學齡自閉症類群障礙兒童在融合與資源班中的溝通互動表現

本研究欲探究ASD學童在不同班級內與不同教師溝通互動表現的差異。研究招募兩組研究對象，分別為學童組與教師組，共15位研究對象，學童組包括7位6至12歲ASD兒童，教師組包括5位普通班一般教師及3位資源班特教教師。本研究僅觀察教室內結構化課程，研究者全程未參與教室內活動。錄影記錄每位ASD學童三堂在普通班與一般教師的溝通互動及三堂在資源班與特教教師的溝通互動，共六堂，每次錄影19分鐘，一天錄影一次，共計42部（7位*6堂）溝通互動影片，而每部影片將刪去一開始的三分鐘，故最終記錄的影片總時長為672分鐘（42部*16分鐘）。研究者與第二位觀察者記錄影片出現的溝通行為，包含教師提供的溝通機會、溝通機會的功能性類型（要求、命名、回答與模仿）與ASD學童的回應效度，也計算觀察者內/間信度，統計分析記錄結果與討論結果。研究結果發現資源班特教教師組提供的溝通機會百分比明顯高於普通班一般教師，而兩組不同教師在不同類型上的表現不完全相同，在模仿類型上兩組教師有顯著差異，資源班教師組會提供較多的模仿類型，而普通班教師組則較少提供模仿類型，但兩組教師提供的功能性類型皆以回答類型為主。另外，ASD學童對資源班教師組適宜回應及開啟溝通機會的百分比較高。雖然研究提出四項研究限制，也建議日後研究的方向， 包括：能增加招募人數、不同族群與擴大招募的地區，以利進行更完整的討論。本研究建議現場教師與相關專業專家可依據本研究結果更了解ASD學童的溝通互動行為，在提供溝通機會類型上能更多元，也能辨識ASD適宜回應的行為，以便提供進一步策略的支持，將更有效改善ASD學童在學校整體的參與狀況。總結，不同班級內的教師提供ASD學童的溝通機會表現不同，且ASD學童在不同班級與不同教師也會有不同的溝通互動，但整體回應表現上仍不理想。

The present study aims to investigate the differences in communication and interaction performance of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in different education settings with different teachers. We recruited two groups of participants: a children group and a teachers group, a total of 15 research participants were recruited .The children group consisted of 7 children with ASD aged 6 to 12, while the teachers group comprised 5 general education teachers and 3 special education teachers. The study solely observed structured lessons within classrooms, and researchers did not participate in any classroom activities throughout the observation. Video recordings each ASD child for three sessions of communication and interaction with a general education teacher in regular classroom and three sessions with a special education teacher in resource classroom, totaling six sessions. Each video lasted 19 minutes and was recorded once per day, resulting in 42 videos in total (7 students* 6 sessions).The researcher removed the first three minutes from each video, so the final total video duration was 672 minutes (42 videos* 16 minutes).The researchers and a second observer documented the communication behaviors displayed in the video clips, including the opportunities for communication provided by the teacher, the functional types of communication opportunities (requesting, naming, answer, and imitation), the percentage of responses from ASD children , and the percentage of initiated communication opportunities from ASD children, and observers also calculate intra/inter-rater reliability. The study found that the percentage of communication opportunities provided by special education teachers in resource classes was significantly higher than that provided by general education teachers in regular classes. The two groups of teachers exhibited different performance patterns in various types of communication. In terms of imitation-type communication, there was a significant difference between the two groups; special education teachers provided more imitation-type opportunities, whereas general education teachers provided fewer. However, both groups primarily provided response-type opportunities. Additionally, ASD students exhibited a higher percentage of appropriate responses and were more likely to initiate communication opportunities with special education teachers. Although the study identified four research limitations, it also suggested directions for future research, including increasing the sample size, recruiting participants from diverse populations, and expanding the study to different regions for a more comprehensive discussion. This study suggests that teachers and relevant professionals can gain a better understanding of the communication and interaction behaviors of ASD students. By providing a more diverse range of communication opportunities and identifying ASD students’ appropriate response behaviors, educators can implement more effective support strategies to improve the overall participation of ASD students in school. In conclusion, teachers in different class settings provide varying levels of communication opportunities for ASD students, and ASD students interact differently depending on the class setting and the teachers they engage with. However, overall response performance remains suboptimal.