개별화교육프로그램 작성과 운영과정에 대한 미국 특수교사의 인식에 미치는 변인에 관한 연구 = Factors Related to Special Educators' Perception of the IEP Process

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study investigated the satisfaction of 191 special educators with their IEP process. Thirty one percent of respondents indicated that they worked in the elementary school level, followed by high school level(20%) and middle school (17%). All respondents were divided into either a positive group or a comparison group. The positive group included special educators who expressed their positive attitudes toward the amount of time to write IEPs and ability to write effective Present Level of Education Performances(PLEPs), goals, and objectives. Logistic regression analysis was adopted to identify factors that distinguished two groups. The result identifies variables that are positively related to the probability of satisfaction with IEP process. These variables are following: (a) satisfaction with the method by which I write IEPs, (b) communication among IEP team members is open and receptive, (c) the formal communication system within IEP teams assures collaborative monitoring and responses to student performance, and (d) I feel confident in the use of my current IEP software. Implication for Korean special education was also discussed.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 개별화교육프로그램(IEP)의 작성과 운영과정에 대한 미국 특수교사의 인식을 분석함으로써, IEP의 작성과 운영과정에 영향을 미치는 주요한 변인들을 확인하고자 하였다. 미네소타 주 191명의 IIEP 담당 특수교사들을 대상으로 한 본 연구는, 초등학교 IEP 담당 특수교사가 31%, 고등학교 20%, 중학교 17%, 유치원 8% 순이었다. IEP의 작성과 운영과정에 대한 특수교사의 태도를 종속변인으로, 특수교사변인, IEP 작성방법, IEP 팀 협력, IEP 작성과 운영을 지원하는 컴퓨터와 IEP 소프트웨어를 독립변인으로 하였다. 로지스틱 회귀분석을 통한 결과는 IEP 작성 방법, 팀 구성원들 간의 협력, 현재 사용하고 있는 IEP 소프트웨어에 대한 만족도가 IEP 작성과 운영과정에 대한 특수교사의 태도에 중요한 영향을 미치고 있음을 확인하였다. 이는 IEP의 실제를 개선하려 노력하는 우리나라의 특수교육에도 시사점을 제공해 준다. IEP 소프트웨어 개발과 보급에 대한 정책적 지원은 특수교사들이 보다 효율적으로 IEP 작성과 운영과정에 참여할 수 있도록 도울 것이다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 태원성, "초등학교 특수학급의 개별화교육계획의 작성과운영에 관한 질적 사례연구" 한국특수교육문제연구소 8 (8): 261-281, 2007

2 교육인적자원부, "장애인 등에 대한 특수교육법" 교육인적자원부 2007

3 이형열, "여성 청각장애 특수학교 졸업 근로자의 개인적 특성, 취업경로, 직업훈련, 직업만족이 직업유지에 미치는 영향" 한국특수교육문제연구소 9 (9): 145-170, 2008

4 김윤실, "미국 장애인교육법과 우리나라 특수교육법에서 개별화교육프로그램(IEP) 고찰" 한국특수교육학회 43 (43): 47-69, 2008

5 윤광보, "개별화교육계획에 의한 교육과정 개별화 방안 연구" 한국특수교육문제연구소 9 (9): 387-408, 2008

6 Smith, S. W., "Using computers to generate IEPs: Rethinking the process" 13 : 81-90, 1996

7 Skrtic, T. M., "The special education paradox: Equity as the way to excellence. in: Challenging orthodoxy in special education: Dissenting voices" Love Publishing Company 91-166, 2003

8 Huefner, D.S., "The risks and opportunities of the IEP requirements under IDEA '97" 33 (33): 195-204, 2000

9 Clark, S. G., "The IEP process as a tool for collaboration" 33 (33): 56-66, 2000

10 Fish, W. W., "The IEP meeting: perceptions of parents of students who receive special education services" 53 (53): 8-14, 2008

11 "No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425"

12 Pruit, P., "Listen to us! Parents speak out about their interactions with special educators" 42 : 161-166, 1998

13 "Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 614 et seq"

14 "Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq"

15 Menlove, R. R., "Individualized education program (IEP) team member satisfaction with the IEP development process for students with disabilities" Utah State University 1999

16 Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA), "H.R. 1350 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 compared to IDEA '97" Author 2004

17 Wilson, G. L., "Form versus function; using technology to develop Individualized Education Programs for students with disabilities" 20 (20): 37-46, 2005

18 Salembier, G., "Facilitating participation: Parents' perceptions of their involvement in the IEP/transition planning process" 20 : 29-42, 1997

19 "Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Pub. L. No. 94–.142, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq"

20 Ryan, L. B., "Computerized vs. noncomputerized individualized education program: teachers'attitudes, time, and cost" 8 (8): 5-12, 1986

21 Smith, S. W., "Comparison of individualized education programs (IEPs) of students with behavioral disorders and learning disabilities" 24 (24): 85-100, 1990

22 Borden, L. M., "Assessing your collaboration: a self evaluation tool" 37 (37): 70-74, 1999

23 Lee-Tarver, A., "Are individualized Education Plans a good thing? A survey of teachers' perceptions of the utility of I뗸 in regular education settings" 33 (33): 263-272, 2006

24 Schlager, M. S., "Analyzing online teacher networks: cyber networks require cyber research tools" 60 (60): 86-100, 2009

25 Smith, S. W., "An analysis of individualized education programs (IEPs) for students with behavioral disorders" 14 (14): 107-116, 1989

26 Lohmeier, K. L., "Aligning state standards and the expanded core curriculum: balancing the impact of the No Child Left Behind Act" 103 (103): 44-47, 2009

27 Menlove, R. R., "A field of IEP dreams: Increasing general education teacher participation in the IEP development process" 33 (33): 28-33, 2001

28 Martin, J. E., "A 3-year study of middle, junior high, and high school IEP meetings" 70 (70): 285-297, 2004