中小學教師之校園霸凌行為辨識、嚴重性與介入評估之研究

Identification, Evaluation, and Intervention of Bullying Behaviors in Secondary and Elementary School Teachers

教師對校園霸凌的正確辨識是防治、評估、介入及處置的關鍵，然目前研究仍欠缺對教師霸凌辨識，以及影響辨識、嚴重性及介入評估之相關因素的探討。基於此，本研究主要目的在探討：（1）教師霸凌辨識的現況及影響辨識之相關因素（含行為及情境特徵、教師背景等）；（2）教師對霸凌之嚴重性及介入之評估，以及影響評估之相關因素（含霸凌辨識、行為及情境特徵、教師背景等）；（3）教師對霸凌處置的看法（含處置方式及權責、遭遇困難、霸凌方案設計等）。霸凌∕非霸凌之辨識及其與行為∕情境之關係、教師背景與霸凌∕非霸凌辨識之關係、霸凌∕非霸凌之嚴重性及介入可能性的評估、教師背景與霸凌∕非霸凌之嚴重性及介入可能性之關係、教師對校園霸凌之處置。本研究樣本為18所學校的175位中小學教師（除5位接受訪談外，其餘皆填答問卷），係以立意取樣方式，考量學校層級、城鄉及學校性質後抽取得到。研究以量化為主，佐以訪談。研究結果發現：（1）教師無法分辨霸凌與非霸凌行為；教師霸凌辨識與行為及情境之特徵、受害者特質、霸凌與受害者關係（是否具「類朋友」關係）等有關；教師背景變項中，除霸凌訓練（受過訓練者對霸凌辨識佳，但對非霸凌辨識差）及年資∕年齡外，皆與霸凌辨識無關；（2）不分情境，教師對介入可能性的評估皆高過對嚴重性的評估，兩者具中度偏高相關；但當教師錯誤辨識情境時，其會誤判霸凌較不嚴重，且較不會介入；教師之性別、身份（教師∕行政人員）、層級、年資與年齡、霸凌訓練等與問題嚴重性及介入可能性之評估有關；（3）針對霸凌處置，教師多以一次介入的方式處理；曾遭遇權責不清、時間太短、難以界定霸凌行為等困難；在規劃方案時，教師的考量雖多元，但仍普遍欠缺系統化的思考與設計。

Despite the recent surge of attention directed at bullying behaviors and the fact that accurate identification of bullying behaviors is the key to bullying prevention and intervention, little research has been done on teachers’ identification of bullying behaviors and its relationship to follow-up evaluation and intervention. The aims of this study were: (1) to investigate teachers’ identification of bully and non-bullying behaviors and its related factors (i.e., behavior and situation characteristics, and teachers’ backgrounds); (2) to investigate teachers’ evaluation on severity and likelihood of intervention, and its related factors (i.e., bullying identification, behavior and situation characteristics, and teachers’ backgrounds); and (3) to explore teachers’ perceptions of bullying intervention. The sample consisted of 175 elementary and secondary teachers selected from 18 schools using a purposive sampling method. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used. The “Bullying Situations Identification Instrument” (Hazler, Miller, Carney, & Green, 2001) was employed to collect quantitative data, and a semi-structure interview was conducted to gather qualitative data. The results indicated that (1) teachers had difficulties in distinguishing bullying behaviors from non-bullying behaviors; (2) the characteristics of a given behavior and a given situation, the traits of victim, teachers’ seniority/age, teachers’ undergoing bullying prevention training, and the relationship between bully and victim were all correlated with the teachers’ identification of bullying and non-bullying behaviors; (3) teachers’ evaluation of the severity of bullying and non-bullying behaviors were lower than their evaluation of the likelihood of intervention; (4) the teacher’s gender, status (teachers vs. administrators), school level (elementary vs. secondary), seniority/age, and teachers’ undergoing bullying prevention training were all correlated with the teacher’s evaluation on severity and likelihood of intervention; (5) when intervening in bullying situations, teachers usually dealt with the problems on a one-shot basis and were unable to design an intervention program or curriculum from a more comprehensive and holistic perspective.