STEM導向特定工程設計課程發展之研究

A study of development in STEM-based specified-engineering-design curriculum

趙語涵(Chao Yu-Han)

指導教授 ： 簡佑宏

國立臺灣師範大學/科技與工程學院/科技應用與人力資源發展學系/碩士(2022年)

https://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202300080

摘要

本研究旨在開發一種以傳統課程內容為基礎融入STEM科際整合課程以利更符合主題需求，透過此方式在不同工程領域類別所設計出的「STEM導向特定工程設計流程」來強化學生的工程能力及科技素養，也藉由這樣的發展來定義出更符合設計主題的工程設計流程教學。以往的傳統科技教育是以技術相關的知識爲主要內容，在問題解決的過程中使用具體且特定的材料進行動手實作以培養學生的創造性思維以及解決問題之能力，而近年來科技教育開始以STEM（Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics）知識整合之工程設計課程為導向，運用不同種材料來動手實作，其中強調解決問題並且注重預測分析以及最佳化的過程。目前大多數的STEM工程設計課程都是採用一般通則性的工程設計流程，但其實在不同的工程領域之設計流程和實作都是存在差異的。本研究以臺北市某高中十年級三個班的學生爲研究對象，將學生們分為三組，以傳統手作木哨課程、一般工程設計流程以及STEM導向之特定工程設計來進行，課程完成後在創意思考方面以產品創意分析矩陣對學生的設計作品進行評價，並採用原案分析法對學生在設計過程對於整個工程設計流程的認知行分析，以比較三種不同方式在工程設計流程的運用及認知上的差異、創意表現之優異。
本研究結果發現：（1）一般工程設計流程以及特定工程設計流程在STEM知識是優於傳統手作木哨課程的。（2）特定工程設計流程讓學生了解何謂工程設計流程上是優於傳統手作木哨課程及一般工程設計流程的。（3）特定工程設計流程課程的受測高中生所表現的創意展現是優於一般工程設計組的學生。鑒於上述結果，在生活科技教育課程當中利用特定工程設計流程進行課程更能使得學生提升STEM相關知能及創造力，並能更加瞭解工程設計之流程，並期望透過此方式能發展出未來高中加深加廣之工程設計課程之參考。

關鍵字

課程 ； 工程設計 ； STEM ； 原案分析 ； 創意

並列摘要

This research aims to develop a STEM interdisciplinary integrated curriculum based on traditional curriculum content to better meet the theme needs. Through this method, the "STEM-oriented specific engineering design process" designed in different engineering fields can strengthen students' engineering ability and technological literacy also use this development to define engineering design process teaching that is more in line with the design theme. In the past, traditional technology education was mainly based on technology-related knowledge. In the process of problem solving, specific and specific materials were used for hands-on practice to cultivate students' creative thinking and problem-solving ability. In recent years, science and technology education has begun to use STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) knowledge integration is an engineering design course oriented, using different kinds of materials for hands-on practice, which emphasizes problem solving and focuses on the process of predictive analysis and optimization. At present, most STEM engineering design courses adopt the general engineering design process, but in fact, there are differences in the design process and implementation in different engineering fields. This research takes students from three classes of tenth grade in a senior high school in Taipei City as the research object. The students are divided into three groups. They are carried out with traditional handmade wooden whistle course, general engineering design process, and STEM-based specified-engineering-design. After the completion of the course, in terms of creative thinking, the product creative analysis matrix is used to evaluate the students’ design works, and the original case analysis method is used to analyze the students’ perception of the entire engineering design process in the design process to compare the three different methods in the engineering design process. Differences in application and cognition, and excellent creative performance.
The results of this study found that: (1) The general engineering design process and specific engineering design process are better than traditional handmade wooden whistle course in STEM knowledge (2) The specific engineering design process allows students to understand what the engineering design process is superior to traditional handmade wooden whistle course and general engineering design processes. (3) The creative of the tested high school students in the specific engineering design process course is better than that of the students in the general engineering design group. In view of the above results, the use of specific engineering design processes in the technology education curriculum will enable students to improve STEM-related knowledge and creativity, and to have a better understanding of the engineering design process. It is hoped this teaching way can be a reference for the broadening of engineering design courses in the future.

並列關鍵字

curriculum ； engineering design ； STEM ； Protocol analysis ； creativity

參考文獻

Mosely, G., Wright, N., & Wrigley, C. (2018). Facilitating design thinking: A comparison of design expertise. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 177-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.02.004

一、中文部份

王明蘅（1997）。設計原案資料記錄格式之研究。國科會整合計畫專案計畫書。國立成功大學。

Brown, T.（2010）。設計思考改變世界（吳莉君，譯）。聯經。（原著出版於2009年）

林坤誼、游光昭（2004）。透過中小學科技素養課程以培育學生創造力之探討。南大學報，38（2），15-30。