本研究以宜蘭縣一所試行員額調整的國中啟智班為行動場域，目的在探討啟智班實施員額調整方案之後，對於啟智班經營所造成的影響，研究者藉著行動研究實際參與員額調整方案的運作，並與場域伙伴協力合作，期望為啟智班目前經營的困境尋求出路。
湯圍國中啟智班自九十學年度開始試行員額調整方案，學校設有啟智班一班，服務學生有五名，分別是輕度智能障礙學生三名、中度智能障礙學生一名及極重度多重障礙學生一名，原編制內的三位老師，在實施員額調整方案之後，自足式啟智班內只剩下一位專任特教老師，並增設教師助理員一名，原編制內的二位回到普通班編制之中，但其中一名仍兼任特教組長，並被要求在校內試辦資源服務方案。研究者的加入使得場域中多了一位部份時間到校的專業人力，和原實施方案預期員額有所不同。
研究探究的方向有三，第一個方向是描述實施員額調整方案之後，啟智班經營模式改變的歷程。員額減少，使得場域老師在方案運作初期所採取的行動是以減少授課節數及工作壓力為主要考量，例如：把學生部份課程安排到普通班中，但隨著學生所反應出的學習狀況、普通班老師的意見、教授的建議及教師自我的反省，在場域中逐漸形成共同對話的機制，並以團體的形式進行自我成長的活動。
第二個方向是探究啟智班經營模式改變所產生的影響。為因應員額調整方案所採取的行動，使得啟智班的經營模式亦有所改變，包括將各類分離的特教服務方案統整為校內的學習服務資源、特教組積極與校內外行政單位進行互動，以及老師改變課程準備的模式及方向。另外，班級經營模式的改變也使得特教老師對於自我專業角色的認定產生變化，由一個老師負責所有學生教育方案的服務模式，使老師角色從單純的教學工作轉變為學習者、個案管理者及自我理想的實踐者。
最後探究的是員額調整方案運作中，研究者介入方案角色存在的價值，以及從行動歷程中提出對於執行行動研究的反省及未來續辦員額調整方案的建議。

This research was conducted at a junior high level self-contained class for mentally retarded students in I-Lan County. The class became an experimental target for adjusting the quota of teachers. The purpose of this research was to investigate the influences the program result in and difficulties the class encountered after the implementation of quota adjustment. Through the action research of participating in the policy-making process of quota adjustment, the researcher aims to find solutions for the obstacles.
In the school year of 2001, the Special Education Department of I-Lan County chose one junior high school as well as one elementary school to join the trial program and there are self-contained classes for the mentally retarded in both schools. Tang-Wei Junior High School is one of them which has one mentally-retarded class. There are five mentally-retarded students, including three mild ones, one moderately, and one profoundly disabled at present. Before the adjustment, one class was allocated with three full-time teachers. With the implementation of the program, the special class now has only one full-time special-education teacher and one teaching assistant. One of other two teachers assigned as section chief of special education to take charge of a special-needs service programs in the school. The other one went back to teach the regular class students.
There were three major issues in this research. First, under the program of teacher quota adjustment, the changing of managing a special class for the mentally retarded was described. In the beginning of the program, the purpose of teacher was to reduce the course burden which is increased after the implementation of quota adjustment. The teachers arranged mentally retarded students to regular classes in some courses. The research and co-researchers became a team gradually because of the learning slowness of the students in regular classroom, the opinions of teachers from general classes, the suggestions of professors, and our own reflection. In this team, every member shared different ideas about special education, discussed the strategies for overcoming the difficulties, and participated in the teachers' discussion and grown-up groups.
Second, the effects brought by the changes were discussed, including the actions taken by integrating all school resources into one learning center for all students with special needs and the changing of teachers’ attitudes in identifying with their own professional roles in the process.
Last but not least, the value of the role that researcher played in this field was evaluated. The reflection for action research and the suggestions for adjusting the quota of teachers was also given in this study.

中文部份
王天苗、邱上真、莊妙芬、鄭麗月、葉瓊華（民86）。特殊教育法修正草案評估執告。台北：立法院立法諮詢中心。
林幸台、林寶貴、洪儷瑜、盧台華、楊瑛、陳紅錦（民83）。我國實施特殊兒童個別化教育方案現況之調查研究，特殊教育研究學刊，10，1-42。
何素華（民83）：課程篇。載於啟智教育教師工作手冊。台北：國立台北師範學院特殊教育中心。
何華國（民84）：特殊兒童心理與教育。台北：五南。
李翠玲（民89）。「個別化教育計畫」納入特教法強制項目後實施現況調查研究，新竹師範學報，13,65-100。
李淑貞譯（民86）：中、重度障礙者有效學習法：個別化重要技能模式。台北：心理。
吳昆壽（民87）。融合教育的省思。特教新知通訊，5（7），1-4。
吳武典（民84）。特殊教育的發展趨勢。載於八十四年兩岸師範教育學術研討會論文集。台北市：師大教研中心。
金樹人（民86）。生涯諮商與輔導。台北：東華。
邱上真（民88）。融合教育問與答。載於中華民國特殊教育學會主編，迎千禧談特教（191-207頁）。台北：中華民國特殊教育學會。
吳美枝, 何禮恩譯（McNiff, J., Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J.著）（民90）。行動研究 : 生活實踐家的研究錦囊。嘉義: 濤石。
洪儷瑜（民90）。英國的融合教育。台北：學富。
宜蘭縣政府教育局（民89）。特殊教育教師助理員聘用辦法。宜蘭：宜蘭縣政府。
夏林清譯（Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. M.）（民89）。行動科學。台北：遠流。
夏林清等譯（Altrichter，Posch & Somekh著）（民86）。行動研究方法導論—教師動手做研究。台北：遠流。
夏林清（民85）。實踐取向的研究方法。輯於胡幼慧主編，質的研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例，99-119。台北：巨流。
陳惠邦（民87）。教育行動研究。台北：師大書苑。
鈕文英（民89）。國小階段實施融合教育可行模式之探討。台北： 教育部特殊教育小組。
教育部（民89）。特殊教育學校（班）國民教育階段智能障礙類課程教學指引。台北：教育部。
教育部（民89）。特殊教育學校（班）國民教育階段啟明課程綱要。台北：教育部。
教育部（民89）。教育部特教小組網站之八十八年度特殊教育統計年報。下載於民國九十年八月二十日
http://spcedu.tkblind.tku.edu.tw
教育部（民88）。特殊教育學校（班）國民教育階段啟聰課程綱要。台北：教育部。
教育部（民86a）。特殊教育法。台北：教育部。
教育部（民86b）。特殊教育法施行細則修正條文。台北：教育部。
教育部特殊兒童普查執行小組（民82）。中華民國第二次特殊兒童普查報告。台北：教育部
楊佩貞（民85）。國民小學啟智班個別化教育方案內容分析之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
國立台灣師範大學特殊教育中心編（民88）。中華民國特殊教育法規彙編。台北：師大特教中心。
劉博允（民89）。台灣與美國融合教育政策之比較研究。國立暨南國際大學比較教育研究所博士論文，未出版。
盧台華（民87）。身心障礙學生課程教材之研究與應用。載於國立台灣師範大學特殊教育系主編，身心障礙教育研討會會議實錄185-190，台北：台灣師大特教系。
甄曉蘭（民84）。合作行動研究─進行教育研究的另一種方式。嘉義師範學報，9，297-318。
英文部份
Algozzine, B., Morsink, C. V., & Algozzine, K. M.（1989）. What’s happening in self-contained special education classroom ？Exceptional Children, 55, 259-265.
Asselin, S. B., Todd-Allen, M., & deFur, S.（1998）. Transition coordinators：Define yourselves. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30, 11-15.
Bateman, B. D.（1997）. Better IEP’s ：How to develop legally correct and educationally useful programs. Colorado: Sopris West.
Bender M., & Valletutti P.J.（1985）. Teaching the moderately and severely handicapped: curriculum objectives, strategies, and activities. Baltimore: University Park Press
Bigge, J. L., & Stump, C. S.（1999）. Curriculum. Assessment, and instruction. Belmont, CA：Wadsworth Pub.
Biklen, D.（1989）. Redefining education. In D. Biklen, D. L. Ferguson, & A. Ford（Eds.）, Schooling and disability （pp.1-24）. Chicago： National Society for the Education.
Brantling, E.（1997）. Using ideology : Case of nonrecognition of the politics of research and practice in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67, 425-459.
Browder, D. M.（2001）. Curriculum and assessment for students with moderate and severe disabilities. New York : Guilford Press
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)
Council for Exceptional Children.（1999）.IEP team guide.VG:Author.
Council for Exceptional Children.（1995）.Record number of special education student served in 1993-94. CEC Today, 2（6）, 1, 5.
Dune, L. M.（1968）. Special education for the mildly retarded-is much of it justifiable？ Exceptional Children, 35, 5-22
Farrell, M.（1998）. The role of the special educational needs co-ordinator：looking forward. Support for learning, 13,82-86.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.（1994）. Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children, 60, 294-309.
Goodman, J. F., & Bond, L.（1993）. The individualized education program: A retrospective critique. Journal of Special Education, 26, 408-422.
Hallahan, D. P., & Kauffman, J. M.（1997）. Exceptional Learners. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Kauffman, J. M., Gerber, M. M., & Semmel, M. I.（1988）. Arguable assumptions underlying the regular education initiative. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 6-12.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R.（1988）. The action research planner（3rd ed.）. Victoria：Deakin University.
Kirk, S. A., Gallagher, J.J., & Anasrasiow, N. J.（1997）.Educating exceptional children（8rd ed.）.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Krom, D. M., & Prater, M. A.（1993）. IEP goals for intermediate-aged students with mild mental retardation. Career development for exceptional individual, 16, 87-95.
Kohler, P. D.（1998）. Implementing a transition perspective of education：A comprehensive approach to planning and delivering secondary education and transition services. In F. R. Rusch & I. G. Chadsey （Eds.）. Beyond high school ： Transition from school to work（pp. 179-205）. New York ： Wadsworth Publishing.
York, J., & Tundidor, M.（1995）. Issues raised in the name of inclusion: Perspectives of educators, parents, and atudents. Journal of the Association for Persons with severe handicaps, 20（1）, 31-44.
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S.（1987）. Integration versus cooperation： A commentary on “Educating children with learning problem: S shared responsibility.” Exceptional Children, 54,66-68.
Salisbury, C., & Chambers, A.（1994）. Instructional costs of inclusive schooling. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19（3）, 215-222.
Sands, D. J., Adams, L. & Stout, D. M.（1995）.A statewide exploration of the nature and use of curriculum in special education. Exceptional Children, 62, 68-73.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A.,（1995）. What makes special education special？Evaluating inclusion programs with the PASS variables. The Journal of Special Education, 29,224-233.
Smith, S. W.（1990）. Individualized education programs（IEPs）in special education-from intent to acquiescence. Exceptional children, 57, 6-14
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)
Warger, C.（1999）. New IDEA’97 requirements：Factors to consider in developing an IEP. (ERIC Digest No. E 578)
Wang, M. C., & Walberg, H. J.（1988）.Four fallacies of segregationism. Exceptional Children, 55, 128-137.
Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., & Thurlow, M. L. （2000）.Critical issues in special education（3nd ed.）.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Ysseldyke, J. E., & Algozzine, B.（1995）.Introduction to special education（2nd ed.）.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Zigmond, N., & Miller, S. E.（1992）.Improving high school programs for students with learning disabilities： A matter of substance as well as form. In F. R. Rusch, L. Destefano, I. Chadsey-Rusch, L. A. Phelps, & E. Symanski（Eds.）. Transition from school to adult life：Mafels, Linkages, and policy（pp. 17-31）. Sycamore, IL：Sycamore Publishing.