透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.235.140.73
  • 學位論文

少年生活中的風險與生活福祉之相關研究─以屏東縣為例

The Research of Juvenile Life Risk and Well-being in Pingtung Country as Examples

指導教授 : 趙善如

摘要


我國近年來開始重視影響少年身心正常發展的風險因素,且隨著世界對兒童少年生活福祉及兒童少年權益保障日漸重視,國內外對於少年生活風險與生活福祉之調查已成為當前重要的趨勢與主流。本研究旨在探究目前少年生活中的風險及生活福祉之現況,探究少年生活風險對於少年生活福祉之影響,,比較2011年與2014年少年生活福祉之差異,找出影響少年生活福祉之有效預測因子,及建構少年家庭內外風險與少年生活福祉之間的關係模型,以作為社會工作福利服務輸送發展走向,及改善少年福利服務政策之參考依據。本研究為了持續掌握屏東縣少年生活福祉,故以量化趨勢研究研究之方法,比照柯旻伶(2011)之研究採用分層非比例抽樣方法,以目前就讀屏東縣境內國中、高中(職)為本研究之研究母體,共抽取616位國中學生,528位高中(職)學生,共計1,144個有效研究樣本,且本研究樣本之學校類型、學制、年齡與父母婚姻關係與柯旻伶(2011)研究樣本特性相符。經過統計資料分析,本研究以屏東縣少年生活中的風險現況、少年生活福祉現況、少年生活福祉三年間變化之情形、少年生活福祉預測因子,及家庭內外風險與少年生活福祉模型建構五項研究發現說明如下: 一、少年生活中的風險現況 (一)少年個人本身風險相對較高,其中有四分之一少年有憂鬱情緒之問題。 (二)少年性別對個人本身風險有顯著之差異;少年父母親的教育程度對主要照顧者風險、家庭風險、社會風險,以及整體少年生活中的風險有顯著差異;少年的族群及主要照顧者年齡,僅與主要照顧者風險,以及家庭風險有顯著差異。 二、少年生活福祉現況 (一)少年教育及健康和安全生活福祉感受程度相對較低。 (二)少年族群為原住民者僅對主觀幸福感生活福祉有顯著差異;少年主要照顧者年齡對各面向生活福祉皆有顯著差異。 (三)少年主要照顧者風險的疏忽照顧與物質生活福祉相關;少年家庭風險的家人互動不良與主觀幸福感生活福祉相關。 三、少年生活福祉三年間變化之情形 (一)教育生活福祉平均分數降低最多。 (二)主觀幸福感生活福祉面向有顯著差異。 四、少年生活福祉預測因子 (一)少年家庭風險為影響其各面向生活福祉的負向預測因子。 (二)少年父親職業聲望為影響其物質生活福祉的正向預測因子。 五、家庭內外風險與少年生活福祉模型建構 (一)少年家庭外風險越高,其家庭內風險越高。 (二)少年家庭內風險越高,其生活福祉則越低。 (三)少年家庭外風險對家庭內風險,會間接影響其生活福祉。 根據本研究發現,共提出五面向之建議:首先,對屏東縣少年及其家庭,少年應適當安排休閒活動與運動,以降低其憂鬱情緒;尊重少年的獨特性,以降低管教要求過高;以開放民主的教養方式,以提升少年教育、家庭和同儕、行為與風險生活福祉;提供子女適當的支持,以提升少年整體生活福祉;重視家庭氛圍,以提升少年各面向生活福祉;鼓勵家長主動參與親職教育講座等相關活動。第二,對屏東縣少年學校,促進學校對於少年風險的敏感度;增加弱勢家庭少年學校生活適應輔導;促進師生關係、改善教學環境,以提升少年教育生活福祉。第三,對社會福利服務輸送體系,透過多元管道提升少年心理情緒之支持;強化弱勢家庭的風險預防機制;提供親職教育相關課程以培養家長正向管教態度;提升社會大眾對於高風險家庭預防之敏感度,以利少年能及時進入預防性服務體系。第四,對社會福利政策,建構友善的文化、娛樂活動空間,以保障少年文化休閒權;重視少年多元學習與學習環境,以保障少年教育權;強化少年風險預防性的服務政策,以保障少年健康發展權。第五,對未來研究,問卷設計應符合研究對象的狀況;連結政府單位,協助研究經費補助及媒合教育單位;研究母體可以擴展未就學之少年;研究地區可擴大至全國;未來量化研究可增加風險次面向的多元性;未來質化研究可更深入的探究少年的生活樣態。

關鍵字

少年 生活風險 生活福祉

並列摘要


In recent years, there is an increasing focus on risk factors that influence juvenile normal physical and mental development in our country. As people more and more emphasize children and juvenile well-being and rights protection, investigation into juvenile life risks and well-beings has become an important trend and mainstream both home and abroad. This study aims to probe into current risks and well-being in juvenile life, discuss effects of life risks on well-being, compare differences between juvenile well-being of year 2011 and 2014, find out effective predictive factors of juvenile well-being, construct a model for relationship between inside-home or outside-home risks and juvenile well-being, and thus provide references for developmental direction of social welfare service delivery and improvement of juvenile welfare service policies. To continuously know well-beings of juvenile in Pingtung County, this study usedtrend quantification approach, and adopted stratified sampling rather than ratio sample which was applied in Ke Minling’s research (2011). 616 junior high school students and 528 senior high school (vocational college) students were sampled from high schools and vocational colleges in Pingtung County. A total of 1,144 effective samples were included. School types, educational systems, ages and parents’ marital relations of samples in this study showed characteristics in conformity with Ke Minling’s research (2011). Through statistical data analysis, this stud summarized five kinds of findings as below-current risks in lives of Pingtung juvenile, current well-being of these juvenile, changes of juvenile well-being over the three years, predictive factors of juvenile well-being, and model construction of inside-home or outside-home risks and juvenile well-being: 1. Current risks in juvenile life (1)Juvenile individual risks are relatively higher. 25% of the investigated juvenile have the problem of depressed mood. (2)Significant differences in individual risks exist between different genders. Educational backgrounds of juvenile parents lead to significant differences in main caregiver’s risk, family risk, social risk and juvenile’s overall life risk. Juvenile’s group and main caregiver’s age only relate to significant differences in main caregiver’s risk and family risk. 2. Current juvenile well-being (1)Juvenile education, health and degree of perceived safety are relatively low. (2)Juvenile who are aborigines show significant differences in subjective sense of happiness; ages of juvenile caregivers cause significant differences in each item of well-being. (3)Main caregiver’s negligence in caring is correlated with well-being of material life; poor interaction of family risk is related to subjective sense of happiness. 3. Changes of juvenile well-being over the three years (1)Among all aspects of well-being, education demonstrates the greatest decline in average core. (2)There’s significant difference in subjective sense of happiness. 4. Predictive factors of juvenile well-being (1)Juvenile’s family risk is the negative predictor of each aspect of well-being. (2)Occupational reputation of juvenile’s father is the positive predictor of material life. 5. Model construction of inside-home or outside-home risks and juvenile well-being. (1)Higher outside-home risk results in higher risk in the family. (2)Higher risk in the family is correlated with lower well-being. (3)Juvenile’s outside-home risk affects inside-home risk and indirectly influences well-being. Based on findings of this study, five proposals are put forward. Firstly, for juvenile of Pingtung County and their families, proper leisure activities and sports should be provided to juvenile so as to reduce their depressed mood. Respect juvenile’s uniqueness to reduce excessive requirements. Open democracy and authoritative parenting style should be utilized to improve juvenile education, family and peers, behavior and well-being. Give children appropriate support for the sake of enhancing juvenile overall well-being. Emphasize on family atmosphere to improve each aspect of juvenile well-being. Encourage parents to actively participate in parent-child activities such as education and lecture. Secondly, for schools in Pingtung County, it’s necessary to increase school’s sensitivity to juvenile risk, provide disadvantageous families guidance on adapting to school life, improve teacher-student relationship and teaching environment, and enhance juvenile educational benefits. Thirdly, with regard to social welfare service delivery system, we should utilize multiple channels to strengthen support in juvenile emotional status, reinforce risk preventing mechanism for disadvantageous families, provide parental education related courses to cultivate parents’ positive attitude, and increase common people’s sensitivity to prevention of high-risk family so that juvenile can timely enter preventive service system. Fourthly, in terms of social welfare policy, it’s essential to create friendly cultural and recreational activity space to guarantee juvenile rights of cultural leisure, focus on juvenile’s multi-learning and learning environment to protect juvenile right of education, and strengthen preventive service policies on juvenile risks to safeguard their rights of healthy development. Fifthly, for future researches, questionnaire should be designed as in accordance with situations of the objects; a collaboration with government agency and education unit should be used to assist in budget subsidy; samples can be extended to children under the school age; studied areas can be enlarged to expanded to the whole country; diversity of sub-aspects of risks can be added in future quantitative researches; in-depth investigation into juvenile lifestyles should be conducted in subsequent qualitative researches.

並列關鍵字

juvenile life risks well-being

參考文獻


柯旻伶(2011)。少年社會資本與生活福祉之研究─以屏東縣為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東科技大學,屏東縣。
李旻昱(2007)。高風險兒童少年風險產生及降低之影響因素與歷程(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東科技大學,屏東縣。
高麗鈞(2011)。發揮預防的力量:風險評估作為高風險家庭服務的一種實務方法。朝陽人文社會學刊,9(1),177-197。
劉正(2006)。補習在臺灣的變遷、效能與階層化。教育研究集刊,52(4),1-33。
張彩秀(2007)。青少年健康行為與憂鬱情緒之差異分析。弘光學報,52,55-56。

被引用紀錄


劉羽珊(2011)。運用SGD對低功能自閉症兒童進行溝通訓練之效果研究〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-1610201315231088

延伸閱讀