「顛峰型」教師之研究

Abstract

本研究持續兩年蒐集教師心理健康相關因子，目的在賡續前案的九\r\n類心理健康狀態的分類，持續探索其中的顛峰型和幽谷型教師在各\r\n測量變項及量表上的差異，並探索各種教師心理健康的保護因子或\r\n危險因子。第一年隨機抽樣全國中小學教師，共獲得1180名有效樣\r\n本，進行有關主觀幸福感量表、靈性幸福感量表、顛峰幸福量表、\r\n及憂鬱情緒量表等因素的測量。第二年再次隨機抽樣全國中小學教\r\n師，共獲得1251名有效樣本，進行有關主觀幸福感量表、正向比量\r\n表、巔峰幸福感量表、憂鬱量表、及積極性因應量表等因素的測量\r\n。兩年來的主要研究發現：（1）顛峰型教師比幽谷型教師在靈性幸\r\n福感總量表及其中三個子因素上，有顯著較高的表現；（2）顛峰型\r\n教師比幽谷型教師在顛峰幸福量表及其二個子因素上，有顯著較高\r\n的表現；（3）顛峰型教師比幽谷型教師，具有較多的義工服務頻率\r\n及靜坐冥想的經驗；（4）高正向比教師比低正向比教師，在主觀幸\r\n福感、巔峰幸福感、及積極性因應量表上，有顯著較高的表現；在\r\n憂鬱量表上，則有顯著較低的表現；（5）高正向比教師比低正向比\r\n教師，在處理學生問題、家長問題、及同（人）事問題的壓力上\r\n，有顯著較低的負荷感受；（6）主觀幸福感在正向比、積極性因應\r\n及工作壓力與憂鬱之間，扮演著中介的角色。整體而言，顛峰型教\r\n師或正向比大於等於3的教師比其他類型教師，具有較為良好的心理\r\n健康狀態與特質；此外，本研究提出部份教師心理健康的保護因子\r\n或危險因子，並發現主觀幸福感在其中扮演著中介的角色。最後\r\n，本研究亦針對研究結果提出具體建議。

The current study used the data randomly sampled from the\r\nelementary to senior-high-school teachers of whole Taiwan.\r\nFirst year, a total random sample of 1180 teachers were\r\ncollected and analyzed. Second year, a total random sample\r\nof 1251 teachers were collected and analyzed. Data analysis\r\nincluded the t-test and SEM, while missing data were\r\nhandled by using the EM algorithm to obtain the ML\r\nestimates. The whole data was collected by using a Likerttyped\r\n4-point survey scale. The goodness-of-fit of model\r\nwas found in the data.\r\nResults show that 1) the flourishing teachers have\r\nsignificantly higher scores on the four subscales and the\r\nwhole Spiritual Well-Being Scale than those of the\r\nlanguishing teachers. 2) Besides, the flourishing teachers\r\nalso have significantly higher scores on the two factors of\r\nFlourishing Scale, such as positive emotions and positive\r\nfunctions, than those of the languishing teachers. 3) The\r\nflourishing teachers have more activities of voluntary\r\nworks and mindfulness meditation than those of the\r\nlanguishing teachers. 4) The teachers with positivity-ratio\r\ngreater than and equal to 3 were proved as having higher\r\nscores on the Subjective Well-Being Scale, Proactive Coping\r\nScale, Flourishing Well-Being Scale, and lower scores on\r\nthe Taiwan Depression Scale than those of other teachers\r\nwith positivity-ratio less than 3. 5) Besides, the teachers\r\nwith positivity-ratio greater than and equal to 3 perceived\r\nlower work-stress from students, parents, and colleges\r\naffairs, as compared to those of teachers with positivityratio\r\nless than 3. 6) The subjective well-being mediated\r\nthe relationships between the positivity-ratio, proactive\r\ncoping, healthy behavior, work-stress, and depression.\r\nIn sum, the flourishing-type teachers seemed to be more\r\nhealth than the other types of teachers. Also, the teachers\r\nwith positivity-ratio greater than and equal to 3 seemed to\r\nbe more health than the other type of teachers. Finally,\r\nconclusions and suggestions for practice and further\r\nstudies were also proposed.