跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.220.255.141) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/11/14 05:42
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:李金妮
研究生(外文):Chin-ni Lee
論文名稱:新竹縣不分類身心障礙資源班教師生命意義之研究--以教師的教學經驗與調適歷程為軸
論文名稱(外文):A study of Meaning of Life of the inclusionary classes teacher in Hsin-Chu county
指導教授:李燕蕙李燕蕙引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yen-hui Lee
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:南華大學
系所名稱:生死學研究所
學門:人文學門
學類:其他人文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2006
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:147
中文關鍵詞:資源班教師生命意義融合教育
外文關鍵詞:the teachers at resource program serviceinclusive educationmeaning of life
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:248
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:7
  本研究屬於質性研究,採立意取樣,選取六名任教於新竹縣資源班的教師為研究對象,透過半結構式訪談指引進行深度訪談,引導教導身心障礙學生的教師做教學歷程的回顧,希望從教學所獲得的經驗以及心理調適歷程,去了解其對生命意義的深刻體會,並探討影響生命意義之因素,主要探討的層面涵蓋:對生命意義的看法、生命的價值觀、生命意義的探尋、面對苦難的意義、教學品質與目標、教學的自由、對人生的觀感等。
 
  研究結果發現:受訪者在教學歷程中,大多會經歷「茫然適應期」、「努力改善期」和「看開隨緣期」等三階段。這些教學歷程,受訪者都親身經歷,對於回應教學的問題或者回應自己的問題都責無旁貸,其中呈現出的生命意義內容共計八類:
1. 教學生命歷程本是難測,衝擊、起伏本是必然。
2. 身障生個別差異大,展現多元化教學。
3. 人有多少,生命的意義就有多少。
4. 盡人事、聽天命。
5. 有緣才知惜福。
6. 困境、情緒內化為經驗,心轉好過人轉、山轉。
7. 持續進修,才無後顧之憂。
8. 教在當下,活在當下。
 
  根據教學經驗及生命意義內容可發現,許多因素影響著身障生教師的生命意義,在尊重這份工作和尊重個人生命的成長和反思上、在教學歷程中,善盡為人師之責,並為身障生的受教權爭得一份尊嚴。這些影響身障生教師生命意義的因素包括:
1.受訪者的家人。
2.學生的家長。
3.專業團隊的支援與否。
4.受訪者的人格特質。
5.學生的普通班導師等。
 
  依本研究結果,提出項建議,供身障班教師及相關單位做參考:
1.對身障資源班教師的建議:讓自己的選擇活起來。
2.對教育單位的建議:(1)專業團隊的設置。(2)辦理一系列的長期研習。
3.對政府與政策的建議:(1)需做好學生升學轉銜的工作。(2)減少班級人數或另增資源班。
 
  衷心盼望本研究,能喚起國人對特殊教育及其教師有更深一層的認識,誠心了解、支持與接納,使特殊教育發展的環境能更完善,讓這些為身障生努力的教師有更好的支持,使對弱勢的生命之愛可以得到落實。
  In this work, we conduct a qualitative research by means of purposive sampling; six teachers from resource room in Hsinchu County are involved in this study as our research subjects. Under the practice of semi-structured interview, the teachers involved in this study are guided to make a retrospection of their lives as a teacher. From the teaching experiences the teachers acquired from their profession and during the course of psychological adjustment, we hope to understand their profound realization of the meaning of their lives as a teacher,and to explore factors that affect the meaning of life. Our principal concerns about the subjects’ experiences lie in how they search for the value and the meaning of life, their interpretation of the meaning of confronting hardship, and what they think about the teaching goal and quality, the freedom of teaching, the viewpoints they offer on teaching life, and so forth.
 
  According to our research results, we found that in the teaching efforts with Resource Room, most of the interviewees underwent three stages of psychological transformation sequentially. At the beginning they are at a loss and struggle to get attuned to their job then do their best to better their work and eventually let nature take its course. Since the interviewees have hands-on teaching experiences, their responses to our specially designed questionnaire are basically authentic and appropriately reveal the eight categories of meaning of life listed below.

1.Being an educator itself is a kind of career hard to be predicted. Facing challenges and handicaps during the course are unavoidable.

2.It differs significantly among the students with special needs and diverse instructional methods are required.

3.The more students they educate, the more meaningful their lives will be.

4.Doing one’s best and letting nature take its course.

5.To understand the predestined relationship with these students would make them treasure what they have already.

6.Transforming the predicament and the emotional suffering they encounter into experience is better than asking for circumstance changes for themselves.

7.There will be fewer worries if you refresh your mind constantly.

8.Enjoy every moment of teaching and in your life.
 
  From the experiences in teaching students the meaning of life, we discovered that many factors jointly affect how the teachers at Resource Room think about the meaning of life.To honor their profession and to respect individual’s growth in life and self-examination, in education activities the teachers will carry out their duties of being a teacher and fight for the rights of being educated for students with special needs. The factors mentioned above include:

1.The families of the interviewees.

2.The patriarch of the students.

3.Whether the support from professional team with experiences in special education is available.

4.The characteristic of the interviewee.

5.The homeroom teachers of the students.
 
  Based on our research results, we’d like to offer a couple of opinions and viewpoints on special education for the reference of teachers in this field and the related educational units:
Suggestion 1: To the teachers from resource room, enjoy the choice you made.
Suggestion 2: To the educational administration units:
A. the need for setting up a professional special education team on each campus is necessary.
B. the education authorities should regularly launch a workshop for special-education teachers to meet and exchange ideas.
Suggestion 3: To the policy-making government department:
a.It is crucial to help students prepare themselves for the next step after graduation.
b.To reduce the average student number at each Resource Room so as to make sure the teacher could take a good care of each student.
 
  To sum up, through this research work we’d hopefully like to give the general public and teachers in fields other than special education a better understanding of what special education is about and then receive their support and acceptance to make the development of special education in Taiwan even better. We believe the back up from the masses would certainly be the endless power for the teachers to help the lives from the disadvantaged.
第一章 緒論………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究背景、動機與目的………………………………………………………1
第二節 名詞界定………………………………………………………3
 
第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………………7
第一節 獲取生命意義的三種途徑………………………………………………………7
第二節 Frankl的生命意義觀點之探究………………………………………………………10
第三節 融合教育………………………………………………………24
第四節 融合教育的觀點………………………………………………………35
第五節 實施融合教育的相關配合條件………………………………………………………40
 
第三章 研究方法………………………………………………………50
第一節 採取質的研究方法之原因………………………………………………………50
第二節 深度訪談………………………………………………………52
第三節 研究對象的選擇………………………………………………………54
第四節 研究步驟與過程………………………………………………………56
第五節 資料分析與詮釋………………………………………………………60
 
第四章 結果與討論………………………………………………………63
第一節 對教學經驗與調適情形的看法………………………………………………………63
第二節 資源班教師之生命意義內容………………………………………………………78
第三節 影響資源班教師生命意義的因素………………………………………………………115
 
第五章 結論與建議………………………………………………………124
第一節 研究結論………………………………………………………124
第二節 研究建議………………………………………………………128
 
參考文獻………………………………………………………135
中文部份………………………………………………………135
外文部份………………………………………………………140
附錄次
附錄一 訪談大綱………………………………………………………146
附錄二 編碼分類架構表………………………………………………………147
1)中文部份
 
王淑霞(2001)。國中教育人員對於實施融合教育態度之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系在職進修專班特殊教育行政碩士班碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
 

 
王天苗(2003)。融合教育的實施。載於2003 特殊教育學術研討會會議手冊(37-41頁)。台北市:國立台灣師範大學。
 

 
王天苗(2001)。運用教學支援建立融合教育的實施模式:以一公立幼稚園的經驗為例。特殊教育研究學刊,21,27-51。
 

 
王淑霞(2001)。國中教育人員對於實施融合教育態度之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系在職進修專班特殊教育行政碩士班碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
 

 
江秋樺(2001)。融合教育的理念對注意力缺陷過動症兒童學校教育的衝擊。載於陳政見(主編),融合教育論文集(91-118 頁)。嘉義市:國立嘉義大學特殊教育中心。
 

 
何英奇(1990)。生命態度剖面圖之編製:信度與效度之研究。師大學報,35,71-94。
 

 
何東墀(2001)。融合教育理念的流變與困境。特教園丁,16(4),56-60。
 

 
沈六(1993)。多元文化教育的意識形態與理論。載於中國教育學會主編;多元文化教育。台北:台灣書店。
 

 
李慶良(2002)。美國1997年IDEA 修正案的研究。載於朱經明(主編),特殊教育論文集9101 輯(57-113 頁)。台中市:國立台中師範學院特教中心。
 

 
李慶良(1995)。美國保障身心障礙學生教育權力的法律基礎。國立台中師範學院初等教育研究集刊,3:161-179。
 

 
李惠藺(2001)。特教班教師支援融合班教師之行動研究-以台北市立師院實小附設幼稚園為例。國立台北師範學院特殊教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
 
吳淑美(1999)。融合教育的實施與困境。國教世紀,188,6-11。
 

 
林麗容(1999)。融合教育的實施方式及其相關的配合措施。國教輔導,38(3),19-22。
 

 
周台傑(1998)。特殊教育學生融合教育之探討。跨越社會的鴻溝-智障、情障、學障的問題與對策研討會會議實錄。台北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
 

 
周台傑(1998)。特殊教育學生融合教育之探討。跨越社會的鴻溝-智障、情障、學障的問題與對策研討會會議實錄。台北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
 

 
邱上真(2001)。普通班教師對特殊需求學生之因應措施、所面對之困境以及所需要之支持系統。特殊教育研究學刊,21,1-26。
 

 
侯麗玲(1986)。意義治療團體對教育學院大一新生生活目標輔導效果之研究。國立台灣教育學院輔導研究所碩士論文。
 

 
胡永崇(2001)。融合教育:意義、爭議與配合措施。載於陳政見(主編),融合教育論文集(21-40 頁)。嘉義市:國立嘉義大學特殊教育中心。
 

 
徐美蓮、薛秋子(2000)。融合教育教學模式-以自閉症兒童融入普通班為例。高雄市:復文。
 

 
秦麗花(2001)。破除融合教育的迷思,建立應有的正見。特教園丁,16(4),51-55。
 

 
陳政見(2001)。融合教育思想演進及個案實例。載於陳政見(主編),融合教育論文集(133-160 頁)。嘉義市:國立嘉義大學特殊教育中心。
 

 
陳金池(1996)。融合安置及其對特殊教育的啟示。教師之友,37(4),49-54。
 

 
陳國鎮(2000)。又是人間走一回—生命的起承轉合。2005年4月16日。取自http://www.thinkerstar.com.tw/newidea/chenkl.html.
 

 
教育部(1995)。中華民國身心障礙教育白皮書-充分就學、適性發展。台北:教育部。
 

 
張海清(2001)。從教師的觀點談學校行政對「融合教育」的支援。特教園丁,16(3),15-19。
 

 
鈕文英、邱上真、任懷鳴、林淑玲、莊竣博(2000)。國小階段實施融合教育可行模式之研究。教育部專題研究計畫成果報告,教育部特殊教育小組。
 

 
游�琱s譯(1987),Vitor E Frankl著。生命的主題。台北:書康。
 

 
黃瑛綺(2002)。國小融合班級教師教學困擾之研究。國立台東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
 

 
傅偉勳(1993)。死亡的尊嚴與生命的尊嚴。台北:正中書局。
 

 
彭慧玲(2002)。國小普通班教師對融合教育態度之研究。國立台中師範學院進修暨推廣部國民教育研究所特殊教育教學碩士學位班碩士論文,未出版,台中市。
 

 
楊瑞文(2002)。國民中學教師對聽覺障礙學生融合教育的認知與支持度之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
 

 
甄炳炫(2002)。資源班教師在融合教育趨勢下的角色調整與自我期許。屏師特殊教育,3,50-57。
 

 
趙可式、沈錦會譯(2001)。活出意義來從集中營說到存在主義,第四版。台北:光啟社。
 

 
鄭雅莉(2001)。台灣幼稚園教師與家長對融合教育的看法。屏東師院學報,15,259-292。
 

 
鄭麗月(1999)。從特殊兒童的融合教育談學校行政的配合。特教新知通訊,6(1),1-4。
 

 
蔡明富(1998)。談融合教育下教師與家長所面臨之問題及其啟示。教師之友,39(2),62-69。
 

 
黎慧欣(1996)。國民教育階段教師與學生家長對「融合教育」的認知與態度調查研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。台北市。
 

 
蘇燕華(2000)。融合教育的理想與挑戰-國小普通班教師的經驗。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
 

 
2)外文部份
 
Brownell, M. T., & Pajares, F. (1999). Teacher efficacy and perceived success in mainstreaming students with learning and behavior disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 22(3), 154-164.
 

 
Bulka,R.P.(1979).The quest for ultimate meaning: Principles and application of logptherapy. New York: Philosophical Library.
 

 
Chiang, L. H. (1999). Secondary teachers’ perceptions of regular education initiative. ( ERICDocument Reproduction Service NO. ED 439552 )
 

 
Cook, B. G., Semmel, M. I., & GerberM. M. (1999). Attitudes of principles and special education teachers toward the inclusion of students with mild disabilities--critical differences of opinion. Remedial and Special Education, 20(4), 199-207.
 

 
Dyck, N., Sundbye, N., & Pemberton, J. (1997). A recipe for efficient co-teaching. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30(2), 42-45.
 

 
Ferguson, D. L., Ralph, G., & Katul, N. A. (1996). From ”special”educators to educators: The case for mixed ability groups of teachers in restructured schools. ( ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED405718 )
 

 
Fabry, J.B.(1988).Guideposts to meaning: Discovering what really matters. Okland, CA: New Harbinger Publication, Inc.
 

 
Frankl,V.E.(1967).Psychotherapy and Existentialism: Selected Paper on ogotherapy. New York: Washington Square Press.
 

 
Frankl,V.E.(1965).The doctor and the soul: From psychotherapy to logotherapy.(2nd ed.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.
 

 
Frankl,V.E.(1992).Man’s search for meaning: An introduction to logotherapy(4th ed.). Boston: Beacon Press.
 

 
Frankl,V.E.(1986).The doctor and the soul: From psychotherapy and logotherapy. New York:Vintase Broks.
 

 
Forest,M.,&Pearpoint,J.(1991).Two roads:Exclusion or Inclusion. Development Disabilities Bulletin,19(1),1-11
 

 
Fox, N. E., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (1997). Implementing inclusion at the middle school level: lessons from a negative example. Exceptional Children, 64(1), 81-98.
 

 
Foley, R. M., & Mundschenk, N. A. (1997). Collaboration activities and competencies of secondary school special educators: A national survey. Teacher Education and Special Education, 20(1), 47-60.
 

 
Frankl,V.E.(1988). The Will to Meaning:Foundations and Application of Logotherapy(2nd ed.).New York:New American Library.
 

 
Gettinger, M., Stoiber, K. C., Goetz, D., & Caspe, E. (1999). Competencies and traning needs for early childhood inclusion specialists. Teacher Education and Special Education, 22(1),41-54.
 

 
Giangreco, M. F., Dennis, R., Cloninger, C., Edelman, S., & Schattman, R. (1993). “ I’ve counted Jon”: Transformational experiences of teachers educating students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59(4), 359-372.
 

 
Gill, A.S.(1970). An appraisal of Viktor E. Frankl’s theory of logotherapy as a philosophical base for education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The American University.
 

 
Hedlud,D.E.(1977).Personal Meaning: Guidance The Problem of Education for Window. Personal and ce Journal.vol.55,no.10.
 

 
Heffernan,R.(1993).Serving students with disabilities ungeneral education:The partnership. Unpublished educational dissertation, University of San Diego State, California.
 

 
Kirk, S.A.,& Gallagher, J.J(1983).Educating exceptional children .Boston:Houghton Mifflin.
 

 
Kauffman, J. M.(1995).Inclusion of all students with emotional or behavior disorders?Let’s think again. Phi Delta Kappan,76(7),542-546.
 

 
Katul, N. A. (1995). Inclusion specialists: Are they really fostering inclusion? ( ERIC DocumentReproduction Service NO. ED 405717)
 
National Association of State Boards of Education [NASBE]. (1992). Winners all: A call forinclusive schools (October).
 

 
Klinger, J. K., & Vaghn, S. (2002). The changing roles and responsibilities of an LD specialist. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 19-31.
 

 
Leyser, Y. (2002). Choices of instructional practices and efficacy beliefs of Israeli general and special education: A cross-culture research initiative. Teacher Education and Special Education, 25(2), 154-167.
 

 
McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. L. (2002). Inclusion and school change: Teacher perceptions regarding curricular and institutional adaptation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 25(1), 41-54.
 

 
McCormick, L., Loeb, D., & Schiefelbusch, R. L. (1996). Supporting children with communication difficulties in inclusive settings: school-based language intervention ( 3rded.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
 

 
Rabbi, E.A.& Grollman, D. D.(1977). Explaining death to children. Journal of School Heath,57(5),336-339。
 

 
Sailor,W.,Gee,K.,&Karasoff ,P.(1992)School restructuring and full inclusion(ERIC Document Reproduction Service NOED 365 050)
 

 
Stainback, S., Stainback, W., & Moravec, J. (1992). Using curriculum to build inclusive classrooms. In S. Stainback & W. Stainback (Eds.), Curriculum considerations in inclusiveclassrooms (pp. 65-83). Maryland: Paul H. Brookes.
 

 
Safford,P.L.&Rosen,L.A(1981).Mainstreaming:Application of a Philosophical perspective in an integrated kindergarden program. Topic in Early Childhood Special Education,1(2)1-10
 

 
Sapon-Shevin,M.(1992).Celebrating Diversity, Creating community: curriculum that honors and builds on differences. In Stainback,S.&Stainback,W.(1992)(eds.).Curriculum consideration in inclusions in inclusive classrooms: facilitating learning for all students,19-36.Blatmore:Paul H. Brookes.
 

 
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1990).The support facilitator at work. In W. Stainback & S.Stainback (Eds.), Support networks for inclusion schooling: Interdependent integrated education (pp.37-47). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
 

 
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1996). Teacher perceptions of mainstreaming/ inclusion,1958-1995: A research synthesis. Exceptional Children, 63(1), 59-74.
 
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1989). Common concern regarding merger. In S. Stainback, W.
 

 
Salend, S. J. (1998). Effective mainstreaming--Creating inclusive classrooms (3rd ed). NewJersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
 

 
Stanovich, P. J. (1999). Conversations about inclusion. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(6),54-58.
 

 
Yalom,I.D.(1980).Existential Psychotherapy. New York: Basic book.
 

 
Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., & Thurlow, M. L. (2000). Critical issues in special education (3rdEd). New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
 

 
York,J.,&Vandercook,T.(1991).Desingning an integrated program for students with serve disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children,23,22-28.
 
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 邱上真(2001)。普通班教師對特殊需求學生之因應措施、所面對之困境以及所需要之支持系統。特殊教育研究學刊,21,1-26。
2. 林麗容(1999)。融合教育的實施方式及其相關的配合措施。國教輔導,38(3),19-22。
3. 吳淑美(1999)。融合教育的實施與困境。國教世紀,188,6-11。
4. 何東墀(2001)。融合教育理念的流變與困境。特教園丁,16(4),56-60。
5. 何英奇(1990)。生命態度剖面圖之編製:信度與效度之研究。師大學報,35,71-94。
6. 王天苗(2001)。運用教學支援建立融合教育的實施模式:以一公立幼稚園的經驗為例。特殊教育研究學刊,21,27-51。
7. 秦麗花(2001)。破除融合教育的迷思,建立應有的正見。特教園丁,16(4),51-55。
8. 陳金池(1996)。融合安置及其對特殊教育的啟示。教師之友,37(4),49-54。
9. 張海清(2001)。從教師的觀點談學校行政對「融合教育」的支援。特教園丁,16(3),15-19。
10. 甄炳炫(2002)。資源班教師在融合教育趨勢下的角色調整與自我期許。屏師特殊教育,3,50-57。
11. 鄭麗月(1999)。從特殊兒童的融合教育談學校行政的配合。特教新知通訊,6(1),1-4。
12. 蔡明富(1998)。談融合教育下教師與家長所面臨之問題及其啟示。教師之友,39(2),62-69。
13. 朱子豪(1990),地理資訊化的沿海土地利用評估與規劃,「中國地理學會會刊」,19:31-36。
14. 朱子豪(1991),地理資訊化的海土地利用評估與規劃,「中國地理學會會刊」,19:157-175。
15. 邱文彥(1994),展望二十一世紀台灣的海岸管理,「中國環保雜誌」,第21、22期合訂本,196-205頁。