| 摘要: | 本研究旨在探討保育人員感受工作壓力與因應策略之情況。主要研究目的為下列幾項：
一、了解托兒所保育人員工作壓力的現況。
二、了解托兒所保育人員因應策略的現況。
三、了解不同個人背景變項之保員人員在工作壓力上是否有差異。
四、了解不同個人背景變項之保員人員在因應策略上是否有差異。
五、了解保育人員之工作壓力與因應策略是否有相關。
六、發展保育人員因應工作壓力策略的預測模式。
本研究以新北市公私立托兒所之保育人員、助理保育人員及照顧托兒所之工作人員為母群體。以立意取樣方式取得739位新北市公私立托兒所之保育人員、助理保育人員及照顧托兒所之工作人員為研究對象，採用問卷調查方式，以研究者自編之「保育人員工作壓力與因應策略量表」為調查工具，以描述統計、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、皮爾遜積差相關分析和多元迴歸分析等方法進行統計分析，結果獲致下列結論：
一、保育人員在整體工作壓力的程度為中等程度，平均得分為3.01。以「工作負荷」層面的工作壓力感受程度最高，其他依序為「學生問題」層面、「專業知能」層面、「人際關係」層面。
二、保育人員在整體壓力因應策略使用頻率頗高，平均得分為3.88。以「理性思考」層面的因應策略程度最高，其他依序為「尋求支持」層面、「情緒調適」層面。
四、保育人員部份背景變項與因應策略有顯著差異：不同年齡「情緒調適」、「尋求支持」、教育程度「情緒調適」、任職年資「情緒調適」的保育人員，在壓力因應策略使用頻率頗高。
五、工作壓力與因應策略具有顯著負相關。
六、工作壓力對因應策略之預測力：
（一）理性思考「人際關係」層面，具有顯著預測力。
（二）尋求支持 「學生問題」、層面，具有顯著預測力。
（三）情緒調適「學生問題」、「專業知能」、層面，具有顯著預測力。
（四）「學生問題」、「專業知能」二個變項對「整體壓力因應策略」層面，具有顯著預測力。
This study is designed to search into the childcare workers’ work pressures and their coping strategies. The main study aims are described as follows.
1. To understand the childcare workers’ work pressures at present.
2. To understand the childcare workers’ coping strategies at present.
3. To understand if the childcare workers’ work pressures vary with different personal background variables.
4. To understand if the childcare workers’ coping strategies vary with different personal background variables.
5. To understand if the childcare workers’ work pressures are related to the coping strategies.
6. To develop the predicted model of the childcare workers’ coping strategies.
The population of the study consists of the childcare workers, the secondary childcare workers and the center care workers who work for the public and private childcare centers in New Taipei City. This study selects 739 of childcare workers, secondary childcare workers and the center care workers who work for the public and private childcare centers in New Taipei City by purposive sampling. It carries out a survey of questionnaire, uses the Scale of Work Pressures and Coping Strategies of Childcare Workers as the survey tool, and conducts the statistical analyses by the methods of descriptive statistics, T-test, one-way ANOVA (Analysis of Variance), and Pearson product-moment correlation. The findings are as follows.
1. To all the childcare workers, the overall work pressure is graded “medium” in level, getting a mark of 3.01 on average. In all aspects of the work pressures, the “work load” has the highest sensitivity in level, and is in turn followed by “students’ problems”, “professional intelligence and abilities” , and “interpersonal relationship”.
2. To all the childcare workers, the use frequency of coping strategies for work pressures is graded “high” in level, getting a mark of 3.88. In all aspects of the coping strategies, the “rational thinking” has the highest use frequency, and is in turn followed by “seeking for support” and “emotion regulation”.
3. There is a distinguishing variety between the childcare workers’ personal background variables and the work pressures:
Age－“student’s problems”
Marital status－“students’ problems”, “interpersonal relationship”, “professional intelligence and abilities”
Educational background－“interpersonal relationship”, “professional intelligence and abilities”. The childcare workers who present such a variety sense greater work pressures in level.
4. There is a distinguishing variety between the childcare workers’ personal background variables and the coping strategies:
Age－“emotion regulation”, “seeking for support”
Educational background－“emotion regulation”
Seniority－“emotion regulation”
The childcare workers who present such a variety use the coping strategies with high frequency.
5. There is a significant negative correlation between the work pressures and the coping strategies.
6. The predictability of work pressures to the coping strategies:
(1) The aspect of “rational thinking－interpersonal relationship” indicates significant predictability.
(2) The aspect of “seeking for support－students’ problems” indicates significant predictability.
(3) The aspect of “emotion regulation－students’ problems, professional intelligence and abilities” indicates significant predictability.
(4) The aspect of “students’ problems, professional intelligence and abilities－overall coping strategies” indicates significant predictability |
