| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立彰化師範大學 === 輔導與諮商學系所 === 96 === The purpose of the study was to construct “Dropout-at-risk Students Rating Scales(DSRS)”for counselors and practitioners to use, and allow practitioners to assess and take rough evaluation for individual student, and then frame adaptable guidance strategy and treatment model. In addition, understanding the difference of risk factors and protective factors between general students, dropout-at-risk students, unstable reentry students and stable reentry students is also the subject of this research.
The present study acquired 466 valid data of dropout-at-risk on constructing DSRS, and 466 valid data of general students, 466 valid data of dropout-at-risk students, 161 valid data of unstable reentry students and 161 valid data of stable reentry students on survey research. The data were analyzed with a number of descriptive statistic methods, factor analysis, multivariate statistical analysis, one-way ANOVA, and Logistic regression.
The results are as follows.
1. The final version of the DSRS contains 2 instrument and each instrument have four subscales which contain“family”subscale,“individual”subscale, “school”subscale, and “society”subscale.
2. Reliability studies of the eight subscales of the DSRS have yield Cronbach α coefficients ranging from .74 to .96. The test-retest coefficients over 2-week period ranging from .83 to .98.
3. The content validity, construct validity and discriminant validity have been found to be satisfactory.
4. The norm of the DSRS have percentile rank norms, whose criterion can product the meaning application.
5. The score of family、individual、school and society subscale of the risk factors instrument in dropout-at-risk students, unstable reentry students and stable reentry students are significantly higher than general students.
6. The score of family、individual and school subscale of the protective factors instrument in general students are significantly higher than dropout-at-risk students, unstable reentry students and stable reentry students. The score of society subscale of the protective factors instrument in general students and stable reentry students are significantly higher than dropout-at-risk students.
Based on the findings, the implication and suggestion are offered reference regarding counselor education, practitioners and future research.
|
|---|
