Context: Public speaking course in a University setting. Female instructor familiar with teaching this course. Approximately 35 students of mixed gender, ages, and ethnicities. Two pre-professional interprepters. Practicum. No d/Deaf students in the classroom, but the occasional d/Deaf observer. For this sample, the consumer in mind preferred more English-based signing.
Preparation: Met with team the day before to go over possible topics as outlined in the syllabus. Practiced interpreting controls pertaining to this specific class session.
Self-assessment
Representing the goal of the speaker:
I feel that all the necessary information is coming across clearly in ASL, but that the affect of the speaker is not retained. After interpreting in her classroom for some time now I have realized that most of her lesson is motivation conveyed by her affect. This is something that I will continue to work on and improve. In regards to my process, I feel I need to explain more about certain things that are happening in my process to let the consumer/observer know that it is a mistake in my interpretation instead of the instruction.
Meaning based work:
Most, if not all, main points and details are conveyed. Sometimes when I become too overwhelmed with information I omit some of the (what I consider to be) minor details. Also, implicit meaning is made explicit in most instances, but can be improved.
Example: MY NAME PUT ON BOARD BUT ADD TOPIC WILL
In reviewing my work this particular example was one of the least clear. Who is the “me” in this instance? I did not refer to a student, and I rushed that part into the interpretation, causing it to be even more confusing.
Interpreting process:
Lexical, phrasal, and sentential levels are moved through in the majority of the interpretation. I have noticed an improvement in my ability to attend to the message, store new information while processing the old, and render a fairly faithful message. For the consumer that I had in mind today, I feel there was much improvement in my work.
Target language composition:
For the purposes of this assignment, this section of my assessment is not 100% applicable. I was focusing on more English-like consumer driven work.
Quality of interpretation:
The interpretation provided for the consumers of the interaction was meaning based and consumer driven. Communication happened, and the consumer would have been able to get their word done with little to no hindrance from the interpretation.
Specifics/initial reactions/areas of improvement
Setting up phone timer while teacher is beginning class - inappropriate? acceptable?
MAYBE HAVE 5 – 7: what? I forgot to add in the subject.
Teacher reads off students names for evaluation – hard to keep up; unclear; however, how necessary is it to fingerspell all the names? Wouldn’t the one student’s name only be of importance?
D-R-E-W AND J-A-N-E-S-S-A EVALUATE D-R-E-W – what? I think I missed something here.
Affect – definitely all Ashley here, and not the instructor at all.
Omission of some mumbled speech from the teacher – I assumed it was unimportant and possibly meant for only the student it was directed towards.
Transliteration skills improved – more English on the mouth with more English-like word order; keeping consumer in mind.
Processing time – need to fall back and allow the message to be fully processed before rendering.
INJURY TO shoulder (shoulder was mouthed and not fingerspelled) – should I have fingerspelled the whole title? I remember being fatigued, even though I do not look it in the video.