| 摘要: | 本研究旨在探討家庭教育中心志工「生命態度」與「幸福感」之現況，並瞭解不同「個人背景因素」之家庭教育中心志工，其「生命態度」與「幸福感」的差異情形；另探討家庭教育中心志工「生命態度」與「幸福感」之相關性。更進一步瞭解不同「個人背景因素」及「生命態度」對家庭教育中心志工「幸福感」的解釋力。
本研究係採「調查法」進行，以臺灣北(基隆市、苗栗縣)、中(臺中市、彰化縣、南投縣)、南(雲林縣、嘉義縣、屏東縣)、東(宜蘭縣、花蓮縣)、離島(澎湖縣、金門縣)各區域共十二個縣市之家庭教育中心志工為調查對象，進行正式問卷施測。共發出問卷 410 份，經回收問卷349份，回收率85.12％，剔除無效問卷4份，實際回收有效問卷345份，有效回收率為84.15％。所使用研究工具包括：「個人基本資料表」、「生命態度量表」及「幸福感量表」，所得之資料以統計應用軟體SPSS for Windows 22.0進行描述性統計、單一樣本t檢定、獨立樣本t檢定、單因子變數分析、雪費事後比較法、皮爾森積差相關及多元迴歸分析等統計方法加以分析。本研究結果如下：
一、家庭教育中心志工「生命態度」與「幸福感」現況
(一) 家庭教育中心志工之「生命態度」為正向之狀況。其中，以「生命經驗」層面之生命態度為最正向，「死亡」層面之生命態度為最負向。
(二) 家庭教育中心志工之「幸福感」為高程度之狀況。其中，以「正向情緒」層面之幸福感為最高，而以「個人成就」層面幸福感為最低。
二、家庭教育中心志工「個人背景因素」對「生命態度」之差異情形
(一)不同「志工種類」之受試者在「生命態度」上有顯著差異。
(二)不同「志工年資」之受試者在「生命態度」上有顯著差異。
(三)不同「志工管理制度滿意度」之受試者在「生命態度」上有顯著差異，且二者間呈顯著低程度正相關。
(四)不同「志工福利制度滿意度」之受試者在「生命態度」上有顯著差異，且二者間呈顯著低程度正相關。
(五)不同「志工在職訓練滿意度」之受試者在「生命態度」上有顯著差異，且二者間呈顯著低程度正相關。
三、家庭教育中心志工「個人背景因素」對「幸福感」之差異情形
（一）不同「志工管理制度滿意度」之受試者在「幸福感」上有顯著差異，且二者間呈顯著低程度正相關。
（二）不同「志工福利制度滿意度」之受試者在「幸福感」上有顯著差異，且二者間呈顯著低程度正相關。
（三）不同「志工在職訓練滿意度」之受試者在「幸福感」上有顯著差異，且二者間呈顯著低程度正相關，且與「生活滿意」層面呈現顯著中程度正相關。
四、家庭教育中心志工之「生命態度」與「幸福感」之相關性
受試者之「生命態度」與「幸福感」呈現顯著非常強烈正相關，亦即受試者之「生命態度」越正向，其「幸福感」也就越高。
五、家庭教育中心志工之「個人背景因素」、「生命態度」對「幸福感」之解釋力
受試者之「重大生活經驗-」、「擔任職務」、「志工在職訓練滿意度」與整體「生命態度」等四項因素，在整體「幸福感」上達顯著水準，能解釋受試者之整體「幸福感」63％ 之變異量。亦即：家庭教育中心志工為「無重大疾病經驗者」、「擔任職務-同時擔任諮詢輔導志工與幹部者、或同時擔任諮詢輔導志工與志工督導者」與「整體生命態度較正向者」，其整體「幸福感」就越高。依據本研究之主要發現與結論，提供家庭教育中心志工、家庭教育中心、政府相關單位及一般民眾參考之建議如下：
一、宜持續保持正向積極之生命態度，並積極維持健康身心體況，以利幸福感之提升；此外，宜以正向態度看待生命中的各項經驗，並覺察「死亡」為生命帶來的正向意義；再者，宜謹慎評估自身情況，在個人心力負荷許可下，增加每週服務時數，或同時擔任諮詢輔導志工與兼任幹部（或兼任志工督導），並持續參與志工服務，積極參與跨領域志工服務，累積志工服務之經驗與年資，以利個人正向生命態度之建立。
二、宜檢視現有志工管理制度是否符合現況需求，俾使家庭教育中心志工提升對管理制度的滿意度，以利其生命態度更正向、幸福感更高；此外，宜制定符合志工需求之福利制度，以提升家庭教育中心志工對「志工福利制度滿意度」，使其「生命態度」更正向、「幸福感」更高；再者，宜提供符合志工需求之在職訓練，以提升家庭教育中心志工對「志工在職訓滿意度」，進而使「生命態度」更正向、「幸福感」更高；各縣市家庭教育中心宜同步執行「志工每年服務時數至少150小時的新規定」。
三、建議政府相關部門宜提供足夠的經費與資源予家庭教育中心，並協助其制定符合需求之「志工管理制度」、「志工福利制度」與「志工在職訓練」，以提升志工對此之滿意度，進而使志工之「生命態度」更正向、「幸福感」更高。
四、建議一般民眾投入家庭教育中心志工之行列，不僅有助於家庭與社會的安定，更可提升自身之「生命態度」與「幸福感」。
The purpose of this study is to explore family education center volunteers’ current situation of “attitude toward life” and “well-being” and probe into difference of “attitude toward life” and “well-being” of family education center volunteers with different “personal background factors”; in addition, it explores correlation between family education center volunteers’ “attitude toward life” and “well-being” and obtains explanatory power of different “personal background factors” and “attitude toward life” on family education center volunteers’ “well-being”.
This study adopted “survey research” and treated family education center volunteers of 12 counties and cities in northern Taiwan (Keelung City, Miaoli County), central Taiwan (Taichung City, Changhua County, Nantou County), southern Taiwan (Yunlin County, Chiayi County, Pingtung County), eastern Taiwan (Yilan County, Hualien County) and outlying islands (Penghu County, Kinmen County) as subjects to conduct formal questionnaire survey. 410 questionnaires were distributed and 349 were retrieved. Return rate was 85.12%. After deleting 4 invalid questionnaires, the researcher obtained 345 valid ones. Valid return rate was 84.15%. Research tools employed were the following: “personal background information”, “attitude toward life scale” and “well-being scale”. As to data acquired, the researcher conducted descriptive statistics by SPSS for Windows 22.0 and they were analyzed by statistical methods such as one-sample t test, independent sample t test, ANOVA, Scheffe’s method, Pearson product-moment correlation and multiple regression analysis. Findings of this study are as follows:
1. Family education center volunteers’ current situation of “attitude toward life” and “well-being”
(1) “Attitude toward life” is at positive situation for family education center volunteers. Among others, the aspect of “life experience” is the most positive, while the aspect of “death” is the most negative.
(2) “Well-being” is at high level for family education center volunteers. Among others, the aspect of “positive emotion” is the highest, while the aspect of “personal achievement” is the lowest.
2. Difference of family education center volunteers’ “personal background factors” on “attitude toward life”
(1) Subjects of different “types of volunteer” show significant difference on “attitude toward life”.
(2) Subjects of different “working years as volunteer” show significant difference on “attitude toward life”.
(3) Subjects of different “satisfaction with volunteer management system” show significant difference on “attitude toward life”; besides, there is significantly low degree of positive correlation.
(4) Subjects of different “satisfaction with volunteer welfare system” show significant difference on “attitude toward life”. Besides, there is significantly low degree of positive correlation.
(5) Subjects of different “satisfaction with volunteer’s on-the-job training” show significant difference on “attitude toward life”. Besides, there is significantly low degree of positive correlation.
3. Difference of family education center volunteers’ “personal background factors” on “well-being”
(1) Subjects with different “satisfaction with volunteer management system” show significant difference on “well-being”. Besides, there is significantly low degree of positive correlation.
(2) Subjects with different “satisfaction with volunteer welfare system” show significant difference on “well-being”. Besides, there is significantly low degree of positive correlation.
(3) Subjects of different “satisfaction with volunteer’s on-the-job training” show significant difference on “well-being”. Besides, there is significantly low degree of positive correlation. It reveals significantly medium degree of positive correlation with “life satisfaction”.
4. Correlation between family education center volunteers’ “attitude toward life” and “well-being”
Subjects’ “attitude toward life” and “well-being” reveal significant and extremely powerful positive correlation. In other words, when subjects’ “attitude toward life” is more positive, their “well-being” will be more significant.
5. Explanatory power of family education center volunteers’ “personal background factors” and “attitude toward life” on “well-being”
Subjects’ “significant life experience”, “posts”, “satisfaction with volunteer’s on-the-job training” and overall “attitude toward life” are significant on “well-being”. It can explain the subjects’ 63% variance of total “well-being”. In other words, when family education center volunteers are those “without experience of serious illness”, “with post as volunteer of counseling and cadre member or as volunteer of counseling and volunteer supervisor” and “with more positive overall attitude toward life”, their overall “well-being” will be higher. Based on main findings and conclusion of this study, this study proposes the suggestions for family education center volunteers, family education centers, governmental sectors and the public as follows:
1. They should continuously maintain positive and active attitude toward life as well as healthy mental and physical state to reinforce well-being; in addition, they should treat all experiences in life by positive attitude and recognize the positive meaning of “death” for life; in addition, they should cautiously evaluate personal situation. In the condition of individual load, they increase weekly hours of service or undertake the post of both volunteer of counseling and cadre member (or volunteer supervisor) and continuously participate in volunteer service, actively join in cross-field service and accumulate experience and working year of volunteer service in order to construct individuals’ positive life attitude.
2. It should examine if current volunteer management system matches current situation in order to increase family education center volunteers’ satisfaction with management system to lead to their more positive attitude toward life and more significant well-being; in addition, it should construct welfare system matching volunteers’ needs in order to reinforce family education center volunteers’ “satisfaction with volunteer welfare system” and result in more positive “attitude toward life” and more significant “well-being”; in addition, it should provide on-the-job training matching volunteers’ needs in order to increase family education center volunteers’ “satisfaction with volunteer’s on-the-job training” and lead to more positive “attitude toward life” and more significant “well-being”; family education centers of the counties and cities should simultaneously practice “new regulation that volunteers’ annual service hours should be at least 150 hours”.
3. This study suggests that governmental sectors should provide sufficient funds and resources for family education centers and assist them to establish “volunteer management system”, “volunteer welfare system” and “volunteer on-the-job training” matching the needs in order to increase volunteer’s satisfaction and result in more positive “attitude toward life” and more significant “well-being”.
4. This study suggests the public to participate in family education center volunteers. It not only enhances stability of family and society, but also strengthens personal “attitude toward life” and “well-being”. |
