(54.236.58.220) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/27 18:32
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:侯儒燕
研究生(外文):Holly Hou
論文名稱:臺北縣特殊教育心理評量人員工作執行狀況之研究
論文名稱(外文):The Study of Executive Status of Special Education Diagnostiican in Taipei County
指導教授:吳訓生吳訓生引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立彰化師範大學
系所名稱:特殊教育學系所
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:2007
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:341
中文關鍵詞:心理評量人員
外文關鍵詞:Special education Diagnostician
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:30
  • 點閱點閱:719
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究探究台北縣特殊教育心理評量人員執行鑑定與安置工作的問題與改進建議。本研究採立意取樣方法,選取台北縣特殊教育心理評量人員和鑑輔會兼心評人員一名等進行訪談:有20名心評人員接受個別訪談;其中16名為區級心評人員和4名一般心評人員。

本研究的主要結果如下:
一、 大多數受訪者皆贊同全部特教教師皆為心理評量人員;大多數也贊成分級制度,但在分級和職責的實施層面上並未完全落實,區級的心評人員承接個案的比例仍然過多,被認為將來有可能擔任層級愈高的心評人員負擔更重的責任且大多數都有持續為心評工作的動力。
二、 培訓課程:大多數一般心評人員皆認為培訓課程是偏重鑑定與評量的理論性課程,且贊成以提供鷹架的方式來完成個案實作。而多數贊成由受訓學員自行提供實作個案且以簡單障礙類別的個案開始實作練習會比較好。但大多數區級心評人員認為第一期之課程是理論和實務兼備,但第二期之實務課程則比較無法提升研判能力。建議保留第一期的理論架構、實作個案和分組討論的方式來設計未來的課程。
三、 進階課程,建議一般之培訓課程加強各種專門診斷的測驗工具介紹和運用,鑑定標準流程…等,而區級心評人員之進階課程增加複雜個案的研討會場次、增強收集能力、新工具的使用和診斷說明等。大多數也都贊成以研習課程、個案研討會、閱讀相關書籍為充實和提升專業知能的最佳模式。
四、 多數都表示以鑑定標準來當作研判個案的標準。大多數認為必 須依據特教法研判標準經過評估以後始能接受特教育。
五、 台北縣心理評量人員之工作內涵包括從轉介前之工作內涵、鑑輔會派案之工作內涵,撰寫鑑定報告以及參加鑑定安置會議。大多數表示轉介前必須落實實施三級輔導,但需要釐清所謂的有效之教學或輔導策略。多數認為學情障不一定需要一年輔導期限,只要是介入策略和輔導方法是有效的。由校內特教教師進行篩檢工作和收集學生資料是恰當的,但是需要先建議測驗基本知能。贊成由經過訓練且領有證照的特教教師實施智力測驗,但必須謹守測驗倫理。半數受訪者認為校內心評工並沒有不均現象,且校內心評人員比例愈高的愈沒有分配不均現象。鑑輔會派案後到他校收集資料和實施測驗是耗時費力,但對有爭議個案是必須的,到他校收集資料也帶來新觀念。大多數表示對自己熟悉或做過的測驗會有選擇適當工具的能力,大多數只有區裡有特教中心的工具借用都方便且充足性足夠,但三鶯區、新莊區借用不方便,但淡水區借用時間不方便,以及板橋和三重區外圍地區的心評人員也認為不方便。建議教育局增設特教中心或工具駐點。雖然大多數皆表示謹守測驗倫理,但實際上有的心評工作為了學生謀取福利的預設立場而進行測驗,建議加強宣導遵守測驗倫理,同時發現嚴重錯誤立即撤照。贊成研判出障礙類別即可,對於要研判出學情障障礙類型是有困難的,因為缺乏相關訓練。鑑定報告可視需要自行調整格式。需要提供教學和輔導策略,大多數認為考試評量調整的實施是可以調整再調整,但缺乏基本學力測驗的實施方式,建議提供研習。資源小組成立的功能和效果需要評估,仍有改善空間。大多數都不受家長的壓力而改變安置建議,儘量溝通與鼓勵家長出席會議說明為孩子爭取最大福利,在分區鑑定安置會議現場不需要相關專業的評估,無法發揮功能,建議事前進行評估,瑞芳區則在會議現場有相關專業評估的必要。大多數認為只要是經過特教資格確認過的個案都可以用書審議決個案,大多數贊成派心評人員直接以座談會方式直接議決個案,但也有少數反對因為人力調派有問題且不經濟。大多數贊成分區預審會和分區鑑定安置會議在地化,可以節省家長、學校行政、心評人員時間,但仍有一些技術性問題需要改善,例如家長參與,比較複雜難以研判個案送聯合鑑定安置會議議決,參加聯合會議感覺會有很大壓力和焦慮,建議委員對於研判結果與心評人員不一致時可以提供理由和說明,心評人員儘量收集資料和加以說明,不必理會鑑定委員的行事風格。各區之個案分配量仍過多,如果減少派案鑑定個案量是未來要努力的方向。
六、 大多數認為個人喜好不會影響鑑定安置建議。半數受訪者認為會因個人因素影響心評工作。心評工作會影響校內課務和教學工作。多數學校會主動派代或是自尋代課老師,但公假派代沒問題,但仍有近半數學校不支持心評的情況。多數受訪者表示校內同事和同儕支持個人從事心評工作。
七、 大多數都表示教育局的福利與個人付出不成正比,在無調整鑑定個案費用的空間下,建議多提供進修研習機會。給假時間不夠,是否建議複雜個案多給予半天時間
This study is intended to explore the problems and improvement suggestions of special education diagnosticians engaged in the field of identifying and making placements. The study is adopted in a way of interviewing and twenty special education diagnosticians were purposely select to be interviewed involving sixteen district members and four members of special education diagnostician.
The main findings of the study were as follow:
1. Most of interviewed parties agree that all of the special education teachers should be special education diagnosticians and classified. But the system and classification should be completely carried out. And the interviewed parties questioned the proportion of taking the case of identification and making decision still high and the workload would be heavier. And most of interviewed parties showed the sustained motivation of the field.
2. Most of interviewed parties thought of the cultivation courses for general special education diagnosticians to be more theoretical ones and they agreed with the trained parties taking the simple and easy cases from their own schools as the apprentice use and the trained parties should be guided and supported by scaffold method. The courses for district special education diagnostician in the first phase were both theoretical and practical ones, but the courses in the second phase could not promote the competence of identification and making placement. The interviewed parties suggested to preserve the structure of course in the first phase, apprentice cases and grouping discussions and design the courses based on the structure.
3. Suggest trained courses for general special education diagnosticians should be added the introduction of use of the assessment tools specialized in diagnosis, standard procedures of identification and so on. And the courses for district ones should be included the increases of workshops for complicated cases, promoting the competence of gathering information, the use of new assessment tools and interpretations. Most of interviewed parties agree research and study courses, workshops, readings to be the best ways of enriching and upgrading professional knowledge.
4. Most of interviewed parties expressed they identified and judged the suspected cases based on the identification standard and the suspected cases should be entitled to special education based on the identification standard and regulations specified in “Special Education Rules”. The duty of special education diagnostician involve the pre-referral contents, the contents of duty assigned by “Identification and Placement Committee”, completion of the identification to a final report and attendance of identification and placement meetings. Most of the interviewed parties expressed the third-grade counseling and guidance should be completely carried out, but they suggest Education Bureau shall clarify what the effective response to instructions or interventions are. And the period of counseling and guidance for learning disabilities and serious emotional disabilities should not be needed one year, whereas the effective response of interventions. The proceedings of gathering information and screening for suspected students by special education in the same school as the suspected students were regarded as the appropriate duty, but the basic knowledge of tests should be established in the first beginning. They generally agreed the intelligence tests should be done by the school special education teachers granted certificates, but they should abide by the ethics and morals of tests. Half of the interviewed parties thought of fairness for the duty jobs of identification and placement executed by the respective special education inside the school, and the fairness degree became more on condition that the proportion of special education diagnosticians were more. Gathering information and tests for suspected students beside the own school were thought to be time and energy exhausted, if needed or any disputed cases, the third party of special education diagnostician should be assigned. The special education diagnosticians went to other schools outside their own schools to execute the identification job would have the special education diagnostician gain new insights and have novel concepts that would brainstorm new ideas. Most of interviewed parties expressed they were competent with choosing the assessment tools that they familiar or acquainted with. But if the more cases they have identified, they would be more competent, the workshops would be another way of increasing the competence. The borrow of assessment tools and tests were convenient for the special education diagnostician in Shuang Ho district, Bang Ciao district, San Chung district and Wen San district, the others of nine districts were inconvenient. Suggest to set up more special education center to put assessment tools or increase posted schools. Although most of the interviewed parties themselves expressed to obey the ethics of assessment and tests, the interviewing records revealed some special education diagnosticians did not obey the moral of the rules. Suggest to disseminate more in public and if any violation of rules found, the certificates of the tests should be withdrawn or cancelled and should be regain the certificate by the attendance of trainings of the tests. There were some difficulties to identify the types of learning disabilities and serious emotional disabilities, unless the training courses enabled to identify provided. The format of identification report could be adjusted or modified to fit own use, but should include the specified items. The instruction strategies or interventions should be regarded to provided in the identification report without details only directions. The adaptation or accommodations of tests could be adjusted over and over after use, but the most of interviewed parties have no idea about the way of administration in the basic academics assessment or large-scale assessments, the research or study courses were suggested. The establishment purpose of research group should be reviewed to see if the purpose still were there or could not functioned well, or the reshape or improvement of research group should be needed. Suggest to provide the principles of override school districts. The attendance of the identification and placement meetings that parents entitled to attend and the parents were encouraged to attend to fight for the welfare of their children. The related professional therapy evaluations were thought unnecessary in the district identification and placement meetings, because the related professional therapists could not offer appropriate suggestions based on their professionals, sometimes they were over and involved too much beyond their professionals. Suggest to set limits for some related therapies, because the therapy effects exceeded the best therapy timings, but the Rui Fany district expressed they need the related therapy in the district identification and placement meetings, the therapists have done very well. Most of the interviewed parties said the cases identified and eligible for special education before that could be reviewed and acknowledged their entitlements and related services in the transition period. Most of interviewed parties consented to adopt the panel discussions to finalize the acknowledged cases in the transition period, but some said the way was not economic and would cause the identification force shortage, if the large-scale administration, one of them said the way only for small-scale school and the types of disabilities should be simple that would be identified in a short time. The district identification pre-reviewed meetings, district identification and placements administrated locally could save the time of parents, school authoritative representatives and special education diagnostician, but there were still some problems needed to manage, such as parents participation, the complicated cases sent to unit identification and placement meetings. The pressure and anxiety of attendance in unit identification and placement meeting for special education diagnosticians were quite big, suggest the committees of unit identification and placement meetings could explain the reason of what the identifications differentiated between the committees and the diagnosticians. Suggest to try to gather more information and explain the conditions of suspected students if the report could not clarify the questions of the committees and disregarded the committees’ behaviors or characteristics. The case burden force were quite high, the direction of decrease case burden for respective special education diagnosticians should be only way to work.
5. Most of the interviewed parties were not influenced by their own preference. Half of them expressed the personal factors would affect the willingness of performance of identification jobs. The administrations of identification and placement would affect the instructions and its quality inside the school. Some school would arrange substitute teachers for their absence, but still half of school did not support the duty. Some peers working in the field of identification and placement supported the job, the colleagues, too.
6. Most of the interviewed parties expressed the welfare and personal rewarded could inappropriately deserved. Suggest offer more workshops, case study chances as the rewards. Suggest offer more time and substitute teachers granted for the complicated cases.
目次 I
表目次 III
圖目次 IV
附錄次 V

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 問題背景 1
第二節 研究目的 6
第三節 研究問題 6
第四節 名詞釋義 7

第二章 文獻探討 9
第一節 鑑定和評量的意涵 9
第二節 特殊教育心理評量的法令基礎 17
第三節 特殊教育心理評量人員之設置 22
第四節 特殊教育心理評量人員之專業知能 41
第五節 特殊教育教師在職進修 47
第六節 多元評量 51

第三章 研究方法 69
第一節 研究架構 69
第二節 研究對象 71
第三節 研究程序 73
第四節 資料處理與分析 75
第五節 研究信賴度之檢驗 76

第四章 結果與討論 78
第一節 特教教師兼任心理評量人員之意見 78
第二節 台北縣心評人員培訓課程之意見 85
第三節 台北縣鑑定與安置之鑑定標準 98
第四節 台北縣心理評量人員執行工作內涵 105
第五節 人為影響因素 211
第六節 綜合討論 228

第五章 結論與建議 268
第一節 結論 268
第二節 建議 299
參考文獻 321
附錄 328

表目次
表2-1 台北縣鑑定安置模式的演變 31
表2-2 心評人員評量方式與資料來源 36
表2-3 台北縣一般心評人員培訓課程 43
表2-4 台北縣九十三學年度第一期區級心評人員培訓課程 45
表2-5 台北縣九十五學年度第二期區級心評人員培訓課程 46
表2-6 使用評量調整之指導原則 53
表3-1 本研究受訪者一覽表 72

圖目次
圖2-1 台北縣心評人員訓練和升級流程 30
圖2-2 校內疑似身心障礙學生發現與轉介鑑定流程圖 33
圖2-3 學習障礙類型 63
圖3-1 台北縣特殊教育心理評量人員工作執行狀況之研究架構 70
圖3-2 研究程序圖 74

附錄次
附錄一 台北縣心理評量人員任用資格和工作內容 328
附錄二 台北縣身心障礙學生考試評量服務 330
附錄三 訪談大綱 331
附錄四 資料處理說明 336
附錄五 同意書 337
附錄六 九十六學年度台北縣鑑定報告格式 338
王燕芬,劉家智,顏淑玲,黃冠穎,賴倩慧,吳沛璇,曲俊芳(2006):自閉症學生發現及評量工具介紹。臺北縣教育局研習資料。
臺北縣教育局(1995):臺北縣特殊教育學生鑑定及就學輔導委員會鑑定評量小組工作手冊。臺北縣鑑輔會。
臺北縣教育局(2000):臺北縣政府特殊教育行政支援系統聯繫及運作方式實施要點。中華民國八十九年五月廿五日八九北府教特字第 188684號函。
臺北縣教育局(2001):臺北縣特殊教育行政手冊。中華民國九十年九月廿日九十北府教特字第 343489號函。
臺北縣教育局(2004):臺北縣特殊教育學生鑑定及就學輔導委員會鑑定評量小組心理評量人員培訓方式實施計劃。中華民國九十三年十月十八日北府教特字第 0930681358號函。
臺北縣教育局(2004):臺北縣鑑定安置機制與心評人員角色與定位。取自臺北縣教育局特教中心網站-http://www.sec.tpc.edu.tw。
王天苗、范德鑫(2000):運用專業判斷鑑定智障學生之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,19,127-148。
王瓊珠(2004):學習障礙學生鑑定問題探討-以台北市國小為例。國小特殊教育,37,39-46。
王瓊珠、林美玉、周瑞倩、殷春梅、徐慧美、陳冠杏(2000):學習障礙個案綜合診斷報告。國小特殊教育,30,30-64。
林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花(2005):質性研究方法:訪談模式與實施步驟。身心障礙研究,3,122-135
林家瑜(2006):國民中學身心障礙資源班教師角色期望與角色實踐之調查研究。國立臺南大學特殊教育研究所博士論文,未出版,臺南市。
林寶貴、李旭原(2003):特殊教育學名詞辭典。台北市:五南。
林寶貴、吳淑敏、曾怡惇、林美秀(1998):特殊教育評量、鑑定工具調查研究。特殊教育研究學刊,16,23-38。
李慶良(2001):美國1997年IDEA修正案的研究。台中教育大學特教論文集。教育部特教小組,56-110。
余民寧、賴姿伶、王淑懿(2002):教師終身進修相關議題之調查研究。教育與心理研究,25,543-584。
吳佳臻(2006):國民中學特殊教育教師在職進修需求之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
吳武典(1999):修正特殊教育法的特色與檢討。師友,390,5-12。
吳毓瑩、林怡呈(2003):多元評量概念在課程標準演變中之定向與意義。教育部委託國立台灣師範大學教育研究中心主編,11,6,4-32。
邱上真(2006):談「優質的特殊教育」--為每個孩子找到一個學習的出口—孩子在那裡服務就到那裡。取自
http://140.127.47.6/DLLearn/teacher/scj/ctshare-index。
邱上真(2006):認知能力與學科學習表現:多元的評量與變通的考試。取自http://140.127.47.6/DLLearn/Teachers/ctshare.index。
孟瑛如(2003):營造學障兒的無障礙教育環境。教師天地,125,18-24.
胡永崇(2005):以教學反應(RTI)作為學習障礙學生鑑定標準之探討。屏東特殊教育,11,1-9。
胡永崇(2005):學習障礙學生的評量調整措施。屏東特殊教育,10,1-9。
洪儷瑜(2005):學習障礙鑑定工作檢討與建議—由「各縣市實施學習障礙學生鑑定工作鑑定調查表」談起。1-27,網址: http://192.192.250.54/liyuhung/chinese/modules/mydownloads/datashare/ld_identification_taiwan2005.pdf。
洪儷瑜(2005):由「身心障礙學生十二年安置計劃」談學習障礙的鑑定。網址:http://192.192.250.54/liyuhung/chinese/modules/mydownloads/datashare/十二年國教與學障鑑定.pdf。
洪儷瑜、單延愷(2005):如何鑑定嚴重情緒障礙學生-由理論到實務的探討。特殊教育季刊,94,01-10。
教育部(2004):特殊教育法。中華民國九十三年六月廿三日總統 (90) 華總一義字第 9000245110號令修正發布。
教育部(2002):特殊教育法施行細則。中華民國九十一年四月十五日教育部 (91) 台參字第 91049522號令修正發布。
教育部(2001):教育改革行動方案。教育部全球資訊網。http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/E0001/EDUION001/menu03/sub02/content_020201/03020201_0303.htm。
教育部(2003):教育改革之檢討與改進會議。中華民國九十二年十一月十日行政院壹教字第0920057846號函核定修正。
教育部(1999):身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準。中華民國九十五年九月廿九日教育部台參字第 0950141561C號令修正。
教育部(1999):特殊教育相關專業人員及助理人員遴用辦法。中華民國八十八年六月廿九日教育部(88) 台參字第 88075896號令修正發布。
陳心怡、洪儷瑜(2005):特殊教育心評老師專業角色之研究(I)&(II)。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系(所),行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃。
陳伯璋(2004):追求生命意義的教師專業發展。教育研究月刊,126, 99-105。
陳麗如、Zhang, D. (2004):美國身心障礙者重要法案之陳述。台東特教,19,41-47。
陳麗如、王瑞珍、陳清溪(2005):讀NCLB在特殊教育—讀CEC 2004年年會焦點主題。特殊教育季刊,96,32-36。
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,95,01-11。
黃瑞珍(2006):國小LD學生鑑定問題與可行方向。國小特殊教育,41,1-13。
單延愷,洪儷瑜(2003):由操作性概念談學習障礙。特殊教育季刊,87,09-17。
楊萬教(2004):特殊教育心理評量教師專業能力之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
楊雅惠(2005):桃園縣特殊教育心理評量人員工作困擾及解決方式之探討。國立台北教育大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
張素貞(2004):國民小學身心障礙資源班教師專業成長之研究-以知能分析和方案規劃為例。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文,未出版,台北市。
蔡美玲(2003):台中市國民教育階段身心障礙學生鑑定工作之研究。國立台中教育大學國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台中市。
蔡崇建(1993):智力的評量與分析。台北市:心理。
趙武升(2003):中部地區特殊教育學生鑑定及就學輔導委員會運作狀況之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
趙靖蕙(2006):論特殊教育教師的專業成長。國小特殊教育,41,44-53。
劉雅億(2000):國民教育階段身心障礙學生鑑定及安置問題與改進意見之探討-以台北市、台北縣為例。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
魏俊華(2005):從特殊教育法的現在未來檢視特殊教育的現況得失。台東特教,21,1-7。
Acrey, C., Johnstone, C., & Milligan, C. (2005). Using Universal Design to Unlock the Potential for Academic Achievement of At-Risk Learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(2), 22-31.
Crawford, L., & Tindal, G. (2006). Policy and Practice, Knowledge and Beliefs of Education Professionals Related to the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in a State Assessment. Remedial and Special Education, 27(4), 208-217.
Council of Exceptional Children (2003). What every special Educator must know, Ethics, Standards and Guidelines for Special Educators (5th eds.). Council of Exceptional Children, VA.
David Wechsler(1999)。陳榮華。魏氏兒童智力量表第三版(中文版)。台北市:中國行為科學社在台灣發行。
Edgemon E. A., Jablonski B. R., & Lloyd, J. W. (2006). Large-Scale Assessments: A Teacher’s Guide to Making Decisions About Accommodations. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(3), 6-11.
Educational Diagnostician (2006).取自http://www.cec.sped. org.
Garcia, S. B., & Ortiz, A. A. (2006). Preventing Disproportionate Representation: Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Prereferral Interventions. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(4), 64-68.
Gronna, S. S., Jenkins, A.A. & Chin-Chance, S. A. (1998). Who Are We Assessing? Determining State-Wide Participation Rates for Students with Disabilities. Exceptional Children, 64(3), 407-418.
Hallanan D. P., Lloyd J.W., Kauffman J. M., Weiss M. P., & Martinez E. A. (2005). Learning Disabilities: Foundations, Characteristics, and Effective Teaching (3rd ed.). NJ., Pearson Education.
Kirk, S. A., Gallagher, J. J., Anastasiow, N. J., & Coleman, M. R. (2006). Educating Exceptional Children (11th ed.). MA., Houghton Mifflin.
Lerner, J. W., & Kline, F. (2005). Learning Disabilities and Related Disorder: Characteristics and Teaching Strategies (10th ed.). MA., Houghton Mifflin.
McLoughlin J. A., & Lewis, R. B. (2005). Assessing Students With Special Needs (6th ed.). NJ., Pearson Education.
Macmillan, D. L., Greshman, F. M., Bocian, K. M., & Siperstein G. N.(1997). The Role of Assessment in Qualifying Students as Eligible for Special Education: What is and What’s Supposed To Be. Focus on Exceptional Children, 30(2), 1-18.
Macmillan, D.L., Greshman, F.M., Bocian, K.M., & Siperstein G.N.(1998). Discrepancy Between Definitions of Learning Disabilities and School Practices: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 314-326.
Pierangelo R., & Giuliani G. A. (2002). Assessment in Special Education–A Practical Approach. MA., Allyn & Bacon.
Overton T. (1992). Assessing Learners With Special Needs-An Applied Approach. Macmillan Publishing Company, NJ.
Overton T. (2003). Assessing Learners With Special Needs-An Applied Approach (4th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc., NJ.
Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke J. E., (2004). Assessment in Special and Inclusive Education. Houghton Mifflin Company Boston, MA.
Taylor R. L. (2006). Assessment of Exceptional Students, Educational and Psychological Procedures (7th ed.). NJ., Pearson Education.
Vaughn, S., Thompson, S. L., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to Instruction as a Means of Identifying Students With Reading/Learning Disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69(4), 391-409.
Yell, M. L., Katsiyannas, A., & Shiner, J. G. (2006). The No Child Left Behind Act, Adequate Yearly Progress, and Students with Disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(4), 32-39.
Ysseldyke J. E., Algozzine B., & Thurlow M. L. (2000). Critical Issues in Special Education (3rd ed.). MA., Houghton Mifflin.
Watkins, M. W., Kush, J. C., & Schaefer, B. A. (2002). Diagnostic Utility of the Learning Disability Indes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(2), 98-104.
Welner, K. (2006). Legal Rights: The Overrepresentation of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students in Special Education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(6), 60-62.
Zirkel, P. A. (2006). What Does the Law Say? Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(3), 62-63.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔