輔助溝通系統服務提供者在特殊教育實踐現況之調查

Investigating the Implementation of Augmentative and Alternative Communication Service in Special Education by Service Providers

輔助溝通系統是特殊教育支持服務項目之一，但是臺灣在國教階段特教學校和集中式特教班裡，輔助溝通系統介入服務的現況為何？國內輔助溝通系統服務主要由特教教師和語言治療師執行，因此，本研究透過問卷調查，探討實務工作者提供服務的情形、實踐經驗及對介入輔助溝通系統時的考量因素之自覺重要程度。本研究共回收610份有效問卷，關於實踐經驗和考量因素的重要性部分只使用其中477位一直有提供或曾經提供過輔助溝通系統服務的資料進行分析。結果發現，在服務提供方面，服務對象以發展性障礙為多；設備以低科技比例最高；使用目的以表達需求和想望比例最高；評估選用工作以語言治療師為主，但訓練則以特教教師為主。在服務實踐經驗部分，評估選用、訓練與成效評估和語言評量等三向度的實踐度均偏低，不過語言治療師有較高的實踐度，一直有提供服務者比曾經提供者在前兩向度上有較高的實踐度，而語言評量向度的實踐度最低。實務工作者對介入輔助溝通系統時的四個考量因素（自覺輔具取得、態度與支持、個案能力、成果因素）自覺重要程度皆高，但自覺成果因素重要性較低。文中也根據研究結果進行討論，並提供未來研究和服務上的建議。

 

Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is one of supportive services that should be provided for students with complex communication needs, required by law. Special education teachers and speech language pathologists (SLPs) are the major AAC services pro-viders in schools. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the current AAC services situation, implementation experience, and importance of consideration factors for providing AAC ser-vices. 610 valid questionnaires were gained from teachers of self-contained class or special education schools and SLPs in special education system. Only the data of 477 who continued to provide AAC services or provided before were used for analysis. The major findings were (a) AAC services provided: the major AAC users were students with developmental disabilities, low tech AAC were used most, the main purposes of using AAC were expressing needs and wants, the procedure of AAC selection was SLPs’ major job while special education teachers were in charge of AAC training. (b) implementation of AAC services: the degree of imple-mentation in dimensions of assessment and selection, training and outcome measurement, and language assessment were low. But SLPs demonstrated higher degree, and AAC services providers who provided service continuously had higher degree in the previous two dimen-sions. (c) importance of consideration factors for AAC services: four factors (device obtaining, attitude and support, capabilities of client, outcome) were regarded as very important.