建構保護性社會工作實務督導指標之初探研究

A Preliminary Study on the Construction of Practice Supervision Standards in Protective Social Work

10.6785/SPSW.202106_25(1).0001

游美貴(Mei-Kuei Yu)；廖明鈺(Min-Yu Liao)

保護性社會工作 ； 保護性社會工作督導 ； 實務指標 ； 德菲法 ； protective social work ； protective social work supervisor ； the practice standards ； Delphi survey

社會政策與社會工作學刊

25卷1期（2021 / 06 / 01）

1 - 48

繁體中文

保護性社會工作在專業發展上，實務督導議題較少被研究。本研究邀集保護性社會工作人員、保護性社會工作督導與學者專家，探討與發展本土的「實務督導指標」及其操作性方式。研究者邀集20位公私部門保護性社會工作人員及督導者參與2次焦點團體。以主題式質化資料分析後，初步擬定「實務督導指標」之草案。後續再邀請10名學者專家舉行兩次德菲法問卷調查，最終確立「實務督導指標」。其後，再邀請10名保護性資深社工與督導，探討指標的具體操作內容。本研究價值在於研擬出屬於本土的「實務督導指標」，包含四大主題「實務知能／技巧」、「專業督導關係」、「責信」與「倫理」構面，以及產出實務督導指標之可操作內容。研究結果可做為保護性社會工作督導制度在實務面及政策面之參考。然而受限於研究量體限制，實務指標恐有未盡之處，未來研究可擴大邀訪公私部門之保護性社會工作人員及督導者參與研究，亦可進行探究此實務督導指標之實踐成效或挑戰。

Over the past few decades, a trend of relying on the external supervision provided in protective social work has been observed. Professional supervision is often sourced externally through a private arrangement or contracted out by agencies or individual practitioners of supervision. However, research investigating the quality and efficiency of professional supervision within agencies is rare. This study examined the practice standards for protective social work supervisors. In the first stage, 20 experienced social workers and supervisors of protective social work were invited to participate this study. Two focus groups were created, and all participants in the study followed the practice standards of professional supervision. In the second stage, two stages of Delphi surveys were completed by 10 experts in protective social work. Finally, the 10 senior experienced social workers and supervisors of protective social work presented the practice standards and practical duties of protective social work supervision. As a significant site of practice, critically informed practice standards have the potential to emerge as a site for modeling social change strategies associated with the tradition of critical supervision. Future research is recommended to include participants from protective agencies or even evaluate the effectiveness of practice standards or challenges in their implementation.

1. 沈慶鴻,賴乃榕(2013)。從「社工」到「督導」：新手社工督導角色轉換之研究─以婚暴防治為例。中華心理衛生學刊，26(2)，215-248。
   連結：
2. 汪淑媛,蘇怡如(2010)。社工督導功能期待與實踐落差研究—比較督導與被督者之觀點：以公部門家暴防治社工為例。臺灣社會工作學刊，9，41-84。
   連結：
3. 許雅娟,游美貴,鄭麗珍(2014)。臺灣社會工作人員的一般健康初探。臺灣社會工作學刊，14，103-156。
   連結：
4. 游美貴(2010)。台北市婚姻暴力被害人垂直整合服務方案實施之研究。臺大社會工作學刊，22，53-108。
   連結：
5. 游美貴(2014)。臺灣家庭暴力防治服務方案的實施與轉變之探討。臺大社會工作學刊，29，53-96。
   連結：
6. 黃彥宜(2009)。保護性業務一線社會工作者職場暴力之初探：權力的觀點。臺灣社會工作學刊，6，80-118。
   連結：
7. 葉晉嘉,翁興利,吳濟華(2007)。德菲法與模糊德菲法之比較研究。調查研究—方法與應用，21，31-58。
   連結：
8. 劉宜君,傅立葉(2009)。以政策德菲法建構健保政策評估指標之研究。國家與社會，6，103-163。
   連結：
9. Bradley, G.,Engelbrecht, L.,Höjer, S.(2010).Supervision: A Force for Change? Three Stories Told.International Social Work,53(6),773-790.
10. British Association of Social Workers=BASW(2011).UK Supervision Policy.Birmingham:The British Association of Social Workers.
11. Bryman, A.(2008).Social Research Methods.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
12. Corby, B.(2006).Applying Research in Social Work Practice.Maidenhead:Open University Press.
13. Cousins, C.(2004).Becoming a Social Work Supervisor: A Significant Role Transition.Australian Social Work,57(2),175-185.
14. Hair, H. J.(2013).The Purpose and Duration of Supervision, and the Training and Discipline of Supervisors: What Social Workers Say they Need to Provide Effective Services.The British Journal of Social Work,43(8),1562-1588.
15. Hamama, L.(2012).Differences Between Children’s Social Workers and Adults’ Social Workers on Sense of Burnout, Work Conditions and Organisational Social Support.The British Journal of Social Work,42(7),1333-1353.
16. Kadushin, A.,Harkness, D.(2014).Supervision in Social Work.New York:Columbia University Press.
17. Kamberelis, G.,Dimitriadis, G.(2005).Focus Groups: Strategic Articulations of Pedagogy, Politics, and Inquiry.The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research,Thousand Oaks, CA:
18. Knee, R. T.,Folsom, J.(2012).Bridging the Crevasse Between Direct Practice Social Work and Management by Increasing the Transferability of Core Skills.Administration in Social Work,36(4),390-408.
19. Manthorpe, J.,Moriarty, J.,Hussein, S.,Stevens, M.,Sharpe, E.(2015).Content and Purpose of Supervision in Social Work Practice in England: Views of Newly Qualified Social Workers, Managers and Directors.The British Journal of Social Work,45(1),52-68.
20. Munro, E.(2011).The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report-A Child-centred System.London:The Stationery Office.
21. National Association of Social Workers=NASW(2013).Best Practice Standards in Social Work Supervision.Washington, DC:National Association of Social Workers.
22. Noble, C.,Irwin, J.(2009).Social Work Supervision: An Exploration of the Current Challenges in a Rapidly Changing Social, Economic and Political Environment.Journal of Social Work,9(3),345-358.
23. O’Donoghue, K.,Tsui, M. -S.(2012).Towards a Professional Supervision Culture: The Development of Social Work Supervision in Aotearoa New Zealand.International Social Work,55(1),5-28.
24. Payne, M.(2005).Modern Social Work Theory.New York:Palgrave MacMillan.
25. Pecora, P. J.,Cherin, D.,Bruce, E.,de J. Arguello, T.(2010).Strategic Supervision: A Brief Guide for Managing Social Service Organizations.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
26. Tracy, S. J.(2019).Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact.Hoboken, NJ:Wiley-Blackwell.
27. Tsui, M. -S.(2004).Social Work Supervision: Contexts and Concepts.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
28. Tsui, M. -S.(2008).Adventures in Re-searching the Features of Social Work Supervision in Hong Kong.Qualitative Social Work,7(3),349-362.
29. van de Luitgaarden, G. M. J.(2009).Evidence-based Practice in Social Work: Lessons from Judgment and Decision-making Theory.The British Journal of Social Work,39(2),243-260.
30. Whittaker, A.(2009).Research Skills for Social Work.Exeter:Learning Matters.
31. Wolfsfeld, L.,Haj-Yahia, M. M.(2010).Learning and Supervisory Styles in the Training of Social Workers.The Clinical Supervisor,29(1),68-94.
32. 江盈誼（譯）,Brown, A.,Bourne, I.(2000).社工督導.臺北:學富文化.
33. 呂寶靜,黃泓智(2010)。內政部公益彩券回饋金補助研究報告內政部公益彩券回饋金補助研究報告,內政部。
34. 沈慶鴻(2008)。家暴社工實務困境與督導需求之研究。「優勢與創新：家庭與社區發展」學術研討會，南投:
35. 周清玉,曾冠均(2011)。保護性社工人力與工作條件之研究。亞洲家庭暴力與性侵害期刊，7(1)，47-77。
36. 游美貴(2013)。臺灣社會工作專業人員協會委託研究報告臺灣社會工作專業人員協會委託研究報告,臺灣社會工作專業人員協會。
37. 游美貴（編）(2018).社會工作督導：理論與實務工作手冊.臺北:雙葉.
38. 潘淑滿(2003).質性研究：理論與應用.臺北:心理.
39. 衛生福利部社會及家庭署（2015）。《104 年社會工作專業制度考核指標及評分標準表》。衛生福利部社會及家庭署網頁（https://www.sfaa.gov.tw/SFAA/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeid=495&pid=3099）。
40. 衛生福利部保護服務司（2015）。《家庭暴力防治社工人員訓練計畫》。衛生福利部保護服務司網頁（https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/dops/cp-1151-7785-105.html）。
41. 嚴祥鸞(2010)。保護性業務社工人力與合理之工作條件。社區發展季刊，129，153-165。

1. 林佩瑾(2023)。臺灣社會工作督導實務之初探：比較被督者、督導者以及主管之觀點。社會工作實務與研究學刊，13，39+41+43-69+71。