「介入反應」在特殊教育的意義與運用

Response to Intervention: The Implication and Application to the Special Education in Taiwan

10.6217/SEQ.201006_(115).0001

洪儷瑜(Li-Yu Hung)；何淑玫(Shu-Mei Ho)

介入反應 ； 學障 ； 融合教育 ； 三級預防 ； 多層次介入 ； response to intervention ； learning disabilities ； inclusive education ； three-tier prevention ； multiple-tier intervention ； Taiwan

特殊教育季刊

115期（2010 / 06 / 01）

1 - 13

繁體中文

本文就美國身心障礙者教育法(IDEA)2004年修訂條文在學習障礙定義提出「介入反應」之相關背景、意義和實施方式提出討論，並對介入反應在國內法規和執行面上提出檢討和建議。最後並期待特殊教育和普通教育得以合作建立連續性的支持系統。

Since 「Response to Intervention (RTI)」 commanded by the IDEA 2004 in USA caused wide attention in Taiwan, the article introduces to the background issues about RTI before the concept and implementation of RTI from the literature: the impact of inclusive education, application of the tertiary preventive model, the evidence-based intervention, and the problems of definition and identification of learning disabilities. Two key components of implementing RIT are discussed: the models of pre-referral intervention and the methods to decide the response of intervention. Then, the implication and application of RTI in Taiwan are discussed and further suggestions for special education in Taiwan are made. At last, to close up the gap between regular education and special education and the cooperation between both are expected in the near future.

1. 王瓊珠、洪儷瑜、張郁雯、陳秀芬(2008)。一到九年級學生國字識字量發展。教育心理學報，39，555-568。
   連結：
2. 洪儷瑜、陳淑麗、王瓊珠、方金雅、張郁雯、陳美芳、柯華葳(2009)。閱讀障礙篩選流程的檢驗—篩選或教師轉介之比較。特殊教育研究學刊，34(1)，1-22。
   連結：
3. 陳淑麗、洪儷瑜、曾世杰(2005)。以國語文補救教學診斷原住民低成就學童是否為學習障礙：轉介前介入的效度考驗研究。特殊教育研究學刊，29，127-150。
   連結：
4. 陳淑麗、洪儷瑜、曾世杰(2006)。原住民國語文低成就學童文化與經驗本位補救教學成效之研究。師大學報，51(2)，147-171。
   連結：
5. 教育部（2006）：身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準。
6. 闕嫣男記錄（2009）：學習障礙的鑑定—由理論定義到現場執行。980912學習障礙專題論壇。臺灣學障學會電子報第三期，1-9。
7. The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities, NRCLD. (2007). Responsiveness to Intervention in the SLD Determination Process. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from http://www.nrcld.org/free/rti.html
8. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA. (2004). U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_public_laws&docid=f:pub1446.108
9. National Center on Student Progress Monitoring (2007). Retrieved in June 20, 2010 from http://www.studentprogress.org/about2.asp
10. The National Center for Learning Disabilities, NCLD. (n.d.b). Field Studies of RTI Programs. Retrieved in January 8, 2010, from http://www.rtinetwork.org/Learn/Research/ar/FieldStudies
11. Texas Education Agency (2004). Three-tier reading mode: Reducing reading difficulties for kindergarten through three grade students. University of Texas, Center for Reading and Language Art, Texas..
12. 張明陽（2007）：Evidence-based Medicne臨床運用。Feb 26, 2010 載於http://www.cgmh.org.tw/intr/intr2/ebmlink/back/CGMH2002EBM.ppt
13. The National Center for Learning Disabilities, NCLD. (n.d.a). Approaches to RTI. Retrieved in January 8, 2010, from http://www.rtinetwork.org/Learn/What/ar/ApproachesRTI
14. Bocian, M.,Beebe, M. E.,MacMillan. D. L.,Gresham, F. M.(1999).Competing paradigms in learning disabilities classification by schools and the variation in the meaning of discrepant achievement.Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,14,1-14.
15. Buck, G. H.,Pollway, E. D.,Smith-Thomas, A.,Cook, K. W.(2003).Prereferral intervention process: A survey of state practice.Exceptional Children,69,349-360.
16. Fletcher, J.(2004).Three-tier reading model.55th annual conference of IDA,Philadelphia, PA:
17. Fuchs, D.,Deshler, D. D.(2007).What we need to know about responsiveness to intervention (and shouldn't be afraid to ask).Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,22(2),129-136.
18. Fuchs, D.,Fuchs, L. S.,Compton, D. L.(2004).Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness to instruction: Specifying measures and criteria.Learning Disability Quarterly,27(4),216-228.
19. Fuchs, L.(2003).Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues.Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,22(2),172-186.
20. Fuchs, L. S.(2009).Responsiveness To Intervention.Creasing a new era of inclusive education,Chungli:
21. Fuchs, L. S.,Fuchs, D.(1998).Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities.Learning Disabilities Research and Practice,13,204-220.
22. Fuchs, L. S.,Fuchs, D.,Speece, D. L.(2002).Treatment validity as a unifying construct for identifying learning disabilities.Learning Disability Quarterly,25,33-45.
23. Good, R. H.,Simmons, D. C.,Kame''enui, E. J.(2001).The importance of decision-making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high stakes outcomes.Scientific Studies of Reading,5(3),257-288.
24. Hale, J. B.,Kaufman, A.,Naglieri, J. A.,Kavale, K. A.(2006).Implementation of IDEA: Integrating response to intervention and cognitive assessment methods.Psychology In The Schools,43(7),753-770.
25. Hallahan, D. P.,Keller, C. E.,Martinez, E. A.,Byrd, E. S.,Gelman, J. A.,Fan, X.(2007).How variable are interstate prevalence rates of learning disabilities and other special education categories? A longitudinal comparison.Exceptional Children,73,136-147.
26. Hallahan, D.,Lloyd, J.,Kauffman, J.,Weiss, M.,Martinez, E.(2005).Learning disabilities.Boston, MA:Allyn & Bacon.
27. Hammill, D. D.(1990).On defining learning disabilities: An emerging consensus.Journal of Learning Disabilities,23,74-84.
28. Kavale, K.(1987).Theoretical issues surrounding severe discrepancy.Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,3,12-20.
29. Kavale, K.,Nye, C.(1981).Identification criteria for learning disabilities: A survey of the research literature.Learning Disabilities Quarterly,4,383-388.
30. Naglieri, J. A.,Reardon, S. M.(1993).Traditional IQ is irrelevant to learning disabilities-Intelligence is not.Journal of Learning Disabilities,26,127-133.
31. National Reading Panel(2000).Teaching children to read: A evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.
32. Odem, S.,Braintlinger, E.,Gersten. R.,Hornor, R.,Thompson, B.,Harris, K.(2005).Research in special education: Scientific methods and evidence-based practice.Exceptional Children,71,137-148.
33. Proctor, B.,Prevatt, F.(2003).Agreement among four models used for diagnosing learning disabilities.Journal of Learning Disabilities,36,459-466.
34. Reynolds, M.,Heistad, D.(1997).20/20 analysis: Estimating school effectiveness in serving students at the margins.Exceptional Children,63,439-449.
35. Sugai, G.,Horner, R. H.(2002).Introduction to the special series on positive behavioral support in schools.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral disorders,10,130-135.
36. Swanson, L.,Hoskyn, M.,Lee, C.(1999).Intervention for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes.New York:Guilford.
37. Torgesen, J. K.,Alexander, A.,Wagner, R.,Rashotte, C.,Voeller, K.,Conway, T.(2001).Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and longterm outcomes from two instructional approaches.Journal of Learning Disabilities,34,33-58.
38. Vaughn, S.,Fuchs, L. S.(2003).Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems.Learning Disabilities Research& Practice,18(3),137-146.
39. Vellutino, F. R.,Scanlon, D. M.,Lyon, G. R.(2000).Differentiating between difficult-to- remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability.Journal of Learning Disabilities,33,223-238.
40. Vellutino, F.,Scanlon, D.,Sipay, E.,Small, S.,Pratt, A.,Chen, R.,Denckla, M.(1996).Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability.Journal of Educational Psychology,88,601-638.
41. 王瓊珠(2004)。學習障礙學生鑑定問題探討—以臺北市國小為例。國小特殊教育，37，39-46。
42. 吳武典(1980)。學校輔導工作。臺北:張老師。
43. 周台傑(1986)。學習障礙兒童之鑑定—能力與成就差異評量方式之探討。中華民國特殊教育學會年刊，我國特殊教育的現代化中華，285-309。
44. 柯華葳編。中文閱讀障礙。臺北:心理。
45. 柯雅淇、曾世杰(2009)。臺東縣學障鑑定中原住民過度表徵現象之探究。臺灣學障學會年會
46. 洪儷瑜(1994)。美國特殊教育與普通教育統合的趨勢—兼談「普通教育為首」（REI）。中西教育專題研究，桃園:
47. 洪儷瑜(1995)。學習障礙者教育。臺北:心理。
48. 洪儷瑜(2005)。教育部委託專案報告教育部委託專案報告,未出版
49. 洪儷瑜(2001)。英國的融合教育。臺北:學富。
50. 胡永祟(2005)。以教學反應（RTI）作為學習障礙學生鑑定標準之探討。屏師特殊教育，11，1-9。
51. 陳淑麗(2009)。弱勢學童讀寫希望工程—課輔現場的瞭解與改造。臺北:心理。
52. 陳淑麗(2004)。博士論文(博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所。
53. 陳瑋婷(2008)。「教學介入反應」對學習障礙學生鑑定之啟示與挑戰。特殊教育季刊，106，24-31。
54. 黃柏華、梁怡萱(2005)。轉介前介入於特殊教育中的角色探析。特殊教育季刊，95，1-11。

1. 陳虹君、孟瑛如、吳東光(2013)。國小資源班及普通班教師針對閱讀困難學生使用多媒體閱讀理解網路教材之現況。人文社會學報，9(2)，127-156。
2. 陳虹君、孟瑛如、吳東光(2014)。RTI 理念融入多媒體閱讀理解教材以提升一般生及閱讀低成就學生在閱讀及識字成效之教學研究。臺中教育大學學報：教育類，28(1)，1-23。
3. 洪儷瑜,呂俐葶,吳怡萱(2023)。從美澳香港等區之學校心理學趨勢談我國學校心理學之服務應用、角色與發展。當代教育研究季刊，31(3)，33-71。
4. 胡永崇(2013)。從特殊教育的觀點檢討我國學習障礙的定義與鑑定標準。國小特殊教育，56，1-16。
5. 黃秋霞、黃秋霞(2011)。轉介前識字教學介入對國小一年級識字困難學童的學習效果─III。屏東教育大學學報，37(教育)，129-174。
6. 黃昭儒(2017)。IDEA網站功能與服務對應用教育部特教通報網資料庫之啟示。學校行政，107，130-151。
7. 孔淑萱(2019)。同儕輔助學習策略對提升國小三年級學生語文能力表現之研究：差異化教學之本土實踐。課程與教學，22(2)，205-233。
8. 盧台華、黃彥融、王麗雲(2018)。新北市國民中小學教育階段融合教育政策評估之研究。特殊教育學報，47，1-31。
9. 呂偉白(2014)。美國多層次補救教學鑑定模式之評析。當代教育研究季刊，22(1)，87-126。
10. 詹秀雯(2013)。運用資料導向決策教學提升高中身障生學習成效一以數學科為例。身心障礙研究，11(1)，27-43。
11. 鄭津妃(2012)。臺灣普教與特教的現況與未來─繼續統合或行動融合？。特殊教育季刊，124，21-28。
12. 鄒小蘭(2020)。國小自閉症資優生多階層校本方案運作模式之探究。特殊教育研究學刊，45(2)，1-28。
13. (2012)。由補救教學到三層級學習支援。教育研究月刊，221，13-24。
14. (2018)。學習障礙、情緒行為障礙及自閉症學生轉介與篩選現況調查研究－以新北市為例。東臺灣特殊教育學報，20，40-69。
15. (2019)。以同儕輔助學習策略之次級介入提升國小學生語文能力：試探性研究。臺東大學教育學報，30(1)，33-72。