Oakland Schools Guidance:
Effective Interpretation Process
For English Learners and Their Families
Special Education
2111 Pontiac Lake Road
Waterford, MI 48328-2736
248.209.2314
www.oakland.k12.mi.us
Spring 2016
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Oakland Schools Special Education and
ESL/Title III Workgroup Members
Diane Katakowski, MA, CCC-SLP, Speech & Language Consultant
Susan Koceski, Ph.D., School Psychology Consultant
Suzanne Toohey, M.Ed., ESL Endorsement, ESL/Title III Consultant
Steve Whitmore, LMSW, School Social Work Consultant
Acknowledgements
We are extremely grateful to the following professionals who graciously gave of their
time and expertise to provide critical feedback on this project and resulting guidance document.
Leena Hosler, CCC-SLP, Speech & Language Pathologist
Giannina Zapatero, PhD, School Psychologist
Board of Education
Ms. Barbara DeMarco, President
Dr. Theresa Rich, Vice President
Mr. Marc Katz, Secretary
Mr. Connie Williams, Treasurer
Mr. George Ehlert, Trustee
Superintendent
Dr. Wanda Cook-Robinson
Copyright © 2016 by Oakland Schools.
This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 license,
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/.
Permission required for further distribution of third party copyrighted material.
Linking to material does not require permission.
Please cite as follows:
“Oakland Schools. (2016). Oakland Schools Guidance: Effective Interpretation Process for English Learners and Their Families.
Retrieved from www.oakland.k12.mi.us.
Oakland Schools does not discriminate on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, religion, height, weight, marital status, sexual orientation
(subject to the limits of applicable law), age, genetic information, or disability in its programs, services, activities or employment opportunities.
Inquiries related to employment discrimination should be directed to the Director of Human Resources at 248.209.2059, 2111 Pontiac Lake
Road, Waterford, MI 48328-2736. For all other inquiries related to discrimination, contact the Director of Legal Affairs at 248.209.2062, 2111
Pontiac Lake Road, Waterford, MI 48328-2736.
ii
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
Introduction
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Purpose
There are currently over 130 languages used in Oakland County, and the percentage of Oakland County students
who identify themselves as English Learners has increased steadily over the last five years. English Learners (ELs)
are both under-identified and over-identified as having disabilities in schools. When a student is suspected of having
a disability involving bilingual educational staff familiar with the language and cultural expectations of the student is
pivotal in gathering essential assessment data. Significant shortages of bilingual school professionals have led to the
frequent use of interpreters to assist the educational team in gathering language, social, developmental and academic
assessment data for English Learners suspected of having a disability.
General education, Title I, ESL, and special education professionals must work together to safeguard the educational
opportunities of students who are learning English as a second language as well as engage in culturally responsive
assessment practices. With these responsibilities in mind, this document aims to provide clarification about the role of
an interpreter from pre-referral through special education evaluation, as well as to establish guidelines for an effective
interpretation process.
Background
Creating a bridge between school professionals and families to maximize benefits to students has been a major goal
of many education reform initiatives. As the U.S. population continues to diversify, teachers and other school staff
need to develop the knowledge and skills necessary to collaborate with families whose cultures and languages differ
from their own (Hart Barnett & Zucker, 2015). The National Center for Education Statistics (2011) has estimated that
11 million school-age children speak a primary language other than English. The percentage of English Learners
with disabilities is almost 8% of all public school students with disabilities (National Center on Educational Outcomes,
2011). This growing population of English Learners in our schools requires that educators not only provide students
with disabilities an appropriate, individualized education, but also partner with families in a way that is culturally and
linguistically responsive and equitable (Hart, Cheatham, & Jimenez-Silva, 2012). Assessing whether a student has
a disability in his or her native language can help educators ascertain whether a need stems from lack of English
Language Proficiency and/or a student’s disability-related educational needs. Consequently, strategic collaboration
with language interpreters can offer educators specific ways to facilitate the meaningful participation of diverse parents
in special education planning for their children (Hart Barnett & Zucker, 2015).
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
1
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Legislative Requirements
All English Learners
Parents of English Learners are entitled to translation and interpretation of particular information under Titles I and III
and the IDEA, as noted supra in Parts II. A, F.1, and G. Local school districts must develop and implement a process
for determining (1) if parents and guardians have limited English proficiency; (2) what their primary language is; and
(3) what their language needs are (Dear Colleague Letter, Office of English Language Acquisition ELL Toolkit, 2015).
Local school districts should:
•translate enrollment forms and Home Language Surveys into languages that are common in the school and
surrounding community
• take parents at their word about their communication needs if they request language assistance
• understand that parents may not be proficient in English, even if their child is
• provide language assistance to parents of English Learners effectively with appropriate, competent staff or appropriate
and competent outside resources
English Learners Suspected of a Disability
Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Local Education Agency (LEA) must take whatever
action necessary to ensure that the parents understand the proceedings of any team meetings (English Learner Toolkit,
2015). To ensure compliance with all of these requirements, both translation and interpretation services are necessary
for the evaluation of an English Learner. All communication in writing, including e-mail, must be translated into a
language the parents can understand. Additionally, an interpreter may be needed for any in-person or over-the-phone
communication between school personnel and the parents of an English Learner if the parents are not orally proficient
in English (Burr, Haas, & Ferriere, 2015).
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504)
address the rights of students with disabilities in school. Evaluations must be nondiscriminatory. Assessments and
other evaluation materials used with a student who is an English learner are selected as not to be discriminatory on
racial, cultural, or language basis. Local Education Agencies (LEAs) must ensure that a student’s special education
evaluation is provided and administered in the student’s native language and in the form most likely to yield accurate
information about what the students knows and can do, unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.
The Federal Regulations (2006) are very clear that a student should not be found as a student with a disability if the
determinant factor is limited English Proficiency (§ 300.306). This means that a team must rule out that the primary
cause of the student’s inadequate achievement is not a student’s limited English proficiency. Furthermore, the Federal
Regulations (2006) require that during any assessment of an EL, the Multidisciplinary Education Team (MET) must
consider the child’s cultural and language differences. Assessment tools must be non-discriminatory with respect to
race and culture (§ 300.304). If the MET is attempting to determine the EL’s proficiency in the primary language,
assessments must be administered in the EL’s primary language, or in a form that best estimates the child’s abilities.
2
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
Basic Considerations
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Language interpretation and translation are two closely related linguistic disciplines. Translation refers to the written
word. It requires denotative accuracy, the ability to provide a dictionary definition-like translation, and excellent command
of both languages. Interpretation refers to the transfer of connotative (emotions and associations related to a word), as
well as denotative meaning. Interpretation applies to dialogue rather than written materials. An interpreter is an active
participant in a cross-cultural, cross-lingual interaction. Interpreters convey every semantic element (tone and register),
intention, and feeling of the message (Language Scientific, 2015).
Interpreters must demonstrate technical, cultural, interpersonal, and ethical competencies (Zapatero, 2015). Technical
competencies include such skills as proficiency in both languages, ability to translate the shades of meaning, knowledge
of specialized terminology, awareness of the approximate sequence of the material to be interpreted, and the ability to
translate verbal, nonverbal, and paraverbal communication (i.e., body language, speech patterns, humor, etc.). Cultural
competencies include: “knowledge of the ethnic community, ability to establish rapport, familiarity with US culture
and expectations, understanding of the culture of the organization, and understanding of the context, purpose, and
objective(s) of the meeting” (Zapatero, 2015). Interpersonal competencies include an awareness of personal biases,
understanding of own communication style, ability to notice areas of incompatibility and react appropriately, relatability,
and ability to deal with stressful situations. In addition, there are also ethical competencies that include confidentiality,
impartiality, and respect to conflict of interests (Zapatero, 2015). Upholding the technical, cultural, interpersonal, and
ethical competencies requires intentional recruitment of these specific competencies and explicit understanding of the
role among interpreters selected to assist an educational team.
There are two modes of interpretation: simultaneous interpretation and consecutive interpretation. Simultaneous
interpretation requires accurate and complete translation, orally and at the same rate of speech as the speaker, with only
a few seconds of lag time (Language Scientific, 2015). Whereas, consecutive interpretation occurs after the speaker
has finished speaking. During consecutive interpretation the interpreter relies on memory or takes notes (Language
Scientific, 2015). The interpreter and educational team should decide which mode will be most beneficial to the meeting
prior to the meeting.
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
3
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Identifying Interpreters
The selection of an appropriate interpreter is critical to the successful interpretation process. According to the American
Speech Language Hearing Association, factors in selecting an interpreter include the individual’s level of proficiency
in spoken English and in the language used by the family, prior experience, educational background or professional
training, and certification (2016). Due to the sensitive nature of educational meetings requiring interpretation it is
advisable to select an interpreter with no connection to the family. It is further advisable to use an interpreter familiar with
the educational language and technical terminology used in these meetings. If an aide or paraprofessional possesses
the background knowledge, is of the same culture and speaks the same language as the family, that may be a suitable
option. The best case scenario is a native speaking, educated, independent interpreter. If the interpreter is not familiar
with the family’s socio-cultural background (including historical markers, and other relevant information from their
country of origin), encourage them to become familiar with that before the meeting. The interpreter should share any
knowledge about socio-cultural background with the educational team.
To find an appropriate interpreter, first, check with your local Special Education and/or ESL/Title III director to access
interpreters from within the district. Access the Translators Resource List, published by the Michigan Department of
State: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/Translators_Resource_List_95124_7.pdf
Contact the ESL/Title III Consultant or Speech and Language Consultant from Oakland Schools, especially for languages
that are less common with fewer options for translator resources.
4
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Working With Interpreters
An interpreter is a paid consultant. Interpreters are highly skilled and professionally trained. It should not be assumed
that a bilingual and/or bicultural person possesses the skills necessary to provide accurate and culturally responsive
interpretation. In many situations, district teams pull a bilingual district employee to provide interpretation on behalf
of families. When a bilingual teacher or paraprofessional is asked to provide interpretation (which may or may not be
within the job description), he or she is pulled from direct service to students resulting in lost instructional time. For
some districts, this has become quite frequent. Furthermore, the bilingual teacher or paraprofessional may not have
the training or background in proper interpretation practices and may have relationships within the bicultural community.
This can lead to unintended consequences such as misunderstanding the role of the interpreter, violations of student/
family privacy and confidentiality, as well as undermines the seriousness of the process.
If you are considering hiring an interpreter, you can anticipate that use of an interpreter requires additional time to
execute any desired task. Best estimates suggest that the process will be 2 to 3 times as long as a typical session with
monolingual English speakers. Keeping this timeframe in mind will ensure that you have secured adequate time for an
interpreter to complete the tasks.
Based on experience and research there are numerous problems that commonly occur during the interpretation
process. Issues may include: establishing rapport with the student or family, omitted information, paraphrasing
incomplete utterances, false interpretations, cultural differences impeding accurate interpretation, distortion of meaning,
exaggeration, lack of understanding of technical terms, and/or misunderstanding of the role of the interpreter. Using the
checklist below should prevent many of these issues from interfering with a successful interpretation.
The following best practices were adapted from: Best Practices in Conducting Assessments via School Interpreters
Excerpted from Best Practices in School Psychology (2014), page 113-28:
Before the session
Provide the interpreter with an overview of the purpose of the session. The overview should include a
description of the activities that should take place such as socio-cultural intakes, discussions, and questions.
 Review confidentiality and test security as well as explore if there are any dual relationships with the family.
 Establish sitting arrangements. It is recommended that the educator and the interpreter sit next to each other
with the interpreter sitting slightly behind the educator. This allows the parents to look at both the educator and
the interpreter to receive verbal and nonverbal messages from both.
 Provide the interpreter with any information that the interpreter needs to understand the context of the situation.
 Address issues related to confidentiality and describe boundaries of confidentiality.
 Decide which mode of oral translation will be used (simultaneous or consecutive).
 Provide the interpreter with the opportunity to examine and translate any documents that may need translation
during the session (i.e., IEPs, letters).
 Discuss technical terms that will be used during the session (i.e., diagnostic categories, special education
terms, psychological terms) and encourage the interpreter to ask questions about any vocabulary or concepts
that they need more information about.
 Discuss cross-cultural issues from the perspective of communication and behaviors.
 Discuss with the interpreter the expectation that everything said will be translated to the clients and that the
interpreter should translate all communication from clients including the emotional context.
 If two interpreters are present a special briefing should take place prior to the meeting in order to communicate
meeting protocol, expectations, and purpose.
 If two interpreters are present they should not speak to each other. The purpose of the interpreters is to ensure
clear, open, and accurate communication for parents and educators.
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
5
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
During the session
 Take the time to welcome the student and parents. The interpreter should introduce herself or himself and any
other school professional present during the session.
 Educators may want to greet culturally diverse families in ways that are culturally appropriate.
 Take time to establish rapport with the family. Speak directly to the family and direct your attention to them
when they are speaking.
 Interpreters need to be aware that children might be reticent to speak their native language in school because
English is the “language spoken at school.” It’s always recommended to take a few minutes to initiate a casual
conversation in the child’s native language to warm up. When the interpreter notices that the child’s native
language is becoming more fluent and comfortable in the conversation, then the evaluator may begin the
formal testing.
 Avoid the ping-pong effect of darting your eyes and attention back and forth from the parents to the interpreter.
Maintain eye contact with the parents as much as possible as they are the people with whom you are
communicating.
 Speak in short sentences and allow time for the interpreter to translate everything said during the session.
Communicate to the parents that they need to stop periodically to allow the interpreter to translate their
messages.
In situations where the interpreter and the parents become involved in long discussions, be prepared to
remind the interpreter and the parents that all communications must be translated.
 Avoid idioms, slang, and metaphors because they are difficult to translate.
 Periodically ask the parents questions to establish that they are understanding the content of the communication.
Debriefing the session
Discuss with the interpreter the outcomes of the translation session. In addition, discuss any translation
problems that may have surfaced during the session and their implications.
 Encourage the interpreter to discuss his or her perceptions of the translation session and the cultural issues
that surfaced during the session.
Actions specific to educational and achievement testing
If the appropriate tools are available prior to the assessment session, the interpreter should review all
assessment materials and have the opportunity to ask questions relevant to the assessment materials.
Discuss with the interpreter concepts related to standardization, validity, reliability, and conduct during
assessment sessions (e.g., do not coax students).
 After assessment sessions and student interviews, discuss cross-cultural issues relevant to the student’s
responses and behaviors. Acknowledge cultural differences and discuss their role in the assessment process.
Evaluating process and outcomes
 Evaluate the data that were obtained via interpreters by taking into consideration the quality of the interpretation,
relational and social aspects, cultural responsiveness, language differences, professional interactions and
adherence to best practices.
Consider a variety of options in decision making if the data gathered are not useful, such as working with
a different interpreter during future assessments, obtaining additional data via response-to-intervention
practices, and finding different means by which to obtain information.
 At the conclusion of the session, reflect with the parents (in their language) on how the process worked for
them. Solicit their feedback and suggestions for future meetings to improve upon the experience. Answer any
lingering questions and provide the process for contacting members of the team.
6
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Documentation When Interpreters are Used
Test reports should describe, in detail, to what extent the interpreter was used during the evaluation process. Reports
should state what type of interpretation was used: simultaneous, consecutive, or a combination of the two. A description
should be included detailing how the presence of the interpreter influenced the assessment sessions and outcomes.
Results should be triangulated from multiple sources of data using culturally responsive interpretation practices.
Qualitative data should be presented if questions exist about the validity of the results due to the use of an interpreter.
If the findings are questionable because the process of working with an interpreter did not yield useful assessment
data, then the assessment report should clearly state so, and the recommendations should address the need for a
bilingual evaluation by a qualified educational personnel or the collection of additional data using alternative assessment
procedures such as test-teach-test methods over time or response to intervention (Lopez, 2008). For more in depth
guidance about reporting results please refer to the Oakland Schools Guidance: Big Ideas When Considering a Special
Education Evaluation of a Student Learning English as a Second Language (Big Ideas #6 & #7).
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
7
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
FAQs
1. What funding source is used to pay for translation and interpretation?
Title III funds may not be used to pay for translation or interpretation services. General funds should be used.
Special Education funds may be available. Check with the district Special Education director.
2. Do we have to do a bilingual evaluation for English Learners?
Michigan Administrative Rules for Special Education:
§ 300.304 Evaluation procedures. (c)(ii) Evaluations are provided and administered in the child’s native language or
other mode of communication and in the form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and
can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is clearly not feasible to so provide or administer.
Additional considerations:
● In most cases it is important to conduct an evaluation in both the first language of the student and in English.
● However, if a school-aged student has not been educated in the first language or if a significant amount of time
has passed since the student has been education in the first language, the team may elect to do the evaluation
only in English.
● When considering an evaluation of a child birth to five years old a bilingual evaluation of an English Learner is
imperative.
● Whenever a team is doing an evaluation on an English Learner the ESL or Bilingual staff should be involved in
all team decision making.
3. Is face-to-face interpreting the only means of interpretation? Can we do it over the phone?
It is most desirable to have face to face meetings with the families and students involved in the evaluation process.
Nuances of language and culture are missed when interpretation occurs over the phone or through e-mail. Similarly,
web tools that translate carte blanche from from one language to another language often misrepresent important
nuances of meaning and are not recommended.
4. Can I use translator apps to translate consent forms and related documents into the language of the parent?
Districts are often looking for easy ways to translate documents to meet the needs of their bilingual families.
The United States Department of Education and Office of Civil Rights have explicit guidance regarding electronic
translation services as follows:
8
Utilization of such services is appropriate only if the translated document accurately conveys the meaning of
the source document, including accurately translating technical vocabulary. The Departments caution against
the use of web-based automated translations; translations that are inaccurate are inconsistent with the school
district’s obligation to communicate effectively with LEP parents. Thus, to ensure that essential information has
been accurately translated and conveys the meaning of the source document, the school district would need
to have a machine translation reviewed, and edited as needed, by an individual qualified to do so. Additionally,
the confidentiality of documents may be lost when documents are uploaded without sufficient controls to a
web-based translation service and stored in their databases. School districts using any web-based automated
translation services for documents containing personally identifiable information from a student’s education
record must ensure that disclosure to the web-based service complies with the requirements of the Family
Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(b), and its implementing regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 99.
For more information on this issue, please review the “Protecting Student Privacy While Using Online Educational
Services” guidance found at http://ptac.ed.gov/sites/default/files/Student%20Privacy%20and%20Online%20
Educational%20Services%20%28February%202014%29.pdf (Dear Colleague Letter, Office of English Language
Acquisition ELL Toolkit, 2015)
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
5. In which situations would two interpreters be needed, one for the family and one for the educational team?
In situations where conflict may occur, it may be advisable to have one interpreter for the family and one interpreter
for the educational team. Likewise, when the parents request a specific interpreter, such as a family member,
having that interpreter next to the family and another interpreter, hired by the district, next to the educational team
protects the interests of both parties and ensures unbiased interpretation.
6. If educators are working with a family over time should the same interpreter be used or is it allowable to
use different interpreters across time?
To the greatest extent possible the same interpreter should be used for all interactions with the family so the team
may establish a familiar and trustful relationship.
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
9
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Key Terms
Connotative Language: the emotions and associations connected to a word; depending on personal experiences,
certain words have a positive, negative, or neutral connotation.
Consecutive Interpretation: occurs after the speaker has finished speaking.
Denotative Language: refers to the literal meaning of a word, the “dictionary definition.”
English Learner: an individual ages 3–21 who is enrolled or preparing to enroll in an elementary school or secondary
school; who was not born in the United States or whose first language is a language other than English, who is a Native
American or Alaska Native or a native resident of the outlying areas and comes from an environment where a language
other than English has had a significant impact on his or her level of English language proficiency, or who is migratory,
has a first language other than English, and comes from an environment where a language other than English is
dominant; and whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English language may be sufficient
to deny him or her the ability to meet the proficient level of achievement on state assessments, the ability to successfully
achieve in classrooms where the language of instruction is English, or the opportunity to participate fully in society.
Individuals With Disabilities Act (IDEA): a law ensuring services to children with disabilities throughout the nation.
IDEA governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education and related services to more
than 6.5 million eligible infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities.
Individualized Education Program (IEP): a written program developed by the school’s special education team with
input from a student’s parents that specifies the student’s academic goals and the method to obtain these goals.
Interpretation: refers to the transfer of connotative (emotions and associations related to a word), as well as denotative
meaning. Interpretation applies to dialogue rather than written materials.
LEP: Limited English Proficiency, a synonym for EL, English Learner.
Simultaneous Interpretation: accurate and complete translation, orally and at the same rate of speech as the speaker,
with only a few seconds of lag time.
Translation: refers to the written word. It requires denotative accuracy, the ability to provide a dictionary definition-like
translation, and excellent command of both languages.
10
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
For Additional Information
Limited English Proficiency A Federal Interagency Website
● http://www.lep.gov/interp_translation/trans_interpret.html
Office of English Language Acquisition English Language Learner Toolkit
● http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/chap10.pdf
Interpreter Protocol and Standards of Practice, Clarity Interpreting, Interpreter Training Videos
● https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wg-qZjMhU4
● https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e_nIDJV-Lk
For further information on this document, contact:
Oakland Schools
2111 Pontiac Lake Road
Waterford, MI 48328
248.209.2070
For information on English Learners, visit:
https://oakland.k12.mi.us/esl
Explore MiPlace for EL resources in the Collaboratorium by
searching for the group
“English Learners: Difference or Disability?”
Start here: https://oakland.k12.mi.us/instructional/mi-place/Pages/default.aspx
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
11
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
References
Burr, E., Haas, E., and Ferriere, K. Identifying and Supporting English Learner Students with Learning Disabilities:
Key Issues in the Literature and State Practice. Rep. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2015. Print.
REL2015-086.
Collaborating With Interpreters. American Speech Language Hearing Association. http://www.asha.org/PracticePortal/Professional-Issues/Collaborating-With-Interpreters/. Retrieved 10/24/16.
The Difference between Translation and Interpreting. Language Scientific. http://www.languagescientific.com/thedifference-between-translation-and-interpreting/. Retrieved 10/24/16.
English Learner Toolkit, US Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, August 2015. http://
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. Retrieved 10/1/15.
Oakland Schools. (2015). Oakland Schools Guidance: Big Ideas When Considering a Special Education Evaluation of
a Student Learning English as a Second Language. 2015. www.oakland.k12.mi.us. Retrieved 10/24/16.
Harrison, P. L., and Grimes, J. (2014). Best Practices in Conducting Assessments via School Interpreters. Best
Practices in School Psychology, VI. 6th ed. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. 113-28.
Hart Barnett, Juliet E., and Stanley H. Zucker. Working Strategically with Language Interpreters. DADD Express: A
Publication of the Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities, a Unit of the Council for Exceptional Children 26
(Fall 2015).
Hart, J. E., Cheatham, G. A., & Jimenez-Silva, M. (2012). Facilitating quality language interpretation for diverse
families of students with special needs. Preventing School Failure, 56, 207–213. doi:10.1080/1045988X.2011.645910.
Lopez, Emilia C. (2010). Interpreters. Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural School Psychology: 547-53.
Springer, US.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). The condition of education 2011. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
NCEO. (2011). Understanding subgroups in common state assessments: Special education students and ELLs
(NCEO Brief #4). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Ortiz, Samuel. (2004). Comprehensive Assessment of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students: A Systematic,
Practical Approach for Non-Discriminatory Assessment. https://www.crosscultured.com/documents/Website/
Comprehensive.pdf. Retrieved 9/1/16.
Park, S., Magee, J., Martinez, M., Shafer Willner, L., and Paul, J. (2016). CCSSO English Language Learners with
Disabilities: A Call for Additional Research and Policy Guidance. Washington, DC: CCSSO.
12
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process
Refugee Children in U. S. Schools: A Toolkit for Teachers and School Personnel. Tool 5. Federal Requirements to
Provide Interpretation/Translation in the Schools. Bridging Refugee Youth and Children’s Services. (2007). http://www.
brycs.org/documents/upload/Interpretation-Translation-FAQ.pdf Retrieved 10/24/16.
Shyyan, V., Thurlow, M., Christensen, L., Lazarus, S., Paul, J., and Touchette, B. (2016). CCSSO accessibility
manual: How to select, administer, and evaluate use of accessibility supports for instruction and assessment of all
students. Washington, DC: CCSSO.
Zapatero, Giannina, Ph.D. Guidelines for an Effective Interpretation Process. Special Education Evaluations of
English Learners. Oakland Schools, Waterford, MI. Lecture 5/8/15.
Oakland Schools Guidance: Consideration for an Effective Interpretation Process • Spring 2016
13