教育體系與社會行政體系對學校社會工作者角色期待之探討

Abstract

臺灣的學校社會工作自1977年發展以來，其制度與角色一直受到關注，尤其是角色模糊和角色衝突的現象時爾發生。就角色理論來看，角色模糊與衝突與角色期待息息相關。據此，本研究先探討學校社工與教育體系、社政體系專業人員互動的經驗；進一步，探討學校社工本身及教育體系與社政體系專業人員對於學校社會工作者的角色期待；並藉此提供學校社會工作與教育體系、社政體系專業人員專業合作之建議。 本研究採取質性研究之深度訪談法作為資料蒐集方法，以學校社會工作服務之臺北市、臺北縣及新竹市作為選樣範圍，選取8名學校社工、6名社政體系社工、5名輔導室行政主管、5名導師、3名學校社工督導，共27名受訪者。 研究發現主要分為三部分：第一部分為學校社工與學校、社政體系社工互動的面貌內涵。首先，接觸前期主要面臨的議題是學校與社政體系社工對於學校社工的認知情形及認識學校社工的管道；接著，共事過程中彼此會依著個案的類型與跟個案的關係作為分工準則；在正式工作關係上時有合作時有競爭，在非正式關係上，駐校型態學校社工與學校較巡迴型態更為緊密；離開互動現場後學校與社政體系社工對於學校社工專業有所肯定，但也提出限制之處。第二部分則以林萬億、王靜惠(2007)修改自Frey &Dupper(2005)所提出的「學校社會工作視角」就教育體系與社政體系對學校社會工作者的角色期待作一討論，此視角主要以工作標的取向作為橫軸，以工作介入方式作為縱軸，形成四個象限的座標圖，除了此四象限外，另佐以學校社工對於學校社會工作專業與實務機構的責信角色等六個角色面向比較當中的異同性。第三部分則是擴大至鉅視面，進一步探討國內教育、學校社會工作及社政體系文化對於角色期待的形塑。 依據研究發現，本研究從角色賦予者和角色接收者兩面向討論學校社會工作者角色期待之異同。在角色賦予者的部分，第一，相較於學校與社政體系社工期待學校社工提供個案即時性的服務，學校社會工作的主管機關—教育局—則希望學校社工經過整體評估後再予服務。 第二，因學校社工與教師養成訓練背景不同，使得教師在資源連結條件較有限，也因此對學校社工在提供校內人員資源連結的知能輔導、保護性個案諮詢兩方面，校內的教師、行政人員與教育局三方賦予的角色期待趨於一致。 第三，在協調者的角色上，學校、社政體系社工及教育局皆期待學校社工可以扮演教育與社政體系之間的協調者，然而實質上又希望學校社工站在各自的立場代為溝通。使得這看似一致的角色期待，實有矛盾。 第四，在資源整合角色上，學校與社政體系給予學校社工的期待有所衝突，學校希望學校社工多引進社政資源，但社政社工又希望學校社工可適時把關，再度凸顯了學校社工在角色中的困境。 第五，在倡導者的角色上，教育局與社政體系社工皆期待學校社工可擔任倡導者，但是學校社工主要的工作場域—學校—卻沒有賦予這樣的期待，形成學校社工倡導者角色的執行有所限制。 第六，對實務機構專業責任的角色上，學校期待學校社工可以學校為重，教育局則期待可以學校社會工作專業為重。然而一個是學校社工工作的主要場域，另一為主管機關，可見學校社工的為難處。尤其是駐校型態中的學校社工，更容易直接接收到學校給予的角色期待。 在角色接收者部分，第一，學校社工與社政體系、教育局等角色賦予者同樣期待可以扮演倡導者角色；但因客觀條件的限制，使臺灣學校社會工作中的倡導概念較趨於保守。第二，學校社工專業責任的角色上，學校社工與學校、教育局皆期待學校社工得以展現專業能力，但實務上行政主管又不免干涉學校社工工作內容，因而取得行政主管的信任成為學校社工隱性的工作考量。第三，對實務機構專業責任角色上，學校社工欲在正式的工作關係上與學校作出區隔，但實務上又得顧及彼此的非正式關係，使非學校社會工作之業務常優先於本身的專業工作。 根據上述的分析與發現，本研究建議如下： 一、對駐校型態的學校社工：(一)確立學校社工的專業職掌；(二)釐清校內行政業務參與程度；(三)技巧性扮演倡導者。 二、對巡迴型態的學校社工：(一)促進學校社工與學校之間的瞭解；(二) 充分扮演倡導者。 三、對所有的學校社工：(一)確立與家暴中心社工於保護性個案的分工；(二)釐清與社政體系社工高風險個案的分工；(三) 拿捏協調者的角色；(四) 展現專業工作態度。 四、對社政體系社工：(一) 於緊急安置情況下-事前告知事後提醒學校；(二) 適度地向學校說明安置個案的情形。 五、對跨專業合作的建議：推行跨專業體系的訓練活動。

On the Role Expectation of School Social Worker from the Education and Social Administration Systems in Taiwan Abstract School social work in Taiwan has been developed since 1977, its system and role performance have been concerned continuously, especially in their role confusion and role conflict. Therefore the research is to explore the role expectations of school social worker which from their partners and themselves. First of all, this research examines the interaction experiences among the school social workers, educational workers, social workers in social administration; secondly, discusses the roles of school social workers from the stands of education system and social administration system; finally, proposes suggestions to the school social workers for the cooperation with education system and social administration system. This research adopted depth interview as data-collecting method, totally twenty-seven interviewees have been interviewed, including eight school social workers, six social workers in social administration system, five administrators of counseling department, five teachers, and three supervisors of school social worker. The research finding discusses as follows: First, the research examines the interactions among school social workers, educational workers and social workers in social administration based on what the perceptions of those various professionals, and how they knew school social work; they would divide professional jobs into different parts depend on types of cases and relationship with clients; besides, “school-based social workers” have more intense informal relationship with school administration than “circuit-based school social workers”; most of them appreciate school social workers’ professional capacities with few exceptions. Second, researcher took the perspective of ” school social work clinical quadrant“ to analyze the similarities and differences among the role expectations of school social worker from the education and social administration systems, including six dimensions. Third, the research explores how the education and social administration systems shape the role expectation in macro-perspective. Based on the research findings, the research concludes two issues: the role expectations from role senders and the role expectations of focal person. Talking about the role expectations of role senders, firstly, the Department of Education expects school social workers provide services on the base of assessments; otherwise, school and social administration system don’t. Secondly, because of the differences of school social workers and teaching professional training, educational workers and the Department of Education expects school social workers provide resources-coordinating skills and consult with domestic violence and sexual assault cases. Thirdly, about role of coordinator, all of the role senders expect school social workers stand by their sides, so school social workers would face a dilemma situation. Fourthly, about role of advocate, the Department of Education and social administration system expect school social workers advocate for students, but school staff don’t. It makes school social workers hard to develop the role of advocate completely. Fifthly, about the accountability for agency, school and the Department of Education both expect school social workers consider them first, especially for “school-based social workers”. Regarding to school social workers, firstly, because school doesn’t expect school social workers to be an advocate, that barricades the playing of advocate in Taiwan. Secondly, about the accountability for school social work, school social workers, the Department of Education and the school expect school social workers develop professional roles, but in fact, administrative manager in school would affect the work of school social workers. Hence, school social workers have to consider how to strengthen the trust from administrative manager. Thirdly, about the accountability for agency, in order to maintain the informal relationship with school staff, it becomes hard for school social workers to reject school administrative affairs. According to above, this research proposes several suggestions: 1. For “school-based social workers”: (1) to establishes the school social worker's professional duties; (2) to coordinate the division of labor of school administrative works; (3) to act the advocate skillfully. 2. For “circuit-based school social workers”: (1) to promote understanding between the school social worker and the school; (2) to act an advocate fully. 3. For all school social workers: (1) to establish the cooperation relationship with social workers of domestic violence and sexual assault prevention center; (2) to coordinate the responsibility of cases at risk; (3) to act role of coordinator appropriately; (4) to display the professional values. 4. For social workers in social administration system: (1) to inform and remind the school in the emergency placement situation; (2) to appropriately explain the placement cases situation to school. 5. For cooperative partners among professional team : to promote cross-professionals trainings.

Key words: school social work, role expectation, role confusion, role conflict.