Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters in 25

Home , See Hear, The Block (season 4), The Block (season 5)

THE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK: MENTORING SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS IN AUSTRALIA

Jemina Napier, Ph.D. Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

ABsTRACT This paper provides a critique of literature on mentoring and sign language interpreting, and proposes six key phases of men- to ring for sign language interpreters. The paper also discusses why a mentoring system has not yet been successfully established in Australia, and gives some recommendations for implementing mentoring for Auslan interpreters, with acknowledgment of poten~ tial barriers.

INTRODUCTION This paper investigates whether mentoring can effectively be provided for sign language interpreters in Australia and suggests six key phases for mentoring. The phrase "new kid on the block" is relevant in two ways: (1) newly trained and qualified interpreters are entering the profession and can benefit immensely from a mentoring relationship, and (2)Australia could be thought of as a new kid on the block in relation to the status of the sign language interpreting profession when compared to the United States. For example, the professional Australian Sign Language Interpreters' Association (ASLlA)was established in 1991 and the first university training course was only established in 2002.l Thus, the next logical stage of progression is to formalize some kind of mentoring system. Australian Sign Language (Auslan) interpreting is an emerging field, which was professionalized in the last 20 to 30 years. Over time, more training courses have become available, and a national accreditation system has been established. The majority of interpreters freelance for interpreting agencies and work on their own -moving from one interpreting assignment to another without coming into contact with other interpreters. Therefore, it is com- mon for interpreters to feel very isolated in their work. When they are faced with challenges and should look to another more experienced interpreter for help, they feel conflicted since they are obligated to abide by a code of ethics. One of the central tenets of the code is confidentiality. Research has shown that interpreters are

1 See Napier (2004) for an overview of sign language Interpreter training and testing in Australia as compared to the U.S.A. and U.K. 25 ':UUb Journal of Interpretation Mentoring Sign Language Interpr

sometimes uncomfortable with 'intra-disciplinary copfidentlallty.' and feel that turning to other interpreters for advice would be tan- LITERATURE REVIEW tamount to breaking their code of ethics (Tate & Turner, 2001). Pollitt (1997) suggests that a suitable career structure for In critiquing available literature on , British Sign Language interpreters would allow professional possible to Identify aspects of mentoring progress from interpreter practitioner, to mentor (after five years not be effectively applied to the workins guage interpreters. interpreting experience), to interpreter educator (after another five years Interpretingjmentoring experience). Organizations (such as Phases of Mento ring ASUANew South Wales and the Deaf Society of New South Wales) In his discussion of corporate mente have attempted to set up mentoring networks, but have met with (1988) states that mentoring involves sel resistance and the networks never got off the ground. role-modeling. It is an evolutionary proc. Sign language interpreting in Australia is at a complex stage of over time, otherwise the relationship be the profession, where clients and service providers are demanding the metaphor of a love relationship, be! higher standards and quality assurance. The implementation of a romance and ending in battle, and states mentoring system would Support the profession in meeting these mentees (or proteges) experience a simi. demands and maintaining standards. The interpreting profession reason, Kram proposes four key phases t( in the United States has been through a similar path of develop- ship, which were devised as a consequel ment, so some of the issues presented here are by no means spective interviews with 18 pairs of mana unique to Australia. However, this discussion takes a different Although Kram discusses the intervi, approach to analyzing how mentoring can work in Australia by phases are supposedly applicable to any drawing on literature from outside of our field and suggesting six ing relationship. She states that there are , key phases of effective mentoring. COileagues in the United States ferences in each phase. and other countries may also benefit from considering these phases and applying them to their own mentoring work. During initiation (first 6 to 12months c manager and junior experience the fantal Interpreting is a community service, not a corporate activity, idolizing each other out of respect and and interpreters do not work tor only one organization. So how can potential. These fantasies then become tra mentoring be incorporated into the Auslan interpreting workplace? expectations and the relationship progres, How can Auslan interpreters effectively access a mentoring system tion (2 to 5 years). This phase involves tI that meets their needs? Are there any models of mentoring that interpersonal bond between mentor and ju Auslan interpreters can apply or adapt to their own context? Why in terms of their expectations from eact hasn't mentorlng worked so far for Auslan interpreters? One of the mutual exchange and both parties experier crucial considerations Is that Interpreters typically freelance, and are not employed by one organization, therefore any system of men- pride as the junior becomes more confiden Iy a POSitive experience, with the least c( toring needs to account for suitable mentoring opportunities. Individual or organizational changes in cl: Another key consideration is that interpreters need to receive criti- lead to a shift to the next phase. cal feedback on their actual interpretations In order to develop their skills, thus any mentoring support would need to involve a level of Separation can OCCurfor several years ( coaching In terms of work observation and critique. Psychological level. According to Kram, tI This paper provides a critique of the relevant literature in feelings of anxiety, disappointment, and mentorlng and sign language interpreting, an overview of possible although a greater level of independence sign language Interpreter mentorlng 'phases,' and finally recom- junior manager. If, for example, the junior h mendations and acknowledgment of potential problems in Imple- promotion, both parties may become mo menting a sign language interpreter mentoring and training pro- thought of becoming true peers. The senic gram in Australia. fore try to block advances of the junior and Kram states that separation is crucial to ca the mentoring relationship ends when both i relationship is no longer needed in that for MentoringSign LanguageInterpreters in Austratia 27

LITERATURE REVIEW In critiquing available literature on workplace mentoring, it is possible to identify aspects of.mentoring systems that mayor may not be effectively applied to the working environment of sign language Interpreters. Phases of Mento ring In his discussion of corporate mentoring for managers, Kram (1988) states that mentoring involves several functions, including role-modeling. It is an evolutionary process that needs to change over time, otherwise the relationship becomes static. Kram uses the metaphor of a love relationship, beginning with the flush of romance and ending in battle, and states that many mentors and mentees (or proteges) experience a similar relationship. For this reason, Kram proposes four key phases to the mentorlng relationship, which were devised as a consequence of conducting retro- spective interviews with 18 pairs of managers. Although Kram discusses the interviews with managers, the phases are supposedly applicable to any two people in a mentoring relationship. She states that there are subtle but important dif- ferences in each phase. During initiation (first 6 to 12months of relationship), both the manager and junior experience the fantasy of the relationship- idolizing each other out of respect and identification of future potential. These fantasies then become transformed into concrete expectations and the relationship progresses to Phase 2-<:ultiva- tion (2 to 5 years). This phase involves the strengthening of the interpersonal bond between mentor and junior and a reality check in terms of their expectations from each other. There is more mutual exchange and both parties experience feelings of trust and pride as the junior becomes more confident. This phase is typically a positive experience, with the least conflict and uncertainty. Individual or organizational changes In circumstances, however, lead to a shift to the next phase. Separation can Occur for several years on either a structural or psychological level. According to Kram, this phase manifests in feelings of anxiety, disappointment, and loss on both sides, although a greater ievel of independence and autonomy for the junior manager. If, for example, the junior has the opportunity for promotion, both parties may become more competitive at the thought of becoming true peers. The senior manager may therefore try to block advances of the junior and thus delay separation. Kram states that separation is cruclal to career development and the mentoring relationship ends when both parties realize that the relationship is no longer needed in that form. As a consequence, ~uuoJournal of interpretation Mentoring Sign Language Intel]

the redefinition phase allows the relationship to take on a new form, where the relationship becomes a friendship. The senior is to the time frames and allowance for fn removed from the 'pedestal,' but the junior still feels indebted to cept is certainly applicable. Maybe on him or her for the guidance. Occasionally, parties may experience toring hasn't worked so far for Ausian i a level of discomfort with the new relationship as they no longer tried to impose a systemic approach, I know how to relate to each other, which can lead to hostility. If this organizations, to a completely differenl occurs, the relationship breaks down completely. It would ·be hard for Auslan inter] Kram found that relationships shifted into different phases one mentor to guide them through th, according to different emotional experiences. She noticed particu- this reason, Peluchett and Jeanquart's ( lar patterns in cross-gender relationships where men and women of different mentors at different stages. would shift Into separation for fear of other colleagues' perspec- for its potential relevance to Auslan int tives on their closeness. In conclusion, Kram states that knowl- Career Success and Different Mental edge of the phases can enhance an individual's learning develop- , Peluchett and Jeanquart (2000)con ment. She recommends that organizations can adopt the four- emics and their use of different mentors phase structure in designing educational programs, mentoring systems, and job descriptions. a measure of their career success. The) ing needs to change at different stages, I Kram's work is widely cited in other literature on mentoring. career, age,and tenure status. They stat. For example, Chao's (1997) study of mentoring phases and out- a1sare typically expected to maintain th, comes with 178 proteges validates Kram's phases. However, fessional standards, loyalty to their em! Kram's research relies on the assumption that mentoring will professional peers for recognition. For th always Occur within an organization, and therefore will always be encouraged to seek multiple mentoring supported by some kind of organizational infrastructure. This is organization and externally within the PI certainly not the case for Auslan interpreters and the same could Peluchett and Jeanquart surveyed n be said for many other professions. Another underlying theme in demics that worked at two different uni' Kram's work Is that the majority of senior managers are men and measures to tap into perceptions of this has an Impact on the emotional shifts that OCcurwithin a rela- career success in order to correlate tionship. This may be true in the business world, but Auslan inter- career success and access to multiple n preting Is a female-dominated profession, with approximately 80 Subjectivecareer success was deline, percent being women (Napier & Barker, 2003). Therefore, some of perceptions about whether they were su the principle reasons for shifting into the separation phase may not Occur. asked to comment on whether they feltsu career success was defined in terms of thl Overall, the phases seem too proscriptive because of the time the number of publications produced by, allocations. It is not clear from Kram's work whether the time allo- The career stage of the academics w cations are based on mentors and proteges seeing each other of the academic (i.e., early, middle, and I, every day, once a week, once a month, or less. Not everybody based on live hypotheses concerning would have the opportunity to develop and maintain a relation- objective and subjective career success, ship with one specific mentor over two to five years. Auslan inter- or outside the organization, Intra-prof' preters do not have very many opportunities to work together. tors, and early, mid or late career stage. Thus, would they have the opportunity to enter a six to twelve The results showed that professiOi month initiation phase, let alone work through the cultivation had the greatest objective career succe! phase to arrive at the separation phase? The notion of how and tiple sources. Career success was also I why a mentoring relationship would pass through different phases is, however, valid and noteworthy. professionai mentors. Mid-career profe., and subjective Success with muitipie IT Krams' mentoring phases cannot be directly incorporated into mentors. Late career profeSSionals had I the Auslan Interpreting workplace. However,with some adaptation tive success with internal organizationa Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters in Australia 29 to the time frames and allowance for frequency of contact, the concept is certainly applicable. Maybe one of the reasons that mentoring hasn't worked so far for Auslan Interpreters is that we have tried to impose a systemic approach, like that used in managerial organizations, to a completely different context. It would ·be hard for Auslan interpreters to regularly access one mentor to guide them through their skills development. For this reason, Peluchett and Jeanquart's (2000) discussion of the use of different mentors at different stages of one's career is appealing for its potential relevance to Auslan interpreters. Career Success and Different Mentor Sources , Peluchett and Jeanquart (2000) conducted research with academics and their use of different mentors at different career stages as a measure of their career success. They acknowledge that mentoring needs to change at different stages, based on the person's early career, age,and tenure status. They state that academic professionals are typically expected to maintain their responsibilities and professionai standards, loyalty to their employer, and an alliance with professional peers for recognition. For this reason, professionals are encouraged to seek multiple mentoring relationships within their organization and externally within the profession. Peluchett and Jeanquart surveyed more than 400 full-time academics that worked at two different universities, and used various measures to tap into perceptions of subjective and objective career success in order to correlate the relationship between career success and access to multiple mentoring relationships. Subjective career success was delined in terms of the individuals' perceptions about whether they were successful, that is, they were asked to comment on whether they felt successful and why. Objective career success was delined in terms of the research productivity and the number of publications produced by each individual. The career stage of the academics was determined by the rank of the academic (i.e., early, middie, and late career). The study was based on live hypotheses concerning the relationship between objective and subjective career success, the use of mentors inside or outside the organization, Intra-professional or multiple mentors, and early, mid or late career stage. The results showed that professionals In their early career had the greatest objective career success with mentors from multiple sources. Career success was also high for those using Intra- professional mentors. Mid-career professionals had high objective and subjective success with multiple mentors and outside work mentors. Late career professionals had high objective and subjective success with internal organizational mentors. Peluchett and ",UUb Journal of Interpretation Mentoring Sign Language Interpr.

Jeanquart concluded that the study provides evidence that the use of mentors has a positive impa,ct on both objective and sub- ASLlAmeetings and events throughout 1 jective career success for early career professionals, but only mentoring has been discussed. Many pe objective success for mid-career professionals. They suggest pro- tration that nothing has got off the grot fessionals can maximize their career success by cultivating the that the status of interpreters, that is, most appropriate mentoring relationships based on the expertise school' may be a factor. Novices have ce and guidance needed, and that they should recognize their pro- and have more technical expertise and k fession as a potential source (not just the organization for which rienced interpreters are seil-taught and they work). experience. It is possible that older int, One of the most appealing things about Peluchett and ened by the new generation of interpre' Jeanquart's work is that they do not assume that mentoring only how to mentor these people. Or else the: exists within one organization, or that people rely on just one men- these people, but feel obligated to do s< tor for a long period of time. They recognize that people have dif- one like this, proteges may not have a p< ferent needs at different pOints of their career, and that percep- why Eby, McManus, Simon and Russell's tions of mentoring success can be influenced by their perceptions and negative experiences of mentoring i, of career success. Although this study was conducted with academics, the conclusions can be applied to a wide range of profes- Experiences of Mentoring sionals, including Auslan Interpreters. The premise of Eby et aI's (2000) pal For Auslan interpreters, the strongest source of mentors research shows that individuals perfor would be intra-professional in terms of interpreting skills develop- rapidly, and report greater job satisfacti. ment. Nevertheless interpreters could also source different men- tive mentoring experiences can occur. a tors for different reasons: (I) from within the organization for is that overall mentoring relationships de whom they do most of their work (e.g., interpreting service man- as positive or negative. as negative ev~ ager), regarding professionalism, working conditions, etc.; (2) healthy mentoring relationship. Many in other professionals they work with on a regular basis, such as able to identify with this assertion-ho counselors or teachers, to support them with subject-specific told an interpreting student, 'you may ha experience, but it does not mean you are knowledge development; 01'- (3) deaf people, who could support them with their Auslan skills development. Even on an intra-pro- Eby et ai's (2000) research focuses, fessionallevel, interpreters work in different contexts and develop tions of negative experiences in relation expertise in different areas, such as medical, legal, conference, the- mentors' characteristic manners of intel ater, etc. Therefore, novice interpreters can source dilferent inter- characteristics that limit their ability to preters as mentors for different aspects of their work. ance (rather than the overall quality 01 One aspect of Peluchett and Jeanquart's study that would be ship). They draw on a variety of researcl difficultto apply to Auslan interpreters is the measurement of objec- provide a theoretical framework for the s tive and subjective career success. There is no clear hierarchy for tions focused on discovering what perce interpreters, so It would be difficult to rank them, apart from num- having at least one negative mentoring eJ ber of actual years interpreting experience. Would success be mea- gories best describe the negative me: sured through an increase In the number of requests/bookings an answer these questions, they surveyed interpreter receives? Through the type of jobs he or she is offered? executive development program. Usinga Through perceptions of consumers using'evaluations? But the real asked people to pass questionnaires on pOint here is that mentoring can be incorporated into the Auslan subordinates. The surveys included oper interpreting workplace by drawing on a variety of sources and could order to elicit qualitative responses 1\ prove to be quite effective for interpreters. could only estimate how many surveys One of the key questions for consideration is why mentoring using this informal 'forwarding on' techl has not been effective so far for Auslan interpreters. At various that approximately 429 surveys were dl: cent return rate. The negative experience egories, and thus a new taxonomy. MentoringSign LanguageInterpreters in Australia 31

ASLIAmeetings and events throughout the country, the notion of mentoring has been discussed. Many people have expressed frus- tration that nothing has got off the ground thus far. It is possible that the status of interpreters, that Is, 'old school' versus 'new school' may be a factor. Novices have completed training courses and have more technical expertise and knowledge, but more experienced interpreters are self-taught and have years of on-the-job experience. It is possible that older Interpreters may feel threat- ened by the new generation of interpreters. They may not know how to mentor these people. Or else they may not want to mentor these people, but feel obligated to do so. If paired up with some- one like this, proteges may not have a positive experience. This is why Eby, McManus, Simon and Russell's (2000) paper on positive and negative experiences of mentoring is intriguing. Experiences of Mentoring The premise of Eby et ai's (2000) paper is that although most research shows that individuals perform better, advance more rapidly, and report greater job satisfaction when mentored, negative mentoring experiences can occur. One thing that they assert is that overall mentoring relationships do not have to be classified as positive or negative, as negative events may occur within a healthy mentoring relationship. Many interpreter trainers will be able to identify with this assertion-how many times have you told an interpretinii student, "you may have had a bad interpreting experience, but it does not mean you are a bad interpreter"? Eby et ai's (2000) research focuses on: (1) proteges' perceptions of negative experiences in relation to specific incidents; (2) mentors' characteristic manners of interacting; and (3) mentors' characteristics that limit their ability to effectively provide guidance (rather than the overall quality of the mentoring relationship). They draw on a variety of research on types of behavior to provide a theoretical framework for the study. The research questions focused on discovering what percentage of proteges report having at least one negative mentorlng experience, and what categories best describe the negative mentoring experiences. To answer these questions, they surveyed people in a university executive development program. Using a snowball technique, they asked people to pass questionnaires on to peers, managers, and subordinates. The surveys included open and scaled questions in order to elicit qualitative responses wherever possible. They could only estimate how many surveys were distributed due to using this Informal 'forwarding on' technique, so they estimated that approximately 429 surveys were distributed, with a 65 percent return rate. The negative experiences were classified into categories, and thus a new taxonomy. 2006 Journal of Interpretation Men/oring Sign Language Interpre

Reasons for negative mentoring experiences were aUocated to the following key broad categories: preters since they do not necessarily WI with a clear hierarchy. Nonetheless, the • inappropriate match within the dyad protege working through a progressive n • distancing behavior applicable, especially in relation to the tn oped during a mentor-protege relationshi • manipulative behavior Peluchett 'and Jeanquart's (2000) dise • lack of mentor expertise mentors for different aspects of work is • general dysfunctionality. preters work in a range of different settin expertise of various interpreters. For exam could engage in a mentoring relationship v The survey found that more than half the respondents had a court interpreter and move through the I negative mentoring experience as proteges during their career. until he or she had developed his or her The negative experience was more likely to OCcurwhen the pro- preting. The interpreter could then move 01 tege perceived the mentor as having a dissimilar attitude, beliefs, another interpreter entering the legai set! and values. Eby et aI suggest that this knowledge and taxonomy mentor relationship with a highly skilledm could be used to screen potential mentors, giving consideration to power dynamics in particular. ference interpreter, an educational interpre Eby et aI (2000) highlighted the poteni This was a fairly rigorous study with a clear outline of the of mentoring but emphasized that if peop methodology and an acknowledgment of the limitations (small rienee, this does not necessarily mean the sample, majority of respondents white males in professional jobs tive relationship. Ills essential that prote with male mentors). IIis innovative because it proposed a new tax- ported in developing their skills, and feel onomy to be applied in mentor programs, but also advised caution in interpreting the results. able with the mentoring process. This m need to feel confident and comfortable wit In relation to Auslan Interpreters, some of the categories and Sosik (2000) have stated that under- c would explain why mentoring has not been successfully imple- mentoring relationship can impact the qUi mented thus far. Although experienced interpreters may have the therefore the notion of a mentoring 'proce actual experience and skill, they may not have the academic back- Eby's (1997) discussion of alternative f ground needed to analyze and discuss their work. In order to avoid lights the fact that the concept of mentor feelings of threat or intimidation, they may subvert the power rela- that an alternative option for Auslan Inteq tionship and manipulate the novice interpreter. Interpreters have would work for them. For example, Londo come into the profession for different reasons. Originally, the coaching processes emphasizes that "ce majority of Auslan interpreters had deaf parents and grew up in one-on-one learning process enabling peol the Deaf community using Auslan as their home language. performance" (p.164). This is exactly wi Therefore, they did not have any specific training and usually fell need - they need to be mentored, to be into interpreting. More recently, people have chosen interpreting coached so that they can develop their ini as a career, so have attended classes to learn Auslan as a second language and have completed interpreter training programs. This Men/oring and Sign Language interpret, has led to different attitudes, Values, and beliefs among practition- A search of the sign language interpre ers with regard to professional development and mentoring. Thus, substantial amount on mentoring. Most of t Eby et aI's taxonomy would be a useful tool to assist with the United States. In particular, many readers' matching of appropriate interpreting mentor-protege dyads. work of Betsy Winston and others w In critiquing these papers, it is possible to identify why men- Interpreter Educators and Mentors Online toring may not have worked for sign language interpreters in University in Boston,' who are doing pione Australia. Kram's (1988) suggestion of mentoring 'phases' is appealing, but the phases he outlined are not appropriate for inter-

2 http://www.asl.neu.edu/t1em.onllne/ L_----

Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters in Australia 33

preters since they do not necessarily work for one organization with a clear hierarchy. Nonetheless, the notion of a mentor and protege working through a progressive relationship is one that Is applicable, especially in relation to the trust and confidence developed during a mentor-protege relationship. Peluchett 'and Jeanquart's (2000) discussion of using different mentors for different aspects of work is also attractive, as interpreters work in a range of different settings and can draw on the expertise of various interpreters. For example, a protege interpreter could engage in a mentoring relationship with a highly experienced court interpreter and move through the phases with that person until he or she had developed his or her own skills In court interpreting. The Interpreter could then move on to become a mentor for another interpreter entering the legal setting, while engaging in a mentor relationship with a highly skilled medical interpreter, a con- lerence interpreter, an educational interpreter and so on. Eby et aI (2000) highlighted the potential negative experiences of mentoring but emphasized that if people have a negative experience, this does not necessarily mean that they have had a negative relationship. It is essential that protege Interpreters feel supported in developing their skills, and feel confident and comfortable with the mentoring process. This means that mentors also need to feel confident and comfortable with the proceSS. Godshalk and Sosik (2000) havJl stated that under- or over-estimation of the mentoring relationship can impact the quality of that relationship, therefore the notion of a mentoring 'process' is vital. Eby's (1997) discussion of alternative forms of mentoring high- lights the lact that the concept of mentoring can be extended, sO that an alternative option lor Auslan interpreters can be used that would work for them. For example, London's (2002) discussion of coaching processes emphasizes that "coaching is an on-going, one-on-o learning process enabling people to enhance their job ne performance" (p.164). This is exactly what Auslan interpreters need _ they need to be mentored, to be supported, and to be coached so that they can develop their interpreting skills. Mentoring and Sign Language Interpreting A search of the sign language interpreting literature yielded a substantial amount on mentorlng. Most of the literature is from the United States. In particular, many readers will be familiar with the work of Betsy Winston and others with 'Project Teaching Interpreter Educators and Mentors Online' based at Northestern University in Boston,' who are doing pioneering work in this area.

2 http://www.asl.neu.edu/t1em,online/ 34 2006 Journal of Interpretation Mentoring Sign Language lnterpl

Much of the literature recognizes that after completing an interpreter training program, the protege interpreter is often relationship is dynamic and wili go placed on the job with little or no support or opportunity for partiCipants interact more with eacl improvement. Additionally, the literature recognizes that interpreters need to be afforded the opportunity to grow, not only in According to a standard practice ~ their skills but professionally and ethically (Barber-Donzales, oped by the Registry of Interpreters for Preston & Sanderson, 1986). The literature also recognizes the demonstr

relationship is dynamic and will go through various stages as participants interact more with each other."

According to a standard practice paper on mentoring developed by the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, mentors should demonstr"te the following qualities: willingness to share knowledge, to be encouraging, have experience, be open to learning, will- ing to role model, have mutual respect for other interpreters, a level of credibility, demonstrate professional demeanor; be enthu- siastic, patient, personable, dependable, open-minded, committed, and talented; to know their own limitations and know what they do not know; be assertive, have realistic expectations and have world knowledge (RID. 1996). Davis et al (1994) provide guidelines for sign language interpreter mentors that encourage mentors to reflect on who they have looked up to and been guided by, both professionally and personally.They acknowledge that mentoring can provide a context for working interpreters to upgrade their skills, and Harrigan (1999) suggests that this upgrade occurs by exploring the technical aspects (cognI- tive, linguistic, cultural) of the interpreting process through collaborative guidance with a more experienced Interpreter. Labath (1998) recommends that mentor and protege interpreters agree on their approach to the mentoring relationship, define what the relationship will involve and the goals for interpreting skill development. She advises that proteges need to have some ownership and make suggestions, as well as accepting guidance from their mentors. Cavallaro and Cook (1986) and Rust (1986) adopt a similar view, counseling that mentors and proteges use a process of 'task analysis' to identify goals for development. This suggestion is also supported by the Conference of Interpreter Trainers (CIT, 1986). Barber-Gonzales, Preston and Sanderson (1986) suggest that some kind of skill improvement contract can be used to guide mentors and proteges through an agreed process. It can seen from the sign language interpreting specific litera- I ture that the concept of mentoring is well established and reflects i" similar discussions of mentoring in the management (Siegel & k Reinstein. 2001), nursing (Sword et ai, 2002) and teaching professions (Carter & Francis, 2001). Mentoring of sign language interpreters needs to encompass some form of skill development (I.e., coaching). therefore mentoring needs to occur within a framework of skills development. Kram's (1988) notions of mentoring phases , have been adapted, with six key phases for a sign language Inter- preter mentor/protege relationship identified. It is dillicuit to ascribe timeframes to each phase as sign language interpreters work in so many contexts, so it is impossible to predict how often they may be abie to meet or work with a mentor interpreter. A rela- 2006 Journal of Interpretation Mentoring Sign Language Intery

tionship could last anywhere between six months to six years, depending on the intensity of the relationship. separate mentoring plan could be use, Preston (1995) states that the ro MENTO RING SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS: includes providing diagnostic assessme, setting, suggestions for skill enhanceml SIX KEY PHASES sional behavior. It Is important to acknl Kram's (1988) phases of mentoring have been adapted to suit process can evolve and change accordil the sign language interpreting context, whereby the mentoring individual protege interpreter and the m process enters different phases and the relationship between the mentor and protege shifts according to the activities involved. Phase 2: Preparing for Interpreting A The focus in this phase is on men Phase 1:Developing a Mentoring Plan (Initiation) interpreters to prepare for upcoming The focus in this phase is on building rapport between the Working together, they can consider wi mentor and protege interpreter in order to identify the skills that most appropriate to accept in order th both parties perceive are needed. Mentorship agreements are liv- can stretch and challenge his or her ski ing contracts that evolve and change over time. The key is for the herself in situations of undue pressure. protege interpreter to feel supported and encouraged, and that his The phase is premised on the notior or her needs are being met. The focus is on getting interpreters to I The development of a mentoring plan can give consideration the kind of preparation they can do witl to all aspects of the mentoring and coaching process. A plan pro- ble forms of information and papers reCE vides the mentor and protege interpreter with a framework for tege can explore a chronological prOCel evaluating strengths and weaknesses, thus targeting areas for skill with practical information collection, fol development. The goal of mentoring should not be to teach Inter- cal look at preparation in terms of harn preting skills, but rather to enhance them. The mentor and protege ence and assumptions to prepare for ill interpreter need to decide how formal the process should be, and diction. Protege interpreters can be guid, whether the process -concentrates on formal coaching/observa- to deal with, and feelings about, poten tion/skills assessment in different contexts, on informal mentoring them to make ethical decisions about wh and debriefing, or a combination of the two. ing assignments. The process taps into Palmer (1986) suggests that interpreting skills development soned interpreters have been through and support can happen from the inside out. The interpreter can interpreting skills and areas of special~ engage in self-reflection and analysis through pOSitive self-imaging empathizing with their proteges about h strategies to enhance their own self-image and confidence, which on new challenges. consequentiy supports their professionalism. He also recom- Mentors should engage in a proCel mends support from the outside in, whereby the interpreter preparing for assignments, and therefo receives support from others (such as mentoring and coaching) to more abstract as well as concrete pre par, shape his or her self-concept. Thus, the mentoring plan should not information can be of enormous assistaJ be prescriptive, it should be discussed and agreed upon by both should be encouraged to think more late parties to ensure a holistic approach to professional development. the challenges and difficulty factors they One other thing to consider is, that the protege interpreter ing assignment. This next stage of prepar, could have several mentors to work on key areas of skill develop- eration of lingUistic, social, environment8 ment. For example, a senior interpreter to focus on professional logical, interpersonal, and ethical issues practice and interpreting skills analysis In general, a Deaf person mapping (Winston & Monikowski, 2000),', to focus on sign language production, and another interpreter with (Dean & Pollard, 2001), and assignm, expertise in a specialist area of interpreting (such as legal). A pro- (Turner, 2001). tege interpreter may be mentored by one person at a time con- secutively or simultaneously dependent on their work patterns. A Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters in Australia 37

separate mentoring plan could be used for each relationship. Preston (1995) states that the role of a mentor interpreter includes providing diagnostic assessment of interpreting skills, goal setting, suggestions for skill enhancement and modeling of professional behavior. It is important to acknowledge that the mentoring process can evolve and change according to the needs of both the individual 'protege interpreter and the mentor interpreter(s).

Phase 2: Preparing for Interpreting Assignments (Cultivation) The focus in this phase is on mentors working with protege interpreters to prepare for upcoming interpreting assignments. Working together, they can consider which assignments would be most appropriate to accept in order that the protege interpreter can stretch and challenge his or her skills without placing him- or herself in situations of undue pressure. The phase is premised on the notion of proactive preparation. The focus is on getting interpreters to think more laterally about the kind of preparation they can do without relying only on tangi- ble forms of information and papers received. The mentor and protege can explore a chronological process of preparation, starting with practical information collection, followed by a more theoretl- cal look at preparation in terms of harnessing knowledge, experience and assumptions to prepare for assignments based on pre- diction. Protege interpreters can be gUided to reflect on their skills to deal with, and feelings about, potential challenges to enable them to make ethical decisions about whether to accept interpreting assignments. The process taps into experiences that all sea- soned interpreters have been through in developing their own interpreting skills and areas of specialty, and relies on mentors empathizing with their proteges about how they feel about taking on new challenges. Mentors should engage in a process of holistic thinking in preparing for assignments, and therefore give consideration to more abstract as well as concrete preparation. Although collecting information can be of enormous assistance, protege Interpreters should be encouraged to think more laterally and try and predict the challenges and difficulty factors they may face in an interpreting assignment. This next stage of preparation can include consid- t eration of linguistic, social, environmental, psychological, physio- f logical, Interpersonal, and ethical issues in the form of discourse mapping (Winston & Monikowski, 2000).'demand-control analysis (Dean & Pollard, 2001), and assignment dimension analysis I (Turner, 2001). , I j, 2006Journal of Interpretation MentoringSign LanguageInterpretel 38

3' Joint Interpreting Assignments (Cultivation) entering the assignment. On completion of tf Pha~e ter and Hall (1996: 112)recommend the use of real interpret- tor should give the protege some immediat' U? ments wherever possible "to introduce less experienced the assignment, and therefore the interpretat ~ngasSlfers to the logistics of our profession." Phase 3 sees the men- their minds. This immediate feedback willalle mterp~ protege interpreter entering int~ joint. interpreting ,,:,sign- on decisions and choices he or she has rna tor an If this type of assIgnment has been IdentifIed as appropnate in mentor should also provide a written reporl ments. ment of the mentoring plan, then it can be an ideal opportu- lighting key areas for attention and recommen devel~p protege interpreters to receive feedback from, and be of supervised assignments. This report can th mty o~ by a more experienced colleague in a real situation where reviewing progress and interpreting skill deve co,,:ch~lls~ll be on display. This type of mentoring environment also This phase also provides the protege w the~~es a perfect learning opportunity th~ou~h role-~odeling. observe the mentor in an interpreting situaU pro is not possible to momtor everythmg m a jomt mterpreting th

entering the assignment. On completion of the assignment, the mentor should give the protege some immediate verbal feedback while the assignment, and therefore the interpretation, is still fresh in both their minds. This immediate feedback will allow the protege to reflect on decisions and choices he or she has made, without delay. The mentor should also provide a written report (at a later date) high- lighting key areas for attention and recommendations for future goals of supervised assignments. This report can then be used as a tool for reviewing progress and interpreting skill development. This phase also provides the protege with the opportunity to observe the mentor in an interpreting situation (without working in th~ assignment themselves), as recommended by Barber-Gonzales, Preston & Sanderson (1986). This would allow the protege to question the mentor on decisions and choices he or she has made, and engage in a process of critiquing the person who is a role-model. A supervised interpreting assignment should focus on various aspects of the interpreting process, by exploring the cognitive, linguistic and cultural, as suggested by Harrigan (1999), as well as the practical, and logistical. Macro assessment still applies, as the mentor has to base their feedback on what he or she can see/ hear, and cannot rewind a tape to analyze in depth. The skills assessment should be constructive, with feedback on both strengths and weaknesses. This assessment is something that must be done will- ingly as detailed critique of interpreting skills can lead to feelings of vulnerability and exposure.

Phase 5:Analysis of Recorded Interpreting Material (Cultivation) Analysis of recorded interpreting material can incorporate use of macro assessment techniques as already suggested for Phases 3 and 4, but in particular provides an opportunity for mentors to explore and evaiuate interpretation skills of protege interpreters on a micro-level, focusing specifically on the linguistic elements of the interpretation. The key to this phase is for mentors to understand the impor- tance of giving time to protege interpreters to reflect on and analyze their practice. Various analysis tools can be used by the mentor and protege interpreter together, which will improve the reflec- tive practice of the protege. Too often, analysis is performed on interpretations that cannot be reviewed (i.e., on spontaneously produced, live interpretations that are not recorded). Accordingly, the interpreter on the receiving end of the analysis has no frame of reference for the comments and cannot revisit the interpretation. Using prerecorded video footage, the mentor and protege interpreter can assess the interpretation in small chunks, by paus- ing and rewinding the videotape to enable microanalysis of the lin- 2006 Journal of Interpretotion 40 Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters i

guistic features of the interpretati?n. This process can heighten the portfolio will be a legacy that the protege protege interpreters' metalmguistlC awareness about their lan- tinue to update and reflect on, even after he 0, guage production, and also their met~

Phase 6: Developing a portfolio (Separation & Redefinition) RECOMMENDATIONS A portfolio refers to "materials collected which are represen- tative of a person's professional wor~" (Malcolm, 1996: 56), and • ASUA should work in collaboration with in can provide a strong sense of a person S own achievement. Hence and training institutions to establish a r this phase is where mentors can work with protege interpreters t~ throughout Australia at state and federal lev enhance the mentoring process, by collecting evidence of inter- ship organizations, such as RID affiliate preters' learning and development. Association of Sign Language Interpreters of , Malcolm (1996) suggests that the critical skills that can be Northern Ireland (ASU), have established m addressed in a portfolio include personal management skills, team- that can be used as models so that Australi, work skills, and professional skills. Humphrey (2000: 153) also sug- reinvent the wheel.3 gests that portfoliOS can "demonstrate one's best works or accom- • A mentor training program needs to be dev plishments as well as the range of one's ability, skill, or knowledge." senior interpreters with a theoretical and pr As mentors will be WOrki?gwith protege interpreters through a for providing mentoring Support to novice process of mentoring, they Willmherently be collecting evidence of Master Mentor Curriculum developed by B, skills development throughout that proce~s. In the very first meet- at Project TIEM.Online4 provides an ideal I Ing between mentor and protege, the beginnings of a portfolio can cially as it is provided online, which would I be established with the mentoring plan itself In Phase 1. As the men- the dispersed interpreting population in Au! tor and protege interpreter progress thro~gh the different phases of the mentoring process, through pre~arIng for assignments, joint • Whoever takes responsibility for establishin interpreting assignments, superVIsed Inte~preting assignments, and needs to consider why problems have occum analysis of prerecorded interpreting materIal, all documentation can U.S. is a vast country, so problems of isolati be included in the portfolio to create a picture of the development only reason. I would suggest that we have beel a corporate framework on a young professl process. Every time the mentor and protege interpret~r meet, they can have the infrastructure and resources to sup~ review the portfoliOand add any new Items of eVIdence. Using this work. By considering the phases of a mentorin system, not only willthe mentor be able to see how the protege inter- appropriate structure can be designed. Spec; preter is progressing, but the protege will also be able to personally should be given to the needs of interpreters track their own development with comparative evidence to demon- haps through an ASUAmembership survey). strate how their interpreting skills and professional behavior have In providing recommendations. however, it shl Improved. When the mentor and protege interpreter have passed edged that there are potential barriers to the imp through the previous five phases of their mentoring relationship, mentoring framework and mentor training.

3 See ASU MeDtatlng Program - http;f/www.asll.org.uk/asICmentorll and RID's standard practice paper on Mentarlng ~http://www.rld.Oll

4 http://www,asl.neu.edu/t1em.onli"'., ...... I~,. t •• _. Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters in Australio 41 the portfolio will be a legacy that the protege interpreter can con- tinue to update and reflect on, even after he or she has moved on. I would recommend that when the mentor and protege agree that the mentoring relationship is no longer needed, that they review the portfolio together to reflect on the relationship and perhaps prevent some of the feelings of loss discussed by Kram (1988). At this point, the mentor and protege may find themselves booked more often to work at the same interpreting assignments as peers, thus redefining the nature of their relationship. Now that an overview has been given of suggested mentoring phases for sign language interpreters, we make the following recom- l1lendations as an action plan in relation to mentoring in Australia.

RECOMMENDATIONS • ASUA should work in collaboration with interpreting agencies and training institutions to establish a mentoring network throughout Australia at state and federal level. Similar member- ship organizations, such as RID affiliate chapters and the Association of Sign Language Interpreters of England, Wales and Northern Ireland (ASU), have established mentoring programs that can be used as models so that Australia does not have to reinvent the wheel.3 • A mentor training pro..sram needs to be developed to provide senior interpreters with a theoretical and practical framework for providing mentoring support to novice Interpreters. The Master Mentor Curriculum developed by Betsy Winston et ai, at Project TIEM.Online4 provides an ideal framework-especially as it is provided online, which would meet the needs of the dispersed Interpreting population in Australia. • Whoever takes responsibility for establishing such a network needs to consider why problems have occurred in the past. The U.S. is a vast country, so problems of isolation cannot be the only reason. Iwould suggest that we have been trying to impose a corporate framework on a young profession that does not have the Infrastructure and resources to support such a framework. By considering the phases of a mentoring relationship, an appropriate structure can be designed. Specific consideration should be given to the needs of interpreters in Australia (perhaps through an ASUAmembership survey).

In providing recommendations, however, it should be acknowledged that there are potential barriers to the Implementation of a mentoring framework and mentor training.

3 See ASU Mentorlng Program· http://www.asll.org.uk/asll_mentorlnLand_mentor.htm . and RID's standard practice paper on Mentorlng. http://www.rld.org/113.pdf

4 http://www.asl.neu.edu/t1em.onlln .. I.....r"'~·.1.. _- 42 2006 Journal of Interprelation Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters if

POTENTIAL BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION CONCLUSION One major problem in implementing mentoring for sign language interpreters in AustralIa is in relation to who will take The aim of this paper has been to explore responsibility for such a project. Although ASLIA and various can effectively be provided for sign langu< interpreting agencies have expressed an interest in offering men- Australia by providing an overview of the rele toring support and training to Auslan interpreters, the key issue is suggested that any mentoring network be estab funding. ASLIAIs a voluntary organization that does not employ work of Kram (1988) and the six key phases for any staff and interpreting agencies (such as Deaf societies) often guage interpreters that have been proposed. Th work on extremely tight budgets. for the development of trust, confidence and s turing, process-based and activity-focused ment In relation to the establishment and provision of mentor train- relationship. By engaging in such a relations ing: Who will develop the curriculum? Where will the money come preters will no longer be the new kids on the blo from? Who will pay the trainers? How much will be charged for the confident and competent interpreters. Recor course? Should it be offered through a combination of distance been made for a mentoring network to be estab and face-to-face teaching? If so, where will it be held? Should the along with appropriate training for mentors. TI course be offered in each state or should people be expected to Australia is no longer the new kid on the bb travel to attend a course in only one state? If offering the course Auslan interpreting professional infrastructure. oniy in one state, then will the course need to be offered as a one- week block? Will interpreters be prepared to pay to attend? Will However, the potential barriers to the impleJ they be prepared to give up their time, and therefore income, to language interpreter mentoring and training pr' attend such a program? have been acknowledged, with further question will take responsibility and how the network sho Additionally, it is feasible that proteges would also need training in order to ensure that both parties approach the mentoring It is hoped that this paper will generate disc for mentoring in Australia, and the shape and f, relationship from the same perspective. Therefore, would a separate curriculum need to be developed? adopt. This paper may also generate dlscussior cept of mentoring in the U.S., UK and other COl If all these logistics were sorted out, then there would still be the IIshed mentoring systems, due to the introducti, problem of how to actually implement mentoring throughout the thinking about mentoring for sign language inte. country, as there is currently no framework in place. This issue rais- notion of six phases of mentoring. es more questions: Should ASUAor the interpreting agencies set up a formal national mentoring program? Should mentoring networks be established at state level? How will mentors and proteges be paired ACKNOWLEDGMENTS up if they are working in isolation and not necessarily for one organi- Some of the ideas for this paper were initially zation? Should mentoring occur on a more informal basis? Can the research and writing of the curriculum , trained mentors be attached to'interpreter training programs and be 'Supervising trainee sign language interpreters: A paired up with new graduates as they enter the field? program designed 'specifically for the Departmen In order to effectively offer any mentoring In Australia, Communication Science at City University in Lon, answers to the following questions need to be ascertained: • Who will be responsible for establishing a mentoring system? REFERENCES • Who will take responsibilIty for providing the training to Anderson, E.M.,& Shannon, A.L. (1995). Toward potential mentors? tlon of mentoring. In T. Kerry & A. S. Mayes I • Who will take responsibility for pairing up mentors and proteges mentoring (pp.25-34). London: Routledge & ( once the training is complete? Barber-Gonzales, D., Preston, c.L., & Sanderson, G. care of interpreters at California State Universi National Center on Deafness. In M.McIntire (Ec The art of cross'<:ultural mediation. Proceedings, Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the (pp. 154-159).Silver Spring, Md.: RIDPublicatlo Mentoring Sign Language Interpreters in Australia 43

CONCLUSION The aim of this paper has been to explore whether mentoring can effectively be provided for sign language interpreters in Australia by providing an overview of the relevant literature. It Is suggested that any mentoring network be established based on the work of Kram (1988) and the six key phases for mentorlng sign language interpreters that have been proposed. These phases account for the development of trust, confidence and skills through a nurturing, process-based and activity-focused mentoring and coaching relationship. By engaging in such a relationship, protege interpreters will no longer be the new kids on the block and will become confident and competent interpreters. Recommendations have been made for a mentoring network to be established in Australia, along with appropriate training for mentors. This will ensure that Australia is no longer the new kid on the block in terms of the Auslan interpreting professional infrastructure. However, the potential barriers to the implementation of a sign language Interpreter mentoring and training program In Australia have been acknowledged, with further questions raised as to who will take responsibility and how the network should be structured. It is hoped that this paper will generate discussion of the need for mentoring in Australia, and the shape and form that It should adopt. This paper may also generate discussions around the concept of mentoring in theLl.S., U.K. and other countries with established mentoring systems, due to the introduction of a new way of thinking about mentoring for sign language interpreters-with the notion of six phases of mentoring.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Some of the ideas for this paper were initially developed during the research and writing of the curriculum and materials for 'Supervising trainee sign language interpreters: A training course,' a program designed specifically for the Department of"Language and Communication Science at City University in London held in 2002.

REFERENCES Anderson, E.M.,& Shannon, A.L. (1995). Toward a conceptualiza- tion of mentorlng. In T. Kerry & A. S. Mayes (Eds.), Issues in mentoring (pp.25-34). London: Routledge & Open University. Barber-Gonzales, D., Preston, C.L.,& Sanderson, G. (1986). Taking care of interpreters at California State University Northridge National Center on Deafness. In M.Mcintire (Ed.), Interpreting: The art of cross

Carter, M., & Francis, R. (2001). Mentoring and beginning teach- Harrigan, AX (1999). Practitioner-research: I ers' workplace learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher experience. In Honoring our past, creati~ Education, 29(3), 249-262. Proceedings of the 16th National Canventi Cassell, J. (1996). Independent study as an option for profession- Interpreters for the Deaf, August 1999. (pp al development, or, doing it to yourself. In A celebration of the Spring, Md: RIDPublications. profession, Proceedings of the 14th National Convention of the Humphrey,). (2000). Portfolios: One answer 1 Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, August 1995 (pp.125-139). assessment and the "readiness to work" Silver Spring, Md.: RIDPublications. Innovative practices for teaching sign lang Cavallaro, C.C., & Cook, L.H. (1986). Task analysis: What, why and (pp.153-176). Washington D.C.:Gallaudet how. In M. Mcintire (Ed.), New dimensions in interpreter edu- Kram, K. (1988). Phases of a mentoring relati, cation: Task analysis, theory and application, Proceedings of (Ed.), Mentoring at work: Developmental' the 5th National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter nizationallife. Lanham, Md.: University P Trainers, March 1984 (pp. 6-20). USA:CiT. Labath, J.E. (1998). Independent study techni Chao, G.T.(1997). Mentoring phases and outcomes. Journal of tapes of American Sign Language models Vocational Behavior, 51, 15-28. vision: RID in the 21st century. Proceeding CIT.(1986). Task analysis of interpretation. In M. Mcintire (Ed.), Convention of the Registry of Interpreters I New dimensions in interpreter education: Task analysis, theory 1997 (pp.59-69). Silver Spring, Md.: RIDP, and application, Proceedings of the 5th National Conuention of London, M. (2002). Coaching processes. In Le the Conference of Interpreter Trainers, March 1984 (pp. 32-69). ment: Paths to self-insight and professiona, USA:CIT. 194). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Davis, J., Fried, J., Herbst, C., McCaffrey, E., Toothman, C., & Malcolm, K. (1996). Assessing exiting compet Clark, T.S. (1994). Mentorship: A true course in collaboration. approach. In D.M.Jones (Ed.), Assessing. In E. Winston (Ed.), Mapping our course: A collaborative ven- our worth: Proceedings of the 11th NationG ture, Proceedings of the 10th National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter Trainers, Little R, Conference of Interpreter Trainers, March 1994 (pp. 129-144). (pp. 47-60). USA:CIT. USA:CIT. Napier, J. (1996). Interpreter support: An amt Dean, R., & Pollard, R.Q. (2001). The application of demand-con- CACDPStandard. Durham: Council for the trol theory to sign language interpreting: Implications for Communication with Deaf People. stress and interpreter training. Journal of Deaf Studies and Napier, J. & Barker, R. (2003). A demographic Deaf Education, 6(1), 1-14. Sign Language interpreters. Australian JOI Eby, L.T.(1997). Alternative forms of mentoring in changing orga- the Deaf, 9, 19-32. nizational environments: A conceptual extension of the men- Nishimura, JA, Bridges, B.W.& Beckford, J.O toring literature. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 125-144. and evaluation sampler. In A celebration, Eby, L.T.,McManus, S.E., Simon, S.A., & Russell, J.E. (2000). The Proceedings of the 14th National Conventil protege's perspective regarding negative mentoring experi- Interpreters for the Deaf, August 1995 (pp. ences: The development of a taxonomy. Journal of Vocational Spring, Md.: RIDPublications. Behaviour, 57, 1-21. Palmer, J. (1986). Interpreter support dynami, Godshalk, Y.,& Sosik, J. (2000). Do.es mentoring-protege agree- side in. In M. Mcintire (Ed.), New dimensi, ment on mentor ieadership behavior influence the quality of education: Task analysis-theory and oppl a mentorlng relationship? Group and Organisational of the 5th National Convention of the Can" Management, 25(3), 291-317. Trainers, March 1984 (pp.139-145). USA:C Gunter, D., & Hall, D. (1996). Mentorship essentials. In A celebra- Interpreter Trainers. tion of the profession: Proceedings of the 14th National Peluchett, J., & Jeanquart, S. (2000). "Professi Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, August ent mentor sources at various career staf 1995 (pp. 111-115). Silver Spring, Md.: RIDPublications. career success. Journal of Social Psycholo Mentoring Sign LanguageInterpreters in Australia 45

Harrigan, AK. (1999). Practitioner-research: One community's experience. In Honoring our past, creating our future together.' Proceedings of the 16th National Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, August 1999. (pp. 81-110). Silver Spring, Mel..:RIDPublications. Humphrey,). (2000). Portfolios: One answer to the challenge of assessment and the "readiness to work" gap In C. Roy (Ed.), Innouative practices for teaching sign language interpreters (pp.153-176). Washington D.C.: Gallaudet University Press. Kram, K. (1988). Phases of a mentoring relationship. In K. Kram (Ed.), Mentoring at work: Developmentai relationships in orga- nizationai life. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America. Labath, J.E. (1998). Independent study techniques: Using video- tapes of American Sign Language models. In Celebrating the vision: RID in the 21st century Proceedings of the 15th Nationai Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, August 1997 (pp.59-69). Silver Spring, Md.: RIDPublications. London, M. (2002). Coaching processes. In Leadership deuelo~ men/: Paths to self-insight and profeSSional growth (pp.161- 194). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Malcolm, K. (1996). Assessing exiting competencies: A portfolio approach. In D.M.Jones (Ed.), Assessing our work, assessing our worth: Proceedings of the I Ith National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter Trainers, Little Rock, October 1996 (pp. 47-60). USA:CIT. Napier, J. (1996). Interpreter support: An ambiguous concept? CACDPStandard. Durham: Council for the Advancement of Communication with Deaf People. Napier, J. & Barker, R. (2003). A demographic survey of Australian Sign Language interpreters. Australian Journal of Education of the Deaf, 9, 19-32. Nishimura, J.A., Bridges, B.w. & Beckford, J.O. (1996). Mentoring and evaluation sampler. In A celebration of the profession: Proceedings of the 14th National Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, August 1995 (pp. 164-176). Silver Spring, Md.: RIDPublications. Palmer, J. (1986). Interpreter support dynamics: Inside out, outside in. In M. Mcintire (Ed.), New dimensions in interpreter education: Task analysis-theory and application. Proceedings of the 5th National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter Trainers, March 1984 (pp.139-145). USA:Conference of Interpreter Trainers. Peluchett, J., & Jeanquart, S. (2000). "Professionals" use of different mentor sources at various career stages: Implications for career success. Journal of Social Psychology, 140(5), 549-564. 46 2006 Journal of Interpretation

Plant-Moeller. J. (1992). Team interpreting. In Expanding horizons: Proceedings of the 12th National Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, August 1995 (pp. 156-165).Silver Spring, Md.: RIDPublications. Pollitt, K. (1997). The state we're in: Some thoughts on profes- sionalization, professionalism and practice among the U.K.'s sign language interpreters. Deaf Worlds. 13(3),21-26. Preston, C. (1995). Mentorship for the working interpreter. In A confluence of diverse relationships: Proceedings of the 13th National Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (pp. 90-93). Silver Spring, Md.: RIDPublications. Project TIEM.Online (2004). Master Mentor Program. Available: http://www.asl.neu.edu/tiem.online/mastermentor.html (Retrieved 20 April 2004). RID.(1996). Standard practice paper: Mentoring. Available: http://www.rid.orgjI13.pdf. (Retrieved I February 2005). Rust, K. (1986). Response to Cavallaro and Cook. In M. Mcintire (Ed.), New dimensions in interpreter education: Task analysis, theory and application, Proceedings of the 5th National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter Trainers, March 1984 (pp. 21-28). USA:CIT Siegel, P., & Reinstein, A. (2001). An exploratory study of mentor relationships in large CPAfirms. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17(4),421-432. Sword, w., Byrne, C., Drllmmond-Young. M., & Rush, J. (2002). Nursing alumni as student mentors: Nurturing professional growth. Nurse Education Today, 22,427-432. Tate, G., & Turner, G.H. (2001). The code and the culture: Sign language interpreting: In search of the new breed's ethics. In FJ. Harrington & G.H.Turner (Eds.), Interpreting interpreting: Studies and reflections on sign language interpreting (pp. 53- 66). Coleford, U.K.:Douglas McLean. Turner, G. H. (2001). Interpreting assignments: Should I or should- n't I? In Harrington, F. J., & Turner, G. H. (Eds.), Interpreting interpreting: Studies and reflections on sign language interpreting (pp. 67-73). Gloucestershire: Douglas McLean. Winston, EA, & Monikowski, C. (2000). Discourse mapping: Developing textual coherence skills in interpreters. In C. Roy (Ed.), Innovative practices for teaching sign language interpreters (pp. (15-<;6).Washington D.C.:Gallaudet University Press.