本研究旨在瞭解特殊教育工作者對於我國發展特殊教育輔助性科技政策的看法。研究者以自編的「特殊教育輔助性科技政策意見調查表」進行問卷調查，以220位包括：縣市特殊教育行政人員、特殊教育領域學者專家、特殊教育教師以及家長團體人員在內的特教工作者為對象。結果發現： 1. 特殊教育工作者對輔助科技本土化用語多傾向使用「科技輔具」一詞，除了學者專家外，對於「教育輔助器材」以及「輔具」也覺得是合適的用詞，至於「輔助性科技」則只受學者專家青睞。 2. .除了特殊教育行政人員有較多人認為政府已重視輔助性科技政策而且法律基礎已足夠外，學者專家、學校教師、家長團體均認為目前政府並未積極重視特殊教育輔助性科技政策而且法律基礎也不足，其中尤以學者專家的看法較為負面。 3. 特教工作者都對發展輔助性科技政策均持正向支持的態度，認為科技可以協助身心障礙學生的學習，政府應積極發展政策，並將學生所需的設備與服務放入個別化教育計畫中。至於實施上則認為輔助性科技設備主要應透過教育部專款補助的方式來提供；在阻礙政策發展的因素中則以大眾對輔助性科技認知的不足以及經費的缺乏為首要阻力。 4. 特教工作者普遍認為有設置特殊教育輔助性科技資源中心的必要，而且該中心宜具有輔助性科技設備展示、需求評估、訓練、租借與流通、維修與保養、研發、觀念宣導以及辦理研習等功能。其中學校的特教教師尤其認為該中心應積極辦理設備使用的訓練以及專業人員的知能研習。至於設置方式除縣市特教行政人員認為應由教育部分區設置外，其他三組多認為可以由教育部設置分區資源中心以及縣市設置地方資源中心的方式並行。 5. 特殊教育工作者多認為特教老師與相關專業人員缺乏運用科技來協助學生學習的知能。宜藉辦理各項教師在職訓練以及在現有師資培育課程中增加輔助性科技相關課程，來提昇相關人員的專業知能，此外學者專家則較其他三組偏好以增設系所方式來培育相關專業人員。

　　　　　The purpose of this study was to investigate special education workers' opinions about current policy of assistive technology for special education. A questionnaire, developed by authors and reviewed by three expertises in this area, was sent out to people including government administrators, special education experts, special educators and those working in associations for exceptional children. 220 people completed the questionnaire out of 368. The return rate was 59.8%. The results from the return questionnaire indicate the followings: 1. People working in special education prefer to use the term "technology device" in the process of assistive technology localization. "Assistant device for education" and "device" were also appropriate terms except for special education experts. Those experts intend to use "assistive technology." 2. People working in special education except for government administrators thought that current policy of assistive technology is still not clear. Those related regulations were insufficient for applying assistive technology. 3. Most people working in special education hold the positive attitude toward applying assistive technology to enhance learning ability for those children with special needs. Assistive technology devices and services for individual students should be considered in the Individualized Educational Plan. Ministry of Education should provide sufficient funding for assistive technology services. Poor public awareness and insufficient funding were the most leading two factors that prevent assistive technology policy development. 4. Most people working in special education emphasized the importance of resource center for assistive technology. The functions of resource center should include demonstrate assistive rechnology devices, evaluate and train people to use assistive devices, or loan and maintain the devices, hold related workshop, as well as educate public. 5. Most people working in special education were not aware of applying assistive technology in children with special needs. Assistive technology related courses should be included in the professional traning program and in-service training. Comparing with other professional groups, special education experts tend to set up the professional program for assistive technology in undergraduate and graduate level.