摘 要
本研究旨在透過資源班教師與三位普通班教師利用自然支援進行合作諮詢模式，以解決六位特殊學生在融合式班級中國語科的學習問題。研究者收集相關資料，並進而探討行動歷程、成效與研究者之專業成長、省思與改變。
本研究之結論如下：
一、研究歷程
（一）合作諮詢夥伴互動的過程
（1）資源班教師與普通班教師合作過程包括：理想與實際的落差、資源班教師獲取認同及建立專業形象，最後則建立對等談話的平台等階段
（2）合作諮詢的範圍擴大為融合式班級生態，有利於獲取普通班教師之認同。
（3）資源班教師主動、低姿態的態度以及抱持同理心，有助於與普通班教師建立合作關係。
（4）特殊學生學習的改善是強化普通班教師對資源班教師之專業肯定及合作意願的有利因素。
（5）資源班教師需增進溝通與社交技巧，以提高與普通班教師互動的質量。
（二）運用自然支援之過程
（1）運用自然支援的過程包括：了解目前可運用自然支援進而提昇其效能，之後再擴展運用自然支援的範圍並持續提升效能最後則是移轉教學技術。
（2）善用預習、模擬普通班級情境、同儕示範及教師和學生角色互換等資源班教學服務調整，可增進特殊學生參與普通班學習活動的能力、建立自信心以及面對及處理挫折的能力，有助於改善其在普通班的學習。
（3）資源班教師專業形象的建立有助於擴展自然支援的運用。
（4）資源班教師應將本身教學技能轉介普通班教師及愛心媽媽，並轉介普通班教師彼此間之教學技巧，甚而從普通班教師的經驗擷取教導特殊學生的技巧。
（5）透過改善特殊學生具體學習表現，可改善特殊學生家長的教養態度。
二、對特殊學生的影響
六位特殊學生國語科的成績、學習態度、人際關係及自我概念都有所改善，但同時亦發生因介入策略未盡周全而稍影響特殊學生人際關係的情形。。
三、對融合式班級之影響
（一）對一般學生的影響大都是正向的，但亦發生小老師模仿特殊學生偏差情緒表達的情形及介入策略過於突顯差異而造成一般學生對特殊學生略有負面印象。
（二）級任導師對於資源班更了解，進而肯定資源班與普通班級密切合作的效果。同時亦提昇級任導師面對改變的接納能力、更加了解與接納特殊學生以及主動因應學生的學習特性調整教法。
四、研究者對鑑定流程、資源班教師工作、融合的關鍵及學術與實務工作者的互動等方面有更深入的覺知；而研究者之溝通能力、自信心及寬容度亦有所提昇。
根據上述結果，本研究針對資源班老師、自然支援的運用與未來研究進一步探究的相關建議。
關鍵字：自然支援；合作諮詢；融合式班級；課程調整。

This research aimed to apply supporting networks (three regular class teachers and 1 resource room teacher) and collaborative consultation model to resolve the Chinese language learning problems of six special students who studied in inclusive classes.
The main findings of this study were as follows:
1.The interaction of the collaborative consultation partners:
(1)The collaborative consultation process of regular teachers and the resource room teacher included the following phases: the awareness of expectation deficiency between ideals and the reality, the resource room teacher getting recognitions and building professional images, establishing interactive talking platform.
(2)To obtain the recognition of regular teachers, it was necessary to expand the extent of collaborative consultation, from the special student to the inclusive class.
(3)Resource room teachers should be active, humble and empathetic to improve the collaborative relationships with regular teachers.
(4)Special students’ improvement in this study was the motivation to the willingness of collaboration and the recognition of resource room teachers’ performance.
(5)To raise the quality of interaction between regular and resource room teachers, resource room teachers should improve their communicating and social skills.
2.The application of supporting networks:
(1)The application process included: understanding the current supporting networks and improving the efficiency, expanding the supporting networks and constantly raising the efficiency, transforming the strength to teaching techniques.
(2)To improve the special students’ learning ability in regular classes, and to increase their confidence and the ability to handle frustration, it was good for resource room teachers to use: previewing the subject content, simulating the situations in regular classes, using peer demonstration, and exchanging roles with students.
(3)The establishment of resource room teachers’ professional images facilitated the expansion of supporting networks.
(4)Resource room teachers should transmit the teaching techniques to regular teachers and volunteers. Resource room teachers and regular teachers should exchange teaching experiences and skills.
(5)The educational attitudes of special students’ parents would be improved through the students’ concrete study performance.
3.On the influences of the special students:
The academic achievements in Chinese Language, the learning attitudes, the relationships with others and the self-conception of the six special students were improved. However, there was an accident of over intervention and influenced the relationship with the classmates.
4.On the influences of inclusive classes:
(1)Most influences are positive, but there once occurred an accident that caused little negative impression on the special students.
(2)The regular teachers understood more about resource rooms, and approved the effect of the close collaboration between resource rooms and regular classes. Moreover, they faced the challenges bravely and were more active in adjusting the methods to fit in special students
5.The researcher was more familiar and gained more insight of the process of appraisal, the field work of resource room teachers, the key concept of inclusion. And the researcher also boosted his confidence and the ability to acceptance and communication.
Based on the results, some suggestions were made to resource room teachers, the using of relevant supporting networks and further exploration in the future.

參考文獻
ㄧ、中文部分
王文科（民89）。質的研究的問題與趨勢。載於中正大學教育研究所主編：質的研究方法，1-24。高雄：麗文。
王振德（民88）。資源教室方案。台北：心理。
王振德（民86）。資源利用與公共關係-資源教室經營的兩個要項。特殊教育季刊，69。
曲俊芳（民87）。國中普通班身心障礙學生及其教師所遇困難及支援服務需求之研究－－以兩名腦性麻痺學生為例。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
吳武典（民87）。特殊教育行政問題與對策。特殊教育季刊，68，1-12頁。
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。
吳美枝、何禮恩（民91）。行動研究－生活行動家的研究錦囊。嘉義：濤石。
吳淑美（民86）。融合式班級設立之要件。特教新知通訊，4（8），1-2頁
邱上真（民91）。特殊教育導論－帶好班上每位學生。台北：心理出版社。
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。
呂美娟、施青豐、李玉錦譯（民91）。盧台華校閱。June Lee Bigge＆Colleen Shea Stump（1999）原著。特殊教育課程與教學（Curriculum,Assessment＆Instruction for Students with Disabilities 1E）。台北：學富文化。
林貴美（民89）。特殊教育的新精神：尊重個別差異，融合不同於群體。載於中華民國特殊教育學會主編：特殊教育年刊—e世代特殊教育，191-206頁。
胡永崇、蔡進昌、陳正專（民90）。高雄地區國小普通班教師對融合教育態度之研究。國民教育研究集刊，民90，9期，235-257頁。國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所。
洪儷瑜(民82)。注意力缺陷及過動學生的人際關係及其相關問題研究。特殊教育研究學刊。
洪儷瑜(民89)。以教師的觀點研究弱勢學生的困境與教育的因應：義務教育階段一般弱勢學生的補救教育方案之研究。載於邱上真、張新仁、洪儷瑜、陳美芳、紐文英合著，補救教學理論與實務（41-94頁）。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育中心。
胡致芬（民86）。重度障礙者之統合教育。特殊教育季刊，第62期， 16-21頁。
夏林清（民89）。行動研究方法導論：教師動手做研究。台北：遠流。
陳向明（民91）。社會科學質的研究。台北：五南
陳明聰（民89）。融合教育安置下課程的發展。特殊教育季刊，76，17-23頁。
陳惠邦（民87）。教育行動研究。台北市：師大師苑。
黃瑛綺（民91）。國小融合教育班級教師教學困擾之研究。臺東師範學院教育研究所碩士論文。
張世平、胡夢鯨（民77）。教育研究法的探討與應用。台北市：師大書苑。
張素貞（民92）。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。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文。
張蓓莉（民82）。普通學校中特殊教育與一般教育之溝通與交流。載於台北市教師研習中心主編，學習障礙與教學資源，106-117頁。台北市教師研習中心
鈕文英（民89）。國小階段實施融合教育可行模式之研究。高雄：國立高雄師範大學特殊教育學系。
鈕文英（民90）。展望與期待---與其詛咒黑暗，不如自己點燈。載於高雄縣政府主編，高雄縣八十九學年度國民中學啟智班改進教學暨啟智班評鑑成果彙編。高雄：高雄縣政府。
鈕文英（民91）。國小階段融合教育實施模式與策略初探。特教園丁季刊，18卷，2期，1-20頁
曾于真（民91）。國小資源班教師和普通班教師實施合作諮詢之行動研究。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
楊惠甄(民89)。台北市國民小學身心障礙資源班實況之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡明富（民87）。融合教育及其對班級經營的啟示。特殊教育與復健學報，6期，349-380頁。
蔡清田（民89）。教育行動研究。台北：五南。
葉靖雲（民87）。資源教室的概念知多少。特教園丁，13卷，3期，19-22頁。
蔣明珊（民90）。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。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文。
劉惠珠（民90）。台北市田園小學身心障礙資源班運作之調查研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
黎慧欣（民85）。國民教育階段教師與學生家長對融合教育的認知與態度調查研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
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。
藍祺琳（民86）。國民小學身心障礙資源班教師角色期望與角色踐行之調查研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育碩士論文。
謝政隆（民87）。國小教育人員對完全融合模式之態度調查研究。國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文
蘇雪玉（民77）。學前障礙幼兒與一般正常幼兒混合就讀之效果。輔仁學誌，22期，61-76頁
蘇燕華（民89）。融合教育的理想與挑戰—國小普通班教師的經驗。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育系碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Adamson, D.R., Cox, J., ＆ Schuller, J.（1989）. Collaboration /consultation: Bridging the gap from resource room to regular classroom. Teacher Education And Special Education, 12（1-2）, 52-55.
Alves, A.J., ＆ Gottlieb, J.（1986）. Teacher interactions with mainstreamed handicapped students and their nonhandicapped peers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9, 77-83.
Brewer, J. C. (1996). Collaborative consultation as a means of facilitating inclusion. The University of Alabama, Ph. D. Dissertation.
Bruneau-Balderrama, O. (1997). Inclusion: Making it work for teacher, too. The Clearing House, 70 (6), 328-330.
Bunch, G., Lupart, J., & Brown, M. (1997). Resistance and acceptance: Educator attitudes to inclusion of students with disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 410 713)
Cochran, H. K. (1997). The development and psychometric analysis of the scale of teachers' attitudes toward inclusion (STATIC). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 415 259)
Cross, C. C., ＆ Villa, R.A.（1992）. The Winooski school system :An evolutionary perspective of a school restructuring for diversity. In Villa, R.A.,Thousand, J.S, Stainback, W. （Eds.）, Restructuring for caring and effective education（219-240）. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
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. ED 406 121)
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.
Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. London: Open University Press.
Fletch-Campbell, F.（2001）. Issue of inclusion: Evidence from three recent research studies. Emotional ＆ Behavioral Difficulties, 6(2), 69-90.
Fulk, B. J. M., & Hirth, M. A. (1994). Perceptions of special education program effectiveness and attitudes toward inclusion. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 374 595)
Givens-Ogle, L., Christ, B. A., Colman, M., King-Streit, S., & Wilson, L. (1989). Data-based consultation case study：Adaptations of researched best practices. Teacher Education And Special Education, 12(1-2), 46-51.
Hoover, J.J. & Patton, J. R. (1997). Curriculum Adaptations for Students With Learning and Behavior Problems: Principles and Practices. (2nd Ed.). Austin, Texas.
Hoover, J. J.（1987）. Preparing special educators for mainstreaming: An emphasis on curriculum. Teacher Education and Special Education, 10, 58-64
Idol, L., Nevin, A., ＆ Paolucci-Whitcomb, P. （1994）Collaborative consultation（2nd.）Austin, TX: PRO-ED
Jordan, A., Stanovich, P., & Roach, D. (1997). Toward a framework for predicting effective inclusion in general education elementary classrooms. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 410 735)
Jordan, A., Lindsay, L., & Stanovich, P. J(1997). Classroom teachers' instructional interactions with students who are exceptional, at-risk and typically achieving. Remedial and Special Education, 18(2), 82-93.
Key, S. G., Bemark, F.（1998）. Collaborative consultant: A new role for conselors serving at-risk youths. Journal of Counseling ＆ Development, 76（2）, 123-133
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)
Klingner, J.K.,Vaughn, S.,Cohen, P., ＆ Forgan, J.W. (1998). Inclusion or pull-out: Which do students prefer? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(2), 148-158.
Knoll, J. A., & Obi, S. C. (1997). An analysis of inclusive education in eastern Kentucky: Final project report. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 414 678)
Kozleski,E., Mainzer, R., & Deshler, D.(2000). Alternate assessment. Lessons learned and roads not taken. Exception Children, 67, 51-66.
Lipsky, D.K., ＆ Gartner, A.(1997). Inclusion and school reform: Transforming America’s classrooms. Baltimore. MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Lipsky, D.K., & Gartner, A. (1998). Taking inclusion into the future. Educational Leadership, 56, 72-78.
Lusky, Melissa B., Hayes, Richard L.. Collaborative Consultation and Program Evaluation. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79, 26-38.
McQuarrie, N. & Zarry, L. (2000). Examining the Actual Duties of Resource Teachers. Education. 120 (2), 378-385.
Moore, C., Gilbreath, 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 on Education Restructuring and Inclusion (1995). National study of inclusive education. New York: The City University of New York.
Otis-Wellborn A., & Judith, W. (2000). The process and impact of standards-based teacher education reform. Teacher Education and Special Education, 23(2), 78-92.
Peggy Dettmer ＆ Norma Dyck ＆ Linda P. Thurston（1999）CONSULTATION, COLLABORATUON, AND TEAMWORK for Students with Special Needs（3rd ed.）. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn ＆Bacon.
Poppers, A. E. (1991). A comparison of the achievement of learning-disabled students in a resource room setting versus a collaborative consultation model. University of La Verne.
Ross, F. C., ＆Wax, I.（1993）. Inclusionary Programs for children with language and/or learning disabilities: Issues in teacher readiness.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED369251）.
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.
Saver, K., & Downes, B. (1991). PIT--A model for teacher collaboration in anelementary school. Intervention In School And Clinic, 37(2), 116-122.
Schulte, A. C., Osborne, S. S., & Mckinney, J. D. (1990). Academic outcomes for students with learning disabilities in consultation and resource programs. Exceptional Children, 57, 162-172
Scruggs, T. E. & Mastropieri, M. A. (1996). Teacher perceptions of mainstreaming/inclusion. 1958-1995: A research synthesis. Exceptional Children, 63(1), 50-74.
Sebastian, J. P., & Mathot-Buckner, C., (1998). Including students with severe disabilities in rural middle and high school: Perceptions of classroom teachers. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 417 911)
Stainback, W., ＆ Stainback, S.(1993). Support networking for inclusive schooling: Interdependent integrated education. Baltimore : Paul H. Brookes.
Stainback, W., ＆ Stainback, S.(1994). A commentary on inclusion and the development of a positive self-identity by people with .... Exceptional Children, 60(6), 486-490
Stainback,W., ＆ Stainback, S.(1984). A rationale for the merger of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 51, 102-111.
Trump, G. C., & Hange, J. E. (1996). Teacher perceptions of and strategies for inclusion: A regional summary of focus group interview findings. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 397574)
Villa, R. A., & Thousand, J. S. (1995). The rationales for creating inclusive schools. In R. A. Villa, & J. S. Thousand (Eds.), Creating an Inclusive School. (pp.28-47). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 396505)
Wood, J.W. (1998). Adapting instruction to accommodate students in inclusive settings (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn ＆ Bacon.
Wolpert, G. (1996). The educational challenges inclusion study. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 400 661)
Whinnery, K., King, M., Evans, WH, & Gable,RA (1995) Perceptions of students with learning disabilities: inclusion versus pull-out services. Preventing School Failure（H.W. Wilson - EDUC）. 40(1), 5-9
Whittaker, C.R., & Taylor, L.S. (1995). Do Resource Room Teachers Have Sufficient Planning Time? Journal of educational and psychological consultation, 6(3), 247-256.