臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

3D建模技術以及建模所需要的空間能力是當今不容忽略的新興核心能力。該技術亦因3D列表機的普及而更受到教育界重視。傳統3D建模的教學多採用三視圖引導學生建構出空間概念。然而，在教學現場中，此類型教材卻往往因為極為欠缺立體的、空間的訊息，以致難以達成該教學目的；同時，部分學生初始的空間能力(prior spatial ability)也往往成為學習3D建模的障礙。此外，過往學生被動的、或僅重視自動化訓練的技術教育，亦需要被轉型。據此，本研究以當今受矚目的CDIO教育框架與認知學徒教學模式結合3D列印實體教材，進行一項實驗研究。受試者為 平均年齡20歲的13位大學生，包括6位男性、7位女性。實驗結果指出，不同教材-三視圖與3D 列印實體模型的輔助，對於心智旋轉與空間視覺化的空間能力與學習成效的確存在著差異；不僅於此，在傳統教學模式與認知學徒教學模式，對於學生在任務導向的問題解決中，認知學徒教學模式不僅能由教材完成任務，並且在行為表現上也與傳統教學模式將更專注在探討與問題解決，使學生能應用所學專業，真正的解決相關3D建模的問題。而實體模型對於學習3D建模時空間能力的輔助效果，較傳統三視圖更為理想。最後，本研究受感知動機理論與雙重編碼理論之啟發，以提升3D建模的學習效益為目的，進一步發展了一套差異化空間能力教學模式；主張依據學習者的空間能力，予以不同的教材與引導之模式，把每個學習者都帶起來。

3D modeling and the spatial ability required by modeling are two emerging core competencies that cannot be ignored. Such technology has drawn great attention from the educational circles as the popularity of 3D printers continues to increase. There are principally three areas that make the education of 3D modeling students difficult. Three-view drawings are frequently used in conventional 3D modeling teaching to guide students in the development of their spatial concepts. However, these teaching materials often fail to achieve the teaching objectives due to a scarcity of stereoscopic and spatial information in the classroom. In the meantime, the prior spatial ability of students can become an obstacle for learning 3D modeling as well. Finally, the method of technical education that puts students in a passive position or focuses solely on the training of automation should also be transformed.
This experimental study focused on the integration of the CDIO educational framework and the cognitive apprenticeship teaching strategy with the traditional teaching materials of 3D printing. Thirteen college students were selected as the subjects. There were 7 females and 6 males. The results indicate that different teaching materials, three-view drawings and physical models of 3D printing, have different influences on the development of spatial ability and the learning of mental rotation and spatial visualization. The cognitive apprenticeship teaching model, which uses teaching materials while focusing on open discussion and problem solving in behavioral expression, was superior to the conventional teaching model in the area of task-oriented problem solving by students. This study indicates that the use of physical models improves the development of spatial ability and the learning of 3D modeling relative to conventional three-view drawings. Finally, inspired by the perceptive motivation and the dual coding theories, the purpose of which is to improve the learning of 3D modeling, this study proposes a differentiated teaching model for the development of spatial ability, which suggests the use of different teaching materials and guidance modes to motivate students.

中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
目錄 iv
表目錄 v
圖目錄 vi
一、 緒論 1
二、 文獻探討 3
1. 3D列印 3
2. CDIO教學模式 5
3. 空間能力 7
4. 認知學徒 9
5. 後設認知 12
6. 觸覺感知學習 14
三、 研究方法 16
1. CDIO教育框架實施 17
2. 教學模式 19
3. 空間能力評量 20
4. 滯後時序分析 22
5. 分析工具 24
四、 結果與討論 26
1. 空間能力 26
2. 後設認知行為序列分析 29
3. 研究訪談結果 33
五、 結論 37
1. 兼具思維與實作的技術教學模式 37
2. 平面三視圖與實體模型對空間能力的輔助效果 38
3. 教學模式與認知行為 41
參考文獻 42

AbouHashem, Y., Dayal, M., & Savanah, S. (2015). The application of 3D printing in anatomy education. Medical Education Online, 20.
Adams, J., Bertram, J., & McMenamin, P. (2015). Anatomy and Additive Manufacturing: Imaging Methods and 3D Printing in Anatomy Education and Research. FASEB J, 29(1_Supplement), 692-12.
Babuscia, A., Craig, J. L., & Connor, J. A. (2012). Teaching practical leadership in MIT satellite development class: CASTOR and Exoplanet projects. Acta Astronautica, 77, 138-148.
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to lag sequential analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bankel, J., Berggren, K. F., Engström, M., Wiklund, I., Crawley, E. F., Soderholm, D. H., ... & Östlund, S. (2005). Benchmarking engineering curricula with the CDIO syllabus. International journal of engineering education, 21(1), 121-133.
Bassett, K., Carriveau, R., & Ting, S. K. D. (2015). 3D printed wind turbines part 1: Design considerations and rapid manufacture potential. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 11, 186-193.
Baumers, M., Dickens, P., Tuck, C., & Hague, R. (2015). The cost of additive manufacturing: machine productivity, economies of scale and technology-push. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 193-201.
Berman, B. (2012). 3-D printing: The new industrial revolution. Business Horizons, 55(2), 155-162.
Bharti, N., Gonzalez, S., & Amy, B. (2015). 3D Technology in Libraries : Applications for Teaching and Research. In In Emerging Trends and Technologies in Libraries and Information Services (ETTLIS) (pp. 161-166).
Bodner, G. M., & Guay, R. B. (1997). The Purdue Visualization of Rotations Test. The Chemical Educator, 2(4), 1-17.
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, 65-116.
Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition.
Budd, J., Madej, K., Stephens-Wells, J., de Jong, J., Katzur, E., & Mulligan, L. (2007). PageCraft: learning in context a tangible interactive storytelling platform to support early narrative development for young children. InProceedings of the 6th international conference on Interaction design and children, 97-100.
Burger, M. L., & DeSoi, J. F. (1992). The cognitive apprenticeship analogue: a strategy for using ITS technology for the delivery of instruction and as a research tool for the study of teaching and learning. International journal of man-machine studies, 36(6), 775-795.
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Casas, L., & Estop, E. (2015). Virtual and Printed 3D Models for Teaching Crystal Symmetry and Point Groups. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(8), 1338-1343.
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational psychology review, 3(3), 149-210.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American educator, 15(3), 6-11.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser, 18, 32-42.
Contero, M., Etsii, D., & Saorín, J. L. (2007). Learning Support Tools for Developing Spatial Abilities in Engineering Design. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(3), 1-12.
Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D. R., & Edström, K. (2014). Rethinking Engineering Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Dickey, M. D. (2008). Integrating cognitive apprenticeship methods in a Web-based educational technology course for P-12 teacher education. Computers & Education, 51(2), 506-518.
Eitel, A. (2016). How repeated studying and testing affects multimedia learning: Evidence for adaptation to task demands. Learning and Instruction, 41, 70-84.
Farooqi, K. M., & Sengupta, P. P. (2015). Echocardiography and three-dimensional printing: sound ideas to touch a heart. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : Official Publication of the American Society of Echocardiography, 28(4), 398-403.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906.
Gallimore, J. J., & Brown, M. E. (1993). Visualization of 3‐D computer‐aided design objects. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 5(4), 361-382.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books.
Glenberg, A. M. (2010). Embodiment as a unifying perspective for psychology.Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(4), 586-596.
Hackett, M., & Proctor, M. (2016). Three-Dimensional Display Technologies for Anatomical Education: A Literature Review. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1-14.
Horn, M. S., Crouser, R. J., & Bers, M. U. (2012). Tangible interaction and learning: the case for a hybrid approach. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing,16(4), 379-389.
Hung, P. H., Hwang, G. J., Lee, Y. H., & Su, I. H. (2012). A cognitive component analysis approach for developing game-based spatial learning tools. Computers & Education, 59(2), 762-773.
Iiskala, T., Vauras, M., Lehtinen, E., & Salonen, P. (2011). Socially shared metacognition of dyads of pupils in collaborative mathematical problem-solving processes. Learning and instruction, 21(3), 379-393.
Järvelä, S. (1995). The cognitive apprenticeship model in a technologically rich learning environment: Interpreting the learning interaction. Learning and Instruction, 5(3), 237-259.
Jianfeng, B., Hu, L., Li, Y., Tian, Z., Xie, L., Wang, L., … Xie, H. (2013). The Progress of CDIO Engineering Education Reform in Several China Universities: A Review. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 381-385.
Jianzhong, Z. (2008). On CDIO Model under “Learning by Doing” Strategy. Research in Higher Education of Engineering, 3, 1-6.
Jin, W., & Corbett, A. (2011, March). Effectiveness of cognitive apprenticeship learning (CAL) and cognitive tutors (CT) for problem solving using fundamental programming concepts. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, 305-310.
Katsioloudis, P., Jovanovic, V., & Jones, M. (2014). A Comparative Analysis of Spatial Visualization Ability and Drafting Models for Industrial and Technology Education Students. Journal of Technology Education, 26(1), 88-101. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v26n1/katsioloudis.html Accessed 15.12.15
Kay C. Wood, Harlan Smith, D. G. (2001). Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development. http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/ Accessed 16.01.18
Knobelsdorf, M., Kreitz, C., & Böhne, S. (2014, March). Teaching theoretical computer science using a cognitive apprenticeship approach. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, 67-72.
Kopcha, T. J., & Alger, C. (2014). Student teacher communication and performance during a clinical experience supported by a technology-enhanced cognitive apprenticeship. Computers & Education, 72, 48-58.
Kostakis, V., & Papachristou, M. (2014). Commons-based peer production and digital fabrication: The case of a RepRap-based, Lego-built 3D printing-milling machine. Telematics and Informatics, 31(3), 434-443.
Kostakis, V., Niaros, V., & Giotitsas, C. (2015). Open source 3D printing as a means of learning: An educational experiment in two high schools in Greece. Telematics and Informatics, 32(1), 118-128.
Kurtuluş, A. (2013). The effects of web-based interactive virtual tours on the development of prospective mathematics teachers’ spatial skills. Computers & Education, 63, 141-150.
Larkins, D. B. (2014, March). Making use of the cognitive apprenticeship framework in an undergraduate robotics course. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, 722-722.
Lee, Y. J. (2011). Empowering teachers to create educational software: A constructivist approach utilizing Etoys, pair programming and cognitive apprenticeship. Computers & Education, 56(2), 527-538.
Liang, Z., Deng, H., & Tao, J. (2011). Teaching Examples and Pedagogy of Mechanical Manufacture based on the CDIO-Based Teaching Method. Procedia Engineering, 15, 4084-4088.
Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1985). Emergence and Characterization of Sex Differences in Spatial Ability: A Meta-Analysis. Child Development, 56(6), 1479.
Liu, M. (1998). A study of engaging high-school students as multimedia designers in a cognitive apprenticeship-style learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(3), 387-415.
Lohman, D. F. (1979). Spatial Ability: A Review and Reanalysis of the Correlational Literature. STANFORD UNIV CALIF SCHOOL OF EDUCATION.
Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human CommunicationResearch, 28(4), 587–604
Marasco, E., & Behjat, L. (2013). Integrating creativity into elementary electrical engineering education using CDIO and project-based learning. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Microelectronic Systems Education (MSE) (pp. 44-47).
Martini, R., & Shore, B. M. (2008). Pointing to parallels in ability-related differences in the use of metacognition in academic and psychomotor tasks.Learning and Individual Differences, 18(2), 237-247.
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
McGee, M. G. (1979). Human spatial abilities: psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychological Bulletin, 86(5), 889-918.
Mealor, A. D., & Dienes, Z. (2013). The speed of metacognition: Taking time to get to know one’s structural knowledge. Consciousness and cognition, 22(1), 123-136.
Meyer, E., Abrami, P. C., Wade, C. A., Aslan, O., & Deault, L. (2010). Improving literacy and metacognition with electronic portfolios: Teaching and learning with ePEARL. Computers & Education, 55(1), 84-91.
Morán, S., Rubio, R., Gallego, R., Suárez, J., & Martín, S. (2008). Proposal of interactive applications to enhance student’s spatial perception. Computers & Education, 50(3), 772-786.
Nielsen, K. (2010). Apprenticeship approach to learning.
Oropallo, W., & Piegl, L. A. (2016). Ten challenges in 3D printing. Engineering with Computers, 32(1), 135-148.
Passig, D., Tzuriel, D., & Eshel-Kedmi, G. (2016). Improving children’s cognitive modifiability by dynamic assessment in 3D Immersive Virtual Reality environments. Computers & Education, 95, 296-308.
Pedersen, M. R., Nalpantidis, L., Andersen, R. S., Schou, C., Bøgh, S., Krüger, V., & Madsen, O. (2015). Robot skills for manufacturing: From concept to industrial deployment. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 37, 282-291.
Poitras, G. J., & Poitras, E. G. (2011). IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF A COGNITIVE APPRENTICESHIP APPROACH TO CIVIL ENGINEERING.Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association.
Price, C. A., Lee, H. S., & Malatesta, K. (2014). Stereoscopy in Static Scientific Imagery in an Informal Education Setting: Does It Matter?. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 721-734.
Price, S., & Jewitt, C. (2013). A multimodal approach to examining '' embodiment'' in tangible learning environments. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, 43-50.
Psycharis, S., Botsari, E., Mantas, P., & Loukeris, D. (2014). The impact of the computational inquiry based experiment on metacognitive experiences, modelling indicators and learning performance. Computers & Education, 72, 90-99.
Rayna, T., & Striukova, L. (2015). From rapid prototyping to home fabrication: How 3D printing is changing business model innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 214-224.
Rayna, T., Striukova, L., & Darlington, J. (2015). Co-creation and user innovation: The role of online 3D printing platforms. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 37, 90-102.
Ridzwan, C. R., & Yasin, R. M. (2015). Cultivating Learning: A Grounded Theory of Skills Acquisition for Vocation in Modern Apprenticeships. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 275-282.
Risko, E. F., & Dunn, T. L. (2015). Storing information in-the-world: Metacognition and cognitive offloading in a short-term memory task.Consciousness and cognition, 36, 61-74.
Roebers, C. M., Krebs, S. S., & Roderer, T. (2014). Metacognitive monitoring and control in elementary school children: Their interrelations and their role for test performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 29, 141-149.
Roth, W. M., & Bowen, G. M. (1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a grade 8 open-inquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and instruction,13(1), 73-128.
Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2014). The role of dynamic spatial ability in geoscience text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 31, 33-45.
Schelly, C., Anzalone, G., Wijnen, B., & Pearce, J. M. (2015). Open-source 3-D printing technologies for education: Bringing additive manufacturing to the classroom. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 28, 226-237.
Shams, L., & Seitz, A. R. (2008). Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(11), 411-417.
Skulmowski, A., Pradel, S., Kühnert, T., Brunnett, G., & Rey, G. D. (2016). Embodied learning using a tangible user interface: The effects of haptic perception and selective pointing on a spatial learning task. Computers & Education, 92, 64-75.
Stankov, L., & Kleitman, S. (2014). Whither metacognition. Learning and individual differences, 29, 120-122.
Telegenov, K., Tlegenov, Y., & Shintemirov, A. (2015). A Low-Cost Open-Source 3-D-Printed Three-Finger Gripper Platform for Research and Educational Purposes. IEEE Access, 3, 638-647.
Tornare, E., Czajkowski, N. O., & Pons, F. (2015). Children''s emotions in math problem solving situations: Contributions of self-concept, metacognitive experiences, and performance. Learning and Instruction, 39, 88-96.
Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47(2), 599-604.
Veenman, M. V., Bavelaar, L., De Wolf, L., & Van Haaren, M. G. (2014). The on-line assessment of metacognitive skills in a computerized learning environment. Learning and Individual Differences, 29, 123-130.
Verner, I., & Merksamer, A. (2015). Digital design and 3D printing in technology teacher education. Procedia CIRP, 36, 182-186.
West, J., & Kuk, G. (2015). The complementarity of openness: How MakerBot leveraged Thingiverse in 3D printing. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 169-181.
Woodward-Kron, R. (2004). ‘Discourse communities’ and ‘writing apprenticeship’: an investigation of these concepts in undergraduate Education students’ writing. Journal of English for academic Purposes, 3(2), 139-161.
Woolley, N. N., & Jarvis, Y. (2007). Situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship: A model for teaching and learning clinical skills in a technologically rich and authentic learning environment. Nurse Education Today, 27(1), 73-79.
Xiao, W., Zheng, L., Huan, J., & Lei, P. (2015). A complete CAD/CAM/CNC solution for STEP-compliant manufacturing. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 31, 1-10.
Yu, F., & Wang, Y. (2012). Preliminary Investigation on CDIO Incorporated Educational Reform of the Course of Network Security. IERI Procedia, 2, 346-349.
Zhang, L. G., Fisher, J. P., & Leong, K. (2015). 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. London: Academic Press.