>>Note if you ever host a tournament with a deaf team attending, that you have an interpreter for each team. Most interpreters charge around $300 per hour (at least the ones affiliated with our university), so you might want to check with learning needs and see if you can't get the school to foot the bill (what we had to do since Model didn't bring their own and Gallaudet couldn't spare any- make sure you get interpreters at least two weeks in advance of the tournament). << I must renew my objection to the use of ASL interpreters. There's two ways that ASL interpreters could be used; each gives someone an unfair advantage. First method: Moderator reads the questions as usual for the benefit of the hearing team. Interpreter translates as s/he hears. Disadvantage: Non-hearing team receives clues a fraction of a second later--crucial, as we know. Second method: Moderator reads the questions as usual; interpreter has own copy of questions and gives signs from them. I'm led to believe that grammatical differences between English and ASL may cause clues to be given in a different order to the different teams. Disadvantage: Depending on the question, one team or the other hears clues in a different order. I'd support a projection system. Tech-heads--would it be possible to automatically convert a block of data the size of a whole NAQT set into some sort of file (powerpoint presentation?) that contains one word per slide, and is easily indexed for moving between tossups and boni, keeping track of which tossup and bonus is up next, and skipping to the next round? --M.W.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST