創造力的思考與實踐：大學藝術系學生立體創作之教學個案研究

Thinking and Practice of Creativity: Case Studies College of Art student perspective Creation

邱建銘(Chien-Ming Chiu)；羅時瑋(Shi-Wei Lo)

創意思考教學策略 ； 創作實務研究 ； 雕塑創作研究 ； 空間裝置藝術研究 ； Creative thinking pedagogy ； Creative practice research ,Sculpture arts studies ； Installation arts studies

藝術學報

100期（2017 / 04 / 01）

1 - 31

繁體中文

本文主旨在探討創意思考方法融入立體創作課程「雕塑媒材運用」對於學生創作學習，並將作品設置於校園空間的影響。利用雕塑創作相關理論探討空間裝置藝術的關係，以及創造思考教學策略對於創作發展的影響，從學生學習過程中的「創意發想」、「媒材應用」以及「空間關係」三個向度進行分析。以學習者即創作者，教學者即研究者的態度進行的行動學習研究，使學習者組成小組為創作單位進行觀察分析，研究結果發現，可以歸納出為兩大屬性，分別為「計劃組織型」與「實驗探索型」，並以此兩種類型在思考與操作過程與作品呈現的兩部分，最後以「訪談紀錄」呈現無法分類的組別情況，進行說明與分析。最後結論因應文獻探討與創作學習結果，修訂教學計畫，綜結全文之研究意涵與提出建議。

This article explores the impacts of incorporating creative thinking into the three-dimensional art course ＂The use of sculpture mediums＂ on the students' learning as well as on the impacts of displaying their works around campus. Using theories related to sculpture arts to explore the relationships between installation arts and the impacts of creative thinking pedagogy on art creation, the students' learning processes are analyzed in terms of three aspects: ＂creative thinking,＂ ＂the use of media,＂ and ＂spatial relationships.＂ The students are treated as artists while the teachers functioned as researchers. The learning progress is studied by observing and analyzing groups of students as creative units. The results show that students can be categorized into two types: the ＂planning type＂ and the ＂experimental type.＂ These two types are used to explain and analyze differences in their thinking and execution as well as the presentation of their works. Finally, the teaching plan is modified according to discussions of the literature and the learning results, and suggestions are provided after summarizing the implications of this study.

1. Black, P. J.(1998).Testing: Friend or foe?.London, UK:Falmer Press.
2. Bryman, A.(Ed.),Burgess, R. G.(Ed.)(1999).Qualitative research (III).London:SAGE.
3. Christisnns, H.(Ed.),Dorst, K.(Ed.).Analyzing design activity.Chichester, UK:John Wiley & Sons.
4. Creswell, J. W.(1994).Research design: Qualitative & quantitative approaches.London, UK:Sage.
5. Cross, N.(1999).Natural intelligence in design.Design Studies,20(1),25-39.
6. Cross, N.(1994).Engineering design methods, strategy or product design.Chichester, UK:John Wiley & Sons.
7. Cross, N.(Ed.),Christisnns, H.(Ed.),Dorst, D.(Ed.)(1996).Analyzing design activity.Chichester, UK:John Wiley &Sons.
8. Eisner, E. W.(1972).Educating artistic vision.NY:Harper & Row.
9. Feldhusen, J.F.,Treffinger, D.J.(1980).Creative thinking and problem solving in gifted education.Texas:Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
10. Gallagher, J. J.(1994).Teaching the gifted child.Boston, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
11. Gardner, H.(1993).Multiple Intelligences: The theory in practice.New York:Basic Books.
12. Goel, V.(1995).Sketches of thought.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
13. Goldschmidt, G.(1991).Dialectics of sketching.Creative Research Journal,4(2),123-143.
14. Guiford, J.P(1968).Intelligence, creativity and their educational implications.SanDiego:Robert R. Knapp.
15. Hanna, R.,Barber, T.(2001).An inquiry into computers in design: attitude before-attitudes after.Design Studies,22(3),255-281.
16. Liu, Y. C.,Bligh, T.(2003).Towards an "ideal" approach for concept generation.Design Studies,24(4),341-355.
17. Liu, Y. T.(1996).Is designing one search or two? A model of deign thinking involving symbolism and connectionism.Design Studies,17(4),435-449.
18. Macdonald, L.(Ed.),Vince, J.(Ed.)(1994).Interacting virtual environment.Chichester:Wiley.
19. Merriam, S. B.(1988).Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
20. Moran, J.D., III(1988).Creativity in Young Children. ERIC Digest.
21. Pugh, S.(1991).Total design.Wokingham, UK:Addison Wesley.
22. Roozenburgy, N. F. M.,Eekels, J.(1995).Product design: Fundamentals and methods.Chichester, UK:Wiley & Sons.
23. Ruspini, E.(2002).Introduction to longitudinal research.London, UK:Routledge.
24. Schon, D. A.(1983).The reflective practitioner: how professionals tink in action.New York:Basic Books.
25. Schön, D. A.,Wiggins, G.(1992).Kinds of seeing and their structures in designing.Design Studies,13,135-156.
26. Seale, C.(1999).The quality of qualitative research.London, UK:Sage.
27. Simon, H.A.(1992).The science of the artificial.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
28. Smutny, J. F.(2001).Creative Strategies forTeaching Language Arts to Gifted Students (K-8). ERIC Digest E612.
29. Stiggins, R. J.(2001).Student-involved classroom assessment.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill Prentice Hall.
30. Suwa, M.,Purcell, T.,Gero, J.(1998).Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designer cognitive actions.Design Studies,19(4),455-483.
31. Suwa, M.,Tversky, B.(1997).What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis.Design Studies,18(4),340-385.
32. Vernon, P. E.(Ed.)(1970).Creativity and its cultivation.Harmondsworth:Creativity Penguin.
33. Verstijnen, I. M.,Hennessey, J. M.,Leeuwen, C.,van Hamel, R.,Goldschmidt, G.(1998).Sketching and creative discovery.Design Studies,19(4),519-546.
34. Williams, F. E.(1982).Developing Children's Creativity at Home and in School.G/C/T,5(4),2-6.
35. 毛連塭(1984)。台北市國民小學推展創造性教學研討會結論報告。創造性教學資料彙編
36. 陳向明(2004)。社會科學質的研究。臺北市:五南。
37. 陳瓊花(1996)。藝術概論。台北:三民書局。
38. 葉俊顯(1992)。國民小學美勞教學之原理與實務—美勞科研習教材。國立新竹師範學院。
39. 劉豐榮(1996)。質的個案研究方法學在藝術教育研究之意義與應用。海峽兩岸小學教育學術研討會論文集，嘉義市:

1. 劉光夏(2021)。大學藝術類數位影像創作課程學習者創意自我效能構念分析之探究。藝術教育研究，41，73-108。