輔導教師之焦點解決督導員訓練成效研究

The Effects of a Solution-Focused Supervisors' Training Program for School Counselors

10.3966/172851862017080049006

許維素(Wei- Su Hsu)；游于萱(Yu-Hsuan Yu)

Kirkpatrick四層次教育訓練成效評估 ； 焦點解決督導 ； 督導員訓練 ； 學校輔導教師督導 ； Kirkpatrick's four-level evaluation model ； school counselor supervision ； Solution-Focused Supervision ； supervisors' training

中華輔導與諮商學報

49期（2017 / 08 / 01）

147 - 182

繁體中文

本研究目的在探討輔導教師接受焦點解決督導員訓練方案之成效。此8.5日共51小時的訓練方案，邀請15位高中職輔導教師參與受訓，於訓練過程，受訓者填寫單元課後滿意度問卷、諮商督導量表、個人準備度評估問卷及學習效果自陳問卷，並於訓練結束時及一個月後參與焦點團體訪談，其中4位全勤受訓者亦接受個別訪談。本研究以量化與質化方法分析各研究資料，研究結果以Kirkpatrick四層次教育訓練成效評估模式呈現之：（1）課後反應：受訓者對方案感到滿意，講師、同儕、課程為主要因素；（2）學習效果：受訓者經訓練後，於諮商督導能力之認知概念、情意態度及行為技巧有顯著提升。同時亦習得焦點解決督導（SFS）與高中職輔導教師督導相關知能，提升擔任督導員之預備度；（3）實際行為：能執行SFS於學校輔導工作（如提供督導、諮詢）及自我督導；以及（4）訓練成果：提升學校輔導工作效能與人力資源（如行政效率與夥伴關係）。最後，本研究根據研究結果，針對影響訓練成效之因素、SFS與校園文化的適配性等進行討論，並對未來相關訓練、研究與制度提出建議。

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of a Solution-Focused Supervision (SFS) training program for senior high school counselors. This study used a mixed method design. Fifteen senior high school counselors underwent a total of 51-hours of SFS training over 8.5-days The program contained four parts: (a) supervision, including instruction on basic concepts, rules, forms, and ethics of supervision; (b) SFS, including the important characteristics, components, processes, skills, and forms of SFS; (c) discussing the multi-faceted role of the school counselor and existing school counselor supervisory models; and (d) how to combine SFS with school counselor supervision and how to prepare for an SFS supervisor. All the trainees attended two focus-group interviews, one right after training and the second one month later. During the interviews, all trainees completed reaction sheets and the learning self-report inventory. All participants also completed the Supervisory Competence Scale and readiness assessment sheets before and after their training. After one month of training, all trainees were required to submit one supervisee's feedback sheet. To solicit more detailed feedback about the training program, 4 trainees who had full attendance participated in semi-structured interviews. The data of the reaction sheets and learning self-report inventory were analyzed through descriptive statistics while a paired-sample t test was conducted on the readiness assessment sheet and supervisory competence scale. After performing a homogeneity test, a dependent sample t test was conducted. In addition, the qualitative data was analyzed by qualitative methodology. The method used by the qualitative analysis team was open coding. The Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Model was used to evaluate the effect of this SFS training program. The main four levels of the Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Model include: (a) Reaction, the trainees' feelings toward the program; (b) Learning, the degree of trainees' acquisition of knowledge, skills, and attitudes; (c) Behavior, what has been learned is expressed in trainees' concrete behaviors; and (d) Results, the impact of training on the trainees' organization. Different qualitative and quantitative research data were selected and analyzed for each level. The results found trainee improvements in all four levels of Kirkpatrick's model. For the Reaction level, trainees reported high satisfaction with the program, and especially appreciated the content of the program and training methods. Peer learning and peer support were mentioned positively by most of the trainees. For the Learning level, there was a significant difference in the scores for the Supervisory Competence Scale, which demonstrates that the trainees improved their knowledge (t = -7.22, p ＜ .001, d = 4.13), attitudes (t = -5.56, p ＜ .001, d = 2.97), and behaviors (t = -6.36, p ＜ .001, d = 3.40). The difference between the pretest and posttest scores on the learning self-report inventory was also significant. Moreover, this SFS training program enhanced the trainees' readiness to supervise school counselors, ability to conduct self-supervision, and also simultaneously increased their competencies as a school counselor. For the Behavior level, trainees implemented SFS as a supervisor. They additionally internalized the concepts of the solution focused approach into their work and changed behaviors in their personal lives. Finally, for the Results level, both the trainees and their supervisees achieved their supervision goals and felt empowered during the process of supervision. The clients of supervisees also reported positive changes. All trainees indicated their school counseling work and communication with staff became more efficacious. This study supports the SFS model as an effective and highly practical model, and fits campus culture in Taiwan. Based on these findings, the study discusses the factors present in this SFS training program that either facilitated or hampered learning, and provides suggestions for SFS training, government policies for the supervision system in school, and future studies.

1. 許育光(2011)。碩士層級實習學校諮商員督導團體之關切議題、學習因素與參與經驗分析。中華輔導與諮商學報，31，61-100。
   連結：
2. 許維素(2009)。焦點解決督導構成要素之研究。教育心理學報，41(2)，475-496。
   連結：
3. 許維素、蔡秀玲(2008)。高中職輔導教師焦點解決團體督導成效之研究。教育心理學報，39(4)，603-622。
   連結：
4. 教育部（2014）： 學生輔導法。取自https://goo.gl/qA6LYB [Ministry of Education. (2014). Student Guidance and Counseling Act. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/qA6LYB]
5. Franklin, C., & Streeter, C. L. (2003). Solution-focused accountability schools for the twenty-first century: An evaluation of Garza high school. Retrieved from https://www.utexas.edu/courses/franklin/garza.pdf
6. Bernard, J. M.,Goodyear, R. K.(2013).Fundamentals of clinical supervision.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Education Inc..
7. Borders, L. D.,Bernard, J. M.,Dye, H. A.,Fong, M. L.,Henderson, P.,Nance, D. W.(1991).Curriculum guide for training counseling supervisors: Rationale, development, and implementation.Counselor Education and Supervision,31(1),58-80.
8. Braun, V.,Clarke, V.(2006).Using thematic analysis in psychology.Qualitative Research in Psychology,3(2),77-101.
9. Cigrand, D. L.,Wood, S. M.(2011).School counseling and solution-focused site supervision: A theoretical application and case example.Journal of School Counseling,9,1-29.
10. Crutchfield, L. B.,Borders, L. D.(1997).Impact of two clinical peer supervision models on practicing school counselors.Journal of Counseling & Development,75(3),219-230.
11. Cunanan, E. D.,McCollum, E. E.(2006).What works when learning solution-focused brief therapy.Journal of Family Psychotherapy,17(1),49-65.
12. Dunn, R. L.(2004).Columbus, USA,Ohio State University.
13. Franklin, C.,Trepper, T. S.,Gingerich, W. J.,McCollum, E. E.(2012).Solution-focused brief therapy: A handbook of evidence-based practice.Oxford, England:Oxford University Press.
14. Glaes, J. M.(2010).Kalamazoo, USA,Western Michigan University.
15. Hawkins, P.,Shohet, R.(2012).Supervision in the helping professions.New York, NY:Open University Press.
16. Hersey, P.,Blanchard, K. H.(1969).Management of organizational behavior-Utilizing human resources.New Jersey, NJ:Prentice Hall.
17. Holloway, E.(1995).Clinical supervision: A systems approach.Oaks, CA:Sage.
18. Kelly, M. S.,Kim, J. S.,Franklin, C.(2008).Solution-focused brief therapy in school: A 360-degree view of research and practice.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
19. Kim, J. S.,Franklin, C.(2009).Solution-focused brief therapy in schools: A review of the outcome literature.Children and Youth Services Review,31(4),464-470.
20. Kirkpatrick, D. L.,Kirkpatrick, J. D.(2006).Evaluating training programs:The four levels.California, CA:Berrett-Koehler.
21. Koob, J. J.(2002).The effects of solution-focused supervision on the perceived self-efficacy of therapists in training.The Clinical Supervisor,21(2),161-183.
22. Liu, X.,Zhang, Y. P.,Franklin, C.,Qu, Y.,Chen, H.,Kim, J. S.(2015).The practice of solutionfocused brief therapy in mainland China.Health and Social Work,40(2),84-90.
23. Miller, S. D.(Ed.),Hubble, M. A.(Ed.),Duncan, B. L.(Ed.)(1996).Handbook of solution-focused brief therapy.San Francisco, SF:Jossey-Bass.
24. Page, B. J.,Pietrzak, D. R.,Sutton, J. M.(2001).National survey of school counselor supervision.Counselor Education and Supervision,41(2),142-150.
25. Roberts, E. B.,Borders, L. D.(1994).Supervision of school counselors: Administrative, program, and counseling.School Counselor,41(3),149-157.
26. Taylor, L.(2010).Workshop manual for training trainers and supervisors.2010 SFBTA Conference,Banff, Canada:
27. Thomas, F. N.(2013).Solution-focused supervision: A resource-oriented approach to developing clinical expertise.New York, NY:Springer.
28. Thomas, F. N.(Ed.)(2012).Solution-focused supervision: A resource-oriented approach to developing clinical expertise.New York, NY:Springer.
29. Thomas, F. N.(Ed.)(2013).Solution-focused supervision : A resource-oriented approach to developing clinical expertise.New York, NY:Springer.
30. Waskett, C.(2006).The pluses of solution-focused supervision.Counselling and Psychotherapy Journal,6(1),9-11.
31. Wilkerson, K.(2006).Peer supervision for the professional development of school counselors: Toward an understanding of terms and findings.Counselor Education and Supervision,46(1),59-67.
32. 朱素芬(2009)。南投=Nantou，國立暨南大學輔導與諮商研究所=National Chi Nan University。
33. 柯雅瓊(2008)。台北=Taipei，國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系=National Taiwan Normal University。
34. 柯雅瓊、許維素(2011)。學校輔導教師督導模式初探。輔導季刊，47(1)，30-41。
35. 徐西森(2003)。彰化=Changhua，國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商研究所=National Changhua University of Education。
36. 許維素(2005)。輔導教師學校系統觀的重要性。輔導季刊，41(3)，72-74。
37. 許維素(2014)。焦點解決短期治療─理論與實務。台北=Tapei, Taiwan:心理=Psychological Publishing Co.。
38. 許維素(2012)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會=National Science Council。
39. 許維素、陳宣融(2015)。焦點解決短期治療於臺灣學校輔導的應用成效。心理研究，8(4)，16-22。
40. 許維素、蔡秀玲(2011)。高中職輔導教師學習焦點解決短期諮商效果之初探研究。全球心理衛生E學刊，2(1)，1-19。
41. 郭秝語(2012)。台北=Tapei，國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系=National Taiwan Normal University。
42. 陳秀如(2008)。台北=Tapei，國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系=National Taiwan Normal University。
43. 陳秉華(1999)。邁向專業—台灣輔導界發展的回顧與前瞻。亞洲輔導學報，6(2)，21-48。
44. 楊雅雯(2009)。台北=Tapei，國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系=National Taiwan Normal University。

1. 許維素,范美珍,林瑋歆(2023)。焦點解決短期諮商對高中生問題解決態度之成效研究。輔導與諮商學報，45(2)，27-65。
2. 許維素、吳宛亭(2018)。焦點解決短期治療訓練對國中專任輔導教師之成果研究。教育心理學報，50(2)，315-340。
3. 黃傳永,陳雁白,郭淑惠(2020)。國小輔導教師接受藝術治療培訓方案期間運用藝術媒材於兒童輔導之經驗探究。中華輔導與諮商學報，57，51-83。
4. 蘇盈儀,蔡妙卿,姜兆眉(2023)。國中小新手學校輔導工作者接受自我覺察督導模式之個別督導受督經驗初探。教育心理學報，54(3)，637-662。
5. (2024)。正向心理健康BMI（友善—情緒—認同）團體輔導之種子師資培訓課程成效研究。教育心理學報，55(4)，819-845。