(18.206.177.17) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/16 22:43
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:王欣宜
研究生(外文):Hsin Yi, Wang
論文名稱:高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧課程綱要發展與應用成效之研究
論文名稱(外文):The Development and Application of Social Skills Curriculum for Secondary Vocational School Students With Mild Mental Retardation
指導教授:盧台華
指導教授(外文):Tai-Hwa Emily Lu
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:特殊教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:特殊教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2003
畢業學年度:91
語文別:中文
論文頁數:267
中文關鍵詞:社交技巧智能障礙學生智能障礙轉銜特殊教育課程
外文關鍵詞:social skillsstudents with mental retardationtransitionspecial education curriculum
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:77
  • 點閱點閱:1389
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:355
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:14
本研究共分為兩部分,一是建構高職階段智能障礙學生之社交技巧課程綱要,二是以本課程綱要及生態評量原則對高職特教班高一的學生進行社交技巧教學實驗。所得結果如下:
一、課程綱要建構及評鑑結果結果
接受問卷調查的188位高職特教班教師及10位受訪的高職特教班教師都認為特教班學生的社交技巧教學不受到重視、社交技巧教學時間不夠、教師無法運用多種方式評量學生的學習成效、教師沒有對自己的教學進行檢討、學生沒有足夠的練習時間,而最嚴重的問題是學生無法類化所學的社交技巧及缺乏適當的社交技巧教材依據。
學生在各領域的社交技巧課程需求是「教室學習」領域的「專心聽老師說話」、「服從教師指令」、「盡力完成工作」、「主動詢問教師」;「與人溝通」領域的「眼神接觸」、「傾聽」、「察言觀色」、「交談音量」、「與人交談」、「問問題」、「回答問題」、「輪流發言」、「正確復述事情」;「與人相處─個人主動」領域的「使用禮貌字眼」、「打招呼」、「主動協助他人」、「關心朋友」、「主動尋求協助」、「與他人維持適當的空間與身體接觸」、「稱讚他人」、「批評他人」、「表達自我的感受」、「為自己的行為道歉」、「控制自己的情緒」、「控制自己的物欲」;「與人相處─與他人互動」領域的「合作」、「接受他人讚美」、「加入他人活動」、「瞭解他人感受」、「接受他人批評」、「面對別人的嘲笑或憤怒」、「處理同儕給的壓力」、「拒絕別人」、「解決問題」、「與異性交談」;「工作社交技巧」領域的「主動自我介紹」、「服從督導指令」、「主動打招呼」、「主動發問」、「與同事交談」、「主動協助同事」、「主動尋求協助」。
十二位專家學者及高職特教班教師對本課程綱要的評鑑結果顯示,超過90%以上的意見都認為本課程綱要的各項目均為「適當」與「尚可」。
二、社交技巧教學實驗的結果
本教學實驗根據課程綱要及生態評量的結果,選取並編寫十九個教學單元,對國立沙鹿高工高一特教班的學生進行教學實驗,結果分為學生學習成效及類化成效兩部分探討。在學習成效方面,「與人交談」、「問問題」、「回答問題」、「輪流發言」、「使用禮貌字眼」、「打招呼」、「關心朋友」、「稱讚他人」、「批評他人」、「表達自我感受」、「加入他人活動」、「瞭解他人感受」、「接受他人批評」、「處理同儕給的壓力」、「解決問題」等單元學習成效較佳,而「主動詢問教師」、「主動協助他人」、「主動尋求協助」、「面對別人的嘲笑或憤怒」學習成效較差。
就類化成效而言,共評量十八個單元,除「面對別人的嘲笑或憤怒」、「處理同儕給的壓力」兩單元的類化成效較差之外,學生在其餘的十六個單元均有類化行為產生。研究者並根據研究結果做出相關之建議,以供參考。
This research is divided into two parts. First, social skills curriculum for secondary vocational schools students with mental retardation is compiled. Second, a social skills teaching experiment is conducted on 13 year-one students studying with a special education class in secondary vocational school on the basis of this curriculum and the ecological assessment principle. The findings are as follows:
1.Findings of curriculum compilation and evaluation
All the 188 special education class teachers and the ten special education class teachers of secondary vocation school, whom we interviewed, believed that the education authority does not attach importance to the social skills teaching to special education class students, the current social skills teaching hours are inadequate, teachers are unable to assess students’ learning results by various means, teachers do not review their own teaching methods and students’ practice hours are too short. The opined that the most serious problem is that students are unable to apply what they learnt from the social skills course to their daily life by analogy and that there is a lack of teaching materials suitable for students taking the social skills course.
Teachers’ opinions about students’ needs for the curriculum with respect to “class learning” is “being absorbed in listening to teachers”, “obeying teachers’ instructions”, “doing one’s best to complete a task” and “taking the initiative in asking teachers questions” were important items. For the curriculum with respect to “communicating with others” is “eye contact”,“listening”, “sensitive”, “strength of voice in conversations”, “conversing with others”, “asking questions”, “answering question”, “taking turns to make remarks” and “capability of reiterating matters correctly” were important items. For the curriculum with respect to “getting along with others--taking initiatives” is “using polite words”, “greeting”, “taking the initiatives in helping others”, “being concerned about one’s friends”, “taking the initiative in asking for a favor”, “keeping an appropriate distance away from another person and having appropriate body contract with another person”, “praising others”, “criticizing others”, “expressing one’s feelings”, “apologizing for one’s conduct” and “controlling one’s temper” were important items. For the curriculum with respect to “gettling along with others--interacting with others” is “cooperation”, “accepting others’ admiration”, “joining others’ activities”, “understanding others’ feelings”, “accepting others’ criticism”, “facing another person’s tease or anger”, “coping with pressure from peers”, “rejecting others”, “problem-solving” and “conversing with a person of opposite sex” were important items. For the curriculum with respect to “job-related social skills” is “taking the initiatives in giving a ‘self-introduction’ presentation”, “obeying a supervisor’s instructions”, “taking the initiatives in greeting others”, “taking the initiative in asking questions”, “conversing with colleagues”, “taking the initiative in helping colleagues” and “taking the initiative in asking for a favor” were important items. The findings of the evaluation of the social skills curriculum outline ,on the whole, the 12-member team composed of experts, academics and teachers held the view that comments like “appropriate” and “so-so” prevailed to an extent greater than 90%.
2.Findings of the Social Skills Teaching Experiment
The teaching experiment involves selecting and compiling 19 teaching units in the light of the curriculum outline and the results of the ecological assessment. The teaching experiment is conducted on special education class year-one students of the National Shalu Industrial Vocational Senior High School. As regards result of learning, it is excellent in units like “conversing with others”, “asking questions”, “answering question”, “taking turns to make remarks”, “using polite words”, “greeting”, “being concerned about one’s friends”, “praising others”, “criticizing others”, “expressing one’s feelings”, “joining others’ activities”, “understanding others’ feelings”, “accepting others’ criticism”, “coping with pressure from peers” and “problem-solving”, but it is poor in four units, namely “taking the initiative in asking teachers”, “taking the initiative in helping others”, “taking the initiative in seeking assistance” and “facing another person’s tease or anger”.
As regards the result of analogy, a total of 18 units are assessed. Although the result of analogy is poor in two units, namely “facing another person’s tease or anger”, and “coping with pressure from peers” , the experiment shows that all the students exhibit analogy behavior after taking the remaining 16 units. Suggestions were made according to the results.
目 次
第一章 緒論
研究動機與問題背景
研究目的與待答問題
名詞解釋
研究限制
第二章 文獻探討
社交技巧的定義與內涵
智障者缺乏社交巧原因之探究
智障者社交技巧之訓練與課程之探究
社交技巧訓練社會效度與類化的探討
第三章 研究方法
研究架構
研究對象
研究工具
研究程序
單元編製與教學步驟
資料分析
第四章 課程綱要發展與討論
高職階段智能障礙學生社交巧課程綱要
內涵之建構與評鑑
高職階段智能障礙學生社交巧課程綱要
內涵之建構與評鑑結果討論
第五章 課程綱要配合生態評量應用成效之結果與討論
高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧課程
教學實驗結果
高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧課程
教學實驗成效討論
第六章 結論與建議
結論
建議
參考文獻
中文部分分
英文部分
表次
表2-1 一般社交技巧與智障生社交技巧
訓練項目的比較
表2-2 社交技巧教學步驟
表2-3 社交技巧診斷方式優缺點比較
表2-4 國內實徵研究中社交巧目標
選定及學習成果評量方式
表3-1 實驗組與控制組的魏氏智力測驗
t考驗結果
表3-2 實驗組與控制組的年齡t考驗結果
表3-3 實驗組和控制組在「智能障礙學生
社會技能評定量表」前後測平均數、
標準差與t考驗結果
表3-4 問卷回收分配表
表3-5 接受訪談教師基本資料
表3-6 課程綱要評鑑專家及教師基本資料
表3-7 實驗組與控制組學生基本資料
表3-8 問卷之專家意見評定者基本資料
表3-9 問卷領域及題號分配表
表3-10 各單元類化行為之觀察情境一覽表
表3-11 「高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧
檢核表」統計結果
表3-12 社交技巧教學時間及單元表
表4-1 教師對現行社交技巧課程教學的看法
表4-2 教師對學生「與人溝通」表現的看法
表4-3 教師對學生「個人主動」表現的看法
表4-4 教師對學生「與他人互動」表現的看法
表4-5 教師對學生「工作社交巧」表現的看法
表4-6 課程綱要「教室學習」領域評鑑結果
項目百分比分析表
表4-7 課程綱要「與人溝通」領域評鑑結果
項目百分比分析表
表4-8 課程綱要「與人相處─個人主動技巧」領域
表4-9 課程綱要「與人相處─與他人互動技巧」
領域評鑑結果項目百分比分析表
表4-10 課程綱要「工作社交巧」領域評鑑結果
項目百分比分析表
表4-11 社交技巧課程綱要整體評鑑結果百分比
表5-1 實驗組與控制組學生在「社會技能
評定量表」的迴歸同質性考驗
表5-2 實驗組與控制組學生在「社會技能
評定量表」共變數分析結果
表5-3 十九個單元教學實驗前後「社交技巧
檢核表」t考驗結果
表5-4 社交技巧單元測驗結果的百分比
表5-5 類化行為表現結果 表5-6 「社交技巧自我評鑑表」統計結果
表5-7 教師與家長訪談結果百分比
圖次
圖2-1 導致缺乏社交巧的變項
圖2-2 Tyler的課程設計模式
圖2-3 Taba的課程設計模式
圖3-1 研究架構與流程圖 56
附錄次
附錄一 高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧課程實施
及表現現況調查問卷
附錄二 高職階段智能障礙學生社交巧課程實施及
需求現況訪談題綱
附錄三 高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧課程綱要
與評鑑表
附錄四 高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧
課程綱要
附錄五 智能障礙學生社會技能評定量表
附錄六 高職階段智能障礙學生社交巧檢核表
附錄七 社交技巧學習狀況評量表
附錄八 高職階段智能障礙學生社交技巧
活動單元設計
附錄九 社交技巧單元測驗
附錄十 社交技巧單元類化評量表
附錄十一 社交技巧課程學生自我評鑑表
附錄十二 教學實驗家長同意書
一、中文部分
王大延(民81):教行為偏異兒童的社會溝通技能。國小特殊教育,13,35-41。
王欣宜(民87):輕度智能障礙就業青年工作社會技能訓練效果之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文。
李怡倩(民85):啟智學校高職學生工作社會技能之研究。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
何華國(民88):特殊兒童心理與教育。台北:五南。
吳國淳(民78):教導中重度智能不足兒童社會技巧成效之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
宋明君(民89):啟智學校中重度智障學生工作社會技能之表現與需求研究。台北:教育部。
邱滿豔(民72):兩種中重度智能不足者社會技巧訓練方法之效果研究。國立台灣大學心理研究所碩士論文。
林竹芳(民78):國中輕度智能不足學生個人-社會技能學習效果之研究。國立台灣教育學院特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
林寶貴(民85):特殊教育課程與教學設計之理論與實務。台北:台灣師範大學特殊教育學系。
林千惠(民85):台灣地區身心障礙者就業能力與意願之調查研究。南投:台灣省府勞工處。
洪儷瑜、黃裕惠、許尤芬(民88):社交技巧訓練課程實例彙編。台北:國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系。
洪儷瑜(民88):少叫多教─談社會技巧訓練。載於中華民國特殊教育學會年刊。中華民國特殊教育學會。
洪儷瑜(民91):社會技巧訓練的理念與實施。台北:國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系。
張美都(民83):啟智班與教養機構智障學生語言理解能力之比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
陳榮華(民75):行為改變技術。台北:五南。
陳靜江(民85):殘障者社區化就業輔導模式之發展與成效之分析─第二階段成果報告。台北:行政院勞工委員會職業訓練局。
陳伯璋(民88):九年一貫新課程綱要修訂的背景及內涵。教育研究資訊,7(1),1-13。
張春興(民83):教育心理學。台北:東華。
教育部(民89):高級中等學校特殊教育班課程綱要。台北:教育部。
教育部(民90):特教通報網〔線上資訊〕。取自全球資訊網:www.set.edu.tw。
教育部(民91):身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定原則鑑定標準〔線上資訊〕。取自全球資訊網:www.set.edu.tw。
黃政傑(民80):課程評鑑。台北:師大書苑。
黃月霞(民82):教導兒童社會技巧。台北:五南。
黃玲蘭(民86):青少年行為改變策略。台北:五南。
鈕文英(民81):國中啟智班的職業社會技巧教學。特教園丁,7(3),40-42。
鈕文英(民90):身心障礙者行為問題處理。台北:心理。
鈕文英(民92):美國智能障礙協會2002年定義的內容和意涵。特殊教育,86,10-15。
趙麗華(民82):台灣地區實施智障者支持性就業模式之現況及其相關因素之探討。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
劉錫吾(民83):肢障學生社會技巧訓練效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
劉永福(民83):認知取向與社會技巧訓練對社會退縮兒童輔導效果研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心裡與輔導研究所碩士論文。
蔡麗芳(民81):社交技巧訓練策略對國小兒童社交技巧、問題行為及同儕接納之影響效果實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學教育與心理輔導研究所碩士論文。
蔡桂芳(民90):高職階段智能障礙學生社會技能訓練效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系博士論文。
盧台華(民83):教學篇。啟智教育教師工作手冊。國立台北師院特殊教育中心。
謝秀蘭(民86):啟智學校高職畢業生就業支持網絡之研究。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
鄭惠霙(民86):國小六年級注意力缺陷及過動症學童社會技能及教學訓練效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
韓福榮(民75):中重度智能不足者職業社會技巧訓練效果之研究。國立台灣教育學院特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Agran, M., Salzberg, C.L., & Stowitscheck, J. J.(1987).An analysis of the efforts of a social skillstraining program using self-instructions on the acquistion and generation of two social behaviors in a work setting. Journal of the Association for Pearsons with Severe Handicapes, 12, 131-139.
Bates, P.(1980).The effectiveness of international skills training on social skill acquisition of moderately and mildly retarded adults. Journal of Applied Behavior,13,237-248.
Bornstein, P. H., Bach, P. H., McFall, M. F., Froman, P.C., & Lyon, P. H.(1980). Application of social skills training program in the modification of interpersonal deficitamog retardedadult: A clinical replication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13,171-176.
Browder, D. M., & West, B. J.(1991). Assessment of individual with severe disabilities: An Applied Behavior Approach to Life Skills Assessment(2nd ed.) (pp.245-217).. Baltimore, MA: Paul H. Brookes.
Carey, S. P., & Stoner, G.(1994).Contextual considerations in social skills instruction. School Psychology, 9(2), 137-141.
Chadsey-Rusch J.(1986).Indentifing and teaching valued social behaviors.In F. R. Rush(Ed.). Competitive Employment : Issues and Strategies(pp.273-287). Baltimore, MA: Paul. H. Brookes.
Chadsey-Rusch, J.(1990).Teaching social skill on the job. In Rusch F. R.(Ed.)Supported Employment: Models, Method, and Issues(pp.161-180).Sycamore, IL: Sycamore Publishing Co.
Cheney, D.,& Foss, G.(1984).An examination of social behavior of mentally retarded workers. Education and Training of The Mentally Retarded ,19(3),216-221.
Collet-Klingenberg, L., & Chadsey-Rusch, J.(1991). Using a cognitive-process approach to teach social skills. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 23(3), 259-270.
Dygdon, J. A.(1993).The Culture and Lifestyle-Appropriate Social Skills Intervention Curriculum. Vermont: Clinical Psychology Publishing Company, Inc.
Elksin, N., & Elksin, L. K.(1991). Facilitating the vocational success of students with handicaps : The need for job-related social skills training. The Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education,13(2),5-11.
Elksnin, N., & Elksnin, L. K.(1998).Teaching social skills to students with learning and behavior problems. Intervention in School and Clinic,33(3),131-140.
Elliot, S., & Gresham, F. M.(1992).Social Skills Intervention Guide. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
Farmer, T. W., & Pearl, R.(1996).Expanding the social skills deficit framework: A developmental synthesis perspective, classroom social networks, and implications for the social growth of students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education,30,232-256.
Fleming, E. R.,& Fleming, D. C.(1982).Social skills training for educable mentally retarded children. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded,44-50.
Foss , G., & Peterson, S. L.(1981).Social-interpersonal skills relevant to job tenure for mentally retarded adults. Mental Rretardation, 19, 103-106.
Foxx, R. M.,McMrrow, J. M., & Schloss, C. N.(1983).Stacking the deck:Teaching social skills to retarded adults with modified table game. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,16,157-170.
Foxx, R. M., Kyle, M. S., Faw, G. D.,& Bittle, R. G.(1989).problem-sovling skills training: Social validation and generalization. Behavior Residential Treament, 4, 269-288.
Gresham, F. M.(1983).Social validity in the assessment of children’s social skills: Establishing standards for social competency. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 1 ,299-307.
Gresham, F. M.(1986).Conceptual issues in the assessment of social competence in children. In P. S.Strain, M. J. Guralnick & H. M. Walker(Eds.) Children’s Social Behavior: DevelopmentAassessment, and Modification(pp143-179.) New York: Academic Press.
Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N.(1990). Social Skills Trating System. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
Gresham, F. M., & MacMillan, D. L.(1997).Social competence and affective characteristics of students with mild disabilities. Review of Education Research,67(4),377-415.
Gresham, F. M.(1998).Social skills training: should we raze, remodel ,or rebuild? Behavior Disorders,24(1),19-25.
Hanley-Maxwell, C.(1989).An analysis of job terminations by length of time on the job for person with severe disabilities in supported employment. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin,33,159-162.
Heiman, T., & Margalit, M.(1998).Loneliness, depression, and social skills among students with mild mental retardation in different educational settings. The Journal of Special Education,32(3), 154-163.
Hobson, R. P., Ouston, J., & Lee, A.(1989). Naming emotion in faces and voices: Abilities and disabilities in autisim and mental retardation.British Journal of Developmental Psychology,7,237-250.
Hughes, J. H., & Sullivan, K. A.(1988). Outcome assessment in social skills training with children. Journal of School Psychology, 26, 167-183.
Knapczyk, D. R., & Rodes, P. G.(1996).Teaching social Competence:A Practical Approach for Improving Social Skills in Students At-risk.Pacific Grove, Ca:Brooks/Cole.
Lagomarcino, T. R., & Rusch, F. J.(1990).Analysis of the Reasons for Job Separations in Relation to Disability, Placement, Job Type, and Length of Employment.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 331 235).
Langone, J., Cless, T. M., Oxford, M., Malone, M.,& Ross, G.(1995).Acquistion and Generation of social skills by high school Students with mild mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 33(3),186-196.
Lasern, S. C.(1992).An Ecological Perspective on Assessment. Paper Presented at 1992 International Symposium on Assessment of Exceptional Children ,Taiwan, R.O.C.
Maston, J.L., & Senatore, V.(1981). A comparison of traditional psychotherapy and social skills training for improving interpersonal functioning of mentally retarded adults. Behavior Therapy, 12, 369-382.
Mathur, S. R., & Rutherford, R. B.(1996).Is social skills training effective for students with emotional or behavioral disorders? Research issues and needs. Behavioral Disorders,22,21-28.
McAlpine,C.,Kendall, K. A.,& Singh, N. N.(1991). Recognition of facial emotion by person with mental retardation. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 96,29-36.
Mcpline, C., Singh, N. N., Kendall, K. A., & Ellis, C.(1992). Recognition of facial expressions of emotion by persons with mental retardation: A matched comparison study. Behavior Modification,16,559-573.
Meichenbaum, D.(1977).Cognitive-behavior modification: An integrative approach. New York: Plenum Press.
Merrell, K. W., & Gimpel, G. A.(1998).Social Skills of Children and Adolescents. NJ:Lawrence Erlbum.
Mize, J., & Ladd, G.(1990). A cognitive-social learning approach to social skill training with low-status preschool children. Development Psychology, 23(3).388-397.
Owens, D. R.(1985). Mental retardation : Difference or delay ? In Bernstein, D. K., & Tiegerman, E. (Eds.), Language and Communication Disorders in Children. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Press.
Quinn, M. M., Kavale, K. A., Mathur, S. R., Rutherford, R. B., & Forness, S. R.(1999).A meta-analysis of social skill interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Journal of Emotional Behavioral Disorders,7(1),54-64.
Rojahn, J., Rabold, D. E. & Schneider, F.(1995). Emotion specificity in mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 99(5), 477-486.
Rosenthal-Malek, A. L. & Yoshida, R. K.(1994). The effects of metacognitive strategy training on the acquistion and generalization of social skills. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Disabilities,29(3),213-221.
Rutherford, R. B.(1997).Why dosen’t social skills training work? CEC Today, July,14.
Salzberg, C. L., Lignubar/Kraft, B., & McCuller, G. L.(1988). Reasons for job loss:A review of employment termination studies of mentally retarded workers. Research In Developmental Disabilities,9,153-170.
Sargent, L. R.(1998).Social Skills for School and Community--Systematic Instruction for Children and Youth with Cognitive Delays. Colorado: Colorado Springs.
Sherman,J. A., Sheldon, J. B., Harchik, A. E., Edwards, K., & Quinn, J. M.(1992). Social evaluation of behaviors comprising three social skills and comparison of the performance of people with and without mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 96(4),419-431.
Smith, C. A.(1982). Promoting the Social Development of Young Children: Strategies and Activities. Palo Alto California: Mayfied Publishing Company.
Stephens, T. M., Hartman, A. C., & Lucas, V. H.(1982). Teaching Children Basic Skills-A Curriculum Handbook.(2nd ed.). Columbus:Charles E. Merill Publishing Company.
Strain, P. S., & Kohler, F. W.(1988).Social skill intervention with young children with handicaps: Some new conceptualization and directions. InS. Odem & M. Karnes(Eds.) Early Intervention for Infant and Children with Handicaps.(pp.129-143).. Baltimore: Brookes.
Trower, P., Bryant, B., Argyle, M., & Marzillier, J.(1978). Social Skills and Mental Health. London: Methuen & Co.,Ltd.
Walker, H. M., McConnell, S., Holmes, D. Todis, B.,Walker, J.,& Golden, N.(1988). The Walker Social Skills Curriculum: The Accepts Program. Texas: Shoal Greek Boulevard.
Webstern-Stratton, C.(1999).How to Promote Children’s Social and Emotional Competence .Lodon:Paul Chapman Publishing ,Ltd.
Wilczenski, F. L.(1991). Facial emotional expressions of adults with mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 26(3), 319-324.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 曾夢蛟、張武男. 1993. 溫度對檬果花粉管在花柱內生長之影響. 興大園藝 8: 19-22.
2. 沈再木. 1994. 數種種間雜交種百合細胞減數分裂行為、花粉稔性及2N花粉形成之研究. 嘉義農專學報. 36: 43-53.
3. 朱建鏞、吳安娜. 1997. 蔗糖對玫瑰花組織培養培植體光自營生長的影響. 中國園藝 43:149-158.
4. 林正斌、陳宗禮、葉茂生. 1995. Callose與花粉不稔及授粉後不和合性之關係. 科學農業. 43: 252-256.
5. 林昭榮. 1976. 熱帶性睡蓮. 中國花卉. 22: 70-73.
6. 林瑋玉、黃敏展. 1977. 鐵砲百合花粉貯藏及不和合性之研究. 興大園藝. 2: 37-44.
7. 姜家華. 1981. 林木人工授粉法. 科學農業 29: 305-307.
8. 李金龍. 1987. 園藝作物花粉活力測定與貯藏之研究. 科學農業 35: 347-356.
9. 邱明賜、倪正柱. 1997. 台灣野梨(Pyrus koehnei)花粉習性之研究. 興大園藝 22: 29-38.
10. 李紅曦、許圳塗、李金龍. 1989. 聚乙二醇對百香果花粉體外發芽之影響. 中國園藝 35: 121-130.
11. 沈再木. 1983. 夜來香花粉貯藏及不親和性之研究. 中國園藝 29: 231-239.
12. 沈再木、黃弼臣. 1979. 檬果花粉發芽之研究. 中國園藝 25: 120-128.
13. 陳福旗、陳采晴. 1998. 無機鹽類濃度及有機添加對文心蘭擬原球體及組織培養苗生長之影響. 中國園藝 44:403-412.
14. 涂美智、李哖. 1988. 氮素、蔗糖濃度及光強度對蝴蝶蘭種子發芽及幼苗生長之影響. 中國園藝 34:293-302.
15. 吳安娜、朱建鏞. 1999. 光和蔗糖對玫瑰花組織培養培植體光自營生長的影響. 中國園藝 43:149-158.
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔