| Summary: | 碩士 === 中原大學 === 教育研究所 === 100 === Abstract
The Purpose of this research is for discussing how the Creative Problem-Based Game Teaching(CPG Teaching) affects students of sixth graders’ technology creativity. The researcher used "quasi-experimental research method " to study on two experimental groups of 58 students and one control group of 27 students of one school in Tao-Yuan County for about ten months. Measur ement tool is technology creativity test by Yu-Chu Yet (2005).The study used the statistical software-SPSS18 Edition Pearson rank correlation, descriptive statistics, and analysis of one-way ANCOVA statistics to obtain quantitative data. As to Qualitative data, it was obtained from teaching notes, problem-based learning sheets, pictures, videos, semi-structured interviews to observe the teaching processes and explore the possible causes of quantitative results.
In this study, the researcher obtained the following findings and conclusions:
First, after CPG, the experimental group students for the dimensions on the progress of technology creativity scores were better than the control group. And through the analysis of one-way covariance, the researcher found that the experimental groups are better than the control group, the differences are significant in the elaboration for the word association, bags design flexibility, originality, and visual modeling; and most importantly the technology creativity weighted score of .001 is a significant difference.
Second, analysis of the material data indicated that-by using the stories, the issues to motivate and cause the interests and the concerns of the students; Issues Discuss, Data collection and Game Operation, the three spiral dynamic dialectical course, inspire the abilities in various dimensions of technology creativity and the overall performance of the technology creativity of the students. The release of results and evaluation results was to examine the works of technology creativity and to stimulate a good sense of mission of the next better performance.
the researcher did finishing and discussion based on the results and findings of this study, and made several recommendations for future teaching and research stakeholder’s reference.
|
|---|
