諮商督導困境與因應效能之研究—以雙矩陣模式為架構之內涵探究與量表發展

Abstract

本研究旨在探討諮商督導困境與因應效能內涵，結合質性研究之意義探究與深度瞭解，以及量化研究之客觀實證與科學性，發展諮商督導困境與因應效能量表，作為諮商督導人員瞭解與檢核其困境與因應之工具，為督導工作提供反思及發展調整因應方式之參考。依據研究目的，研究採取序列性混合研究設計，共分三個研究進行。研究一質性階段，為督導困境與因應的內涵探究，邀請6位諮商督導者進行深度訪談，運用主題分析法進行資料分析，並以雙矩陣督導模式作為主題分類架構。研究一結果，在督導困境中依據59個意義編碼、27個次主題，歸納出與治療系統有關的個案理解與概念化的困境、諮商策略與介入的困境及諮商關係困境主題，以及與督導系統有關的受督者困境、督導關係困境、督導者困境及脈絡因素困境主題，共有7個督導困境主題；而在困境因應中依據39個意義編碼、18個次主題，歸納入雙矩陣督導系統，共有7個因應主題。研究二為量表發展階段，結合研究一質性發現與文獻整理形成初編量表，先經專家內容效度審查確定項目後，進行預試與項目分析及建立信、效度。研究二之結果：諮商督導困境與因應效能量表，包含7個向度共計56題的困境與因應配對題；量表信效度方面，諮商督導困境不同分量表信度介於 .82～ .89之間，總量表信度 .95，因應效能不同分量表信度介於 .88～ .94之間，總量表信度 .97，分量表與總量表均具備良好的內部一致性。效度部分則進行驗證性因素分析，結果顯示量表具備良好之建構效度；諮商督導困境與因應效能量表與諮商督導專業知覺量表之相關達中度顯著相關，顯示具備良好之效標關連效度。研究三為量表應用階段，包含差異性分析與表現程度分析，以作為背景參照與督導現況評估，研究三針對不同背景之差異性分析結果顯示：1. 督導困境程度女性高於男性，因應效能為男性高於女性；2. 督導困境程度碩士層級高於博士層級，因應效能則為博士層級高於碩士層級；3. 不同督導身份者（是否持有督導認證）在督導困境之考驗均未達顯著差異，因應效能總分則認證者高於未認證者；4. 不同年齡在督導困境、因應效能之考驗，除個案理解與概念化困境的因應效能達顯著外，其餘均未顯著，整體因應效能則達顯著；5. 不同諮商工作年資在個案理解與概念化的困境、諮商關係困境、督導者困境上，年資愈淺組別的督導困境高於年資愈深的組別；諮商工作年資愈高的組別，其因應效能較高於年資愈淺的組別；6. 不同督導年資在個案理解與概念化的困境、督導者困境上，年資愈淺者所感受到的困境較高於督導年資深者；因應效能的七個分量表均達顯著，督導年資愈深者，面對此七個困境向度之因應效能均高於督導年資較淺者。研究以督導困境作為Y軸，因應效能作為X軸，與其平均數架構出包含四個象限的表現程度：分別為優先改善區（高度困境頻率與低度因應效度）、次要改善區（低度困境頻率與低度困境因應效能）、繼續保持區（高度困境頻率與高度困境因應效能），及過度重視區（低度困境頻率與高度困境因應效能），分析參與者在督導困境與因應效能各向度之表現程度。結果顯示，座落在優先改善區的為督導系統中之「督導者」與「受督者」因素，顯示此兩個分量表上感到偏高困難頻率且因應效能偏低，極需要增加此部分專業的知能；座落在次要改善區的為督導關係，亦即督導者雖較少面對有關督導關係的困境，但由於其因應效能偏低，與督導關係有關的能力亦需要增加。研究亦發現不同發展階段之督導者（資淺組與資深組）的督導困境與因應效能達顯著差異，兩組之表現程度有所差異。最後，透過討論綜整督導困境與因應效能的內涵與發現，並提出對評量工具、實務應用與未來研究方向的建議。This study aims to explore the difficulties and coping effectiveness of counseling supervision, combining the significance exploration and in-depth understanding of qualitative research, as well as the objective empirical evidence and scientific nature of quantitative research. It aims to develop a scale for counseling supervision difficulties and coping effectiveness, serving as a tool for counseling supervisors to understand and assess their challenges and coping strategies. This scale is intended to provide reflection and reference for the development and adjustment of coping methods in supervision work.According to the research objectives, a sequential mixed-methods research design was adopted, involving three stages of research. In the qualitative stage (Study One), six counseling supervisors were invited for in-depth interviews to explore the connotations of supervision difficulties and coping. Thematic analysis was employed for data analysis, utilizing the double matrix supervision model as the thematic classification framework. The results of Study One identified seven themes of difficulties, including difficulties related to case understanding and conceptualization, counseling strategies and interventions, and counseling relationship, as well as difficulties related to supervisees, supervisory relationships, supervisors, and contextual factors. In coping, seven themes were identified within the double matrix supervision system.Study Two focused on scale development, integrating qualitative findings and literature review to form an initial scale. After expert content validity and item analysis, the Counseling Supervision Difficulties and Coping Effectiveness Scale was finalized. The scale comprises 56 paired items across seven dimensions. The reliability of the scale for different dimensions of counseling supervision difficulties ranged from .82 to .89, with a total scale reliability of .95. For coping effectiveness, reliability ranged from .88 to .94, with a total scale reliability of .97. Internal consistency and construct validity were found to be satisfactory through confirmatory factor analysis. The scale also demonstrated good criterion-related validity with the Counseling Supervision Professional Perception Scale.Study Three, the scale application stage, involved different test and importance performance analysis to serve as a background reference and assess the current status of supervision. The results indicated significant differences based on various backgrounds: 1. Female supervisors reported higher levels of supervision difficulties, while males exhibited higher coping effectiveness. 2. Those with a master's degree reported higher difficulties in supervision, while those with a doctoral degree showed higher coping effectiveness. 3. Certified supervisors and non-certified supervisors did not show significant differences in supervision difficulties, but certified supervisors exhibited higher coping effectiveness. 4. Age differences showed significant effects on overall coping effectiveness but limited impact on specific difficulties. 5. Differences in counseling work experience influenced both difficulties and coping effectiveness. 6. Differences in supervision experience showed significant effects on difficulties and coping effectiveness.In terms of importance performance analysis, using supervision difficulties as the Y-axis and coping effectiveness as the X-axis, four quadrants were constructed based on their means: Concentrate here (high difficulty frequency and low coping effectiveness), low priority (low difficulty frequency and low coping effectiveness), keep up the good work (high difficulty frequency and high coping effectiveness), and possible overkill (low difficulty frequency and high coping effectiveness). The results indicated that scores of the scales located in the Concentrate here were both of the"Supervisor" and "Supervisee" factors, this suggests implying a need to enhance professional competence in these areas. The scores of scales in the Low priority included the supervision relationship, indicating highlighting the need for improvement in skills related to supervision relationships. The research also identified significant differences in supervision difficulties and coping effectiveness between supervisors at different developmental stages (novice and experienced). This findingemphasizes the importance of considering the developmental stage of supervisors when addressing supervision difficulties. Finally, through continued discussions and suggestions, recommendations are provided for assessment tools, practical applications, and future research directions.