兩岸特教師資生對身心障礙學生態度之研究——三要素觀點

Abstract

有鑑於國內外特殊教育領域與態度的研究領域缺乏有效教育評量專業人員對身心障礙學生態度的工具，兩岸特殊師資培育缺乏對特教師資生態度的實證研究與了解。故此，本研究目的旨在探討兩岸特殊教育專業師資生對身心障礙學生的態度，師資生所在地區、年級及身心障礙學生的障礙類別對態度的影響，以及初步分析師資生對身心障礙學生態度的預測因子。 本研究正式樣本為884名台灣與大陸地區特殊教育學專業的師資生，研究工具為「身心障礙學生態度問卷」和「Marlowe-Crowne社會期許量表」。前者基於態度的三要素理論、環狀情緒模型以及障礙研究等理論觀點發展而來，包括三個障礙類別版本，分別評量對ADHD、肢體障礙、智能障礙學生的態度。該問卷有40題，「積極情緒」、「消極情緒」、「醫療模式」、「社會模式」和「行爲意向」五個分量表構成。基於預試與正式樣本的檢驗結果，該問卷具有良好的信度與效度。本研究採用描述性統計、相關分析、單因子變異數分析（ANOVA）、重複測量共變數分析（ANCOVA）、以及多元回歸等統計方法進行資料的統計與分析。主要發現如下： 一、對於態度之情意要素，兩岸特教師資生對於身心障礙學生的積極情緒與消極情緒水平不高，均在中等程度的強度水平以下。兩岸受試對身心障礙學生的積極情緒感受均略高於消極情緒感受；在積極態度向度，無論障礙類別與年級，大陸受試的積極情緒顯著高于台灣受試；在消極態度，大陸師資生對ADHD學生的消極情緒顯著高于台灣師資生，其他障礙類別不存在差異。 二、對於態度之認知要素，兩岸師資生對醫療模式的障礙觀持中立的評價傾向，對社會模式的障礙觀持積極的評價傾向，對社會模式障礙觀的認同度高于醫療模式，台灣受試比大陸師資生對社會模式觀點的認同態度更高。 三、對於態度之行爲意向要素，兩岸師資生均持相當高的積極評價傾向，台灣師資生的行爲意向反應略高于大陸。 四、兩岸特教師資生對三類身心障礙學生的態度間存在差異，總體上對肢體障礙（PD）學生的態度最正向、對ADHD學生的態度最負面，這種差異在三要素中均有體現。此外，大陸受試對ADHD的情意反應相較於台灣受試更消極。 五、特教師資生的地區、性別、年級等人口背景變項，過去與身心障礙學生的直接接觸和間接接觸經驗，以及社會期許等，對身心障礙學生態度的5個向度（分量表）表現的影響程度相當有限，多元回歸模型的解釋量介於3%~10.2%之間；但社會模式障礙觀對行爲意向變异具有頗高的解釋力，約為30%左右。This study aimed to explore the attitudes of special education pre-service teachers toward students with disabilities in Taiwan and mainland China. It examined the effects of the region, students’ grade levels, and types of disability on pre-service teachers’ attitudes and conducted a preliminary analysis of the predictors of their attitudes toward students with disabilities. The formal sample included 884 special education pre-service teachers from Taiwan and mainland China. The research instruments developed were the Multidimensional Attitudes Scale Toward Students with Disabilities and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. The former was derived from the multicomponent perspective of attitude, the circumplex model of affect, and disability studies. It was available in three versions for assessing attitudes toward students with three different disabilities: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), physical disability (PD), and intellectual disability. The 40-item scale consisted of 5 subscales: “positive affect,” “negative affect,” “medical model,” “social model,” and “behavioral intention.” The results of the pilot and actual tests showed that the scale had satisfactory reliability and validity. The data were analyzed using statistical methods including descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, one-way analysis of variance, repeated measures analysis of covariance, and multiple regression. The key findings were as follows: 1.In terms of the affect component, special education pre-service teachers in both Taiwan and mainland China scored low on positive and negative affect, displaying lower-than-moderate levels of affect toward students with disabilities. Their positive affect was slightly higher than their negative affect. Pre-service teachers from mainland China showed significantly stronger positive affect than their Taiwanese counterparts regardless of the type of disability and grade level. They also displayed significantly stronger negative affect toward students with ADHD than Taiwanese pre-service teachers, but no significant difference was observed for other types of disability. 2.In terms of the cognitive component, special education pre-service teachers from both regions showed a neutral appraisal tendency toward the medical model of disability and a positive appraisal tendency toward the social model of disability. While pre-service teachers from both regions identified more strongly with the social model of disability than with the medical model, those from Taiwan identified more strongly with the social model than their mainland Chinese counterparts. 3.In terms of the behavioral intention component, special education pre-service teachers from both regions showed a fairly positive appraisal tendency, but pre-service teachers from Taiwan reported slightly stronger behavioral intentions than their mainland Chinese counterparts. 4.The attitudes of special education pre-service teachers from the two regions toward students with disabilities varied according to the three types of disability. Overall, their attitudes were the most positive toward students with PD and the most negative toward students with ADHD. The difference was observed across the three components of attitude. In addition, pre-service teachers from mainland China reported more negative affect toward ADHD than their Taiwanese counterparts. 5.The demographic variables (e.g., region, gender, and grade level), experience of direct and indirect contact with students with disabilities, and social desirability had a limited influence on the five dimensions of the pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward students with disabilities. While the multiple regression model had an explanatory power of 3–10.2%, the social model of disability had considerable explanatory power and explained around 30% of the variance in behavioral intentions.