Debriefing團體在處理校園危機事件的應用之研究

Abstract

中文摘要

本研究旨在探討學校成員受校園危機事件的衝擊程度與因應方式，並了解以debriefing模式介入校園危機事件的成效與適用性。本研究採用問卷調查與訪談調查法進行資料的收集，以自編之「校園危機事件中應用分享支持團體之調查問卷」和「校園危機事件中應用分享支持團體(debriefing)之訪談大綱」為研究工具，蒐集39位校園debriefing團體成員，及3位debriefing團體帶領者之意見。問卷所得量化資料，透過次數分配、百分比與t考驗等統計方法進行分析；訪談質化資料則以逐字稿內容依主題歸納的方式進行分析處理。本研究主要發現如下:一、校園危機事件發生後，學校成員普遍處於高壓力狀態，並多數以第1~3天壓力感受最大。最大壓力指數會因學校及因應行為的不同而有顯著差異，而目前壓力指數則受因應行為不同影響而有差異；二、因應方式上，學校成員大多會找人談論此事，且對象以同儕最多、老師次之，而老師的協助輔導是主要的正向因應行為項目；三、在debriefing團體過程部份，大多數的成員表示自己投入參與程度高，且認同debriefing模式的作法；在debriefing團體結果部份，有五成以上成員肯定各分項的助益感受，並有七成以上成員肯定團體的整體助益；四、3位debriefing團體帶領者一致認為，debriefing模式十分適用於校園危機事件的處理，同時提出現存的困難、需求及建議。最後根據研究結果進行討論，並提出建議，以作為學校危機處理與未來相關研究之參考。The application of psychological debriefing for campus crisis intervention Abstract The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of campus crisis incidents on school students and their responses to the critical events. We attempted to understand the efficacy and feasibility of the psychological debriefing model in the management of campus crisis events. A total of 39 subjects in two groups debriefed on campus crisis events received questionnaire investigation, and three leaders of the debriefing group were interviewed. The quantitative information in the questionnaire was analyzed statistically to obtain the respective frequency and proportion. T test was used to compare the characteristics of different groups among these subjects. The qualitative information of the interview was summarized and analyzed categorically according to the record word by word. The principle findings of this study were as follows: First, after the critical campus incidents happened, school members were generally in a high pressure state, and most of them experienced maximal stress during the first to the third day. There were significant differences in the maximal stress scores between different schools and subjects with different responding behaviors. Second, in responding behaviors, most school members responded to the critical events by discussing the events with others. Most members responded to the events by sharing with schoolmates, followed by teachers. Among different responding behaviors, the greatest benefit derived from receiving counseling and assistance from teachers. Third, in the practice for psychological debriefing, most members in the groups indicated that the degree to which they had participated in the course was high and approved the practice of debriefing. For the psychological debriefing course, the benefits of different aspects and in general were affirmed by more than 50% and 70% of the members in the debriefing groups, respectively. Fourth, the three debriefing leaders all agreed that the debriefing model was very suitable in the management of campus crisis incidents. However, they noted some difficulties and requirements, and made suggestions for the practice of psychological debriefing at the present time. Finally, discussion and suggestion were made for the present psychological debriefing according to results of our study. We hope this study will become a reference for psychological debriefing in the management of campus crisis incidents and for future investigation.