Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Other Titles:||Constructing and Applying Professional Competency Indicators for Special Education Students|
National Taiwan Normal University Department of Special Education
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
|Appears in Collections:||特殊教育研究學刊|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.