十二年國民基本教育的「科技領域」主要希望培養學生的科技素養，透過運用工具、材料來動手實作，促進學生的批判思考、問題解決以及運算思維等思考能力，這樣的課程內容具有銜接高等工程教育的功能。除此之外，新課綱也帶入了3D列印等新興科技，「工程設計」也是其中的重點之一。透過3D列印技術，學生能夠快速建模，加速設計流程，使設計流程更具流暢性，也能促進學生的產品創意表現。
　　十二年國教實施後，工程相關的課程預期將能提升高中生的工程素養與能力，因此高等教育也須因應調整。為了解工程教育培育後的高中生與現今大學生的能力差距，本研究提出專題導向之教學課程，以能夠通過障礙、達成目標任務、具備創新造形的機械蟲設計活動，發展課程後進行教學活動。研究對象為某高中二年級學生33人與某大學工程設計背景之大學生33人，於教學活動結束後透過創意產品分析矩陣、原案分析來比較高中生與工程設計背景之大學生參與課程後的表現，以了解學生能力上的差異與需求，提供高等教育工程相關課程和活動發展與教學之參考。
　　本研究之研究結果發現：(1)工程設計背景之大學生的產品創意表現優於高中生；(2)高中生與工程設計背景之大學生在工程設計活動中項目次數與百分比上沒有顯著差異；(3)工程設計背景之大學生在工程設計行為原案分析結果雖優於高中生，但還是存在個體差異。在工程相關的課程中，教師往往只透過學生設計、製作的產品來評量學生的學習表現。鑒於上述研究結果，在高等教育的工程課程中，教師應採用更多元的評量方式，才有助於學生的認知發展。

The Domain-specific curriculum of Technology in Taiwanese Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education aims to develop students’ core competencies of technology. By using technological tools, materials, and doing practical operation, it can boost students’ ability of critical thinking and problem-solving. Such a curriculum content includes the function of connecting high level engineering education. Moreover, the new curriculum guidelines bring emerging technology, such as 3D printing, and the engineering design is one of the point as well. Via the techniques of the 3D printing, students can build models, accelerate the design process, to make the whole progress more fluent, and promote students’ creative expression.
After the practice of Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education, curriculums concerned with engineering are expected to promote students’ engineering competency and skills, so the higher education needs to adjust as a response. To understand the difference of the ability between senior high school students and current college students who are trained with engineering education, the study has carried out a project oriented teaching curriculum, which is conducting a teaching experiment after developing sessions, by solving obstacles, achieving goals of the tasks, and providing an activity of designing creative models of the Arduino based hexapod robot. The experimental objects are 33 second grade students in a senior high school and 33 college students with engineering speciality. The testing results are done with researching tools, such as the creative product analysis matrix, and protocol analysis. It can help us understand the difference and demand of the students’ ability to provide a reference of developing activities and learning program which are related to the engineering curriculums in higher education.
This study found that: (1) students with engineering design background have better performance of product creativity than high school students; (2) there is no significant difference in the number and percentage of projects in engineering design activities between high school students and college students with engineering design background; (3) although the analysis results of engineering design behaviors of college students with engineering background are superior to high school students, there are still individual differences. In engineering-related courses, teachers usually evaluate students' learning performance only through products designed and produced by students. In view of the above results, in the engineering courses of higher education, teachers should adopt more diverse evaluation methods to help students' cognitive development.

一、　中文部份
王明蘅（1997）。設計原案資料記錄格式之研究。國科會整合計畫專案計畫書，國立成功大學建築系，台南。
林世健（2013）。雲端印刷的創新應用－3D列印。中華印刷科技年報，2013(6)，65-75。
林營宗（2013）。3D列印技術改變工業未來。三聯技術，87 (1)，24-26。
邱茂林（1999）。原案分析中設計知識表達與紀錄之研究－以案例式建築設計為例。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（編號：NSC-88-2211-E-006-054），國立成功大學建築系，台南。
邱茂林（2000）。建築設計原案記錄與分析之課題探討。建築學報，34， 11-37。
許立涵、佟心平、林思穎、林奇秀（2017）。3D列印的發展與應用。圖資與檔案學刊，90，32–51。
張玉山、李大偉、游光昭、林雅玲（2009）。不同範例展示及實作經驗對國中生科技創造力的影響。教育科學研究期刊，54(4)，1-27。
張芳瑜（2016）。於高中實施工程設計專題製作活動課程設計之探討。科技與人力教育季刊，3(1)，5-11。
國家教育研究院十二年國民基本教育課程綱要課程初稿（2017年6月）。科技領域課程手冊。2020/4/10取自http://www.cssh.ntpc.edu.tw/front/bin/download.phtml?Part=17110001&Nbr=256&Category=0
教育部（2016）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校科技領域草綱。2020/04/10取自 http://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/attach/92/pta_10229_131308_94274.pdf
顏晴榮（2007）。有聲思考法的應用。中等教育雙月刊，58（4），國立台灣師範大學，106-116。
蔡錫錚、李建寬、葉則亮、張佩芬（2007）。新手設計行為與思考模式探討。中國機械工程學會第二十四屆全國學術研討會論文集。
蕭錫錡（2000）。合作學習對大學生專題製作創造力影響之研究。科學教育學刊，8(4)，395-410。

 
二、　外文部份
Alley, L. G. (1961). Three-Dimensional Models: How Effective? Journal of Architectural Education (1947-1974), 15(4), 19-24.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. New York: West View Press.
Anderson, O. R., & Demetrius, O. J. (1993). A flow-map method of representing cognitive structure based on respondents’ narrative using science content. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(8), 953-969.
Apedoe, X. S., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: the heating/cooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454-465.
Arunachalam, V., & Sasso, W. (1996). Cognitive processes in program comprehension: an empirical analysis in the context of software reengineering. Journal of Systems and Software, 34, 177-189.
Atman, C.J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 359-379.
Besemer, S. P., & Treffinger, D. J. (1981). Analysis of creative products: Review and synthesis. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 15(3), 158-178.
Besemer, S. P., & O'Quin, K. (1999). Confirming the three-factor creative product analysis matrix model in an American sample. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 287–296.
Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P. L., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Training in self-explanation and self-regulation strategies: investigating the effects of knowledge acquisition activities on problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13(2), 221-252.
Blikstein, P., Kabayadondo, Z., Martin, A., & Fields, D. (2017). An assessment instrument of technological literacies in makerspaces and fablabs. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(1), 149–175.
Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387.
Brogden, H., & Sprecher, T. (1964). Criteria of creativity, In Taylor, C.W., Creativity, progress and potential. New York: McGraw Hill.
Cheng, W. J., & Hsiao, H. C. (2001). A creative teaching method for the industrial design (engineering) education on the foundational course. Paper presented at the 4th UICEE Annual Conference on Engineering Education, Bangkok, Thailand.
Cross, N. (1999). Natural intelligence in design. Design Studies, 20, 25-39.
Cropley, D., & Cropley, A. (2010). Recognizing and fostering creativity in technological design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(3), 345-358.
Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperCollins.
Davis, T., & Gilbert, J. (2003). Modelling: promoting creativity while forging links between science education and design and technology education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(1), 67-82.
D'astous, P., Detienne, F., Visser, W., & Robillard, P. N. (2000). On the use of functional and interactional approaches for the analysis of technical review meetings. In A. F. BLACKWELL and E. BILOTTA (eds), Proceedings of the 12th annual conference of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group (PPIG 12) (Cozena, Italy), 155-170.
Detienne, F., & Soloway, E. (1990). An empirically-derived control structure for the process of program understanding. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 33(3), 323-342.
Dimitrov, D., Schreve, K., & de Beer, N. (2006). Advances in three dimensional printing – state of the art and future perspectives. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 12(3), 136-147.
Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O, Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103-120.
Eisenberg, M. (2013). 3D printing for children: What to build next? International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 1(1), 7–13.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data rev. edn. Cambridge, Massachu-setts: MIT Press.
Erkens, G. (1998). Multiple episode protocol analysis (MEPA 3.0). Utrecht: Department of Educational Sciences.
Eshach, H. (2006). Science literacy in primary schools and pre-schools. Springer Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
Frampton, K., Kolbowski, S., & Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies. (1981). Idea as model. New York, N.Y.: Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies : Rizzoli International Publications.
Gibson, I., Kvan, T., & Ming, L. W. (2002). Rapid prototyping for architectural models. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 8(2), 91-99.
Hailey, C. E., Erickson, T., Becker, K., & Thomas, T. (2005). National center for engineering and technology education. The Technology Teacher, 64(5), 23-26.
Householder, D. L., & Hailey, C. E. (Eds.). (2012). Incorporating engineering design challenges into STEM courses. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&context=ete_facpub
Howe, R. (1997). Handbook of seminar on instruction for creative thinking. Taipei, Taiwan: National Taiwan Normal University.
Hjalmarson, M., Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Moore, T. (2008). Designing model development sequences for engineering. In J. S. Zawojewski, K. J. Bowman, & H. A. Diefes-Dux (Eds.), Models and modeling in engineering education: designing experiences for all students. Roterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Hughes, J., & Parkes, S. (2003). Trends in the use of verbal protocol analysis in software engineering research. Behaviour and Information Technology, 22(2), 127-140.
International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
International Technology and Engineering Educators Association [ITEEA]. (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
Johnson, S. D., & Daugherty, J. (2008). Quality and characteristics of recent research in technology education. Journal of Technology Education, 20(1), 16-31.
Kelley, T. R. (2008). Cognitive processes of students participating in engineering-focused design instruction. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 50-64.
Kim, J. and Hahn, J. (1997). Reasoning with multiple diagrams: focusing on the cognitive integration process. Proceedings of the 19th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 376-381.
Knoll, M. (1997). The project method: Its vocational education origin and international development. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 34(3), 59-80.
Kolodner, J. L. (2002). Facilitating the learning of design practices: Lessons learned from an inquiry into science education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 39(3), 32.
Lammi, M., & Becker, K. (2013). Engineering design thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 24(2), 55-77.
Lee, A., & Pennington, N. (1994). The effects of paradigm on cognitive activities in design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40, 577-601.
Lewis, T. (1999). Research in technology education: Some areas of need. Journal of Technology Education, 10(2), 41-56.
Lin, Y. C., & Fan, K. K. (2017). A study on the practical ability of industrial design students influenced by 3D printer. The Journal of Design Research, 13, 13-16.
Lipson, H., & Kurman, M. (2013). Fabricated: The new world of 3D printing. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Markillie, P. (2012). A Third Industrial Revolution, Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/21552901.
Martin, R., Bowden, S., & Merrill, C. (2014) 3D Printing in Technology and Engineering Education. The Technology and Engineering Teacher. 73(8), 30-35.
Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71-85.
Modeen, T. (2005). CADCAMing: The use of rapid prototyping for the conceptualization and fabrication of architecture. Automation in Construction, 14(2), 215-224.
Mostow, J. (1985). Toward better models of the design process. AI Magazine, 6(1), 44-63.
Moss, J. (1966). Measuring creative abilities in junior high school industrial arts. Washington, DC: American Council on Industrial Arts Teacher Education.
National Science Foundation, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind06/, last access 2020/04/01.
National Academy of Engineering. (2006). Tech tally: Approaches to assessing technological literacy. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council [NRC]. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Academy of Engineering, & National Research Council [NRC]. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council [NRC].(2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practice, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Olson, G. M., Olson, J. S., Storrøsten, M., Carter, M., Herbsleb, J., & Rueter, H. (1996). The structure of activity during design meetings. In T. P. Moran and J. M. Carroll (eds) Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques and Use (NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 217-239.
Pesut, D. J. (1990). Creative thinking as a selfregulatory metacognitive process – a model for education, training and further research. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 26(3), 163-164.
Rinderle, J. R. (1982). Measures of Functional Coupling in Design. Ph.D dissertation, Mass. Inst. Technol., Cambridge.
Robillard, P. N., D'astous, P., Detienne, F., & Visser, W. (1998). Measuring cognitive activities in software engineering. Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Software Engineering (ICSE `98). Kyoto, Japan: IEEE CS Press.
Song, T., Becker, K., Gero, J., DeBerard, S., Lawanto, O., & Reeve, E. (2016). Problem decomposition and recomposition in engineering design: A comparison of design behavior between professional engineers, engineering seniors, and engineering freshmen. Journal of Technology Education, 27(2), 37–56.
Sonnentag, S. (1996). Planning and knowledge about strategies: their relationship to work characteristics in software design. Behaviour and Information Technology, 15(4), 213-225.
Strimel, G., & Grubbs, M. E. (2016). Positioning technology and engineering education as a key force in STEM education. Journal of Technology Education, 27(2), 21-36.
Simon, H.A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd ed.. Cambridge, Mass.s: MIT Press.
Sheppard, S. D. (2003). A Description of Engineering: An Essential Backdrop for Interpreting Engineering Education. Proceedings (CD), Mudd Design Workshop IV, Claremont, Cal.: Harvey Mudd College.
Steinberg, L. I. (1987). Design as Refinement Plus Constraint Propagation: The VEXED Experience. In Proc. of AAAI-87, 830 - 835. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: The Free Press.
Scott Greenhalgh. (2016). The effects of 3D printing in design thinking and design education. Journal of Engineering Design and Technology, 14(4), 752-769.
Tennyson, S. A., & Krueger, T. J. (2001). Classroom Evaluation of a Rapid Prototyping System. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 65(2), 21-29.
Tsai, C. C. (1998). Science learning and constructivism. Curriculum and Teaching, 13, 31-52.
Tsai, K. C. (2016). Fostering creativity in design education: Using the creative product analysis matrix with Chinese undergraduates in Macau. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(4), 1-8.
Vans, A. M., von Mayrhauser, A., & Somlo, G. (1999). Program understanding behaviour during corrective maintenance of large-scale software. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 51, 31-70.
Vissers, G., & Dankbaar, B. (2002). Creativity in multidisciplinary new product development teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11(1), 31-42.
Vitalari, N. P., & Dickson, G. W. (1983). Problem solving for effective systems analysis: an experimental exploration. Communications of the ACM, 26(11), 948-956.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. London, UK: Watts.
West, L. H. T., Fensham, P. J., & Garrard, J. E. (1985). Describing the cognitive structures of learners following instruction in chemistry. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structures and conceptual change, (pp. 29-48). Orlando: Academic Press.