| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北教育大學 === 特殊教育學系碩士班 === 96 === This study is to investigate the interpersonal self-efficacy of the elementary school teachers in Taipei Taiwan. The population is the Taipei City municipal elementary school teachers of students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) in the academic year of 2007 in Taiwan. 108 samples are randomly selected from 216 elementary school teachers of students with IDD. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is applied to the design of questionnaire as well as the relevant researches and the information about the current situation of education in Taiwan. The questionnaire designed by the researcher is named “What the municipal elementary school teachers of students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Taipei think about their job”. 216 questionnaires named were distributed and 133 of them were responded effectively. The rate of response reached 62%. The results were analyzed and interpreted by frequency distribution, mean, standard deviation, percentage, t-test and one-way ANOVA. The following lists the researcher’s findings.
1. On average, the 133 respondents have scored 118.46. The most highly scored dimension in the four-dimension scale is “receiving parents’ support”. Then in accordance with the scores, the second highly scored dimension is “receiving partner teachers’ support”; the third one is “class student behavior management” and the lowest scored dimension is “receiving administrators’ support”.
2. Analyzing the interpersonal self-efficacy of government’s elementary school teachers teaching students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Taipei with the variables of gender, level of education and profession background, the results have not reached the level of significance. By analyzing the differences between age and total seniority of teaching, the result of the dimension of “receiving parents’ support” has reached the level of significance. By comparison, the variable of seniority of teaching students with intellectual and developmental disabilities has not reached the level of significance.
3. The variables of personalities of “group membership positioning” and “reasoning process dimension” have reached the level of significance while analyzing the interpersonal self-efficacy of government’s elementary school teachers teaching students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Taipei. By contrast, the variables of “informational process model” and “judgmental thinking model” have not reached the level of significance.
4. A comparison between the cross analysis of gender, profession background and total teaching seniority of the government’s elementary school teachers teaching students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Taipei and their partner teachers, and the seniority of teaching students with intellectual and developmental disabilities has been made. However, the number in some groups of respondents was too low to see the difference of interpersonal self-efficacy across groups.
5. By comparing the teachers of government’s elementary schools teaching the students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Taipei with their partner teachers, it could be found from the cross analysis of the difference of age and the level of education that the interpersonal self-efficacy has not reached the level of significance.
6. It could be seen from the cross analysis between the type of personality and the dimension of “group membership positioning” that there is significance difference between personality type and interpersonal self-efficacy in comparison with the teachers of government’s elementary schools teaching the students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Taipei with their partner teachers. The difference between personality and “reasoning process dimension” has not reached the level of significance. Due to the extremely low number of respondents of “informational process model” and “judgmental thinking model”, the difference could not be told across groups.
Finally, with the results of this study, suggestions have been put forward for education authorities, teacher training institutes, school administrators, and teachers of students with intellectual and developmental disabilities of elementary schools and the future studies.
|
|---|
