台灣校長對特殊教育需求定義的觀點之社會學研究

A Sociological Study of Principals' Perspectives on the Definition of Special Educational Needs (SEN) in Taiwan

10.6172/BSE201007.3502001

張嘉文(Chia-Wen Chang)

國中小學校長 ； 特殊教育需求 ； 障礙 ； 資賦優異 ； 教育社會學 ； primary and secondary school principals ； special educational needs SEN ； disabilities ； giftedness and talents ； sociology of education

特殊教育研究學刊

35卷2期（2010 / 07 / 27）

1 - 27

繁體中文

本文旨在為校長對特殊教育需求的觀點提供理論化的解釋。研究過程採個別訪談法訪問台灣地區二十五位中小學與特殊學校校長，藉由學校領導者的角度來瞭解他們如何定義所謂有特殊教育需求的學生，並藉由他們的看法來剖析障礙與資優是否為價值中立的概念。本文首先探討文獻對障礙與資優的觀點，接著以特殊教育社會學取向分析研究結果。研究結果發現資本主義社會下的校長多採本質論者觀點來定義特殊教育需求，且多接受特教法和鑑輔會對於特殊教育需求的定義；但也有部份校長則以實務工作經驗為依據，認為特殊教育需求一詞應被賦予更多元的觀點。此外，比照法令與政策文件結果亦顯示障礙和資優的概念並非為中立且無價值觀導向的概念。目前特殊教育法雖已修法，然其對於所謂特殊教育需求所下的定義是否足夠符合現今多元的社會現狀，有待商榷。本文希冀能為研究或政策做出貢獻，以利未來參考。

This study sets out to understand how primary, secondary and special school principals in Taiwan define special educational needs (SEN) and how they identify students with SEN, and to examine whether disabilities, giftedness and talent are value-free concepts in terms from the perspective of school leaders. The article thus offers a theoretical explanation of principals’ perspectives on SEN. After a review of literature regarding perspectives on disability and giftedness, the researcher individually interviewed twenty five primary, secondary and special school principals in Taiwan. The results were analyzed via a sociological perspective on special education. In our capitalistic society, the majority of principals have been found to adopt an essentialist perspective to understand students with SEN, and they tend to accept a definition of SEN based on the Special Education Act and the findings of the Identification, Placement and Counseling Committee. Based on their practical experience, however, some principals suggest that we should take more diverse perspectives to understand the term SEN. Furthermore, the results also show that disability, giftedness and talent are not neutral and value-free concepts when contrasted with law and policy documents. The Special Education Act has been amended recently, but the definition of the term SEN remains ambiguous and open to discussion. This study hopes to contribute to relevant research and policymaking in the future.

1. 張恆豪(2007)。特殊教育與障礙社會學一個理論的反省。教育與社會研究，13，71-93。
   連結：
2. 特殊教育法（2004）：中華民國九十三年六月二十三日華總（一）義字第○九三○○一一七五五一號令發布
3. 身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準（2006）：中華民國九十五年九月二十九日教育部臺參字第○九五○一四一五六一Ｃ號令發布
4. Allan, W.(ed.),Clive, D.(ed.)(2002).School Leadership and Administration.London:Routledge Falmer.
5. Allen, J.,Slee, R.(2008).Doing Inclusive Education Research.Rotterdam:Sense Publishers.
6. Ball, S. J.(1987).The Micro-Politics of the School: Towards a theory of school organization.London:Routledge.
7. Barton, L.(1986).The politics of special educational needs.Disability, Handicap & Society,1(3),273-290.
8. Barton, L.(ed.)(1988).The Politics of Special Educational Needs.London:Falmer Press.
9. Barton, L.(ed.)(1996).Disability & Society: Emerging Issues and Insights.London:Longman.
10. Barton, L.(ed.),Tomlinson, S.(ed.)(1981).Special Education: Policy, Practices and Issues.London:Harper & Row Publishers.
11. Becker, H.(1967).Whose side are you on?.Social Problems,14(3),239-247.
12. Becker, H.(1997).Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance.New York:The Free Press.
13. Booth, T.,Ainscow, M.(2004).Index for Inclusion: developing learning, participation and play in early years and childcare.Bristol:Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education (CSIE).
14. Borland, J. H.(1997).The construct of giftedness.Peabody Journal of Education,72(3&4),6-20.
15. Borland, J. H.(1989).Planning and implementing programs for the gifted.New York:Teachers College Press.
16. Borland, J. H.(ed.)(2003).Rethinking Gifted Education.New York:Teachers College Press.
17. Bowe, R.,Ball, S. J.,Gold A.(1992).Reforming Education and Changing Schools: Case studies in policy sociology.London:Routledge.
18. Bowles, S.,Gintis, H.(1976).Schooling in Capitalistic America.London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
19. Campbell, C.(ed.)(2002).Developing Inclusive Schooling: Perspectives, Policies and Practices.London:IOE, University of London.
20. Clark, C.(ed.),Dyson, A.(ed.),Millard, A.(ed.)(1998).Theorising Special Education.London:Routledge.
21. Corbett, J.(1996).Bad-Mouthing: The Language of Special Needs.London:Falmer Press.
22. Department of Education & Science(1978).Special Educational Needs: Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People.London:HMSO.
23. Florian, L.(2008).Special or inclusive education: future trends.British Journal of Special Education,35(4),202-208.
24. Florian, L.(ed.)(2007).The SAGE Handbook of Special Education.London:SAGE.
25. Florian, L.(ed.),McLaughlin, M. J.(ed.)(2008).Disability Classification in Education.London:Corwin Press.
26. Ford, J.,Mongon, D.,Whelan, M.(1982).Special Education and Social Control: Invisible Disasters.London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
27. Foucault, M.(1991).Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison.London:Penguin Books.
28. Fwu, B. J.,Wang, H. H.(2002).The social status of teachers in Taiwan.Comparative Education,38(2),211-224.
29. Gardner, H.(1993).Frame of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences.London:Fulton.
30. Goffman, E.(1963).Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity.Middlesex:Penguin.
31. Goffman, E.(1961).Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates.New York:Anchor Books.
32. Gordon, C.(ed.)(1980).Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977.New York:Pantheon Books.
33. Hawley, W. D.(ed.),Lipsky, M.(ed.)(1976).Theoretical Perspectives on Urban Politics.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
34. Lindsay, G.(ed.),Thompson, D.(ed.)(1997).Values into Practice in Special Education.London:David Fulton Publishers.
35. Lipsky, M.(1980).Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services.New York:Russell Sage Foundation.
36. Mittler, P.(2000).Working towards Inclusive Education: Social Contexts.London:David Fulton Publishers.
37. Murphy, D. M.(1996).Implications for inclusion for general and special education.The Elementary School Journal,96(5),469-493.
38. Oliver, M.(1990).The Politics of Disablement.London:Macmillan.
39. Patton, M. Q.(1990).How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation.London:SAGE.
40. Plomin, R.,Petrill, S. A.(1997).Gneetics and intelligence: What's new?.Intelligence,24(1),53-77.
41. Plomin, R.,Spinath, F. M.(2004).Intelligence: genetics, genes, and genomics.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,86(1),112-129.
42. Potts, P.(ed.)(2003).Inclusion in the city: selection, schooling and community.London:RoutledgeFalmer.
43. Sapon-Shevin, M.(1987).Giftedness as a social construct.Teachers College Record,89(1),39-65.
44. Sӧder, M.(1989).Disability as a social construct: the labeling approach revisited.European Journal of Special Needs Education,4(2),117-129.
45. Sussman, M. B.(ed.)(1965).Sociology & Rehabilitation.Washington, DC:American Sociological Association.
46. Thomas, G.,Walker, D.,Webb, J.(1998).The making of the inclusive school.London:Routledge.
47. Tomlinson, S.(1982).A Sociology of Special Education.London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
48. Tomlinson, S.(1988).Why Johnny can't read: Critical theory and special education.European Journal of Special Education,3(1),45-58.
49. Union of the Physically Impaired against Segregation (UPIAS)(1976).Fundamental Principles of Disability.London:UPIAS.
50. Walford, G.(ed.)(1994).Researching the powerful in education.London:UCL Press.
51. Wang, J.,Mao, S.(1996).Culture and the kindergarten curriculum in the People's Republic of China.Early Child Development and Care,123,143-156.
52. Warnock, M.(2000).Mary Warnock: A Memoir-People and Places.London:Duckworth.
53. Young, M.(1961).The Rise of Meritocracy 1870-2033: An Essay on Education and Equality.London:Penguin.
54. 王麗雲(2004)。教育研究中的菁英訪談。教育研究資訊雙月刊，12(2)，95-126。
55. 立法院(1984)。法律案專輯（第七十六輯）：特殊教育法案。台北:立法院。
56. 吳武典(1998)。特殊教育行政問題與對策。特殊教育季刊，68，1-12。
57. 林堤塘、張嘉文(2008)。國際功能、障礙與健康分類系統（ICF）的發展、應用及其對特殊教育的影響。特殊教育季刊，106，1-8。
58. 張嘉文(2008)。二十世紀末期英國障礙與特殊教育的社會學觀點。網路社會學通訊，72
59. 張嘉文(2009)。檢視台灣融合教育的研究與發展實務。網路社會學通訊，83
60. 教育部(2008)。中華民國資優教育白皮書。台北:教育部。
61. 譚光鼎(1998)。社會與文化再製理論之評析。教育研究集刊，40，23-50。

1. 楊巧玲(2021)。重思學習障礙之定義與鑑定：一個特殊教育社會學的觀點。教育研究集刊，67(3)，1-42。