技職教師生涯素養量表之編製

卷期：65卷第4期
日期：2020年12月
頁碼：241-273
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.202012_65(4).0008

摘要：
本研究目的在發展技職教師生涯素養量表，期望提供教師一個生（職）涯服務表現的自我檢視工具。本研究參考生涯素養相關理論及測量文獻並輔以質性訪談，建立量表編製架構與題目編寫依據。在預試階段，以315位教師為對象，經項目分析與探索性因素分析，確立正式量表，共包含九個因素：「協助自我瞭解」、「指導科系出路」、「引導目標選擇」、「提供就業資訊」、「實施職能培育」、「進行親師溝通」、「連結資源運用」、「關心學生生涯」及「教師專業成長」，計有44題，量表以五點量表方式填答，分數愈高表示該向度的生涯素養表現愈佳。正式施測以北、中、南、東及離島四區進行分層叢集抽樣，以1,098位教師為對象，進行經驗證性因素分析，結果指出量表具有良好的模式適配，信度與效度良好。另外，量表與自我效能及教師認同兩個效標具有顯著正相關，代表三者關係密切。背景變項的分析顯示，技職教師的生涯素養表現，因學校屬性、學校區域、學校類型、年資及年齡的不同而有顯著差異。研究者歸納研究結論，並提出相關建議。

關鍵詞：生涯素養、技職教育、教師生涯素養量表

《詳全文》

1. 王如哲（2008）。評鑑大學績效的新指標─就業力。評鑑雙月刊，15，20-23。【Wang, R.-J. (2008). A new indicator for university evaluation — Employability. Evaluation Bimonthly, 15, 20-23.】
2. 王秀槐（2015）。從「以我為榮」到「證明自己」：華人文化脈絡下知覺不同父母期待之大學生的生涯因應組型初探研究。輔導與諮商學報，37（1），79-97。【Wang, H.-H. (2015). From “taking pride in me” to “proving my own worth”: An exploratory study of the impact of college students’ perceived parental expectations on their patterns of career choices. The Archive of Guidance and Counseling, 37(1), 79-97.】
3. 王秀槐、陳珍德（2019）。問世間「生涯」為何物？臺灣大學生生涯概念原型分析研究。教育科學研究期刊，64（2），39-68。doi:10.6209/JORIES.201906_64(2).0002【Wang, H.-H., & Chen, J.-D. (2019). What do you mean when you think of career? A prototype analysis of the conception of career among Taiwanese college students. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 64(2), 39-68. doi:10.6209/JORIES.201906_64(2).0002】
4. 田秀蘭（2015）。生涯諮商與輔導：理論與實務。臺北市：學富。【Tien, H.-L. (2015). Career guidance and counseling: Theories and practice. Taipei, Taiwan: Pro-Ed.】
5. 田秀蘭、郭乃文（2005）。成人生涯認知量表指導手冊。臺北市：心理。【Tien, H.-L., &Kao, N.-W. (2005). The guidebook of the Development and Validation of the Adult Career Cognitive Scale. Taipei, Taiwan: Psychological.】

Development of a Career Competencies Scale for Technological and Vocational Teachers

Vol.&No.：Vol. 65, No. 4
Date：December 2020
Pages：241-273
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.202012_65(4).0008

Abstract：
This study aimed to develop a Career Competencies Scale (CCS) for technological and vocational teachers to facilitate their career education and guidance. The pilot questionnaire was administered to a sample of 315 technological and vocational teachers from different schools who volunteered to participate in our study. Each statement was rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree,” and the higher the score, the greater the participant’s career competency performance. After an item analysis and exploratory factor analysis, a total of 44 items were retained and distributed into nine categories as follows: “improve students’ self-understanding,” “understand occupation outcomes by major,” “goal setting and decision making,” “provide job information,” “skill training,” “teacher-parent communication,” “make use of networking resources,” “pay attention to students’ career planning,” and “teacher’s professional growth.” In the formal-test stage, 1,098 technological and vocational teachers were recruited to determine the scale’s reliability and validity. The results of confirmatory factor analysis indicated the construct validity of the CCS. This study also found that all factors of the CCS were significantly and positively correlated with two criteria, namely “career self-efficacy” and “teacher identity,” revealing favorable criterion-related validity. In the demographic background analysis, significant differences were revealed in schools’ attributes, locations, and types as well as in vocational teachers’ teaching fields, length of service, and age. On the basis of these results, conclusions and suggestions for future research and practical applications were provided.

Keywords：career competency, technological and vocational education, Career Competencies Scale for teachers