當前專題式學習在實施過程中常面臨學生難以理解實際應用情境、設計與使用脈絡脫節，以及作品驗證困難等問題，導致學生投入感不足，進而影響學習動機與設計品質。雖然專題式學習強調真實問題與實作歷程，但在教學現場中，學生往往缺乏具體且可驗證的設計環境，使得學習經驗流於抽象，無法有效發展創造性解決問題的能力。
為回應此一困境，本研究建構一套結合生成式AI、數位故事板、數位雙生與元宇宙技術的數位學習系統，營造沉浸式且可互動的設計驗證環境。透過虛擬角色模擬、場景編輯與感測互動等功能，學生能在專題開發歷程中進行反覆修正與驗證，增強對設計任務的真實感與認同感。
本研究以64名大學生為對象，採取準實驗設計，分為實驗組與對照組進行18週教學實驗。實驗組使用本研究所建構之系統完成兩次課堂任務與一次期末專題，歷經構思、故事板建構、場景模擬、裝置整合與成果展示等歷程；對照組則採用傳統專題式學習流程進行同樣主題的學習任務。實驗結果顯示，實驗組學生在學習動機、設計思維心態與心理擁有感上皆有顯著提升，並在專題成果的情境邏輯性與使用者導向面向表現出更佳水準。多數學生表示，系統的互動設計與角色代入感有助於理解使用情境，進而提升投入度與設計品質。
本研究說明，透過虛實整合與敘事導向的數位學習系統，能有效解決專題式學習在真實應用連結與學習投入上的瓶頸，為未來設計導向教學提供具體實踐路徑。

Project-Based Learning (PBL) often encounters practical challenges in its implementation, such as students’ difficulty in understanding real-world application contexts, disconnection between design and usage scenarios, and limited opportunities for prototype validation. These issues frequently lead to low student engagement, which in turn hinders learning motivation and design quality. Although PBL emphasizes authentic problem-solving and hands-on learning, students often lack concrete and verifiable environments to test their ideas, resulting in abstract learning experiences that constrain the development of creative problem-solving skills.
To address these challenges, this study proposes an immersive and interactive digital learning system that integrates generative AI, digital storyboarding, digital twin, and metaverse technologies. Through features such as avatar-based role simulation, scene editing, and sensor-enabled interaction, the system supports students in iteratively refining and validating their designs, thereby enhancing the sense of authenticity and psychological ownership of their projects.
A quasi-experimental study was conducted with 64 university students over an 18-week period. Participants were divided into an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group used the proposed system to complete two classroom tasks and a final project involving stages such as idea development, storyboard creation, scenario simulation, device integration, and final presentation. The control group followed a traditional PBL approach using the same project topics. The results indicate that students in the experimental group demonstrated significantly higher levels of learning motivation, design thinking mindset, and psychological ownership. They also produced more contextually coherent and user-centered project outcomes. Many students reported that the system’s interactive design and immersive avatar experience helped them better understand usage scenarios, leading to greater engagement and improved design quality.
This study demonstrates that a narrative-driven, virtual-physical integrated learning system can effectively overcome key limitations of traditional PBL by fostering authentic engagement and applied thinking, providing a viable pathway for future design-oriented education.

Alasadi, E. A., & Baiz, C. R. (2023). Generative AI in Education and Research: Opportunities, concerns, and solutions. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(8), 2965-2971.
Arnold, O., Franke, R., Jantke, K. P., & Wache, H. H. (2022). Dynamic plan generation and digital storyboarding for the professional training of accident prevention with time travel games. In Innovations in Learning and Technology for the Workplace and Higher Education: Proceedings of ‘The Learning Ideas Conference’2021 (pp. 3-18). Springer International Publishing.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard business review, 86(6), 84.
Buchem, I. (2012). Psychological Ownership and Personal Learning Environments: Do sense of ownership and control really matter. In PLE Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1, No. 1).
Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., & Wang, F. L. (2023). Metaverse in education: Contributors, cooperations, and research themes. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 16(6), 1111-1129.
Cocieru, O. C., Lyle, M. C., & McDonald, M. A. (2021). An exploration of the dynamic nature of psychological ownership in a classroom-as-organization. Journal of Experiential Education, 44(3), 293-307.
Dahan, N. A., Al-Razgan, M., Al-Laith, A., Alsoufi, M. A., Al-Asaly, M. S., & Alfakih, T. (2022). Metaverse framework: A case study on E-learning environment (ELEM). Electronics, 11(10), 1616.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
Dolapcioglu, S., & Doğanay, A. (2022). Development of critical thinking in mathematics classes via authentic learning: an action research. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(6), 1363-1386.
Ghafar, Z. N., Raheem, B. R., & Mahmood, H. M. A. (2023). Teaching and learning through storyboarding: A new approach via critical reflection. Humanities, 3(4), 94-100.
Giannakos, M., Azevedo, R., Brusilovsky, P., Cukurova, M., Dimitriadis, Y., Hernandez-Leo, D., ... & Rienties, B. (2024). The promise and challenges of generative AI in education. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-27.
Gomez-del Rio, T., & Rodriguez, J. (2022). Design and assessment of a project-based learning in a laboratory for integrating knowledge and improving engineering design skills. Education for Chemical Engineers, 40, 17-28.
Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational technology research and development, 48(3), 23-48.
Hou, H., Lai, J. H., & Wu, H. (2023). Project-based learning and pedagogies for virtual reality-aided green building education: case study on a university course. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 24(6), 1308-1327.
Jia, L., Jalaludin, N. A., & Rasul, M. S. (2023). Design thinking and project-based learning (DT-PBL): A review of the literature. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(8), 376-390.
Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (3th ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Lebid, A. Y., & Shevchenko, N. Y. A. (2020). Cultivation of the skills of design thinking via the project-based method as a component of the dual model of learning.
Liang, Z., Zhang, X., Ma, K., Liu, Z., Ren, X., Goucher-Lambert, K., & Liu, C. (2024). StoryDiffusion: How to Support UX Storyboarding with Generative-AI. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.07672.
Lowell, V. L., & Tagare, D. (2023). Authentic learning and fidelity in virtual reality learning experiences for self-efficacy and transfer. Computers & Education: X Reality, 2, 100017.
Mittal, U., Sai, S., & Chamola, V. (2024). A comprehensive review on generative AI for education. IEEE Access.
Muck, C., & Palkovits-Rauter, S. (2021). Conceptualizing design thinking artefacts: the Scene2Model storyboard approach. In Domain-Specific Conceptual Modeling: Concepts, Methods and ADOxx Tools (pp. 567-587). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Mystakidis, S. (2022). Metaverse. Encyclopedia, 2(1), 486-497.
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and research in Education, 7(2), 133-144.
Pesovski, I., Santos, R., Henriques, R., & Trajkovik, V. (2024). Generative AI for customizable learning experiences. Sustainability, 16(7), 3034.
Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of management review, 26(2), 298-310.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
Qadir, J. (2023, May). Engineering education in the era of ChatGPT: Promise and pitfalls of generative AI for education. In 2023 IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1-9). IEEE.
Shin, N., Bowers, J., Krajcik, J., & Damelin, D. (2021). Promoting computational thinking through project-based learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 3, 1-15.
Shu, X., & Gu, X. (2023). An empirical study of A smart education model enabled by the edu-metaverse to enhance better learning outcomes for students. Systems, 11(2), 75.
Tao, F., Zhang, H., Liu, A., & Nee, A. Y. (2018). Digital twin in industry: State-of-the-art. IEEE Transactions on industrial informatics, 15(4), 2405-2415.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning.
Truong, K. N., Hayes, G. R., & Abowd, G. D. (2006). Storyboarding: an empirical determination of best practices and effective guidelines. In Proceedings of the 6th conference on Designing Interactive systems (pp. 12-21).
Van der Lelie, C. (2005). The value of storyboards in the product design process. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10(2-3), 159-162.
Yim, J. S. C., Moses, P., & Azalea, A. (2018). Effects of psychological ownership on teachers’ beliefs about a cloud-based virtual learning environment. Research and practice in technology enhanced learning, 13, 1-19.
Zhu, Z., Liu, Z., Zhang, Y., Zhu, L., Huang, J., Villanueva, A. M., ... & Ramani, K. (2023, April). Learniotvr: An end-to-end virtual reality environment providing authentic learning experiences for internet of things. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-17).