4.3 Article

Quality in special education from teacher perspectives

期刊

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08856257.2023.2294239

关键词

Quality in special education; separate special education schools; teacher perspective

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to identify quality indicators in separate special education schools, based on the perspectives of teachers. Six main themes were identified, including teacher and administrator qualifications, school environment, curriculum and educational process, family interest and attitude, policies and practices, and child-related factors. Various factors such as qualified teachers, materials, social perspective, evidence-based practices, family support, and individualized education programs were found to play important roles as quality indicators in separate special education schools.
In this study, we aimed to determine the quality indicators in separate special education schools that only educate individuals with special needs from the perspectives of teachers. We collected data from 82 special education teachers included by maximum diversity sampling using a semi-structured interview form. We conducted a content analysis using the MAXQDA qualitative data analysis program. As a result of the study, we identified six main themes as quality indicators in separate special education schools. These were teacher and administrator qualifications, school environment (social and physical), curriculum and educational process, family interest and attitude, policies and practices, and child-related factors. Moreover, several factors such as teachers with degrees in special education, materials, social perspective, evidence-based practices, family support, and individualised education programs were found to play an important role as quality indicators in separate special education schools. Improvements in quality indicators in separate special education schools can contribute to student outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据