New Orleans, Louisiana
June 26, 2016
June 26, 2016
August 28, 2016
An Analysis of First Year Engineering Majors’ Spatial Skill
Spatial knowledge is associated with success in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) (Wai, Lubinski, & Benbow, 2009). Spatial knowledge, as defined here, results from both an inherent spatial ability and practiced spatial skills. Uttal et al. (2013) suggests an expanded interest in, and in turn, enlarged participation in STEM fields is possible due to increases in spatial knowledge as a result of spatial skills training.
This quantitative study aims to investigate the spatial knowledge of incoming proposed engineering majors at a large southeastern university. The participants are enrolled in a new college of engineering; the institution upgraded its status from a department of engineering three years ago. Three semesters of data were collected in an engineering computer-aided design class.
The tests utilized in this investigation were card rotations (CR), cube comparison (CC), form board (FB), paper folding (PF) and surface development (SD) (Ekstrom, French, Harman, & Derman, 1976), the Revised Purdue Spatial Visualization Tests: Visualization of Rotations (Revised PSVT:R) (Yoon, 2011), and Spatial Orientation Test (SO) (Kozhevnikov & Hegarty, 2001). Five or six spatial assessments were given to 423 participants over three semesters. During the first two semesters the same set of tests were used to assess all participants (CR, CC, FB, PF, and SD). The third semester differed, with the addition of two tests (Revised PSVT:R) and removal of another (CR).
The first two exams focused on spatial relations and the next three on visualization. Spatial relations is defined as a simple one-step mental rotation. Visualization combines mental rotation with other serial manipulations; it is a higher order spatial ability than spatial relations.
The Revised PSVT:R is also considered a test of visualization, however it combines multiple rotations and revolution. Often used by the engineering community to require further spatial skill development within weak spatial students (Sorby & Baartmans, 2000), this investigation compares other tests of spatial knowledge to the PSVT:R. In addition, SO was examined to establish if the participant sample demonstrated a dissociation between spatial visualization and perspective taking skills as suggested by Hegarty and Waller (2004). SO is a skill associated with navigation; moving object and/or frame of reference perceived from different viewpoints.
A Man-Whitney U Test was used, because the data was not normally distributed, to analyze differences between each test and gender. Internal consistency was measured by Cronbach’s alpha and are as follows: CR-.997, CC-.85, FB-.91, PF-.83, SD-.93, Revised PSVT:R-.89, and SO-.87. Significant differences between gender were found on the Revised PSVT:R (p = .0037) with an effect size of .62 (Cohen’s d) and SO (p = .0447) of effect size .38. The effect size as reported by a meta-analysis (Maeda & Yoon, 2013) was .57 for the Revised PSVT:R.
In addition a Spearman’s Correlation Matrix was created to determine the correlation and significance, separately by gender. Males and females differed by correlation magnitude and significance level for each comparison except for SD and P.
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2016 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015