Systems & Collaboration
This Systems & Collaboration webpage demonstrates my knowledge of education as a complex system (C1). The system of education is made up of interconnected parts influenced by historical, legal, and social influences across time and proximity to people within the system. As a member working in this complex system, this page also demonstrates my knowledge of and ability to respectfully collaborate with the educational team (C4), using my knowledge of educational theories and practices to work effectively within the school system.
School Interpreting Series (SIS) Standards
SIS Competency 1
Analyze educational laws, state regulations, and school protocols that influence U.S. public educational systems and structures, ultimately impacting deaf and hard of hearing students and the support provided by educational professionals. (Knowledge)
SIS Competency 4
Collaborate with educational professionals, respecting the collective contribution of the different roles and responsibilities in schools, serving the unique educational needs of each deaf and hard of hearing student. (Knowledge & Skill)
This page includes a demonstration of Systems & Collaboration for:
This page also includes an overarching reflection and references.
In the United States, the K–12 education system is multi-layered and complex. From federal laws that govern student rights and outline special education requirements to the staff members who interact with students daily, numerous factors influence students’ educational access and experiences. School interpreters must understand and navigate these systems in order to provide meaningful access for deaf and hard of hearing students. Within these structures, interpreters must also collaborate with educators, administrators, and other stakeholders to meet students’ needs and ensure compliance with special education law.
This webpage demonstrates competency in the 1st and 4th SIS competencies through the artifacts presented below. By examining factors that impact students at multiple levels, analyzing observed classroom lessons, and presenting a decision-making scenario, I demonstrate an understanding of the legal regulations and systemic structures that shape K–12 education, as well as the collaboration required to support an effective educational environment.
Ecological System of a Deaf and Hard of Hearing Student
A student’s experience in school and their ability to access education depend on a number of factors, many of which extend beyond the classroom. The complexities a student experiences can be illustrated through Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory, which helps explain these layered influences, as shown in the artifact below (Sprouts, 2021). For school interpreters, this visual representation serves as a reminder of the multi-layered system they work within and that students navigate on a daily basis. It highlights how factors beyond the classroom influence interpreting decisions and collaboration in school settings.
To enlarge the photo, please click here.
Many factors influence a student’s experience within the K–12 education system. One way to examine these influences and how they interact is through Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory (Sprouts, 2021). Because I will be working as a school interpreter with deaf and hard of hearing students, my ecological system places the student at the center.
Microsystem: The layer closest to the student is the microsystem. This includes the people with whom the student has direct, regular contact, such as parents, siblings, other family members, teachers, and interpreters. Because these relationships are part of the student’s daily experience, they play a significant role in shaping the student’s development.
Mesosystem: The mesosystem consists of relationships among individuals within the student’s microsystem, even when the student is not directly involved in those interactions (Johnson et al., 2023). For example, a student’s relationship with their parents and siblings can influence their development in meaningful ways. I have experienced this personally as a younger sibling—observing how my parents interacted with my older sister influenced my own behavior, as I sought a similar positive relationship.
Exosystem: The exosystem includes influences that do not involve the student directly but still impact their development and educational experience. One example is a parent’s workplace. Employment policies that require long hours or frequent travel can shape family dynamics, which may, in turn, affect a student’s engagement and performance in school.
Macrosystem: The macrosystem encompasses broader societal influences such as laws, policies, cultural values, and social norms. For deaf and hard of hearing students, legislation outlining accommodations—such as IDEA and No Child Left Behind—has significantly shaped how public schools approach education and access. These policies influence classroom practices and expectations, even though students are often unaware of the legal frameworks that guide their educational experiences (IDEA, 2004; Lee, n.d.).
Chronosystem: The chronosystem reflects changes and transitions that occur over time. These may include personal life events such as the birth of a sibling, moving to a new home, parental divorce, or transitioning to a new school. Broader societal changes also play a role, such as the rise of the internet and social media, as well as shifts in education following the COVID-19 pandemic. These changes can influence many aspects of a student’s life, including how they access and experience education (Guy-Evans, 2024).
It is important to note that these systems are constantly interconnected, as illustrated by the arrows in the model. A change or event in one system can ripple through the others, influencing the student’s overall development and educational experience.
Additional sources informing the model: Clerc Center (n.d.); Guy-Evans (2024); IDEA (2004); Johnson et al. (2023); Lee (n.d.); Sprouts (2021); Washington Office (n.d.); Washington State (n.d.).
It is a personal philosophy of mine to always do my best to treat people with kindness and an open mind, because you never truly know what others are experiencing or dealing with beneath the surface. Creating this artifact resonated with me because it models the many visible and less visible factors that shape the experiences of the students I will work with. Developing the model allowed me to engage with this belief on a deeper level by connecting it directly to the school system and the role of a school interpreter.
Prior to the experience, I understood that a student's family and major life events can play a significant role in their development and ability to engage in the classroom. However, some of the less obvious factors, like the ones in the macrosystem for me, are not ones I fully considered before. For example, in the macrosystem, I placed access to quality healthcare. Previously, I understood that if children themselves did not have access to the healthcare they needed, it would impact their ability to attend school and participate in class. When I zoomed out and considered this from a macrosystem perspective, I began to question how a lack of quality healthcare across an entire community might affect a student. How does this shared experience within a community trickle down to impact the student at an individual level? Of course, the answers to these questions can only be definitively answered in each individual situation. This process has given me greater comfort moving between the broader system and the lived experience of individual students. Understanding how each level interacts with the others, as well as viewing the system as a whole, allows me to create a more in-depth and complete picture of the student.
This framework informs my classroom interpreting practice in many ways. One of the most significant impacts of creating this artifact was recognizing how much is occurring in students’ lives beyond what is immediately visible. In day-to-day work, it is easy to focus only on the challenges directly in front of us, perhaps existing within our microsystems, and not consider everything else that has an impact on us at any given time. By considering the broader systems and factors at play, we cannot only better understand the actions that may be necessary to make positive change, but also have deeper compassion for ourselves and others in the moment. If I am in a situation where a student is having a difficult time and I find myself feeling challenged by their decisions or behaviors, I can recall the ecological system and know that many factors are impacting that student at that moment. Understanding how these systems interact allows me to approach students, colleagues, and families with greater patience, awareness, and professional compassion. This awareness also supports more effective collaboration, as it encourages me to listen carefully to other team members’ perspectives and recognize how different systems shape their roles and decisions.
Instructional Assessment
An Instructional Assessment highlights one of the most important principles of interpreting: it is impossible to interpret content effectively if it is not fully understood. If a school interpreter does not have a deep understanding of both the content and the teacher’s instructional intent, deaf and hard of hearing students may not have equitable access to classroom participation. By completing instructional assessments, interpreters can develop a comprehensive understanding of lesson content and delivery, supporting clearer and more effective interpretations.
To complete the instructional assessment, I observed four live, in-person classroom lessons and two recorded video lessons. I was able to observe a variety of grade levels and subjects, including 3rd-grade Math, 5th-grade Math, Social Studies, and English/Language Arts, 8th-grade Science, and 12th-grade Algebra II. Additionally, I discussed my observations with instructional aides and interpreters to gain further insight into strategies that support comprehension and access for deaf and hard of hearing students.
The instructional assessment demonstrates the importance of interpreters maintaining a clear understanding of lesson goals, curriculum, academic standards, and the instructional rationale to provide clear and effective interpretations. This connects to the 1st SIS competency by demonstrating awareness of the school procedures and instructional structures that directly impact interpreting work. Observing these dynamics in practice clarified how the interpreter’s role fits within the broader educational system.
This artifact also aligns with the 4th SIS competency by highlighting how interpreters collaborate with teachers to align interpreting approaches with instructional goals, thereby enabling more effective access for students. Conversations with other members of the education team during these observations reinforced the value of professional collaboration in the classroom. Prior to this experience, I had not fully considered what classroom collaboration could look like in practice or the impact it could have on interpreting effectiveness. Ultimately, it creates a better learning environment for deaf and hard of hearing students.
Completing the instructional assessment strengthened my ability to analyze lessons for the key themes that should be emphasized in interpretation. I observed effective interpreting strategies in practice, including the use of visual aids, intentional role-space decisions, and minimized lag time. Attending to these factors supports interpretations that convey meaning effectively while remaining aligned with both immediate lesson objectives and broader IEP goals. This has since influenced my decision-making in interpreting, as I now consider how lesson goals, instructional structures, and collaboration with teachers shape effective interpretation.
Decision-Making in Action: Family Life Class
The decisions made by a school interpreter in the classroom have implications across the entire educational system. The following artifact includes an analysis of a fictional scenario in which I envisioned myself as the interpreter. In this scenario, I was interpreting for a fourth-grade student named Molly. Molly is a motivated student who sometimes struggles with patience during the learning process. In science class, the students had just begun a sex education unit, which they referred to as family life class, that would continue for the next two weeks. In the final minutes of class, just before lunch, Molly asked me, as the interpreter, “whq WHAT MEAN (ref fs) fs-S-E-X?” At that moment, the teacher was assisting another student who was trying to catch up on homework after being out sick.
During the lesson, Molly appeared attentive but did not respond to the content as her peers did, many of whom appeared physically uncomfortable or laughed as they viewed the teacher’s visual aids. The school district’s official sex education policy is abstinence-only. Teachers are expected to teach biological functions and anatomy separately and to refrain from providing further explanation of intercourse. During the interpretation, I fingerspelled “S-E-X” and used the sign “X on the chin” (similar to the sign for Deaf but with an “X” handshape) to represent concepts such as “the sex of the baby is determined by XY chromosomes,” “female sex organs,” and “sex can lead to pregnancy.”
In considering how to approach this situation, several factors came into play. Within the system, I needed to consider both district policy and the student’s parents’ expectations. It would have been inappropriate for me to overstep my role by providing information that was not aligned with school expectations. Additionally, there was a time constraint, as lunch was approaching and maintaining the class schedule was important. Another key factor was that the teacher was actively supporting another student. I could not immediately seek guidance without pulling attention away from a student who also needed support. As a collaborator within the system, I needed to respect that the teacher was responsible for many students, while I was assigned specifically to Molly.
I chose to begin by clarifying what Molly was asking. It was possible that her question was linguistically motivated and that she needed clarification about the signs I had used during interpretation. In the video below, this is where I begin my response. After clarifying the lexical meaning, I imagined that Molly indicated her question was not about vocabulary but about the concept itself. At that point, I briefly explained my role as the interpreter and how it differs from that of the teacher to avoid stepping into an instructional role that would conflict with district policy. To validate her curiosity while maintaining appropriate boundaries, I asked whether she would like to write her question down so I could pass it along to the family life teacher for them to answer in class the following day. I also noted that lunch was about to begin. This approach balanced maintaining professional boundaries with preserving trust, allowing Molly to view me as a supportive resource while still working within the constraints of the educational system.
Video Language: ASL
After addressing the situation with Molly, I knew it was important to notify relevant members of the educational team. I chose to contact the family life teacher and the Teacher of the Deaf, as they were the most appropriate team members for this time-sensitive situation. Because Molly would likely want an answer to her question soon, I wanted to involve the professionals best positioned to provide accurate information and follow up appropriately. They were also the most appropriate contacts to communicate with Molly’s parents regarding her questions.
The email below represents the type of collaboration I would initiate with these team members to respect their roles and expertise within the system. Through this collaborative approach, I am confident that we could provide thoughtful, appropriate support for Molly during this learning opportunity.
Working through this scenario highlights the importance of using systems thinking when making decisions in the classroom. As an individual, my instinct was to tell Molly the information she wanted, driven by my personal values around information access. However, when considering systems thinking and the importance of collaboration in the school setting, I realized that I needed to prioritize a different approach. Being an effective school interpreter requires thinking beyond what I would do as an individual and considering how my decisions impact the broader system, which reflects the systems awareness required in the 1st SIS competency.
In this scenario, acting on my initial impulse could have had broader ramifications, including going against district policy and potentially against Molly’s parents’ wishes. The decision demonstrated above reflects respect for both the system and my colleagues within it. I felt empowered to clarify Molly’s question within the boundaries of my role—first determining whether it was a linguistic issue—while maintaining collaboration and ethical practice through communication with the appropriate colleagues, consistent with the 4th SIS competency.
Moving forward, I will approach similar situations through a systems lens, working within professional boundaries while still prioritizing student access and team collaboration. Taking time to apply this perspective before acting will strengthen my decision-making and effectiveness as a practitioner in school settings.
Overarching Reflection
This page demonstrates my growth in the first SIS competency, which emphasizes understanding the laws, structures, and systems that impact deaf and hard of hearing students in the classroom. Through the SIS courses, I have developed stronger skills in analyzing how these systems affect students and, ultimately, the interpreting product I create. This growth matters because interpreters do not operate outside of these systems; our daily decisions are shaped by them. Understanding how laws, instructional structures, and school policies interact allows me to make informed, ethical choices that directly affect a student’s access in real time.
The ecological systems framework, in particular, expanded my ability to examine education from multiple perspectives. Rather than focusing on a single layer of a situation, I now intentionally analyze how expectations at the macrosystem and pressures within the microsystem intersect. This helps me recognize potential tensions among instructional goals, legal requirements, and classroom realities related to access.
These learning experiences collectively demonstrate how I now analyze interpreting work within highly complex, layered educational systems. Through these artifacts, I show increased professional judgment by evaluating choices in relation to instructional intent, legal requirements, and collaboration with educational team members. This reflects my readiness to function within real classrooms, where access must be negotiated quickly, collaboratively, and with clear awareness of institutional constraints.
Before beginning the SIS courses, I understood that school interpreting carried significant responsibility. Through this coursework, I have developed an even clearer understanding of the larger educational systems I will work within and the professional responsibilities that come with that role. Across the artifacts on this page, a pattern emerges: access is shaped not by a single factor but by the interactions among systems that influence instructional priorities, professional roles, and the decisions interpreters make in the moment. This page demonstrates my readiness to navigate real school environments where access is shaped by policy, instructional practices, and collaboration. Rather than viewing these factors as obstacles, I now understand them as variables that require intentional analysis and professional judgment to support meaningful access.
References
Clerc Center. (n.d.). Education of the deaf act. https://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/ccsp-2020/education-of-the-deaf-act/
Guy-Evans, O. (2024). Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/bronfenbrenner.html
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/
An investigation into patterns of practice (2nd Ed.). Interpreting Consolidated.
Lee, A. M. I. (n.d.). What is No Child Left Behind (NCLB)? Understood. https://www.understood.org/en/articles/no-child-left-behind-nclb-what-you-need-to-know
Sprouts. (2021). Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems: 5 forces impacting our lives [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6pUQ4EDHeQ
Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. (n.d.). Resources by subject area. https://ospi.k12.wa.us/student-success/resources-subject-area
Washington State Professional Educator Standards Board. (n.d.). Educators of the deaf and visually impaired.