美國多層次補救教學鑑定模式之評析

A Critical Commentary on Responseto-Intervention

多層次補救教學的鑑定模式（Response－To－Intervention, RTI）近年來在美國教育界廣受討論。美國於2004年開始正式立法將RTI列為特殊教育評估的一部份，以協助決定學生是否符合學習障礙的分類標準。RTI之所以受到重視，主要是因為學習障礙的鑑定一直存在著很大的爭議。傳統以「智商─成就」之間的差距來學習障礙鑑定模式受到批評，因為這種模式無法將學習障礙學生從一般低成就學生中區分出來；此外，這樣的模式也讓無法達到鑑定標準的低成就學生坐等失敗。在RTI的鑑定模式中，普通教育教師與特殊教育教師攜手合作，使用研究證實有效的教學法來定期監督學生的進步情形；如果學生經過多個階段還是無法達到預定目標的，則認定其為需要特殊教育服務的學習障礙學生。然而RTI是否真的解決了所有傳統學習障礙鑑定模式的舊問題，答案仍然十分模糊，學者之間對於RTI模式的成效也有不同看法，有些學者認為應該審慎的且全面性的評估不同RTI模式的成效。本文回顧有關RTI出現的歷史背景、不同模式間的異同以及其在學習障礙鑑定上所扮演的角色和所產生的一些新的問題，希冀能經由美國的他山之石，對於我國未來實施RTI的可能性，提供更深入、更多元的省思。

In 2004, the United States revised the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, allowing schools to use a new educational model, Response to Intervention (RTI), to identify students with learning disabilities eligible for special education. Since then, there has been much discussion in the American educational field about this model. The RTI model requires general education teachers and special education teachers to cooperate with each other and to deliver evidence-based instruction to students while systematically monitoring students' progress. Only those students who cannot meet particular goals can receive special education services. Many see the RTI model as a response to long-lasting controversy regarding the identification of learning disabilities; it is viewed as an improvement over the previous model, the discrepancy model. One group of researchers has argued that the discrepancy model is not capable of distinguishing students with learning disabilities from those with low achievement. The discrepancy model has also been criticized as a “wait-to-fail” model because schools must wait until students' performances are low enough before they can provide intervention. The introduction of RTI has led to significant changes in the American educational system. For example, it requires all educators to focus on students' performance. The model has potential to provide every child the opportunity to successfully learn in school. However, it has not yet been demonstrated that it can solve all problems related to the identification of learning disabilities. This article first reviews the fundamentals of RTI, then goes on to evaluate various effects of the model, and finally discusses potential challenges in RTI implementation. It is hoped that this article can help educators in Taiwan to use the experiences in the United States to rethink the Taiwanese model of identification and remediation for students with learning disabilities.