在科技不斷進步發展的時代，傳統產業逐漸與物聯網、雲端傳輸及大數據分析等技術，轉變成數位化監控智慧型生產工廠，提升產品生產品質與效率，滿足市場多樣化的產品需求。但目前無完善的教學教具與內容來提供教師教學，培養理論與實務智慧技術兼具的人才，因此需要改善課堂的教具設計與教學來強化學生學習成效，導入PBL問題導向學習及STEAM跨學科領域的科學教育方法與精神，將機器人研究與應用融入到教育領域當中。透過開發紙機器人教具產品設計為例，將紙張與椴木板雷射切割成2D平面模型部件，互相組裝成3D立體結構並結合Arduino單晶片控制紙機器人運作，融入到工程科學教育實作課程當中，協助學生及教師能夠快速學習科技知識。並藉由問卷調查及六個學習力指標向度的雷達圖方式，對機器人課程進行診斷，分析學生參與紙機器人教具實作課程後，對機器人技術的認知及興趣是否有明顯的提升，解決學生在機電整合教育理論學習與實際應用的落差，強化學生的專業技能，為未來的智慧製造領域打造穩定的基礎知識。

In the era of continuous technological advancement, traditional industries are gradually transforming with technologies such as the Internet of Things, cloud transmission and big data analysis into digital monitoring and intelligent production plants to improve product production quality and efficiency and meet the diversified product needs of the market. However, there are currently no complete teaching aids and content to provide teachers with teaching and cultivate talents with both theoretical and practical wisdom and technology. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the design and teaching of classroom teaching aids to strengthen students' learning effectiveness, and introduce PBL problem-oriented learning and STEAM interdisciplinary areas. The scientific education methods and spirit of the company integrate the research and application of robots into the field of education. Through the development of paper robot teaching aid product design as an example, paper and linden wood are laser-cut into 2D plane model parts, assembled into a 3D three-dimensional structure and combined with an Arduino single chip to control the operation of the paper robot, which is integrated into the engineering science education practical course. Assist students and teachers to quickly learn scientific and technological knowledge. And through the questionnaire survey and the radar chart of the six learning ability index dimensions, the robot course is diagnosed, and the students’ participation in the paper robot teaching aid implementation course is analyzed whether their cognition and interest in robotics has significantly improved, so as to solve the problem. The gap between the theoretical study and practical application of electromechanical integration education will strengthen students' professional skills and create a stable basic knowledge for the future of smart manufacturing.

目錄
中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vii
表目錄 x
一、緒論 1
1.1研究背景 1
1.2研究動機與目的 2
二、文獻探討 3
2.1 教學方法 3
2.1.1 PBL問題導向學習方法 3
2.1.2 STEAM教學方法 4
2.1.3 6E教學模式 5
2.1.4 機器人技術融入教育領域 6
2.2 產品企劃方法 7
2.2.1 四象限產品分析法 7
2.2.2 SWOT分析法 7
2.3 產品設計方法 8
2.3.1 品質機能展開方法(Quality Function Deployment, QFD) 8
2.3.2 層級分析法(Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP) 9
2.4 生產製造技術 10
2.4.1雷射切割加工技術 10
三、市場分析 11
3.1機器人教具產品市場分析 11
3.2產品四象限分析法 12
3.3紙機器人教具產品對於市場上的特點 13
四、研究方法 14
4.1研究流程 14
4.2 產品分析及設計需求 15
4.3 QFD品質機能展開與AHP層級法分析 17
4.4硬體規劃 18
4.4.1雷射切割設備與材料介紹 18
4.4.2紙機器人電控零件介紹 19
4.5軟體規劃 21
4.5.1結構設計軟體規劃 21
4.5.2程式編程軟體規劃 22
4.6雷射加工參數分析 23
4.7紙機器人初步概念研究 25
4.7.1結構概念設計 25
4.7.2電控概念設計 25
4.7.3外觀概念設計 26
4.7.4程式概念設計 27
4.7.5包裝概念設計 27
4.8紙機器人概念模型試作 28
4.8.1內部木板結構試作 28
4.8.2電控功能模擬 30
4.8.3外觀紙模試作 31
4.8.4程式編程測試 34
4.8.5包裝設計試作 35
4.9紙機器人教具產品試量產 36
4.9.1內部木板結構試量產雷射切割加工平面佈局 36
4.9.2電控量產修正 37
4.9.3外觀紙模型製作 38
4.9.4程式範例製作 39
4.9.5包裝設計修正 43
五、科學教育實作及驗證 44
5.1課程網路平台規劃 44
5.2紙機器人教具產品實作課程教案規劃 45
5.3紙機器人教具6E教學模式規劃 46
5.2紙機器人教具產品系列性教學實作課程規劃 47
5.4紙機器人教具產品系列性教學實作課程回饋問卷設計 48
六、結果與討論 49
6.1產品設計問題與改善方式 49
6.1.1雷射加工參數與不同材料表面效果之差異 49
6.1.2 紙機器人設計問題與改善方式 51
6.1.3 量產製造加工問題與改善方式 52
6.2 課程定性評量 53
6.3 問卷調查結果分析 55
6.3.1受訪者背景分析 55
6.3.2滿意度評量 55
6.3.3 教具體驗 57
七、成果與建議 60
7.1對產業及學術發展的貢獻 60
7.2研究限制與後續建議 60
參考文獻 61
附錄 64
附錄一：STEAM紙機器人科學教育實作系列課程_課程前測驗問卷 64
附錄二：STEAM紙機器人科學教育實作系列課程_課程後測驗問卷 65
附錄三：問卷調查同意書 67
附錄四：AMIE 2021國際學術論文 70
附錄五：ISME2020 國內學術論文 72

1.Rojko. A, 2017, “Industry 4.0 concept：background and overview”, International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 11(5), 77-90.
2.Vaidya. S, Ambad. P, & Bhosle. S, 2018, “Industry 4.0–a glimpse”, Procedia Manufacturing, 20, 233-238.
3.Tao. F, & Qi. Q, 2017, “New IT driven service-oriented smart manufacturing： framework and characteristics”, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 49(1), 81-91.
4.Kusiak. A, 2018, “Smart manufacturing”, International Journal of Production Research, 56(1-2), 508-517.
5.Godhe. A. L, Lilja. P, & Selwyn. N, 2019, “Making sense of making：critical issues in the integration of maker education into schools”, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(3), 317-328.
6.Hung. W, 2016, “All PBL starts here: The problem”, Interdisciplinary Journal of problem-based learning, 10(2), 2.
7.Colombo. C. R, Moreira. F, & Alves. A. C, 2015, “Sustainability Education in PBL Education：the case study of IEM-UMINHO”, In Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Project Approaches in Engineering Education (pp.6-9).
8.Servant. V. F, 2016, “Revolutions & re-iterations：An intellectual history of problem-based learning”, Doctoral dissertation, Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences.
9.Carvalho. A, 2016, “The impact of PBL on transferable skills development in management education”, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(1), 35-47.
10.Çevik. M, 2018, “Impacts of the project based (PBL) science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education on academic achievement and career interests of vocational high school students”, Pegem Egitim ve Ogretim Dergisi= Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 8(2), 281.
11.Cheng. J. H, & Lin. H. H, 2020, “Development and Technical Experience of Plastic Injection Machine for STEAM Education”, In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 215-230), Springer, Cham.
12.LaForce. M, Noble. E, & Blackwell. C, 2017, “Problem-based learning (PBL) and student interest in STEM careers：The roles of motivation and ability beliefs”. Education Sciences, 7(4), 92.
13.Park. H, Byun. S. Y, Sim. J, Han. H. S, & Baek. Y. S, 2016, “Teachers’ perceptions and practices of STEAM education in South Korea”, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(7), 1739-1753.
14.Han. S, Capraro. R, & Capraro. M. M, 2015, “How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement”, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089-1113.
15.Shatunova. O, Anisimova. T, Sabirova. F, & Kalimullina. O, 2019, “STEAM as an Innovative Educational Technology”. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 10(2), 131-144.
16.Lin. K. Y, Hsiao. H. S, Williams. P. J, & Chen. Y. H, 2020, “Effects of 6E-oriented STEM practical activities in cultivating middle school students’ attitudes toward technology and technological inquiry ability”, Research in Science & Technological Education, 38(1), 1-18.
17.Chung. C. C, Lin. C. L, & Lou. S. J, 2018, “Analysis of the learning effectiveness of the STEAM-6E special course—A case study about the creative design of IoT assistant devices for the elderly”, Sustainability, 10(9), 3040.
18.Lin. C. L, & Chiang. J. K, 2019, “Using 6E model in STEAM teaching activities to improve university students’ learning satisfaction: A case of development seniors IoT smart cane creative design”, Journal of Internet Technology, 20(7), 2109-2116.
19.An. L, & Yang. J. W, 2020, “Research on the Teaching Design and Experiment in Physics Education at a Junior High School Based on STEAM Education and 6E Learning Process”, In 2019 3rd International Conference on Education, Economics and Management Research (ICEEMR 2019) (pp. 596-605), Atlantis Press.
20.M. Rubenstein, B. Cimino, R. Nagpal, and J. Werfel, 2015, “AERobot: An affordable one-robot-per-student system for early robotics education”, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Seattle, WA, pp.6107-6113.
21.Arvin. F, Espinosa. J, Bird. B et al, 2018, “Mona：an Affordable Open-Source Mobile Robot for Education and Research”, J Intell Robot Syst 94, 761–775.
22.López-Rodríguez. F. M, & Cuesta. F, 2016, “Andruino-a1: Low-cost educational mobile robot based on android and arduino”, Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 81(1), 63-76.
23.Belk R, 2016, “Understanding the robot：Comments on Goudey and Bonnin”, Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition), 31(4)：83-90.
24.Karim. M. E. Lemaignan. S, & Mondada. F, 2015, “A review: Can robots reshape K-12 STEM education?”, IEEE international workshop on Advanced robotics and its social impacts (ARSO) (pp. 1-8), IEEE.
25.Sanggor. E. M, Pangemanan. S. S, & Rumokoy. F. S, 2018, “Evaluating brand image and consumer product knowledge of Apple smartphone in Manado”, Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis dan Akuntansi, 6(1).
26.Dalpiaz. F, & Parente. M, 2019, “RE-SWOT：from user feedback to requirements via competitor analysis”, In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering：Foundation for Software Quality (pp. 55-70), Springer, Cham.
27.Vlados. C, 2019, “On a correlative and evolutionary SWOT analysis”, Journal of Strategy and Management.
28.Chen. K. J, Yeh. T. M, Pai. F. Y, & Chen. D. F, 2018, “Integrating refined kano model and QFD for service quality improvement in healthy fast-food chain restaurants”, International journal of environmental research and public health, 15(7), 1310.
29.Zheng. P, Xu. X, & Xie. S. Q, 2019, “A weighted interval rough number-based method to determine relative importance ratings of customer requirements in QFD product planning”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 30(1), 3-16.
30.Caligiana. G, Liverani. A, Francia. D, Frizziero. L, & Donnici. G, 2017, “Integrating QFD and TRIZ for innovative design”, Journal of Advanced Mechanical Design, Systems, and Manufacturing, 11(2), JAMDSM0015-JAMDSM0015.
31.Frizziero. L, Francia. D, Donnici. G, Liverani. A, & Caligiana. G, 2018, “Sustainable design of open molds with QFD and TRIZ combination”, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 35(1), 21-31.
32.Franceschini. F, & Maisano. D, 2015, “Prioritization of QFD customer requirements based on the law of comparative judgments”, Quality Engineering, 27(4), 437-449.
33.Ho. W, & Ma. X, 2018, “The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process”, European Journal of Operational Research, 267(2), 399–414.
34.Darko. A, Chan. A. P. C, Ameyaw. E. E, Owusu. E. K, Pärn. E, & Edwards. D. J, 2019, “Review of application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in construction”, International Journal of Construction Management, 19(5), 436-452.
35.Taherdoost. H, 2017, “Decision making using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP); A step by step approach”, International Journal of Economics and Management Systems, 2.
36.Mu. E, & Pereyra-Rojas. M, 2017, “Understanding the analytic hierarchy process”, In Practical decision making (pp. 7-22). Springer, Cham.
37.de FSM Russo. R, & Camanho. R, 2015, “Criteria in AHP：a systematic review of literature”, Procedia Computer Science, 55, 1123-1132.
38.Kubovský. I, Krišťák. Ľ, Suja. J, Gajtanska. M, Igaz. R, Ružiak. I, & Réh. R, 2020, “Optimization of Parameters for the Cutting of Wood-Based Materials by a CO2 Laser”, Applied Sciences, 10(22), 8113.
39.Nayak. R, & Padhye. R, 2016, “The use of laser in garment manufacturing：an overview”, Fashion and textiles, 3(1), 1-16.
40.Happonen. A, Stepanov. A, Piili. H, & Salminen. A, 2015, “Innovation Study for Laser Cutting of Complex Geometries with Paper Materials”, Physics Procedia, 78, 128-137.
41.Badoniya. P, 2018, “CO2 laser cutting of different materials–a review”, Int Res J Eng Technol (IRJET), 5, 2103-2115.
42.Bogue. R, 2015, “Lasers in manufacturing: a review of technologies and applications”, Assembly Automation.