心理師在學校輔導跨專業合作的現況與信念：應然面與實然面的落差

School Psychologists' Expectations Verses the Reality of Interdisciplinary Collaboration between School Psychologists and School Counselors

10.30074/FJMH.202103_34(1).0003

陳婉真(Wan-Chen Chen)；江守峻(Shou-Jiun Jiang)；林傳陽(Chuan-Yang Lin)；洪雅鳳(Ya-Feng Hung)

心理師 ； 合作信念 ； 跨專業合作 ； 學校輔導 ； collaboration ； interdisciplinary collaboration ； psychologist ； school counselor

中華心理衛生學刊

34卷1期（2021 / 03 / 01）

55 - 84

繁體中文

研究目的：心理師與輔導教師的合作越來越普遍，但目前雙方的跨專業合作，是否符合心理師的期待？本研究旨在以心理師的觀點，瞭解合作現況、合作信念以及兩者之間的差異。研究目的有二，其一為修訂「心理師的合作現況與合作信念量表」，分析跨專業合作之情形；其二藉由大樣本施測，比較實際情況與理想目標之間的差距。研究方法：由於任職學輔中心的心理師母群體小，故採用普查方法，共收集到125份有效問卷。研究結果：量表修訂結果顯示：「合作現況量表」與「合作信念量表」皆具三個因素「專業協助」、「合作支持」以及「學校融入」，且有良好的信效度；大樣本分析結果顯示：心理師的合作現況與合作信念，均是專業協助最高、合作支持最低；心理師的合作信念，在專業協助與學校融入，顯著高於合作現況。研究結論：心理師在跨專業合作中，認同自己提供專業協助的重要性，優先期待以「專業提供者」與輔導教師合作。另外，專業協助與合作支持的合作現況會隨著年齡與執業年資的不同而有所差異。

Purpose: Interdisciplinary collaboration between school psychologists and school counselors is the key to enhancing the professional practice of school counseling. School policies formulated in recent years aim to motivate psychologists to provide mental health services in a school setting. We investigated the self-evaluation ability of school psychologists engaging in interdisciplinary collaboration, including their own perceived ability to evaluate clients, maintain interpersonal relationships, and engage in systematic consultation. We addressed 2 research questions: As experts from outside the school system, what are their observations and beliefs about interdisciplinary collaboration? And, how do factors like gender, age, and seniority affect this interdisciplinary collaboration? To answer these questions, we revised the Collaboration Situation and Beliefs between School Counselor and School Psychologist Scale, which is comprised of two subscales: the Collaboration Situation Scale (CSS) and the Collaboration Belief Scale (CBS). Analysis of the difference between responses reflecting the current situation (CSS) and expectations (CBS) should provide constructive feedback for both school psychologists and school counselors. Methods: We contacted 10 school counseling centers around Taiwan, which resulted in 125 valid questionnaires (20 men and 105 women). Results: Both scales showed an acceptable Cronbach's alpha above .86. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis to evaluate the goodness of fit of both scales, and their criterion-related validity was supported with the ＂Psychologist Competency Rating Scale＂. Our confirmatory factor analysis identified 3 identical dimensions on the CSS and the CBS: professional assistance, collaboration support, and school immersion. On both the CSS and the CBS, the average score on professional assistance was significantly higher than the average score for school immersion, and the average for school immersion was significantly higher than the average for collaboration support. In addition, The CBS scores were higher than the CSS scores for professional assistance, school immersion, and for the complete scale. However, there was no difference in collaboration support between the CBS and the CSS. As for background variables, there was no difference between genders; older and more experienced psychologists scored higher in professional assistance, school immersion, and the complete CSS than younger and less experienced psychologists, but there was no difference in CBS. Conclusions: Based on the analyses, we concluded that school psychologists build equal and mutually-supportive relationships with school counselors. In addition, the ability to develop systematic collaboration should be cultivated during the training of professional psychologists. Lastly, dedication and engagement in school settings may facilitate school psychologists' interdisciplinary collaboration with school counselors. As for future research, the difference in perspectives between school counselors and school psychologists, and the difference between professional assistance and collaboration support should be investigated. We hope to promote collaboration between school psychologists and school counselors, and to achieve optimal outcomes in interdisciplinary collaboration.

1. 方惠生,戴嘉南(2008)。彰化縣專業諮商人員介入國小校園輔導工作實驗方案評估研究。諮商輔導學報，18，89-121。
   連結：
2. 王川玉,葉一舵(2017)。臺灣學校輔導工作的新進展及其關鍵事件。學生事務與輔導，56(2)，13-27。
   連結：
3. 王麗斐,杜淑芬(2009)。臺北市國小輔導人員與諮商心理師之有效跨專業合作研究。教育心理學報，41，295-320。
   連結：
4. 王麗斐,杜淑芬,趙曉美(2008)。國小駐校諮商心理師有效諮商策略之探索性研究。教育心理學報，39(3)，413-434。
   連結：
5. 刑志彬,許育光(2014)。學校心理師服務實務與模式建構初探：困境因應與專業發展期待分析。中華輔導與諮商學報，39，117-149。
   連結：
6. 林郁倫,陳婉真,林耀盛,王鍾和(2014)。心理師校園駐區服務的困境、需求與挑戰：由台北市國中輔導人員之觀點。輔導與諮商學報，36(1)，37-64。
   連結：
7. 林家興,林旻沛,黃佩娟,胡薇瑄,江信男(2015)。心理師能力評量表之編製及其信效度分析。教育心理學報，47(1)，63-86。
   連結：
8. 林家興,洪雅琴(2001)。學校人員對國中輔導工作及專業輔導人員試辦方案之評估研究。教育心理學報，32(2)，103-120。
   連結：
9. 林家興,黃佩娟(2013)。臺灣諮商心理師能力指標建構之共識研究。教育心理學報，44(3)，735-750。
   連結：
10. 陳婉真,江守峻,邱郁涵,彭秀玲,洪雅鳳(2018)。「輔導教師與心理師的跨專業合作量表」之編製研究：輔導教師的觀點。測驗學刊，65(4)，341-365。
    連結：
11. 陳婉真,黃禎慧,侯瑀彤,江守峻,洪雅鳳(2018)。心理師與學校輔導合作經驗初探：北部地區心理師之觀點。輔導與諮商學報，40(1)，25-44。
    連結：
12. 陳愉雅,張高賓(2012)。諮商心理師五大人格特質、壓力因應策略與專業耗竭之相關研究。家庭教育與諮商學刊，13，1-23。
    連結：
13. 黃君瑜,王欽毅,徐堅璽,柯書林,王智璿(2009)。臨床心理學在學校的應用。應用心理研究，41，93-108。
    連結：
14. 趙文滔,陳德茂(2017)。中小學輔導教師在跨專業系統合作中的挑戰：可能遭遇的困境、阻礙合作的因素以及如何克服。應用心理研究，67，119-180。
    連結：
15. 趙曉美,王麗斐(2008)。國小兒童個案問題與輔導室對校外心理健康專業協助需求之研究－以臺北市為例。北體學報，16，351-363。
    連結：
16. 趙曉美,王麗斐,楊國如(2006)。臺北市諮商師國小校園服務方案之實施評估。教育心理學報，37(4)，345-365。
    連結：
17. 鄭如安,葉宣瑩(2011)。高雄市駐校心理師服務現況與困境之分析研究。美和學報，30(2)，15-40。
    連結：
18. Bagozzi, R. P.,Yi, Y.(1988).On the evaluation of structural equation models.Journal of Academy of Marketing Science,16(1),74-94.
19. Bandura, A.(1991).Social cognitive theory of self-regulation.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,50(2),248-287.
20. Bothma, F. C.,Lloyd, S.,Khapova, S.(2015).Work identity: Clarifying the concept.Conceptualizing and measuring work identity,Dordrecht:
21. Casto, R. M.(Ed.),Julia, M. C.(Ed.)(1994).Interprofessional care and collaborative practice.Belmont, CA:Brooks/Cole.
22. Fornell, C.,Larcker, D. F.(1981).Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error.Journal of Marketing Research,18(1),39-50.
23. Gardner, S.(1994).Beyond collaboration to results: The future of services to children for the families.Fullerton, CA:California State University.
24. Hair, J. F.,Anderson, R. E.,Tatham, R. L.,Black, W. C.(1995).Multivariate data analysis.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
25. Hair, J. F.,Black, W. C.,Babin, B. J.,Anderson, R. E.,Tatham, R. L.(2006).Multivariate data analysis.NJ:Pearson Prentice Hall.
26. Harvey, O. J.(1986).Belief systems and attitudes towards death penalty and other punishments.Journal of Personality,54(4),659-675.
27. Knapp, M. S.(1998).Paths to partnership: University and community as learners in interprofessional education.New York, NY:Rowman & Littlefield.
28. Lerner, R. M.(Ed.),Simon, L. A. K.(Ed.)(1998).University-community collaborations for the twenty-first century: Outreach scholarship for youth and families.New York, NY:Garland.
29. Miller, R. B.,Brickman, S. J.(2004).A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation.Educational Psychology Review,16(1),9-33.
30. Minahan, A.(Ed.)(1990).Encyclopedia of social work.Washington, DC:NASW Press.
31. Mulaik, S. A.,James, L. R.,Van Alstine, J.,Bennett, N.,Lind, S.,Stilwell, C. D.(1989).Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models.Psychological Bulletin,105(3),430-445.
32. Oriarewo, G. O.,Agbim, K. C.,Owutuamor, Z. B.(2013).Job rewards as correlates of job satisfaction: Empirical evidence from the Nigerian banking sector.The International Journal of Engineering and Science,2(8),62-69.
33. Paavola, J. C.,Carey, K.,Cobb, C.,Illback, R. J.,Joseph, H. M., Jr.,Routh, D. K.,Torruella, A.(1996).Interdisciplinary school practice: Implications of the service integration movement for psychologists.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice,27(1),34-40.
34. Rehman, M. Z. U.,Khan, M. R.,Ziauddin Lashari, J. A.(2010).Effect of job rewards on job satisfaction, moderating role of age differences: An empirical evidence from Pakistan.African Journal of Business Management,4(6),1131-1139.
35. Walsh, M. E.,Brabeck, M. M.,Howard, K. A.(1999).Interprofessional collaboration in children’s services: Toward a theoretical framework.Children’s Services: Social Policy, Research, and Practice,2(4),183-208.
36. Waxman. R. P.,Weist, M. D.,Benson, D. M.(1999).Toward collaboration in the growing education mental health interfaces.Clinical Psychology Review,19(2),239-253.
37. 王麗斐(2009)。臺北市國小駐區心理師服務現況與運作。取自https://goo.gl/72MDv4
38. 余民寧(2006).潛在變項模式：SIMPLIS的應用.臺北:高等教育.
39. 吳淑萍(2016)。桃園市，中原大學心理學研究所。
40. 杜淑芬,王淑玲(2014)。學校輔導教師與外部諮商心理師的團隊合作。諮商與輔導，337，4-7。
41. 林家興(2005).心理師執業之路.臺北市:心理.
42. 林書勤(2011)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學育心理與輔導學系。
43. 林勝義(2003).學校社會工作服務.臺北市:學富.
44. 林萬億,黃韻如(2010).學校輔導團隊工作：學校社會工作師、輔導教師與心理師的合作.臺北市:五南.
45. 翁家茵(2017)。花蓮縣，國立東華大學諮商與臨床心理學系。
46. 張美娜(2016)。屏東縣，國立屏東大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士班。
47. 陳誠文(2002)。高雄市，國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系。
48. 陳錦如(2007)。臺北市，市立臺北教育大學心理與諮商學系。
49. 游珠莉(2008)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學教育學系在職進修碩士班。
50. 楊士賢(1997)。臺北市，臺北市立師範學院國民教育研究所。
51. 臺北市學生輔導諮商中心(2014)。專輔人員實務工作手冊。民109年1月31日，取自：http://tscc.tp.edu.tw/sites/default/files/web-pages-attach/臺北市學生輔導諮商中心專輔人員實務工作手冊(103下半年修改).pdf
52. 潘雅芳(1996)。臺北市，國立政治大學教育研究所。
53. 鄭淑靖(2015)。高雄市，國立高雄師範大學諮商心理與復健諮商研究所。
54. 賴炘棠(2007)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學教育學系在職進修碩士班。
55. 顏銘志(1996)。屏東市，國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所。
56. 羅雅茹(2014)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系。

1. 洪儷瑜,呂俐葶,吳怡萱(2023)。從美澳香港等區之學校心理學趨勢談我國學校心理學之服務應用、角色與發展。當代教育研究季刊，31(3)，33-71。
2. 劉宗幸(2022)。親子心理健康的代間傳遞：初探家庭凝聚力之中介效果。國立臺灣科技大學人文社會學報，18(1)，47-72。
3. (2023)。跨專業合作的結與解：從輔導教師與心理師的觀點並行分析。教育學刊，61，1-41。
4. (2024).Counseling Psychologists' Interprofessional Collaboration with Social Workers: An Exploration of Grounded Theory.教育心理學報,55(4),635-659.