| 摘要: | 中文摘要
本研究旨在探討學齡階段身心障礙學生安置問題：包括學齡階段身心障礙學生安置的優先取向、學齡階段中重度障礙學生安置的可行方式、學齡階段中重度障礙學生在家教育的輔導方式、學齡階段中重度障礙學生安置政府的責任歸屬。
研究採問卷調查法，受試包括中小學教育人員、特殊學校教育人員、社會福利機構人員、醫療機構人員、各級民意代表、政府行政人員、學者專家及學生家長等八類不同身份人員，合計1,4l5人。回收問卷873份，有效問卷864份，可用回收率61.06%。資料經統計處理，獲得以下結論：
一、學齡階段不同身心障礙程度學生安置的優先取向各有不同。
二、增加特殊學校強迫中重度障礙學生接受教育，力是安置中重度障礙學生最可行的方式，其次是增加教養院強迫接受教養。顯示現行在家自行教育的安置方式不被認同。
三、如維持現行中重度障礙學生在家教育的方式，以職能治療師等專業人員及一般教師輪流負責輔導的方式最被接受；另編制專任特殊教育教師專責輔導則勉能接受。
四、受試對身心障礙學生安置責任歸屬的看法，會影響其對特殊教育立法的立法取向。
五、中重度障礙學生的安置宜由教育單位、社會福利單位及醫療單位，依學生障礙程度分工負責。
六、特殊教育中資優教育與身心障礙教育宜分別立法。
根據研究結論，本研究分別對政府行政機關、特殊兒童安置單位、及未來研究提出建議。
Abstract
This study attempted to survey the public opinions in regard to the placement of school-aged handicapped people, including (1) the favored placement alternatives, (2) the feasible programs for placing the medium and severely handicapped, (3) the implementation of Individual Family Education Plan and (4) the delineation of placement responsibilities among government sectors.
The questionnaire, developed by the authors, was administered to 1,415 sample randomly selected from elementary school teachers, special school teachers, social welfare workers, medical workers, elected representatives, government officials, parents, and experts concerned. A total of 873 questionnaires were returned, including 864 valid ones, with a 61.06% valid percentage.
The study findings are as follows:
1. The placement alternatives for different types of handicapped people differed in priority.
2. the most favored alternative for placing the medium and severely handicapped was to increase special schools and enforcing their attendance, and the second favored one was to increase social welfare centers. The existing individual family education plans were not favored.
3. In the case of individual family education plans to be sustained, the most urgent task was to have both of the occupational therapists and school teachers available, and the second one was the increase of special teachers.
4. The way to attribute the placement responsibility had an effect on the perception of the enactment of Special Education Act.
5. the responsibility for placing the medium and severely handicapped was better to be placed evenly on the three divisions: education divisions, social welfare divisions, and medical divisions.
6. the Special Education Act was supposed to be split into two individual ones to be enacted for the gifted and the handicapped separately.
The recommendations generated by the study findings are presented in closure. |
如有問題歡迎與系統管理員聯繫 
