國中輔導教師介入關係霸凌事件的輔導困境與策略

No Thumbnail Available

Date

2021-09-??

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

國立臺灣師範大學教育心理學系
Department of Educational Psychology, NTNU

Abstract

本研究探究學校輔導教師在關係霸凌事件中的輔導困境與策略。透過團體訪談,共有27 位專兼任輔導教師參與,包含22 位女性、5 位男性,平均年齡34.5 歲,教學年資8.31 年,而平均輔導年資則為5.59 年。資料收集階段共進行5 次團體訪談,每次團體約為2.5 ∼ 3 小時。資料分析採用模板主題分析進行,運用第一次逐字稿建立初步分類系統,再將資料進行分類並視需要增建或修改分類系統。研究結果:輔導教師主要的困境包括(1)關係辨識困境,何謂關係霸凌難以定義,而受害者與加害者互為霸凌循環也讓辨識困難;(2)個別輔導困境包括受害者質疑與擔心被輔導、加害者否認與抗拒輔導等;而(3)系統合作困境則包括合作導師的輔導知能與抗拒合作、以及家長情緒涉入過深導致事件的複雜化等議題。在輔導策略部分,輔導教師多採用個別輔導與系統合作雙管齊下的多元介入輔導策略。首先,輔導教師需要擱置辨識、接納關係流動特性,其次,在受害者和加害者的個別輔導工作中,同理尊重當事人主觀感受,將焦點放在修復人際關係與發展關係能力;而在系統合作中,則直接入班進行旁觀者輔導及導師或家長等重要他人系統合作諮詢,以營造有利於人際修復與關係發展的人際環境。
Relational bullying is a prevalent phenomenon that is commonly observed among peers in schools, particularly middle schools. The victims of relational bullying are affected by severe social and psychological adjustment problems; moreover, these interpersonal adjustment problems continue to affect them in subsequent phases of their lives. Studies have revealed an association between reductions in school bullying incidents and the presence of teachers who are sensitive to relational problems and capable of providing competent class management as well as positive behavioral and emotional support and praise to students. Preventive programs that emphasize the development of students’ empathy, prosocial behaviors, emotional management, and interpersonal social skills were demonstrated to be effective in reducing relational aggression. Studies have examined the interventions and counseling provided after the occurrence of bullying events and discovered that school counselors mostly worked with victims through individual and group counseling; however, these studies have also suggested the establishment of teacher–parent collaborations to stop bullying. Purpose: This study explored counselors’ difficulties and strategies when they intervene in relational bullying incidents in schools. Method: In total, 27 school counselors (comprising 22 females and 5 male counselors) were interviewed in a group setting. The participants had an average age of 34.5 years and an average of 8.31 and 5.59 years of teaching and counseling experience, respectively. They all had experiences of intervening in relational bullying incidents, with 11.1%, 18.9%, 51.8%, and 14.8% of them having intervened in one, two, three, and four incidents, respectively. The participants were divided into five groups, and a group interview lasting 2 to 3 h was conducted for each group. The guidelines for the group interviews comprised four items, namely (i) relational intervention experience (i.e., sharing of experiences in intervening in students’ relational bullying incidents), (ii) identification experience (i.e., how incidents were identified or confirmed as relational bullying incidents), (iii) strategies (i.e., sharing of intervening strategies applied to involved students [instigators and victims], bystanders, and other individuals in response to the occurrence of incidents), and (iv) difficulties (i.e., sharing of difficulties encountered when intervening in incidents and the methods used to overcome these difficulties). Data analysis was conducted in the form of template analysis, and the draft of the first group was used to establish the initial category template, after which the categories were amended or revised per the data generated during the analysis. The kappa coefficient for the raters was determined to be .84 after two rounds of adjustments. A group of 10 school counselors were invited to evaluate the draft’s credibility, completeness, closeness, and applicability; on a 7-point scale, the raters gave scores ranging from 6.33 to 6.67. Results: The difficulties encountered by counselors who intervened in relational aggression incidents were as follows: (i) Difficulties in identifying relational bullying: The counselors reported that they felt constrained and confused when they had to identify the roles of the individuals involved in relational bullying incidents. An involved student might claim that he or she felt ostracized by his or her classmates even though no one had acted aggressively against them, or they might have been the instigator. In other cases, students might have repeatedly acted aggressively against each other but still claim that they were bullied. (ii) Difficulties in conducting individual counseling: The counselors experienced difficulties in aiding victims, particularly those who lacked social skills and were resistant to change and those who resisted counseling because they felt that they were being blamed. Furthermore, a few counselors were also concerned that their countertransference might hurt the involved students because of the frustrations that they experienced when interacting with stubborn victims. Another challenge was counseling bullies; these instigators had interpersonal advantages and general adopted the avoidant strategy of denial. Some accused instigators also claimed that they felt hurt and became defensive during counseling sessions. (iii) Difficulties in establishing systematic collaboration: First, the counselors reported that they conducted group counseling with the involved classes but encountered difficulties because they had no previous experiences of interacting with these classes. Second, collaboration with homeroom teachers was another challenge because many of these teachers lacked the skills to identify relational bullying in their classes and provide guidance in response to relational bullying incidents; in some cases, the situation was made worse by the use of inappropriate interventional strategies. Moreover, working with parents could be a complex matter; occasionally, these parents were overprotective or too emotional involved in their children’s relational problems. Some parents also insisted on verifying the actual roles of the individuals involved in an incident; thus, they neglected the psychological well-being of the involved students. The strategic component of the results indicated that an integrated interventional strategy that incorporated both individual and systematic interventions was optimal for addressing relational aggression events involving relational bullying incidents. The counselors reported that they were able to alleviate the students’ trauma when they set aside the concept of identifying the instigator or investigating the incident and accepted the volatile nature of interpersonal relationships among adolescents. When providing counseling to clients who were victims, a counselor empathized and respected a client’s subjective perception of the incidents and devoted their efforts toward assisting client's interpersonal skills' development and relational restoration with peers. The counselors revealed that empathic listening and rapport relationships were especially important when working with aggressors; also, if a teacher, possibly with the help of a counselor, could make good use of aggressors' interpersonal power, the whole class would have benefited from this effort. In addition, a counselor could apply mediation to resolve conflicts if agreement could be reached between both parties. When intervening in bullying incidents, counselors reported that the most frequently used strategy was a team-based one that involved homeroom teachers, heads of discipline, and special education teachers. Counselors could establish collaborative relationships with homeroom teachers when they could provide emotional support to these teachers who were coping with problematic relational bullying incidents in their classes. Most counselors conducted group counseling to release tension in a class, implementing antibullying psychoeducation programs, and promoting empathic understanding for victims with special needs (such as autistic or hyperactive students). When working with difficult parents in relational bullying incidents, the counselors revealed that empathizing with parents was the general practice because these parents often received biased information from their children. The counselors worked with parents by maintaining continual home–school communication, providing the parents with consultation services using multiple resources, or implementing these two measures simultaneously. Although enforced counseling was recommended for inclusion in school rules as a legislative means of ensuring involved students' have access to counseling when their parents or guardians are resistant to providing consent, the present study indicated that counselors must overcome multiple types of difficulties and gain the support of parents or guardians to achieve optimal counseling effectiveness. Conclusion/Suggestion: First, both individualized and systematic interventional strategies must be applied for relational bullying incidents. Second, although role identification is essential for preparing mandatory reports, school counselors should focus on the humane roles and functions of a counselor rather than those of an investigator when intervening in bullying incidents. Therefore, we recommend that school counselors concentrate on the relationship traumas of the involved students and aid them in developing their interpersonal skills and restoring their relationships. Furthermore, school counselors must improve their systematic collaboration and consultation abilities to work with teachers and parents when intervening in such incidents. Finally, we recommend the establishment of a community resource center to provide consultation services to school counselors and staff when they encounter relational bullying incidents because they often consider identification and intervention as problems.

Description

Keywords

Citation