本研究主要目的在分析我國當前特教師資培育與進用政策取向及難題，並透過問 卷，調查公共意見。經文獻分析，我國當前特教師資政策重點如下：（１）師資培育管道多 元化；（２）師資進用採區分性登記；（３）鼓勵一般教師轉任特教工作，並留任在職特教 教師；（４）進用相關服務專業人員；（５）一元化之特殊學校校長任用制度。在調查研究 方面，設計「我國特殊教育師資政策之調查問卷」乙種，內容包括政策、行政及培育三個層 面。共發出 986 份問卷，有效回收 731 份（回收率 74.14% ），調查對象包括：民意代表 、專家學者（特殊教育與普通教育二類）、行政人員（教育行政與學校行政二類）、教師（ 普通教育、障礙教育與資優教育三類）、家長（普通學生家長、障礙學生家長及資優學生家 長三類），共十一類人員。調查結果主要發現如下： 在政策與行政方面：（１）我國現階段特教師資培育政策不夠明確，法律依據頗為薄弱；（ ２）我國特教師資之量與質均有待加強；（３）一般認為，特教教師可以擔任普通教育工作 ，但反之則不宜；障礙與資優教育教師則可在補修相關學分後，適度交流；（４）現行特教 教師依學科別、類別、教育階級別檢定（登記）之辦法，太過刻板，應加修改，多數贊成以 「專任特教教師」聘用或以類別為主要考量。 在師資培育方面：（１）特教師資的最理想來源為特教系所畢業者；（２）障礙與資優二類 師資之培育宜分開並各自分類辦理；至於障礙類教師分教育階段別培育，亦具共識，惟主要 爭議點在於：把學前及國小合為一組或把國中、小合為一組（學前則單獨成組）；（３）在 特教體系內有必要設置各類相關服務專業人員，可聘為專任或兼任，惟仍宜補修特教學分。 根據上述發現，研究者對我國特殊教育師資問題，從政策面就行政、培育、進用三個方面提 出若干建議，以作為研訂與改進我國特教師資政策之參考。

　　　　　This study was to investigate current policies of special education (SPED) professionals education and recruitment in Taiwan through the literature review and a questionnaire survey. Based on the literature review, it was found that the current policies were characterized by: (1) multiple channels of SPED teachers education; (2) differential accreditation/recruitment of SPED teachers according to educational level, subject matter, and category of student's exceptionality; (3) recruiting regular education teachers to serve SPED through in-service training programs and keeping those who have been in the field; (4) employing related professionals, such as occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech therapists; (5) same qualification of special school principals as to regular ones. A questionnaire addressed to public opinions was devised for the survey study. The target populations were civil council members, special and regular education experts, government and school administrators, regular and special education teachers (both for the disabled and the gifted), regular and exceptional students' parents (both of the disabled and the gifted). In total, 731 subjects were available, the effective return rate was 74.14%. The major findings were as follows: In terms of policy and administration: (1) the current policy regarding SPED professionals education and recruitment was not clear enough and the related regulations were lacking or loose; (2) SPED teachers provision was not sufficient and the existing teachers' quality needed to be improved; (3) it was believed that qualified SPED teachers were eligible to work for regular education, but not vice versa; however, teachers of the disabled and teachers of the gifted should be allowed to interchange their jobs provided they were qualified for both; (4) the current differential accreditation/recruitment system was severely criticized for it's rigidity, the majority of the subjects were in favor of non-categorical accreditation by using the title of "professional special education teacher" or only taking the category of exceptionality into major account. In terms of teacher/professional education: (1) the ideal SPED teachers were those with university SPED majors; (2) teachers for the disabled and for the gifted should be educated as different categories; for the disabled, although varied school levels (pre-school, elementary, junior high, and senior high) should be considered, it was also suggested that the pre-school and the elementary levels be combined.; (3) it was necessary to employ various related professionals on full-time or part-time basis in SPED settings, but preferably they have basic SPED knowledge and skills before or after entering this field. Finally, based on the review of the literature and survey study, suggestions regarding improving SPED teachers education and accreditation/recruitment were made.