International Sign version of this blogpost: https://youtu.be/IjrHNaW-w8Q

By Jemina Napier.

I was lucky enough to be supported by the Department of Languages & Intercultural Studies (LINCS) and the Centre for Translation & Interpreting Studies in Scotland (CTISS) to attend the 2024 conference of the European Forum of Sign Language Interpreters (efsli).

The conference took place in Turin, Italy and after a few travel dramas with delayed flights and an unplanned overnight stay in Frankfurt I arrived in Turin eager to engage learn from sign language interpreter practitioners and researchers from all over the world and to catch up with old friends and colleagues. Luckily I didn’t miss the start of the conference, but had to leave a little before the end to catch my flight home (which also involved nearly missing a connecting flight!).

The conference programme was over two days in a single plenary session, but also with poster sessions, and in this v/blogpost I highlight some of the research-based presentations. For a full overview of the programme and abstracts of presentations see the conference programme.

Day one

Maya De Wit

The first day kicked off with a presentation from Maya De Wit, from The Netherlands who is a former efsli president and graduated with her PhD in 2023 (for which I was privileged to be one of her supervisors!). Maya has been a long-standing independent researcher and advocate for quality assurance and standards in conference sign language interpreting and was the first convenor of the AIIC Sign Language Network. It was fitting then that her presentation entitled “Eternally Qualified!” drew on four of her  studies:

1. A European survey of sign language interpreters, which she has repeated 4 times over 20 years (first in 2000, most recent in 2020, with launch of 5^th survey now planned for 2025)
2. A survey of deaf people’s perspectives on interpreting quality
3. Various publications from her PhD thesis on interpreting quality in International Sign interpreting
4. Inequalities between signed & spoken language interpreters working in institutional settings

She conducted a poll of audience perceptions of the most important quality criteria for interpreting and asked people to note if they were a hearing interpreter, a deaf person/interpreter or a hearing (non-interpreter). Interestingly the audience responded in different ways with the most important rated as:

• Interpreters: professional attitude/ signing fluency
• Deaf people: qualification, professional attitude
• Hearing: spoken language fluency

She reiterated that it depends on the context, but as there is no consensus on the definition of quality/ quality assurance in sign language interpreting – what does this mean for qualifications? Based on her survey results, she has found that there has been an increase from 28 to 76 sign language interpreting degree programmes over 20 years, which is a good thing. But continuing professional development (CPD) is still not mandatory in most countries, and there is lack of incentive if interpreters cannot command higher fees if they engage in further education/ training.

One of the interesting points that Maya made is about the people who were *not* at the conference that need to participate in conversations about what we mean by interpreting quality, as people who attend efsli are participating because they want to learn.

Aleksandra Kalata- Zawłocka & Kamila Skalska

I was then delighted to see the presentation by Aleksandra Kalata- Zawłocka & Kamila Skalska, who are sign language interpreters, trainers and researchers from the University of Warsaw in Poland, who replicated the sign language translator and interpreter census that myself and several other researchers conducted on behalf of the Association of Sign Language Interpreters (ASLI) UK in 2021. Their presentation entitled “The Polish SLTI profession and the concept of continuous professional development: key findings of a nationwide translators and Interpreters census” was the first national census of practitioners in Poland and they added a specific focus related to interpreter education and CPD. They said they were inspired by seeing us present the findings of the ASLI UK census at the efsli 2023 conference, which is nice to see the ethos of efsli to inspire research across different European countries in action!

They received 236 responses, the majority of whom (40%) were based in Warsaw. The profile of respondents was slightly different from then UK, with a mean age 38, female 78%, hearing 62%, straight 70%, full time other job + interpreting 43%. Only 28% work full time as interpreter. 20% preferred not to say their sexuality which they suggested reflects wider Polish culture and how open people feel they can be about their sexuality. Nearly 57% have Masters degrees, 14% a BA  degree (but not in interpreting). There is no formal interpreter certification, or university training programmes specifically for sign language interpreting. The only training provided is by the SLI association. 23% had no formal training, and for 20% who had it was for less than 200 hours. There are issues in participation in CPD, many interpreters can’t afford it, or they think they are already good enough and do not need CPD. The census provided insights on how to support professional development – e.g that education options need to be improved, and to embed understanding of need for CPD and also for certification.

It was fascinating to see the contrast between the Polish and UK contexts and how the demographic profile is heavily influenced by the sociocultural contexts and also the stage of professionalisation for the profession. I hope others will also take the census and administer in their own countries so we get a bigger picture of the profile of the profession.

Myself and Alys Young from the University of Manchester then delivered a presentation entitled “Ensuring best practice through inter-professional dialogue: Insights from the INforMHAA project” on behalf of the INforMHAA project team. Our 3 year project, which was funded by the National Institute for Health & Social Care Research, School for Social Care Research (NIHR-SSCR) focused on best practices for Approved Mental Health Professionals (AMHPs) and spoken and signed language interpreters in working together in Mental Health Act assessments in England. The project involved surveys and interviews with AMHPs, interpreters and service users and carers, which have led to the creation of free downloadable resources, guidelines and training materials that can be used in AHMP and interpreter education/ training. We were heartened by the responses we got, and in particular by one person who was a self-professed “efsli addict” who has been to almost every conference since they began in 1996 and felt that topics were often repeated, and she said that this was a brand new topic for her and she had learned so much about how much more she needed to know to work in mental health contexts.

Day two

Isabelle Heyerick

The second day started with a presentation from Isabelle Heyerick, who is originally from Belgium but currently is an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Deaf Studies, Trinity College in Dublin. Isabelle’s PhD and subsequent research has focused on the strategic nature of interpreting (and I was pleased to be on her dissertation committee!), but this time she was presenting on “The sustainability of the signed language interpreting profession” in Flanders (Belgium). She surveyed 217 sign language interpreters and found that demand outstrips supply. There is a concern that interpreters have the qualification but don’t work as interpreters or do not work full-time, which may impact on the sustainability of the profession in that region/country. She found that there are 194 active sign language interpreters in Flanders but 445 have a sign language interpreting degree so many do not use their degree. In relation to demand-supply, 48 work full time (more than 700 hours per year), which means that there are 33,600 hours of guaranteed interpreter availability, but there are 122,473 hours of interpreting requested through agencies! So that is a huge unmet need. When asking why graduates don’t enter the profession once they are certified, they said they did not feel ready, and having to be (mostly) self-employed put them off. Some said that they felt there would not be enough work – which contradicts the statistics on interpreter demand.

Isabelle asked various questions based on the data:

• Why are interpreters not interpreting full time?
• Would having more interpreters be better?
• What ecosystem is needed?
• Whose responsibility is it to ensure the profession is sustainable?
• Why is sign language interpreting a female dominated profession (as also noted in many other countries)? What does this mean for a sustainable profession?

She encouraged others to replicate her survey in other countries, so we can create a stronger picture of what is needed to ensure that the sign language interpreting profession is sustainable worldwide. Isabelle has also written a blogpost about the efsli conference.

Karolien Gebruers

The last presentation I saw was from Heriot-Watt University PhD student (& practising interpreter and interpreter educator) Karolien Gebruers. Karolien is co-supervised by me and Kate Sang, a Professor in Gender & Employment Studies  in the Edinburgh Business School (EBS), so she is part of the SIGNS@HWU group in LINCS and the Centre for Research on Work, Employment & the Professions (CREWS) in EBS, and thus she has the benefits of interdisciplinary supervision to support her research on the gendered nature of International Sign conference interpreting.

Karolien’s presentation at the efsli conference was entitled “Exploring Sign Language Interpreter Positionality: Insights from Academic Reflexivity” and gave an excellent overview about how she has developed as a reflexive researcher during her PhD, and how the in-depth and continuous reflections needed is an appropriate framework for interpreters to also be reflexive practitioners. Karolien used engaging slides to talk about interpreter positionality and the extent to which interpreters understand the potential impact that they have on interpreted events, and whether interpreters investigate their identities and privileges. She also discussed the importance of considering intersectional characteristics and recognising the intersections between privileges and oppression to reflect on our own potential biases.

Karolien suggested that visual methods that are often used in qualitative research (e.g. autophotography/ photo elicitation, egocentric sociograms, language portraits, mind maps) can also be used effectively in sign language interpreter education or CPD training to encourage reflexivity, using different prompts depending on what you are asking students/ participants to reflect on. She shared how she has used visual methods in her MA & PhD research, and also in CPD workshop with sign language interpreters.

Karolien’s presentation provided nuanced insights into how using visual stimulants enables the opportunity to discuss complex ideas in a structured way; provides positive tools for reflection (e.g. reflecting on power dynamics, who is (not) in your network and why, what words we use to talk about relationships, what language(s) we use with whom and why, etc.). She also recommended that sign language interpreters read the blogposts Acadeafic and Not an Angry Deaf Person to ‘get smarter’ about topical discussions and reflections from deaf researchers, which may help with their own reflexivity.

There were several posters presented on various aspects of sign language interpreter research and practice. One of which was particularly interesting – from Mike Ballinger on work related stress and how this might influence interpreters to leave the profession; and another from Camilla Warnicke on challenges and opportunities in remote sign language interpreting in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. I was also co-presenter on a poster with several other international colleagues about our experience of delivering the Francqui Sign Language Translation & Interpreting Research Summer School at UCLouvain in Brussels in June 2024. Our poster reflected on the importance of creating this as a signing space for researchers to support their career development, and many people asked us when the next summer school would be held!

All in all, it was an enjoyable conference. I learned a lot. I was proud to see current and former PhD students presenting. I reflected on my role as a sign language interpreter practitioner, educator and researcher. I (re)connected with friends and colleagues that I have met at many efsli conferences in years gone by. And I got to eat pasta and pizza. #LoveWattYouDo J