透過您的圖書館登入
IP:44.192.20.240
  • Journals
  • OpenAccess

以「設計導向學習」模式初探智齡設計課程

Using "Design-Based Learning" as Preliminary Foundation of Smart Aging Design Course

Abstracts


「以學習者為中心的學習」在受重視後,教學現場分別推行「問題導向學習」與「專案導向學習」的教學模式,藉此將學生的學習連結真實世界問題及培養解決問題能力。為了讓自主學習更為完整,基於設計思考的「設計導向學習」隨之興起。本研究以設計導向方式設計「智齡設計」一跨領域總整課程為案例,課程以美國史丹佛大學d.School的ME310課程課綱為基礎,在臺灣的大學教學現場開課,招募跨校跨不同領域之大三以上學生參與,同時邀請對高齡議題有興趣之臺灣企業參與課程並提出產業議題。研究方法採用參與式行動研究,歷經派遣團隊至史丹佛大學學習ME310課程,以相同模式於臺灣的大學開課二學年,其中不斷地修正完成適合臺灣學生之課程內容安排,期間課程針對相對應步驟會接觸到的議題給予教授課程,讓知識的驗證更有其臨場感。結果顯示透過設計導向學習方式,學生能夠認同釐清問題前同理階段的價值,團隊溝通的成長對學生來說也印象深刻。本研究為以高等教育教學現場的創新實務經驗及發現,對於其他課程來說將增進設計導向學習實施的機會,研究成果所建立之課程能夠提供適當教學結構,並提醒執行上的挑戰,支持未來「設計導向學習」之課程設計與執行。

Parallel abstracts


Since Learner-Centered Learning (LCL) has been seen as important pedagogy, Problem- Based Learning (PBL) and Project-Based Learning (PBL) have been a phenomenon of modern higher education. To complete the LCL, Design Thinking-structured Design-Based Learning (DBL) has then been introduced. Using DBL as the main structure, this research has developed interdisciplinary capstone course-Smart Aging Design. Based on ME310 course of d.School at Stanford University, we developed Smart Aging Design course adapted with Taiwanese course design regulation. The course recruited junior and senior college students from different departments and universities. Companies were invited to participate in the course and provide practical issue they are interested in. The course was designed for one year, i.e. two semesters to build students non-linearly experience in design thinking stages such as empathy, define, ideate, prototype and test. After participating ME310 course, this research has used Participatory Action Research method to repeat plan, action, observe and reflect Smart Aging Design course design. As the results of DBL, students recognized the value of empathy after finishing the products, the products were convincing to the companies in their marketing prospective, experience of team communication were also impressive. This research experienced and explored the chance implementing DBL in the future. The results provided appropriate DBL teaching structure and call attention to possible challenges support for teachers. DBL builds up teamwork competency, and successful DBL also requires top-down real-life issues provided by real companies in conjunction with bottom-up teachers and student's passions.

References


陳毓凱、洪振方(2007)。兩種探究取向教學模式之分析與比較。科學教育月刊,305,4-19
經濟部人才快訊(2011)。史丹佛大學設計創新及跨領域人才培育方案:ME310。人才快訊電子報,查詢日期:2018年7月14日。檢自http://itriexpress.blogspot.tw/2011/10/me310.html
Apedoe, X. A., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: The heating/cooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454-465
Archer, L. B. (1979). Whatever became of design methodology? Design Studies, 1(1), 17-20
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 85-92

Cited by


陳迺葒(2021)。運用設計思考於「護理專題創新實作」課程之學習成效探討長庚科技學刊(35),101-116。https://doi.org/10.6192/CGUST.202112_(35).9

Read-around