科技部專題研究計畫主持人
MOST-105-2410-H-004-079-SSS
心理師校園服務的困境、需求與挑戰:探討輔導教師的需求滿意度與學校心理師的效能滿意度
Difficulties, Needs, and Challenges of School-based Mental Health Services: Exploring the Need Satisfaction of School Counselors and the Efficacy Satisfaction of School Psychologists
科技部
Ministry of Science and Technology
國立政治大學
National Chengchi University
陳婉真
Chen, Wan-Chen
國立政治大學
National Chengchi University
陳婉真
02-29393091 #63385
106172007@nccu.edu.tw
計畫執行期間起:2016-08-01
計畫執行期間迄:2018-01-31
2016-08-01
2017-07-31
在國中服務的輔導老師與心理師
1
003
01,03
學校輔導、心理師校園服務、跨專業合作
school guidance, psychologist in school, interdisciplinary collaboration
研究目的:輔導教師與心理師的跨專業合作是目前推展學校輔導工作之重要政策,基於輔導工作 困境萌發之需求,將心理師引入校園以增加輔導工作的專業度。本研究旨在發展「輔導教師與心理師 的合作量表」,初步以量化方式,分別從輔導教師與心理師的觀點分析跨專業合作之成效。研究方法: (1)輔導教師的部分。首先訪談 12 位輔導教師,進行內容分析以做成編寫量表題目之依據;接著以 138 位國中輔導教師為預試對象,進行項目分析與探索性分析,決定以 17 題的正式量表,包含三個因素: 支持合作、專業協助、學校融入;最後採用北中南東四個地區分層叢集抽樣,以 399 位國中輔導教師 (男性 67 人、女性 332 人)為正式研究樣本,進行信度與效度檢驗。(2)心理師的部分。以前述量表為 主,邀請 3 位心理師協助題目的潤飾;最後採用北中南東四個地區分層叢集抽樣,以 147 位心理師(男 性 21 人、女性 126 人)為正式研究樣本,進行信度與效度檢驗。研究結果: (1)對輔導教師而言,信 度分析結果顯示,「合作現況量表」與「合作期待量表」均具有良好的信度。驗證性因素分析結果顯示, 兩量表皆具有良好的適配程度。由量表內的相關係數分析顯示,分量表間的相關都低於分量表與總量 表之間的相關係數,代表兩量表均具有良好的區辨效度。另外,輔導教師對於與心理師的各層面合作, 均出現期待顯著高於現況之現象;(2)對心理師而言,信度分析結果顯示,「合作現況量表」與「合作期 待量表」均具有良好的信度。驗證性因素分析結果顯示,兩量表皆具有良好的適配程度。由量表內的 相關係數分析顯示,分量表間的相關都低於分量表與總量表之間的相關係數,代表兩量表均具有良好 的區辨效度。另外,心理師對於與輔導教師的支持合作層面,呈現合作現況顯著高於合作價值觀,而 在專業協助層面,則為合作價值觀顯著高於合作現況;(3)輔導教師與心理師對於合作現況的評估存 在顯著差異,無論是合作支持、專業協助、學校融入,心理師所知覺的合作現況均顯著高於輔導教師, 凸顯出輔導教師與心理師迥異的主觀感受。這樣差異的主因可能是:輔導教師不願意表露出對於合作 關係的真實感受,或是心理師沒有積極關注輔導教師的期待,因此造成跨專業合作關係的主要矛盾: 陽奉陰違。研究結論:(1)心理師與輔導教師合作本質在於:「以學生為中心,共同為學生工作」,彼 此透過原先的專業訓練以凸顯各自的專業能力,形成合作的基礎(徐堅璽、吳英璋,2003)。此理想合 作藍圖的背後無法被忽視的現實為:相對於輔導教師,心理師屬於外部資源,是一個外來的專業心理 服務提供者。以外來者適應的觀點論述,輔導教師可能擔憂心理師無法了解學校整體文化脈絡,有時 期待心理師為處理三級個案的專家、有時質疑心理師的建議、有時又會因心理師的證照而倍感壓力, 這種檯面下未能浮現的聲音對合作關係是具有傷害性的;(2) 因此,本系列研究最重要的意義就是,讓 輔導教師與心理師清晰地面對目前的合作關係困境,進而才有機會增進專業對話的可能性,使輔導教 師與心理師均願意從各自的看見與理解中展開對話。這樣雙方才可以更精準地評估學生的心理問題, 並共同做出有效的處遇計畫,亦能增進彼此的「團隊認同」。
Purpose: The interdisciplinary collaboration between school counselors and psychologists is important policy in current school guidance work. Due to the need for emerging dilemma of guidance work, introducing the psychologists into schools could enhance the guidance work’s profession. The study aims to develop “collaboration of school counselors and psychologists scale”. By quantitate method primarily, we analyzed the outcome of interdisciplinary collaboration from the perspectives of both school counselors and psychologists. Method: (1) School counselors: we first interviewed twelve school counselors and developed scale items by content-analyzing. Afterwards, pre-test included 138 school counselors and analyzed through item analysis and exploratory factor analysis to decide 17 items in formal test, which included three factors: collaborative support, professional assistance, and school immersion. Last, formal test used stratified cluster sampling to investigate 399 school counselors (76 males, 322 females) from the North, Middle, South, and West areas in Taiwan to examine the reliability and validity of the scale. (2) Psychologists: we invited three psychologists to revise the items of the previous scale. Last, formal test used stratified cluster sampling to investigate 147 psychologists (21 males, 126 females) to examine the reliability and validity of the scale. Results: (1) For the school counselors, the result of reliability indicated “collaboration situation scale” and “collaboration expectation scale” have good reliability. The result of confirmatory factor analysis indicated two scales have good model fit. The internal correlation analysis indicated the correlation between the subscales are lower than the correlation between the subscales and main scales, referring two scales have good discriminant validity. Besides, the dimensions of expectation from the school counselors are higher than the dimensions of situation. (2) For the psychologists, the result of reliability indicated “collaboration situation scale” and “collaboration expectation scale” have good reliability. The result of confirmatory factor analysis indicated two scales have good model fit. The internal correlation analysis indicated the correlation between the subscales are lower than the correlation between the subscales and main scales, referring two scales have good discriminant validity. Besides, the collaboration situation from the psychologists is higher than collaboration belief in collaborative support, but in professional assistance, belief is higher than situation. (3) The evaluation between the school counselors and psychologists have significant differences, no matter in collaborative support, professional assistance, and school immersion. The psychologists perceived significantly higher levels of collaboration situation than the school counselors, revealing the objective perceptions of the school counselors and the psychologists are dramatically different. This difference might be: the school counselors were unwilling to express true feelings of collaboration, or the psychologists didn’t actively understand the expectation of the school counselors. Therefore, the difference caused the main dilemma in interdisciplinary collaboration: Yang-Fong-Yin-WEI. Conclusion: (1) the core essential of collaboration between the school counselors and the psychologists is “student center, work for the students” and reveal their professional capacities through their own professional trainings to form the basis of collaboration (Hsu & Wu, 2003). There is an unignorably true reality behind the ideal collaboration vision: compared to school counselor, psychologists are outside resource, a foreign professional mental service provider. From the perspective of the foreigner adaptation, school counselors might worry about psychologists have no idea on the cultural context of the school. School counselors sometimes expected psychologists to be the experts who deal with level three clients, but sometimes questioned about the suggestions of psychologists, and sometimes felt stressful due to the psychologists’ certificate. These voices underneath the surface is harmful for the collaboration between the school counselors and the psychologists. (2) thus, the most important meaning in these serial researches is to let the school counselors and the psychologists to clearly 3 face the challenges in the collaboration dilemma so they could increase the possibility of the professional conversation. By this process, the school counselors and the psychologists may willingly open the conversation with each other in seeing and understanding, therefore, they can evaluate the mental issues of students and come up with effective intervention plans together and also increase the mutual “team identity”.
否,無直接識別資料
除檢查有無隱私資料外,另檢查個案編號是否重複、變項及選項數值說明是否與問卷一致或未被定義。
追蹤清單
下載(0)
申請(0)
遠距(0)