本文為探究少年矯正學校暨輔育院對身心障礙犯罪學生的服務現況及校際間現況的異同，以反映當前資料的「個案研究」設計為主，經由深度訪談19位研究參與者、非干擾性測量中的檔案資料分析、簡易觀察這三種方式，蒐集「幸福輔育院」和「曙光中學」（學校化名）二校在「學生特質、少年矯正機構扮演的家長角色、教師工作」三個向度的資料，力求整體闡述校際間的異同，整合出三項結論：（1）兩校逐漸重視學生的個別化需求但因為體制差異而出現分歧；（2）兩校已有特教的雛型但因為沒有全方位交流平台而出現斷層；（3）兩校已有整合服務但應用範圍因教育自主權限多寡而有不同，這些都顯示少年矯正機構對於身心障礙犯罪學生的教育逐漸邁向適性化。並以三個向度的研究結果為基礎，提出「建立身心障礙犯罪少年的官方統計、確立教師對融合教育的接納度及知能、建立適用於犯罪少年多元需求的證據本位策略、整合資源以妥善運用、增進全校師長對於特教服務的認識與知能、善用新興科技擴增教學資源和親子互動、以多層次的介入反應作為服務的架構、開設以創意和安全為基礎的多元技訓課程、發展證據本位的行為管教策略」九項建議，謹供日後酌參。

This study was aimed to explore the current educational services for students with disabilities/delinquency in the Juvenile Correctional School and Juvenile Reform School, and the commonalities or differences between the two schools. The research was a multiple case study design, including two cases called “Shu-kuang” and “Hsing-Fu” high schools, and three educational service dimensions called “Characteristics of Students, Roles of Schools as Parents and the Work of Teachers”. In order to collect data mentioned above, this study methods involved in-depth interview, simple observation and unobtrusive measures, especially interviews were conducted with 19 participants who worked in the schools. There were three findings in this research: (a) the staff in schools have noticed that there were inter-individual differences among students with delinquency, and due to different framework of administrative organizations, the quality and quantity of services of both schools were dispersed; (b) both schools have provided some special educational services within the juvenile justice system, however, the services were impeded by lacking of access to exchange information among units or professionals; (c) the staff have provided certain integrated educational services in the schools, but different levels of teacher autonomy limited the range of educational applications. The findings as mentioned above, it showed that “Shu-kuang” and “Hsing-Fu” high schools have changed their educational priorities from emphasizing military management to focusing on the needs of the individual delinquent with or without disabilities. According to the results of the study, the authors provided nine suggestions for the future researchers, including: (a) official youth justice annual statistics should include the data of students with disabilities/delinquency; (b) assuring that teachers accepted the concepts and equipped with knowledge of inclusive education; (c) exploring appropriate and evidence-based instructional strategies for the educational needs of incarcerated youths; (d) unifying various resources in order to arrange them appropriately; (e) introducing the knowledge and skill of special educational services to both school personnel; (f) utilizing new technology skills or equipments to broaden the teaching resources and the interactive opportunities between delinquents and their parents; (g) establishing the framework of service delivery based on the theory of Responsive to Intervention; (h) delivering various, creative and safe vocational courses; (i) developing evidence-based behavioral strategies to deal with the problems incarcerated youths had.

少年矯正學校; 少年輔育院; 身心障礙犯罪學生; 教育服務現況

Juvenile Correctional School; Juvenile Reform School; students with disabilities/delinquency; current educational services