American Sign Language-English Interpreting Program Faculty: Characteristics, Tenure Perceptions, and Productivity Kimberly J
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Eastern Kentucky University Encompass Online Theses and Dissertations Student Scholarship January 2012 American Sign Language-English Interpreting Program Faculty: Characteristics, Tenure Perceptions, and Productivity Kimberly J. Hale Eastern Kentucky University Follow this and additional works at: https://encompass.eku.edu/etd Part of the Educational Administration and Supervision Commons, and the Higher Education and Teaching Commons Recommended Citation Hale, Kimberly J., "American Sign Language-English Interpreting Program Faculty: Characteristics, Tenure Perceptions, and Productivity" (2012). Online Theses and Dissertations. 65. https://encompass.eku.edu/etd/65 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at Encompass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Online Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Encompass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE-ENGLISH INTERPRETING PROGRAM FACULTY: CHARACTERISTICS, TENURE PERCEPTIONS, AND PRODUCTIVITY By KIMBERLY J. HALE Master of Science University of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina 2003 Bachelor of Arts Maryville College Maryville, Tennessee 1998 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Eastern Kentucky University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION March, 2012 Copyright © Kimberly J. Hale, 2012 All rights reserved ii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to Moxie-Jim, by whom I have measured the passage of the last four years, and to my girls, Morgan Jo and Kennie, who have missed their momma and frequently ask when the ―big project‖ will be done. And finally, this dissertation is dedicated to their father, Michael, with whom I look forward to spending more time. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my major professor, Dr. Charles Hausman, for his guidance in the process of completing this study. His assistance in pruning an ever-growing project is appreciated. I would also like to thank the other committee members. First, thanks to Dr. Brenda Nicodemus for holding to me an extremely high standard and then making numerous helpful suggestions, which allowed me to meet that standard. To Dr. Justin Cooper, I am appreciative of the guidance in my work as an ASL-English faculty member and his insights as a previous chair of a department that housed an interpreting program. Dr. Sherwood Thompson I give my sincere appreciation for being willing to serve on short notice. Next, I must express my thanks to Michael for helping me fulfill this dream. Without his support and assistance, this would not have been possible. Thanks to my good friend Deborah Jackson, who helped me remain a good friend by suggesting occasional girls‘ nights out. Finally, I would be remiss if I did not thank all of my family and friends who have loved and entertained my children while I was locked away working. Your care of my children has lightened my mothering burden and guilt while missing so many hours of their lives. iv ABSTRACT American Sign Language (ASL)-English interpreting education, which began as a community apprenticeship and vetting process, has within the last several decades moved into higher education. Most recently, the number of baccalaureate-granting ASL-English interpreting programs have continued to increase while the number of associate‘s degree programs has remained steady. This shift to higher education and to four-year colleges in particular has received little empirical analysis. The overarching objective of this study, which was framed by a conceptual model of the relationship between employment context, faculty member characteristics, perceptions and productivity, is to better understand how ASL-English interpreting education programs and their faculty fit within the academy. The first purpose was to describe the institutional context and professional and personal characteristics of faculty members within baccalaureate-granting ASL- English interpreting education programs in the United States. A second purpose was to describe the faculty members‘ and department chairs‘ perspectives regarding criteria and requirements for tenure and the extent to which their perceptions were aligned. The final objective was to determine if employment qualifications and context predict perceptions and productivity. Data were collected from program websites, department chairs, and faculty members of baccalaureate granting ASL-English interpreting programs in the United States. Descriptive and inferential statistical techniques were used to analyze the data. Analysis of the data indicated that relationships exist between components of the conceptual model. Employment context and faculty members‘ characteristics included v variables that were significant predictors of perceptions and productivity. Implications for policy and practice include expanding degree opportunities for current and potential faculty members, increasing tenure-track appointments, increasing scholarly productivity in traditional outlets, and increasing the diversity of faculty members. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 The Research Problem .................................................................................................... 1 Studies Addressing the Problem ..................................................................................... 2 Limitations of Previous Studies ...................................................................................... 7 The Significance of the Study ......................................................................................... 8 Academic Researchers ................................................................................................ 8 Academic Practice ...................................................................................................... 9 Research Purpose and Questions .................................................................................. 10 Overview of Methods ................................................................................................... 12 Delimitations ................................................................................................................. 12 Definitions of Key Terms ............................................................................................. 13 Dissertation Organization ............................................................................................. 14 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................ 15 Brief History of ASL–English Interpreting .................................................................. 15 Sign Language Interpreter Education in the United States ....................................... 18 ASL Instruction in Higher Education ....................................................................... 20 Conceptual Model Overview ........................................................................................ 21 Components of the Conceptual Model ......................................................................... 22 Employment Context ................................................................................................ 22 Faculty Member ........................................................................................................ 32 vii Perceived Weight and Merit of Tenure Criteria ....................................................... 34 Productivity ............................................................................................................... 36 American Sign Language and Interpreting In Higher Education ................................. 36 ASL and Interpreting Faculty Employment Qualifications ...................................... 37 Accessing Higher Education ..................................................................................... 40 ASL and Interpreting Faculty Employment Status ................................................... 42 ASL and Interpreting Faculty Employment Context ................................................ 43 ASL and Interpreting Faculty Productivity ............................................................... 44 Summary ....................................................................................................................... 47 3. METHODS .................................................................................................................. 48 Research Purposes and Questions ................................................................................. 48 Research Design............................................................................................................ 50 Population and Sample ................................................................................................. 51 Sampling ................................................................................................................... 52 Instrument Development and Testing ........................................................................... 56 Chairperson Interview ............................................................................................... 56 Faculty Survey .......................................................................................................... 57 Data Collection ............................................................................................................