特殊教育場域的障礙論述： 以特殊教育導論教科書為例

Abstract

本研究採用內容分析探討1966年至2012年，國人自行撰寫的17個版本、36個版次特殊教育導論教科書的障礙定義，以瞭解台灣特殊教育場域障礙論述的型態與規則。研究發現台灣特殊教育導論教科書障礙定義的論述，多半隨法定頒訂而修訂，並可依據1970年《特殊教育推行辦法》頒行、1984年《特殊教育法》頒布與1997年《特殊教育法》修訂為界分為四個階段。儘管有零星社會取向的替代論述，但是教科書障礙論述型態仍是以個人取向為主。依據國內實務需要為本，官方法令、專業觀點為體的論述機制，組織障礙定義。以兼具專業本位與行政實務的論述立場，篩選障礙定義。並且會依據不同章次，以彈性變動的方法分配論述型態，常簡化障礙為個人取向，集中法令與專業觀點，並且運用忽略與區分方法處理社會因素，形塑教科書的障礙論述。根據研究發現，本研究提出對台灣特殊教育導論教科書若干建議：1. 採用跨典範、跨科際與跨觀點的障礙論述。2. 啟發思考重於知識傳遞的論述立場。3. 打破法令與專業本位的論述機制。4. 多元異質與跨領域對話的論述方法。This research explored how introductory special education textbooks in Taiwan adopted discourses to build “disability” from 1966 to 2012. Content analysis was conducted on 17 different versions, 36 revisions of introductory special education textbooks, to examine the definition of disability on mainstream special education. Research found there were disability discourses in four periods. Despite some counter-discourse, the majority of textbooks constructed disability as an individual-specific discourse; arguing it was “deficiency”, “abnormal”, “deficiency/abnormal”, and “maladjustment” in culture and communities. It was Taiwan’s education demand and authority’s view to decide the selection of disability categories and space allocation within textbooks. Definitions of disability were largely affected from the authority of the profession and law with respect to disability. The critical perspectives of disability were vaguely noticed within the textbooks, reducing the debate of discursive contestation between history, intervention, or non-special education perspectives. The research proposes a number of implications. 1. Providing diversity and multiple paradigms of disability in special education. 2. The purpose of these textbooks is to inspire pupils to ponder over disability rather than deliver knowledge. 3. Breaking through law-based and profession-based approaches to disability. 4. Focusing on the diversity and multiple approaches to disability through trans-disciplinary dialogues.