The Investigation of Regular Teachers’ Special Educational Background and Professional Growth at Inclusive Education in Taipei County Elementary Schools

• Main Authors: Wen-Pin Yu, 游文彬
• Other Authors: Li-yue Cheng
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2006
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/63734013995426175744

碩士 === 國立臺北教育大學 === 特殊教育學系碩士班 === 94 === This study aims to discuss the regular teachers’ professional background and professional needs on special education in elementary schools in Taipei County. A total of two hundred and fifty regular teachers with handicapped students in their classroom were selected randomly to answer the questionnaires. The questionnaire is designed to explore the regular teachers’ professional background and professional needs on special education. Professional backgrounds on special education among regular teachers were analyzed based on percentage and frequency distribution. Chi-square test and environmental variables were used to analyze the effects of individual and on needs of special education profession among regular teachers. The research has the following findings. First of all, 18% of the subjects have taken both a three-credit special education introductory course and attended a short-term special education training workshop, 36% have taken a three-credit special education introductory course, 32% have attended a short-term special education training workshop alone, whereas 14% do not have any background on special education at all. Secondly, the number of years taught by regular teachers have affected their professional needs specifically on “knowing the technology and aids used in special education,” “skills on classroom management to cater to students with special needs,” and “curriculum design on how to train students to accept these students with special needs.” The longer the regular teachers have taught, the stronger professional needs they have on “related special educational laws” and “providing social guideline among students with special needs.” Next, school sizes, resources spent on special education in different schools, and regular teachers’ different backgrounds on special education do not make any notable differences on the needs on special education expertise among regular teachers. Regular teachers all agree that professional needs on special education are important, but their needs are not different. Regular teachers who have taught the mental retarded have professional needs, particularly on “how to get information from administration,” “skills on classroom management to cater to students with special needs,” and “practicum on teaching handicapped students.” Furthermore, regular teachers who have many handicapped students in their class have professional needs particularly on “writing individual education plans,” “implementing individual education plan,” and “designing functional curriculum for students with special needs.” Finally, the findings of this research provide practical suggestions for education administration, elementary schools, regular teachers, and pave the foundation for future research in this field.