See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260317916

Developing 3-D Spatial Visualization Skills for Non-Engineering Students

Article · January 2005

CITATIONS READS
42 1,602

4 authors, including:

Sheryl Sorby Kedmon Hungwe

University of Cincinnati Michigan Technological University
135 PUBLICATIONS 2,980 CITATIONS 36 PUBLICATIONS 196 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Paul Charlesworth
Michigan Technological University
20 PUBLICATIONS 467 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

CS1 Interventions and Assessment View project

BECOMING A MACHINIST IN A CHANGING INDUSTRY View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kedmon Hungwe on 02 April 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Developing 3-D Spatial Visualization Skills for
Non-Engineering Students

Sheryl A. Sorby, Thomas Drummer, Kedmon Hungwe, Paul Charlesworth

Michigan Technological University

Abstract
The ability to visualize objects and situations in one’s mind and to manipulate those
images is a cognitive skill vital to many career fields, especially those requiring work
with graphical images. Unfortunately, of all cognitive processes that have been
investigated, spatial cognition shows some of the most robust gender differences favoring
males, especially in the ability to mentally rotate 3-dimensional objects. This has obvious
implications for our attempts to encourage gender equity in technical and scientific fields.
At Michigan Tech we have been offering a course aimed at improving the 3-D spatial
skills of engineering students since 1993. Through a subsequent grant, we developed nine
multimedia software and workbook modules for developing 3-D spatial skills. In the Fall
of 2004, we were awarded a grant from the National Science Foundation to extend our
training materials and activities to students in majors other than engineering and to
investigate gender differences in preferred learning/training styles. This paper
summarizes the results from our research to date with non-engineering majors and
discusses implications for the future.

Background
The ability to visualize objects and situations in one’s mind and to manipulate those
images is a cognitive skill vital to many career fields, especially those requiring work
with graphical images. Evidence suggests that well-developed spatial skills are critical to
success in Engineering, Chemistry, Computer Science, Mathematics, Physics, Medicine,
Dentistry, and many other fields. Spatial abilities have been widely studied and are
known to be fundamental to higher-level thinking, reasoning, and creative processes.
Unfortunately, of all cognitive processes that have been investigated, spatial cognition
shows some of the most robust gender differences favoring males, especially in the
ability to mentally rotate 3-dimensional objects. This has obvious implications for our
attempts to encourage gender equity in technical and scientific fields. Recognizing the
importance of well-developed spatial skills for technological careers, the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) has included benchmarks regarding the
development of spatial abilities within the Pre-college Mathematics Educational
Standards (NCTM, 2000) and middle school mathematics education has been a focus of
national interest due mainly to the results of the Third International Mathematics and
Science Study, and state, national and local standards (Ai, 2002).

Fortunately, although individuals vary in spatial performance, research has shown that
Page 10.428.1

most, if not all, of the component skills can be improved through training and practice.

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
For the project described in this paper, we began research studies to investigate whether
materials developed for improving spatial skills for one audience will work with other
audiences. The materials that we used in our research studies consist of an established
workbook and multimedia software package developed through an NSF grant for use in a
first-year engineering course for undergraduate students.

Prior Research in Spatial Cognition.

According to Piagetian theory (Bishop, 1978), spatial skills are developed in three
stages. In the first stage, topological skills are acquired. Topological skills are primarily
two-dimensional and are acquired by most children by the age of 3-5. With these skills,
children are able to recognize an object’s closeness to others, its order in a group, and its
isolation or enclosure by a larger environment. The second stage involves visualizing
three-dimensional objects and perceiving what they will look like from different
viewpoints or what they would look like if they were rotated or transformed in space.
Most children have typically acquired this skill by adolescence, however, if the object is
unfamiliar, many students in high school or even college have difficulty visualizing at
this stage of development. In the third stage, people are able to visualize the concepts of
area, volume, and distance in combination with those of translation, rotation, and
reflection. At this stage, therefore, a person is able to combine measurement concepts
with their previously acquired projective skills.

The relationship between spatial ability and success in science and mathematics has been
reported in several publications over the past 20 years. A significant body of work in the
chemical sciences was undertaken by Bodner and his co-workers in the late 1980s.
(Pribyl & Bodner, 1987; Carter, et al, 1987; Bodner & McMillan, 1986). In those
studies, it was noted that both spatial ability and gender can play a significant role in the
success of students, particularly in entry-level classes such as general chemistry.
However, with the exception of a few very recent studies (Yang, Andre, & Greenbowe
2003; Barke & Engida, 2001; Coleman & Gotch, 1998), subsequent work in the
chemical sciences has been sparse and only Yang, Andre, & Greenbowe (2003) have
really considered the impact of spatial training on the ability of students and their
performance in the chemical sciences. Their study considered the impact of computer
animations on college students’ understanding of electrochemical cells and found that
they enhanced understanding.

Studies have shown quite clearly that students with high spatial ability scores performed
better on organic chemistry questions requiring problem-solving skills (Small & Morton,
1983; Pribyl & Bodner, 1987). This was particularly true for questions involving the
drawing or manipulation of molecular representations, and it was observed that students
with higher spatial skills were more likely to draw correct structures and diagrams than
those with lower spatial skills. These studies also noted that, as expected, spatial ability
had little impact on those questions requiring memorization or simple numerical
procedures. It is interesting to note that although a positive relation was observed
between spatial ability and achievement, gender was only a significant factor in four out
of 60 cases. One might explain this lack of significance by considering the type of
Page 10.428.2

student taking organic chemistry, who tend to be a science or engineering major with

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
several years experience and a predisposition toward the sciences. Students with weak
spatial skills would likely have been filtered out of the system before taking organic
chemistry. Furthermore, since spatial ability can be taught, it is reasonable to assume that
organic chemistry students, who have had continued exposure to three-dimensional
representations and chemical structures over several years, would have likely developed
their spatial skills, regardless of gender.

By one estimate there are at least 84 different careers for which spatial skills play an
important role (Smith, 1964). For technical professions, such as engineering, spatial
visualization skills and mental rotation abilities are especially important (Maier, 1994).
Norman (1994), found that a person’s spatial skill level was the most significant predictor
of success in his/her ability to interact with and take advantage of the computer interface
in performing database manipulations, and Sorby (2000) found that a person’s spatial
skills are related to his/her ability to effectively learn to use computer aided design
software. Eyal and Tendick (2001) found that a person’s spatial ability is related to
his/her ability to effectively learn how to learn to use the modern-day laparoscopic
equipment utilized throughout the medical profession. Tartre (1990) has suggested
gender differences in spatial skills may be linked to math performance and indeed, when
mental rotation ability was held constant in one study, gender differences in mathematical
problem solving disappeared (Casey, Pezaris, & Nuttall, 1992).

Gender Differences in Spatial Skills.

There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that the spatial skills of women lag
significantly behind those of their male counterparts. Theories for the cause of these
differences include the assertion that spatial ability is transmitted as a recessive
characteristic on the X-chromosome (Stafford, 1972), that spatial ability is related to a
male sex hormone (Hier & Crowley, 1982), or that environmental factors are the primary
reasons for male-female differences in spatial skill levels (Fennema & Sherman, 1977).
The truth most likely falls in the interaction of many factors. Because of media reports of
research findings, as well as traditional stereotypes, both women and men in Western
societies are usually convinced that women are naturally inferior in both mathematical
and spatial performance (Jones et al., 1984). Stereotype threat theory (Spencer, Steele, &
Quinn, 1999) suggests that performance may suffer if one is in a situation where the
requirements of a task go against one’s stereotypical role. Women in male-dominated
professions do report feeling more threatened by negative stereotypes and also report
thinking about changing their major more than males (Steele, James, & Barnett, 2002).
This research suggests that female role models and mentors will be important to
increasing gender diversity in STEM disciplines. Therefore it is critically important to
increase the number of women entering and completing degrees in STEM fields.

Studies by Bodner and McMillen (1986) and by Carter et al (1987) support the idea that
spatial ability in upper level classes, such as organic chemistry, is less gender dependent
than lower level classes, such as general chemistry. Bodner and McMillen found that
there were statistically significant correlations between spatial ability and achievement,
not only on spatial concepts such as the manipulation of solids, but also on multiple-
Page 10.428.3

choice stoichiometry problems. This suggests, therefore, that the spatial ability of

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
students can improve with exposure to spatial concepts and that this can lead to
improvements in a student’s ability to solve a wide range of scientific problems by
improving their ability to identify and restructure relevant information. In the studies by
Carter et al it was found that gender was often a significant factor in both exams and
classroom activities in general chemistry.

In a meta-analysis of spatial studies, Linn and Petersen (1985) found that males
outperform females on mental rotation tasks where speed of performance is a factor.
Males were more likely to use a “holistic strategy” and females were more likely to use
an “analytic strategy.” The holistic strategy relies on visualizing the whole object, and the
analytic strategy uses a systematic, stepwise approach. The holistic strategy has been
found to be more efficient (i.e., less time consuming) in timed tests. Linn and Peterson
have therefore concluded that “spatial strategy selection” is a factor in gender differences
in mental rotation tasks. Hsi, Linn, and Bell (1997) determined, however, that spatial
strategies can be acquired through instruction.

There appears to be a generic shift from ‘analytic’ to ‘holistic’ skill that is tied to the
development of spatial expertise. Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1986) describe this in terms of a
hierarchical skill development model. Hungwe (1999) describes transformations of
knowledge and skill over time in machining work that are consistent with the Dreyfus &
Dreyfus model. More research is needed to better understand the development of spatial
visualization skills and strategy over time. In particular there is a need to understand the
role of strategy in skill development and the best ways of teaching strategy to novice
learners so that they can perform optimally in school-type assessments. Specific
instruction on strategy coupled with practice should help learners to reflect on their
learning and become more metacognitively aware of their learning process. These skills
are important in the overall development of learners.

There have been several studies examining what type of pre-college activities tend to be
present in students who have well developed spatial skills (Deno, 1995, Leopold, Sorby,
& Gorska 1996, and Medina, Gerson, & Sorby, 1998). Activities that require eye-to-hand
coordination are particularly useful in developing these skills such as: 1) playing with
construction toys (e.g., Legos) as a young child, 2) participating in classes such as shop,
drafting, or mechanics as a middle school or secondary student, 3) playing 3-dimensional
computer games, 4) participating in certain types of sports (e.g., basketball), and 5)
having well-developed mathematical skills. Since most of these factors typically have a
fairly high degree of gender bias favoring men, it is no wonder that the spatial skills of
women often fall behind those of their male peers.

In the Fall of 2004, the authors received a grant from the National Science Foundation to
test the methods and materials developed for engineering students with a non-engineering
audience. Results from the research conducted to date are presented in the following
sections.
Page 10.428.4

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
Pre-and post-testing
As a technological university, Michigan Tech enrolls approximately 95 percent of its
nearly 6000 undergraduate students in engineering, science, or technology with about
two-thirds in engineering alone. For this study, first- and second-year students in majors
outside of engineering were contacted for participation. The two largest programs outside
of engineering are computer science (~325 undergraduates) and biology (~250
undergraduates). In-class presentations were made and mass emails were sent to targeted
students who were invited to earn a $15 gift certificate to the Michigan Tech bookstore in
exchange for taking a 20-minute spatial skills test. The Purdue Spatial Visualization Test:
Rotations (PSVT:R) (Guay, 1977) was used for the pre-testing.

In all 170 students in majors outside of engineering opted to take the pre-test. The
students were subsequently divided into three experimental groups and one comparison
group. The pre-test scores were balanced across the experimental groups to avoid
possible regression to the mean effects in the analysis. The three experimental groups
participated in weekly training sessions over a ten-week period using materials originally
designed for use in the engineering course. One of the groups used just the workbook, the
second group used just the software, and the third group used both the software and the
workbook. Students in the experimental groups were also pre-tested with the Mental
Cutting Test (MCT) (CEEB, 1939).

At the end of the ten-week training session students were post-tested with both the
PSVT:R and the MCT and were administered an attitudinal survey as well. Students in
the comparison group were also invited back to take the PSVT:R as a post-test and
received an additional $30 gift certificate to the MTU bookstore for their participation.

Results from Pre-/Post-testing

Table 1 indicates data obtained from the pre- and post-testing with the PSVT:R and the
MCT for the experimental and comparison groups. It also presents data (GN131 and
ME104) obtained from pre- and post-testing conducted associated with two different
engineering graphics courses at Michigan Tech (Sorby & Gorska, 1998).

Table 1. Pre-/Post-Test Results

PSVT:R MCT
Pre- Post- Gain Pre- Post- Gain
Test Test Test Test
GN131-Graphics Course 77.2 84.7 7.5 51.4 60.0 8.6
(p<0.005) (p<0.005)
ME104-Graphics Course NA NA NA 69.8 76.0 6.2
(p<0.005)
EG-Software Only 69.5 79.4 8.4 44.5 59.9 6.5
(p<0.005) (p<0.01)
EG-Workbook Only 75.9 86.6 11.6 53.9 62.3 8.4
(p<0.0005) (p<0.001)
EG-Software & Workbook 74.3 85.6 11.2 46.4 60.2 13.8
(p<0.0005) (p<0.0005)
Page 10.428.5

Comparison Group 72.6 77.9 5.3 NA NA NA

(p<0.025)

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
As illustrated by the data in Table 1, students in each of the experimental groups made
significant gains in their spatial skills as measured by both the MCT and the PSVT:R.
Gains were comparable to those achieved by students in traditional engineering graphics
courses, and in some cases, better. Students in the Comparison Group made marginally
significant gains on the PSVT:R over roughly the same time period.

Our intention was to compare gains across treatment groups and gender using a standard
two-way ANOVA. But there were several large gains/losses (up to 13 points) that could
be classified as outliers in the data, which inflated the variance and decreased the power
of the traditional ANOVA. Also, students with high pretest scores are more likely to
decline due to chance than students with low pretest scores, although this effect is
probably balanced across the groups.

For these reasons we took another approach to the analysis. We created a binary variable
that equaled 1 if the student gained in score, and equaled 0 if they had a negative or zero
gain. We then fit a nonparametric logistic regression model, called a generalized additive
model (Hastie and Tibshirani, 1990) using this binary variable as the dependent variable
with independent variables being group and pretest score. This logistic regression model
essentially models the probability of improvement rather than the actual gain. The major
advantage of the generalized additive model is that it can capture curvature in the
response. Gender was also considered in this analysis; however, gender had no effect on
the probability of improvement for either the PSVT:R or MCT gains. Figure 1 illustrates
the results from this analysis.

Figure 1. Fitted Logistic Regression Models for the Four Groups

Page 10.428.6

For the PSVT:R gains, both groups that used the workbook were significantly better than
the control group (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02), whereas the group using only software was not

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
better than the control group (p = 0.75). The workbook only group and workbook and
software group were not significantly different, and the control group and software alone
group were not significantly different. Note that the curves for the Control Group and the
Software Only Group start around 80% and are relatively flat for the students with “low”
pre-test scores and that all curves decrease with high pre-test scores, as expected. By this
model, if the training has no effect, then we would expect, by chance, about 50% of the
students to exhibit gains. One theory is that some learning takes place just by taking the
exam, so even the control group can be expected to gain, thus the 80% improvement rate
for the control group. Another theory is that all groups should be expected to exhibit
gains on the PSVT:R over the course of a semester due to the highly technical and
mathematical training each is receiving over a semester through their studies at Michigan
Tech. Further research with students in non-technical majors, who are not enrolled in
rigorous math and science courses over a semester, could determine the significance of
the practice effect in taking the PSVT:R as both a pre- and post-test under these
conditions. For the MCT, there were no significant differences between groups or gender
(p > 0.05), although the response curves exhibited a similar shape to those in Figure 1.

Results of Attitudinal Survey

Upon completion of the lessons and post-test, students completed an eleven question
attitudinal survey regarding their experiences. We cross-tabulated responses by gender
and treatment type, and for each question compared male and female responses and
treatment group responses using a Chi-squared contingency table analysis. We obtained
completed questionnaires from 29 females and 66 males.

There was no difference (p = 0.37) between males and females regarding which treatment
they would have chosen, with 62% of all students expressing preference for the software
only group. Students in the software only group expressed significantly higher
preference for the software only treatment, 87%, compared to 51% for students in the
software and workbook group and 47% in the workbook only group, although “Software
Only” was the most frequently selected category for students in all 3 groups. It is
interesting to note that the preferred learning mode was in reality the least effective. The
reason for this stated preference could be that the time involved in completing the
software modules was significantly lower when compared to completion of workbook
pages (see following paragraph).

Female students spent significantly more time on the activity than males (p = 0.01); 40%
of males spent less than one half hour per week compared to 21% of females. Thirty-five
percent of females spent one to one and a half hours per week compared to 9% of males.
Students in the software only group spent significantly less time per week (p = 0.01) than
students in the other groups. Seventy-two percent of students in the software only group
spent less than one half hour per week compared to 13% in the software and workbook
group and 16% of students in the workbook only group.

Male students expressed higher levels of confidence in their visualization abilities (Table
2) at the onset of the study than did females (p = 0.01). There was no difference in this
Page 10.428.7

response between treatment groups (p = 0.21).

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
Table 2. Level of confidence in ability to do tasks at beginning of study. (Question was
asked retrospectively at end of study.)
Level of Confidence Males (n = 66) Females (n = 29)
Not Confident 1.5% 27.6%
Somewhat Confident 28.8% 51.7%
Confident 37.9% 20.7%
Most Confident 31.8% 0%

When asked about their level of confidence at the end of the study, male students still
expressed a significantly higher level of confidence than female students (p = 0.01), with
53% of male students indicating the highest level of confidence compared to 21% of
female students. For female students, 27.6% possessed the lowest level of confidence at
study end compared to only 3% of male students. Yet significantly (p = 0.01) more
female students, 82.7%, compared to 50% of males, indicated an increase in confidence.
This could be due to the high level of confidence expressed by males at the study onset.

Overall only 3% of students indicated that their training was not adequate; 8% of
indicated that their training was more than adequate, 59% indicated it was adequate, and
30% indicated the training was somewhat adequate. Low frequency counts in the "not
adequate" category invalidated the use of the Chi-square test comparing genders and
treatments.

There was no difference between treatment groups regarding their attitude about working
alone on the tasks (p = 0.95), but there were significant differences (p = 0.01) between
males and females, with more males (73%) preferring to work alone on the activities
compared to 38% of females.

There was no difference (p = 0.69) between treatment groups regarding their perceived
learning. Overall, 5% of students indicated that they did not learn anything new; 38%
indicated that they learned a few aspects, 32% stated that they learned something on most
days, and 25% indicated that they learned something every session. Female students
were more positive than their male counterparts (p = 0.03), with female students
generally expressing higher levels of learning than male students (Table 3).

Table 3. Perceived learning by male and female students.

Level of Learning Males (n = 66) Females (n = 29)
Did not learn anything new 6% 3%
Learning limited to a few aspects 47% 17%
Learned something on most days 26% 45%
Learned something every session 21% 35%

Male and female students indicated similar attitudes regarding the relevance of the
Page 10.428.8

activity to their field (p = 0.91). Overall 21% indicated that they saw absolutely no

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
relevance, 57% saw some relevance, 18% said the activities were relevant to their field,
and 4% thought the activities were most relevant. There were no significant differences
between treatment groups (p = 0.31).

Regarding the use of manipulatives (snap cubes), there was no difference between
treatment groups ( p = 0.80), with 41% of participants stating they did not use
manipulatives at all, 37% used the manipulatives only occasionally, 14% use the
manipulatives most of the time, and 8% used the manipulatives whenever they were
available. Male and female students differed significantly (p = 0.01) in their use of
manipulatives, with female students tending to use the manipulatives more than males.
Fifty one percent of males never used the manipulatives compared to 17% of females,
and 14% of females used manipulatives whenever available compared to 6% of males.

In rating their overall experience, there were no differences between males and females
(p = 0.75) nor treatment groups (p = 0.92). Three percent of students rated their overall
experience as not useful, 37% as somewhat useful, 47% as useful, and 13% as most
useful.

Conclusions
It appears that the software and workbook developed for use in improving the spatial
skills for engineering students are also suitable for use with non-engineering students.
The students made statistically significant gains on two standardized tests designed to
measure spatial skills and self-reported learning from their experiences with the
materials. It appears that the gains in spatial skills were not equivalent for each group.
Those groups that used the workbook achieved significantly higher gains in test scores
compared to the students who used the software only. Gains for the software only group
were comparable to those achieved by the control group. Gender differences in gains
were not observed, probably due to low sample sizes.

Several gender differences were noted based on results from the attitudinal survey
completed by students at the end of the training sessions. In particular, women exhibited
significantly higher gains in confidence level when compared to their male counterparts.
In addition, women perceived that they learned more and were more likely to use
manipulatives, when available. Further study is required to determine if gender
differences are present based on treatment type.

Acknowledgement
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of this project from the National Science
Foundation through grant HRD-0429020.

Bibliography
Ai, X. (2002). Gender differences in growth in mathematics achievement: Three-level longitudinal and
multilevel analyses of individual, home, and school influences. Mathematical Thinking and Learning
Page 10.428.9

4(1), 1-22.

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
Barke, H.-D. and T. Engida, (2001). Structural Chemistry and Spatial Ability in Different Cultures.
Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 2(3): p. 227-239.
Bishop, J.E.(1978). Developing students spatial ability. Science Teacher, 45, 20-23.
Bennett, G.K., Seashore, H. G., & Wesman, A. G. (1973). Differential aptitude tests, forms S and T. New
York: The Psychological Corporation.
Bodner, G.M. and T.L.B. McMillen, (1986). Cognitive restructuring as an early stage in problem solving.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23: p. 727-37.
Casey, M.B., Pezaris, E., & Nuttall, R.L. (1992). Spatial ability as a predictor of math achievement: the
important of sex and handedness patters, Neuropsychologia, 30, 35-40.
Carter, C.S., M.A. LaRussa, and G.M. Bodner, A study of two measures of spatial ability as predictors of
success in different levels of general chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1987.
24: p. 645-57.
CEEB Special Aptitude Test in Spatial Relations, developed by the College Entrance Examination Board,
USA, (1939).
Coleman, S.L. and A.J. Gotch, (1998). Spatial perception skills of chemistry students. use of the Inventory
of Piaget's developmental tasks. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(2): p. 206-9.
Collins, H. M (1990) Artificial experts: Social knowledge and intelligent machines. Cambridge: MIT
Press.
Deno, J. A. (1995). The relationship of previous experiences to spatial visualization ability.
Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 59(3), 5-17.
Dreyfus, H. L. and Dreyfus, S. E. (1986) Mind over Machine. New York: Free Press.
Erickson, F & Gutierrez, K. (2002). Culture, rigor, and science in educational research. Educational
Researcher, 31(8), 21-24.
Eyal, R. & Tendick, F. (2001). Spatial ability and learning the use of an angled laparoscope in a virtual
environment. Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 2001,J. D. Westwood et al, Editors, IOS Press,
Amsterdam, pp. 146-152.
Fennema, E., & Sherman, J.A. (1977). Sexual stereo-typing and mathematics learning. The Arithmetic
Teacher, 24(5), 369-372.
Gimmestad, B. J. (1989). Gender differences in spatial visualization and predictors of success in an
engineering design course. Proceedings of the National Conference on Women in
Mathematics and the Sciences, St. Cloud, MN, 133-136.
Guay, R. B. (1977). Purdue spatial visualization test: Rotations. West Lafayette, IN, Purdue Research
Foundation.
Hungwe, K.N. (1999) Becoming a machinist in a changing industry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Michigan State University.
Hsi, S., Linn, M. C. & Bell, J. E. (1997)The role of spatial reasoning in Engineering and the design of
spatial instruction. Journal of Engineering Education, 86(2) 151-158.
Hier, D.B., & Crowley, Jr., W.F. (1982). Spatial ability in androgen-deficient men. New England Journal of
Medicine, 306(20), 1202-1205.
Jones, E. E., Farina, A., Hastorf, A.H., Markus, H., Miller, D. T., & Scott, R. (1984). Social Stigma: the
psychology of marked relationships. New York: Freeman.
Leopold C., Sorby, S. & Gorska, R. (1996). Gender differences in 3-D visualization skills of
engineering students. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Engineering
Computer Graphics and Descriptive Geometry, Andrzej Wyzykowski, et. al., Editors, Cracow,
Poland, 560-564.
Linn, M.C. & Petersen, A.C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A
meta-analysis. Child Development, 56, 1479-1498.
Maier, P. H. (1994). Raeumliches vorstellungsvermoegen. Frankfurt a.M., Berlin, Bern, New York, Paris,
Wien: Lang.
Mc Kim, R. H. (1980). experiences in visual thinking, PWS Publishers, Boston Massachusetts.
Medina, A. C., Gerson, H. B. P., & Sorby, S. A. (1998). Identifying gender differences in the 3-D
visualization skills of engineering students in Brazil and in the United States. Proceedings
of the International Conference for Engineering Education 1998, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Page 10.428.10

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and Standards for School
Mathematics

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
 Norman, K.L. (1994). Spatial visualization-A gateway to computer-based technology. Journal of
Special Educational Technology, XII(3), 195-206.
Pribyl, J.R. and G.M. Bodner, (1987). Spatial ability and its role in organic chemistry: a study of four
organic courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24: p. 229-40.
Small, M.Y. and M.E. Morton, (1983). Spatial visualization training improves performance in organic
chemistry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 13(1983): p. 41-3.
Smith, I. M. (1964). Spatial ability-Its educational and social significance. London: University of London.
Sorby, S. A. (2000). Spatial abilities and their relationship to effective learning of 3-D modeling software.
Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 64(3), 30-35.
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C.M., & Quinn, D., (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.
Stafford, R.E. (1972). Hereditary and environmental components of quantitative reasoning. Review of
Educational Research, 42, 183-201.
Steele, C. M., James, J.B. & Chait Barnett, R. (2002). Learning in a man’s world: examining perceptions
of undergraduate women in male-dominated academic areas. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
26, 46-50.
Tartre, L.A. (1990). Spatial skills, gender, and mathematics. In E. H. Fennema & G. C. Leder (Eds.),
Mathematics and Gender, (pp. 27-59). New York, NY: Teachers College Press
Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A.R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three dimensional spatial
visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599-604.
Yang, E.-m., T. Andre, and T.J. Greenbowe, Spatial ability and the impact of visualization/animation on
learning electrochemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 2003. 25(3): p. 329-49.

Authors

SHERYL A. SORBY
Sheryl A. Sorby is a Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Associate Dean for Academic
Programs in the College of Engineering at Michigan Technological University. Sorby is active in the
American Society for Engineering Education and the American Society of Civil Engineers. She is a past
chair of the Engineering Design Graphics Division of ASEE. She was a recipient of the Dow Outstanding
New Faculty award and the Distinguished Teaching award, both from the North Midwest Section of ASEE.
Her research interests include spatial visualization and computer aided design.

THOMAS D. DRUMMER
Dr. Tom Drummer, Associate Professor of Mathematics, has an extensive background in the application of
statistics to a wide range of engineering and science problems. He has been a consultant to a wide variety
of private and public sector clients. His research interests are primarily in biostatistics.

KEDMON N. HUNGWE
Kedmon Hungwe is Assistant Professor of Education at Michigan Technological University. His training is
in Educational Psychology. He has conducted research on learning in the workplace, focusing on changes
in work tied to automation and their impact on cognition and professional identities of workers.

PAUL CHARLESWORTH
Paul Charlesworth is an associate professor at Michigan Technological University with joint appointments
in the departments of Chemistry and Education, with research interests in chemical education and
educational technologies. He has well cited publications, and has presented several recent papers on the use
of web-based educational technology in general chemistry.He has extensive experience working with
educational technologies such as the World Wide Web and WebCT, digital video and streaming media,
Page 10.428.11

conceptual animations, and virtual instrumentation.

Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education

View publication stats