Justification for
this post
I have been racking my brain to remember the
author of a quote that states that most people do not know the history of their
profession. Agreeing with this assertion, I am trying to include in a single document an
overview of court interpreting in the United States (US) as we know it today. This
blog post draws from two postings I wrote in February 2011 and is not to be
considered, by any means, as exhaustive. It includes, however, some of the most
significant actions that have been taken to bring court interpreting to the
level it has currently reached.
Interpreting in public administration settings
(or community interpreting, among other names) in the US, especially in the courts,
has gained momentum in the last ten years. While there is still a lot to be
done, it would be safe say that interpreters are gaining standing as officers
of the courts. It is to be noted that for the first time a language-based
profession in the US is a step ahead of countries like Canada. This has been
acknowledged by my Canadian colleagues in academia and in the courts, as well
as my Canadian court interpreting students. While court interpreting in the US
is not a perfect model, it is establishing its bona fides, and it is worth
writing about it.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination against “any person
in this country on the ground of race, color, or national origin.” It also
prohibits that any such person be excluded “from participation in, be denied
the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or
activity receiving federal financial assistance.” Since these provisions have
been construed to include any person in the US, state courts that receive
federal funds are required to provide interpreters to Limited English Proficient
(LEP) individuals in civil and criminal cases at no charge for defendants.
Under federal law, courts must also ensure that interpreters have essential
language and interpreting skills.
In October 1978, President Carter signed the Court Interpreters Act of
1978, establishing
the right for any individual involved
in a court proceeding to have a certified or otherwise qualified court
interpreter if his/her communication or comprehension capabilities are
inhibited because of a language barrier, or a hearing or speech impairment. To implement the provisions of the
Court Interpreters Act, the Federal Court Interpreter Certification Examination
program (FCICE) was created to
define criteria for certifying interpreters qualified to interpret in federal
courts and to assist the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO) in maintaining a list of federally-certified court
interpreters. These requirements also apply to state courts, where the
‘otherwise qualified’ interpreter category may represent a problem since it
could include individuals whose language skills have not been screened or
tested as we will see later in this post.
In August 2000, President Clinton’s Executive Order 13166 “Improving Access to Services for Persons
with Limited English Proficiency” and its limited English proficiency Resource Document: Tips andTools from the Field strengthened the limited English proficiency
initiative.
Executive Order 13166 requires that federal
agencies take “reasonable steps to provide meaningful access for LEP people to
federally-conducted programs and activities.” It also requires that “every
federal agency that provides financial assistance to non-federal entities
publish guidance on how those recipients can provide meaningful access to LEP
persons.” Ten years later, the Attorney General stressed the importance of
complying with this executive order to
turn policy into reality.
In July 2008, the Brennan Center for Justice – a public
policy and law institute that focuses on issues of democracy and justice –
released an 88-page report on an extensive study of language access in state
courts. The report, Language
Access on the State Courts, notes
that about 25 million people in the US are LEP and need an interpreter in
court. It further notes that at least 13 million of them live in states that do
not require the provision of court interpreting services in most types of civil
cases, while six million live in states that fail to uphold Title VI provisions, charge LEP persons for interpreting
services, or have ill-prepared interpreters providing such services.
In June 2010, the US Attorney General issued a Memorandum for Heads of Department
Components restating
the obligations set forth in Executive Order 13166. In August 2010, less
than a month later, Assistant Attorney General for the
Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice Tom Perez sent a similar reminder to all chief justices and court administrators in
an attempt to bring courts into compliance with provisions that seek to provide
language access to LEP persons in the judicial system. However,
additional clarification was in order as the letter gave rise to a series of questions
by the state courts, including definition of the extension of the term “court” and the
Department of Justice’s expectations on telephone interpretation and
certification for less frequently used languages.
Otherwise Qualified Interpreters
Certified
interpreters have continuously requested review of the category “otherwise qualified interpreters.” In some states, the interpreter registry
includes as “otherwise qualified interpreters” individuals who have only
completed a two-day orientation session that does not assess the candidate’s
language proficiency or interpreting skills. In some cases, non-certified
interpreters have been grandfathered based on years of services provided to the
court. Of course, compensation for “otherwise qualified interpreters” is
significantly lower and decision makers try to save money. What they don’t seem to take into account when
hiring a non-qualified interpreter is the cost of cases on appeal. Some
interpreters who have been grandfathered in various courts have gained
certification, are reaching retirement age or are simply not interpreting in
court proceedings. Attrition and
advocacy on the importance of working with certified are solving the issue of
grandfathered and “otherwise qualified interpreters”.
Court Interpreter Certification
Authority over the federal and state court interpreter certification
programs falls on the National
Center of State Courts (NCSC) under
contract to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. NCSC
oversees the court interpreter certification program through the Consortium for Language Access in the
Courts (formerly the Consortium for State Court Interpreter Certification),
which was created in August 1997 with the mission
to “facilitate court interpretation test development and administration
standards, to provide testing materials, to develop educational programs and
standards, and to facilitate communication among the member states and
entities, in order that individual member states and entities may have the
necessary tools and guidance to implement certification programs.” Aside from
developing and administering testing material, the Consortium has conducted
research on certification examination outcomes and career trends. Research
reports and other information on court interpreter issues can be found on the Consortium’s
website Publications page.
These
certification processes, and the fact that success
rates in both the state and federal court interpreter exams are notoriously low, has generated an increasing demand for the training of hundreds
of aspiring interpreters. Interpreter training needs have primarily been addressed
through short-term workshops and seminars offered by court administrators,
professional organizations, and entrepreneurs, rather than through academia. A
whole certification process has been set in place before establishing the
mechanisms that would provide aspiring interpreters a well-rounded education Court
interpreter education and training in the US has been correctly described as
“putting the cart before the horse.” (Angelelli: 2005).
Court Interpreter Certification in Indiana
A good
example of a strong program can be found in Indiana. The Indiana Court
Interpreter Certification Program is the result of an interim recommendation made to
the Supreme Court in 2000 by its Commission
on Race and Gender Fairness on ways to
improve race and gender fairness in the courts, legal service providers, state
and local governments, and public organizations. The court interpreter
certification program is now the most important program of the Commission. It
administers the certification examination twice a year, and offers not only a
compulsory two-day orientation session for aspiring court interpreters but also
skill-building workshops. It also has an advisory board made up of a
cross-section of stakeholders across the state, including judges, public
defenders, law professors, and of course, interpreters, which allows to program
to receive feedback from a wide array of sources. All this has been
accomplished with the support of the entire state judiciary. Indiana is
currently exploring continuing education activities as a requirement for
certified court interpreters.
Overview
of the certification process
Given that court interpreter
certification is under the oversight of a national body, the certification
process is by and large similar in most states. The following are certification
steps in Indiana:
·
First: Attend a two-day court interpreter orientation
session that covers interpreter ethics, protocol, basic criminal procedure, and
the three modes of interpretation used in the courtroom. No language
proficiency assessment is required for this activity. Anyone who pays
registration fees may attend.
·
Second: Pass a written exam covering vocabulary,
criminal procedure, and court interpreter ethics with a score of 80% or better.
·
Third: Attend a two-day skills building seminar
that covers sight translation, consecutive interpretation and simultaneous
interpretation. Not all states include this step.
·
Fourth: Pass all three portions – sight translation,
consecutive interpretation and simultaneous interpretation – of the National
Consortium-approved interpreter certification oral exam with a score of 70% or
better on each of three sections. A candidate who fails one or two portions of
the oral exam can retake only those portions until all three are completed
successfully.
·
Fifth: Submit to a criminal background check.
·
Sixth: Sign an oath promising to comply with the
Indiana Supreme Court Interpreter Code of Conduct and Procedure.
Overview of
the written exam
The written test contains 135
multiple-choice questions and measures a candidate's knowledge of the following
areas central to the work of a court interpreter:
·
English Language: One indispensable
component necessary to function as a professional court interpreter is a high
degree of proficiency in the English language. Accordingly, the written
examination assumes a high degree of literacy in the English language and
familiarity with a range of language constructions. The candidate is tested on
comprehension of written English vocabulary and common English idioms.
·
Court-Related Terms and Usage: A second
area of knowledge essential to successful professional performance is
familiarity with the terminology and procedures of the court system.
Accordingly, the written examination also measures recognition of common
court-related situations and vocabulary.
·
Ethics and Professional Conduct: The
third area of knowledge required of professional court interpreters encompassed
in the written test is general knowledge of ethical standards guiding the
performance of duties. Accordingly, the written exam includes questions aimed
at measuring a candidate's knowledge of ethical behavior and professional
conduct.
For Spanish, the test includes a
ten-sentence translation component in which the candidate translates ten English
sentences to Spanish. The passing score is borderline
or better.
Overview of the oral certification exam
The oral certification exam tests
proficiency in the three modes of interpretation used in the courts: sight
translation, consecutive interpretation and simultaneous interpretation. A
candidate must achieve a score of 70% or better on each portion of the test to
pass. Tests are given individually recorded, and scored by two certified
interpreters trained as raters. The passing score for FCICE is 75% for the written
portion and 80% for the oral portion. Candidates
have to achieve a passing score in the two languages involved in the test.
Certification by reciprocity
Since most states use the testing materials developed by the
Consortium, interpreters are eligible for certification by reciprocity. In
Indiana, certification by reciprocity is granted as long as the certifying
state or federal government maintains the same or higher scoring standards as
Indiana.
This link leads to
reciprocity requirements in Indiana.
Salary and wages
The
inclusion of translation and interpretation in the 2004-2005 Occupational Outlook Handbook of the United States Department of Labor’s
Bureau of Labor Statistics was a much celebrated step towards the
professionalization of this activity. The handbook, which is updated every
other year, provides a description of the nature of the work, training and
other qualifications required, job outlook, and earnings and wages for the
profession. While more job opportunities and better earnings remain in the
realm of projections for the future, there is reason to hope that translation and
interpretation are on their way to acquiring a higher standing.
Regarding
the pay scale for interpreters working in courts and legal settings
, the National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators (NAJIT) notes that it depends in
part on the law of supply and demand and the type of certification or other
qualifications held by the interpreter, frequency and volume of work available,
settings in which interpretation is needed,
and employment circumstances under which the interpreter
works (self-employment, freelance, or salaried).
Remuneration varies also according to the
associated cost of living of a particular area.
As NAJIT points out, most court
interpreters are self-employed but full-time staff positions exist in areas where
the volume of work is greatest. Of course, giving the number of Hispanics in
the US, almost all staff positions are for Spanish-English interpreters.
Starting annual salaries in state or federal courts for staff interpreters may
range from $30,000 to $80,000. Supervisory positions may also be
available. In some jurisdictions, such
as California, New Jersey, and Cook County, Illinois, for example, court
interpreters in certain categories, both full-time and part-time, are
considered judiciary employees, and as such have collective bargaining rights.
As for freelance rates in
federal courts for certified or professionally qualified interpreters, the web
page of the United States Courts provides the following:
Certified and Professionally
Qualified Interpreters:
Full Day: $ 388
Half Day: $ 210
Overtime: $ 55 per hour or part thereof
Language Skilled (Non-Certified)
Interpreters:
Full Day: $ 187
Half Day: $ 103
Overtime: $ 32 per hour or part thereof
The difference in wages between
certified and non-certified interpreters in the US federal court systems is
significant and the demand for certified interpreters is great. One wonders why
the Federal Court Interpreter Certification Examination is not offered more
frequently. The written portion of the exam is administered once a year
nation-wide. Those who pass it can take the oral portion of the test the
following year but those who fail have to wait two years to take the exam
again. A recent innovation in the administration of the Federal Court
Interpreter Certification Examination is that it is now computerized. No more
paper exams. However, candidates have to go to an exam location, like in the
past, where a proctor will be responsible for conducting the test session properly.
A lot has
been achieved regarding the Language Access for LEP persons initiative;
however, compliance with the various dispositions remains an issue. The good
news is that forty three states have joined the Consortium as of 2011. Court interpreters
have their own professional association –NAJIT, which actively advocates for
the use of certified interpreters in both state and federal courts.
Interpreting
in public administration settings is a profession that has evolved in nearly
four decades from being a service usually provided by “bilingual” but otherwise unqualified individuals, including untrained family and
staff members. It is now a profession practiced by certified or otherwise
qualified interpreters. Immigrants have been at the heart of this country’s
foundation, and this is not about to change even with radical anti-illegal immigration
legislation like the recently enacted in Arizona, which has been copied in
states like Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina, and Utah. On the
educational front, more and more higher education institutions are seeing
translation and interpretation as subjects worthy of serious scholarship. A
great deal is yet to be done in this arena, but a positive trend has, without a
doubt, been set. This is a ‘story’ to be continued… Please continue to check back.
As always,
your comment are most welcome!
References
Angelelli, Claudia. 2005. “Healthcare Interpreting
Education: Are We Putting the Cart before the Horse?” ATA Chronicle November-December
34.2: 33-38.
Additional
Resources
2. ACEBO Publishing. ACEBO is owned by Holly
Mikkelson, a leading figure in judicial interpreting (most commonly called
“court” interpreting /court interpreter) training in the United States, who
also teaches judicial interpreting at the Monterey Institute of International
Studies, in Monterey, California.