工業設計系學生的學習風格與自我反思能力之關係

The Relationship Between the Learning Style of Industrial Design Students and Their Self-Reflection

賴怡如(Yi-Ru Lai)

指導教授 ： 曹永慶 ； 葉雯玓

大同大學/設計學院/工業設計學系所/碩士(2007年)

摘要

設計系學生所接受的教育課程強調的是做中學，然而如果沒有經由反思和觀察，實做所得經驗未必就能增加學習的深度。此外，學生本身的學習風格亦可能影響其自我反思能力，乃至學習成效。
本研究之目的即在透過實際設計教學，探討設計系學生之四種不同學習風格與自我反思能力間之關係。研究共分為兩階段進行：第一階段利用Kolb學習風格量表及Kember et al.所編制的反思量表以瞭解學生學習風格與反思層次之關係。第二階段，以回溯訪談的方法調查學生於設計教學結束後其反思之方式。主要研究成果如下：
1、學習風格為「分散型」、「同化型」及「聚斂型」的學生，反思層次以「批判反思」為主；「調適型」學生則以「理解」為主。
2、不同學習風格學生在學習目標、學習成就、學習態度、觀摩同儕表現、 作品 及回饋的反思項目上呈現出異同之特徵。
(a)學習目標的反思：「調適型」學生無預先設定學習目標；「分散型」以觀察使用族群為主；「聚斂型」以老師講解之優秀作品為主；「同化型」以抽象概念為主。(b)學習成就的反思：四種學習風格學生皆以學習態度和設計表現能力為主。(c)學習態度的反思：四種不同學習風格學生皆認為自己有努力學習，至於會出現學習錯誤行為多歸因於學習過程上時間規劃不當所致。(d)觀摩同儕表現的反思：「調適型」學生觀摩同儕作品的感覺皆認為畫的很好，對自我的期許則希望跟同儕一樣優秀甚至超越他們；「分散型」及「同化型」學生觀摩同儕作品的感覺皆有提到好壞的差別，對自我的期許則是想提升電腦繪圖能力及創意發想部份；「聚斂型」觀摩同儕作品的感覺皆認為畫的很好，對自我的期許則希望跟同儕一樣優秀。(e)作品的反思：「調適型」學生擔憂後續設計會面臨的問題和其對作品的創意發想過程之想法；「分散型」提到其對未來之影響和其對作品的創意發想過程之想法；「聚斂型」和「同化型」提到對作品的結果及製作過程之想法。(f)回饋的反思：四種學習風格學生對於老師所給與之回饋皆認為很切實際且對自己有很大幫助。
3、不同學習風格學生在反思層次與作品的反思項目上呈現出異同之特徵。
「調適型」學生屬於反思層次以「理解」及「反思」中的內容與過程的反思為主；「分散型」屬於「批判反思」及「反思」中的內容的反思為主；「聚斂型」屬於「反思」中的內容的反思為主；「同化型」屬於「反思」中的內容的反思及內容與過程的反思為主。

關鍵字

學習風格、自我反思

並列摘要

The educational classes accepted by design department students emphasize learning by doing. However, if not through reflection and observation, the experience from doing may be not increase the depth of learning. Besides, a student’s own learning style can possibly influence his/her self-reflection ability and even learning effect.
The purpose of this study is to, through practical design teaching, explore the relationships between design department students’ 4 different learning styles and self-reflection ability. The study was conducted with 2 stages: In the first stage, we used Kolb’s learning style scale and reflection scale compiled by Kember et al. to understand the relationships between students’ learning styles and reflecting levels. In the second stage, we used dating-back method to survey students’ reflecting method after the end of design teaching. The main results of this study are as follows:
1. For the students with the learning styles as “divergence type”, “assimilation type” and “convergence type”, their reflecting level is mainly “critical reflection”; for the “accommodation type” students, mainly “understanding”.
2. The students with different learning styles display difference and similarity on the items such as learning goal, leaning achievement, learning attitude, watching peer’s performance, works and Reflection towards feedback.
（a）Reflection of learning goal: “accommodation type” students have no pre-set learning goal; “divergence type” students focus on observing the using groups; “convergence type” students focus on the mater pieces proposed by the teachers; “assimilation type” students focus on abstract conceptualization.
（b）Reflection of leaning achievement: The students of 4 learning styles focus on learning attitude and ability of design performance.
（c）Reflection of learning attitude: The students of 4 learning styles all consider they were hard-learning; and attribute the occurrence of learning mistakes to improper time planning in the learning process.
（d）Reflection of watching peer’s performance: As for the feeling about watching peers’ works, “accommodation type” students consider they are doing good and their self-expectation is hoping to be as good as the peers and even better than them; “divergence type” students and “assimilation type” students all mentioned there were the good and the bad and their self-expectation is hoping to upgrade computerized graphic ability and creativities; “convergence type” students consider they are doing good and their self-expectation is hoping to be as good as the peers.
（e）Reflection of works: “Accommodation type” students are worried about the problems faced by the follow-up design and their ideas about the process of creativity of the works; “divergence type” students mentioned the influence on the future and their ideas about the process of creativity of the works; “convergence type” students and “assimilation type” students all mentioned the results towards the works and the ideas about making process.
（f）Reflection towards feedback: The students of 4 learning styles all consider the feedback from teachers are practical and very helpful to themselves.
3. The students with different learning styles display difference and similarity on the reflection items such as reflecting levels and works.
“Accommodation type” students’ reflecting level focus on content & process reflection of “understanding” and “reflection”; “divergence type” students focus on content reflection of “critical reflection” and “reflection”; “convergence type” students focus on content reflection of “reflection”; “convergence type” students focus on content reflection and content & process reflection of “reflection”.

並列關鍵字

learning style ； self-reflection

參考文獻

7. 顏明仁（2001）。Bloom認知分類在科技教育的應用。生活科技教育，34（4），2-9。

2. 蔡明翰，民92，自我反思活動對高中生程式設計學習成效與創造力之探討，國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。

4. 吳明芳，民94，網路化檔案評量標準與信、效度之建立。國立國立臺北科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文初稿。(未出版)

1. Bloom, M. (1975). The paradox of helping: Introduction to the philosophy of scientific practice, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

2. Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2000). Assessing and reporting on habits of mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.