模組教具對不同學習風格學生的工程概念學習成效影響之研究

Abstract

本文旨在探討模組教具應用對不同學習風格學生的工程概念學習成效之影響，以提供學校日後推動工程教育之參考。本研究對象為臺北市立某高中二年級10個班級的學生，共計417人，分為實驗組209人，控制組208人。 主要研究方法為準實驗研究法，並採用不等組前後測實驗設計，以Kolb學習風格量表、模組教具教學單元-機械獸、學習單及工程概念學習成效評量表為研究工具。在資料分析方面，利用SPSS 20.0 for Windows進行平均數、標準差、獨立樣本單因子共變數分析及獨立樣本雙因子共變數分析。 研究結果發現，模組教具應用對學生的工程概念學習成效優於傳統教學，模組教具應用對學生的工程限制概念及工程最佳化概念學習成效沒有顯著影響，模組教具應用對將近四成學生的工程預測分析學習成效優於傳統教學。 不同的學習風格對學生的工程概念及工程限制概念有顯著影響，皆以擴散型學生學習效果為最好，但是對學生的工程最佳化概念及工程預測分析概念學習成效，並沒有顯著影響。學習風格與模組教具應用對高中生工程概念學習成效有交互作用，以調適型的學生在模組教具應用教學中的工程概念學習效果最好。

This study was to examine how modular teaching aids and learning styles influenced different learners’ engineering concepts. This also served as a reference for schools to promote engineering education. The research subjects of this study were ten classes of eleventh graders from a Taipei Municipal Senior High School. They totaled 417 people with 209 people as an experimental group and 208 people as a control group. The major research method was characterized by a quasi-experimental research design and a pre-post-test design. The research tools and instruments included Kolb’s learning style inventory and the modular teaching aids-oriented instructional units—mechanical beasts, worksheets, and Engineering Concept Test. Concerning the analysis of the research data, this study utilized SPSS Statistics 20.0 for Windows not only to calculate the average and standard deviation but also to perform one-way ANCOVA and two-way ANCOVA. The major research findings were: (1) the modular teaching aids assisted the students significantly better in learning engineering concepts than the traditional teaching modes; (2) the application of the modular teaching aids exerted no significant impact on the students’ learning of both constraint concepts and optimization concepts in engineering; (3) the modular teaching aids were more conducive to approximately forty percent of the students’ learning of predictive analysis concepts in engineering than the traditional teaching modes. Various learning styles exercised obvious influence on the students’ learning of engineering concepts and constraints concept in engineering, particularly the divergers’. Nevertheless, there existed no significant difference in all the students’ learning of optimization concepts and predictive analysis concepts in engineering. Additionally, there were interactive effects of the modular teaching aids and learning styles on engineering concept learning of participant students. The students categorized as accommodators performed the best when provided with the modular teaching aids in engineering concept learning.