I see it often. A hard of hearing student, who uses “listening and spoken language” (they can hold a conversation with you), has a sign language interpreter in their classes. Inevitably, the IEP team begins to wonder:

Is this interpreter actually needed?

For many teams, this question feels like a tug-of-war. On one side is the commitment to accessibility and equity. On the other are doubts and objections that surface time and again:

• “The student doesn’t watch the interpreter.”

• “They don’t know enough sign language to benefit.”

• “An interpreter is too costly if it isn’t the best fit.”

These concerns are real—and they deserve careful consideration. But they also can’t be the end of the conversation. The real question isn’t just, “Does the student need an interpreter?” It’s, “How are we ensuring this student has full access to instruction, peers, and school life?”

This very topic was the focus of a training I recently led: “4 Things to Ask When Determining if a Hard of Hearing Student Needs an Interpreter.” You can watch the full recording HERE .

Here are the four questions every IEP team should ask.

1. How much auditory access does the student really have in the classroom?

Being able to converse one-on-one in a quiet space is not the same as accessing instruction in a bustling classroom. Distance, noise, multiple speakers, and fast pacing make listening far more challenging than many people realize.

That’s why the Functional Listening Evaluation (FLE) is so critical. It replicates classroom conditions—listening from 12 feet away, in background noise, without visual cues like lipreading. The FLE also measures the benefit of a remote microphone system. But here’s the catch: you must pay close attention to performance without the remote mic—especially if the student resists wearing it or teachers are inconsistent in using it.

If a student is accessing less than 90–95% of instruction, additional supports—including an interpreter—must be on the table.

2. What are the student’s sign language skills?

Even if auditory access is limited, interpreters can only bridge the gap if the student has enough sign language to understand them. A strong foundation is essential. Without it, students will default to whatever feels easier—even if that’s incomplete listening.

A common misconception is that placing a student in front of an interpreter will naturally “teach” them sign language. In reality, students need intentional sign language instruction and rich opportunities with signing peers to build this foundation.

This is where targeted IEP goals matter. To support schools, The Online Itinerant is launching an IEP Goal Bundle on Sign Language Development—providing assessments, measurable goals, and activities to strengthen sign skills. Even more, it offers recommendations on the best role for sign language in a student’s education—whether that’s through a signing aid, language facilitator, or classroom interpreter.

3. What has the school done to set the student up for success?

When interpreting comes up, familiar objections surface:

• “The student doesn’t watch.”

• “They don’t use the interpreter.”

• “They aren’t benefiting.”

These may be true observations—but they don’t always mean the interpreter is the wrong support. More often, they mean the student has never been explicitly taught how to use one.

Using an interpreter is a skill. Students need direct instruction on roles and expectations, how to advocate, and how to maximize the interpreter’s support. Think of it like new technology: you wouldn’t expect someone to use it to its fullest without first exploring the manual and learning its features. The same is true for interpreters.

To guide this process, The Online Itinerant is releasing an IEP Goal Bundle on Interpreter Use, with concrete goals, activities, and progress monitoring. Instead of abandoning interpreting too soon, schools can now build student readiness step by step, ensuring success.

4. What’s the plan if an interpreter isn’t the right fit?

The truth is, interpreters aren’t always the best match for every hard of hearing student. And given the cost of providing a full-time interpreter, schools are right to ask tough questions.

But here’s the bottom line: saying no to an interpreter can never mean saying no to access. If interpreting isn’t the solution, what else will be in place? Options include:

• Real-time captioning (CART, C-Print, or speech-to-text)

• Direct support from a Teacher of the Deaf (TOD)

• A deaf language model or fluent signing staff member

• Intentional use of visuals, pre-teaching, and repetition

• A quieter, more supportive learning environment

Every student deserves a “yes” to access—even if the interpreter isn’t the answer.

Final Thoughts

Deciding on interpreter services requires nuance, data, and above all, a commitment to doing what is best for the student. By asking these four questions—about auditory access, sign language skills, understanding of how to use an interpreter, and alternatives—IEP teams can move past assumptions and toward decisions grounded in evidence.

And with the new IEP Goal Bundles from The Online Itinerant—on Sign Language Development and Interpreter Use—schools now have the tools to directly address the very challenges that often cause hesitation. These resources provide a roadmap to build readiness, track progress, and ensure that no hard of hearing student is left navigating the classroom without access.

Want to learn more? Watch my full training, “4 Things to Ask When Determining if a Hard of Hearing Student Needs an Interpreter” HERE .

Do you want the assessments, Goal Banks, teaching activities, and data collection forms? Join the Professional Academy HERE.

Because the real question isn’t just “Does the student need an interpreter?”
It’s “Are we doing everything possible to set this student up to thrive?”