色彩計劃課程之實作設計研究

A Study of a Practically Operative Design for a Hued Scheming Curriculum

10.7118/JHSS.200612.0037

林睿琳(Rui-Lin Lin)

色彩計劃 ； 實作設計 ； 學習歷程檔案 ； 多元評量 ； hued scheme ； practically operative scheme ； archived course ； pluralistic assessment measurement

人文暨社會科學期刊

2卷2期（2006 / 12 / 01）

37 - 51

繁體中文

本研究旨在針對色彩計劃課程之特質的了解與教學過程之實作設計的討論，以建國科技大學商業設計系九十三學年度入學之在職專班二專一年級學生為研究對象，透過各個設計單元之實作方式，要求學生針對自己的作品進行設計概念之口頭報告，並以教師評分、同儕互評及自我評分的方式進行多元評量。其次，教師針對作品之優缺點進行講評，期望能夠引導每位學生在藉由觀賞與評量其他同學作品的同時，也能達到相互學習並提升設計能力的機會。再者，本研究藉由學生之學習歷程檔案的記錄，分別利用期中與期末兩週對學生進行色彩計劃課程之學習成果的自我檢視，讓學生針對自己的實作設計學習歷程與成果進行檢討與期許。最後，為考量篇幅有限，只就各單元得分結果較佳之作品提出展示，做為本研究在色彩計劃課程之實作設計成果的呈現與後續相關研究的參考。

The aim of this research was to comprehend the character of a hued scheming curriculum and discuss a practically operative design by using freshmen entering the Commercial Design Department of Chienkuo University of Technology in the 2004 academic year as subjects. Through a practical mode of individually scheming unified elements, the students were requested to focus their own work on an oral report on scheming concepts and conducting a pluralistic assessment measurement by means of marks given by teachers, peers and self. In addition, the teachers focused on the advantages and disadvantages of having interpretations and comments, looking forward to expediting a unique opportunity by leading each student to not only mutually learn but also to acquire promotional designing ability, while each student simultaneously enjoyed seeing and assessing other students' works. Furthermore, by virtue of the students' archived course records, this research utilized two one-week periods between the middle and the end of the term, respectively, to concentrate on self-examination and self-inspection of the learning resulting from the hued scheming curriculum, to allow the students to focus on the curriculum for this practically operative scheme and the resulting effects to promote introspection and meet expectations. Eventually, taking limited space into consideration, only those works receiving better marks in the individually unified elements were submitted for exhibition, to which future students who will engage in related studies may refer.

1. 方仁敏(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台中，國立台中師範學院教育測驗統計研究所。
   連結：
2. 林睿琳(2005)。博士論文(博士論文)。彰化，國立彰化師範大學工業教育與技術學系。
   連結：
3. Breault, R. A.(2004).Dissonant themes in preservice portfolio development.Teaching and Teacher Education,20(8),847-859.
4. Centofanti, J. M.(2002).A single-subject multiple baseline and feminist intertextual deconstruction of gender differences among kindergartners in learning the alphabet using clay and a tactual/kinesthetic multiple intelligence and Montessori pedagogy.Texas Tech University.
5. Fast, M.,Armstrong, J.(2003).The course portfolio in a library setting.Research Strategies,19(1),46-56.
6. Gardner, H.(1983).Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.New York, NY:Basic Books.
7. Johnson, R. L.,Fisher, S.,Willeke, M. J.,McDaniel, F.(2003).Portfolio assessment in a collaborative program evaluation: The reliability and validity of a family literacy portfolio.Evaluation and Program Planning,,26(4),367-377.
8. Rockwood, A. C.(2003).Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence as praxis: A test of its instructional effectiveness.State University of New York at Buffalo.
9. Ruth, E.,Morag, A. G.,Melanie, A. J.,Mirjam, M.,Carolyn, M.,Julie, S.,Christine, W.(2004).Using portfolios in the assessment of learning and competence: The impact of four models.Nurse Education in Practice,4(4),250-257.
10. Sendi, P.,Al, M. J.,Gafni, A.,Birch, S.(2004).Portfolio theory and the alternative decision rule of cost-effectiveness analysis: Theoretical and practical considerations.Social Science and Medicine,58(10),1853-1855.
11. Tigelaar, D. E. H.,Dolmans, D. H. J. M.,Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P.,Van-der V. C. P. M.(2004).Using a conceptual framework and the opinions of portfolio experts to develop a teaching portfolio prototype.Studies in Educational Evaluation,30(4),305-321.
12. William, S.,Walid, E. L. A.(2004).Portfolio assessment: Practice teachers` early experience.Nurse Education Today,24(5),388-401.
13. 山中俊夫、黃書倩譯(2003)。色彩學的基礎。台北:六合。
14. 方炳林(1992)。教學原理。台北:教育文物。
15. 王文中、呂金燮、吳毓瑩、張郁雯、張淑慧(1999)。教育測驗與評量。台北:五南。
16. 王淑萍(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北，國立台北市立師範學院科學教育研究所。
17. 史考特•派瑞斯、琳達•愛爾斯、林心茹譯(2000)。培養反思力。台北:遠流。
18. 余民寧(1997)。教育測驗與評量：成就測驗與教學評量。台北:國家圖書館。
19. 亞瑟•柯斯塔、貝娜•考力克、李弘善譯(2001)。評量和記錄心智習性。台北:遠流。
20. 亞瑟•柯斯塔、貝娜•考力克、陳佩秀譯(2001)。活化和運用心智習性。台北:遠流。
21. 林美賢(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。新竹，國立新竹師範學院課程與教學碩士班。
22. 林書堯(1993)。色彩學。台北:三民。
23. 范淑惠(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。彰化，國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修專班。
24. 國立台灣師範大學學術研究委員會(1992)。教學評量研究。台北:五南。
25. 黃壬來(1983)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄，國立高雄師範大學教育研究所。
26. 鄭國裕、林磐聳(2002)。色彩計劃。台北:藝風堂。
27. 賴瓊琦(1999)。設計的色彩心理：色彩的意象與色彩文化。台北:視傳。
28. 戴文雄(1989)。專科學校教師教學評量手冊。台北:教育部技職司。
29. 謝瑩圓(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。彰化，國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修專班。

1. 蕭惠君、蔡美珠(2016)。數位遊戲融入色彩教學之適切性分析。國際數位媒體設計學刊，8(2)，28-42。