透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.148.185.226
  • 期刊

國小導師輔導自我效能量表之因素結構研究

The Factor Structure of Elementary School Homeroom Teachers' Self-Efficacy in Guidance Scale

摘要


本研究旨在探索國小導師輔導自我效能量表之因素結構。研究採用叢集與配額取樣,取得桃園市296位導師之自願參與。研究工具採用自編之國小導師輔導自我效能問卷,研究程序係透過項目分析與探索性因素分析檢視題目與因素屬性,並進一步以驗證性因素分析驗證國小導師自我效能之因素結構。因素分析結果顯示導師輔導自我效能包括「師生關係」、「班級經營與正向管教」、「問題解決與衝突處理」、「辨識適應問題徵兆」、與「系統合作」等五項因素,42項題目之因素負荷量介於.64到.85之間,各分量表信度介於.87 ~ .92之間,五因素相關介於.87到.97之間。五因素模式卡方值X^2/df = 2.361,各項適配度指標CFI = .900、IFI = .901、SRMR = .042、RMSEA = .068。不同性別、年齡、婚姻、服務年資、任教年段、與輔導背景的導師,其部分或整體輔導自我效能呈現顯著差異(P < .05)。

並列摘要


The aim of current study is to explore the factor structure of homeroom teachers' self-efficacy in guidance scale. The study adopted stratified clustering sampling process and included 296 homeroom teachers from Taoyuan City. A questionnaire was developed to study the homeroom teachers' self-efficacy in guidance. In pre-test, item analysis and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were performed to investigate the item quality and factors construct. Then, CFA was further conducted to confirm the factor constructs of homeroom teachers' self-efficacy in guidance. The results of CFA produced five constructs that consisted of teacher-student relationship, class management and positive disciplinary, problem solving and conflict resolving, identifying signs of adjustment problems, and system collaboration. The factor loadings of 42 items ranged from .64 to .85, the correlations between five factors were from .87 to .97, and the Cronbach α's were from .87 to .92 for five factors. The CFA model fit index was X^2/df = 2.361, other fit indexes included CFI = .900, IFI = .901, SRMR=.042, RMSEA=.068. In addition, teachers' self-efficacy in guidance showed significant differences with regard to different gender, age, marriage status, years of service, grade of teaching, and background education in counseling (P<.05).

參考文獻


鍾榮進(2015)。國小教師教學效能自評之研究。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊,8(1),69-104。DOI 10.3966/207136492015040801004
Finney, D. (2006). Stretching the boundaries: Schools as therapeutic agents in mental health. Is it a realistic proposition? Pastoral Care in Education, 24(3), 22-27. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0122.2006.00375.x
Larson, L. M., & Daniels, J. A. (1998). Review of counseling self-efficacy literature. The Counseling Psychologist, 26, 179-218. doi: 10.1177/0011000098262001
Larson, L. M., Suzuki, L. A., Gillespie, K. N., Potenza, M. T., Bechtel, M. A., & Toulouse, A. L. (1992). Development and validation of the counseling self-estimate inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 105–120. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.39.1.105
Urbani, S., Smith, M. R., Maddux, C. D., Smaby, M. H., Torres-Rivera, E., & Crews, J. (2002). Skills-based training and counseling self-efficacy. Counselor Education and Supervision, 42, 92–106. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2002. tb01802.x

被引用紀錄


趙曉美(2021)。問題導向學習在輔導原理與實務課程之應用研究教育研究與實踐學刊68(2),1-32。https://doi.org/10.6701/JEPR.202112_68(2).0001
陳婉真、戴芳儀、宋宥賢、江守峻(2021)。國中導師對於輔導工作的觀點與挑戰:從專業典範差異看導師與輔導老師之跨領域合作輔導與諮商學報43(1),57-90。https://doi.org/10.3966/181815462021054301003

延伸閱讀