檢視融合教育之論述與研究：以台灣為例

A Critique on Discourse and Research regarding Inclusive Education:Taiwan as a case example

本篇文章以批判理論為基礎檢視台灣融合教育相關之論述與研究。筆者主張目前國內特殊教育之法律與政策的論述以缺陷觀點為核心，教育目的則以補償學生缺陷為目標，在此情況下發展出部分或完全隔離的教育措施也就理所當然。再者，國內傾向將融合教育窄化為一種針對特殊學生的安置形式並視最少限制環境為安置準則，雖然使得許多特殊學生被安置在普通班級，但是卻也造成國內誤將最少限制環視為融合教育的具體實踐。事實上，卻使得融合教育〈確切的說是安置在普通班〉變成部分特殊學生的特權而非權力。此外，雖然國內融合教育的研究取向逐漸呈現多元的面貌，但是政府的政策卻將實證主義奉為圭臬。這可能造成教育決策以效果或效率為導向，遺漏教育合理性與公平性的辯證，忽略知識生產與應用過程中政治與權力的角色。有鑑於此，筆者主張以「所有人的教育」的概念出發重新詮釋融合教育的內涵，並將批判理論導入融合教育相關的研究以進一步落實融合教育。

Based on critical theory, this paper reviews the discourse and the research approach concerning the education of students with disabilities in Taiwan. Three main obstacles that might inhibit the development of inclusive education are indentified. Firstly, relevant legislation and policy in Taiwan are dominated by the deficit discourse; different forms of exclusionary artefacts are formulated in order to compensate students’ defects. Secondly, inclusive education is often reduced to a placement strategy, and least restrict environmental (LRE) is applied to determine an educational placement for students with disabilities. As such, excluding some students with disabilities to special classes or out to special schools is deemed appropriate. This might suppress the reflections upon the exclusionary practice. Thirdly, the governmental affirmation for valuing positivism as a superior research methodology might further limit the development of inclusive education. The (potential) contributions alternative methodologies could make in enhancing inclusive practice might be overlooked. In overcoming these difficulties, I am arguing for using inclusive education as a discourse to reflect and reconstruct educational practice in a more inclusive way; and embrace the multiplicity of research methodologies in discussing inclusive education.