工業設計專案學習的評量項目意涵及意涵說明：教師觀點

Evaluation Criteria in Industrial Design Learning: An Analysis of Teachers' Perspective

陳淳迪(Chun-Di Chen)；黃佳音(Chia-Yin Huang)；翁註重(Ju-Jong Wong)

工業設計專案學習 ； 學習評量 ； 設計教育 ； industrial design project learning ； learning assessment ； design education

藝術教育研究

23期（2012 / 05 / 01）

71 - 100

繁體中文

工業設計實務學習評量趨向於採用多元評量方式，然而目前相關研究主要著眼於評量項目種類上的探討，較少觸及評量項目的內涵以及如何向學生說明這些評量項目等實際執行面上的議題。本研究訪談九位產品設計相關學系教師，以文本分析方式歸納出被最多受訪教師所提到的前五項設計專案學習評量項目，包含創意、造形美感、完整性、發表能力、以及表現能力，並探討這些評量項目的意涵以及如何向學生解釋這些意涵的方法。分析結果顯示在設計專案的學習評量中，教師除了在評量內容上沒有標準答案，對於學生表現良莠與否的差異性似乎無法在事前明確的加以定義，對於特定的評量項目也不易在事前向學生清楚說明表現好壞的差異為何。本研究從教師、教學以及學科特性探討可能的原因，並提出以互為主體性的實踐促進教師群與學生甚至其他的專業者在價值、知識以及思想上的對話與理解，以獲得更佳的學習成效。

This study argues that the assessment methods proposed from the current studies concerning with design practical learning assessment are less practical due to inappropriate research approaches. Instead, this research work addresses the contents of assessment criteria and the way to explain these criteria in terms of interviewing 9 design teachers, and applying the text analysis to the transcriptions of the interviewees' utterance. Having categorized the most popular 5 criteria (creativity, beauty of form, integrity, presentation skill, and performance) employed by the interviewees, the results of the analysis showed that there is neither standard nor consistent meaning to each criterion amongst these interviewees. Moreover, it is virtually impossible to precisely clarify what the good or bad learning performance is prior to the commencement of the design project. Facing on the nature of the subjectivity in design, this paper proposes the practice of inter-subjectivity to enhance the dialogue between the teachers and the students and then to become a co-learning group looking for the better performance.

1. 吳志衍、楊裕富、楊紹裘(2006)。設計教學歷程之評量指標建構初探：以中臺灣設計科系為例。建築學報，55(3)，1-20。
   連結：
2. 翁註重(2003)。久被遺忘的誘騙原型：從「商品美學批判：資本主義社會中的表象、慾望及廣告」反思現代設計。城市與設計學報，13(14)，411-429。
   連結：
3. 楊敏英、游萬來、陳斐娟(2005)。探討工業設計系學生面臨的困擾及生涯輔導需求對設計教育的意涵。設計學報，10(2)，57-76。
   連結：
4. Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company
5. Ammer, J. J.(1998).Peer evaluation model for enhancing writing performance of students with learning disabilities.Reading & Writing Quarterly,14(3),263-276.
6. Andrade, H. G.(2000).Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning.Educational Leadership,57(5),13-19.
7. Bayazit, N.(2004).Investigating design: A review of forty years of design research.Design Issues,20(1),16-29.
8. Blandford, A. E.(1993).Applying the WON to WOMBAT: Evaluation of a tool to support learning about design evaluation.Design Studies,14(3),228-246.
9. Buckanan, R.(2001).The problem of character in design education: Liberal arts and professional specialization.International Journal of Technology and Design Education,11(1),13-26.
10. Cheng, W. J.(2000).Taiwanese perspective: Factors involving the transition period in the new millennium and the design education in Taiwan.The IERA Symposium 2000,USA: San Francisco:
11. Crossley, D. N.(1996).Intersubjectivity: The fabric of social becoming.London, UK:Sage.
12. Findeli, A.(2001).Rethinking design education for the 21st century: Theoretical, methodological, and ethical discussion..Design Issues,17(1),5-17.
13. Flick, U.(2009).An introduction to qualitative research.London, UK:Sage.
14. Freire, P.(1993).Pedagogy of the oppressed.New York, NY:Continuum.
15. Gero, J.(Ed.),Tversky, B.(Ed.)(1999).Visual and spatial reasoning in design.Sydney, Australia:Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney.
16. Glaser, B. G.,Strauss, A.(1967).The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.Chicago, IL:Aldine.
17. Gluck, J.,Ernst, R.,Unger, F.(2002).How creatives define creativity: Definitions reflect different types of creativity.Creativity Research Journal,14(1),55-67.
18. Green, L. N.,Bonollo, E.(2004).The importance of design methods to student industrial designers.Global Journal of Engineering Education,8(2),175-182.
19. Lee, N.(2009).Project methods as the vehicle for learning in undergraduate design education: A typology.Design Studies,30(5),541-560.
20. Lewis, W. P.,Bonolo, E.(2002).An analysis of professional skills in design: Implications for education and research.Design Studies,23(4),385-406.
21. Linn, R. L.,Baker, E. L.,Dunbar, S. B.(1991).Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria.Educational Research,20(8),15-21.
22. Matusov, E.(2001).Intersubjectivity as a way of informing teaching design for a community of learners classroom.Teaching and Teacher Education,17,383-402.
23. Nonaka, I.,Takeuchi, H.(1995).The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
24. Oxman, R.(2003).Think-maps: Teaching design thinking in design education.Design Studies,25(1),63-91.
25. Parkes, J.(2000).The interaction of assessment format and examinee's perceptions of control.Educational Research,42(2),175-182.
26. Patton, M. Q.(2007).Qualitative research and evaluation methods.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
27. Saunders-Smits, G.,Melkert, J.(2011).Innovative grading for design exercise: A case study from aerospace engineering.IASDR'2011,Delft, Northland:
28. Stiggins, R.(1987).Design and development of performance assessment.Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,6(3),33-42.
29. Topping, K. J.,Ehly, S. E.(2001).Peer-assisted learning: A framework for consultation.Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation,12(2),113-132.
30. Wagner, I.(2000).Persuasive artefacts in architectural design and planning.Proceedings of CoDe signing 2000,London, UK:
31. Yang, M.,You, M.,Chen, F.(2005).Competencies and qualifications for industrial design jobs: Implications for design practice, education, and student career guidance.Design Studies,26(2),155-189.
32. Yeh, W.(2003).The demand and the evaluation of the industrial design profession from the industries.Proceedings of the 6th Asian design conference,Tsukuba, Japan:
33. Zerull, D. S.(1990).Evaluation in arts education: Building and using an effective assessment strategy.Designs for Arts in Education,92(1),19-24.
34. 林家旭(2008)。以德飛法建構服裝設計作品評量表之建構。華岡紡織期刊，15(4)，323-332。
35. 林曼麗(2000)。臺灣視覺藝術教育研究。臺北=Taipei:雄獅美術=Lionart。
36. 胡薏涵(2005)。長庚大學工業設計研究所=Chang Gung University, Graduate School of Industrial Design。
37. 彭森明(2006)。學習成就評量的多元功能及其相應研究設計。教育研究與發展，2(4)，21-37。
38. 楊深坑(1996)。理性的冒險、生命的行動及主體性的失落與拯救。教育研究集刊，37，20-38。
39. 歐滄和(2002)。教育測驗與評量。臺北=Taipei:心理=Psychological。
40. 潘文福(2010)。建構互為主體性的教室觀察指標：詮釋的觀點。教育資料與研究，96，95-116。
41. 魯俊賢、陳美英、吳毓瑩(2005)。過程技能能力要項藉由能力指標聚焦並轉化成實作評量設計之行動研究。當代教育研究季刊，13(4)，95-132。
42. 蕭錫錡、鄭文俊(2001)。工業設計教育之發展方向。技術及職業教育雙月刊，61，51-56。
43. 嚴貞、孫志誠(2008)。設計類師生對實作評量的認知與評量規準之研究。科技學刊，17(1)，41-57。

1. 劉光夏(2021)。跨越主觀：網路同儕互評應用於大學藝術設計課堂之實踐研究。設計學報，26(2)，69-92。