The Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program

ACIA ANNUAL CONFERENCE

12/3/2016

David Svoboda

Language Access Coordinator

Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts

11/29/2016

1

The Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program

ACIA Annual ConferencePhoenix, AZ, 1 December 2016David Svoboda, Language Access Coordinator, AOC

ACIA vs. ACICP

11/29/2016

2

Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program

(ACICP)

TIERS

Tier 1: Foundation & Language

Testing: In-Person, Multiple Locations

Oral Proficiency Interview English Written Exam

Education: Online & Self-Paced

AZ Courts Overview Court Interpreter Ethics

Self-Identify: Create Profile in Interpreter RegistryUpon successful completion:

• Appear in Registry as a Tier 1 credentialed interpreter

• Receive a corresponding certificate

11/29/2016

3

Tiers 2-4: Testing Interpretation Skills

Simultaneous Interpreting

Consecutive Interpreting

Sight Translation

Oral Examination

Tier 260%

24 Months; Temporary

Tier 370%

Nat’l Standard; Permanent

Tier 480%

Superior; Permanent

Passing Scores on All 3 Portions of Exam*

Tier 1 Achieved

* See Tiers Recap slide for more score info

20 Languages Available for Oral Exam

1. Arabic

2. Bosnian/Serbian/ Croatian**

3. Cantonese

4. French

5. Haitian Creole

6. Hmong

7. Ilocano

8. Khmer

9. Korean

10. Laotian

11. Mandarin

12. Marshallese**

13. Polish

14. Portuguese

15. Russian

16. Somali

17. Spanish

18. Tagalog

19. Turkish**

20. Vietnamese

** Abbreviated Exams

11/29/2016

4

Tier A: Superior Language Ability

• Languages for which there are no oral exams

Tier 1 Achieved

Superior performance on an Oral Proficiency Interview

Tiers Recap

Tier 1

• Registry

• Ethics Class

• Courts Class

• Written Exam 80%

• OPI –Advanced +

• PERMANENT

Tier 2

• Tier 1 requirements

• Consec – 60%

• Simul – 60%

• Sight – 60% overall; both at least 55%

• TEMPORARY – 24 mos.

Tier 3

• Tier 1 requirements

• Consec – 70%

• Simul – 70%

• Sight – 70% overall; both at least 65%

• PERMANENT

Tier 4

• Tier 1 requirements

• Consec – 80%

• Simul – 80%

• Sight – 80% overall; both at least 75%

• PERMANENT

Tier A

• No oral interpreting test available

• Tier 1 requirements

• OPI – Superior

• PERMANENT

11/29/2016

5

Re

cip

roci

ty C

red

en

tia

ls

Federal

NAJIT

NCSC*

Tra

nsf

er

Co

mp

on

en

ts

OPI

Written Exam

Simultaneous

Consecutive

Sight Translation

Sti

ll R

eq

uir

ed

Registry

Ethics

Court Overview

Reciprocity and Transfer of Components

Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program

COMPONENTS OF THE CREDENTIAL

11/29/2016

6

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

135 Multiple Choice Questions

English Language Vocab

Court Process and Ethics

• Passing Score: 80%

Sentence Completion

Synonyms

Antonyms

Idioms

Court Terminology

Sequence

Ethics

11/29/2016

7

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

• 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

Simultaneous Interpreting

Consecutive Interpreting

Sight Translation

11/29/2016

8

Oral Interpreting Examination - Simultaneous

• 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

Simultaneous Interpreting

Oral Interpreting Examination - Consecutive

• 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

Consecutive Interpreting

11/29/2016

9

Oral Interpreting Examination – Sight Translation

• English Target Language

• Target Language English

• Each document is approximately 225 words in length

• 6 minutes allowed per document

Sight Translation

Arizona Court Interpreter Credentialing Program

LOGISTICS

11/29/2016

10

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

11/29/2016

11

Arizona Component

Cost

Ethics Class $55

Court Overview Class* $55

Written English Exam $80

Oral Proficiency Interview

$65

Oral Exam (Complete) $300

Total $555 State Total Amount

Highest Nevada $787

Average Illinois $500

Lowest Washington $405

How much does credentialing cost?

Component High Avg. Median Low

Application/ Background Check

$116 $56 $40 $0

Ethics + Overview (orientation)

$350 $162.5 $145 $80

Written English Exam $164 $75 $75 $25

Oral Exam (Complete) $475 $289 $300 $200

OPI-Tier 1 NA NA NA NA

Reciprocity and Transfer

Cost

Full Reciprocity $200

Transfer of Components $50 each

Fees for Other Situations

Out of State Cost

Ethics Class $100

Court Overview Class

$100

Written English Exam

$125

Oral Proficiency Interview

$100

Oral Exam (Complete)

$450

Total $875

11/29/2016

12

2017 ACICP Exam Calendar – Cycle 1*

Locations

• Phoenix

• Tucson

• Yuma

English Written Exam

• Exam Dates: January 12 – 14, 2017

• Registration Deadline: December 12, 2016

Oral Proficiency Interview

• Exam Dates: January 18 – 20, 2017

• Registration Deadline: December 12, 2016

Oral Interpreting Exam

• Exam Dates: May 25 – 27, 2017

• Registration Deadline: April 6, 2017

2017 ACICP Exam Calendar – Cycle 2

Locations

• Phoenix

• Tucson

• Kingman

English Written Exam

• Exam Dates: July 13 – 15, 2017

• Registration Deadline: June 8, 2017

Oral Proficiency Interview

• Exam Dates: July 19 – 21, 2017

• Registration Deadline: June 8, 2017

Oral Interpreting Exam

• Exam Dates: November 16 – 18, 2017

• Registration Deadline: September 28, 2017

11/29/2016

13

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

11/29/2016

14

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.

11/29/2016

15

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

11/29/2016

16

• 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.

11/29/2016

17

ACICP

Hotline: 602.452.3333

E-mail: interpreters@courts.az.gov

Web: www.azcourts.gov/interpreter

Program Points of Contact

Questions?

 

1  

IN 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

 

2  

interpreting 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

 

3  

Appendix 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

1

IN 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

2

Appendix 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.

3

Interpreters 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.

4

CANON 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;

5

4. 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.

6

Interpreters 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.

7

The 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.

8

CANON 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

ARIZONA 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) 452-3333

1

Resource 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.

2

TABLE 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

3

Overview 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.

4

Test 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.

5

Glossaries

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.

6

Spanish

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.

7

Practice 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.

8

Practice 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.

9

Additional 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.

10

Professional Organizations

National Association of Judiciary Interpreters & Translators

American Translators Association

New England Translators Association

International Medical Interpreters Association

NAJIT Position Papers