特殊教育類科師資生職前特殊教育專業表現水準之調查研究

Special Education Preservice Teachers' Professional Performance Levels

教育部於2016 年發布「中華民國教師專業標準」，揭櫫以標準本位培育師資的重要性，特殊教育專業標準和專業表現水準的內容也陸續產生，本研究以13 所特殊教育師資培育學系與學程之師資生為調查研究對象，探討其對「特殊教育類科師資生職前特殊教育專業表現水準」（五等量表）的具備程度，總共發放2，283 份問卷，回收1，941 份，剔除無效問卷後，剩下1，929 份有效問卷，問卷可用率為99.38%。本研究以描述性統計、重複樣本單因子變異數分析、獨立樣本單因子變異數分析、獨立樣本多變量變異數分析進行分析，主要發現為：（一）特殊教育類科師資生在40 題職前特殊教育專業表現水準中，其整體自我評定結果皆落在部分具備（3 分）與大部分具備（4 分）之間。（二）特殊教育類科師資生在五個因素的具備程度，以「專業倫理因素」的具備程度最高，「班級教學因素」的具備程度最低。（三）特殊教育類科師資生在五個因素的專業表現之具備程度有顯著差異，且在「專業倫理因素」的具備程度顯著高於其他四個因素，且「班級教學因素」顯著低於其他四個因素。（四）不同年級特殊教育類科師資生在職前特殊教育專業表現水準的具備程度達顯著差異，且愈高年級的具備程度優於愈低年級。 （五）不同年級的特殊教育類科師資生，在每一個因素的具備程度均隨著年級愈高，表現愈好，且依序為：專業倫理、精進協作、課程與教學、班級教學、教育專業。本研究據此進一步提出對特殊教育類科師資培育的討論與建議。

In 2016， the Ministry of Education issued the R.O.C. Professional Standards for Teachers (PST)， declaring the importance of professional teacher education standards. Therefore， research on the effects of the PST within the field of special education and for teachers’ performance was in high demand and duly emerged. Purpose: To analyze the professional performance quality of special education preservice teachers in Taiwan. Methods: A 5-point Likert scale survey， the Scale of the Special Education Pre-Service Professional Performance Levels， was applied to all special education preservice teachers from 13 universities in Taiwan. In total， 2283 questionnaires were distributed， of which 1941 were returned and 1929 were valid (99.38%). Descriptive statistics， independent and repeated measures one-way analysis of variance， and independent measures one-way multivariate analysis of variance were used for data analysis. Results/ Findings: The main findings concerning the special education preteachers’ professional performance quality were as follows: (1) Overall， the degrees of qualification for the preservice professional performance levels of special education were between most qualified (4 points) and partially qualified (3 points). The highest score was for “understanding and encouraging positive behaviors among special education students” (M = 3.89)， and the lowest score was for “counseling knowledge and career development skills (transition)” (M = 3.11). (2) The highest score among the five factors was for “professional ethics” ， and the lowest score was for “class management”. (3) Significant differences were observed between the five factors. ”professional ethics” scores were statistically higher for special education preteachers than the other four factors’ scores were， and “class management” scores were significantly lower than the other factors’ scores were. (4) Overall， the degrees of qualification among the preservice professional performance levels of special education teachers differed significantly according to grade. The senior preservice teachers possessed significantly higher levels of qualification than the junior preservice teachers did.(5) Among the five factors of professional performance individually， senior preservice teachers also demonstrated significantly higher scores than junior ones for professional ethics， collaborative deliberation， curriculum and instruction， class management， and educational profession. Conclusions/Implications: On the preservice professional performance levels of special education， special education preservice teachers from 13 universities in Taiwan exhibited the degrees of qualification located between most qualified (4 points) and partially qualified (3 points) on the scale. Degrees of qualification differed significantly according to grade. The senior preservice teachers demonstrated significantly higher levels of qualification than junior ones did. The implications regarding teacher cultivation for the special education preservice teachers are discussed， including for curriculums concerned with special education students’ career transitions， special event processing， special education policies， and clinical teaching abilities. Further research on this subject is warranted.