運用創造性問題解決法融入創意競賽以培養國中生科技創造力之研究

吳曜安

doi:10.6846/TKU.2013.00480

3.235.140.84，Hello！

Close
Search Quick Search Advanced Search Publication Search	Personal Service Member Login Searching History Use Bonus Card SYMSKAN
Browse Browse by University of Graduate Thesis Browse by Pinyin of Graduate Thesis Browse by Conference Proceedings Topic Browse by Conference Proceedings Publisher Browse by Pinyin of Conference Proceedings Browse by eBook Category Browse by eBook Topic Browse by eBook Publisher
Customer Services Authorize Airiti Recommend a Journal

Search Symbol (Half-width)	Description of Search Symbols
Space	"AND" indicates the intertwining of key terms used in a search
Double Quotation Marks ("") ( " " )	Double quotation marks indicate the beginning and end of a phrase, and the search will only include terms that appear in the same order of those within the quotations. Example: "image process" ： " image process "
?	Indicates a variable letter. Entering two ? will indicate two variable letters, and so on. Example: "Appl?", search results will yield apple, apply… e , appl y … ( (often used to English word searches) )
*	Indicates an unlimited number of variable letters to follow, from 1~n. Example: Enter "appl*", search results will yield apple, apples, apply, applied, application…(often used in English word searches) e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( (often used to English word searches) )
AND、OR、NOT	Boolean logic combinations of key words is a skill used to expand or refine search parameters. (1) AND (1) AND: Refines search parameters (2) OR (2) OR: Expands search parameters (3) NOT: Excludes irrelevant parameters

DOI stands for Digital Object Identifier （ D igital O bject I dentifier ） ,
and is the unique identifier for objects on the internet. It can be used to create persistent link and to cite articles.

Using DOI as a persistent link

To create a persistent link, add「http://dx.doi.org/」「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」 before a DOI.
For instance, if the DOI of an article is 10.5297/ser.1201.002 , you can link persistently to the article by entering the following link in your browser: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
The DOI link will always direct you to the most updated article page no matter how the publisher changes the document's position, avoiding errors when engaging in important research.

Cite a document with DOI

When citing references, you should also cite the DOI if the article has one. If your citation guideline does not include DOIs, you may cite the DOI link.

DOIs allow accurate citations, improve academic contents connections, and allow users to gain better experience across different platforms. Currently, there are more than 70 million DOIs registered for academic contents. If you want to understand more about DOI, please visit airiti DOI Registration （ doi.airiti.com ）。

Data Source

College of Education > In-service Master's Program, Department of Educational Technology
Social Sciences > Education

Bibliography Management Tool

Related Links

Report an Issue

Purchase Single Articles

Download PDF

運用創造性問題解決法融入創意競賽以培養國中生科技創造力之研究

A Study of Applying Creative Problem Solving into Creativity Contest to Improve Junior High School Student's Technological Creativity

吳曜安 , Masters　　Advisor：黃雅萍　　

繁體中文 DOI： 10.6846/TKU.2013.00480

創造性問題解決法；創意競賽；科技創造力； Creativity problem solving ； Creativity contest ； Technological creativity

Abstract │ Reference (121) │ Times Cited (1) │ Altmetrics

Abstract 〈TOP〉

因應二十一世紀知識經濟時代所趨，科技之國更應落實科技教育以培養創意學子予奠定國家基石。研究者執教近十年，深感國中教育教學僵化以致學子缺乏創意刺激與變通能力，時至十二年教改之際，研究者以此為契機，將創意競賽融入教學課程，並試圖培養國中生科技創造力之表現。
本研究的目的在了解不同型式的創造性問題解決（Creativity Problem Solving，CPS）教學法與傳統教學法對培養國中生科技創造力之影響。採準實驗研究法，以國中二年級三班共94人為研究對象，區分成Web－CPS組、CPS組與傳統教學組。每組再依據其國二上學期自然科段考成績的平均值區分為科學程度高分組、中分組與低分組三種層次，探討教學法與科學程度在科技創造力表現的交互作用，以及不同教學法對科技創造力表現之影響。
本研究的研究工具為「科技創造力測驗（Technological Creativity Test，TCT）」與「情境式科技創造力測驗（Situation-based Technological Creativity Test，STCT）」，採不等組前後測設計，以TCT與STCT的前測為共變量，並以TCT與STCT的後測為依變項進行二因子共變數分析。另以創意競賽共識評量（Consensus Assessment Techniques，CAT）評量創意產品，再輔以教室觀察記錄、活動記錄表與半結構訪談作為學習歷程之探討，研究結果整理如下：
一、不同型式創造性問題解決教學法對科技創造力的影響情形
（一）教學法與自然科領域程度有顯著的交互作用。
（二）對自然科領域程度高分組而言，CPS教學法優於傳統教學法；對中分組而言，CPS教學法優於Web-CPS教學法與傳統教學法；對低分組而言，Web-CPS教學法優於CPS教學法與傳統教學法。
（三）對Web-CPS教學法而言，自然科領域程度高分組在科技創造力的表現優於中分組；對CPS教學法而言，高分組與中分組均優於低分組；對傳統教學法而言各組間無顯著差異。
二、不同型式創造性問題解決教學法對流暢力、變通力、獨創力與精進力的影響情形
（一）流暢力：教學法與自然科領域程度有顯著的交互作用；對自然科領域程度高分組而言，CPS教學法優於傳統教學法；對中分組而言，CPS教學法優於Web-CPS教學法；對低分組而言，Web-CPS教學法優於CPS教學法與傳統教學法。
（二）變通力：教學法與自然科領域程度有顯著的交互作用；對自然科領域程度高分組而言，Web-CPS教學法與CPS教學法均優於傳統教學法；對中分組而言各組間無顯著差異；對低分組而言，Web-CPS教學法優於CPS教學法與傳統教學法。
（三）獨創力：教學法與自然科領域程度沒有顯著的交互作用；以自然科領域程度而言，高分組在獨創力的表現優於中分組與低分組。
（四）精進力：教學法與自然科領域程度沒有顯著的交互作用；以自然科領域程度而言，高分組與中分組在精進力的表現優於低分組。
三、不同型式創造性問題解決教學法對情境式科技創造力的影響情形
（一）教學法與自然科領域程度有顯著的交互作用。
（二）對自然科領域程度高分組而言，Web-CPS教學法與CPS教學法均優於傳統教學法；對中分組而言，各組間無顯著差異；對低分組而言，Web-CPS教學法與傳統教學法優於CPS教學法。
（三）對Web-CPS教學法而言，自然科領域程度高分組在情境式科技創造力的表現優於中分組與低分組；對CPS教學法而言，高分組優於中分組，中分組又優於低分組；對傳統教學法而言高分組與中分組優於低分組。
四、創造性問題解決法融入創意競賽之學習歷程
（一）整體而言Web工具提高了學習意願並增進了合作與互動，而自然科領域程度高中分組對CPS的學習情況均優於低分組。
（二）創意競賽實作評量部份，以教學法而言，在「思維多樣性」、「變通反應力」、「思維可行性」三個向度與總分上Web-CPS教學法與CPS教學法均優於傳統教學法。

Parallel Abstract 〈TOP〉

As 21st century is knowledge economy era and Taiwan is known for its technological power in the world, technology education becomes an essential part of curriculum design of junior high schools in Taiwan. During my ten-year teaching experience, I have seen how our current education system renders our students incapable of being creative and responsive in class. With the approach of twelve-year public education program, it is about time to incorporate creativity competition in the curriculum in order to develop junior high school students’ technological creativity. 
    The purpose of this study is to understand how various types of creativity problem solving and traditional teaching methods influence the development of junior high school students’ technological creativity. This study adopts quasi-experimental design. The subjects participating in the study are 94 eighth graders from three different classes. The subjects are divided into three groups—Web-CPS, CPS and traditional teaching. And based on the mean score of monthly exams in natural science, students in each group are further divided into three levels—high, medium, and low. There are two intentions in this strategy. One is to explore the mutual influence of teaching methods and levels of science knowledge in the context of students’ performance of technological creativity, and the other is to investigate how different teaching methods affect students’ performance of technological creativity. 
    The research skills adopted in this study are technological creativity test and situation-based technological creativity test, designed by the nonequivalent pretest-posttest. The pretest of technological creativity test and situation-based technological creativity test acts as the covariates; while the posttest plays the role as the dependable variables for two-way ANCOVA. Besides, consensus assessment techniques are also used to assess students’ creative products. It is conducted along with classroom observation, activity records, and semi-structural interview. The conclusion of the study is shown as follows:
1.	Effects on technological creativity by different types of Creativity Problem Solving (CPS) teaching methods:
(a)	There is significant mutual interaction between teaching methods and levels of education in natural science.
(b)	As for the high-level group, CPS teaching method surpasses the traditional teaching method; for the medium-level group, CPS outranges Web-CPS and traditional teaching; for low-level group, Web-CPS is the best among three teaching methods. 
(c)	As far as Web-CPS is concerned, the technological creativity performed by high-level group in natural science is better than that performed by medium-level group. And with respect to CPS, both high and medium level groups are superior to low-level group. However, no significant difference is shown when concerning traditional teaching method.  
2.	Effects on fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration by different types of Creativity Problem Solving (CPS) teaching methods:
(a)	Fluency: There is significant mutual interaction between teaching methods and levels of education in natural science. As for the high-level group, the CPS teaching method surpasses the traditional teaching method; for the medium-level group, CPS outranges Web-CPS; for low-level group, Web-CPS is the best among three teaching methods. 
(b)	Flexibility: There is significant mutual interaction between teaching methods and levels of education in natural science. As for the high-level group, both Web-CPS and CPS teaching methods surpass the traditional teaching method; for the medium-level group, there is no significant difference; for low-level group, Web-CPS is the best among three teaching methods.
(c)	Originality: There is no significant mutual interaction between teaching methods and levels of education in natural science. As for the level of education in natural science, high-level group performs the best.
(d)	Elaboration: There is no significant mutual interaction between teaching methods and levels of education in natural science. As for the level of education in natural science, high-level and medium-level groups perform better than low-level group.
3.	Effects on Situation-based Technological Creativity Test (STST) by different types of Creativity Problem Solving (CPS) teaching methods:
(a)	There is significant mutual interaction between teaching methods and levels of education in natural science.
(b)	As for the high-level group, Web-CPS and CPS teaching methods surpass the traditional teaching method; for the medium-level group, no significant difference is presented; for low-level group, both Web-CPS and traditional teaching methods perform better than CPS.
(c)	As far as Web-CPS is concerned, the technological creativity performed by high-level group in natural science is better than that performed by medium-level and low-level groups. And with respect to CPS, high-level is better than medium-level, and medium-level is better than low-level. And concerning traditional teaching method, high-level and medium-level groups perform better than low-level group. 
4.	Learning process of creativity contest integrated by CPS:
(a)	On the whole, Web 2.0 increases learning intention and enhances cooperation and interaction. In addition, the state of learning performed by high and medium levels is superior to that performed by low level.
(b)	As for teaching methods adopted in implementation assessment in creativity contest, Web-CPS and CPS are better than traditional teaching method in respect to the overall score in three different dimensions-intellectual diversity, flexible reaction capacity, and intellectual feasibility.

Reference ( 121 ) 〈TOP〉

朱益賢（2006）。從科技素養到科技創造力。生活科技教育月刊，39（8）,1-2。
連結：
伍建學、洪國勳（2002）。淺談國中生活科技競賽績優學生學習經驗。生活科技教育月刊，35（7），36-39。
連結：
何宜軒（2006）。透過網路化創造性問題解決教學活動以培養國中學生科技創造力之研究。新竹縣教育研究集刊，6，124-127。
連結：
吳怡瑄（2002）。主題統整教學,教室氣氛,年級及父母社經地位與國小學童科技創造力之關係。國立中山大學碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
連結：
李大偉、張玉山（2000）。科技創造力的意涵與教學（上）。生活科技教育月刊，33（9），9-16。
連結：

Times Cited (1) 〈TOP〉

謝有全(2014)。創造性問題解決教學策略對學生技能檢定學科學習成效影響之研究-以高職電機科為例。臺北科技大學技術及職業教育研究所學位論文。2014。1-134。

Altmetrics

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

When an article is available to download, a notice will be sent to your mailbox address.

E-mail ：