지적장애아동을 대상으로 한 환경중심 언어중재 연구의 문헌분석: (1992년～2014년을 중심으로) (Analysis of Research Literatures on Milieu Language Intervention for Children with Intellectual Retardation: between 1992 and 2014)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 대구대학교 한국특수교육문제연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 특수교육저널:이론과 실천 / 15권 / 4호 / 507 ~ 533페이지
· 저자명 : 송희선, 이영철

초록

본 연구는 1992년부터 2014년 7월까지 지적장애아동만을 대상으로 한 환경중심 언어중재를 실행한 석박사 학위논문, 학술지 논문 총 21편을 대상으로 문헌분석을 실시하였다. 연구결과 첫째, 중재목적은 의사소통기능의 향상이 가장 높게 나왔으며 중재가 유아와 초등학생연령을 중심으로 한 연구가 많았음을 볼 때 유아 및 초등학생에게 많이 적용하는 중재임을 볼 수 있었다. 중재장소로는 학교와 복지관 순으로 나타났으며 중재시간은 별도시간과 놀이시간, 특별시간, 간식시간 순으로 나타났다. 둘째, 선별도구로는 지능검사와 적응검사, 언어검사를 동시에 실시하는 경우는 52.4%로 나타났고 지능검사는 KEDI-WISC와 인물화에 의한 간편지능검사를 동시에 사용하는 경우가 19%로 나타났다. 의사소통진단도구사용은 교육진단검사가 42.9%로 나타났다. 셋째, 언어발달 연령에 따른 PND는 중재초기에는 중간정도의 효과를 나타냈으나 통계적으로는 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 넷째, 강화된 환경중심언어중재가 기초선-중재 1기에 높은 효과를 보였으나 통계적으로 유의미한 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났으며 강화된 환경중심언어중재 보다 환경중심언어중재를 더 많이 활용하고 있음을 볼 수 있다.

영어초록

The purpose of this study was to make a analysis of research literatures 21 theses, dissertations and articles that offered milieu language intervention for children with intellectual retardation only in between 1992 and July of 2014. The findings of the study were as follows: First, the most common goal of the intervention was to improve communicative competency. Many of the studies provided the intervention primarily for preschoolers and elementary school students, which denoted that this intervention was applied much to preschoolers and elementary school students. The most dominant place for the intervention was schools, followed by welfare centers. As for the time for the intervention, the most common case was providing it separately without using the regular timetable, and the second most case was doing it during play. The third most case was using a time for a special purpose, and the fourth most case was using a time for eating between meals. Second, concerning instrumentation, the case that an intelligence test, adjustment test and language test were all conducted at the same time accounted for 52.4 percent. In the case of intelligence test, the case that KEDI-WISC and DAP(Draw-a-Person) were both utilized accounted for 19 percent. Regarding instruments for communication diagnosis, PEP(Psycho Educational Profile) accounted for 42.9 percent. Third, as for PND according to the age of language development, it produced a medium level of effect in the initial stage of intervention, but the effect wasn't statistically significant. Fourth, reinforced milieu language intervention was highly effective in the baseline and the intervention stage 1, but the effect was not statistically significant. The use of milieu language intervention was more prevailing than that of reinforced milieu language intervention.

참고자료

· 없음