中部地區國民小學身心障礙資源班教師課程設計之研究

A Study of the Curriculum Design From the Resource Room Teachers in Elementary Schools in Central Taiwan

本研究探討中部地區國民小學身心障礙資源班教師課程設計之現況，採自編問卷進行調查，以中部八縣市資源班教師之研究對象，依縣市班級比率採隨機抽樣抽取三分之二教師為樣本，寄出338份問卷，回收有效問卷302份，資料以次數分配、百分比統計、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、事後考驗及卡方考驗等進行統計分析。研究發現：（1）近六成的資源班教師課程設計會參酌家長意見或和普通班教師討論；（2）課程內容以國語、數學及學習策略教學為主，並實施情緒及人際互動課程、專注力訓練和溝通課程；（3）課程來源以普通班教材為最多，其次是自編的教材，再者是網路教材及坊間出版圖書教材；（4）課調整的模式最多是補救式課程，其次是修正式課程，再者是輔助性課程；（5）資源班教師課程設計的困難有不同學生間無法適用、特殊個案學生課程設計不易、缺乏教材交流的機會和教師缺少獎勵與回饋。在教師背景變項差異方面：合格資源班教師在課程設計原則的得分高於不合格資源班教師；專任教師在課程設計原則的得分高於兼任其他組長的資源班教師。資源班教師課程設計的困難會因教師年齡、專業背景、擔任職務及班級學生人數的不同而有顯著差異。

The purpose of this study was to investigate how the resource room teachers designed curriculum at elementary schools in central Taiwan. Researcher-developed questionnaire was used as research instrument while resource room teachers at elementary schools were sampled from eight cities and counties in central Taiwan as participants. Fifty percent of resource room teachers were recruited through stratified random sampling. Three hundred and two out of 338 questionnaires were returned as valid data. Descriptive statistics, independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, Chi-Square, and post-hoc were applied for data analysis. The results were as follows: (1) Near 60% of resource room teachers would listen to parents' opinions or discuss with regular class teachers. (2) The contents of the curriculum were Chinese Language Arts, Mathematics, and learning strategies. Moreover, emotional and interpersonal interaction, attention, and communication training were applied as well. (3) Teaching materials in resource room were mostly the same as regular classes. Self-developed materials were on the second place, followed by web materials and other published teaching materials. (4) Course models mainly used in resource room were remedial, modification, and aided courses. (5) The difficulties that the resource room teachers encountered included (a) the original curriculum design unfitted different groups of students; (b) time consuming for adjusting the curriculum and special cases; (c) difficulties in curriculum design; (d) lacking opportunities for material exchange with other schools; and (e) lacking awards and feedback for resource room teachers. (6) Comparison of teachers' backgrounds showed that qualified resource room teachers scored significant higher than unqualified ones, and full-time teachers gained higher scores significantly than part-time teachers in curriculum design principles. (7) The difficulties of the resource room curriculum design were significantly different due to the teachers' age, professional background, position, and numbers of students.