淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-2207202015512000
中文論文名稱 探討設計思考對大學生學習動機及學習成效影響之研究-以電機系專題實驗為例
英文論文名稱 The Influence of Design Thinking on College Students’ Learning Motivation And Learning Outcomes - A Case Study of “Project Experiment” in ECE Department
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 電機工程學系機器人工程碩士班
系所名稱(英) Master’s Program In Robotics Engineering, Department Of Electrical And Computer Engineering
學年度 108
學期 2
出版年 109
研究生中文姓名 張家銘
研究生英文姓名 Jia-Ming Zhang
學號 607470027
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2020-07-08
論文頁數 79頁
口試委員 指導教授-劉寅春
委員-邱謙松
委員-劉智誠
中文關鍵字 工程教育  設計思考  合作學習  雙鑽石設計流程 
英文關鍵字 Engineering Education  Design Thinking  Cooperative Learning  Double Diamond Design Process 
學科別分類
中文摘要 本研究將107學年度電機系開設之專題實驗課程作為研究對象,透過教學方式的重新設計,打造全新面貌之電機專題課程,讓學生能以實務角度應用電機系專業知識,並運用電機知識於原型開發。課程將設計思考要素融入後,學生必須在一學年的課程當中執行雙鑽石設計流程(The Double Diamond Design Process),以此方式了解淡江大學的各類型場域,確認場域中的真實問題,最後在學期末的報告中,使用電機工程的專業知識嘗試解決問題。
  定量研究部分,本研究採用非對等控制組設計進行,研究成果表示時間管理及團隊互動之學習成果有顯著提升,且p值小於0.05,表示實驗後成果具有顯著差異,而針對實驗組控制組之成對樣本T檢定,確認實驗組學生在經過設計課程後,學習成效的提升高於控制組。
  定性研究部分,採用課堂觀察法及訪談法實施。研究中可發現當組員對單元活動展現出熱情,亦或團隊內有可帶領組員完成任務的領導者學生出現時,該組在課堂中較能迅速組織隊伍,且快速根據教學目標完成任務,而當課程中有擅長報告的同學出現時,團隊在成果呈現上則較有優勢。
  此外,本研究也針對實驗組採用了半結構式的訪談方法,從此訪談可以得知電機系專題課程融入設計思考後,學生明顯有動機上的提升,而學生對課程更有興趣之後,也能使課程更加貼近實務導向,達到有效的課程整合效果。
  本研究之貢獻,包含專題實驗課程之安排及規劃,課程內容、教學大綱擬定,課程執行的方式。研究也詳細說明了各課程的實施策略、問卷設計及研究設計的方式。
英文摘要 This research takes the project experiment courses offered by the Department of Electrical Engineering in the 107 academic year as the research object. Through the redesign of teaching methods, a brand-new electrical project courses are created, so that students can apply electrical professional knowledge from a practical perspective and use electrical knowledge in prototypes. After integrating the design thinking elements into the course, students must implement The Double Diamond Design Process in the course of one academic year to understand the various fields of Tamkang University and confirm the real problems in the field. Finally, in the report at the end of the semester, use the professional knowledge of electrical engineering to try to solve the problem.
In the quantitative research part, this research adopts the non-equivalent control group design. The research results indicate that the learning results of time management and team interaction have been significantly improved (p-value < .05) , indicating that the results after the experiment have significant differences, and for the experimental group control group The paired sample T test confirms that the students in the experimental group have a higher learning effect than the control group after the designed course.
The qualitative research part is implemented using classroom observation and interview methods. In the research, it can be found that when the group members show enthusiasm for the unit activities, or when there is a leader student in the team who can lead the group members to complete the task, the group can organize the team quickly in the classroom and complete the task quickly according to the teaching goal. When there are students who are good at reporting in the course, the team has an advantage in the presentation of results.
In addition, this study also adopted a semi-structured interview method for the experimental group. From this interview, it can be learned that after the design thinking of the electrical engineering department is integrated, the students are obviously motivated, and the students are more interested in the courses. Make the curriculum closer to practical orientation and achieve an effective curriculum integration effect.
The contribution of this research includes the arrangement and planning of special experimental courses, the preparation of course content, syllabus, and the way of course implementation. The research also explained in detail the implementation strategies, questionnaire design and research design methods of each course.
論文目次 Acknowledgement I
Abstract in Chinese II
Abstract in English III
Contents IV
List of Figures VII
List of Tables IX
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background and Research Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Recent Research on Electrical Engineering Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 The Practical Application of Design Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3.1 Definition of Design Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3.2 Application of Design Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 The Curriculum Design Method of Cooperative Learning . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4.1 Definition of Cooperative Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4.2 The Implementation of Cooperative Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.5 Research Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.5.1 Learning Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.5.2 Learning Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.5.3 Project Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2 Problem Statement 14
2.1 Research Purpose and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3 Methodology 17
3.1 Research Architecture and Flow Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3 Participants and Research Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.4 Instructional Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4.1 Design Thinking Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4.2 Cooperative Learning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.4.3 Course Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4 Results and Discussion 56
4.1 Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.2 Qualitative research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.2.1 Interview Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.2.2 Observe Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
5 Conclusion 68
5.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
5.2 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
References 71
Appendix A Pretest
Questionnaire 74
Appendix B Posttest
Questionnaire 77

List of Figures
1.1 Design thinking process by. Stanford d.school . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Double diamond Process by. Design council, UK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3 Cooperative learning basic elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1 Research framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2 Research flow chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.3 Quantitative research design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.4 Discover and Define in the course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.5 Instructional design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.6 Self introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.7 Students follow the tips of teammates to shoot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.8 Students make boxes to protect eggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.9 The moment a student throws an egg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.10 The students observed the engineering building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.11 Simple mechanism for making vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.12 Materials prepared for the course in research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.13 Antishake spoon Schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.14 Group discussion process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.15 Idea report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.16 Results report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.17 Students control the vehicle through the APP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4.1 Questionnaire items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.2 Mean of pretest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.3 Mean of experimental group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.4 Mean of control group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.5 Mean of posttest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.6 Students in group c are discussing course content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

List of Tables
4.1 Cronbach’s alpha reliability analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.2 Independent sample T test of pretest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.3 Paired sample T test of experimental group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.4 Paired sample T test of control group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.5 Independent sample T test of posttest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
參考文獻 [1] YuHsuan,Lien, ChunMing,Yang, and DingHau,Huang, “The research of designthinking process through the empathy acase study of design thinking in ming chiuniversity of technology,” Industrial Design Magazine, no. 139, pp. 60–65, Jan 2019.
[2] R. Ministry of Education, Education Policy White Paper. Ministry of Education,R.O.C., 2001.
[3] ——, The Ministry of Education subsidizes and mentored colleges and universities topromote the key points of the schoolwidecurriculum innovation program with generaleducation at the core., 4 2007.
[4] ShunPo,Chiu and HueyWen,Chou, “Discussion on the factors influencing the satisfactionof university information management subject learning: From the perspective ofsocial cognitive theory,” Vanung Journal, no. 33, pp. 269–280, Jul 2011.
[5] JiannChyuan,Wang, “Reflections on the oem model of taiwan’s hightechindustry,”Economic Outlook Bimonthly, no. 99, pp. 65–69, May 2005.
[6] E. F. Crawley, The CDIO syllabus: a statement of goals for undergraduate engineeringeducation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA, 2001, no. s 36.
[7] E. F. Crawley, J. Malmqvist, S. Östlund, D. R. Brodeur, and K. Edström, “The cdioapproach,” in Rethinking engineering education. Springer, 2014, pp. 11–45.
[8] DingBang,Luh and ChiaChen,Lu, “Case study analysis of curriculum planning inindustrial design,” Journal of Design Science, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 25–38, 2012.
[9] FangYu,Chang, “An exploration of projectbasedengineering design curriculum insenior high school,” Technology and Manpower Education Quarterly, vol. 3, no. 1, pp.5–11, Sep 2016.
[10] A. Newell, H. A. Simon et al., Human problem solving. PrenticeHallEnglewoodCliffs, NJ, 1972, vol. 104, no. 9.
[11] P. G. Rowe, Design thinking. MIT press, 1987.
[12] T. Brown and J. Wyatt, “Design thinking for social innovation,” Development Outreach,vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 29–43, 2010.
[13] D. M. Kelley, “Retrieved from stanford d.school,” https://dschool.stanford.edu/.
[14] H. Dalton, “Ukdesign council,” https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/.
[15] R. Ministry of Education, White Paper on Creative Education. Ministry of Education,R.O.C., 2003.
[16] HuiJiun,Hu, “4ds teaching method in rural service design course,” Journal of TeachingPractice and Research on Higher Education, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 79–106, Jun 2018.
[17] ShuHuei,Wang, “A study on innovative teaching of immersive and interactive appdesign,” Journal of Cultural and Creative Industries Research, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1–8,Dec 2018.
[18] R. Lefrancois, G. Leclerc, M. Dubé, R. Hebert, and P. Gaulin, “The development andvalidation of a selfreportmeasure of selfactualization,”Social Behavior and Personality:an international journal, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 353–365, 1997.
[19] R. T. Johnson, D. W. Johnson, and E. J. Holubec, “Structuring cooperative learning :lesson plans for teachers,” in Structuring cooperative learning : lesson plans for teachers,1987.
[20] A. Bandura, “Social foundations of thought and action,” in Social Foundations ofThought and Action, 1986.
[21] L. Vygotsky, “Socioculturaltheory,” Mind in society, 1978.
[22] B. Dyson and A. Rubin, “Implementing cooperative learning in elementary physicaleducation,” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, vol. 74, no. 1, pp.48–55, 2003. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2003.10608363
[23] BaoYuan,Hwang and SiehHwa,Lin, “The effects of cooperative learning on learningoutcome: A metaanalysisapproach,” Bulletin of Educational Psychology, vol. 34, no. 1,pp. 21–41, Oct 2002.
[24] D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, Aprender juntos y solos. Aique, 1999.
[25] J. C. Richards and T. S. Rodgers, Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridgeuniversity press, 2014.
[26] P. Kalkowski, Communication in Cooperative Learning Groups. ERIC, 1988.
[27] S. B. Watson, “Cooperative learning and group educational modules: Effectson cognitive achievement of high school biology students,” Journal of Researchin Science Teaching, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 141–146, 1991.
[Online]. Available:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/tea.3660280205
[28] Shengchuan,Lin, Sociology of Education. Chuliu, Taipei, 1990.
[29] ChunHsing,Chang, Educational Psychology. Tunghua, Taipei, 2007.
[30] PingYen,Yeh, “Research on the definition of learning motivation and related theories,”Pingtung University Sports Quarterly, no. 16, pp. 285–293, Apr 2013.
[31] MingWei,Cheng, “Research on learning method, learning participaton, & learningachievement of national open universty ””s students in chiayi area,” Master’s thesis,National Chung Cheng University, 1999.
[32] TengHsiang,Chen, “Basics of educational engineering,” The Educator Monthly, no. 53,pp. 2–4, Nov 1971.
[33] E. E. Maccoby and N. Maccoby, “The interview: A tool of social science,” Handbookof social psychology, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 449–487, 1954.
[34] M. Williams, “Social surveys: design to analysis,” Social research: issues, methods andprocess. Buckingham, 1997.
[35] V. Minichiello, R. Aroni, E. Timewell, and L. Alexander, “Indepthinterviewing: principles,analysis,” 1995.
[36] S. Kagan and S. Kagan, Cooperative learning. Kagan Cooperative Learning San JuanCapistrano, CA, 1994, vol. 2.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2020-08-18公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2020-08-18起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2486 或 來信