輔導教師與心理師的跨專業合作是目前推展學校輔導工作之重要政策，係基於輔 導工作困境萌發之需求，將心理師引入校園以期增加輔導工作的專業度。本研究旨在 發展輔導教師與心理師的「合作現況量表」與「合作期待量表」，初步以量化方式， 從輔導教師的觀點分析跨專業合作之成效。首先訪談12 位輔導教師，進行內容分 析，以做成編寫量表題目之依據；接著以138 位國中輔導教師為預試對象，進行項目 分析與探索性因素分析，決定以17 題的正式量表，包含三個因素：合作支持、專業 協助、學校融入；最後採用北、中、南、東四個地區分層叢集抽樣，以399 位國中輔 導教師（男性67人、女性332人）為正式研究樣本，進行信度與效度檢驗。信度分析 結果顯示：「合作現況量表」與「合作期待量表」均具有良好的信度。驗證性因素分 析結果顯示：兩量表皆具有良好的適配程度。在效標關聯效度部分，輔導教師的合作 現況與工作滿意度呈現顯著的正相關，與角色壓力呈現顯著的負相關。另外，男性輔 導教師知覺心理師的學校融入程度高於女性輔導教師，且輔導教師對於與心理師的各 層面合作，均出現期待顯著高於現況之現象。整體而言，「合作現況量表」與「合作 期待量表」之信效度皆獲得支持，且能初步窺探跨專業合作的現況與期待。

The interdisciplinary collaboration between school counselors and school psychologists is the main policy in current school guidance work. Based on the need to overcome the predicaments in school guidance work, introducing school psychologists into campus is important for increasing the amount of manpower and the level of profession in school guidance. This paper is aim to develop “Collaboration Situation and Expectation between School Counselor and School Psychologist Scale”, which can be separated into “Collaboration Situation Scale, CSS” and “Collaboration Expectation Scale, CES”. By using quantitative method, we analyzed the effectiveness of interdisciplinary collaboration from the perspective of the school counselors. Before the tests, we interviewed 12 junior- high-school counselors and then used content analysis in order to form the suitable scale items. Afterwards, a total of 138 junior-high-school counselors participated in the pretest study. By the method of item analysis and exploratory factor analysis, three dimensions, collaboration support, professional assistant, and school immerse, were identified in both CSS and CES. Two scales were both self-report five-point Likert-type scales and includes 17 items. In formal test, a total of 399 participants (67 male, 322 female) were included to examine the reliability and validity of the scales from the four areas in Taiwan (North, Middle, South, and East) by using proportional stratified sampling. In reliability, the internal consistency of CSS and CES was satisfactory. The result of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated the models of CSS and CES were acceptable. Also, in criterion-related validity, CSS was significantly and positively related to work satisfactory, but significantly and negatively related to role pressure. Besides, male school counselors perceived higher level of school immerse of the psychologists than females. Furthermore, three dimensions and overall scores in CES were significantly higher than CSS. In sum, the reliability and validity of CSS and CES are supported, and the scales could explore the interdisciplinary collaborative situation and expectation between school counselors and school psychologists.