interpreters to understand that more than
likely, they will not be able to simply interpret the content into ASL or English. Instead, there
will likely be a need to expand concepts to expose the student to rich language and to check with
the student for comprehension and repeating missed information. The interpreter will have to
decide what is vital information for the student to have and what is secondary information. This
raises the ethical question of how an interpreter decides what information the student will receive
or not receive. More research is needed on this topic and these interviews will only be able to
touch the surface of what interpreters have to consider when interpreting for immigrant and
refugee students. Once the interviews are complete and the research is ready to be shared. I
would like to give workshops for interpreters to be able to benefit from the findings of this
project.
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
12
References

1. Camarota, S. A., & Zeigler, K. (2021, December 20). Immigrant population hits record
46.2 million in November 2021. CIS.org. Retrieved April 23, 2022, from
https://cis.org/Camarota/Immigrant-Population-Hits-Record-462-Million-November-202
1

2. Cole, E., & Akamatsu, C. T. (2000). Meeting the psychoeducational needs of deaf
immigrant and refugee children. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 16(1), 1.
https://ezproxy.rit.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/meeting-ps
ychoeducational-needs-deaf-immigrant/docview/224377551/se-2?accountid=108

3. Fischbeck, C. R. (2018). Working with Immigrant and Refugee Deaf Students: Strategies
and Decision-Making Process of Interpreters [Masters Thesis, St. Catherine University].
Sophia, the St. Catherine University repository website https://sophia.stkate.edu/maisce/4

4. Hall, W. (2017). What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You: The Risk of Language
Deprivation by Impairing Sign Language Development in Deaf Children. Matern Child
Health J 21, 961–965 https://doi-org.ezproxy.rit.edu/10.1007/s10995-017-2287-y

5. Haynes, J. (2013). Getting started with English language learners : How educators can
meet the challenge. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

6. Humphries, T., Kushalnagar, P., Mathur, G., Napoli, D. J., Padden, C., & Rathmann, C.
(2014). Ensuring language acquisition for deaf children: What linguists can do.
Language, 90(2), e31-e52.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.rit.edu/10.1353/lan.2014.0036

7. Humphries, T., Kushalnagar, P., Mathur, G. et al. (2012). Language acquisition for deaf
children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches. Harm
Reduct J 9, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7517-9-16

8. Langer, E. C. (2007). Classroom discourse and interpreted education: What is conveyed

to deaf elementary school students (Publication No. 3256442). [Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Colorado]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

9. Lummer, L. S. (1999). Teachers' receptions of the academic and language needs of deaf
immigrant students: An exploratory survey (Publication No. 1395278) [Masters Thesis,
Lamar University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
INTERPRETING NEEDS OF DEAF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE STUDENTS
13
10. Mayberry, R. I. (2007). When timing is everything: Age of first-language acquisition
effects on second-language learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28(3), 537-549.
doi:http:// dx.doi.org.ezproxy.rit.edu/10.1017/S0142716407070294

11. Mitchell, R. E., & Karchmer, M. A. (2004). Chasing the Mythical Ten Percent: Parental
Hearing Status of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in the United States. Sign
Language Studies. 4(2), 138-163,216-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/sls.2004.0005

12. Rush, N. (2021, November 18). FY 2021 refugee resettlement roundup. CIS.org.
Retrieved April 23, 2022, from
https://cis.org/Report/FY-2021-Refugee-Resettlement-Roundup

13. Schick, B., Williams, K., & Kupermintz, H. (2006). Look Who’s Being Left Behind:
Educational Interpreters and Access to Education for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(1), 3–20.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42658789

14. Seal, B. C. (2000). Working with educational interpreters. Language, Speech & Hearing
services in schools. 31(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.3101.15

15. The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2022, January 8). Supporting English Language
Learners. The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
https://www.aecf.org/blog/supporting-english-language-learners