高中生與大學生在工程設計流程與創造力表現差異之研究

十二年國民基本教育的「科技領域」主要希望培養學生的科技素養，透過運用工具、材料來動手實作，促進學生的批判思考、問題解決以及運算思維等思考能力，這樣的課程內容具有銜接高等工程教育的功能。除此之外，新課綱也帶入了3D列印等新興科技，「工程設計」也是其中的重點之一。透過3D列印技術，學生能夠快速建模，加速設計流程，使設計流程更具流暢性，也能促進學生的產品創意表現。　　十二年國教實施後，工程相關的課程預期將能提升高中生的工程素養與能力，因此高等教育也須因應調整。為了解工程教育培育後的高中生與現今大學生的能力差距，本研究提出專題導向之教學課程，以能夠通過障礙、達成目標任務、具備創新造形的機械蟲設計活動，發展課程後進行教學活動。研究對象為某高中二年級學生33人與某大學工程設計背景之大學生33人，於教學活動結束後透過創意產品分析矩陣、原案分析來比較高中生與工程設計背景之大學生參與課程後的表現，以了解學生能力上的差異與需求，提供高等教育工程相關課程和活動發展與教學之參考。　　本研究之研究結果發現：(1)工程設計背景之大學生的產品創意表現優於高中生；(2)高中生與工程設計背景之大學生在工程設計活動中項目次數與百分比上沒有顯著差異；(3)工程設計背景之大學生在工程設計行為原案分析結果雖優於高中生，但還是存在個體差異。在工程相關的課程中，教師往往只透過學生設計、製作的產品來評量學生的學習表現。鑒於上述研究結果，在高等教育的工程課程中，教師應採用更多元的評量方式，才有助於學生的認知發展。

關鍵字

3D列印；工程設計流程；工程教育；產品創意

並列摘要

The Domain-specific curriculum of Technology in Taiwanese Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education aims to develop students’ core competencies of technology. By using technological tools, materials, and doing practical operation, it can boost students’ ability of critical thinking and problem-solving. Such a curriculum content includes the function of connecting high level engineering education. Moreover, the new curriculum guidelines bring emerging technology, such as 3D printing, and the engineering design is one of the point as well. Via the techniques of the 3D printing, students can build models, accelerate the design process, to make the whole progress more fluent, and promote students’ creative expression. After the practice of Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education, curriculums concerned with engineering are expected to promote students’ engineering competency and skills, so the higher education needs to adjust as a response. To understand the difference of the ability between senior high school students and current college students who are trained with engineering education, the study has carried out a project oriented teaching curriculum, which is conducting a teaching experiment after developing sessions, by solving obstacles, achieving goals of the tasks, and providing an activity of designing creative models of the Arduino based hexapod robot. The experimental objects are 33 second grade students in a senior high school and 33 college students with engineering speciality. The testing results are done with researching tools, such as the creative product analysis matrix, and protocol analysis. It can help us understand the difference and demand of the students’ ability to provide a reference of developing activities and learning program which are related to the engineering curriculums in higher education. This study found that: (1) students with engineering design background have better performance of product creativity than high school students; (2) there is no significant difference in the number and percentage of projects in engineering design activities between high school students and college students with engineering design background; (3) although the analysis results of engineering design behaviors of college students with engineering background are superior to high school students, there are still individual differences. In engineering-related courses, teachers usually evaluate students' learning performance only through products designed and produced by students. In view of the above results, in the engineering courses of higher education, teachers should adopt more diverse evaluation methods to help students' cognitive development.