Newsfeeds
This Newsfeed webpage includes a summary of a current issue in education (C9), which reflects my knowledge of the intersection between K-12 educational and school interpreting topics.
School Interpreting Series (SIS) Standards
SIS Competency 9
Cultivate an understanding of current educational issues that continually elevate the current practices, interactions, and contributions of a school interpreter as a Related Service Provider on the educational team and within the educational system. (Knowledge & Skill)
The following newsfeeds include short summaries in various communication methods (spoken English and written English) that name the current issue in education, illustrate it, and explain how it intersects with my role as a school interpreter and others on the educational team. This webpage demonstrates my competence in understanding a current issue in education. In the following newsfeeds, I name the current issue in education, illustrate the issue, and explain how the issue intersects with the role of a school interpreter and others on the educational team. This page includes a newsfeed for:​
​
This page also includes an overarching reflection.​​
This page includes a demonstration of my competence in understanding current issues within education. It is important that I understand current issues within education because changes at the systems level often have direct consequences for deaf and hard of hearing students’ access to language and learning. By remaining informed and reflective, I am better prepared to respond to these changes, collaborate effectively with IEP teams, and uphold my professional responsibility as a school interpreter.
​
The issues discussed below illustrate the dynamic and interconnected nature of the educational system. Laws and federal regulations, emerging research, and evolving best practices continuously shape the environments in which school interpreters work. Understanding these developments helps me remain aware of factors influencing access across multiple levels of the education system and adjust my practice accordingly. Staying informed supports ethical and effective interpreting practice and enables me to implement approaches and collaborate with the IEP team in ways that best support deaf and hard of hearing students’ access to education.
Varying Qualifications for Interpreters in Education
Fall 2024
One current issue that deaf students and the field of educational interpreting face is the lack of standardization in state requirements for school interpreters. This issue illustrates how differences in policy and regulation across states can directly shape the educational access deaf and hard of hearing students receive. Because each state is able to set its own standards, there is significant variation across the country, which can negatively impact deaf students’ access to education. This is an issue that requires ongoing awareness from school interpreters, as state regulations and professional expectations continue to evolve. State requirements vary in the required scores on the Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA). For example, five states require a score of 3.0, twenty-two states require a 3.5, fourteen states require a 4.0, four states have regulations but do not use the EIPA, and five states, plus Washington, DC, do not have interpreter regulations at all (NAIE, 2023). For reference, an interpreter who scores a 3.0 on the assessment is recommended by EIPA raters to interpret only in supervised situations while continuing to further their education in interpreting. In contrast, an interpreter who scores a 4.0 is considered competent and skilled enough to navigate most classroom conversations independently (EIPA, n.d.). The NAIE Professional Guidelines for Interpreting in Educational Settings state that qualified school interpreters should score a 4.0 on the EIPA and pass the EIPA written exam (NAIE, 2019).
This issue impacts the interpreter’s role because it allows underqualified interpreters to work in classrooms in states without regulations or with requirements that are set too low. When an interpreter is working in a classroom without the necessary qualifications, students may receive inadequate communication access, even though an interpreter is physically present. In these situations, the interpreter is unable to fully fulfill their role or uphold their professional and ethical responsibilities.
​
​To hearing administrators and teachers who may not be familiar with interpreting standards, an underqualified interpreter can appear no different from a qualified one. This can have serious implications for the educational team. Teachers and administrators may believe that a student has had full access to instruction, while another factor is actually contributing to lower academic performance. For example, if a student fails a test and the teacher assumes the student had access to all instructional content, the teacher may conclude that the student lacks motivation, did not prepare adequately, or has an undiagnosed learning disability. In reality, the most significant barrier may have been inadequate interpreting services or limited access to classroom discourse. These assumptions can influence how a student’s abilities are perceived and discussed by the team.
Additionally, this lack of standardization can impact other interpreters working with the student. If a student advances to a higher grade level and begins working with a highly qualified interpreter, it may be expected that the student’s skills align with their grade placement. A qualified interpreter will typically interpret at a level appropriate to the student’s academic and developmental expectations. However, if the student previously worked with an underqualified interpreter, their actual access to instruction may not reflect those expectations. While a skilled interpreter will likely recognize this mismatch and make adjustments, this process takes time and may require changes to the student’s IEP and support services.
​
​Greater standardization across states regarding interpreter qualification requirements would better support deaf students and more accurately represent their abilities within the educational system. Until that occurs, school interpreters must remain aware of evolving regulations and professional guidelines and reflect on how these issues influence their own practice. Underqualified interpreters admitted to classrooms due to inadequate requirements can cause significant harm to students’ social, emotional, and academic development, underscoring the importance of continued learning and advocacy within the profession.
​
As a school interpreter and related service provider, staying informed about these standards allows me to advocate for appropriate services, collaborate more effectively with educational teams, and help prevent language deprivation.
References
​
Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment. (n.d.). Profile of skills at each rating level of the EIPA [PDF]. Classroom
Interpreting. https://cdn.aglty.io/classroom-interpreting/resources/ProfileOfSkillsAtEachRatingLevelOfTheEIPA.pdf
​
National Association of Interpreters in Education. (2019). Professional guidelines for interpreting in educational settings (1st ed.).
https://naiedu.org/guidelines/
​
National Association of Interpreters in Education. (2023, March 31). State requirements for educational interpreters.
https://naiedu.org/state-standards/
Additional Learning
​
Boys Town National Research Hospital Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment. (2021). Glossary of EIPA terminology.
https://cdn.aglty.io/classroom-interpreting/resources/GlossaryOfEIPATerminology.pdf
​
Classroom Interpreting. (2024). Resources. https://www.classroominterpreting.org/resources
​
Johnson, L.J., Taylor, M.M., Schick, B., Brown, S., Bolster, L., & Girardin, E.G. (2023). Complexities in educational interpreting: An
investigation into patterns of practice (2nd Ed.). Interpreting Consolidated.  
Update: TerpsWA and Community Coalition Efforts in Washington State Interpreting
Spring 2026
TerpsWA is a community advocacy group formed to investigate the shortage of qualified and certified ASL, ProTactile (PT), and trilingual interpreters throughout Washington State. In 2011, Seattle Central Community College announced the closure of its interpreter training program (ITP) due to budget cuts, with the final cohort graduating in 2013. Following this closure, Spokane Falls Community College (SFCC) became the home of the only ITP in the state. SFCC offers a two-year program focused on preparing interpreters primarily for K–12 settings. This limited training infrastructure has contributed significantly to the current interpreter shortage in Washington, with a state workgroup reporting approximately 400 qualified and certified interpreters serving an estimated 250,000 d/Deaf and hard of hearing individuals statewide. (Long, 2011; TerpsWA, n.d.)
​
In July 2024, under SHB 2221, TerpsWA was awarded $926,000 to establish a workgroup under the direction of the Washington State Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ODHH). This stakeholder workgroup examined potential solutions to the interpreter shortage and ultimately produced a report outlining legislative recommendations for addressing the crisis. In August 2025, the workgroup publicly announced that it had submitted its report to the Washington State Legislature, concluding its work under the SHB 2221 proviso (TerpsWA, n.d.).
​
Stakeholders identified the establishment of a four-year ITP as their primary recommendation. A four-year program would support the development of generalist practitioners who could then complete specialized training. Such a program would allow currently working interpreters in Washington to pursue bachelor’s degrees without the financial and logistical burden of leaving the state. It would also enable students entering the field to complete their education locally, increasing the likelihood that they remain in Washington to practice after graduation. Ultimately, this approach would strengthen the interpreter workforce and increase the number of qualified interpreters serving communities across the state. (TerpsWA, n.d.)
​
TerpsWA is now advocating for a state-supported four-year ITP to become a legislative priority during the 2026 session. At the time of this publication, the 60-day legislative session is approximately halfway complete, and no public updates regarding progress have been released. (TerpsWA, n.d.; Washington State Legislature, n.d.)
​
Although this initiative is not directed exclusively at school interpreters, establishing a four-year ITP in Washington would have a direct and measurable impact on K–12 interpreting. A stronger interpreter pipeline would increase the availability of qualified school interpreters, reduce turnover, and support more consistent access for deaf and hard of hearing students. This issue is particularly meaningful to me for several reasons. I have heard directly from consumers in my community about how the interpreter shortage in Washington has affected their access to information and communication. My own educational path was shaped by the absence of a four-year ITP in the state. While I had the privilege of pursuing my education out of state at the University of Northern Colorado, I recognize that this option is not accessible to many aspiring interpreters. The barriers posed by limited in-state training opportunities are significant, and establishing a four-year ITP would significantly reduce them. I have supported the workgroup’s efforts by contacting state legislators, signing petitions, and sharing information within my community, and I intend to continue supporting this work in any capacity I can.
References
​Long, K. (2011, June 17). College to end training interpreters for the deaf. The Seattle Times. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/college-to-end-training-interpreters-for-the-deaf/
​
TerpsWA. (n.d.). TerpsWA: The community coalition for Washington State interpreters. https://www.terpswa.com/
​
Washington State Legislature. (n.d.). Latest session documents. https://leg.wa.gov/bills-meetings-and-session/session/session-documents/latest-session-documents/
Additional Considerations for Deaf Plus Students
Spring 2025
Beyond system-level standards, current issues also require interpreters to examine how access is provided to individual students with complex and intersecting needs. As school interpreters, it is important to tailor our approach to each student so that the access we provide aligns with their individual needs. A “one size fits all” approach is problematic and can place deaf and hard of hearing students at risk of missing critical aspects of their education. This becomes especially important when a deaf and hard of hearing student has additional physical, cognitive, or learning disabilities. Approaching each student individually is not only a best practice, but an ethical responsibility tied to providing equitable and meaningful access.
​
Deaf and hard of hearing students with additional disabilities are often referred to as Deaf Plus students. The spoken English newsfeed below provides a brief overview of special considerations that interpreters must take into account when working with Deaf Plus students.
Video Transcript:
​
"A 2021 article by Hands and Voices reported that in 2005, Gallaudet published research that showed 30 to 40% of deaf children have an additional disability. The 2021 article by Hands and Voices updates this number to be between 40% and 60% in 2021. The term for people who are deaf and have an additional disability is Deaf Plus. Unfortunately, there's limited research and there are limited resources available to support deaf students in our current school system who are Deaf Plus. For example, as interpreters, we are not trained by default in our programs to know how to interpret for students with other developmental disabilities. We talk about the fact that Deaf Plus students exist, but we don't talk about how we should adjust our approach to best support them in their communication access and their learning goals. In a similar vein, it's rare to find Teachers of the Deaf to be fully trained to support a deaf or hard of hearing student who also has cerebral palsy.
Children experiencing deafness and additional disabilities can have a harder time getting a solid diagnosis. For example, maybe a student is aware that they are deaf, but they don't know that they have another developmental disability. That diagnosis comes later or vice versa. They might know that a deaf student has cerebral palsy, but they might not be aware that the child is also deaf. This can become problematic because it can prevent successful language acquisition and really make it difficult for that student to develop socially and emotionally at the appropriate times. Hands of Voices emphasizes the importance of the education team for each of these students to take an approach that is specific to that child
and where they are currently at. They say that parents should focus on what their child can do rather than what they can't do, and this is an appropriate perspective for all members of the educational team to have. By focusing on what the child can do instead of what they can't, we can help build positive self-image for the Deaf Plus student, as well as make sure that their education plans, their IEPs, and their goals are individualized and attainable.
It can be difficult to find these kinds of supports because deaf and hard of hearing service providers are trained to support deaf and hard of hearing students, but they don't necessarily have the additional training to support students with other disabilities. This could mean that it's necessary to bring in an additional team member or two and really work with them to make sure that the support provided is effective and helpful to the Deaf Plus child. For example, on an IEP team, you might have an interpreter already there, a speech-language pathologist, but if the child also has ADHD, you might need to bring in a psychologist to assist in evaluation and goal setting to really make sure that the team is supporting the full child and not just their deafness, or not just their ADHD, but supporting the child as a whole. Another important thing for parents and other members of the education team to be aware of is that having other Deaf Plus adults and children in that child's life as role models is very important. This promotes the child's social and emotional development.
Ultimately, there needs to be more research and more training available so that school interpreters and other educational team members are able to support these children just as they are and meet them where they are to achieve their learning goals. Thanks!"
​
​This information reinforces my responsibility to move beyond a one-size-fits-all approach and to actively collaborate with other team members when supporting Deaf Plus students. As a school interpreter, this may mean adjusting my interpreting strategies, advocating for additional supports, and recognizing when interdisciplinary collaboration is necessary to ensure meaningful access
References
​
Beams, D. (n.d.). Communication considerations A to Z: Deaf plus. Hands & Voices. https://handsandvoices.org/comcon/articles/deafplus.htm
Early Hearing Detection & Intervention Parent to Parent Committee. (2021). A community of support: Connecting families of children who are deaf or
hard of hearing plus (DHH Plus) with resources and support [PDF]. Hands & Voices. https://www.handsandvoices.org/resources/pubs/DHH-Plus_connecting-families.pdf
​
Gallaudet Research Institute. (2005, December). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2004–2005 annual survey of deaf and hard
of hearing children and youth. Gallaudet University.
​What is Deaf Plus? (2011). The Endeavor. American Society for Deaf Children. https://issuu.com/asdc/docs/asdcfinal.fall_11
​
​This newsfeed serves as a brief overview of additional considerations for interpreters working with Deaf Plus students. This is an incredibly nuanced and individualized topic, as each Deaf Plus student should be met and supported where they are at. As new research continues to emerge, it is important to stay up to date with the latest data and potential approaches. For further learning, please consider the following resources:
​
-
Lawson, H. (2021). Educational interpreters: Facilitating communication or facilitating education? In Winston, E. A., & Fitzmaurice, S. B. (Eds.), Advances in educational interpreting (pp. 245-265). Gallaudet University Press.
-
From the International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1272602.pdf
-
Position Statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics: https://www.jcih.org/JCIH-2007-Position-Statement-Supplement.pdf
-
To see if your state has a Bill of Rights for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children, visit: https://www.nad.org/resources/education/bill-of-rights-for-deaf-and-hard-of-hearing-children/
Dismantling the Department of Education:
Notes on the Impact on Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students
Spring 2025
Beyond individual student needs, broader political and funding decisions at the federal level also shape the conditions under which school interpreters and educational teams operate. At a time when public schools and their resources are already stretched thin, deaf and hard of hearing students may face additional risk due to changes being proposed by the current administration. President Trump ran his campaign on a platform that included dismantling the U.S. Department of Education and shifting greater responsibility for education systems to individual states (Trump, n.d.). As his administration begins its second term, Trump is expected to sign an executive order and ask Congress to dismantle the Department of Education (Rahman, 2025). While these changes would have widespread implications for all students, they could disproportionately impact deaf and hard of hearing students and students with other disabilities (Walker, 2025).
The National Education Association reported in 2025 that 15% of public school students (about 7.5 million students) receive support through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This accounts for about $15 million, covering services for these students that would likely be spread across different state agencies, making it more difficult for all students who need support services to actually receive them (Walker, 2025). Another proposed cut by the Trump Administration would be to Title I funding, which supports high-poverty schools. This could also lead schools to cut related service professionals who are essential to the education of deaf and hard of hearing students (Walker, 2024). This could mean that DHH educational programs in schools could lose the funding that they rely on to provide Teachers of the Deaf, interpreters, speech-language pathologists, audiologists, and other related service providers.
As a school interpreter working within the system, this could have a major impact. As a related service provider on the educational team, these systemic changes directly affect how I contribute to student access, collaboration, and service delivery. If budgets are cut, schools may be forced to reduce personnel. This could mean that fewer interpreters are in place to support the educational access of deaf and hard of hearing students. It could also mean that teachers of the Deaf and their positions in the school could be eliminated, and that deaf and hard of hearing students would be placed in general special education classrooms. This would put significant strain on the staff currently supporting deaf and hard of hearing students and most likely impact the quality of the education they receive. These proposed changes could also make it more difficult for a school interpreter to foster positive, healthy identity development and honor a student's intersectionalities. Interpreters could become overwhelmed and have less bandwidth to get to know each student and understand what best fits their individual needs. Additionally, budget cuts could lead to a shortage of Deaf role models (in positions such as Teacher of the Deaf or instructional aide) in schools. This could negatively impact deaf and hard of hearing students’ ability to create positive Deaf identities, which, in turn, could inhibit their learning, development, and achievement (Wu & Grant, 2020). ​
As Walker stated in 2021, disability is shaped more by barriers created by society than the actual limitations a person with a disability has. These impending changes to the overall system in which I will work as a school interpreter could create additional barriers for the students I will serve. Keeping current with new policies that impact public schools is imperative as I prepare to become a school interpreter. Changing approaches, providing excellent communication access with fewer resources, and being open to more creative ways to support students are all things I will continue to think about. ​
Staying informed about these policy shifts allows me to anticipate changes, advocate more effectively within educational teams, and adjust my practice to protect student access even in increasingly constrained systems.​
References
Rahman, K. (2025, February 4). Is Donald Trump dismantling the Department of Education? What to know. Newsweek.
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-dismantling-department-education-2025776
Trump Vance 2025. (n.d.). Agenda 47. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform
Walker, N. (2021). Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the neurodiversity paradigm: Autistic empowerment, and postnormal
possibilities. Autonomous Press.
Walker, T. (2024, October 4). How project 2025 would devastate public education. NEA Today. https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-
news-articles/how-project-2025-would-devastate-public-education
​​
Walker, T. (2025, February 4). How dismantling the Department of Education would harm students. NEA Today.
Wu, C., & Grant, N. C. (2020). Intersectionality beyond the individual: A look into cultural identity development of deaf and hard of hearing children of
multicultural hearing families. In I. W. Leigh & C. A. O’Brien (Eds.), Deaf identities: Exploring new frontiers (pp. 226–253). Oxford University Press.
The current political climate remains divisive, and decisions regarding these policies are ever-evolving. It is important to remain informed and up to date as changes unfold. For further learning, please consider the following resources:
​
-
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/31/politics/trump-policy-project-2025-executive-orders-invs/index.html
-
https://www.nad.org to keep up with current position statements from the National Association of the Deaf
Update: Trump Administration Funding Cuts Impact
Deaf, Hard of Hearing, Deafblind, & Blind Kids
Spring 2026
On September 5, 2026, under the direction of the Trump administration, the U.S. Department of Education notified organizations and programs that more than 30 federal special education grants under IDEA Part D, totaling over $30 million, would be discontinued effective October 1, 2026. These grants supported thousands of deaf, hard of hearing, deafblind, and blind children through direct services as well as through the training of professionals who work with these populations (Arundel, 2025; Diament, 2025; Lieberman, 2025).
​
Savannah Newhouse, the press secretary for the Department of Education, stated that the funds were not eliminated but redistributed to organizations and programs that were more closely aligned with the priorities of the current administration. Newhouse explained that some of the programs that lost funding were outwardly advocating for diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, which the administration characterized as perpetuating divisive narratives. According to Newhouse, the grant funding was instead redirected to programs the administration believes will better serve children with “special needs” (Arundel, 2025).
While the full impact of these funding decisions can only be inferred at this time, it may take years for the consequences of losing these grant funds to be fully realized by programs and organizations supporting students with disabilities across the country. However, the potential harm is already apparent. Beyond the immediate loss of services and supports for deaf, hard of hearing, deafblind, and blind students, this action represents one of the first major policy decisions of the current administration with direct implications for the students I will serve as a school interpreter. For deaf and hard of hearing students in classrooms, these impacts may be reflected in reduced services for families and a decreased number of trained and qualified professionals available to support them.
This situation will continue to evolve, and as a practitioner, it is my responsibility to remain informed about policy changes that affect public education. Even as funding priorities and standards shift, I remain responsible for providing the highest quality interpreting services possible. Additionally, I can encourage colleagues and educational team members to continue developing their skills and knowledge, regardless of changes in external expectations or requirements.
References
Arundel, K. (2025, September 12). Education Department terminates some grants for deafblind students. K-12
​
Diament, M. (2025, September 11). Trump administration yanks funds from dozens of special education programs. Disability
​
Lieberman, M. (2025, October 7). Trump funding cuts hit particularly hard for deaf and blind children. Education
​
To see the current priorities of the National Education Association in relation to supporting special education funding and IDEA, please visit their Special Education Issue Explainer.
​
For more information about the grants the U.S. Department of Education is currently administering, please visit their Grants for Individuals with Disabilities page.
Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools
Fall 2025
From 2004 to 2016, Miguel Luna Perez, a deaf student, attended Sturgis Public Schools in Michigan. Court filings state that he was never provided a qualified interpreter during his 12 years in the district, causing language deprivation, even as the district told his parents he was doing well. In 2016, a psychologist concluded that this deprivation resulted from the district’s negligence and that, with earlier access to language, Perez likely could have attended college rather than receiving only a certificate of completion instead of a diploma (The Daily Moth, 2023; RID & NAIE, 2023).
The situation involves violations of both the ADA and IDEA. Perez had already settled the IDEA claim, and the Supreme Court case addressed only the ADA issue. Sturgis argued the suit should be dismissed because Perez had not exhausted the full process of IDEA remedies. The Court instead considered whether he could seek financial compensation under the ADA. On March 21, 2023, it unanimously ruled in his favor, holding that students with disabilities do not need to exhaust all IDEA procedures before bringing an ADA claim. Unlike IDEA, which provides services and supports, the ADA allows students and families to seek monetary compensation (Modan & Arundel, 2023; RID & NAIE, 2023).
This case is significant because it highlights the serious risks DHH students face when unqualified interpreters are used or when interpreting services are denied entirely. It also brought national attention to the rights of students with disabilities (Johnson et al., 2023). From a school interpreter’s perspective, this underscores the ethical obligation to prevent language deprivation by maintaining high professional standards. In Washington, this includes meeting the minimum requirement of a 4.0 on the EIPA, as well as pursuing ongoing professional development, advanced certification, and adherence to national best-practice guidelines, such as those outlined by NAIE (2025). The case reinforces the need for interpreters to advocate for consistent national standards so all DHH students have equitable access to qualified educational interpreting.
This case is equally important for the entire educational team. It serves as a reminder of the legal and ethical responsibilities under IDEA and the ADA, as well as the necessity of interpreters participating meaningfully in IEP development and implementation (Shipman, 2023). Complacency in serving DHH students can lead to long-term linguistic and academic harm, and learning from the systemic failures in this case strengthens my resolve to continually deepen my skills to be an effective practitioner. While the Supreme Court cannot restore the years of lost language access Perez experienced, its ruling—affirming families’ ability to seek monetary compensation under the ADA—empowers families and encourages educators, including interpreters, to uphold the highest standards of service. Ultimately, this decision should motivate educational teams to collaborate more intentionally, ensure compliance with federal laws, and prioritize practices that protect the linguistic and educational rights of DHH students.
References
​
Johnson, L. J., Taylor, M. M., Schick, B. S., Brown, S., Bolster, L., & Girardin, E. G. (2023). Complexities in educational interpreting: An
investigation into patterns of Practice (2nd ed.). Interpreting Consolidated.
Modan, N., & Arundel, K. (2023, March 21). Supreme Court rules against district in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools special ed case. K-12 Dive.
https://www.k12dive.com/news/Supreme-Court-Perez-Sturgis-special-education/645589/
National Association of Interpreters in Education [NAIE]. (2025). Washington: Standards for permanent credential. https://naiedu.org/washington/
Shipman & Goodwin LLP. (2023). Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools: Supreme Court narrows IDEA exhaustion requirements.
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc., & National Association of Interpreters in Education. (2023, May 18). RID/NAIE joint position statement on
Perez v. Sturgis County Schools System. https://www.rid.org/rid-naie-joint-position-statement-perez-v-sturgis/
The Daily Moth. (2023, January 23). Supreme Court hears arguments on case involving deaf student [Video]. YouTube.
Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools
Fall 2025
When systems fail to provide appropriate access and oversight, the consequences for deaf and hard of hearing students can be severe, as illustrated by the case below. From 2004 to 2016, Miguel Luna Perez, a deaf student, attended Sturgis Public Schools in Michigan. Court filings state that he was never provided with a qualified interpreter during his twelve years in the district, resulting in language deprivation, even as the district assured his parents that he was doing well academically. In 2016, a psychologist concluded that this language deprivation was the result of the district’s negligence and that, had Perez been provided earlier access to language, he likely could have attended college rather than receiving only a certificate of completion instead of a diploma (The Daily Moth, 2023; RID & NAIE, 2023).
.png)
_edited_edited_edited.png)
The case involved violations of both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Perez had already settled his IDEA claim, and the Supreme Court case focused solely on the ADA issue. Sturgis Public Schools argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed because Perez had not exhausted all available IDEA remedies. The Court instead considered whether Perez could pursue financial compensation under the ADA. On March 21, 2023, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in his favor, holding that students with disabilities are not required to exhaust IDEA procedures before bringing claims under the ADA. Unlike IDEA, which focuses on services and supports, the ADA allows students and families to seek monetary damages. (Modan & Arundel, 2023; RID & NAIE, 2023)
​
This case is significant because it highlights the serious risks deaf and hard of hearing students face when unqualified interpreters are used or when interpreting services are denied altogether. It also brought national attention to the rights of students with disabilities and the legal consequences of failing to provide appropriate access (Johnson et al., 2023). From a school interpreter’s perspective, this decision underscores the ethical responsibility to prevent language deprivation by maintaining high professional standards. As a related service provider on the educational team, understanding cases like this informs how I uphold professional standards, advocate for appropriate services, and contribute meaningfully to IEP decision-making. In Washington, this includes meeting the minimum requirement of a 4.0 on the EIPA, pursuing ongoing professional development, obtaining advanced certification, and adhering to national best-practice guidelines, such as those outlined by NAIE (2025). This case reinforces the importance of advocating for consistent national standards so that all deaf and hard of hearing students have equitable access to qualified educational interpreting services.
​
The case is equally significant for the broader educational team. It serves as a reminder of the shared legal and ethical responsibilities under IDEA and the ADA, as well as the importance of interpreters’ meaningful participation in IEP development and implementation (Shipman & Goodman LLP, 2023). Complacency in serving deaf and hard of hearing students can result in long-term linguistic and academic harm. Reflecting on the systemic failures highlighted in this case strengthens my resolve to continue deepening my skills and effectiveness as a practitioner. While the Supreme Court’s ruling cannot restore the years of language access Perez lost, its affirmation that families may seek monetary compensation under the ADA empowers families and reinforces accountability. Ultimately, this decision should motivate educational teams to collaborate more intentionally, ensure compliance with federal law, and prioritize practices that safeguard the linguistic and educational rights of deaf and hard of hearing students.​​​
​
​Members of the IEP team must work collaboratively to ensure that each student receiving IEP services is provided a high-quality, free, appropriate public education (FAPE). Through collaboration, team members can hold one another accountable while working toward shared goals that support students in meeting their individualized educational needs and IEP objectives. This case reinforces that meaningful collaboration and accountability within IEP teams are essential to preventing language deprivation and ensuring students receive the access guaranteed to them under federal law.
References
​
Johnson, L. J., Taylor, M. M., Schick, B. S., Brown, S., Bolster, L., & Girardin, E. G. (2023). Complexities in educational interpreting: An
investigation into patterns of Practice (2nd ed.). Interpreting Consolidated.
Modan, N., & Arundel, K. (2023, March 21). Supreme Court rules against district in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools special ed case. K-12 Dive.
https://www.k12dive.com/news/Supreme-Court-Perez-Sturgis-special-education/645589/
National Association of Interpreters in Education [NAIE]. (2025). Washington: Standards for permanent credential. https://naiedu.org/washington/
Shipman & Goodwin LLP. (2023). Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools: Supreme Court narrows IDEA exhaustion requirements.
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc., & National Association of Interpreters in Education. (2023, May 18). RID/NAIE joint position statement on
Perez v. Sturgis County Schools System. https://www.rid.org/rid-naie-joint-position-statement-perez-v-sturgis/
The Daily Moth. (2023, January 23). Supreme Court hears arguments on case involving deaf student [Video]. YouTube.
For additional learning:
-
The official opinion from the Supreme Court:
-
Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 598 U.S. 142 (2023). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-887_k53m.pdf
-
-
Amicus Curiae Brief from American Association of School Administrators:
-
Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools. (2022, December 16). Brief of amicus curiae of the American Association of School Administrators. Thompson & Horton LLP. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-887/250190/20221216131602103_Perez%20v.%20Sturgis%20Public%20Schools%20AASA%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf
-
-
Original K-12 Dive Article Detailing the Case:
-
Modan, N. (2022, October 12). SCOTUS case could change special ed dispute resolution, settlement processes. K-12 Dive. https://www.k12dive.com/news/scotus-case-could-change-special-ed-dispute-resolution-settlement-processe/633937/
-
-
More Information about Language Deprivation from the National Association of the Deaf:
-
National Association of the Deaf. (2025). Implication of language deprivation for young deaf, deafblind, deafdisabled, and hearing children. https://www.nad.org/implications-of-language-deprivation-for-young-deaf-deafblind-deafdisabled-and-hard-of-hearing-children/
-
Stem Cell Research and The Deaf Community
Fall 2025
In addition to legal and policy decisions, emerging research and medical discourse also shape how deafness is understood and how educational decisions are made. School interpreters must stay up to date on research affecting the Deaf community, as these developments may ultimately impact the students we work with. Similar to the discourse surrounding cochlear implants when they were first approved and began to be used more widely, stem cell research related to deafness has become a widely discussed and controversial topic. While many medical professionals view this research as a promising treatment for deafness, the Deaf community offers a different perspective that centers on language, culture, and identity.
New research, such as that announced in early 2024 by the pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly and Company, has reported positive results, including hearing restoration following stem cell injection into the cochlear nerve of a genetically deaf child (Eli Lilly and Company, 2024). This preliminary research has led some medical professionals to believe that stem cell therapy could be a promising pathway for restoring hearing in deaf individuals. Professionals who approach deafness from a pathological perspective often view it as a condition that should be cured in order to improve quality of life. This perspective closely mirrors early medical discourse surrounding cochlear implants, when they were often framed as a near-complete “cure” for deafness, making current conversations around stem cell research similar to those previously held within the Deaf community (Cooper, 2019).
​
Alternatively, the Deaf community often views this research as a potential threat to Deaf language and culture. Because most deaf children are born to hearing parents, those parents may receive information that is rooted primarily in the pathological perspective, without being fully informed about linguistic, cultural, and community-based alternatives. Deaf educators and advocates are frequently excluded from the care teams supporting deaf children, limiting families’ exposure to Deaf-centered perspectives (Kilgore, 2019). When decisions are made without consideration of Deaf culture and language, harmful stereotypes about what it means to be d/Deaf may be reinforced. Over time, this can further marginalize a community that already must work to validate its language, culture, and identity.
​
School interpreters will work with students from diverse backgrounds and experiences. As a related service provider on the educational team, understanding these perspectives enables me to contribute more thoughtfully to IEP discussions and tailor my interpreting approach to each student’s experiences and needs. As members of the IEP and educational team, interpreters should understand where a student comes from and what interventions they may have experienced, including participation in or consideration of stem cell therapies. This information can and should inform an interpreter’s approach to their work, as well as the goals outlined in a student’s IEP. By remaining informed about emerging research and technologies, interpreters are better prepared to support students effectively. Interpreters must also be ready to advocate for visual access to communication and information when it is appropriate and effective for the individual student.
For additional context, I include a conversation I had with an experienced interpreting colleague on this topic to deepen my understanding of how experienced practitioners navigate these complex and evolving issues. I chose to speak with her because she has worked in the field for many years across multiple settings, including K–12 education, and brings a thoughtful, practice-based perspective. In our discussion, we examine multiple viewpoints and explore the potential long-term implications of stem cell therapy decisions for children. The full English interview with captions is available below, along with a written summary here.
​
​
​
Because this topic is nuanced and deeply personal, it is important to examine it from multiple perspectives. The resources below reflect a range of viewpoints present in both the field and the Deaf community and served as the basis of the conversation I had with Cyndi.
-
Burke, T. B. (2017, March 2). Gene therapy: A threat to the Deaf community? Impact Ethics. https://impactethics.ca/2017/03/02/gene-therapy-a-threat-to-the-deaf-community
​​
Teresa Blankmeyer Burke is a Deaf Associate Professor of Philosophy at Gallaudet University who writes on a forum dedicated to discussing ethics in health care and health policy. She argues that, beyond considerations of safety and effectiveness, serious concerns about bodily autonomy, identity formation, and cultural preservation within the Deaf community must be addressed before stem cell therapies can be considered ethical. While Burke acknowledges the value of research and medicine, she emphasizes that when outcomes have such significant implications for a cultural community, sensitivity and caution are required.
​
Burke raises concern that if hearing parents are given the opportunity to “fix” their deaf children through stem cell therapies, the child’s autonomy may be compromised by decisions that are irreversible. This becomes particularly problematic if the child later wishes to identify more deeply with the Deaf community and its language and culture. From this perspective, stem cell interventions risk reinforcing hearing-centric views and further discrediting the legitimacy and value of Deaf culture and the Deaf community.
​
-
Cord Blood Registry. (2024, July 23). Grace’s first gift: How one family is taking on hearing loss [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wp-yVFwsh3c​​
The video is produced by Cord Blood Registry, an organization that preserves umbilical cord blood and tissue to save stem cells for research and potential future use. The video centers on the Huber family, whose child, Grace, experienced improved hearing after receiving stem cell therapy. Also featured are the Baumgartners: Dr. James, a neurosurgeon and research scientist, and Linda, a listening and spoken language specialist.
​
The video presents hearing loss as a barrier that can prevent a child from reaching their full potential, while emphasizing hope through medical advancements. By planning ahead and preserving cord blood stem cells, the video suggests that conditions once thought incurable, such as hearing loss, may now be treatable with stem cell therapy. Although this research is still emerging, the video frames stem cell therapy as a promising medical intervention. From this perspective, parents who choose to preserve and later use newborn stem cells are portrayed as making responsible decisions to ensure their children have every opportunity for success. If research continues to yield outcomes similar to those presented, this medical approach is positioned as a way to support a child’s access to spoken language and speech.
​
-
Putz, K. (n.d.). Spotlight on stem cell research: Mixed feelings. Hands & Voices.
https://handsandvoices.org/articles/research/v15-3_stemcells.htm
The article is written by a mother who has experienced the transition from being hard of hearing to being deaf. As a child, she grew up trying to hide signs of her hearing loss, but later learned to embrace Deaf culture and sign language after becoming deaf at nineteen. She has many Deaf and hard of hearing family members, including her children, due to a genetic condition. From this perspective, she reflects that while widespread stem cell therapy may have been something she herself would have wanted earlier in life, it could erode aspects of the world's diversity.
​
Putz acknowledges that her personal experiences shape her perspective on this issue. As a child who felt embarrassed by her hearing loss, she understands why families or children in similar situations might want to participate in stem cell trials. However, after being introduced to ASL and the Deaf community as a young adult, she discovered a sense of belonging that profoundly shaped her life. She reflects that her life would be fundamentally different if the Deaf and hard of hearing people she has known had instead undergone treatments that made them hearing. Although she expresses mixed feelings throughout the article, she concludes by aligning with her daughter’s perspective that a world without deaf people would be a loss.
​​
Taken together, these perspectives illustrate the complexity of stem cell research as an educational issue and reinforce the importance of interpreters engaging with multiple viewpoints without privileging any one narrative. Our role requires providing unbiased, ethical services to students and families regardless of medical history or intervention choices. While interpreters may hold personal opinions about controversial topics, those beliefs must not influence the access we provide or the quality of our interpretations.​
References
​Cooper, A. (2019). Hear me out: Hearing each other for the first time: The implications of cochlear implant activation. Missouri Medicine, 116(6), 469-
471. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6913847/
Eli Lilly and Company. (2024, January 23). Positive phase 1/2 clinical trial data for an investigational gene therapy for genetic hearing loss to be
presented at the association for research in otolaryngology. https://investor.lilly.com/node/50201/pdf
​
Kilgore, T. (2019). Exploring the cochlear implant controversy: The role of and experience with Deaf culture for parents of pediatric cochlear implant
users. Ursidae: The Undergraduate Research Journal at the University of Northern Colorado, 5(2). https://digscholarship.unco.edu/urj/vol5/iss2/4
Overarching Reflection
Creating the newsfeeds on this page was a valuable experience for me for several reasons. Most notably, it reinforced the idea that knowledge truly is power. My decision to research certain topics, such as the state of the Department of Education, was initially fueled by fear. I found myself unsure about what was happening or what to expect in the future, which led me to choose this topic for further exploration. Through that process, I felt empowered by gaining a clearer understanding of what was actually occurring rather than relying on speculation or secondhand information.
​
This experience reminded me that even when situations feel overwhelming or have the potential to significantly impact the education of deaf and hard of hearing students, remaining informed is essential. Staying educated allows me to remain an active and engaged member of the profession and to use accurate information to collaborate more effectively with educational teams. Ultimately, this process reinforced the importance of approaching uncertainty with curiosity and intentional learning rather than avoidance.
​
In a similar vein, I was initially intimidated by topics such as the Supreme Court case and stem cell research. Because I do not come from a legal or scientific background, much of the terminology felt inaccessible at first. However, by engaging in my own research, I was able to build a stronger understanding of these issues. This experience reinforced that, as an interpreter, I will encounter topics and systems that I may not initially understand or have an established schema for, but that this does not limit my ability to learn and engage critically. These newsfeeds gave me practice applying research-based insights to interpreting contexts and strengthened my critical thinking skills.
​
Another insight I gained while creating this page was recognizing my hesitation to engage with topics that might be viewed as controversial. While I made a deliberate effort to keep the newsfeeds neutral and unbiased, I am aware that my personal perspectives may still be visible in the reflective portions of this work. In classroom interpreting, I cannot and will not allow my personal opinions to influence the access I provide. At the same time, I do hold values and beliefs about issues that directly affect the students I work with. Learning how to maintain professional boundaries while honoring those values is an area of ongoing growth for me. Developing awareness of when and where it is appropriate to engage in honest discussion about field-wide issues is something I will continue to practice as a professional.
​
Overall, these newsfeeds highlight the importance of remaining informed and reflective as a school interpreter, aligning with SIS Competency 9. As I move into professional practice, I intend to stay engaged with developments that affect the field, the educational system, and the students I serve. Doing so will allow me to align my practice with students’ needs, adapt to changing systems, and contribute meaningfully as a collaborator on educational teams.​​​