這是一篇從學校特殊教育出發的論文，論文的題目為「生活事件中呈現的特殊教育─以一所國中在地經驗為例的探究」。顧名思義是在生活事件的發展中呈現在地學校之特殊教育的樣態。此論文探索一所國中的在地經驗，研究場域中有著多族群的事實，研究從國中校園展開，接著生活事件的發展會延續到家庭、社區與社會，並從中探究這之間所延伸的議題。
研究中使用了三種研究方法，會以敘事探究將生活事件敘說出來，此部分會帶出後續的相關討論。另外，以建制民族誌來探討學校以及特殊教育與其之間的關係。最後，訪談在地中與特殊教育相關的人，將他們訪談的內容也列為研究資料之一。研究中除了運用特殊教育的相關教育理論之外，也應用了社會學的障礙研究與汙名理論等視角來家加入相關的討論。
研究結果以四部分呈現，首先，以建制民族誌的相關概念來分析學校和特殊教育的相關運作與事物。研究發現，學校以及特殊教育的確受著「建制」所影響，在這個場域中的老師雖然可以說出自己所做之事，也能分析教育場域內相關的事件，但仍然缺乏能看入制度的能力，通常是以一種片面或只與自身相關的立場來分析教育場域內所發生的事件。接著，探討特殊教育的鑑定流程以及特殊教育中相關名詞與汙名之間的關係。研究在探究特殊教育鑑定流程的過程中證實這是一個縝密而完備的程序，國家的教育藉由這樣的程序而實施「分類」的事實，而這當中不能擺脫汙名的實在性。然後，以敘事中的故事帶出學生、家庭、社區以及社會之間的關聯，研究中顯現這是一個多元族群匯聚之地，每一個學生的家庭背後有著不同的多元文化教育交織著的因素，研究藉由多元文化教育與在地經驗之間的連結畫出了家庭圖像，讓教育場域內的老師對這些學生以及家庭有更深刻的理解，而不是用場域內所慣用理論來框架他們；連帶的，教育場域內對於一些名詞的詮釋也有更深刻的想像。最後，連結特殊性與在地性，研究中以敘事呈現在地經驗的特殊性與在地的獨特性，並以此來呼應多元文化教育中包容與接納的精神，並在此基礎去思考怎樣的教育方式或是社會資源可以給在地經驗更多的理解與協助。

This was a thesis which about special education in school, and the title was “ Special education was presented in life event – example as the inquiry of a local experience in junior high school. ” The thesis explored a local junior high school experience and the research field had multi-ethnic groups. Research happened in campus, and then produced important issues when life event extended to family, community and society.
There were three research methods in the thesis. First was narrative inquiry that to narrate life event what had resulted related research issues from telling. Second was institutional ethnography that to discovery the relationships between school and special education. Third was interview that to interview the people who lived or taught in research field, and interview data were research materials. Besides the theory of special education, there were some discussions with disability study and stigma theory in the thesis.
The study had four findings; the first part which was school and special education were affected by institution. The teachers didn’t to distinguish and clarify the condition that under the whole educational system. Usually they judged many situations by their feeling and rules. The second part was explored the connection between the process of identification in special education and stigma. The study found, there was a complete and successive process of identification which on the basis of classification. And the mechanism of classification didn’t evade the reality of stigma. Third, the study showed the narrative within the students, family, community and society. And the study found, this was a multi-ethic groups where full of experiences that had interwoven multicultural education and local features. Through the display of multi-pictures, the understanding with student and family were deeper and tolerant. Moreover, the interpretations with some terms didn’t avoid the fixed meaning and had more space and imagination. Finally, connecting the specialty and local experiences that to respond the characteristics of tolerance in multicultural education. According to above principles that had considered what kind of educational and social resources would be suitable for local experiences.

第一章 緒論 ................................ 1
第一節 研究背景 ............................ 1
第二節 研究緣起 ........................... 5
第三節 研究初探與研究目的................... 7
第二章 文獻探討............................. 11
第一節 台灣的特殊教育........................ 11
第二節 多元文化教育........................... 20
第三節 障礙研究 ........................... 22
第四節 汙名 .............................. 29
第三章 研究設計 ............................ 33
第一節 問題意識與研究發問...................... 36
第二節 研究場域 ..................... 38
第三節 研究視角 ....................... 39
第四節 研究方法 .............. 40
第五節 研究流程 ....................... 49
第四章 生活事件中的特殊教育................... 51
第一節 特教教師的日常 .................. 51
第二節 特殊學生的升學與轉學 ................... 59
第三節 不回家的學生 ...................... 68
第四節 部落裡的孩子 ................. 77
第五節 星星的孩子 .......................... 87
第六節 家庭、特殊學生與其他 ................... 98
第五章 分析與討論 ........................... 111
第一節 學校特殊教育的運作與建制民族誌的關係..... 111
第二節 特殊學生的鑑定機制與汙名 ............... 138
第三節 特殊學生、學校、家庭與社區.............. 164
第六章 結論與省思 ........................ 199
第一節 結論 ......................... 199
第二節 研究的限制 ......................... 206
第三節 研究的省思 ....................... 207
參考文獻 .......................... 209
附錄一 ........................... 217
附錄二 ................... 225
附錄三 ............................. 227

中文部分
王文科(2000)。特殊教育的定義、發展與趨勢。載於王文科(主編)，特殊教育通
論(頁1-30)。台北：五南。
王增勇(2012)。建制民族誌：為弱勢者發聲的研究取徑。載於瞿海源等(主編)，
社會及行為科學研究法(二)：質性研究法(頁313-343)。台北：東華。
王增勇、郭婉盈（2008）。建制民族誌：勾勒在地權力地圖的社會探究。載於周
帄、蔡宏政（主編），日常生活的質性研究（頁27-44）。嘉義：南華大學教
育社會學研究所。
王應棠(2010)。研究訪談的特性：哲學詮釋學的觀點。教育與多元文化研究，2，
1-20.
何國華(2004)。特殊兒童心理與教育(第四版)。台北：五南。
沈慶盈、蔣明珊(2008)。社會學。載於林寶貴(主編)，特殊教育理論與實務(頁
93-131)。台北：心理。
林津如、黃薇靜(2010)。失竊的世代？漢人家庭意識型態符碼與原住民族兒童保
護 。台灣社會研究季刊，77：59-96。
徐享良(2002)。緒論。載於王文科(主編)，特殊教育導論(頁003-048)。台北：
心理。
郭為藩(2002)。特殊兒童心理與教育(第四版)。台北：文景。
郭婉盈(2007)。在生活世界中實踐專業的慢性療養院社工。未出版之碩士論文，
國立陽明大學衛生福利研究所，台北。
陳麗如(2006)。特殊學生鑑定與評量(第二版)。台北：心理。
張茂桂(2002)。多元主義、多元文化論述在台灣的形成難題。http://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw/fellow/maukueichang/
張淑麗(2009)。日常生活研究。人文與社會科學簡訊，10(3)：22-28。
張世慧＆藍瑋琛(2003)。特殊學生鑑定與評量。台北：心理。
葉啟政(2006)。社會理論的本土化建構。北京：北京大學。
鄭震(2011)。列斐伏爾日常生活批判理論的社學意義：邁向一種日常生活的社會
學。社會學研究，3：191-246。
鄭震(2012)。當代西方社會學的日常生活轉向：以核心理論問題為研究路徑。天津社會科學。 http://www.sociologyol.org/yanjiubankuai/fenleisuoyin/shehuixuelilun/2013-03-13/16071.html
謝妮(2009)。建制民族誌 ― 一種新的方法視角。。貴州社會科學，7：59-63。
謝育亞(2008)。「我真的錯了嗎？」居家服務衝突事件的建制民族誌研究。未出
版之碩士論文，國立陽明大學衛生福利研究所，台北。

英文部分
Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (Eds.). (2006). SAGE Benchmarks in Social Research Methods：Narrative methods.(Vols. 1-4). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Archer, M. & Green, L. (1996). Classification of learning difficulties. In S. Kriegler & P. Englebrecht (eds.), Perspectives on Learning Difficulties. Hatfield, SA: Van Schaik.
Artiles, A, J., (2003). Special education's changing identity: Paradoxes and dilemmas in views of culture and space. Harvard Educational Review, 73(2) : 164-202.
Banks, J. A. (2010). Multicultural education: Characteristic and goals. In J. A. Banks, & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and Perspectives (chap. 1, pp. 3-30). NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Barnes, C. (2012). The social model of disability: Valuable or irrelevant?. In Watson, N., Roulstone, N. & Thomas, C. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of special education (pp. 12-29). London: Routledge.
Baynton, D. D. (2001). Disability and the justification of inequality in American history. In Longmore, P.K. & Umansky, L. (Eds), The new disability history: American perspectives (pp. 33-56). New York: New York UP.
Burch. S., ＆ Sutherland. I. (2006). Who's not yet here? American disability history. Radical History Review , 94 : 127-147.
Caine, V., Estefan , A. ＆ Clandinin , D. J. (2013). A Return to Methodological Commitment: Reflections on Narrative Inquiry. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(6)：574–586.
Campbell, M., C ＆ Gregor, Frances (2002) . Mapping Social Relations: A Primer in Doing Institutional Ethnography. Toronto：University of Toronto Press.
Clandinin, D. J., & Rosiek, J. (2007). Mapping landscape of narrative inquiry. Borderland spaces and tensions. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp. 35-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication
Collins, P.H. (1992) .Transforming the Inner Circle: Dorothy Smith's Challenge to Sociological Theory. Sociological Theory 10, 73-81.
Cresswell, T. (2006). 《地方：記憶、想像與認同》 (王志弘 & 徐苔玲, Trans.). 台北: 群學.
Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and education. New York：Collier Books.
Dunn, L. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded: Is much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35, 5–22.
Gadamer, H. (1989). Truth and method (2nd Ed.). New York: Crossroad.
Gallagher, J.J. (1976). The sacred and profane uses of labeling. Mental Retardation, 5(2), 1–2.
Germeten, S. (2013). Personal Narratives in Life History Research. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. 57 (6) , 612-624.
Gillman,M., Heyman, B.＆Swain,J.(2000). What’s in a name?The implications of diagnosis for people with learning difficulties and their family carers. Disability and Society, 15 (3), 389–409.
Goldstein, H., Arkell, C., Ashcroft, S., Hurley, O., & Lilly, S. (1975). Schools. In Hobbs, N. (Ed.), Issues in the classification of children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Conway, M. A. (2005). Introduction: Disability studies meets special education. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal 1(3), 3-9.
Govier, T.(2013). Teaching and Learning, Stories and Arguments. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57 (6) ,587-599.
Griffith, A. I., & Smith, D. E. (2005) . Mothering for schooling. London and New York: Falmer.
Higginbotham, E., & Andersen, M. L. (2006). Race：why it matter. In E.Higginbotham ＆ M. L. Andersen (Eds.), Race and ethnicity in society：The Change landscape (pp. 7-10). Australia：Thomson Wadsworth.
Highmore, Ben.(2002). Everyday Life and Cultural Theory: An Introduction. New York: Routledge.
Hohr, H. (2013).Normativity in Fairy Tales: Scope, Range and Modes of Communication. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57 (6) , 600-611.
Hunt, P. (1966). A critical condition. In P. Hunt(ed.), Stigma: The Experience of Disability(pp. 145-159). London: Geoffrey Chapman.
Jackson, L. (2014). What Legitimizes Segregation? The Context of Special Education Discourse: A Response to Ryndak et al. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities,39(2),156-160.
Kauffman, J. M. (2004). The president’s commission and the devaluation of special education. Educationand Treatment of Children, 27(4), 307-324.
Kvembekk, T., ＆ Frimannsson, G., H. (2013). Narrative: A Brief Introduction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57 (6) , 571-573.
McLeskey, J., Skiba R., ＆ Wilcox, B.(1990). Reform and Special Education: A Mainstream Perspective. Journal of Special Education,24, 319-325.
McLeskey, J. (2004). Classic Articles in Special Education. Remedial and Special Education,25(2)：79-87.
Lauchlan, F., & Boyle, C. (2007). Is the use of labels in special education helpful? Support for Learning, 22(1), 36-42.
LeMoine, N. R. (2001), Language variation and literacy acquisition in African American students, In J. L. Garris, A. G. Kamhi & K. E. Pollock (Eds.), Literacy in African American communities (pp.169-194). Mahwah, NJ：Hampton press.
Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding Disability：From Theory to Practice. London : Macmillan.
Pentland, B. T. (1999). Building process theory with narrative：From description to explanation. The Academy of management review, 24(4), 711-724.
Pinnegar, S., ＆ Daynes, J., G. (2007). Locating Narrative Inquiry Historically: Thematics in the Turn to Narrative. In J. D. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp. 35-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Powell, J.D. (2009). To Segregate or to Separate ? Special Education Expansion and Divergence in the United States and Germany. Comparative Education Review,53(2), 161-187.
Ryndak, D. L., Taub, D., Jorgensen, C. M., Gonsier-Gerdin, J., Arndt, K., Sauer, J., Ruppar, A. L., Momingstar, M. E. & Allcock, H. (2014). Policy and the impact on placement, involvement, and progress in general education: Critical issues that require rectification. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe
Disabilities, 39, 65-74.
Sutcliffe, J., & Simmons, K. (1993). Self-advocacy and adults with learning difficulties. Leicester: National Institute of Adult Continuing Education.
Semmel, M. I., Abernathy, T. V., Butera, G., ＆ Lesar, S. (1991).
Teacher perceptions of the regular education initiative. Exceptional Children,58,9-23.
Shakespeare, T. (1994). Cultural Representation of Disabled People: Dustbins for Disavowal?. Disability and Society, 9(3), 283-299.
Smith, D. E. (1987). The everyday world as problematic. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Smith, D. E. (2002) . Institutional ethnography. In T. May (Ed.), Qualitative research in action (pp. 17-52). London: Sage.
Smith, D. E.(2005). Institutional ethnography：A sociology for people. Oxford：Alta Mira Press.
Smith, J. D. (1998). Histories of special education: Stories from our past, insights for our future introduction to the special series. Remedial and Special Education, 19(4), 196–200.
Spencer, J. S., ＆ Laurel, M.G.D.(2011). "Historical and philosophical changes in the education of students with exceptionalities" In History of Special Education. Published online: 1-20.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S0270-4013(2011)0000021004
Thomsa, C. (2007). Sociologies of disability and illness : contested ideas in disability studies and medical sociology. New York: Macmillan.
Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segreation.(UPIAS). Foundamental Principle of Disability. UK：UPIAS.
Widdershoven, G. A. M. (1993). The story of life: Hermeneutic perspectives on the relationship between narrative and life history. In R. Josselson & A. Lieblich (Eds.), The Narrative study of lives (pp. 1-20). Newbury Park, Calif: Sage.
Wilson, J. (2000). ‘Learning difficulties’, ‘disability’ and ‘special needs’: some problems of partisan conceptualisation. Disability and Society, 15(5), 817–824.
Winzer, M. A. (1993). The History of Special Education : From Isolation to Integration. Washington： Gallaudet University Press.