More Than a Performance: Learning Through Shared Practice
Reflecting on Catherine King, Donna Jewell and Katy Smillie-Wilcox’s session about collaboration, comedy and professional learning
Three interpreters arrive at a comedy venue.
One has nearly 30 years of experience interpreting stand-up but has begun to feel disconnected from the work. Another is preparing to interpret live comedy for the first time. The third does not yet feel ready to take the stage but wants to observe, contribute and understand how comedy can move successfully between English and BSL.
There is no tutor, training plan or certificate. Nobody has formally enrolled on a course.
Over three nights, they watch, prepare, interpret, observe and talk for hours about what worked, what did not and what they might try differently next time.
Was this professional development?
Catherine King, Donna Jewell and Katy Smillie-Wilcox opened their session at The Together Conference 2026 by describing it as a CPD activity that was not really a CPD activity, but actually was.
Their snapshot session, Three Interpreters Walk into the Fringe: Collaboration, Comedy and CPD, explored what happened when professional learning developed naturally within a real interpreting assignment.
The presenters were clear that they were not offering a formal model or a blueprint that could simply be reproduced. Their experience was one particular moment involving three comedians, three interpreters and three days of shared work. However, the ingredients within that experience raise important questions about how interpreters and translators learn, how trust develops and whether some of our most useful CPD happens outside a training room.
When experience stops feeling like development
Catherine had been interpreting stand-up comedy for almost 30 years. It was a form of performance she had loved from a young age and felt fortunate to include within her professional practice.
However, by 2019, the work had begun to feel stale.
Comedy interpreting can be surprisingly solitary. An interpreter may arrive at a festival alone, prepare in whatever small space is available, complete the performance and then leave without an opportunity to reflect with colleagues or the Deaf audience.
At a large venue, the audience may disappear quickly after the performance. At a smaller event, the interpreter may not be recognised once they leave the stage. They are then left to replay the difficult moments alone, with nobody available to discuss why a joke worked, why another did not or what could have been done differently.
Catherine had begun telling herself that the Fringe no longer paid enough, the work was too difficult, she was too old or perhaps no longer very good at it. When she looked more closely, she realised that comedy had not changed. She had lost a sense of connection and no longer felt that she was learning.
She had also experienced professional learning environments in which horizontal violence, misuse of professional power and damaging feedback had made CPD feel unsafe. Formal gatherings became something to avoid rather than places of collegiate support. She increasingly turned towards books and online presentations, where she could learn at a distance without risking being judged in the room.
This experience will be familiar to professionals far beyond performance interpreting. Someone can remain experienced and capable while gradually becoming isolated from reflective conversation.
Completing more work does not automatically mean continuing to develop. Experience needs somewhere to be examined, questioned and understood.
Three different starting points
The group came together after the COVID-19 restrictions had interrupted live performance.
In August 2021, the Edinburgh Comedy Festival held a limited number of events under the restrictions still in place at the time. Catherine wanted to return to the work without losing the professional connections she had built during lockdown, so she invited colleagues to join her.
Donna and Katy responded immediately.
Donna brought extensive community and justice interpreting experience but had not previously interpreted stand-up comedy. Her interest in the form went beyond watching comedians. In 2019, she had taken an evening course to learn about comedy structures, styles and conventions, and had written and performed her own short set.
She understood the language of comedy and was fascinated by the way jokes worked. What she did not yet know was how to take that knowledge onto a stage as a BSL interpreter.
Katy also had interpreting experience and had written and performed stand-up. She did not feel ready to interpret a live comedy set herself, but she knew that she could observe, discuss the material and contribute to the team.
The three were therefore not arranged into a simple expert, trainee and passive observer hierarchy. Each arrived with different forms of knowledge and different reasons for taking part.
Catherine had extensive comedy-interpreting experience but needed renewed connection and reflection. Donna wanted to move from familiar community and justice settings into a new performance domain. Katy wanted to learn through observation while using her knowledge of comedy and interpreting to support the others.
Their individual aims were different, but compatible.
The work itself created the learning
The event took place over three nights at the Corn Exchange in Edinburgh.
On the first night, Catherine, Donna and Katy watched all three comedians, Craig Hill, Kai Humphreys and Daniel Sloss. On the second night, Catherine interpreted Craig Hill while Donna and Katy observed. On the final night, Donna interpreted Kai Humphreys, Catherine interpreted Daniel Sloss and Katy continued in the observing role.
Donna described learning simply by watching Catherine prepare. Catherine did not stop to deliver a lesson or explain every action. Donna and Katy saw who she approached, what questions she asked and how she checked lighting, sound, backstage access and contact with the comedians.
They also observed how Catherine balanced the interpreter’s preparation needs with the fact that the comedians were carrying out their own pre-performance routines.
This is an important form of learning that can be difficult to capture within formal training. Professional judgement is often visible through small actions.
Who does an experienced interpreter speak to first?
How do they introduce the role?
Which problem do they address immediately, and which do they decide can wait?
How do they ask for what they need without creating unnecessary pressure for someone else?
A developing practitioner may learn a great deal by being allowed to remain close enough to observe those decisions.
Comedy requires more than an accurate sentence
Stand-up comedy places particular demands on an interpreter.
The interpreter needs to consider timing, cultural references, wordplay, character, audience reaction and the energy of the performance. A joke that is linguistically accurate but arrives after the spoken audience has already laughed can separate the Deaf audience from the shared response in the room.
Preparation cannot therefore be limited to finding equivalent vocabulary.
Catherine and Donna received permission to record the comedians they would interpret. They listened repeatedly and used the recordings as the basis for discussion.
The audience reaction became part of the material. They could hear where people laughed, where they groaned and where a joke produced little response. This allowed the team to ask what made the joke funny, what the comedian was trying to achieve and how that effect might be represented visually in BSL.
One example involved a comedian describing someone attempting to begin a Mexican wave that failed to move around the audience. Rather than only translating the description, the team could think about what the failed movement looked like and how the visual nature of the event might support the interpretation.
Their preparation became collaborative problem-solving. They were not searching for one hidden correct translation. They were testing possibilities against the meaning, timing and audience response of the performance.
Learning to occupy the stage
The final night was Donna’s first experience interpreting stand-up comedy.
Before the performance, Catherine shared some of her own physical preparation. She encouraged Donna to walk with purpose, as though trying to catch a bus without quite running, and to use a strong, upright “Superman” position to influence her sense of readiness and entitlement to occupy the stage.
The advice was not about adopting a theatrical pose throughout the performance. It was about entering the space with intention rather than apologising physically for being there.
Donna described beginning the performance nervously but gradually moving into a state of flow with Kai Humphreys. At times, their physical movements mirrored one another without rehearsal.
She also noticed herself slipping back into the formal posture she associated with court interpreting. She consciously relaxed, placed her hands in her pockets and shifted her attention towards a particularly visual part of the comedian’s set.
That moment showed how deeply our familiar professional habits can remain within the body. Donna had the language and interpreting experience, but this setting required a different physical presence.
Afterwards, she experienced an intense shared excitement with the comedian and immediately wanted to hear what Katy had observed. The performance had given her the experience, but the learning depended on having people available to help her understand it.
The person who does not interpret may still be part of the team
Katy’s role was especially interesting because she did not produce an interpretation on stage.
She initially expected to shadow and learn, but realised that she was also bringing something useful to the process. She understood comedy, had performed her own material and could watch the interpretations without carrying the pressure of live production.
That distance gave her space to notice how jokes landed and consider different BSL possibilities when Catherine or Donna wanted to discuss a particular choice.
Katy described this as a form of team interpreting. She never raised her hands on stage or spoke into a microphone, but she was involved in the discussions, preparation and reflection from the beginning.
Her role challenges a narrow understanding of contribution.
In professional teams, the most visible person is not always the only person doing meaningful work. Observation, analysis and thoughtful feedback may affect the final interpretation even when the person offering them is not seen by the audience.
Katy also experienced the post-performance excitement alongside Catherine and Donna. She had not simply watched their work from outside. She had become part of the shared process that produced it.
Trust cannot be announced into existence
The presenters’ discussion moved beyond comedy into the professional culture surrounding feedback.
Katy described interpreting as a profession that has not always felt psychologically safe. Competition for work, harsh training experiences, bullying and the idea that interpreters need a “thick skin” have made many practitioners reluctant to interpret in front of colleagues.
When professional opportunities are imagined as one fixed pie, supporting another interpreter can feel like giving away part of your own work. Feedback becomes connected to judgement and competition rather than shared improvement.
The three presenters wanted to interrupt that cycle, but they did not begin by declaring that they had created a safe space.
As Katy observed, one person’s safe space may be another person’s nightmare. Simply announcing that a space is safe can ignore differences in power, history and experience.
In their case, trust developed through what they did.
They were honest about why they had joined the project and what they hoped to gain. Catherine allowed others to see her working process, including the uncertainty and decision-making that usually remained private. Donna and Katy were then able to share their own concerns without pretending to know more than they did.
Trust also developed through acceptance. The team recognised that some jokes and some interpreting choices would not land as hoped.
This did not mean that quality was unimportant. Deaf audience members had paid for an enjoyable night and deserved good access.
However, accepting that failure was possible made it safer to try. Ideas that might otherwise have remained untested could be discussed and explored.
Moving away from master and apprentice
When the presenters later tried to describe the experience, they were uncomfortable with labels such as master and apprentice.
Those terms created a hierarchy that did not reflect what had happened. Catherine held more experience in comedy interpreting, but the learning did not move in only one direction.
They eventually described the group as a learning triad involving three roles:
the experienced
the learner
the witness
In this framing, experience means having lived through something, made mistakes and developed knowledge over time. It does not mean having completed learning.
The learner is actively moving through a process rather than passively receiving the expert’s knowledge.
The witness observes closely and reflects something back to the other people. Their role allows someone working in the moment to later see aspects of their performance that would have been impossible to notice while interpreting.
The roles were not fixed. Catherine, Donna and Katy moved between them.
Catherine had extensive experience but learned through Katy’s observation and Donna’s developing approach. Donna was learning a new domain while contributing knowledge from comedy, justice and community interpreting. Katy was the dedicated witness but also offered interpretation ideas and learned from the others.
A non-hierarchical approach does not pretend that everyone has the same knowledge. It allows differences in experience to exist without turning one person into the source of all legitimate answers.
Experienced professionals need witnesses too
One of Catherine’s most important reflections concerned the effect of feeling unseen.
An experienced interpreter may receive less feedback as their career continues.
Colleagues assume they no longer need it, while the interpreter may hesitate to invite observation because earlier feedback has been damaging or judgemental.
However, experience does not remove the need for reflection.
Catherine described self-reflection during the heat of a live assignment as being almost impossible. The interpreter is already processing language, timing, audience response and performance.
Having Katy as a dedicated witness meant that Catherine and Donna could remain in the moment knowing that someone else was paying attention and gathering information.
Katy’s observations allowed Catherine to recognise parts of her own work differently. Catherine could also see Donna’s shift from a formal platform-interpreting posture into a more intentional performance presence and experienced pride in seeing her feel the fear and continue.
Professional witnessing can therefore do more than identify mistakes. It can help someone recognise growth, habits and strengths that they cannot easily see from inside the work.
This is relevant across all stages of a career. Newly qualified interpreters need supported opportunities, but established professionals also need colleagues willing to observe them thoughtfully.
The debrief made the experience useful
Each night, the group spent time reflecting together.
After the final performance, they talked for so long that the Corn Exchange was closing. They drove to a nearby supermarket intending to continue in the café, but COVID restrictions meant it was closed.
Rather than end the conversation, they sat in their cars in the car park with the doors open and continued talking for hours.
The discussions focused on interpreting choices, audience reactions, jokes that had worked and moments they might approach differently in future.
The performance produced the experience. The debrief helped them process it and make sense of what had happened.
Without that conversation, each interpreter could have left with a strong emotional reaction but only a partial understanding of the work. Donna might have remembered mainly the nerves and excitement. Catherine might have returned to replaying difficult moments alone. Katy might have held useful observations that were never shared.
Reflection turned their separate experiences into shared learning.
The interpretation presented on stage belonged to the person producing it in that moment, but its preparation and development had become collective.
CPD does not always look like CPD
The presenters repeatedly emphasised that they were not offering a new formal CPD model.
They had not recreated the exact experience since, and they did not suggest that every assignment should become an informal training opportunity.
There are practical and ethical limits. Permission is needed before observers join an assignment. Deaf audiences and performers should not unknowingly become part of someone’s training. Responsibilities, confidentiality and payment need to be clear.
However, the session showed that professional development can emerge within real work when certain conditions are present.
These included:
a shared purpose
permission for observation
openness about experience and uncertainty
time to prepare together
acceptance that different people bring different knowledge
space to experiment responsibly
a witness who can observe without carrying the performance pressure
a proper debrief afterwards
trust that is built through behaviour rather than declared in advance
The certificate was not what made the experience valuable. The value came from the way the three practitioners worked together.
What might this look like outside comedy?
Most interpreters and translators will not be preparing for a stand-up performance at the Edinburgh Fringe, but the underlying principles can apply elsewhere.
An experienced community interpreter could invite a developing colleague to observe how they prepare for a complex but suitable assignment, with the agreement of everyone involved.
A translation team could watch a signed draft together and discuss audience, register, structure and visual choices without treating one person as the final authority.
Co-workers could arrange a proper reflection after a demanding conference rather than leaving immediately once the booking ends.
A practitioner entering a new domain could contribute through research, observation or preparation before taking responsibility for live delivery.
An experienced professional could ask a trusted colleague to witness one area of their work and offer focused feedback.
The purpose is not to turn every workplace into a classroom. It is to notice the learning already taking place and give it enough structure to become useful.
What are we passing on?
The theme for The Together Conference 2026 was Pick It Up, Pass It On.
This session showed how much is passed between professionals without a formal lesson taking place.
Donna and Katy picked up knowledge by watching Catherine carry out routine preparation. Catherine received renewed energy, connection and insight through their presence. Katy’s observations helped the others see their work from a position they could not occupy while performing.
The three presenters also asked us to consider what kind of professional culture we pass on.
Do we treat knowledge as one fixed pie, where helping another practitioner means losing part of our own share?
Do we teach developing interpreters that they need a thick skin and should expect judgement?
Do experienced interpreters hide their uncertainty, leaving others to believe that professional expertise means always knowing the answer?
Alternatively, we can pass on a culture where people are honest about what they know, willing to show their process and able to offer feedback without using it to establish superiority.
As the presenters reflected, one candle does not become dimmer by lighting another. The combined light becomes greater.
New insights can emerge through shared work
The theme for The Together Conference 2027 is New Insights, Shared Purpose.
Catherine, Donna and Katy did not begin with a research project or formal learning model. They began with a shared piece of work and a willingness to let one another into the process.
Perhaps you have developed a useful approach through co-working, mentoring, observation or shared reflection.
You may have experience of professional witnessing, non-hierarchical learning or supporting someone into a new domain without positioning yourself as the person with every answer.
You might also have examined psychological safety, horizontal violence, feedback or competition within interpreting and translation.
These experiences could contribute to The Together Conference 2027.
The Call for Papers opens on Monday 5 October 2026. You do not need to decide whether your proposal belongs in the live programme or the extended conference. Submit your idea and the review panel will consider where accepted contributions fit best.
Poster submissions will also be welcomed for professional projects, developing models, reflective practice, early findings and shared learning initiatives.
New insights do not always arrive through a lecture. Sometimes they emerge in a green room, during preparation or in an ASDA car park after the official work has ended.
The shared purpose is what allows those moments to become something we can carry forward.
Using this article for unstructured CPD
You may wish to reflect on one or more of the following questions:
Where have your most useful professional learning experiences taken place?
How much of your development has happened through formal training, and how much through real work and professional conversation?
Have previous experiences of feedback made you reluctant to interpret or translate in front of colleagues?
What behaviour helps you begin to trust a co-worker?
What is the difference between declaring a space safe and building trust through actions?
When have you learned by observing an experienced professional’s ordinary preparation and decision-making?
Could someone who is not producing the interpretation or translation still make an important contribution to the team?
How might the roles of experienced practitioner, learner and witness move between people?
Do experienced professionals receive enough thoughtful feedback and professional witnessing?
What happens to learning when there is no time to debrief after the work?
How could you create a reflective conversation after a future assignment without turning it into judgement?
What would make it safer for you to experiment, ask questions or admit uncertainty?
Are there appropriate ways to support colleagues into unfamiliar domains without placing clients or audiences at risk?
What knowledge or working process could you share more openly with another interpreter or translator?
Is there a collaborative experience or learning approach that could become a 2027 conference proposal or poster?
A short professional reflection on these questions could be recorded as part of your unstructured CPD.
Comments