研究生: |
張聖麟 CHANG, Shen-lin |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
國中啟智班學生所需之科技素養教育研究 Technological Literacy Education Needed for Mentally Retarded |
指導教授: |
余鑑
Yu, Chien |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
科技應用與人力資源發展學系 Department of Technology Application and Human Resource Development |
畢業學年度: | 84 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 210 |
中文關鍵詞: | 啟智班 、科技素養 |
英文關鍵詞: | Mentally Retarded Students, Technological Literacy |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:164 下載:0 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
本研究旨在探討國中啟智班學生所需科技素養教育,以及其需要程度
之順序以作為未來相關課程規畫之參考。為達成本研究的目的,本研究之
研究方法為以專家座談確立研究架構、文獻探討及分析發展出依據科技的
五大層面(科技的範圍與內涵、科技的演進、科技的程序、科技的應用與
評估、科技的衝擊與影響等),以及七大科技系統(整體、營建、製造、
運輸、傳播、動力能源、生物等),再加上生涯教育課程模式中之四個領
域(日常生活技能、 個人 - 社交技能、職業輔導及基本的學科技能等)
為三構面之科技素養教育內涵架構, 由此架構整理出 21 項科技素養教
育內涵項目,發展為 95題之調查題目。 調查實施則以班級為單位,
國中啟智班及啟智學校國中部之教師及學生家長為調查對象,採分層隨機
取樣及郵寄方式進行。寄出教師問卷 483 份,學生家長問卷 483 份,合
計 966 份,有效回收教師問卷 460 份,學生家長問卷 416 份,合計
876 份,回收率教師為 95.23 %學生家長為 86.13 %。資料處理採次數
分配、百分比、平均數、t 考驗與單因子變異數分析。 本研究發現:
1. 國中啟智班教師及學生家長, 在總體及七大科技系統需要程度評量之
平均數皆 顯著高於需要程度的中間值 3.00。其需要程度由高至低
依次為「傳播科技」、 「整體科技」、 「動力能源」、「生物科
技」、「製造科技」、「運輸科技」 、「營建科技」。 2. 在
未來規畫國中啟智班科技素養教育相關課程時, 需要優先納入課程內容
的項 目計有 66 項(平均值顯著大於需要程度的中間值 3.00 者
)。 暫時不需納入 課程內容的項目計有 23 項(平均值顯著小於
需要程度的中間值 3.00 者)。 3. 國中啟智班或啟智學校國中部之
不同學校性質、 不同學校所在地、不同年齡、 不同年資及具備不
同特殊教育專業情形之教師呈現顯著差異。 4. 教師及學生家長在總
體及七大科技系統之評量無顯著差異。 5. 不同任教科目、 不同性別
、不同學歷及不同畢業科系之教師在總體及七大科技 系統之評量
上無顯著差異。 6. 國中啟智班或啟智學校國中部、不同性別、不同
學校所在地、 不同年齡及不同 職業之學生家長在總體及七大科技
系統之評量上並無顯著差異。
Technolical Literacy Education needed for Mentally Retarded
Students in Junior-hIgh Schools
Abstract The purpose of this study was to discuss the
technological literacyeducation for mentally retarded
students in junior-high schools and as areference for
arragning related curriculum. Experts panels and
documentanalysis were used to achieve this purpose. In
this study, the abovementioned two methods developed five
technology catergories (scope andcontent, evolution, process,
application and evaluation, implication), sevenmain
technology systems (mainbody, construction,
manufacture,transportation, communication, energy and power,
biology), and four aspectsin career education curriculum (
technology ability in daily life, socialcommunication ability,
career consultation and basic technology ability indifferent
lessons). According to the above development, the
3-dimension framework of thecontent of technological literacy
education was constructed. There were 21items deriving from
this framework, and 95 questions were turned
intoquestionnaires. The proportionate stratified random
sampling and maildelivery were executed. The questionnaires
were sent to the pwerents,to theteachers of the mentally
retard-student classes in ordianry junior-highschools, and to
other teachers in the mentally retard-student junior-high
schools. There were 966 questionnaires as a whole sum (half to
teachers andhalf to pwerents). 460 available questionnaires
(95.23%) were returned fromteachers while 416 available
questionnaires from pwerents (86.13%).Statistics methods
such as frequency distribution, percentage, average,t--test
and one-way ANOVA were used to analysize the data of
thequestionnaires. After the survey, the findings were as
follows:-1. The parents and the teachers of the mentally
retard-student classes in ordinary junior-high schools
agreed to the necessity of technological literacy education.
The degree of its necessity was shown definitely over the
mean 3.00. The order of the degree of the necessity of the
technological literacy from high to low was communication,
mainbody, energy and power, biology, manufacture,
transportation and construction.2. When arranging the
technological literacy education curriculum in future, we had
to consider 66 questions which were definitely over the mean
3.00 and put them in the curriculum. On the other hand,
there were 23 questions which were below 3.00, and they
would not be included in the future curriculum
temporarily.3. Teachers under the following conditions had
definite different ideas on the seven main technology
systems: --different nature of schools, or --schools at
different locations, or --different ages, or --different
seniority, or --different professional qualifications on
special education.4. The teachers and pwerents had no definite
different ideas on the seven main technology systems.5.
Teachers of different subjects, sex, qualifications,
majors in graduation, or seniority also have no definite
different ideas on the seven main technology systems.6.
Pwerents under the following conditions had no definite
different ideas on the seven main technology systems: --the
different nature of schools, or --different sex, or
--different ages, or --scho ols at different locations,or
--different jobs.
Technolical Literacy Education needed for Mentally Retarded