Deaf Student-Interpreter Relationships and Feedback Practices in K-12 Mainstream Deaf Education.
Lisa M Prinzi
PMID 35996851WHAT IT FOUND
Deaf students and interpreters said a trusting personal relationship made interpreted school work more usable.
Without training in giving feedback, many students preferred raising concerns through a coordinator rather than telling the interpreter directly.
Key findings
01The deaf student-interpreter relationship was described as central to students' participation and learning through interpreted instruction.
02Deaf students often had not been taught how to use interpreting services or how to give feedback.
03Deaf participants often raised concerns through a third party, while interpreters preferred direct problem-solving with students.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The Deaf participants and interpreters were not paired together, so their accounts cannot be compared directly. Participants were recruited through snowball sampling from the author's professional network, so they may not represent all mainstreamed deaf students or interpreters. The study did not control for interpreter experience or whether deaf students were fully or partially mainstreamed. The findings are perceptions and narratives, not measured outcomes for learning, participation, or interpreter performance.
Declared interests
The author declared no known conflict of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat these themes as proof that stronger interpreter-student relationships improve learning or that third-party feedback is the best solution. The study reports perceptions from participants who were not paired together and does not measure educational outcomes.