The Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program - ACIA ANNUAL CONFERENCE David Svoboda
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
David Svoboda
Language Access Coordinator
Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts
The Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program
ACIA ANNUAL CONFERENCE
12/3/201611/29/2016
The Arizona Court Interpreter
Credentialing Program
ACIA Annual Conference
Phoenix, AZ, 1 December 2016
David Svoboda, Language Access Coordinator, AOC
ACIA vs. ACICP
111/29/2016
Arizona Court Interpreter
Credentialing Program
(ACICP)
TIERS
Tier 1: Foundation & Language
Upon successful
Self-Identify: Create Profile in Interpreter Registry completion:
• Appear in Registry
as a Tier 1
Education: Online & Self-Paced
credentialed
interpreter
AZ Courts Overview Court Interpreter Ethics
• Receive a
corresponding
certificate
Testing: In-Person, Multiple Locations
Oral Proficiency Interview English Written Exam
211/29/2016
Tiers 2-4: Testing Interpretation Skills
Passing Scores on All 3 Portions of Exam*
Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 * See Tiers Recap
60% 70% 80% slide for more
24 Months; Nat’l Standard; Superior; score info
Temporary Permanent Permanent
Oral Examination
Simultaneous Consecutive
Sight Translation
Interpreting Interpreting
Tier 1 Achieved
20 Languages Available for Oral Exam
1. Arabic 7. Ilocano 14. Portuguese
2. Bosnian/Serbian/ 8. Khmer 15. Russian
Croatian** 9. Korean 16. Somali
3. Cantonese 10. Laotian 17. Spanish
4. French 11. Mandarin 18. Tagalog
5. Haitian Creole 12. Marshallese** 19. Turkish**
6. Hmong 13. Polish 20. Vietnamese
** Abbreviated Exams
311/29/2016
Tier A: Superior Language Ability
• Languages for which there are no oral exams
Superior performance on an Oral
Proficiency Interview
Tier 1 Achieved
Tiers Recap
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier A
• Registry • Tier 1 • Tier 1 • Tier 1 • No oral
• Ethics Class requirements requirements requirements interpreting
• Courts Class • Consec – 60% • Consec – 70% • Consec – 80% test available
• Written Exam • Simul – 60% • Simul – 70% • Simul – 80% • Tier 1
80% • Sight – 60% • Sight – 70% • Sight – 80% requirements
• OPI – overall; both at overall; both at overall; both at • OPI – Superior
Advanced + least 55% least 65% least 75% • PERMANENT
• PERMANENT • TEMPORARY • PERMANENT • PERMANENT
– 24 mos.
411/29/2016
Reciprocity and Transfer of Components
Reciprocity Credentials
Transfer Components
Still Required
Federal OPI Registry
NAJIT Written Exam
NCSC* Simultaneous Ethics
Consecutive
Sight Court
Translation Overview
Arizona Court Interpreter
Credentialing Program
COMPONENTS OF THE CREDENTIAL
511/29/2016
Online Classes
Arizona Courts Overview
• Required for contractors (freelance)
• Supervisor discretion for court staff interpreters
Court Interpreter Ethics
• Required for everyone
• Additional downloadable reference materials included
Online, self-paced trainings
Not scored; must complete all slides and all questions
Written Examination
• Passing Score: 80%
135 Multiple Choice
Sentence Completion
Questions
Synonyms
English Language Antonyms
Vocab Idioms
Court Terminology
Court Process and
Sequence
Ethics
Ethics
611/29/2016
Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI)
Evaluation of the non-English language
Evaluation of proper language usage in progression of speaking tasks
Telephonic interview
Live speaker vs. computerized prompts
Rated by trained experts according to ACTFL standards
Passing score: Advanced or higher
Oral Interpreting Examination
Simultaneous Consecutive Sight
Interpreting Interpreting Translation
• Candidates are recorded digitally as they test
• Digital recordings are sent to raters to rate the exams
• Acceptable pass score nationally: 70% on all 3 parts
• Information to prepare for the exam available to candidates
711/29/2016
Oral Interpreting Examination - Simultaneous
Simultaneous
Interpreting
• English Target language
• Attorney’s opening statement or closing argument
• Speed of 120 words/minute
• Approximately 900 words in length
• Speech lasts for 7-10 minutes
Oral Interpreting Examination - Consecutive
Consecutive
Interpreting
• English Target Language; Target Language English
• Attorney questioning a non-English speaking witness
• Maximum length of each question or answer is 50 words
• 22 Minutes to complete this portion of the test
• Allowed to take notes; may request up to 2 repetitions
811/29/2016
Oral Interpreting Examination – Sight Translation
Sight
Translation
• English Target Language
• Target Language English
• Each document is approximately 225 words in length
• 6 minutes allowed per document
Arizona Court Interpreter
Credentialing Program
LOGISTICS
911/29/2016
Expectations for Courts - Freelancers
Freelance Preference
• Exercise appointment preference
for credentialed freelance
interpreters
• Beginning July 1, 2017*
Expectations for Courts - Staff
Staff Requirement
• Required to have staff interpreters credentialed at
Tier 3 or Tier 4
• Current staff by 6.30.19
• New hires after 6.30.17
• Already credentialed; or
• Within 24 months of hire
1011/29/2016
How much does credentialing cost?
Arizona Cost Component High Avg. Median Low
Component
Application/ Background $116 $56 $40 $0
Ethics Class $55 Check
Court Overview Class* $55 Ethics + Overview $350 $162.5 $145 $80
(orientation)
Written English Exam $80 Written English Exam $164 $75 $75 $25
Oral Exam (Complete) $475 $289 $300 $200
Oral Proficiency $65
Interview
OPI-Tier 1 NA NA NA NA
Oral Exam (Complete) $300
Total $555 State Total
Amount
Highest Nevada $787
Average Illinois $500
Lowest Washington $405
Fees for Other Situations
Out of State Cost
Ethics Class $100
Court Overview $100
Class Reciprocity and Cost
Written English $125 Transfer
Exam
Full Reciprocity $200
Oral Proficiency $100
Transfer of Components $50 each
Interview
Oral Exam $450
(Complete)
Total $875
1111/29/2016
2017 ACICP Exam Calendar – Cycle 1*
• Phoenix
Locations • Tucson
• Yuma
English Written • Exam Dates: January 12 – 14, 2017
Exam • Registration Deadline: December 12, 2016
Oral Proficiency • Exam Dates: January 18 – 20, 2017
Interview • Registration Deadline: December 12, 2016
Oral Interpreting • Exam Dates: May 25 – 27, 2017
Exam • Registration Deadline: April 6, 2017
2017 ACICP Exam Calendar – Cycle 2
• Phoenix
Locations • Tucson
• Kingman
English Written • Exam Dates: July 13 – 15, 2017
Exam • Registration Deadline: June 8, 2017
Oral Proficiency • Exam Dates: July 19 – 21, 2017
Interview • Registration Deadline: June 8, 2017
Oral Interpreting • Exam Dates: November 16 – 18, 2017
Exam • Registration Deadline: September 28, 2017
1211/29/2016
Arizona Court Interpreter
Credentialing Program
QUESTIONS YOU MAY BE THINKING….
What are the benefits of credentialing?
Indicates awareness of ethics, court knowledge & language ability
Demonstrates your modal competency to the courts
Separate yourself from the pack
Commitment to professionalism in the field
Potential to receive priority for work
Potential impact on earnings
1311/29/2016
YES! The credentialing program does
NOT preclude you from working for
an agency.
No. No one will be grandfathered
into the program.
Reciprocity may be available for
those credentialed by certain entities.
1411/29/2016
No, not as a requirement of the
credential.
Continuing education is a part of the
Arizona Court Interpreter Code of
Conduct (ethics).
• Enroll now!
• Email blasts to people in the Registry
• Information updated on website
• Notices sent to courts
• Notices sent to ATI and ACIA
1511/29/2016
• Read & follow closely the exam
guides for candidates (written &
oral exams; on website).
• Practice & critique objectively.
• Classes?
• Critical analysis of where you
underperformed.
• Study, practice, prep.
• Retest when ready.
1611/29/2016
Program Points of Contact
ACICP
Hotline: 602.452.3333
E-mail: interpreters@courts.az.gov
Web: www.azcourts.gov/interpreter
Questions?
17IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
____________________________________
In the Matter of: )
)
CREDENTIALING FOR COURT ) Administrative Order
INTERPRETERS ) No. 2016 - 02
)
)
)
The Arizona Judicial Branch is committed to ensuring meaningful access to those who look
to our courts to protect their rights and resolve their disputes fairly and efficiently. Limited English
language skills should not be a barrier to accessing justice.
To promote high-quality interpreter services, the Court has examined the need for and
benefit of an interpreter credentialing program for the judiciary. Governing policies for an
interpreter credentialing program and fees to support the program have been formulated through
discussion with the court community and committees of the Judicial Branch, and the Arizona
Judicial Council recommended approval of this program at its October 22, 2015, meeting.
Therefore, pursuant to Article VI, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution,
IT IS ORDERED that an interpreter credentialing program is established.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the program shall be comprised of tier levels as follows:
1. Tier 1 Credential: Requires demonstration of general court knowledge, an
understanding of ethical conduct required by Administrative Order No. 2015-98, and
language skills in both English and the non-English language. Tier 1 Credential
requirements must be met before an interpreter may apply for higher tier credentials.
2. Tiers 2, 3, and 4 Credentials: Each tier credential is demonstrated through performance
on an oral interpreting examination. Performance requirements for each tier shall be
established by the Administrative Office of the Court and maintained on its website.
a. Tier 2 is a temporary credential valid for 24 months from the date of
issuance. Upon expiration of the Tier 2 credential, the applicant reverts to
a Tier 1 credential.
b. Tiers 3 and 4 are permanent credentials. Applicants who qualify for a Tier
3 credential may re-test to achieve a Tier 4 credential.
3. Tier A: Established for credentialing languages for which there is no oral interpreting
examination available from the National Center for State Courts. Tier A does not test
1interpreting skills, but requires the candidate to demonstrate superior language skills in
the non-English language. Should an oral interpreting exam become available in the
language, Tier A candidates may sit for the oral interpreting exam in order to advance
to Tiers 2, 3, or 4.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
1. Court employees who provide interpreting services must achieve a permanent Arizona
credential at Tier 3 or 4 by June 30, 2019.
2. Any court employee who provides interpreting services hired after June 30, 2017 must
be credentialed at a Tier 3 or Tier 4 level. In the event that a court cannot find a viable
credentialed candidate at the time of recruitment, the court shall require that the new
employee become credentialed at a Tier 3 or Tier 4 level within 24 months from their
hire date.
3. Effective July 1, 2017, judges should give appointment preference to credentialed
contract interpreters, if available.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Administrative Director or his designee shall:
1. Administer the statewide interpreter credentialing program. The administration shall
include the establishment of a system of test administration, policies and procedures
regarding test scores and tier credentials assigned, reciprocity with other programs, and
the processing of fees and refunds.
2. Publish and maintain a website which details the tier credential requirements and
provides information regarding the credentialing program.
3. Establish a Credentialing Program account with the State Treasurer and the General
Accounting Office within the Grants and Special Revenue Fund. Funds deposited into
this account shall include all credentialing fees net of any banking or electronic
payment transactional costs. Expenditures from this account shall be made to support
the Credentialing Program and language access.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the fee schedule in Appendix A, as recommended by the
Arizona Judicial Council, is hereby adopted.
Dated this 6th day of January, 2016.
__________________________________________
SCOTT BALES
Chief Justice
2Appendix A: Fee Schedule
Fees Associated with Requirements for the Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing
Program
Arizona Residents
Online Ethics Class .....................................................................................................$55.00
Online Court Overview Class .....................................................................................$55.00
Written Examination ...................................................................................................$80.00
Oral Proficiency Interview ..........................................................................................$65.00
Oral Examination (full) .............................................................................................$300.00
Oral Examination (one component) ..........................................................................$125.00
Out of State Candidates
Online Ethics Class ...................................................................................................$100.00
Online Court Overview Class ...................................................................................$100.00
Written Examination .................................................................................................$125.00
Oral Proficiency Interview ........................................................................................$100.00
Oral Examination (full) .............................................................................................$450.00
Oral Examination (one component) ................................................................ Not Available
Reciprocity and Transfer
Credential Award based on Full Reciprocity ............................................................$200.00
Transfer of a Component Requirement.......................................................................$50.00
3IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
_________________________________
In the Matter of: )
)
ARIZONA COURT INTERPRETER ) Administrative Order
CODE OF CONDUCT ) No. 2015 - 98
)
)
____________________________________)
The Judiciary’s Strategic Agenda, Advancing Justice Together, includes the goals of
increasing the availability and quality of court interpreters and interpreter services and developing
strategies ensuring meaningful access to justice for all persons. On October 22, 2015, the attached
Arizona Court Interpreter Code of Conduct was approved by the Arizona Judicial Council and
recommended for adoption.
Therefore, pursuant to Article VI, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution,
IT IS ORDERED that the Arizona Court Interpreter Code of Conduct in Appendix A is
adopted effective January 1, 2016.
Dated this 25th day of November, 2015.
___________________________________
SCOTT BALES
Chief Justice
1Appendix A: Arizona Court Interpreter Code of Conduct
1. Accuracy and Completeness
2. Representation of Qualifications
3. Impartiality and Avoidance of Conflict of Interest
4. Professional Demeanor
5. Confidentiality
6. Restriction of Public Comment
7. Scope of Practice
8. Assessing and Reporting Impediments to Performance
9. Duty to Report Ethical Violations
10. Professional Development
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR INTERPRETERS IN THE JUDICIARY PREAMBLE
Many persons who come before the courts are partially or completely excluded from full participation in
the proceedings due to limited English proficiency or a speech or hearing impairment. It is essential that
the resulting communication barrier be removed, as far as possible, so that these persons are placed in
the same position as similarly situated persons for whom there is no such barrier. 1 Interpreters help
assure that such persons may enjoy equal access to justice and that court proceedings and court support
services function efficiently and effectively.
APPLICABILITY
This code shall guide how interpreting services will be provided, and be binding upon all persons who
deliver interpreting services to the judiciary. This code shall not be binding on non-interpreter staff who
may carry out their official non-interpreting duties in a language other than English when providing
assistance or information to court customers. This code is meant to be administered in concert with the
Employee Code of Conduct, found in the Arizona Code of Judicial Administration §1-303, where
applicable.
Commentary:
The canons of this Code of Conduct are widely recognized principles of general application for judiciary
interpreters. The use of the term "shall" is reserved for these recognized principles. Statements in the
commentary use the term "should" to describe behavior that illustrates or elaborates on the principles.
The commentaries are intended to convey what are believed to be probable and expected behaviors.
CANON 1: ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS
1. A non-English speaker should be able to understand just as much as an English speaker with the same level of
education and intelligence.
2Interpreters shall render a complete and accurate interpretation or sight translation, without altering,
omitting, or adding anything to what is stated or written, and without explanation.
Commentary:
The interpreter has a twofold duty: 1) to ensure that the proceedings in English reflect precisely what
was said by a non-English speaking person, and 2) to place the non-English speaking person on an equal
footing with those who understand English. This creates an obligation to conserve every element of
information contained in a source language communication when it is rendered in the target language.
Therefore, interpreters are obligated to apply their best skills and judgment to faithfully preserve the
meaning of what is said in court, including the style or register of speech. Verbatim, "word for word," or
literal oral interpretations are not appropriate when they distort the meaning of the source language,
but every spoken statement, even if it appears nonresponsive, obscene, rambling, or incoherent should
be interpreted. This includes apparent misstatements.
Interpreters should never interject their own words, phrases, or expressions. If the need arises to
explain an interpreting problem (e.g., a term or phrase with no direct equivalent in the target language
or a misunderstanding that only the interpreter can clarify), the interpreter should ask the court's
permission to provide an explanation. Interpreters should convey the emotional emphasis of the
speaker without reenacting or mimicking the speaker's emotions, or dramatic gestures.
Sign language interpreters, however, must employ all of the visual cues that the language they are
interpreting for requires -- including facial expressions, body language, and hand gestures. Sign language
interpreters, therefore, should ensure that court participants do not confuse these essential elements of
the interpreted language with inappropriate interpreter conduct.
The obligation to preserve accuracy includes the interpreter's duty to correct any error of interpretation
discovered by the interpreter during the proceeding. Interpreters should demonstrate their
professionalism by objectively analyzing any challenge to their performance.
CANON 2: REPRESENTATION OF QUALIFICATIONS
Interpreters shall accurately and completely represent their certifications, training, and pertinent
experience.
Commentary:
Acceptance of a case by an interpreter conveys linguistic competency in legal settings. Withdrawing or
being asked to withdraw from a case after it begins causes a disruption of court proceedings and is
wasteful of scarce public resources. It is therefore essential that interpreters present a complete and
truthful account of their training, certification and experience prior to appointment so the officers of the
court can fairly evaluate their qualifications for delivering interpreting services.
3CANON 3: IMPARTIALITY AND AVOIDANCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Interpreters shall be impartial and unbiased and shall refrain from conduct that may give an
appearance of bias. Interpreters shall disclose any real or perceived conflict of interest.
Commentary:
The interpreter's duty in a court proceeding is to serve the court and the public to which the court is a
servant. This is true regardless of whether the interpreter is publicly retained at government expense or
retained privately at the expense of one of the parties.
The interpreter should avoid any conduct or behavior that presents the appearance of favoritism toward
any of the parties. Interpreters should maintain professional relationships with their clients, and should
not take an active part in any of the proceedings. The interpreter should discourage a non-English
speaking party's personal dependence.
During the course of the proceedings, interpreters should not converse with parties, witnesses, jurors,
attorneys, or with friends or relatives of any party, except in the discharge of their official functions. It is
especially important that interpreters, who are often familiar with attorneys or other members of the
courtroom work group, including law enforcement officers, refrain from casual and personal
conversations with anyone in court that may convey an appearance of a special relationship or partiality
to any of the court participants.
The interpreter should strive for professional detachment. Verbal and non-verbal displays of personal
attitudes, prejudices, emotions, or opinions should be avoided at all times.
Should an interpreter become aware that a proceeding participant views the interpreter as having a bias
or being biased, the interpreter should disclose that knowledge to the appropriate judicial authority and
counsel.
Any condition that interferes with the objectivity of an interpreter constitutes a conflict of interest.
Before providing services in a matter, court interpreters must disclose to all parties and presiding
officials any prior involvement or relationships, whether personal or professional, that could be
reasonably construed as a conflict of interest. This disclosure should not include privileged or
confidential information.
The following are circumstances that are presumed to create actual or apparent conflicts of interest for
interpreters where interpreters should not serve:
1. The interpreter is a friend, associate, or relative of a party or counsel for a party involved in the
proceedings;
2. The interpreter has served in an investigative capacity for any party involved in the case;
3. The interpreter has previously been retained by a law enforcement agency to assist in the
preparation of the criminal case at issue;
44. The interpreter or the interpreter's spouse or child has a financial interest in the subject matter
in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that would be affected by
the outcome of the case;
5. The interpreter has been involved in the choice of counsel or law firm for that case should
disclose to the court and other parties when they have previously been retained for private
employment by one of the parties in the case.
Interpreters should not serve in any matter in which payment for their services is contingent upon the
outcome of the case.
An interpreter who is also an attorney should not serve in both capacities in the same matter.
CANON 4. PROFESSIONAL DEMEANOR
Interpreters shall conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the dignity of the court and shall be
as unobtrusive as possible.
Commentary:
Interpreters should know and observe the established protocol, rules, and procedures for delivering
interpreting services. When speaking in English, interpreters should speak at a rate and volume that
enable them to be heard and understood throughout the courtroom, but the interpreter's presence
should otherwise be as unobtrusive as possible. Interpreters should work without drawing undue or
inappropriate attention to themselves.
Interpreters should dress in a manner that is consistent with the dignity of the proceedings of the court.
Interpreters should avoid obstructing the view of any of the individuals involved in the proceedings.
However, interpreters who use sign language or other visual modes of communication must be
positioned so that hand gestures, facial expressions, and whole body movement are visible to the
person for whom they are interpreting are encouraged to avoid personal or professional conduct that
could discredit the court.
CANON 5: CONFIDENTIALITY
Interpreters shall protect the confidentiality of all privileged and other confidential information.
Commentary:
The interpreter must protect and uphold the confidentiality of all privileged information obtained during
the course of her or his duties. It is especially important that the interpreter understand and uphold the
attorney-client privilege, which requires confidentiality with respect to any communication between
attorney and client. This rule also applies to other types of privileged communications.
5Interpreters must also refrain from repeating or disclosing information obtained by them in the course
of their employment that may be relevant to the legal proceeding.
In the event that an interpreter becomes aware of information that suggests imminent harm to
someone or relates to a crime being committed during the course of the proceedings, the interpreter
should immediately disclose the information to an appropriate authority within the judiciary who is not
involved in the proceeding and seek advice in regard to the potential conflict in professional
responsibility.
CANON 6: RESTRICTION OF PUBLIC COMMENT
Interpreters shall not publicly discuss, report, or offer an opinion concerning a matter in which they
are or have been engaged, even when that information is not privileged or required by law to be
confidential.
CANON 7: SCOPE OF PRACTICE
Interpreters shall limit themselves to interpreting or translating, and shall not give legal advice,
express personal opinions to individuals for whom they are interpreting, or engage in any other
activities which may be construed to constitute a service other than interpreting or translating while
serving as an interpreter.
Commentary:
Since interpreters are responsible only for enabling others to communicate, they should limit
themselves to the activity of interpreting or translating only. Interpreters should refrain from initiating
communications while interpreting unless it is necessary for assuring an accurate and faithful
interpretation.
Interpreters may be required to initiate communications during a proceeding when they find it
necessary to seek assistance in performing their duties.
Examples of such circumstances include seeking direction when unable to understand or express a word
or thought, requesting speakers to moderate their rate of communication or repeat or rephrase
something, correcting their own interpreting errors, or notifying the court of reservations about their
ability to satisfy an assignment competently. In such instances they should make it clear that they are
speaking for themselves.
An interpreter may convey legal advice from an attorney to a person only while that attorney is giving it.
An interpreter should not explain the purpose of forms, services, or otherwise act as counselors or
advisors unless they are interpreting for someone who is acting in that official capacity. The interpreter
may translate language on a form for a person who is filling out the form, but may not explain the form
or its purpose for such a person.
6The interpreter should not personally serve to perform official acts that are the official responsibility of
other court officials including, but not limited to, court clerks, pretrial release investigators or
interviewers, or probation counselors.
CANON 8: ASSESSING AND REPORTING IMPEDIMENTS TO PERFORMANCE
Interpreters shall assess at all times their ability to deliver their services. When interpreters have any
reservation about their ability to satisfy an assignment competently, they shall immediately convey
that reservation to the appropriate judicial authority.
Commentary:
If the communication mode or language of the non-English-speaking person cannot be readily
interpreted, the interpreter should notify the appropriate judicial authority.
Interpreters should notify the appropriate judicial authority of any environmental or physical limitation
that impedes or hinders their ability to deliver interpreting services adequately (e.g., the court room is
not quiet enough for the interpreter to hear or be heard by the non-English speaker, more than one
person at a time is speaking, or principals or witnesses of the court are speaking at a rate of speed that
is too rapid for the interpreter to adequately interpret). Sign language interpreters must ensure that
they can both see and convey the full range of visual language elements that are necessary for
communication, including facial expressions and body movement, as well as hand gestures.
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of the need to take periodic breaks to maintain mental
and physical alertness and prevent interpreter fatigue. Interpreters should recommend and encourage
the use of team interpreting whenever necessary.
Interpreters are encouraged to make inquiries as to the nature of a case whenever possible before
accepting an assignment. This enables interpreters to match more closely their professional
qualifications, skills, and experience to potential assignments and more accurately assess their ability to
satisfy those assignments competently.
Even competent and experienced interpreters may encounter cases where routine proceedings
suddenly involve technical or specialized terminology unfamiliar to the interpreter (e.g., the
unscheduled testimony of an expert witness). When such instances occur, interpreters should request a
brief recess to familiarize themselves with the subject matter. If familiarity with the terminology
requires extensive time or more intensive research, interpreters should inform the presiding officer.
Interpreters should refrain from accepting a case if they feel the language and subject matter of that
case is likely to exceed their skills or capacities. Interpreters should feel no compunction about notifying
the presiding officer if they feel unable to perform competently, due to lack of familiarity with
terminology, preparation, or difficulty in understanding a witness or defendant.
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of any personal bias they may have involving any aspect
of the proceedings. For example, an interpreter who has been the victim of a sexual assault may wish to
be excused from interpreting in cases involving similar offenses.
7CANON 9: DUTY TO REPORT ETHICAL VIOLATIONS
Interpreters shall report to the proper judicial authority any effort to impede their compliance with
any law, any provision of this code, or any other official policy governing court interpreting and legal
translating.
Commentary:
Because the users of interpreting services frequently misunderstand the proper role of the interpreter,
they may ask or expect the interpreter to perform duties or engage in activities that run counter to the
provisions of this code or other laws, regulations, or policies governing court interpreters. It is
incumbent upon the interpreter to inform such persons of his or her professional obligations. If, having
been apprised of these obligations, the person persists in demanding that the interpreter violate them,
the interpreter should turn to a supervisory interpreter, a judge, or another official with jurisdiction over
interpreter matters to resolve the situation.
CANON 10: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Interpreters shall continually improve their skills and knowledge and advance the profession through
activities such as professional training and education, and interaction with colleagues and specialists
in related fields.
Commentary:
Interpreters must continually strive to increase their knowledge of the languages they work in
professionally, including past and current trends in technical, vernacular, and regional terminology as
well as their application within court proceedings.
Interpreters should keep informed of all statutes, rules of courts and policies of the judiciary that relate
to the performance of their professional duties.
An interpreter should seek to elevate the standards of the profession through participation in
workshops, professional meetings, interaction with colleagues, and reading current literature in the
field.
Modeled after the code of conduct provided in Court Interpretation: Model Guide for Policy and Practice
in the State Courts National Center for State Courts, 1995
8ARIZONA COURT INTERPRETER CREDENTIALING PROGRAM
DATE: 09 September 2016
Background The Arizona Judiciary has as one of its goals to increase the availability and
quality of court interpreters and interpreter services. On January 6, 2016 the
Arizona Supreme Court adopted the Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing
Program (ACICP) through Administrative Order 2016-02.
Program Expectations
Registry: All interpreters should create a new profile in the new Arizona Court
Interpreter Registry at: https://apps.azcourts.gov/registry
Tiers: Tier 1 – Foundation and Language only
Applicable to interpreters of all spoken languages.
Elements include online classes on the Arizona court system and court
interpreter ethics; a written English exam; and an oral proficiency interview
(OPI) in the non-English language.
Tiers 2 – 4 – Interpreting Skills
Applicable to interpreters of the 20 languages for which an oral interpreting
exam is available.
Tier level is based on exam score.
Tier 2 is temporary; it expires after 24 months. It can only be earned once.
Tiers 3 & 4 are permanent.
Tier A – Superior Language Skills
Applicable only to interpreters of languages for which no oral interpreting
exam is available.
Requires the highest score available on the OPI.
Is credentialing required? Courts are required to have staff interpreters credentialed at the Tier 3 level,
at a minimum, by June 30, 2019. Staff hired after June 30, 2017 should
already be credentialed, or become credentialed within 24 months of hire, at
the Tier 3 level at a minimum.
For freelance interpreters, beginning July 1, 2017 courts are expected to
show preference for those interpreters holding an Arizona credential.
Can I be “grandfathered” in? No, there is no “grandfather” clause.
Can I apply for reciprocity? Yes, the federal (AOUSC), NAJIT, and Consortium certifications are
recognized for reciprocity if they meet certain requirements. Also, for those
who have begun the credentialing process in another state, certain individual
credential components that meet or exceed the Arizona requirements may be
transferred in, and the program then completed in Arizona.
Are observation hours or CEUs required? No, there are currently no ongoing requirements to maintain the permanent
credentials (Tiers 1, 3, 4, A). However, continuing education is referenced in
the ethical canons of the Arizona Court Interpreter Code of Conduct.
How often will tests be held? Two cycles of test are held per year in various locations. The current
schedule of exams is posted on the program website:
www.azcourts.gov/interpreter
Where do I go for more information? Full program and test information is posted on the program website at:
www.azcourts.gov/interpreter
Program contact information: Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program (ACICP)
E-mail: interpreters@courts.az.gov Tel: (602) 452-3333Resource Guide for
Court Interpreters
August 2016
This publication provides references compiled by the Council of Language Access Coordinators (CLAC)
Working Group on Language Neutral Training Materials.
1TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview of Interpreting……...………………………………………………………………. 3
Test Taking Strategies………………………………………………………………………….. 4
Glossaries………………………...…………………………………………………………… 5-6
Practice Exam Kits and Sample Tests………………………………………………………… 7
Practices Sites for Idioms……………………………………………………………………… 8
Additional Resources…………………..……………………………………………………… 9
Professional Organizations……………………………...…………………………………… 10
2Overview of Interpreting
United States Courts. Federal Judiciary Careers: Court Interpreter.
United States District Court, District of Maine. Taking an Interpreter’s Oath to Heart.
Open Learning Agency and Vancouver Community College. Ethical Challenges for Court
Interpreters.
Ken Strutin. Interpretation and Translation Resources for the Criminal Justice System.
Courtroom Demonstrations
Direct Examination. Questioning in Court: Prepping the Defendant.
Professor Wes Porter, Golden State University School of Law. Direct Exam I: Hosting a
Conversation.
Louisiana State University Trial Advocacy. Opening Statement Demonstration.
Cross Examination Style. Questioning in Court: Prepping the Defendant.
The Secret to Successful Cross-Examination
Consecutive Interpreter Practice
Essex Superior Court, Salem, Massachusetts. Philip Chism Trial Prosecution, Part I.
Essex Superior Court, Salem, Massachusetts. Philip Chism Trial Prosecution, Part II.
Essex Superior Court, Salem, Massachusetts. Philip Chism Trial Prosecution, Part III.
3Test Taking Strategies
Written Exam
Synonyms and Antonyms
English Maven. Synonyms and Antonyms Quiz
English Club. Idiom Quizzes.
The U.S. Criminal Justice Process: Definitions and Steps
Free Rice, English Vocabulary Quizzes
Oral Exam
FluentU, Practice Tongue Twisters
About Education. Reading Comprehension Dialogues
Dialogue Workout
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Oral Argument Search.
Suffolk University Law School. Oral Arguments Before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial
Court
TransLegal. Lawyer-Client Dialogue.
4Glossaries
Maupin Taylor & Ellis, P.A. Glossary of Terms for Judiciary Interpreters.
United States Courts. Glossary of Legal Terms.
New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts. Essential Dictionaries for Court
Interpreters.
Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento. Legal Glossaries.
TransLegal. Legal Glossaries.
New York Courts. Glossary of Legal Terms.
NOLO. Nolo’s Free Dictionary of Law Terms and Legal Definitions.
Vancouver Community College. Multilingual Legal Glossary.
MassLegal Services. Legal and Social Service Glossaries in Various Languages.
Duhaime. Duhaime’s Law Dictionary.
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch. Glossary of Legal Terminology-Most Frequently Used
Terms.
Tennessee Courts. Glossary of Legal Terminology.
National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers. Legal Terminology.
National Center for State Courts. Glossaries for 2010-2011 Test Development: Armenian
(Eastern), Khmer, Korean, Mandarin, Punjabi, Spanish, Tagalog, Vietnamese.
National Association for Court Management. Glossary.
National Center for State Courts. Glossary of Commonly Used Court & Justice System
Terminology.
Lexicool. Dictionaries and Translation.
The Idiom Connection. English Idioms and Quizzes.
Foreclosure University. Foreclosure Terms.
5Spanish
New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts, Glossary of Legal (and Related) Terms and
Courthouse Signs English/Spanish.
Portuguese
New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts, Glossary of Legal (and Related) Terms and
Courthouse Signs English/Portuguese.
Marshallese
Marshallese-English Online Dictionary.
Korean
Washington Courts. Glossary of Selected Legal Terms: English-Korean.
Chuukese
Oregon Courts. Glossary of Legal Terms for Multnomah County (Chuukese)
Ilokano
National Center for State Courts. Abbreviated Glossary for Ilokano Examination.
Arabic
Ayman Khatib, Khalil Ansara. Glossary of Legal Terminology English-Arabic.
French
SIL. French/English Glossary of Linguistic Terms.
6Practice Kits, Sample Tests and Recordings
The Interpreter’s Gym.
ChinaSona. Court Interpreter Preparation Class (Mandarin Chinese).
National Center for State Courts. Self-Assessment and Study Tools.
Prometric. Sample Court Interpreter Oral Examination.
Minimal Pair. Resources for Court Interpreters.
Speechpool.
New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts. Resources for Professional Development of
Court Interpreters.
7Practice Sites for Idioms
Learn English Today. English Idioms and Idiomatic Expressions.
GoEnglish. Pocket English Idioms.
Kaete Hester. Understanding English Idioms. SlideShare.
American Interpreting. Idiomatic and Expressions 108 Module 4.
American Interpreting. Idiomatic Expressions and Slang 105 Module 3.
8Additional Resources
Written
Alcaraz-Varó, E., Legal Translation Explained – Translation Practices Explained, Vol.4.
Berg-Seligson, Susan, The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process (U.
of Chicago Press, 1990, 2002)
Dueñas-González, Vásquez & Mikkelson, Fundamentals of Court Interpretation (Durham,
NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2012)
Edwards, Alicia, The Practice of Court Interpreting (Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1995)
Gile, Daniel, Basic Concepts and Modes for Interpreter and Translator Training
(Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1995)
Jones, Roderick, Conference Interpreting Explained (Manchester: St Jerome, 1998)
Mikkelson, Holly, Introduction to Court Interpreting (Manchester, UK: St. Jerome
Publishing 2000)
Newmark, Peter, A Textbook of Translation (Longman, 1988)
Rozan, Jean-François, Note-taking in Consecutive Interpreting (Tertium: 2005). *English
translation of the original.
Online
Interpreter Training Resources
Note-Taking
Rozan, Jean Francois. Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpreting. (Geneve: Georg, 1956)
Interpreter Trainers. Consecutive Note-Taking, Part I.
9Professional Organizations
National Association of Judiciary Interpreters & Translators
American Translators Association
New England Translators Association
International Medical Interpreters Association
NAJIT Position Papers
10You can also read
