臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究定義未來高等教育學習的樣貌，規劃大學課程學習彈性，藉由專案導向式學習、CDIO、跨域合作及創客四項核心精神將課程架構模組化。透過彈性且多元的模組課程向上提升學校既有的四年期制度，分為通識層、實踐層、精熟層三個層次。通識層藉由不同模組的搭配，建立基礎知識與能力；實踐層逐漸進入關鍵的專門領域，進行跨領域合作，深化各自的專長與能力，是為跨域團隊育成；最終精熟層發展實踐能力，跨領域團隊的組成，一同將知識轉化到不同的實際應用場域中，最終產出服務型、創新型、市場型人才。
本研究為建構模組化課程的操作模式，探究以專案導向式學習(PBL)為基礎、CDIO工程教育教學流程，並佐以雙菱形設計模型幫助學生做跨域連結，作為未來人才培育翻轉的核心架構，發展出一套培育創客人才的「創客育成法」。創客育成法分成四大階段，分別是：(1)議題需求、(2)設計思考、(3)製作應用、(4)呈現行銷。而為驗證創客育成法的理論架構，本研究先將其投入兩個短期模組化課程進行前導測試，得出改善的方法後，接續投入學期制模組課程，進行量化問卷與質性問答，評定創客育成法成效及學生學習成效，驗證其可行性並獲取反饋經驗，做為未來持續改進及高等教育架構改革的參考。

This research defines the future learning model in the higher education. We modularize the courses structure according to four principles including PBL, CDIO, interdisciplinary collaboration, and maker. Based on the flexible and multiple module courses, we improve original quadrennial system in the higher education, and re-generate it into three levels: (1) General level, (2) Implement level, and (3) Practical level. General level builds the basic knowledge and ability with the combination of different modular courses. Implement level increases the degree of project implement and interdisciplinary collaboration. Practical level goes deep into the practical projects which can connect with the society needs. It aims to train the talents who have the abilities in service-oriented, innovating-oriented, and marketing-oriented expertise.
This research integrates the problem-based learning (PBL), CDIO learning process, and double diamond interdisciplinary method to develop the maker incubation pedagogy. We develop 4 stages of the maker incubation including (1) issue finding, (2) design thinking, (3) fabrication implementing, and presentation marketing.
In order to evaluate the performance of maker incubation pedagogy, we conduct two short-term modular courses at first. It provides some solid conclusions for our further modification of pedagogy. Then we run the semester course based on the modified one. We use quantitative and qualitative questionnaires to assess the performance of course and students’ learning. The feedback and finding demonstrate the potential of our maker incubation pedagogy and give use the clues to devote it into the higher education.

摘要 III
Abstract IX
目錄 XI
圖目錄 XIV
表目錄 XVII
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機與目的 2
1.2 研究方法與流程 3
第二章 文獻回顧 5
2.1 創客風潮的發展與趨勢 5
2.1.1 創客起源與定義 5
2.1.2 創客發展趨勢 6
2.2 未來人才需求轉型影響教育翻轉 9
2.3 PBL教學原理與應用 13
2.4 跨領域思維 18
2.4.1 設計思考 18
2.4.2 雙菱形設計模型 28
2.5 CDIO工程教育模式 32
2.5.1 教學願景、大綱與標準 36
2.5.2 整合式課程設計 45
2.5.3 學生學習評估 50
2.5.4 CDIO應用與實施 54
2.6 小結 58
第三章 研究方法 61
3.1 未來大學學習系統架構 62
3.2 未來課程教學操作模式 67
3.2.1 專案導向學習 68
3.2.2 CDIO教學流程 69
3.2.3 跨域雙菱形設計模型操作 70
3.3 模組化教學與微學分 77
3.3.1 序列學習模組 81
3.3.2 共時學習模組 86
3.3.3 序列與共時學習模組之比較 89
3.4 小結 92
第四章 評估設計與驗證 95
4.1 創客育成法操作設計 95
4.1.1 創客育成法投入短期模組課程 96
4.1.2 創客育成法投入學期制課程 107
4.2 評估設計與實施 114
4.2.1 研究對象 114
4.2.2 研究工具 114
4.2.1 研究流程與方法 116
4.2.2 問卷設計與評估方法 117
4.3 評估結果分析與討論 120
4.3.1 創客育成法成效評估 120
4.3.2 學生學習成效評估 134
4.4 評估結果分析與討論 138
第五章 討論與結論 141
5.1 討論 141
5.2 結論 144
5.2.1 研究貢獻 144
5.2.2 未來發展 147
參考文獻 149
附錄A、創客育成法評估問卷 155
附錄B、同儕互評問卷 158
附錄C、創客育成法前測評估問卷成果 159
附錄D、創客育成法中測評估問卷成果 162
附錄E、創客育成法後測評估問卷成果 165
附錄F、創客育成法同儕互評問卷成果 168

中文文獻
1.李隆盛(1994)。工藝教材教法新趨勢：模組化的課程設計與解決問題的教學策略。科技與職業教育的課題，317-341。台北:師大書苑。
2.沈揚庭(2012)。識域：科技中介、社群融入、空間擴增的學習環境。成功大學建築學系學位論文，1-209。
3.沈揚庭、戴沛吟(2016)。以 CDIO 精神發展創客育成模式之課程設計與評估。高等教育研究紀要，81-100。
4.沈揚庭(2015)。未來教室：科技中介、社群融入、空間擴增的學習環境。智慧化居住空間技術報告。
5.林鳳、李正(2007)。美國高等工程教育的歷史沿革與發展趨勢。設計藝術研究，(5)，37-39。
6.邱筱琪(2012)。臺灣高等教育服務─學習課程發展脈絡之研究朝陽學報。2014，19：1-16。
7.施勳鉁(1997)。生活科技課程模組化教學之探討。中學工藝教育，30(7)，16-20。
8.查建中(2008)。論「做中學」 戰略下的CDIO模式。高等工程教育研究， 3(1)， 6。
9.唐玄輝、林穎謙(2011)。情境故事法運用於跨領域合作設計課程的問題與影響。設計學報(Journal of Design)，16(3)。
10.張迺貞、周天。(2015)。運用Kirkpatrick模式評估資訊法律課程在數位學習環境之學習成效。教育資料與圖書館學，52(4)，417-450。
11.翟本瑞、周惠那、陳淑慧(2016)。創意思考與實際演練。臺中市：逢甲通識教育中心。

英文文獻
1.Abowd, G. D. (1999). Classroom 2000: An experiment with the instrumentation of a living educational environment. IBM systems journal, 38(4), 508-530.
2.Anderson, C. (2010). The new industrial revolution. Wired magazine18, 2.
3.Bankel, J., Berggren, K. F., Engström, M., Wiklund, I., Crawley, E. F., Soderholm, D., ... & Östlund, S (2005). Benchmarking engineering curricula with the CDIO syllabus. International journal of engineering education, 21(1), 121-133.
4.Barrett, Terry, & Moore, Sarah. (2011). New approaches to problem-based learning: Rrevitalising your practice in higher education. London: Routledge.
5.Barrett, Terry, Cashman, Diane, & Moore, Sarah. (2011). Designing problems and triggers in different media. In T. Barrett & S. Moore (Eds.), New approaches to problem-based learning: Revitalising your practice in higher education (pp. 18-35). London: Routledge.
6.Barrows, Howard S., & Tamblyn, Robyn M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York: Springer Pub. Co.
7.Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British journal of educational technology, 39(5), 775-786.
8.Berggren, K. F., Brodeur, D., Crawley, E. F., Ingemarsson, I., Litant, W. T., Malmqvist, J., & Östlund, S. (2003). CDIO: An international initiative for reforming engineering education. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 2(1), 49-52.
9.Bergmann, J. and Sams A. A. (2012). Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. N.Y.: ISTE/ASCD.
10.Bohemia, E., Lauche, K., Badke-Schaub, P., Langeveld, L., Thompson, I., Wilson, C., ... & Titley, W. (2007). Outcomes from a distributed design studio.
11.Brown, T .(2009). Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation. Harper Collins.
12.Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard business review, 86(6), 84.
13.Carnoy, M., Hallak, J., & Caillods, F. (1999). Globalization and educational reform: what planners need to know. UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning.
14.Cheng, V. M. Y. (2010). Tensions and dilemmas of teachers creativity reform in a Chinese context. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(3): 120-137.
15.Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Lucas, W. A., & Brodeur, D. R. (2011). The CDIO syllabus v2. 0. An updated statement of goals for engineering education. In Proceedings of 7th International CDIO Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark.
16.Crawley, E., Malmqvist, J., Ostlund, S., & Brodeur, D. (2007). Rethinking engineering education. The CDIO Approach, 302, 60-62.
17.Dewsbury, G., Taylor, B., & Edge, M. (2001). The process of designing
appropriate smart homes: including the user in the design. 1st Equator IRC Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing in Domestic Environments, University of Nottingham: Citeseer.
18.Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
19.Gagne, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1988). Principles of instructional design (3th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
20.Hallström, S., & Kuttenkeuler, J. (2004). Experiences from a three-semester design-implement project course. Stockholm: The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH).
21.Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner centered assessment on college campuses, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA, 2000. (Hallström S., 2004)
22.Kelley, T., & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. Crown Business.
23.Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1977). Evaluating training programs: Evidence vs. proof. Training and Development Journal, 31(11), pp.9-12.
24.Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D., & Vecchi, M. P. (1983). Optimization by simmulated annealing. Science, 220(4598), pp.671-680.
25.Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology.
26.Nair, P. (2005). The language of school design: Design patterns for 21st century schools.
27.Nunnally, J.C.(1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
28.Shen, Y. T., & Lu, P. W. (2012, October). Learning by annotating: a system development study of real-time synchronous supports for distributed learning in multiple locations. In Information Science and Service Science and Data Mining (ISSDM), 2012 6th International Conference on New Trends in (pp. 701-706). IEEE.
29.Shen, Y. T., & Lu, P. W. (2013). Engage the Power of Social Community in the Lecture-based Learning by Using the Collaborative Tagging System. Journal of Convergence Information Technology, 8(11), 485-493.
30.Van Buren, M. E., & Erskine, W. (2002). The 2002 ASTD state of the industry report. Alexandria, VA: American Society of Training and Development.
31.Wagner, T. (2014). The Global Achievement Gap: Why Even Our Best Schools DonÕt Teach the New Survival Skills Our Children NeedÑand What We Can Do About It. Basic Books.

網頁文獻
1.Embrace http://embraceglobal.org/
2.IDEO https://www.ideo.com/
3.National Training Laboratories. https://www.ntl.org/
4.P21 http://www.p21.org/
5.Stanford d. school https://dschool-old.stanford.edu/
6.Times Higher Education https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings
7.Worldwide CDIO Initiative http://www.cdio.org/
8.英國設計委員會http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/
9.問題導向學習http://www.ncsu.edu/pbl/design.html/