文章詳目資料

中華輔導與諮商學報 TSSCI

  • 加入收藏
  • 下載文章
篇名 團體領導能力量表之編製與信、效度建構
卷期 32
並列篇名 Development of the Group Leadership Competence Scale
作者 吳秀碧許育光
頁次 001-031
關鍵字 能力評量領導能力諮商師團體治療團體諮商團體領導者competence assessmentcounselorgroup counselinggroup leadergroup psychotherapyleadership competenceTSSCI
出刊日期 201204

中文摘要

本研究旨在編製「團體領導能力量表」,以評量團體領導者之實務表現能力,供諮商與心理治療實 務、教學訓練暨督導之應用。研究主要根據先前研究成果,並參酌實務經驗、以及學者專家論述, 發展量表架構與題項共60題。再針對量表初編題項進行專家效度檢核後,依建議修正,並刪除CVI 小於.70之題項,共得預試題項56題。預試時針對不同背景相關心理專業人員抽樣,得258份有效 樣本。預試後刪除臨界比(CR值)和内部一致性未達.001顯著水準之7個題項,形成正式量表共 計49題。信度方面,全量表内部一致性信度係數a = .970,折半信度yxx = .935。效度方面,因素分 析共得「改變與行動能力」、「促進凝聚力的能力」、「深化團體的能力」、「引導與推進過程的能力」、 「深化個體的能力」、「建立互動規範的能力」、「突破過程障礙的能力」、「強化學習和獲得的能力」等 八個因素;與「諮商團體領導者專業能力量表」得分之積差相關係數y = .697 (p < .001)。最後,本 研究針對量表應用,以及後續研究進行討論並提出相關建議。

英文摘要

The study was aimed at developing an instrument for measuring trainees’ competencies in leading counseling and psychotherapy groups. Foundation of the original 60 items of Group Leadership Competence Scale (GLCS) were proposed mainly based on group theory, researchers’ previous research findings, group counselor training practices, and literature reviews. After evaluated by six professionals for content validity, three items CVI lower than .70 were deleted and two similar items were integrated into one, then the version of remaining 56 items were used. 258 valid samples were gathered for analyzing the critical ratio and test their internal consistency. 7 items were deleted and only 49 items were left for examining the validity and reliability. The reliability of internal consistency correlation a = .970, and split-half correlation yxx= .935. The validity of GLCS showed a 8-factors structure by factor analysis, and that were competence of Change and Action Facilitating, Cohesion Facilitating, Group Depth Enhancing, Process Leading & Facilitating, Individual Depth Enhancing, Norm Building, Process Obstacle Breaking through, and Terminating & Change Intensifying. Furthermore, Pearson’s correlation with the “Professional Ability Scale for Group Counseling Leader” y = .697. Based on those well acceptable evidences for the validity and reliability of the instrument, its advanced application in practice and research were discussed and recommended.

相關文獻