Technology in Interpretation

Results: Professional Interpreter Survey  

Home

            To enhance the quality of technology training in the future, the instructors must possess a realistic and current view of how computer technology is being used in the interpretive profession.  An e-mail survey was sent to professional interpreters and supervisors responsible for hiring interpreters.  Participants were asked how technology is currently being used at their sites in terms of specific skills and access to certain hardware.  In addition, participants were asked to rate specific technology skills on their importance to the interpretation job.  Based on the results from these two categories, the courses at UWSP will be reshaped to better fit the expectations and desires of professional who ultimately hire students after graduation.

Please choose a topic below for more information:

   Survey Size and Response Rate

   Close-ended Survey Questions Results

1.  How do interpreter's currently use computers at your site?

2.  From the choices above, list the top 3 that are the most important for an interpreter at your site to be successful.

3.  What type of computer technology equipment do you currently have access to at your site?

4.  Listed below are computer skills that we are currently teaching in our interpretive courses.  On a scale of 1 to 5, please rank these skills based on their importance to an interpretation job.

5.  From the choices above, list the top 1 or 2 skills that would make an interpretive students most employable in the interpretive profession?

   Close-ended Survey Questions Recommendations

   Open-ended Survey Questions Results

6.  Are there other advanced computer skills that students should be learning in a college program not included on the list?

7.  Do you have any other suggestions for teaching interpreters/naturalists about using computers and other technology?

   Open-ended Survey Questions Recommendations

   Return to Results

 

Survey size and response rate

            In total, 657 e-mail questionnaires were sent out to potential participants in interpretation-related organizations and agencies (click here for a list of major groups).  A major limitation encountered in e-mail surveys is the reliability of the e-mail address lists available.  People change their e-mail addresses so often that the lists are frequently outdated.  Due to this challenge, 224 of the original questionnaires were either undeliverable or indefinitely delayed.  The actual initial sample size for the study, therefore, was 433 potential participants.

            However, this number does not accurately reflect the final sample size.  To obtain a general view of the interpretive profession as a whole, the researcher strove to distribute the survey to as broad of an interpretive audience as possible.  In the introduction of the survey, participants were encouraged to send the questionnaire to other people that might be interested in the study.  Since the additional number of sent surveys is unknown, the sample size is truly amorphous.

            By the deadline date of April 18, 2002, 232 questionnaires had been returned.  If compared to the initial sample size, the response rate was nearly 54%.  However, the actual sample size is larger than the initial by an unknown amount, which means the actual response rate is lower than 54%.  Due to time constraints, a follow-up message to encourage more responses was not sent out. 

            The absolute response rate was not a critical factor in the survey.  The survey was designed as an exploratory analysis to obtain an inexpensive approximation of the truth.  Biases introduced through non-probability sampling and the e-mail survey method already limits the ability to generalize this data to the entire population.  As an exploratory study, the survey produced viable results from a variety of interpretation professionals.  This provides a general view of technology in interpretation, although the specific percentages may not exactly represent the entire profession. 

Return to Menu

 
Introduction
Related Readings

Methods
Results
Thesis

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For More Information, contact:

Jim Buchholz
Schmeeckle Reserve
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point
(715) 346-4992
jbuchhol@uwsp.edu

 

 All pictures and text are copyrighted by Jim Buchholz, 2002.  No part of this website may be duplicated without written permission of the author.