國中生認知風格對產品創意歷程與創意表現影響之研究

Abstract

本研究旨在探討學生個人特質可能影響學習成就，文獻探討發現個人差異對學習成就有顯著差異，其影響是否能影響科技實作的歷程與表現，有待本研究探討。本量化研究，以國中生的認知風格為自變項，產品創意歷程與創意表現為依變項，研究對象為臺北市某市立國民中學257位學生，研究工具為劉信雄修編自Keefe的「認知風格量表」、「產品創意歷程學習單」與「產品創意量表」。「認知風格量表」包括「連續處理技能」、「區別技能」、「同時處理技能」、「分類技能」、「分析技能」、「空間技能」、「記憶技能」七個量表；產品創意歷程「製作規畫」、「設計分析」、「製作組裝」、「功能測試」四份學習單；產品創意評量「整體評分」、「樣式」、「材料」、「結構」四份量表。所得資料以描述統計、皮爾森績差相關、獨立樣本t檢定及多元迴歸分析等統計方法來進行資料處理，主要發現如下： 一、學生的「認知風格」表現大致良好，以「連續處理技能」表現最佳，但「分類技能」表現最不理想；「產品創意歷程」表現大致良好，以「設計分析」表現最佳，但「作品規畫」表現最不理想；「創意表現」大致良好，「樣式」表現最佳，但「結構」表現最不理想。 二、認知風格的「空間技能」高低分組在產品創意歷程「作品規劃」的差異達顯著水準；「區別技能」高低分組在創意表現「整體評分」、「樣式」、「結構」的差異達顯著水準，「空間技能」高低分組在創意表現「結構」的差異達顯著水準。 三、產品創意歷程的「作品規畫」、「設計分析」及「製作組裝」的高低分組在「整體評分」、「材料」、「樣式」及「結構」的差異達顯著水準；「功能測試」在「整體評分」、「材料」及「樣式」的差異達顯著水準。 四、認知風格的「分類技能」、「空間技能」及「記憶技能」能有效預測產品創意歷程的「作品規畫」；認知風格的「分類技能」能有效預測創意表現的「功能測試」得分。 五、產品創意歷程的「作品規畫」和「設計分析」能有效預測創意表現 的「整體評分」、「樣式」及「結構」。 最後，研究者根據本研究結果加以討論，針對生活科技教學活動提出具體建議，作為未來研究參考。

The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of cognitive styles on junior high school students’ creative product process and creative performance. According to literature review that individual differences, cognitive styles would affect one’s learning achievement. The effects of cognitive styles on creative product process and creative performance were investigated in details in this study. The subjects of this study were 257 sevevn-grade students from a municipal junior high school in Taipei. These subjects were assessed with the “cognitive styles scale”, “creative product profile” and “creative product sclale”. The t-test, Pearson correlation, multiple regression analysis were to analyze the data and the results were show as below: 1.Students’ cognitive styles performance, creative product process, creative performance were good generally, especially “sequential processing”, “design and analyze”, and “style”. 2.The study showed that “spatial skill” difference was found on “planning” and “implementation”; “discrimination skill” difference was found on “overall rate”, “style” and “structure”. 3.The study showed that “plan”, “design and analyse”, and “production” difference were found on “overall rate”, “material”, “style”, and “structure”; “production” difference were found on “overall rate”, “material”, and “style”. 4. The study showed that “categorization skill”, “spatial skill”, and “memory skill” can predict from “plan”; “spatial skill” can predict from “implementaion”. 5. The study showed that “plan” and “design and analyse” could predict from “overall”, “style”, and “structure”. Implications of the finding for living technology curriculum and future research were also discussed.