| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺中教育大學 === 特殊教育學系碩士在職專班 === 98 === This study was aimed to investigate the current situations of collaboration between the regular class teachers(RCTs) and the resource room teachers(RRTs) and how different background factors of both RCTs and RRTs (including gender, seniority, special education background, teaching history, student ages, class scale, and personal administrative experiences) affect the way they cooperate with each others in terms of teachers' attitudes, implementation situations, difficulties and causes. The connection between teachers' attitudes towards collaboration and implementation situations is analysed as well.
Objects of this study were RCTs and RRTs in Taichung City, Taichung County, Chunghua County, Nantou County and Yunlin County. There were 365 returned valid questionnaires and the data were analysed by descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way ANOVA, and Pearson product-moment correlation. According to the result of the data analysis, the conclusions of this study were as follows:
1. Both RCTs and RRTs have positive attitudes towards collaboration.
a.In "cooperation belief" dimension, female regular class teachers show more positive attitudes than male teachers.
b. In "role function" dimension, RRTs without regular class teaching experiences were more convinced of the benefits through collaboration than RRTs with experiences. Teachers with both regular and special education teaching certificates demonstrate a stronger belief in collaboration compared with teachers with only special education teaching certificate.
2. The best outcome of current collaboration condition is the cooperation and
interaction between RRTs and RCTs, but on the contrary, they have less interaction
in terms of "student work assessment".
a. When doing the assessments, RCTs teaching 3rd and 4th graders participate more than RCTs teaching 1st and 2nd graders.
b. In both "identification and placement" and "curriculum and teaching" dimension, RRTs with 6-10-year teaching experiences cooperate better with RCTs than RRTs with 1-5-year teaching experiences.
c. The most common way for both teachers to communicate with each others is "face to face", followed by "regular meeting". The frequency is mostly once a week.
3. Both RCTs and RRTs find distinct obstacles in working together in terms of "curriculum and teaching", and less difficulties in "cooperation and interaction". They both encounter remarkable obstructions in "identification and placement", "class schedule arrangement", "curriculum and teaching" and "cooperation and interaction" dimensions, particularly for RCTs. When preparing for curriculum and teaching, RRTs have more barriers than Itinerant Service Teachers.
4. The attitudes towards collaboration between RCTs and RRTs and the status quo of that are significantly positively correlated.
5. The tendency towards cooperation between RRTs and RCTs is mainly affected by "teachers' professional knowledge" and "working environment", and least affected by "teachers' educational belief".
a. In "teachers educational belief" dimension, male teachers' acceptance is higher than female teachers.
b. In "teachers roles perception" dimension, teachers teaching students with learning disabilities have higher acceptance than teachers teaching multiple handicapped and health impaired students. RRTs teaching students from all age groups also display higher acceptance than RRTs teaching students with less differences in ages.
c. In "teachers working environment" dimension, RRTs with 11-15-year seniority show less preferences for the collaborated relationship with RCTs compared with RRTs with 6-10-year teaching experiences.
Finally, relating suggestions based upon these study results are proposed to RCTs, RRTs, school and government administrators, and future researchers.
|
|---|
