研究生: |
許維峰 |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
相遇的時刻-一位國中輔導老師陪伴學生的敘事研究 Moment of Encounter: A Narrative Research of a Junior High School Guidance Teacher Accompanying His Students |
指導教授: | 李佩怡 |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
教育心理與輔導學系 Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling |
論文出版年: | 2011 |
畢業學年度: | 99 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 231 |
中文關鍵詞: | 國中輔導老師 、師生關係 、相遇 、馬丁布伯 、陪伴 、敘事研究 |
英文關鍵詞: | junior high school guidance teacher, teacher-student relationship, encounter, Martin Buber, companionship, narrative research |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:246 下載:48 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
本研究旨在從我陪伴學生的經驗中,探討我與學生相遇及非相遇的師生關係內涵、相遇在教育中的意義及我是如何在教育現場與學生相遇。研究方法採用敘事研究法,除了我的自我敘說外,也以立意取樣的方式,邀請五位學生接受訪談,並依據Lieblich等人(1998)提出的「整體-內容」與「類別-內容」分析模式進行資料分析與整理。研究發現如下:
一、我與學生相遇之師生關係的內涵為(1)像朋友般的師生關係;(2)像「第二個」家人般的師生關係;(3)像與「生命導師」互動般的師生關係;(4)處處皆可相遇。
二、我與學生非相遇之師生關係的內涵為(1)上對下的關係;(2)角色關係。
三、我認為相遇在教育中的意義為(1)相遇讓老師成為真實的存有;(2)相遇讓老師得著滋潤,獲得感動與力量;(3)相遇讓老師的心境超越義務性的情感工作,進入自發性的情感工作;(4)相遇讓老師發揮影響力,由內而外的轉化學生;(5)相遇可以提供學生安全堡壘,轉化家庭失能的社會現象;(6)相遇避免學生被物化;(7)相遇讓學生不再壓抑自己,在生命導師的接納引導下,在關係中成為真實的人;(8)唯有相遇,才能真正地陪伴。
四、我如何與學生相遇為(1)省思角色的「應該」,以人的樣貌與學生交流;(2)放下印象、暫緩意圖,以開放的態度直接與學生對話;(3)建立安全信任,以尊重敞開的心關懷回應學生;(4)放下單向的獨語,以積極的傾聽感受回應學生;(5)相信人性的美善,以真實的自我投入關係;(6)超越對外在表現的專注,以人性的本然接觸學生的內心世界;(7)放下知識為主體的專業迷思,以整全的存有與學生交流;(8)覺察倫理的迷思,以坦然的態度接受相互的滋養;(9)放下單一價值的偏頗,以多元的眼光欣賞學生整全的存有;(10)超越表面的批判,以同理的心情體貼學生的需求;(11)超越對成果的專注,以陪伴的心情支持學生生命成長。
最後,研究者進行綜合討論,並提出研究限制與建議,以及研究者的反思。
Purpose of this research was to explore the contents of teacher-student relationship specifically in the encounter and non-encounter aspects in addition to the encounter significance within the context of education and how I encountered with students in the onsite educational environment. The narrative research method was adopted; other than my narration, purposive sampling was also applied, and this was accomplished through inviting five students for interviews. Moreover, the data were analyzed with holistic-content and category-content modes according to Lieblich et al. (1998). The findings of this research are as follow:
1. The contents of the teacher-student relationship within my encountering with the students were (1) teacher-student relationship could be characterized as friendship; (2) Relationship could be characterized as members of “second family” to each other; (3) Relationship could be characterized as interactive “mentor of life”; (4) Encounter could have happened at anywhere and any place.
2. The contents of the teacher-student relationship within my non-encounter with the students were (1) Essentially a top-down relationship; (2) Role model relationship.
3. The significance within the educational context derived the encounter would manifest as (1) The encounter enabled the teacher as the authentic being; (2) The encounter nourished the teacher and enabled the teacher with a sense of touching and new-found inner strength; (3) The encounter enabled the teacher’s mind surpassing the obligatory emotional works and entering into the emotional state of spontaneity; (4) The encounter enabled the teacher with the influential capability which would transform the student from internally to externally; (5) The encounter could provide student with a secure base and transform the social phenomenon of dysfunctional family; (6) The encounter could prevent students from being objectified; (7) The encounter could render students no longer suppressing themselves, under the embrace and guidance from the mentor of life, the students could grow up to be real persons within the context of relationship; (8) Only through encountering, could it be possible to have realistic companionship.
4. As for how I encountered with students, they primarily were (1) the “should-be” of the reflective role, communicated with students as a human being; (2) Let go of the images, slowed down on the intentions, directly dialogized with student via open attitude; (3) Established a safe trust so as to respond to students with reopened caring from true respects; (4) Laid down the unidirectional monologue, responded to students via proactive listening and feelings; (5) Placed trust to the basic human goodness, and injected the truthful selfness into the relationship; (6) Surpassed the focus on the external performance, encountered the inner world of the student via human authenticity; (7) Laid down the professionally knowledge-based myth, communicated and interacted with students via the whole being as a teacher; (8) Perceived the ethical myth and accepted the mutual nourishments through calm and peaceful attitude; (9) Laid down the bias of singular value and appreciated the student’s whole being via diverse perspectives; (10) Surpassed the superficial criticism and was considerate to the student needs via empathy; (11) Surpassed the focus on achievements and performances, supported students’ growth through the mindset of companionship.
Lastly, the researcher shall proceed to comprehensive discussions in addition to proposing research constraints and recommendations as well as reflections from the researchers.
中文部分
王勇智、鄧明宇譯(2003):敘說研究。臺北市:五南。Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative analysis. CA: Sage Publication.
朱台翔(2009):去讚美、去陪伴,就對了!。人本教育札記,239,38-40。
伍育英(2011):費爾本的客體關係理論在心理治療上的意義與運用(下)。諮商與輔導,307,25-30。
江思妤(2005):不只陪伴還有學習—給弱勢少年的貴族教育。研習資訊,22(5),34-41。
江筱帆(2006)存在的真實樣貌:一個新手教師陪伴孩子共同成長的故事。國立新竹教育大學教育學系碩士班碩士論文。
杜永泰(2004):華人師生關係測量之研究。國立台北師範學院教育心理與諮商學系碩士班碩士論文。
李昱德(2003):國小學童依附關係傾向與人際行為之相關研究。國立臺北師範學院教育心理與輔導學研究所碩士論文。
李佩怡(1999):現今教育環境中師生互動之我見。諮商與輔導,157,49。
李佩怡(2000):在安寧病房中與瀕死病人及家屬接觸之「心領神會」經驗(五之三)。諮商與輔導,179,41-46。
李靜怡(2004):國中生的師生關係、同儕關係與其快樂來源、快樂程度之相關研究。臺中師範學院諮商與教育心理研究所論文。
呂育生(2008):以關懷為核心的師生關係-諾丁之關懷倫理學在道德教育上的運用。南華大學哲學系碩士班碩士論文。
林志丞(2010):國中教師社會支持與工作倦怠之相關研究以角色壓力、自我效能為中介變項。國立嘉義大學教育學系研究所碩士論文。
林智偉(2010):安寧護理人員生涯選擇歷程敘事研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。
林美紅(2008):國小四年級師生互動策略及調適歷程之研究。網路社會學通訊期刊,74。取自http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/74/74-24.htm
林美珍(2008):國中生樂觀特質、社會支持、因應策略與生活適應之相關研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系在職進修碩士班碩士論文。
林秀慧、林明雄譯(2001):客體關係治療:關係的運用。台北市:心理。Cashdan, S. (1988). Object relations therapy: using the relationship. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
來安民(1992)。馬丁布伯的對話哲學及其教育思想研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
周淑如(2006):家庭暴力經驗、社會支持與國中生偏差行為之關聯性研究。國立成功大學育研究所碩士論文。
周煥臣(1987):中西師生關係之比較研究。嘉義師專學報,17,17-41。
周燦德(2008):師生關係理論及實徵研究分析。教育研究月刊,166,80-91。
吳芝儀譯(2008):敘事硏究:閱讀、分析與詮釋。嘉義市:濤石文化。Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: reading, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
吳芝儀(2005):敘事研究的方法論探討。載於齊力、林本炫(主編),質性研究方法與資料分析(頁145-188)。嘉義:南華大學教育社會學研究所。
吳芝儀、李奉儒譯(1995):質的評鑑與研究。台北:桂冠。Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, Calif. : Sage Publications.
吳靖國(2005):從海德格Einspringen與Vorausspringen的區別談師生關係。師大學報:教育類,50(2),33-54。
吳靖國(2006):生命教育:視域交融的自覺與實踐。台北:五南。
吳慧玲(2006):花婆婆-一位新手教師陪伴孩子的行動故事。國立新竹教育大學教育學系碩士班碩士論文。
吳臻幸(2010):「張力時刻」-課程敘事探究的另一扇窗。載於莊明貞(主編),敘事探究:課程與教學的應用(頁75-95)。台北市:心理。
易之新譯(2005):關係花園。台北市:心靈工坊文化。Mckeen, J., & Wong, B. (1996). The relationship garden. Gabriola Island, BC: PD Publishing.
孟祥森譯(1993):愛的藝術。台北市:志文。Fromm, E. (1956) . The art of loving. New York: Harper.
姚季沁(2009):國小班級經營中教師權威展現之研究。網路社會學通訊期刊,82。取自http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/82/82-14.htm
姚美華、胡幼慧(2008):一些質性方法上的思考:信度與效度?如何抽樣?如何收集資料、登錄與分析?載於胡幼慧(主編),質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(頁117-132)。台北:巨流圖書。
張君玫譯(1999):解釋性互動論。台北市:弘智文化。Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park, Calif. : Sage Publications.
張淑美譯(2007):生命教育-推動學校的靈性課程。台北市:學富文化。Miller, J. P. (2000). Education and the soul: toward a spiritual curriculum. Toronto, Ontario: OISE Press.
高淑清(2008):質性研究的18堂課-揚帆在訪之旅。高雄市:麗文文化。
許瑞蘭(2001):國中生依附關係、人際問題解決態度與學校生活適應之相關研究。屏東師範學院教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
陳育含譯(2010)。訪談研究法。新北市:韋伯文化。Kvale, S. (2007). Doing inverviews. London, UK: SAGE Publications.
陳維剛譯(1991):我與你。台北市:桂冠。Buber, M. (1958). I and thou, London, UK: Continuum.
陳奎憙、王淑俐、單文經、黃德祥(1999):師生關係與班級經營。台北市:三民。
陳櫻梅(2009):彰化縣國中導師領導型態與班級氣氛相關之研究。國立中正大學教學專業發展數位學習碩士在職專班碩士論文。
黃武雄(2003):學校在窗外。新北市新店市:左岸文化。
黃建興(2009):奢華的幸福—來自陪伴一個特別的小孩。人本教育札記,243,9-14。
黃堅厚(1999):人格心理學。台北市:心理。
黃雅琪(2010):桃園縣國中教師人格特質、社會支持與幸福感之相關研究。銘傳大學教育研究所碩士在職專班碩士論文。
楊中芳(2001):人際關係與人際情感的構念化。本土心理學研究,12,105-179。
楊智翔(2009):國小教師人格特質、幸福感與師生關係之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士論文。
楊添圍、周仁宇譯(1999)。人我之間:客體關係理論實務。台北市:心理。Hamilton, N. G. (1990). Self and others: object relations theory in practice. Northvale, N. J. : Jason Aronson.
楊誌卿、簡淑惠(1988):師生關係的陷阱。諮商與輔導,33,49。
賈紅鶯(1996):師生衝突的成因與輔導。諮商與輔導,123,12-20。
詹弼如(2009):師生關係品質之探討-師與生依戀傾向的影響。國立臺北教育大學心理與諮商學系碩士班碩士論文。
鄒美芳(2004):中學生師生衝突經驗之敘說研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
熊英君(2006):國中生之內外控、社會支持、情緒智力與學業成就之相關研究-以板橋市國中為例。銘傳大學教育研究所碩士在職專班碩士論文。
鄭居安(1995):成人依附量表之編制。高雄醫學大學行為科學研究所碩士論文。
劉宗幸(1998):社會支持、自我效能對兒童知覺雙親衝突影響兒童生活適應歷程之調節效果研究。國立政治大學心理學系碩士論文。
劉婉菁(2007):原住民與非原住民國中生社會支持與身體活動之研究。國立臺灣體育大學體育研究所碩士論文。
謝珮玲、楊大和譯(1998)。客體關係理論與心理劇。台北市:張老師。Holmes, P. (1992). The inner world outside: object relations theory and psychodrama. NY: Routledge.
蕭紫菡(2004a):陪伴我們的寶貝-陪伴,何其重要!。人本教育札記,182,50-53。
蕭紫菡(2004b):陪伴我們的寶貝-陪伴,需要品質!。人本教育札記,182,54-57。
嚴長壽(2011):教育應該不一樣。台北市:天下文化。
蘇麗純(2009):師生衝突對師生關係的影響-以臺北縣立高中教師為例。國立台北大學犯罪學研究所碩士論文。
英文部分
Agneessens, F., Waege, H., & Lievens, J. (2006). Diversity in social support by role relations: A typology. Social Networks, 28(4), 427-441.
Blasi, A., & Milton, K. (1991). The development of the sense of self in adolescence. Journal of Personality, 59(2), 217-241.
Buber, M. (2002). Between man and man. London & New York: Routledge.
Buhrmester, D., & Furman, W. (1987). The Development of Companionship and Intimacy. Child Development, 58, 1101-1113.
Goldstein, L. S. (1997). Teaching with love: A feminist approach to early childhood education. New York: Peter Lang.
Gottlieb, B. H. (1983). Social support strategies: Guidelines for mental health practice. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Guilherme, A., & Morgan, W. J. (2009). Martin Buber’s philosophy of education and its implications for adult non-formal education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 28(5), 565–581.
Kurita, J. A., & Janzen, H. L. (1996). The Role of Social Support in Mediating School Transition Stress. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED407636)
Larson, R., & Richards, M. H. (1991). Daily Companionship in Late Childhood and Early Adolescence: Changing Developmental Contexts. Child Development, 62, 284-300.
Lynch, M., & Cicchett, D. (1997). Children's Relationships with Adults and Peers: An Examination of Elementary and Junior High School Students. Journal of School Psychology, 35(1), 81-99.7
Metcalfe, A., & Game1, A. (2008). Potential space and love. Emotion, Space and Society, 1, 18–21.
Murray, C., Murray, K. M., & Waas, G. A. (2008). Child and teacher reports of teacher–student relationships:Concordance of perspectives and associations with school adjustment in urban kindergarten classrooms. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29, 49–61.
Reid, M., Landesman, S., Treder, R., & Jaccard, J. (1989). "My Family and Friends": Six- to Twelve-Year-Old Children's Perceptions of Social Support. Child Development, 60, 896—910.
Sarason, I.G., Levine, H.M., Basham, R. B., & Sarason, B. R. (1983). Assessing social support: the social support questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 127–139.
Schmuck, R. A., & Schmuck, P. A. (2001). Group processes in the classroom. Boston : McGraw Hill.
Shim, S. H. (2008). A philosophical investigation of the role of teachers: A synthesis of Plato, Confucius, Buber, and Freire. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 515–535.
Sibii, R. (2010). Conceptualizing tezcher immediacy through the’companion’ metaphor. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(5), 531-542.
Steinberg, S., & Bar-On, D. (2002). An analysis of the group process in encounters between Jews and Palestinians using a typology for discourse classification. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26(2), 199-214.
Steptoe, A., Owen, N., Kunz-Ebrecht, S. R., & Brydon, L. (2004). Loneliness and neuroendocrine, cardiovascular, and inflammatory stress responses in middle-aged men and women. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 29(5), 593–611.
Teyber, E. (2006). Interpersonal porcess in therapy: an integrative model(5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Uitto, M., & Syrjälä, L. (2008). Body, Caring and Power in Teacher–Pupil Relationships: Encounters in former pupils’ memories. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(4), 355–371.