本研究主要在探討傑出科技創作學童在參與「Power Tech：2002全國少年科技創作競賽」之點子發想，針對表現傑出隊伍於問題解決模式之點子擷取方法及點子發想成效進行分析。為達成此目的，本研究以立意選取表現傑出隊伍進行深度訪談，訪談內容則採用半結構式訪談大綱，並蒐集作品創新歷程記錄進行文件分析。透過文件分析、訪談表現傑出隊伍、指導老師及家長三方面資料做為本研究三角分析校正之用。根據本研究所得到的結論如下：
一、 科技創造力成長背景與發展
本研究就家庭環境與學校學習經驗兩點做摘要說明：
（一）家庭環境：傑出科技創作學童參加Power Tech，皆獲家長高度支持，家長不只在時間及材料購買方面支持，在空間上，以家庭兼工廠的概念來支持學童從事科技創作，加上學童本身的興趣使他們具備高度信心參賽。
（二）學校學習經驗：假設傑出科技創作學童對於與Power Tech較高度相關的自然科目有高度的興趣，但根據研究結果，不支持假設，究其原因，他們表示任課教師過度注重講述，忽略了動手經驗（no hands-on experience）有關。
二、 個人與團隊點子發想之方法與成效
本研究就個人點子發想特色、團隊運作方式與團隊點子發想特色三點做摘要說明：
（一）個人點子發想特色
個人點子發想特色分為下列四點：1.點子發想方法：傑出科技創作學童最常用的為與人討論及探勘他物兩種方法。2.點子發想的情境：多為在共同製作場地中一同討論時所發想出來。3.篩選原始點子的方法：多半為自行選出較可行的點子。點子不是太誇張及不實際即可試驗。4.篩選認為可行點子的方法：多半選擇提出由團隊一起討論抉擇。
（二）團隊運作方式
兩隊在材料加工部分的團隊運作方式採保齡球隊，即各自分工完成各人負責部分；在部品組合部分採籃球隊，即相互提出自己的知識與技術，並由隊長調度分配，依據當時比賽狀況做隨機應變。
（三）團隊點子發想特色
團隊點子發想特色分為下列四點：1.點子發想方法：團隊皆採用一般討論法來共同發想。2.點子發想的情境：多在共同製作討論的時候發想出來。3.篩選原始點子的方法：先篩選個人提出可行的點子，然後再依無法解決的問題討論或是取較平衡的點子來運用在作品上。4.篩選認為可行點子的方法：甲隊篩選認為可行的方法分別為製作完成後再行針對出現的問題狀況加以解決或把行不通的點子去除，討論新的點子；乙隊則分成兩小隊實際比賽，依比賽結果修正。
最後，根據研究結果提出八點建議以供培養科技人才及相關活動單位之參考。

This study aims to investigate the idea generating process of outstanding pupils in the Power Tech 2002 Taiwan Youth Technological Innovation Contest. To do that, an in-depth analysis of the idea generating methods applied for problem solving as well as the idea generating results of the winning teams will be provided. The study selects the outstanding teams in the contest through purposive sampling for an in-depth interview, of which a semi-structured content outline is used, and collects the records of the project creation process for document analysis. The three data sets obtained from the document analysis and the interviews on the outstanding teams, the teacher advisors, and the parents are then used for triangulation. The major findings of this study are summarized below:
1. Personal background with the development of technological creativity
For personal background, this study mainly discusses family environment and school learning experience:
(1) Family environment: All of the outstanding pupils at the Power Tech contest had strong support from their parents. The parents not only allow their children to spend time on the project but provide financial support with material purchase. Space-wise, the parents even use the “home factory” concept to encourage their children to engage in technological innovation. All this, together with the children’s own interest, have given the children a high level of confidence in competition.
(2) School learning experience: The hypothesis is that the outstanding pupils are highly interested in the Science subject at school because it is closely related to the Power Tech contest. The research findings however do not support the hypothesis. The reason, according to the outstanding pupils is that their teachers at school tend to over-emphasize the importance of lecture and have largely ignored hands-on experience.
2. Idea generating methods and results of individual members and of the team as a whole
For idea generating methods and results, this study mainly discusses individual member’s idea generation characteristics, team operation method, and team idea generation characteristics:
(1) Individual members’ idea generation characteristics
The idea generation characteristics of individual members can be discussed under the following four categories: 1. Idea generating method—discussion and object exploration are the two major approaches most frequently applied by the outstanding pupils in Power Tech. 2. Idea generating context—most of the ideas are generated during discussion at the general joint production site. 3. Original idea screening method—most of the pupils pick out feasible ideas by themselves. All ideas are tested except those too farfetched or impractical ones. 4. Feasible idea screening method—most pupils leave it to the team for discussion and final decision.
(2) Team operation method
Both outstanding teams adopt a bowling-team type of operation in material processing, i.e. each member completes his own part of work, whereas in component assembly, the basketball team operation model is adopted, i.e. each member provides his own knowledge and skills and the team manager or leader is responsible for resource allocation and decision making according to the change of the situation at the contest.
(3) Team idea generation characteristics
The team idea generation characteristics too can be discussed under the following four categories: 1. Idea generating method—both teams adopt the discussion approach to brainstorm for ideas. 2. Idea generating context—most of the ideas are developed during discussion and joint production. 3. Original idea screening method—team members first raise the ideas that they believe to be feasible and then the team discusses the unsolved problems or selects relatively balanced ideas for use in the final product. 4. Feasible idea screening method: Team A first selects feasible ideas and applies them in production. After the project is completed, the team then fixes the problems or drops the unworkable ideas to discuss new possibilities. Team B on the other hand divides themselves up into two sub-groups to compete for ideas and then revises the ideas according to the result of competition.
Based on the research findings, this study makes eight recommendations as reference for institutions in charge of preparing future technological talents and for organizers of similar technological contest activities.

壹、中文部份
王怡云(1995)。從家庭環境和學校環境看幼兒同儕互動。國立台灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文。
王文科(2000)。教育研究法。台北市：五南圖書公司。
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台(2000)。創造力研究。台北：心理。
江新合(1999)。中小學科學創造性思考能力培養研究。國科會研究計畫，NSC89-2519-S017-001-C。
吳淑敏(1992)。創造性問題解決之心像教學方案對國小資優班學生問題解決能力、創造力、自我概念及認知風格之影響。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
吳清基、洪榮昭、朱永裕及鄭廉鐙(2001)。科技創作能力發展分析-以第一屆全國少年科技創作競賽為例。第二屆兒童發展國際研討會: 靈機一觸創新意。香港：浸會大學‧兒童發展研究中心。
呂俊甫(1983)。發展心理與教育。台北：台灣商務書局。
李錫津(1987)。創造思考教學研究。台北：台灣書店。
李大偉、張玉山(2000)。科技創造力的意涵與教學(上)。生活科技教育，33(9)，10-12。
邱皓政(2000)。組織創新環境的概念建構與測量工具發展。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究未發表。
林奇芳(2001)。廿一世紀組織決勝之道：論團隊創造力的本質與內涵。研習論壇，10，44-45。
林展立(2001)。傑出科技創作學童創造特質之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育所碩士論文。
林義夫(2002)。台灣經濟趨勢。http://210.69.121.61/chief/news/index.asp。
柯怡君及張靜嚳(1995)，以問題為中心的數學教學策略在資優班與普通班實施之比較。科學教育，6，181-207。
俞國良(1996)。創造力心理學。杭州：浙江人民出版社。
洪榮昭(1996)，日本「創造力培育」考察心得報告。台北：行政院國科會科資中心。NSC85-2517-S003-008。
洪榮昭(1998)。創新領先-如何激發個人與組織的創造力。台北：張老師文化。
洪榮昭、許書務（1998）。專題製作對科技創造力發展之影響分析---以多功能機器人製作為例，技術及職業教育學報，創刊號，169-180。
洪榮昭(2001a)。知識創新與學習型組織。台北：五南。
洪榮昭(2001b)。創造技法與創造情境研究。國科會研究計畫，NSC89-2511-S-003-153-X3。
胡龍騰、潘道中、黃瑋瑩合譯(2000)。研究方法：步驟化學習指南。台北：學富。
孫本初(1996)。從分析單元論團隊的意義及對公共管理之影響，國立政治大學學報，73(下)，145-177。
徐宗國譯(1997)。質性研究概論。台北：巨流。
張世彗(1988)。創造性問題解決方案對國小資優班與普通班學生創造性問題解決能力，創造力和問題解決能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
張玉山(1999)。美國中小學科技教育課程現況及其啟示。生活科技教育月刊，32(7)，2-11。
教育部(2002)。創造力教育白皮書草案。http://www.edu.tw/society/report/index.htm。
郭進隆譯(1994)。第五項修練－學習型組織的藝術與實務。台北：天下。
郭有橘(1994)。發明心理學。台北：遠流。
郭素蘭(1994)。國小資優兒童與普通兒童在家庭社經背景與父母管教態度上的差異。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳龍安(1984)。「問、想、做、評」創造思考教學模式的建立與驗證。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
陳英豪、蔡武利（1996）。談創造思考。臺灣省高級職業學校學生創作研究發會專輯。臺南：臺灣省立臺南高級職業學校。
陳龍安(1999)。活潑快樂的創意教學。教師天地，102，19-25。
陳昭儀(1990)。我國傑出發明家之人格特質創造歷程及生涯發展之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
陳昭儀(1995)。增強創造力的方法。資優教育季刊，54，19-23。
陳怡全 譯（1992）。建立團隊的要訣。世界經理文摘，125，25-33。
陳海鳴(1993)。管理概論—理論與台灣實證。台北:華泰。
陳怡琪(1999)。國小高年級學童實施問題解決教學之實驗研究—以家庭垃圾清理為例。國立臺灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文。
陳博志(2000)。知識經濟與產業的發展方向。全球工商，536，13-15。
游詩蒂(2002)。兒童創造性問題解決歷程及影響因素之研究－以科學創意競賽活動為例。臺中師範學院自然科學教育學系碩士論文。
黃瑞煥、洪碧霞(1983)。資賦優異兒童與創造能力的教學。高雄：復文。
黃政傑(1987)。課程評鑑。台北：師大書苑。
黃俊英(1996)。行銷研究-管理與技術。台北：華泰書局。
黃瑞琴(1999)。質的教育研究方法。台北：心理。
湯誌龍(1999)。高工機械科學生專業創造力及其相關因素之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育研究所博士論文。
楊國賜(2001)。知識創新與學習型組織。台北：五南。
董 奇(1995)。兒童創造力發展心理。台北：五南。
詹秀美(1989)。國小學生創造力與問題解決能力的相關變項研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡如菱(2002)。企業內部創新發想過程及影響因素之探討。國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
潘文章(1992)。企業管理。台北：三民。
鄭廉鐙(2002)。傑出科技創作學童創新歷程之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育學系碩士論文。
鍾一先(1997)。問題解決教學策略應用於國民中學生活科技之實驗研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育研究所博士論文。
羅汝惠(1993)。臺灣南區國中一年級數學科解題導向教學法之教學成效比較研究。國立高雄師範大學數學教育研究所碩士論文。
貳、英文部份
Aldous, J. (1973). Family background factors and originality in children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 17, 183-192.
Amabile, T. M. (1979). Effects of external evaluation on artistic creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 221-233.
Amabile, T. M. (1988a). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167.
Amabile, T. M. (1988b). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, September-October, 77-87.
Amabile, T. M. (1989). Growing up creative. Buffalo, NY: The Creative Education Foundation.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in the context. NY: Springer-Verlag.
Ashkenas, R., Ulrich, D., Jick, T. & Kerr, S. (2002). The boundary less ganization: Breaking the chains of organization structure. NY: Jossey-Bass: A Wiley Company.
Basadur, M. (1994). Managing the creative Process in organizations. In Mark A. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Bonneau, G. A. & Amegan, S. (1999). Evaluating community creativity and innovation: Methodological proposal and reflexions. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 33(3), 208-222.
Boris, K. & Gordon, E. O.(1979). Cooperation structure and the relationship of labor and member ability to group the relationship of labor and member ability to group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(5), 526-532.
Bronfenbrenner,U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brown, A. (1998). Organization culture. London: Pitman.
Busse, T. V. (1967). Childrearing antecedents of flexible thinking. ERIC Document ED022530.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. NY: Harper & Row.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perpective for the study of creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.). Handbook of creativity. Cambrigdge: Cambridge University Press, 313-335.
Cooper, D. R. & Emory, C.W. (1995). Business research methods, Richard D, Irwin, Inc .
Davis, G. A. (1986). Creativity is forever(2nd ed.). Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D.C. Heath.
Drucker, Peter F. (1986). Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. NY: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.
Dudek, S. Z., Strobel, M. G., & Runco, M. A. (1993). Cumulative and proximal influences on the social environment and children’s creative potential. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 154(4), 487-499.
Ekvall, G. (1983). Climate, structure, and innovativeness of organizations. Stockholm: The Swedish council for management and organizational behavior.
Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Creativity and personality: Word association, origence, and psychoticism. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 209-216.
Feist, G. J.(1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In R.J. Sternberg(Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 273-296.
Ford, N. (1999). Information retrieval and creativity: Towards support for the original thinker. Journal of Documentation, 55(5), 528-542.
Friedman, S. (1991). Where employees go for information. Administrative Management, September.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham and Gandhi, basic book. NY: New York.
Guenter, C. E. (1985). The historical influence of creativity and its measurement in American education: 1950-1985. Dissertation Report. University of Wyoming.
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity and its cultivation. N.T.: Harper and row.
Guilford, J. P. (1971). Creativity and its cultivation. N.T.: Harper and Row.
Hong, J. C. (1997). An explorative analysis of technological creativity. International Conference on Creativity Development in Technical Education and Training, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Jacob, J. F. & Cunningham, M. A. (1970). Creativity and intelligence: Their relationship to peer acceptance. Psychological Abstracts, 44, 14-92.
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structed and ill-structed problem solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(1), 45-94.
Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. San Clemente: Kagan Cooperative Learning.
Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 169-211.
Kao, J. J.(1989). Entrepreneurship creativity , and organization , NJ: Prentice Hall.
Koehler, J. W. & Pankowski, J. M. (1996). Team in government: A handbook for teams-based organizations. Delary Beach, F.L.: St. Lucie Press.
Kopelman, R.E., Brief, A.P. & Guzzo, R.A. (1990). The role of climate and culture in productivity, organizational climate and culture. Edited by Schneider, B., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Lewin
Kruger, R. (1977). Guidelines for the education of the scientifically creative student: Preschool-5th grade. Office of Education（DHEW）, Washington, D.C.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED181654）.
Lair, J. (1984). Change induction groups psychotherapy, integrity groups, peer counseling In R.J. Corsini (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Psychology, 2, 493-494.
Langness, L. L. & Frank, G. (1981). Lives: An anthropological approach to biography. Novato. C.A.: Chandler & Sharp.
Maslow, A. (1959). New knowledgism human values. NY: Harper & Row.
Mayer, R.E.(1999). Fifty years of creativity research. In Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 449-460.
Mcmillan, J. H. and Schumacher, S.(1997). Research in education: A conceptual Introduction (4th Ed.). NY: Addison-Wesley Education Publishers.
Milius, S.(1999). The search for animal inventors: How innovative are other species? Science News, 155(23), 364-366.
Monahan, T. (2002). The do-it-yourself lobotomy-open your mind to greater creative thinking. NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Morgan, D. L.(1998). The focus group guidebook. Focus Group Kit 1. N.D.: Sage Publications.
Mumford, M. D. & Sigrid B. G. (1988). Creativity syndrome : Integration, application, and innovation, Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27-44.
Mumford, M. D. & Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creativity in the workplace: People, problems, and structures. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 31(1), 1-6.
Nonaka, I. & Konna, N.(1998). The concept of : Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review , 40(3), 40-54.
Osborn,A.F.(1993). Applied imagination. Bufallo. NY: Creative
Education Foundation.
Parker, G.. M.(1990). Team players and teamwork: The new competitive business strategy. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publisherss.
Petrowski, M. F. (2000). Creativity research: Implications for teaching, learning and thinking. Reference Services Review, 28(4), 304-312.
Plucker, J. A. & Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 35-61.
Ram, A. & Leake, D. B. (1995). Goal-Driven Learning. London: A Bradford Bood.
Rejskind, F. G. (1982). Autonomy and creativity in children. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 16(1), 58-67.
Robbins, S. P.(2001). Organizational behavior. (9nd). NJ: Prentice Hall.
Robison, A. G. & Stern, S. (1997). Corporate creativity-how innovation and improvement actually happen. San Francisco: Berren-Roehler.
Robert, G. C., Scott, J. E. & Elko, J. K. (1998). Portfolio management for new products. New York: Perseus Books.
Rogers, C. (1959). Toward a theory of creativity . In H.H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation. New York: Harper & Row.
Rossman, J.(1931). The psychology of the inventor. Washington, D.C. Inventors Publishing Company.
Rossman, J. (1935). A study of the childhood, education, and age of
710 inventors. patent office, 17, 411-421.
Roth, W. M. (2001). Learning science through technology design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 387(7), 768-790.
Rule, M. (1998). Fostering creativity in the camp environment. Camping Magazine, 71(6), 22-26.
Sanderlin, O. (1971). Creative teaching. New Jersey: A. S. Barnes and Co. Inc.
Smith, G. F. (1998). Idea-generation techniques: A formulary of active ingredients. Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(2), 107-133.
Stanish, B. and Eberle, B. (1997). Be a problem-solver: A resource book for
teaching creative problem-solving. Prufrock Press.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED405273).
Starko, A. J. (1995). Creativity in the classroom. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Stephen, P. R. (1998). Organizational behavior. N. J: Prentice-Hall.
Sternberg, R. J.(1988). The triachic mind: A new theory of human
intelligences. NY: Viling.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Cognitive psychology. Orlando: Harcourt Brace College.
Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 667-668.
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity from a historiometric perspective. In Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 116-133.
Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Identifying and developing creative giftedness. Roeper Review, 23(2): 60-75.
Sternberg, R. J. & O’Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 251-272.
Tan, A. G. (2001). Singaporean Teachers’ perception of activities useful for fostering creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(2), 131-145.
Tardif, T.Z.& Sternberg, R. J. (1993). What do we know about creativity ? In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity.4thed.New York: McGrow-Hill.
Tomkins, S. P. & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2001). Look for ideas: Observation, interpretation and hypothesis-making by 12-year-old pupils undertaking science investigations. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8) 791-813.
Torrance, E.P., (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Torrance, E. P. (1971). Creativity and infinity. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 3, 35-41
Torrance, E. P. (1972). Can we teach children to think creatively? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 6(2), 114-443.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought . New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Wellins, R. S., Byham, W.C., & Dixon, G.R.(1994). Inside team: How 20 world- class organization are winning through teamwork. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass Publishers.
Wiles, J. (1985). The mind of invention : Activities to stimulate creative thinking. NY: Freeman.
Woodman, R. W. ,Sawyer, J. E. ,& Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Reviewer, 18(2), 293-321.
參、日文部份
高橋誠(1993)。創造力事典。日本：モード学園出版局。
須賀田正泰（1996）。技術開発における創造性。日本創造協会年会。
畑村洋太郎(2000)。実際の設計選書“TRIZ入門-思考の法則性を使ったモノづくりの考え方。東京：日刊工業新聞社。