Word Dan.
Also, if this BA/BS thing is a requirement for certification can we not
assume (ooh dangerous) that people going for their certification have some
sort of training, in interpreting? If they do not, if they have a BA in the
dreaded modern dance and no ITP time and no sign skills would they pass the
CI/CT? I don't think they would, at least I hope not. If one cannot pass
the CI/CT, the BA/BS does not matter. If one can pass the CI/CT, the
benefit of a BA in anything helps your general knowledge base and can make
you a better interpreter.

--
Roberto R. Santiago
"Old skool is a shovel, Can ya dig it?"


on 10/16/02 11:01 PM, Dan Parvaz at dparvaz@... wrote:

>> I stand by my comments that a person with some other degree BA/BS
>> (Modern Dance) but no
>> interpreter training is still not going to make that person a better
>> interpreter than a person with an AAS degree in INTERPRETING and no
>> BA/BS degree.
>
> Objection, Tammy -- assuming facts not in evidence. :-)
>
> The assumption here is that interpreter training programs taken as a
> whole do a better-than-chance job of preparing interpreters. There are
> individual programs which do rather well, but is there any work
> (perhaps by someone in CIT?) which points to the efficacy of
> interpreter education in general?
>
> Put another way: is there consensus on what skills/knowledge/attributes
> need to be instilled in potential interpreters, and is there a good
> consistent method of instilling them?
>
> Just for grins, I thought I'd go to look at the BA in dance offered at
> my institution (University of New Mexico):
> http://finearts.unm.edu/academic/degrees/dance_degrees/danceba.htm
>
> It includes a core curriculum well beyond what is required at any AAS
> program, and courses in the major which any interpreter would benefit
> from: Voice for Actors, Kinesiology, Movement Analysis, Pedagogy, to
> say nothing of elective hours from pretty much any field. And not for
> nothing, but they'd actually be well-versed in at least one field (and
> just might make for a kick-butt performing arts interpreter!).
>
> But wait? Can they sign? And I say again... can ITP graduates? Sad
> experience dictates that language is the single weakest area in the
> field generally, and with ITP grads particularly. As one of the faculty
> here is fond of saying, interpreters who are weak at sign-to-voice only
> *think* they are better at voice-to-sign. When one voices, one can hear
> all the mistakes, and one's English instincts are well-honed enough to
> make one wince. An interpreter with weak language skills make not have
> the linguistic maturity to realize that what they are producing is sign
> salad.
>
> -Dan.