跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.210.21.70) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/11 16:17
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:蔣明珊
論文名稱:普通班特殊需求學生課程調整之探討及其在國語科應用成效之研究
論文名稱(外文):Exploring the Implementation and Application of Curriculum Adaptation and Evaluating the Effects of Curriculum Adaptation on Language Subject for the Students with Special Needs in Regular Classrooms
指導教授:盧台華
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:特殊教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:特殊教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
論文頁數:299
中文關鍵詞:課程調整特殊需求學生成效
外文關鍵詞:Curriculum AdaptationStudents with Special Needseffects
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:92
  • 點閱點閱:1881
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:15
本研究的主要目的在於瞭解目前國小普通教師實施課程調整的狀況及需求,然後藉由實施普通班課程調整教學實驗,並評鑑其實施過程與成效,以發展一個可行之課程調整實施模式。本研究之進行是以行動研究的概念為指導原則,研究過程可概分為計劃、發展、教學及評鑑四個階段。在計劃階段的研究對象為十九位國小普通教師,在其它階段的研究對象則主要來自台北市一所國民小學的一至三年級班上有特殊需求學生之普通班,又可分為實驗班級及對照班級。實驗班級共有六個班,對象包含六位級任教師、六名身心障礙學生、九名資優學生、十五名特殊需求學生之家長、一八七名普通學生及研究者本身;對照班級則有三個班,包含五位身心障礙學生及九十七名普通學生,資優生則未做鑑定。研究過程所用的研究方法包括問卷調查、訪談、準實驗設計、觀察、測驗、文件分析及團體座談等。研究結果顯示:
一、 在計劃階段訪談的十九位普通班教師不具備課程調整的具體概念,因此雖然大多同意實施課程調整有其必要性,但卻因擔心沒有多餘時間或增加教學負擔,而有一半以上表示不會實施課程調整。
二、 六位參與教師對課程調整訓練方案感到滿意,不過認為研討內容不需太多,並建議搭配具體實例或在實際的教學情境中以實務操作的方式進行。
三、 參與教師對實施國語科課程調整的態度因調整效果的顯現而從實驗初期的興奮或觀望,進展到中期的忙碌與接納,直到後期則有明顯的肯定。在課程調整教學實驗後,教師所使用的調整策略均有明顯增加,對課程調整有正向的看法,且認為在專業方面有所成長。不過教師亦發現實施課程調整會拉長教學時間。
四、 普通教育的國語科課程可以從課程內容、教學策略、教學環境及學習成果四方面進行調整,而且在普通班中同時進行資優與障礙學生的課程調整是可行的,其中各項調整策略的選用亦須綜合考慮各項原則,而特殊班教師與普通班教師的合作則是影響課程調整實施的重要因素。
五、 特殊班教師可以提供普通班教師課程調整的的協助主要包括提供課程調整的建議,設計相關的學習單,製作教具,協助尋找相關資源,對部份障礙較嚴重、學習較困難的學生進行入班合作教學,將在資源班發現到的合適教學策略轉移給普通班教師及協助訓練愛心媽媽等。
六、 學生較喜歡的調整策略為語文遊戲及視覺化提示,認為最有幫助的則為視覺化提示。而教師認為效果較佳的調整策略則為合作教學、教導學習策略、運用合作學習、多元層次教學、遊戲教學、獨立研究指導及視覺化提示。
七、 實施課程調整教學能提高部份障礙學生的專心度、對國語科的學習適應狀況及對國語科的學習態度。資優學生的專心度則視其特質及活動內容而定,且大部份資優生的國語學習適應狀況及國語態度沒有明顯變化。
八、 雖然部份障礙生的學業成就有所提昇,但並沒有一致的結果。大抵而言,即使沒變好,也不會明顯變差;大多數資優生的學業成就則無明顯改變。教師則認為課程調整可以滿足不同學生的學習需求,並促進特殊需求學生的學業成就與人際關係。在家長方面,障礙學生的家長認為實施課程調整能幫助孩子學習國語,其中以認字、讀寫及造句方面的表現較佳;而資優學生的家長則非常滿意獨立研究的指導及充實課程的設計。
根據上述結果,本研究分別就師資培訓、教育制度、教學、教科書出版商及未來研究,提出相關的建議,最後並綜合文獻及研究發現提出一個普通班的國語科課程調整模式,供未來實施課程調整的教師參考。
This study examined the current status and needs of 19 regular class teachers’ implementation of curriculum adaptation, and then conducted a quasi-experiment to evaluate the effects of curriculum adaptation for the students with special needs in the regular classrooms. Six of the 19 teachers participated in the experiment. Self-developed Questionnaires, interview, observation, tests, documents, and focus groups were used to collect data. The sample of the experiment consisted of 6 teachers, 6 disabled students and their parents, 9 gifted students and their parents, and 187 regular students in the experimental group, and 5 disabled students and 97 regular students in the comparison group.
Results showed that teachers were not familiar with the concept of curriculum adaptation. Most of the 19 teachers agreed with the importance of implementing curriculum adaptation for the special needs students in the regular classrooms, but more than half of them did not modify the curriculum.
After the experiment, all 6 teachers held more positive attitudes toward curriculum adaptation, had better professional ability, and implemented more adaptation strategies than before. Although implementing curriculum adaptation did not consistently improve students’ academic performance on the test scores, disabled students were more concentrated on class events than without. Teachers and parents of the students with special needs also recognized the improvement of students’ learning and peer relationship after implementing curriculum adaptation. The findings suggest that it is feasible to adapt curriculum for disabled and gifted students at the same time with the help of special teacher. Implications for teachers’ training, education systems, teaching strategies, and future research are discussed. A model for the implementation of curriculum adaptation is also proposed.
目 次
誌謝........................... I
中文摘要 ......................... II
英文摘要......................... IV
目次........................... VI
附錄目次........................ VIII
表次........................ IX
圖次......................... XI
第一章 緒論.......................... 1
 第一節 研究背景與動機..................... 1
第二節 研究目的與研究問題.................... 6
第三節 名詞釋義........................ 7
第二章 文獻探討.......................... 9
第一節 課程調整的適當性..................... 9
第二節 課程調整的內涵......................20
第三節 影響課程調整的相關因素..................34
第四節 課程調整的原則與步驟...................39
第五節 國語科的教學內容與教學方法................50
第三章 研究方法......................... 60
第一節 研究設計與步驟......................61
第二節 研究對象.........................73
第三節 研究工具.........................81
第四節 資料處理與分析......................88
第四章 研究過程、結果與討論................... 90
第一節 普通教師課程調整之狀況及需求.............. 90
第二節 參與教師對課程調整師資訓練方案之看法..........116
第三節 特殊需求學生能力狀況及學習需求.............124
第四節 國語科課程調整教學實驗之運作過程與檢討.........140
第五節 學生之國語科學習適應及學業成就.............228
第五章 結論與建議........................262
第一節 研究結論........................262
第二節 研究建議........................264
第三節 研究限制........................279
參考文獻.............................281
附錄目次
附錄一 教學計劃參考範例................... 附 1
附錄二 各類學習單範例.................... 附20
附錄三 普通班課程調整實施情其形訪談題綱........... 附42
附錄四 國小教師課程調整實施狀況及需求調查問卷........ 附43
附錄五 課程調整研討滿意度調查表............... 附48
附錄六 課程調整教學教師自我檢核表.............. 附49
附錄七 國小資優兒童特質檢核表................ 附52
附錄八 家長同意書...................... 附53
附錄九 國語科學習適應狀況量表................ 附54
附錄十 國語科成就測驗試題範例及前後測難易度分析範例..... 附56
附錄十一 課程調整教室觀察記錄範例.............. 附63
附錄十二 課程調整教學實驗實施成效與問題........... 附67
附錄十三 課程調整回饋問卷-給老師的鼓勵問卷範例........附68
附錄十四  ES1D1個別指導記錄................ 附72
附錄十五  課程調整上課單元名稱................附74
附錄十六  班級經營座談整理..................附75
附錄十七  資優生獨立研究之指導過程..............附79
表 次
表2-1 九年一貫課程與身心障礙課程的相通之處............16
表2-2 課程調整的方式.......................26
表2-3 身心障礙及資優課程調整策略比較分析表........... 32
表3-1 課程調整研討主題一覽表...................64
表3-2 各次班級觀察信度分析表.................. 68
表3-3 計劃階段研究對象基本資料表.................74
表3-4 學生基本資料表.......................77
表3-5 身心障礙學生實驗組及對照組學生基本能力和學習狀況比較表...79
表3-6 研究資料編碼說明......................89
表4-1 教師課程調整知能之需具備程度及已具備程度評量....... 115
表4-2 國小教師對課程研討方案滿意度分析............. 117
表4-3 各類特殊需求學生課程調整策略之選用一覽表......... 137
表4-4 課程調整初期之調整重點(少量調整).............145
表4-5 課程調整中期之調整重點(大量調整).............151
表4-6 教師使用課程調整策略的數目變化.............. 171
表4-7 學生對國語課之感覺.................... 185
表4-8 學生對課程調整策略之態度................. 188
表4-9 對各類特殊需求學生特別有效及效果不顯著之課程調整策略一覽表 216
表4-10 語科不同階段課程調整策略及教學活動使用時機一覽表.... 220
表4-11 特殊需求學生上課專心時間的百分比............ 229
表4-12 特殊需求學生國語學習適應狀況前後測差異分析表...... 231
表4-13 各班普通學生國語學習適應狀況...............232
表4-14 特殊需求學生之國語學習態度差異分析表...........234
表4-15 各班普通學生之國語態度..................235
表4-16 各班普通學生之自評國語程度前後測差異分析表........236
表4-17 實驗班級學生對本學期語文能力是否有進步之看法.......237
表4-18 特殊需求學生標準化成就測驗之成績與百分等級........238
表4-19 各班普通學生標準化成就測驗之平均成績與進步差異檢驗結果..239
表4-20 身心障礙學生自編成就測驗成績與在班上的百分等級......241
表4-21 資優學生自編成就測驗成績與在班上的百分等級........242
表4-22 各班普通學生自編成就測驗之平均成績與進步差異檢驗結果...243
表4-23 特殊需求學生段考成績...................244
表4-24 特殊需求學生之平時成績..................246
圖次
圖2-1 四種課程型式........................ 21
圖3-1 研究架構及流程圖...................... 72
圖4-1 身心障礙學生在不同實驗階段的專心上課時間比例........230
圖4-2 資優生在不同實驗階段的專心上課時間比例...........230
圖5-1 普通課程調整模式......................265
圖5-2 國語科課程調整教學模式:實施課程調整階段..........269
王文科(民80):課程論。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
王天苗(民88)迎向二十一世紀的障礙者教育。載於中華民國特殊教育學會編
印:迎千禧談特教。台北市:中華民國特殊教育學會。
王天苗(民90):運用教學支援建立融合教育的實施模式:以一公立幼稚園的經驗為例。特殊教育研究學刊,21期,27-51頁。
王英君(民89):國小閱讀理解障礙學生閱讀理解策略之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
毛連塭(民84):資優教育─課程與教學。台北市,五南圖書出版公司。
毛連塭等編譯(民78):資優學生課程發展。台北市,心理出版社。
中華民國課程與教學學會主編(民89):學校本位課程發展基本理論與實施策略。台北市:教育部。
王萬清(民86):國語科教學理論與實際。台北市:師大書苑。
行政院教育改革審議委員會(民85)教育改革總諮議報告書。台北市:作者。
江芳盛(民87)從政策研究的觀點看美國教育改革。暨大學報,2卷1期,253-271頁。
江惜美(民87):國語文教學論集。台北市:萬益樓。
何三本(民90):九年一貫語文教育理論與實務。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
李子建、黃顯華(民85):課程:範式取向和設計。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
李佳娥(民90):漢字教學法。http://psyultra.ccu.edu.tw/learning/chinese learning.html。
吳武典(民84):特殊教育的發展與趨勢,載於國立台灣師範大學教育研究中心編印,師資培育的理論與實務學術研討會系列。
吳武典(民87)教育改革與特殊教育。載於國立教育資料館編印:教育改革專輯,教育資料集刊23輯,197-220頁。
吳武典、郭靜姿(民75):國小資優兒童特質檢核表。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育中心編印。
李坤崇(民88)多元化教學評量。台北:心理出版社。
吳訓生(民89):國小低閱讀能力學生閱讀理解策略教學效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文。
何素華(民85):國小普通班與啟智班兒童合作學習效果之研究。台北市:文景書局。
吳淑美(民84):完全包含(Full inclusion)模式可行嗎?特教新知通訊,3卷3期,1-2頁。
吳淑美(民86):融合式班級設立之要件。特教新知通訊,4卷8期,1-2頁。
李翠玲(民90):特殊教育教學設計。台北市:心理出版社。
何華國(民87):特殊兒童心理與教育。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
何華國(民89)澳洲特殊學生之融合教育。嘉義大學學報,69期,161-181頁。
李錫津(民79):合作學習的應用。教師天地,47期,48-54頁。
李默英(民72):性別、年級、數學學習態度、性別角色與數學態度之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
吳麗寬(民89):合作學習對國小學習障礙學生閱讀理解效果與同儕社會關係之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
邱上真(民80):學習策略教學的理論與實際。特殊教育與復健學報,1期,1-49頁。
邱上真(民89):帶好每位學生:理論實務與調查研究-普通班教師對特殊需求學生之因應措施。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃成果報告,計劃編號NSC89-2413-H-017-004,未出版。
邱上真(民90):普通班教師對特殊需求學生之因應措施、所面對之困境以及所需之支持系統。特殊教育研究學刊,21期,1-26頁。
林天佑(民87):初等教育改革課題之分析。載於國立教育資料館編印:教育改革專輯,教育資料集刊23輯,197-220頁。
周台傑(民85):國民小學國語文成就測驗(一年級、二年級、三年級)。彰化縣:精華印刷企業社。
沈姍姍(民87):教育改革趨向與影響因素分析。載於國立教育資料館編印:教育改革專輯,教育資料集刊23輯,39-53頁。
林佩璇(民81):台灣省國立高級職業學校合作學習實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
林建平(民83):整合學習策略與動機的訓練方案對國小閱讀理解困難兒童的輔導效果。國立台灣師範大學心理輔導研究所博士論文。
林玟慧(民84):閱讀理解策略教學隊國中閱讀障礙學生閱讀效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
林清江,蔡清田(民86):國民中小學課程發展共同原則。嘉義:中正大學教育學程中心。教育部國民教育司要記專案。
林清江、蔡清田(民88):國民教育階段學校課程發展之共同原則。師大校友,295期,4-10頁。
林淑貞(民81):國畫心像策略對國中輕度智能不足學生記憶文章內容效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所論文。
周淑卿(民88):論九年一貫課程的「統整」問題。載於中華民國課程與教育學會,九年一貫課程的展望。台北市:揚智。
邵淑華(民86):「直接教學法」在國小數學資源班補救教學之成效研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
胡永崇譯(民77):輕度障礙學生之研究。屏東:國立師範學院特殊教育中心。
胡永崇(民81):學習遲緩學生學業成究的相關因素及記憶策略指導效果之研究。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文。
胡永崇(民84)後設認知策略教學對國小閱讀障礙學童閱讀理解成效之研究。
國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文。
胡永崇(民86):聽覺障礙者之教育。載於王文科主編:特殊教育導論。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
胡永崇(民88):學習障礙或書寫障礙?抑或考試障礙?--個案初步觀察及晤談。5卷,3期, 33-37頁。
柯華葳(民82):台灣地區閱讀研究文獻回顧。載於中國語文心理學研究第一年度結案報告,31-76頁。國立中正大學認知科學研究中心。
夏林清等譯(民86)行動研究方法導論─教師動手做研究。台北市:遠流。
洪美連(民84):國小聽覺障礙學生數學口語應用問題教學效果之實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
特殊教育法(民86):中華民國八十六年五月十四日總統華總(一)義字第八六OO一一二八二O號令修正公佈。
特殊教育課程教材教法實施辦法(民87):中華民國八十七年十二月二日教育部台(八七)參字第八七一一三八O五三號令修正發布。
翁素燕(民78):學習策略教學對短期記憶及長期記憶效果影響之研究。資優季刊,32期,44-48頁。
洪榮照、張昇鵬(民86):智能障礙者之教育。載於王文科主編:特殊教育導論。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
洪儷瑜(民90):英國的融合教育。台北市:學富文化。
張正男(民72):語文遊戲。台北市:台北市立社會教育會館。
陳弘昌(民88):國小語文科教學研究。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
陳李綢(民77):學習策略的言教與教學。資優教育季刊,29期,15-24頁。
陳伯璋,周麗玉,游家政(民87):國民教育階段課程綱要草案:研訂構想。作者:未出版。
曹秀美(民79):國小聽障學生與普通學生句型理解能力之比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究碩士論文。
教育部(民87):國民教育階段九年一貫課程總綱綱要。台北:教育部。
教育部(民88a)國民教育階段啟智學校(班)課程綱要。台北市:教育部。
教育部(民88b):身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定原則、鑑定基準。台北市:教育部。
教育部(民89a)學校本位課程發展基本理念與實務策略。台北市:教育部。
教育部(民89b)特殊教育學校(班)國民教育階段肢體障礙類課程綱要。台北
市:教育部。
教育部(民90a)特殊教育學校(班)國民教育階段聽覺障礙類課程綱要。台北
市:教育部。
教育部(民90b)特殊教育學校(班)國中小教育階段視覺障礙類課程綱要。
台北市:教育部。
教育部(民91)國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要(草案)。台北市:教育部。
郭秀鳳(民86):障礙幼童融合式教育之探討。載於中華民國特殊教育學會主編:身心障礙教育的革新與展望。台北市:心理出版社。
陳建明(民86):閱讀理解策略教學效果之個案研究:以花蓮安通部落阿美族國小學生為例。花蓮師範大學院教育研究所碩士論文。
張景媛(民77):教學類型與學習類型適配性研究暨學生學習適應理論模式的驗證。國立台灣師範大學教育與心理輔導研究所碩士論文。
陳淑絹(民84):「指導-合作學習」教學策略增進國小學童閱讀理解能力之實徵研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。
陳莉莉(民79):資優學生與普通學生記憶策略之比較研究,國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
陳榮華修訂(民86):魏氏兒童智力量表第三版(中文版)。台北市:中國行為科學社。
張瑛玿(民84):自我發問策略對國小學生閱讀理解與自我發問能力之影響。國立台灣師範大學心理輔導研究所碩士論文。
郭靜姿(民81):閱讀理解訓練方案對於增進高中學生閱讀策略運用與後設認知能力之成效研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
陳龍安(民89):創造思考教學。載於毛連塭、郭有適、陳龍安、林幸台著:創造力研究。台北市:心理出版社。
鈕文英(民90)身心障礙者行為問題處理─正向行為支持取向。台北市:心理
出版社。
曾世杰(民85):閱讀低成就學童及一般學童的閱讀歷程成份分析研究。國科會專題研究計劃成果報告,未出版。
黃光雄(民88):課程與教學。台北市:師大書苑。
黃光雄、蔡清田(民88):課程設計:理論與實際。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
黃政傑(民81):台灣省高級職業學校合作學習實驗研究。台北市:國立台灣師範大學教育研究研究中心。
黃政傑(民82):課程設計。台北市:東華書局。
黃政傑、林佩璇(民85):合作學習。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
黃政傑(民88):國教九年一貫課程的展望。師友,379期,4-9頁。
游家政(民88):九年一貫課程綱要總綱的理念與架構。教師天地,102期, 34-41頁。
游家政(民89):學校課程的統整及其教學。課程與教學,3卷,1期, 19-37頁。
曾陳密桃(民79):國民中小學生的後設認知及其與閱讀理解之相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
楊紹旦(民70):行動研究法及其實例。國教輔導月刊,20卷4期,頁5-7。
溫惠君(民90):融合教育指標及其特殊教育績效之探討─以智障學生為例。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
甄曉蘭(民84):合作行動研究(Cooperative Action Inquiry)-進行教育研究的另一種方式。嘉義師院學報,9期, 297-318頁。
廖鳳池(民79):行動研究法簡介。諮商與輔導,60期, 5-9頁。
鄭月嬌(民83):小組探究式合作學習法對國小資優生專題研究成果問題解決能力及合作技巧之影響。台北市立師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
歐用生(民83):課程發展的模式探討。高雄市:復文書局。
歐用生(民88):九年一貫課程之「潛在課程」評析。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會主編:九年一貫課程研討會論文集(上)。邁向課程新紀元,19-33頁。
歐用生(民89)九年一貫課程改革的經驗。國民教育,40卷,4期,2-9頁。
劉玲吟(民83)後設認知閱讀策略的教學對國小低閱讀能力學生閱讀效果之研
究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
葉淑真(民82):高中音樂科合作學習實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學音樂研究所碩士論文。
盧台華(民81):智能障礙者之適應行為研究。載於國際特殊兒童評量研討會論文集。彰化市:彰化師範大學特殊教育中心。
盧台華(民87):身心障礙學生課程教材之研究與應用。載於行政院國家科學委員會及教育部編印:身心障礙教育研討會:當前身心障礙教育問題與對策專輯 (185-190頁)。台北市:編者。
賴惠玲、黃秀霜(民88):不同識字教學模式對國小學生學習成效研究。國立台灣師範學院「初等教育學報」,12期,1-26頁。
蔣明珊(民85):台北市國小資優資源班課程實施狀況之調查分析。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
蔣明珊、盧台華(民89):國小資優教材評鑑檢核表建構與試用之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,19期,347-370頁。
蔡典謨譯(民90)濃縮課程:調整能力優異學生一般課程的全盤指引。台北市:
心理出版社。
蔡清田(民88)九年一貫課程改革之行動探究,台灣教育,581期,9-21頁。
蔡清田(民89):教育行動研究。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
謝順榮(民87):合作學習對輕度智障學生閱讀學習成效及同儕關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
蔡銘津(民84):文章結構分析策略教學增進學童閱讀理解與寫作成效之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育系博士論文。
魏麗敏(民77):國小學生數學焦慮、數學態度與數學成就之關係暨數學學習團體諮商之效果研究。國立台灣師範大學心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
藍慧君(民80):學習障礙與普通兒童閱讀不同結構文章之閱讀理解與理解策略的比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
蘇宜芬(民80):後設認知訓練課程對國小低閱讀能力學生的閱讀的理解能力與後設能力之影響。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
Adams, p. R., Quintero, M., killoran, J., Striefel, S., & Frede, E. (1987). A review and synthesis o teacher competencies necessary for effective mainstreaming. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED290289).
Affleck, J., Madge, S., Adams, A., & Lowenbraun, S. (1988). Integrated classroom versus resource model: Academic viability and effectiveness. Exception Children, 54, 339-348.
Allinder, R. M., & Bse, L. D. (2001). Improving fluency in at-risk readers and
students with learning disabilities. Remedial & Special Education, 22(1), 48-55.
Association for the Gifted (1989). Standards for Programs involving the gifted and
talented. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
Ayres, B., et al (1992). Examples of curricular adaptations for students with Severe disabilities in the elementary classroom. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED344418).
Bear, G., & Productor, W. (1990). Impact of a full-time integrated program on the achievement of nonhandicapped and mildly handicapped children. Exceptionality, I, 227-238.
Betts(1985). Autonomous learner model: For the gifted and talented. Greely & Co: Autonomous Learning Publication and Specialists.
Billingsley, B.S., Farley, M., & Rude, H. A. (1993). Program leadership for serving students with disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED372532)
Bjorklund, D. F. & Harnishfeger, K. K.(1987). Development differences in the mental effort requirements for the use of an organizational strategy in free recall. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 44, pp.109-125.
Borkowski, J. G. & Kurtz, B. E.(1987). Met cognition and executive control. In J. G. Borkowski & J.D. Day(Eds.). Cognition in special children: Comparative approaches to retardation, learning disabilities, and gifted, 123-152. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.
Bradley, D.F., King-Sears, M.E., & Switlick, D. M. (1997). Teaching Students in Inclusive Setting: From Theory to Practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Brewer, J. C.(1996). Collaborative consultation as a means of facilitating inclusion.
The University of Alabama, Ph. D. Dissertation.
Brier, N. (1989). The relationship between learning disabilities and delinquency: A review and reappraisal. Journal of learning disabilities, 22, pp546-553.
Bunch, G., Lupart, J & Brown, M.(1997). Resistance and acceptance: Educator attitudes to inclusion of students with disabilities.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED410713)
Burnette, J.(1987). Adapting instructional materials for mainstreamed students: Issue Brief 1. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED 284383).
Cline, B. V., Billingsley, B.S., & Farley, M.(1993). Planning and implementing effective staff development programs. In B.S.Billingsley, et al. (Eds). Program leadership for Serving Students with disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED372532).
Coleman. M. R. and others (1993). Cooperative learning and gifted student: Report on five case studies. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED335675)
Connis, R. T.(1979). The effects of sequential pictorial cues, self-recording and praise on the job-task sequencing of retarded adults. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 12, pp.335-361.
Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1993). Inclusion. Instructor, 103(4),52-57.
Cox, B. E. (1999). The effects of inclusion of students with learning disabilities on
urban fourth grade general education students. Old Dominion University, Ph. D. Dissertation.
Cutbirth,D., & Benge,B.(1997).Using Q methodological studies to investigate
attitudes of educators and of students with disabilities toward inclusion.(ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No.ED406121)
D’Alonzo, B. J. & Giordano, G. et al. (1997). Perceptions by theachers about the
benefits and liablilties of inclusion. Preventing School Failure, 42(1), 4-11.
Daris, G. A. & Rimm, S.B.(1989). Education of the gifted and talented. N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Dayton, J. M. (1998). The effect of educational background on principals’ attitudes
toward inclusive programs for special education students in Illinois Schools. Saint Louis University Ph. D. Dissertation.
Delp, J. (1980). How to live successfully with the gifted. In S. Kaplan (ed.),
Education the preschool/primary gifted and talented (167-182). Los Angeles: National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented.
DFEE(1997)Excellence for all Children: Meeting Special Educational Need.
London: DFEE.
Diamond, K.E., Hestenes, L.L. & O’Connor, C.E.(1994). Integrating young children with disabilities in preschool: problems and promise. Young Children, 49(2), 68-75.
Dunn, L. M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded--Is much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35,5-22.
Ehlers, K., & Montgomery, D. (1999). Teachers’ perceptions of curriculum modification for students who are gifted. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED429750).
Erickson, K. I. (2000). The impact of inclusion: A comparison of reading and math
achievement of general education middle school students in inclusive versus non-inclusive setting. Wayne State University Ph. D. Dissertation.
Farlow, L. J. (1994). Cooperative learning to facilitate the insclusion of student with moderate to severe mental retardation in secondary subject-area classes. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No Ep375541)
Filk, B.J.M., & Hirth, M.A. (1994). Perception of special education program effectives and attitudes toward inclusion (ERIC Document reproduction Service No. ED 174595).
Fisher, D., Sax, C., Rodifer, K., & Pumpiam, I. (1999). Teachers’ perspectives of curriculum and climate changes: Benefits of inclusive education. Journal for a Just and Caring Education, 5(3), 250-268.
Foil, C. R., & Alber, S. R. (2002). Fun and effective ways to build your students’
vocabulary. Intervention in School & Clinic, 37(3), 131-140.
Frasier, M. M., and Others (1995). A New Window for Looking at Gifted Children (ERIC Document reproduction Service No. Ed402710).
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. (1994). Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children, 60, 294-309.
Gable, R. A., McLaughlin, V. L. (1993). Unifying general and special education teacher preparation. Preventing School Failure, 37(2), 5-10.
Galant, K., & Hanline, M. F. (1993). Parental attitudes toward mainstreaming young children with disabilities. Childhood Education, 69(5), 293-297.
Gajrra, M. & Salvia, J. (1992). The effects of summarization instruction on text
comprehension of students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58(6), 508-517.
Gallagher, J. J.(1985). Teaching the gifted children. Boston: Alyn & Bacon.
Goldberg, L. F. (1989). Implementing cooperative learning within six elementary school learning disability classrooms to improve math achievement and social skills. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No Ed312839)
Greene, G. (1999). Mnemonic multiplication fact instruction for students with
learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14(3), 141-149.
Hallahan, D. P. & Kauffman, J. M. (1991). Exceptional children: Introduction to specaial education (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Harrower, J. K. (1999). Educational inclusion of children with severe disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(4), 215-235.
Heilman, T., Blair,T., & Rupley,W. (1990).Principles and practicess of teaching reading.Columbus,Ohio:Merrill.
Helmstetter, E. Peck, C. A., & Giangreco, M. F.(1994). Outcomes of interactions with
peers with moderate or severe disabilities: A statewide survey of high school students. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 236-276.
Hollovood, T. M., Salisbury, C. L., Rainfourth, B., & Palombaro, H. M. (1994). Use
of instructional time in classrooms serving students with and without severe disabilities. Exceptional Children, 61(3), 242-253.
Hoover, J. J.(1987). Preparing special educators for mainstreaming: An emphasis on curriculum. Teacher Education and Special Education, 10, pp.58-64.
Hoover, J.J.& Patton, J. R. (1997). Curriculum Adaptations for Students With Learning and Behavior Problems: Principles and Practices. (2nd Ed.). Austin, Texas.
Huber, K. D. (1998). The impact of inclusive education on regular education student
achievement. Temple University. Ph. D. Dissertation.
Jenkins, J. R., Jewell, M., Leicester, N., Jenkins, L., & Troutner, N. (1991). Development of a school building model for educating students with handicaps and at-risk students in general education classroom. Joumal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 311-320.
Jenkins, J. R., Jewell, M., Leicester, N., O’Connor, R. E., Jenkins, L. M., & Troutner, N. M. (1994). Accommodations for individual differences without classroom ability groups: An experiment in school restructuring. Exceptional Children, 60, 344-358.
Johnson, C., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1997). The effects of goal setting and self-
instruction on learning a reading comprehension strategy: A study of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(1), 80-92.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T.(1986). Mainstreaming and cooperative learning strategies. Exceptional Children, 52, pp.553-561.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T.(1987). Structuring cooperating learning lesson plans for teachers. Edina MN: Interaction Book Company.
Judd, C. M., Drake, R. A., Downing, J. W., & Krosnick, J. A.(1991).Some dynamic properties of attitude structures: Context-induced response facilitation and polarization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,60,193-202.
Kauffman, J., & Hallahan, D. (Eds.)(1995). The Illusion of Full Inclusion. Austin,
TX: Pro-ED.
Kennedy, C. H., & Itkonen, T. (1994). Some effects of regular class participation on
the social contacts and social networks of high school student with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 1-10.
Kirk, S. A. & Gallagher, J. J. & Anastasiow, N. J. (1997). Educating exceptional children. Houghton Mifflin Company.
Kis-Glaves, L., Nikolie, B., & Igreic. L (1996).Teachers’ aptitudes toward the integration of pupils with intellectual disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 408751)
Knoll, J. A., & Obi, S. C.(1997). An analysis of inclusive education in eastern Kentucky: Final project report.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 414678)
Kochhar, C.A., West, L.C., & Taymans, J.M.(2000). Successful Inclusion: Practical Strategies for a Shared Responsibility. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Korinek, L.(1993). Positive behavior management: Fostering responsible student behavior. In B.S. Billingsley, et al. (Eds.). Program Leadership for Serving Students with Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED372532).
Kramer, J. J., et al. (1980). Recent advances in mmemonic strategy training with
mentally retarded persons: Implications for educational practice. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 85(3), 306-314.
Lebzelter, S., & Nowacek, E. J. (1999). Reading strategies for secondary students
with mild disabilities. Intervention in School & Clinic, 34(4), 212-220.
Leirer, K., & Dancer, J. (1998). Reading comprehension strategies used by deaf
middle-school student. Perceptional & Motor Skills, 87(3), 874.
Lieberman, L. J., & Houston-Wilson, C. (1999). Overcoming the barriers to including
students with visual impairments and deaf-blindness in physical education. RE:view, 31(3), 129-138.
Lipsky, P. K., & Gartner, A. (1997). Inclusion and School Reform Transforming America’s Classrooms. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Lipsky, D.K.; & Gartner, A. (1998). Taking inclusion into the future. Educational Leadership, 56, 72-78.
Lombardi, T., & Butera, G. (1998). Mnemonics: Strengthening thinking skills of
students with special needs. Cleaning House, 71(5), 284-287.
Madden, N. A. & Slavin. R. E. (1981). Effects of Cooperative Learning on the Social Acceptance of Mainstreamed Academically Handicapped Students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 209882)
Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., Karweit, N. L., Dolan, L. J., & Wasik, B. A. (1993). Success for all: longitudinal effects of a restructuring program for inner-city elementary schools. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 123-148.
Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum Development for the Gifted. Rockville, MD: Aspen.
Mamlin,N. (1999). Despite best intention: Urben inclusion fails. Journal of Special
Education, 33(1), 36-50.
Manset, Genevieve & Semmel, Melvyn I.(1997). Are inclusive programs for students with mild disabilities effective? A comparative review of model programs. Journal of Special Education, 31(2), pp.155-126.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Sweda, J. (2000). Putting mnemonic strategies to work in an
inclussive classroom. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(2), 69-75.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1998). Constructing more meaningful
relationships in the classroom: Mnemonic research into practice. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 138-145.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1998). Enhancing school success with
mnemonic strategies. Intervention in School & Clinic, 33(4), 201-209.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & Levin, J. R. (1985). Maximizing what
exceptional students can learn: A review of research on the keyword method and related mnemonic techniques. Remedial and Special Education, 6(2), 39-45.
McLaughlin, V.L. (1993). Curriculum adaptation and development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED372535)
McLaughlin, M. J., Nolet, V., Rhim, L. M., & Henderson, K. (1999). Integrating
standards: Including all students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(3), 66-75.
McMahan, C. (1993). Developing vocabulary skills in a learning disbility calss through cooperative learning groups. Application Project-Model 6. Collaborative and cooperative technigues. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED363870)
McMaster, K. N., & Fuchs, D. (2002). Effects of cooperative learning on the
academic achievement of students with learning disabilities: An update of Tateyama-Sniezek’s review. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 107-118.
Melser, N. A. (1999). Gifted students and cooperative learning : Astudy of grouping strategies, Roe per, Review, 21(4), p315.
Mevarech, Z. R. (1993). Who benefits from cooperative computer-assisted indtruction ? Educational Computing Research, 9 (4), 451-464.
Mittler, P. (1993). Special needs at the crossroads. In J. Visser, & G. Upton (Eds.), Special Education in Britain After Warnock. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Monahan, R. G., Marion, S.B., Miller, R. & Cronic, D. T.(1997). Rural teachers’ administrators’ and counselors’ attitudes about inclusion. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED406099).
Moore, C., Gilbrenth, D., & Maiuri, F. (1998). Educating students with disabilities in
general education classroom: A summary of the research (ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED419329).
National Center for Education Statistics (2002). The Condition of Education 2002. Washington, DC: U. S. Dept. of Education.
National Center on Education Restructuring and Inclusion. (1994). National study of inclusive education. New York: The City University of New York.
Neary, Tom., Halvorsen, A., Kronberg, R., & Kelly, D. (1992). Curriculum adaptation for inclusive classroom. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED358637).
Neber, H. Finsterwald, M. & Urbam, N. (2001). Cooperative learning with gifted and high-achieving students: a review and meta-analyses of 12 studies. High Ability Studies, 12(2), pp199-214.
Ostoits, J. (1999). Reading strategies for students with ADD and ADHD in the
inclusive classroom. Preventing School Failure, 43(3), 129-133.
Palincsar, A. S. & Brown, A. C. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, pp117-175.
Paris, S. G. (1988). Motivated rembering. In F. E. Weinert & M. Perlmutteer(Eds.). Memory development: Universal changes and individual differences. Hillsadle, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assciates.
Paris, S. G. (1988). Theories and metaphors about learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein, E. T. Goetz & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Assessment, instruction and evaluation (pp. 299-321). N. Y. : Academic Press.
Paris, S. G. ; Newman, R. S. & McVey, K. A.(1982). Learning the functional significance of mnemonic actions a microgenetic study of strategy acquisition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 34, pp.490-509.
Passow, A. H.(1987) Issues and trends in curriculum for the gifted. Gifted International, 4.
Peck, C. A., Donaldson, J., & Pezzoli, M. (1990). Some benefits nonhandicapped
adolescents perceive for themselves from their social relationship with peers who have severe handicaps. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15, 241-249.
Pressley, D. C., & Gillies, L. A. (1985) Children’s flexible use of strategies during reading. In M. Pressley & j. R. Levin (Eds.) Cognitive Strategy Research Educational Applications. NY: Springer-Verlag.
Putnam, J. & Markovchick, K. (1996). Cooperative learning and peer accptance of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Social Psychology, 136(6), pp 741-756.
Rademacher, J. A., Wilhelm, R.W., Hildreth, B. L., Bridges, D. L. & Cowart, M. F. (1998). A study of preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion. Educational Forum, 62(2), pp.154-163.
Ramsay, S. G. & Richards, H. C. (1997). Cooperative learning environments: Effects on academic attitudes of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, Fall, 41(4), pp 160-169.
Reganick, K. A. (1993). Full inclusion: Analytic of a controversial issue. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED 366145).
Renzulli, J. S. (1979). What Makes Giftedness? A Reexamination of the Difinition of Gifted and Talented. Ventura, CA: Ventura Country Superintendent of School Office.
Renzulli, J. S., Reis, S. M. & Smith, L. H. (1981). The revolving door identification model, Mandfield, Conn: Creative Learning Press.
Reynolds, M. C., & Birch, J. W. (1982). Teaching Exceptional Children in All America’s Schools. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
Roberts, L. D. (1996). The class within a class model: A study of the effects on
academic achievement of regular education students in a middle school setting. University of Kansas. Ph. D. Dissertation.
Rosenberg, M. J., & Hovland, C. I. (1960) Cognitive, Affective, and behavioral components of attitudes. In C. I. Hovland & M. J. Rosenberg (Eds.) Attitude Organization and Change. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ross, D. M. & Ross, S. A. (1978). Facilitative effect of mnemonic strategies on multiple-associate learning in EMR children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 82(5), pp 105-121.
Salend, S. J. & Garrick Duhaney, L. M. (1999). The impact of inclusion on students with and without disabilities and their educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20(2), 114-126.
Salisbury, C. L. ; Gallucci, C. ; Palombaro, M. & Peck, C. A. (1995). Strategies that promote social relations among elementary students with and without disabilities in inclusive school. Exceptional Children, 62(2), pp.125-137.
Sax, L., Fisher, D., & Pumpian, I. (1996). Outcomes for students with severe
disabilities: Case studies on the use of assistive technology in inclusive classrooms. Technology and Disability, 5, 327-334.
Schulte, A. C., Osborne, S., & McKinney, J. D. (1990). Academic outcomes for
students with learning disabilities in consultation and resource programs. Exceptional Children, 57(2), 162-172.
Scruggs, T. E. (1985). Maximizing what gifted students can learn: Recent findings of learning strategy research. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29(4), pp 181-185.
Scruggs, T. E, Mastropieri, M. A., & Levin, J. R. (1985). Vocabulary acquisition by
mentally retarded students under direct and mnemonic instruction. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 89, 546-551.
Scruggs, T. E. and others (1986). Effective mnemonic strategics for gifted learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 9(2), pp 105-121.
Sebastion, J. P. & Mathot-Buckner, C. (1998). Including students with severe disabilities in rural middle and high school: Perceptions of classroom teachers. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED417911).
Sharan, S, & Hertz Lazarowitz, R. (1982), effects of an instructional change program on teacher’s behavior, attitudes, and perception. The Journal of Applied Behavior Science, 18(2), 185-201.
Skipper, S. B. (1996). A study of preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusive
education. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. Ph. D. Dissertation.
Slavin, R. E. (1984).Team assisted individualization: Cooperative learning and
individualized instruction in the mainstreamed classroom.RASE,5(6),33-42.
Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning, Celin Rogers: The social psychology of the primary school, N. T. : KKY.
Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Karweit, N. L. Livermorn, B. J. & Dolan, L. (1990). Success for all: First-year outcomes of a comprehensive plan for reforming urban education. American Education Research Journal, 27(2), pp. 255-278.
Snell, M.E., & Janney R. (1993), Including and supporting Students with disabilities within general education. In B.S. Billingsley, et al. (Eds). Program Leadership For Serving Students With Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services. No ED372532).
Spagna, M. E., & Silberman, R. K. (1999). Curriculum, assessment, and instruction for students with disabilities.
Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (Eds.)(1992a). Curriculum considerations in inclusive
classrooms: Facilitating leaning for all students. Baltimore: Brookers.
Stainback, S & Stainback, W. (1992b). School as inclusive communities. In W. Staunback & S. Stainback (Eds), Controversial issues confronting special education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Staub,D,. & Peck,C.A.(1994).What are the outcomes for nondisables students? Educational Leadership.52(4),36-40.
Stephens, J. A. H., & Dwyer, F. M. (1997). Effect of varied mnemonics strategies in
facilitating student achievement of different educational objectives. International Journal of Instructional Media, 24(1), 75-89.
Sternberg, R.(1985). Beyond IQ. Combridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Stevens, R. J. & others (1989). A cooperative Learning Approach to Elementary Reading and Writing Instruction: Long-Term Effects. Report No. 42.(ERIC Docuemtn Reproduction Service No. ED 328901).
Stoler, R. D. (1991). Attitudes and perceptions of regular education teachers toward
inclusion of all handicapped students in their classrooms . Wayne State University, Ed. D. Dissertation.
Stout, J. (1993). The use of cooperative learning with elementary gifted students: Practical and theoretical implications. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 360782).
Swanson, H. L.(1989). The effects of central processing strategies on learning disable, mildly retarded, average, and gifted children’s elaborative encoding abilities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 47, pp.370-397.
Taylor, H. E., & Larson, S. M. (2000). Teaching elementary social studies to students
with mild disabilities. Social Education, 64(4), 232-236.
Thoutman, A. C. (1998). A survey of general education elementary teachers’ attitudes
toward including stduents with disablities in the general education classroom. The University of Memphis. Ed. D. Dissertation.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). How to Differentiated Instruction in Mixed-ability Classrooms. Alexandria, PA: Association for Supervision and Cruuiculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Kiernan, L. J. (1997). Differentiating Instruction. Alexandria, PA: Association for Supervision and Cruuiculum Development.
Trosko, P. L. (1992). Teacher attitudes towards mainstreaming and inclusion of special education students into vocational and regular education programs. DAI-A, 53(12), 4294-4402.
Uhing, R. H. (1994). Perceptions of Nebraska special educators concerning the
impact of the regular education initiative on existing school programs. University of South Dakota. Ed. D. Dissertation.
Van Tassel-Baska, J.(1991).Gifted education in the balance: Building relationships with general education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35(1), 20-25.
Van Tassel-Baska, J.(1994). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. & Complell, M.(1988). Developing scope and sequence for the gifted learner: A comprehensive approach. GCT, March/April, pp.2-7.
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Laughon, P., Simmons, K. & Rashotte, C. A.(1993). Development of young readers phonological processing abilities. Journal of educational psychology, 85, pp.83-103.
Walker, C., Munro, J., & Rickard, F. W. (1998). Teaching inferential reading strategies
through pictures. Volta Review, 100(2), 105-116.
Wang, M. C., & Birch, J. W. (1984). Comparison of a full-time mainstreaming program and a resource room approach. Exceptional Children, 5, 33-40.
Wang, M. C. ; Peverly, S. & Randoiph, R.(1984). An investigation of the implementation and effects of a full-time main-streaming program. Remedial and Special Education, 5(6), pp.21-32.
Wang, A. Y., & Thomas, M. H. (1996). Mnemonic instruction and the gifted child.
Roeper Review, 19(2), 104-106.
Webb, N. M. (1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups: A research summary. In Slavin, R. et al. (Eds.) Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn, PP. 147-172.
Weisherg, R. (1988). 1980s: A change in focus of reading comprehension research: A
review of reading/ learning disabilities research based on an interactive model of reading. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11(1), 149-159.
Whitaker, C. E. (1996). Managing inclusion: A study of principal leadership in
Inclusion. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Ed. D. Dissertation.
Wigle, S. E.; & Wilcox, D. J. (1996). Mainstreaming in education─United States. Remedial & Special Education, 17(5), 323-329.
Wong, B. Y. L. (1985). Metacognition and learning disabilities. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley., G. E. MackKinnon & T. G. Waller (Eds.). Metacognition, cognition, and human performance, pp. 137-180 (vol. 1). New York: Academic Press.
Ysseldyke, J., Algozzine, B. & Thurlow, M. L. (1995). Critical Issues in Special Education. Boston: Houghton Mittlin company.
Zigmond, N., Baker, J.(1990). Mainstream experiences for learning disabled student (Project MELD): Preliminary report. Exception Children, 57, 176-185.
Zigmond, N. & Baker, J.(1994). Is the mainstream a more appropriate educational setting for Randy? A case study of one student with learning disability. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 108-117.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 吳淑美(民86):融合式班級設立之要件。特教新知通訊,4卷8期,1-2頁。
2. 邱上真(民80):學習策略教學的理論與實際。特殊教育與復健學報,1期,1-49頁。
3. 吳淑美(民84):完全包含(Full inclusion)模式可行嗎?特教新知通訊,3卷3期,1-2頁。
4. 吳武典(民87)教育改革與特殊教育。載於國立教育資料館編印:教育改革專輯,教育資料集刊23輯,197-220頁。
5. 江芳盛(民87)從政策研究的觀點看美國教育改革。暨大學報,2卷1期,253-271頁。
6. 王天苗(民90):運用教學支援建立融合教育的實施模式:以一公立幼稚園的經驗為例。特殊教育研究學刊,21期,27-51頁。
7. 游家政(民88):九年一貫課程綱要總綱的理念與架構。教師天地,102期, 34-41頁。
8. 邱上真(民90):普通班教師對特殊需求學生之因應措施、所面對之困境以及所需之支持系統。特殊教育研究學刊,21期,1-26頁。
9. 游家政(民89):學校課程的統整及其教學。課程與教學,3卷,1期, 19-37頁。
10. 何華國(民89)澳洲特殊學生之融合教育。嘉義大學學報,69期,161-181頁。
11. 甄曉蘭(民84):合作行動研究(Cooperative Action Inquiry)-進行教育研究的另一種方式。嘉義師院學報,9期, 297-318頁。
12. 楊紹旦(民70):行動研究法及其實例。國教輔導月刊,20卷4期,頁5-7。
13. 廖鳳池(民79):行動研究法簡介。諮商與輔導,60期, 5-9頁。
14. 歐用生(民89)九年一貫課程改革的經驗。國民教育,40卷,4期,2-9頁。
15. 蔣明珊、盧台華(民89):國小資優教材評鑑檢核表建構與試用之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,19期,347-370頁。