学前融合教育成为各国特殊教育发展的趋势，随着学前融合教育的推进，特殊儿童在普通幼儿园的入学率不断提升，处于弱势群体的学龄前特殊儿童的教育问题日益受到关注。然而，我国特殊儿童的学前教育尚缺乏系统的支持体系，学前融合教育相关政策颁布数量少，内容涵盖面窄，不具有强制性实施的“威力”；多方主体对于学前融合教育的态度比较消极；且融合幼儿园师资数量不足，专业化水平不够等，我国学前融合教育质量现状不容乐观，亟需有效的教学方式应对异质性的儿童需求。合作教学被被证明是循证融合教育最佳实践的一种方式，具有很强的可操作性，并且有助于融合教育推广及质量提升，在教育目标设定、教学方式设置以及教育内容选择等具有很强的灵活性的学前教育阶段也易于进行合作教学践行的探索，已有研究表明合作教师构建的合作关系及合作教学实践质量将直接关系合作教学效果，因此高质量的学前融合教育的实现需要对合作教学的实施及基于此，对园所内合作教学的实施过程与合作关系的构建样态进行揭示，并进一步探索园所内的合作教学与合作关系缘何呈现如此的样态。合作关系的构建进行关注。在田野学校研究者发现，园所整体生机勃勃的发展态势下，教师们对融合幼儿园中合作教学呈现出多元的意义感知和行为取向，产生了不同的班级合作教学效果。

为能够细致了解学前融合教育场域中普教教师与特教教师合作教学的过程和关系，本研究采用质性的研究范式，个案研究方法，通过访谈法、观察法与实物收集等进行数据收集，通过“自下而上”（从资料中提炼出类别与主题）和“自上而下”（采用分析框架来发现资料中蕴含的主题和与本土概念）相结合，使用扎根理论的三级编码技术，对访谈文本和资料展开分析。

于田野学校中进行了为期两月余的观察、访谈以及实物收集，发现园所内教师呈现出一致的积极融合教育态度，但对于良好的合作教学的认知存在些许不一致。大多数合作教师认为合作教学对普通儿童、特殊儿童以及教师均有益；良好的合作教学对教师提出了更高的要求，良好的合作教学是以儿童为中心，不要分工过于细致；而对于良好的合作关系的认知，合作教师分别将重心置于关注儿童需求、熟悉合作教师以及了解合作教师的性格与做事态度等方面。大多数教师认同良好的合作关系需要合作教师相互信任、及时沟通、有一定的教育理念、有责任心，教师双方“合得来”。自主选择合作教师被认为是高效建立良好合作关系的途径。

对于合作教学的互动样态，在合作教学中，Y融合幼儿园主要对合作教师提出了班级主班、配班及保育教师，以及发挥自身专业优势、帮助合作教师和支持特殊儿童的角色期待。在多重角色期待以及教师自主意义感知下合作教师将角色定位为“特殊儿童支持者”、“合作教师专业助力者”以及“合作教师心理赋能者”，而针对特教教师，教师们普遍强调特教教师是普教教师辅助者。在合作教学过程中，合作教师因合作教学内容、合作教学流程以及模式不同，呈现出不同的结果，三对教师分别形成了“问题解决导向：合作默契”、“优势互补导向：相互依赖”以及“任务执行导向：相互疏离”的合作教学；而合作关系方面，教师均为被动参与到合作关系中来的，但基于不同的问题解决方式等产生了不同的在工作与日常中的合作关系体验：“合作默契且情感联结”、“相互依赖且尊重信任”以及“相互疏离且互不认同”的合作关系。

分析其影响因素发现，合作教师的认知与互动主要受到组织制度环境以及来自教师个体的自主性的影响。Y融合幼儿园中的外地意义中的制度逻辑：职业逻辑与教师各互动行为呈现松散耦合，教育逻辑与各方面表现“得过且过”类型教师的互动行为呈现脱耦的状态。其内地意义中的制度逻辑：“科层逻辑”、“人情逻辑”以及“专业逻辑”主要以“科层逻辑”为主导，多层逻辑相交叉或结合作用于合作教师的认知与行为；合作教师通过组织互动对园所教学制度给以重构；教师自主性通过反思性监控评估合作教学场域中的因素做出行为决策，通过合作教学中发挥权能，进行自我调整或保持自我，基于此与合作教师进行互动。

最后，对Y融合幼儿园中合作教师的“合作教师分工”的认知，互动中形成的“特教教师是普教教师辅助者”的角色定位以及部分教师认知与行为相脱节的问题进行分析，并针对幼儿结构设置不合理、缺乏针对性培训与持续性助理机制、特教教师角色同化的困境提出突破路径。

Preschool inclusive education has become a trend in the development of special education in various countries, and with the promotion of preschool inclusive education, the enrolment rate of children with special needs in ordinary kindergartens is increasing, and the education of preschool children with special needs, who are in a disadvantaged position, is receiving more and more attention. However, China's preschool education for children with special needs still lacks a systematic support system, and the number of policies related to preschool inclusive education is small, the content of which is narrow and does not have the "power" of mandatory implementation; the attitude of many parties towards preschool inclusive education is rather negative; and the number of teachers in inclusive kindergartens is insufficient and the level of specialisation is not sufficient. The quality of preschool integrated education in China is not promising and there is an urgent need for effective teaching methods to respond to the heterogeneous needs of children. Co-teaching has been proven to be an evidence-based best practice in inclusive education, which is highly operational and helps to promote and improve the quality of inclusive education. The quality of co-teacher relationships and co-teaching practices is directly related to the effectiveness of co-teaching, so the implementation of co-teaching and the construction of co-teaching relationships need to be addressed in order to achieve high-quality preschool inclusive education. The field school researchers found that the overall dynamism of the school was such that teachers had a variety of perceptions of meaning and behavioural orientations towards co-teaching in the inclusive kindergarten, resulting in different classroom co-teaching outcomes. Based on this, the implementation of co-teaching and the construction of co-operative relationships in the kindergarten are revealed, and the reasons for such co-teaching and co-operative relationships in the kindergarten are further explored.

    In order to gain a detailed understanding of the process and relationship between general education teachers and special education teachers in the preschool inclusive education field, this study adopts a qualitative research paradigm, a case study approach, data collection through interviews, observations and physical collection, and a bottom-up approach (extracting categories and themes from the data) and a top-down approach. "The interview texts and data were analyzed using a combination of 'top-down' (using an analytical framework to uncover themes and indigenous concepts embedded in the data), using the three-level coding technique of rooted theory.

Over two months of observation, interviews and physical collection in the field schools, it was found that there was a consistent positive attitude towards inclusive education among the teachers in the schools, but some inconsistency in the perception of good co-teaching. The majority of the co-teachers believed that co-teaching was beneficial for children in general, children with special needs and teachers; that good co-teaching placed greater demands on teachers, that it was child-centred and not too detailed; and that the perception of good co-teaching was focused on attending to children's needs, getting to know the co-teacher and understanding the personality and attitudes of the co-teacher. The majority of teachers agreed that a good partnership required a good understanding of children's needs. The majority of teachers agreed that a good partnership required mutual trust, timely communication, a certain educational philosophy, a sense of responsibility and that both teachers 'got along'. Self-selection of co-teachers was seen as an effective way to build a good partnership.

In terms of the type of interaction in co-teaching, the Y Integrated Kindergarten mainly expects the co-teacher to be the main classroom teacher, the classroom teacher and the caregiver, as well as to use their professional strengths to help the co-teacher and support the children with special needs. With the multiple role expectations and the teacher's own sense of meaning, the cooperating teachers position themselves as "supporters of children with special needs", "professional helpers of the cooperating teachers" and "psychological empowerers of the cooperating teachers". ". In the co-teaching process, the co-teachers showed different results depending on the content, process and mode of co-teaching, with the three pairs forming "problem-solving orientation: cooperative understanding", "complementary orientation: interdependence" and "task implementation orientation: mutual detachment". In terms of partnership, teachers were passive participants in the partnership, but had different experiences of the partnership in their work and daily lives based on different problem-solving approaches: "cooperative and emotionally connected", "interdependent and The relationship is characterised by "cooperation and emotional bonding", "interdependence and respectful trust" and "alienation and mutual disagreement".

The analysis of the factors and mechanisms of influence reveals that the perceptions and interactions of the cooperating teachers are mainly influenced by the institutional environment of the organisation and the autonomy of the individual teacher. The internal institutional logic of the Y-integrated kindergartens: the "scientific" logic is loosely coupled with the interaction behaviour of the teachers. The internal institutional logics: 'subject logic', 'human logic' and 'professional logic' are mainly dominated by 'subject logic'. "The co-teachers reconfigure the teaching and learning system through their organisational practices. The teachers' autonomy is based on their interaction with the co-teachers by evaluating the factors in the co-teaching field and making behavioural decisions, by exercising their power in co-teaching, and by adjusting or maintaining themselves.

Lastly, the analysis of the co-teacher's perception that the division of labour between co-teachers should not be too detailed, and the interaction with the co-teacher's role as a supporter of the general education teacher, as well as the disconnection between the perceptions and behaviours of some teachers in the Y-integrated kindergarten, are discussed. It also proposes a way out of the dilemma of the unreasonable structure of children, the lack of targeted training and continuous assistant mechanism, the assimilation of special education teachers' roles and the over-reliance on teachers' autonomy in co-teaching.

  With the introduction of integrated education, more and more children with special needs are being educated in ordinary schools, but the lack of specialisation of teachers and the lack of support from schools have brought many serious problems. However, the implementation of preschool integrated education is an important step in guaranteeing the right to education for children with special needs, and it has become a trend in the development of special education in various countries. The implementation of high-quality integrated education requires the guarantee of specialised teachers, which is in conflict with the unbalanced structure of the teaching force and the insufficient number of teachers. However, the overall dynamic development of inclusive education in kindergartens is characterised by a multiplicity of complex meaning constructions and behavioural orientations of teachers. Based on my research interests, I investigate the co-operative teaching of Y-integrated children.

This study adopts a qualitative research paradigm, a case study approach, data collection through interviews, observation and physical collection, and a thematic 'bottom-up' (summarising categories and themes from the data) and 'top-down' (using an analytical framework to A combination of thematic 'bottom-up' (identifying categories and themes from the data) and 'top-down' (using an analytical framework to discover themes and local concepts embedded in the data) was used to analyse the interview texts and data using a three-level coding technique based on grounded theory.

During the two months of observation and interviews in the field school, the whole school was "vibrant" in its development of inclusive education, but it was also clear that underneath the harmony there were many different and even opposite understandings of teachers' roles, orientations and behaviours. The differences between what teachers specialise in and what they do present a different picture of co-teaching in terms of role adaptation, identity construction and teacher collaboration.

In the Y Integrated Kindergarten, teachers are presented with a variety of complex roles in different contexts, in different curricula, and in different work contents, mainly as school administrators, as lead, supporting and nursery teachers for regular classroom management, as well as as as lead, supporting and nursery teachers for classroom teaching. The role of the cooperating teacher is expected of teachers from different professional backgrounds who provide professional support and psychological empowerment to each other, while the cooperating teachers perceive their roles as "supporters of the general education teacher", "supporters of children with special needs" and "professional helpers of the cooperating teacher", "The cooperating teachers' perceptions of their roles as 'supporters of the general education teacher', 'supporters of children with special needs', 'professional helpers of the cooperating teacher' and 'psychological empowerers of the cooperating teacher'. Ultimately, based on the multiple and complex role expectations, their own role perceptions and individual characteristics, the role of the cooperating teacher is based on the administrative/managerial role, moderated by their professional characteristics and personal educational philosophy, and through the practice of their teaching role in order to bring their professional characteristics and educational philosophy into play, they form their multiple and complex roles: 'disciplinarian', 'coordinator', 'coordinator' and 'coordinator'. ", "coordinator", "organiser", "guide", "supporter ", "multi-handler" and "supporter", in different combinations depending on the content, the teaching situation and the co-teacher.

The development of integrated education poses a major challenge to both general and special education teachers, and the emergence of co-teaching in the context of integrated education is both a product of established teacher provision and a natural consequence of teachers' behavioural orientations. Since the implementation of integrated education in kindergartens, both general education teachers and special education teachers have been placed in the same integrated classroom situation, and both general education teachers and special education teachers have experienced the confusion of entering an integrated classroom - recognizing that there are differences between the two teachers - and making a professional division of labour/ The process of co-teaching and relationship building was characterised by mutual learning from each other's strengths/managing the children and caring for them - cooperation/interdependence/dissociation.

In terms of co-teaching processes, two pairs of cases showed a co-teaching process of co-planning - co-teaching - co-assessment - co-reflection - co-planning again, while the other pair of cases showed a co-teaching process of advance arrangement - co-teaching - co-reflection.

In terms of collaborative relationships, the three pairs of cases show that they know each other from perception to difference - collaborate according to the division of labour - work together professionally and build emotional connections; know each other from perception to difference - learn from each other in various areas. -The three pairs of cases show mutual learning from each other's strengths in various areas - mutual dependence at work and mutual respect and trust in daily life; mutual recognition to differences - "free-riding" teaching relationship - mutual detachment at work and mutual respect and trust in daily life. -The relationship is one of mutual detachment at work and mutual disagreement in everyday life.

This is followed by an analysis of the system of integrated teaching and learning in kindergarten Y, the social interaction and individual understanding of meaning and behavioural orientations, and the role of co-teachers in co-teaching, their participation in co-teaching and the mechanisms for building co-teaching relationships.