設計科系學生知覺電腦支援合作設計平臺的使用性評估及滿意度之研究 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)67. 國立政治大學「教育與心理研究」 2016 年 9 月，39 卷 3 期，頁 67-95 DOI. 10.3966/102498852016093903003. 設計科系學生知覺電腦支援合作設計平臺的使用性評估及滿意度之研究許正妹*. 摘. 要. 網路教學平臺的功能及設計是影響教學成效的重要關鍵。本研究根據先前研究，在了解設計科系學生對於網路教學平臺之功能需求後，乃設計並建置設計科系網路教學平臺，名為「以電腦為基礎並支援合作設計」（ Computer Support for Collaborative Design, CSCD）教學平臺。接續，本研究使用CSCD平臺做為輔助教學的網路平臺，由設計科系學生進行實際上線測試，再進行使用性評估及滿意度調查，以進一步驗證平臺的使用滿意度及實用價值。本研究貢獻為：一、提供一個符合設計科系學生需求的網路教學平臺；二、提供合作式心智圖工具以支持合作式設計；三、提供一個有助於提升學習成效及設計創造力的網路教學環境；四、提供一個評估網路學習平臺的範例，並有助於提升網路教學平臺的品質及發展。. 關鍵詞：合作式心智圖、使用性評估、電腦支援合作設計平臺、滿意度評估、線上學習平臺. *. 許正妹：中國科技大學視覺傳達設計系助理教授電子郵件：[email protected] 收件日期：2015.09.23；修改日期：2016.03.07；接受日期：2016.03.09.

(2) 68. Journal of Education & Psychology September, 2016, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 67-95. Research on the Usability and Satisfaction of Online CSCD Platform for Design Students Cheng-Mei Hsu* Abstract The function and design of an online learning environment are the key factors affecting learning efficacy. This is a follow-up study, and the effects of online learning environment- the Computer Support for Collaborative Design (CSCD) platform which was designed and constructed especially for design students was examined. The researchers first adopted the CSCD platform to serve as the online learning platform for assisted design instruction. Then, students engaged in usability assessment and satisfaction surveys to verify further the satisfaction with and practical value of the CSCD platform. Contributions of this study include: (1) providing an online learning platform which meets needs of design students; (2) provides collaborative mind mapping tool to support collaborative design; (3) enhances learning outcomes and creativity; and (4) promoting the development of online design education.. Keywords: collaborative mind mapping, usability assessment, CSCD platform, satisfaction assessment, online learning platform. *. Cheng-Mei Hsu: Assistant Professor, Department of Visual Communication Design, China University of Technology E-mail: [email protected]. Manuscript received: 2015.09.23; Revised: 2016.03.07; Accepted: 2016.03.09.

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

(16)

(17)

(18)

(19)

(20)

(21)

(22)

(23)

(24)

(25) 設計科系學生知覺電腦支援合作設計平臺的使用性評估及滿意度之研究. caused differences were not further analyzed. In the future, these variables may be discussed in detail. In addition, there are many CSCD platform learning tools, which are all factors affecting students’ learning outcome. In the future, several of these factors can be selected to fully. present. students’. work. for. discussion.. References Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. M. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25-56). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2010). Work teams. Retrieved from http://digitalcom mons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi ?article=1441&context=articles Buzan, T. (2007). The speed reading book. Taipei, Taiwan: Yale International Cultural. Chen, W., & You, M. (2001). Internet mediated design course: The construction of the Internet to assist design course. Design Research, 2, 109115. Chiocchio, F., Forgues, D., Paradis, D., & Iordanova, I. (2011). Teamwork in integrated design projects: Understanding the effects of trust, conflict, and collaboration on performance. Project Management Journal, 42(6), 78-91.. 91. Chou, Y., Yang, M., & Huang, S. (2010). A study of applying electronic process portfolios for enhancing student reflection: A course of metalwork design. Journal of National United University, 7(2), 211-232. Corona, F., Perrotta, F., Polcini, E. T., & Cozzarelli, C. (2010). The symbolic threshold: A dynamic form of the mind as an expression of radiant thinking. American Journal of Neuroscience, 1(2), 34-37. Fleischmann, K. (2011). Closing the gap: Flexible and dynamic design education to better prepare digital media design students for professional practice. Design Principles and Practices, 5, 213224. Guan, S., Hsu, C., & Yen, J. (2006). The study on the design criteria and inventory development of the web-based teaching platform. Journal of Science and Technology, 15(2), 151-166. Haymaker, J., Keel, P., Ackermann, E., & Porter, W. (2000). Filter mediated design: Generating coherence in collaborative design. Design Studies, 21(2), 205-220. Hong, M. (1999). E-learning. Taipei, Taiwan: Hua-Cai. Hsu, C. M. (2013). The construction of a webbased learning platform from the perspective of computer support for collaborative design. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 3(4), 44-67. Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist leaning environment. In Instructional design theories and.

(26) 92 教育與心理研究. 39 卷 3 期. models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 215-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Jonassen, D. H. (2002). Designing constructivist-learning environments. Retrieved from http://www.coe.missouri. edu/~jonassen/courses/CLE Kalay, Y. (2006). The impact of information technology on design methods, products and practices. Design Studies, 27(3), 357-380. Kali, Y., Levin-Peled, R., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). The role of design-principles in designing courses that promote collaborative learning in highereducation. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5), 1067-1078. Keith, H. (2003). A scorm-based content aggregation and presentation system (Unpublished master thesis). Tamkang University, Taipei, Taiwan. Khan, B. H. (1997). “Web-based instruction (WBI): What is it and why is it?” Webbased Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology. Koutsabasis, P., Vosinakis, S., Malisova, K., & Paparounas, N. (2012). On the value of virtual worlds for collaborative design. Design Studies, 33(4), 357-390. Li, C. L., Yang, L. P., & Wang, W. (Eds.). (2015). Application of mind mapping to improve the teaching effect of Java program design course. In H. C. Liu, W. P. Sung, & W. Yao (Eds.), Computing, control, information and education engineering (pp. 451-454). London, UK: Taylor & Francis Group. Liu, K., & Hsieh, C. (2009). The study of the effects of mind mapping program on the. fifth-grade students’ linguistic creativity in elementary school. STUT Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1, 75106. Liu, M., Kao, T., Lin, C., Su, Y., & Chan, C. (2012). Investigating the effect of using peer tutoring to assist guiding e-class discussion forums. Tzu-Chi University Journal of the Educational Research, 8, 31-51. Lu, C., Wang, T., Chen, I., & Lin, S. (2008). Using a concept map in clinical nursing teaching: A pilot study. Tzu Chi Nursing Journal, 7(5), 65-73. Lu, H., & Lin, H. (2010). A study of PBL practice in general education in universities-a case study of “Family and human relations: Guided reading of classic plays”. Zhishan, 8, 71-96. Peck, K. L., Jonassen, D. H., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Phelan, A. (2006). Studio art education today: The impact of digital media and technology on the pedagogical structure. The International Journal of Arts Education, 4(1), 9-22. Rosciano, A. (2015). The effectiveness of mind mapping as an active learning strategy among associate degree nursing students. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 10(2), 93-99. Şendağ, S., & Odabaşı, H. (2009). Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Computers & Education, 53(1), 132-141. Shen, W. (2011). A BIM-based pre-occupancy.

(27) 設計科系學生知覺電腦支援合作設計平臺的使用性評估及滿意度之研究. evaluation platform (PEP) for facilitating designer-client communication in the early design stage (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://repository.lib.polyu.edu.hk/jspui/h andle/10397/5313 Shen, W., Hao, Q., & Li, W. (2008). Computer supported collaborative design: Retrospective and perspective. Computers in Industry, 59, 855-862. Shieh, R. (2012). The impact of technologyenabled active learning (TEAL) implementation on student learning and teachers’ teaching in a high school context. Computers & Education, 59(2), 206-214. Tidafi, T., & Dorta, T. (Eds). (2009). Design tools and collaborative ideation. Retrieved from http://www.hybridlab. umontreal.ca/documents/23-CAADFutur es.pdf Vyas, D., Heylen, D., Nijholt, A., & van der Veer, G. (2009). Collaborative practices that support creativity in design.. 93. Proceedings of 2009 11th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW'09), 151170. doi: 10.1007/978-1-84882-854-4_9 Wen, F. (2002). The influence of web-based collaborative environment on learning performance (Unpublished master thesis). Shu Te University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Yazici, S., Boyle, T., & Khan, T. (2001, August). Towards a multimedia learning environment for object oriented design. Paper presented at the LTSN-ICS 2nd Annual Conference, London, UK. Yen, J., & Hsu, C. (2007). The functional designs of the web-based teaching platform for design field: An application of analytical hierarchy process. Journal of Science and Technology, 16(1), 61-80. Yue, X. (2003). Online english teaching resource and support. Retrieved from http://cmp.nkuht.edu.tw/cu/htm/artical/ar tical-11.htm.

(28) 94 教育與心理研究. 39 卷 3 期. Appendix The satisfaction questionnaire of CSCD platform 1 I. Instructional strategy 1. It clearly indicates the instruction goal. 2. It indicates knowledge and techniques to be learned. 3. It assigns evaluation practice for the class. 4. It provides Frequently Asked Question (FAQ). 5. It provides cases and situations to improve students’ understanding. 6. It applies various learning facilitation medias. 7. It applies novel and challenging strategies to increase motivation. 8. The presented content is correct in its instructional goal. 9. It effectively integrates learners’ past learning experience and knowledge. 10. It provides learner communication and interaction opportunities (e.g. online discussion). II. Teaching material 11. The teaching material is accurate. 12. The teaching material is objective. 13. The teaching material paragraph is clear. 14. The teaching material induces learning motivation. 15. The teaching material scheme is appropriate and materials correlate. 16. The teaching material quantity is appropriate and meets learners’ needs. 17. The teaching material quality is appropriate and meets learners’ capabilities. 18. The teaching material unit topic is clear and definite. 19. The teaching material organizational structure is clear and systematic. 20. The teaching material cases and situations meet learners’ cognitive abilities. III. Learning tool 21. It provides practical learning tools (e.g. online notebook). 22. It provides search functions. 23. It provides related software for downloading. 24. It provides learning records. 25. The menu linkage displays normally. 26. The category is appropriate. 27. It provides learner process management. 28. It provides quick error instruction. 29. It provides the mechanism to ask for systematic manager help. 30. The navigation is clear and easily understood. IV. Learning interface 31. The texts can be clearly read. 32. The words frequently convey information. 33. The images clearly communicate information. 34. The graphics and text complement and support comprehension improvement. 35. The animation design clearly communicates information. 36. The animation design increases learning desire.. 2. 3. 4. 5.

(29) 設計科系學生知覺電腦支援合作設計平臺的使用性評估及滿意度之研究. 1 37. 38. 39. 40.. The video quality is clear and good. The video transmission is smooth and does not lag. The interface design is pleasing and artistic. The interface design is creative.. 2. 3. 4. 95. 5.

(30)