建構特殊教育學系學生專業能力指標及其應用
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2013-11-??
Authors
胡心慈
朱尹安
蔡碩穎
林秀瑋
Shin-Tzu Hu
Yin-An Chu
Shou-Ying Tsai
Hsiu-Wei Lin
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系
National Taiwan Normal University Department of Special Education
National Taiwan Normal University Department of Special Education
Abstract
本研究分兩階段進行，第一階段先建立專業能力指標，第二階段則依此指標編製自評量表，並加以實際應用。其中，第一階段之研究先經由文獻探討、兩次專家會議，再透過兩回合德懷術之專家意見調查而達成共識。指標內容分成四個向度，包括知識與認知、職能導向、個人特質，以及價值／倫理。第二階段則由此專業能力指標編製成「特殊教育學系學生專業能力指標自評量表」，並以北部某一大學之特殊教育學系學生為對象，實施全系學生之自我評量。結果發現，各年級之總平均數隨著年級的升高，大致呈增加的趨勢，且職能導向向度有年級間之差異；全體學生在個人特質以及價值／倫理向度的分數高於知識與認知、職能導向的分數。第二年之得分亦均較第一年為高，且四個年級在四個向度上之得分均有差異，顯示本量表能合理反映學生自我覺知之專業成長，表示此一專業能力指標之建構具有實用價值。研究者並對參與本研究之特教系、其他大學之特教系及未來研究提出建議。
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to construct and apply the pre-service special educator professional competency indicators (PSEPCI) for special education students. This study was conducted in 2 phases. The first phase involved constructing the professional competency indicators for special education students by integrating the opinions of special education teachers and professors, and the second phase entailed developing and validating the professional competency indicator self-rating scale, based on the PSEPCI constructed at the first phase. Method: The professional competency indicators were drafted by the authors after reviewing relevant literature and collecting the opinions of special education teachers and professors during 2 meetings. These professional competency indicators were validated by conducting 2 rounds of using the Delphi technique to gather expert opinions. In the second phase, the Self-rating Scale for Assessing the Professionalism of Special Education Students, a 6-point Likert-type scale, was derived from the PSEPCI and piloted with students studying Special Education at a university in Northern Taiwan. Results: These professional competency indicators for special education students include 4 dimensions: professional knowledge, professional functioning, special behavior or attitude, and professional ethics. In general, the overall average scores of all of the students increased according to higher grade level. Furthermore, the average score of the person's special behavior or attitude of all students were higher than the average scores of the professional knowledge and the professional functioning. The students' scores in the second year were higher than in the first year. Conclusion/Implications: The professional competency indicators for the special education students included the professional competencies of special education teachers, college students, and the developmental tasks of undergraduate students. The opinions between special
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to construct and apply the pre-service special educator professional competency indicators (PSEPCI) for special education students. This study was conducted in 2 phases. The first phase involved constructing the professional competency indicators for special education students by integrating the opinions of special education teachers and professors, and the second phase entailed developing and validating the professional competency indicator self-rating scale, based on the PSEPCI constructed at the first phase. Method: The professional competency indicators were drafted by the authors after reviewing relevant literature and collecting the opinions of special education teachers and professors during 2 meetings. These professional competency indicators were validated by conducting 2 rounds of using the Delphi technique to gather expert opinions. In the second phase, the Self-rating Scale for Assessing the Professionalism of Special Education Students, a 6-point Likert-type scale, was derived from the PSEPCI and piloted with students studying Special Education at a university in Northern Taiwan. Results: These professional competency indicators for special education students include 4 dimensions: professional knowledge, professional functioning, special behavior or attitude, and professional ethics. In general, the overall average scores of all of the students increased according to higher grade level. Furthermore, the average score of the person's special behavior or attitude of all students were higher than the average scores of the professional knowledge and the professional functioning. The students' scores in the second year were higher than in the first year. Conclusion/Implications: The professional competency indicators for the special education students included the professional competencies of special education teachers, college students, and the developmental tasks of undergraduate students. The opinions between special