科技輔助生活科技課程對國中生「對工程設計流程認知」與「對工程的態度」之影響：以投石車製作課程為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：79

、訪客IP：3.16.47.65

姓名

盧楷文(Kai-Wen Lu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

科技輔助生活科技課程對國中生「對工程設計流程認知」與「對工程的態度」之影響：以投石車製作課程為例
(The Influence of Technology-supported Technology Course on Junior High School Students’ Understanding of Engineering Design Process and Attitudes Towards Engineering)

相關論文

★ 支援國小科展探究教與學之網路科展探究系統的開發與評估	★ 教師科展專業知識分享社群平台系統開發與評估
★ 科學小論文寫作平台的建置與評估	★ 「探究教學線上教師社群平台」之建置與評估:以知識管理理論為基礎
★ 科學閱讀平台之發展與評估	★ 以鷹架為基礎之科展探究系統平台之開發與評估
★ Improving Novice Teachers’ Instructional Practice Through Online Multilevel Reflection: The Role of Novice Teachers’ Beliefs	★ The Effect s of Video-based Reflection on Preservice Teachers′ Micro Teaching Focusing on Meaningful Learning with ICT
★ Examining Teachers’ Online Video-Based Reflective Practice for Professional Development Regarding Guided-Discovery Learning Instruction	★ 數位教育遊戲之開發與評估：以「Mr.道耳頓的奇幻歷險」為例
★ 應用自然語言處理技術開發基於知識翻新理論之線上非同步合作論證平台與平台初步評估	★ 同步討論與反思系統（SDRS）對小學生知識建構學習環境感知和學習成果的影響
★ 具有集成設計框架的同步在線論證系統用戶界面：重新設計和評估	★ 科學探究學習系統之開發與評估
★ 支援科學專題學習之線上學習平台開發與評估	★ 線上合作共同備課平台：開發與評估

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

台灣在工程教育的發展主要受到目前工業型態與美國的工程／科技教育影響，由於工程教育是培育工業人才最根本的管道，世界各國有許多專家學者致力研究工程教育，努力培養能為業界適用的工程師，然而，在台灣，由於生活科技一直以來都不是大考的考試科目，造成教師、學生甚至家長的不重視。也因此研究者身為工程師，嘗試對工程教育進行研究，貢獻一己之力。數位學習在近幾十年，逐漸成為各教學領域的潮流，加上近幾年疫情肆虐全球，更促使了數位科技的發展。數位學習不單單只是實現遠距教學的願景，背後更是期盼在這個資訊爆炸的世代，培養學生自主學習的能力。
綜合上述觀點，本研究以透過生活科技課程進行問題解決的專案活動，製作投石車投擲彈珠，彈射至指定距離，藉此讓國中學生認識工程設計流程，也企圖藉此提升學生對工程的態度。與此同時，適時安排數位科技輔助的介入，讓工程設計流程的特定階段能夠更有效率地進行。本研究之研究對象為桃園地區某國中，分為實驗組與對照組，實驗組在討論活動中使用以想法為中心的科技輔助工具進行討論；而對照組則是使用紙筆的傳統方式進行討論，並在課程進行的適當時間蒐集學生「對工程設計流程的認知」與「對工程的態度」並加以分析，本研究之研究結果如下：
一、無論學生是否有使用科技輔助工具進行討論活動，整體上對工程設計流程的認知都有成長。
二、學生使用科技輔助工具進行討論比使用紙本進行討論對於工程設計流程的認知更有幫助。
三、無論學生是否有使用科技輔助工具進行討論活動，整體上對工程的態度皆沒有顯著提升

摘要(英)

In Taiwan, engineering education was mainly affected by industrial type and the technology/engineering education in the U.S. Researchers around the world have devoted in developing engineering education for several years due to the direct influence of the cultivation of engineers for industry. However, engineering has never been an exam subject in Taiwan. Thus, the ignorance from teachers, students and even parents led to few researches in Taiwan. As an engineer, try working on research in engineering education is the goal of this research. E-learning had become a popular topic in education for decades. Additionally, the pandemic of COVID-19 has prompt it even faster. The goal of e-learning development was not just for making distant-learning come true, but to cultivate self-learning in this information explosion era.
In summary, in order to create an environment for junior high school students to learn the engineering design process and improve the attitude towards engineering, a problem-oriented-project organized course was applied, which was to make a catapult hitting a requested object in a distance. Additionally, online learning platform plays a role of supporting students to learn much more efficiently.
44 students were involved in this research, 22 for experimental group and 22 for comparison group. Online learning platform was conducted during the discussion activities while comparison group was discussed via paper-pen-based.
The result of this research listed as follows:
1. No matter what kind of media was conducted in discussion activities, students have a better understanding through technology courses.
2. Students with technology-supported technology course had a better understanding on “Engineering Design Process” than ones without technology-supported.
3. No matter what kind of media was conducted in discussion activities, there are no significant difference on attitude towards engineering after the technology course.

關鍵字(中)

★ 工程設計流程
★ 對工程的態度
★ 生活科技教育
★ 工程教育
★ 數位科技

關鍵字(英)

★ Engineering Design Process
★ Attitude Towards Engineering
★ Technology-Supported Technology Course
★ Engineering Education
★ e-learning

論文目次

中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
致謝詞 iv
目錄 v
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
第一章緒論 1
第一節研究背景與動機 1
第二節研究目的與問題 5
第三節研究範圍與限制 6
第四節名詞解釋 7
第二章文獻探討 9
第一節工程設計流程 11
第二節對工程的態度 16
第三節評量方式 17
第四節科技輔助工具 20
第三章研究方法 22
第一節研究對象 22
第二節研究流程 23
第三節課程設計 24
第四節研究工具 32
第五節資料蒐集 35
第六節資料分析 36
第四章研究結果與討論 38
第一節國中生對「工程設計流程的認知」的歷程變化 38
第二節國中生「對工程的態度」差異 52
第五章結論與建議 57
第一節結論 57
第二節建議 58
參考文獻 59
附錄 63
附錄一對工程的態度與對工程設計流程的認知之測驗（前／後測） 63
附錄二對工程設計流程的認知課後反思單 65

參考文獻

Abarca, J., Bedard, A., Carlson, D., Carlson, L., Hertzberg, J., Louie, B., Milford, J., Reitsma, R., Schwartz, T., & Sullivan., J. (2000). Introductory Engineering Design: A Project-Based Approach.
Alexa.com. (2017). Youtube.com Traffic, Demographics and Competitors - Alexa. https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/youtube.com
Atman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of engineering education, 96(4), 359-379.
Back, J. (2017). Integrating Engineering Design and Challenge-Based Learning in STEM.
Bahill, A. T., & Gissing, B. (1998). Re-evaluating systems engineering concepts using systems thinking. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), 28(4), 516-527.
Bailey, R., & Szabo, Z. (2007). Assessing engineering design process knowledge. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(3), 508.
Besterfield‐Sacre, M., Atman, C. J., & Shuman, L. J. (1997). Characteristics of freshman engineering students: Models for determining student attrition in engineering. Journal of engineering education, 86(2), 139-149.
Board, N. S. (2004). An Emerging and Critical Problem of the Science and Engineering Labor Force: A Companion to Science and Engineering Indicators 2004. National Science Foundation.
Chester, M. D. (2016). Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Curriculum Framework — 2016.
Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K. H. (1992). Cognitive models in industrial design engineering: a protocol study. Design theory and methodology, 42(1), 131-140.
Council, N. R. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
Driscoll, D. P. (2006). Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Curriculum Framework. Massachusetts Department of Education.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual review of psychology, 53(1), 109-132.
Edwards, S. H. (2004). Using software testing to move students from trial-and-error to reflection-in-action. Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education,
Fazio, R. H., & Zanna, M. P. (1978). Attitudinal qualities relating to the strength of the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(4), 398-408.
Forum, W. E. (2020). The Future of Jobs Report 2020.
Frymier, A., & Nadler, M. (2017). The relationship between attitudes and behaviors. Persuasion: integrating theory, research, and practice, 42-58.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. Basic books.
Gibbons, S. J., Hirsch, L. S., Kimmel, H., Rockland, R., & Bloom, J. (2004). Middle school students′ attitudes to and knowledge about engineering. International conference on engineering education, Gainesville, FL,
Gudimetla, P., & Mahalinga-Iyer, R.-I. (2006). The role for e-learning in engineering education: creating quality support structures to complement traditional learning. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education,
Hazelton, S. (2019). The Disadvantages of Trial and Error.
Higher Education Outcomes & High-Tech Workforce Demands. (2001). (The Fifth Annual Systemwide Accountability Report, Issue.
Jain, V. K., & Sobek, D. K. (2006). Linking design process to customer satisfaction through virtual design of experiments. Research in Engineering Design, 17(2), 59-71.
Ltd, T. (2020). What is Engineering Design Process.
Luxhøsj, J. T., & Hansen, P. H. (1996). Engineering curriculum reform at Aalborg University. Journal of engineering education, 85(3), 183-186.
McKenna, A. F., & Carberry, A. R. (2012). Characterizing the role of modeling in innovation. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(2), 263-269.
Muller, D. (2014). This Will Revolutionize Education. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEmuEWjHr5c&ab_channel=Veritasium
NASA. (2018). Engineering Deisng Process.
Peterson, G. D., & Feisel, L. D. (2002). e-Learning: The challenge for engineering education.
Schon, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol. 5126). Basic books.
Sias, A. W.-L. C. M. (2017). Solving Everyday Problems Using the Engineering Design Cycle.
Standards, N. G. S. (2013). APPENDIX I – Engineering Design in the NGSS. https://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/default/files/Appendix%20I%20-%20Engineering%20Design%20in%20NGSS%20-%20FINAL_V2.pdf
Stasser, G., Stewart, D. D., & Wittenbaum, G. M. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31(3), 244-265.
Unfried, A., Faber, M., Stanhope, D. S., & Wiebe, E. (2015). The development and validation of a measure of student attitudes toward science, technology, engineering, and math (S-STEM). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33(7), 622-639.
Walker, J., Cordray, D. S., King, P. H., & Brophy, S. P. (2006). Design scenarios as an assessment of adaptive expertise. situations, 1(2).
Wang, X. (2013). Why students choose STEM majors: Motivation, high school learning, and postsecondary context of support. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1081-1121.
Wicker, A. W. (1969). Attitudes versus actions: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social issues, 25(4), 41-78.
王美芬、熊召弟. （2005）. 國小階段自然與生活科技教材教法
張式魯（2002）. 試誤法 Trial and Error Method
教育部（2018）. 十二年國民基本教育課程綱要
陳政宏（2002）. 工學院裡的咬文嚼字－談「科學」、「科技」、「技術」
黃嘉眉（2020）. 以想法為中心的合作科學探究習平台之系統開發與初步評估

指導教授

吳穎沺(Ying-Tien Wu)

審核日期

2021-7-19

推文