A Macintosh Program for Improving Three-Dimensional Thinking

Bezzi, Alfredo

doi:10.5408/0022-1368-39.4.284

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding supports Chadwick's (1978) assumption that students might improve their spatial skills needed for geology by encountering general spatial tests, which was later applied by Bezzi (1991) in his software.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Spatial abilities of high-school students in the perception of geologic structures

Kali

Orion

1996

J. Res. Sci. Teach.

169

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The specific spatial abilities required for the study of basic structural geology were characterized by quantitative and qualitative data analysis. A geologic spatial ability test (GeoSAT) was developed and administered to 115 comprehensive high-school students. Six of these students were interviewed. An analysis of students' incorrect answers revealed two types of answers: (a) nonpenetrative answers, which were based on external exposures of the structure; and (b) penetrative answers, which indicated attempts at representing internal properties of the structure. Students who tended to give penetrative incorrect answers performed significantly higher than students who tended to give nonpenetrative incorrect answers. The reasoning of students for these types of answers, as determined by interviews, supported the initial assumption that these answers were given by students with different levels of ability mentally to penetrate the image of a structure, which was named visual penetration ability (VPA). The interview findings indicated that the VPA is one of two complementary factors needed to solve the problems of GeoSAT; the other factor is the ability to perceive the spatial configuration of the structure. It is concluded that the teaching and learning process should provide students with assistance in both of these areas. 1.What are the typical answers students give in solving such problems? 2. What are students' reasoning behind different types of answers? 1. Cross-section subtest, including four problems which require drawing cross-sections of structures presented as block diagrams (Figure la). 2. Completion subtest, including four problems which require completing block diagrams that reveal only a single face (Figure 1 b). Construction subtest, including five problems in which two cross-sections and theirlocation on a very simplified geologic map are given. The students are required to draw a third cross-section at a specified location on the map (Figure lc).Each subtest is based on the same geologic structures, which include inclined flat layers, two types of horizontal folds (upright synclinal and anticlinal), and a plunging anticlinal fold (Figure 2).The test includes an instruction sheet, which gives an illustrated explanation of the concept cross-secrion, designed for non-earth sciences students. In addition, the following guidelines are listed:1. The problems might have more than one correct answer. 2. The layers are continuous and have consistent thicknesses. 3. The block diagrams can be regarded as cut out of larger three-dimensional structures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Spatial abilities of high-school students in the perception of geologic structures

Kali

Orion

1996

J. Res. Sci. Teach.

169

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is true even if the main purpose of the studyware is to teach certain scientific subject content (Kiser, 1990;Rodriguez, 1990;Wiley, 1990;Bezzi, 1991). The use of computer technology in mathematics teaching improved achievements in both mathematics and in spatial ability (Teles, 1990;Vazquez, 1991;ShoaffGrubbs, 1992).…”

Section: The Use Of Computers In Developing Spatial Abilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Models in Science Education

2000

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

References 363Index 381 PrefaceThis book arises from the collaborative work of a group of international researchers who are members of the Centre for Models in Science and Technology: Research in Education (CMISTRE). Based at The University of Reading in the UK, the Centre has a widely scattered membership, i.e. currently also in Australia, Brazil, Israel, New Zealand, Netherlands.Information about its present work can be accessed via The University of Reading's web pages on http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~ems97pc/MISTRE.Formed in 1995, the first years of the group were spent in formulating a common language with which to talk about models and modelling and in negotiating the boundaries of the areas to be investigated. In this period of time the main themes which are addressed in this book started to be formulated, based on the interests and experiences of the collaborating members. All this was fuelled by academic visits by members to each others, by regular seminars where new papers and ideas were discussed, in conference symposia, both national and international, where these ideas were subjected to a wider audience and, more lately, by publications in journals. In most senses the Centre is typical of a research group in any field: a commitment by a group of academics to enquiry in a theme held in common. It might differ from many in two ways. First, it draws on the insights of a number of established disciplines: philosophy of science, historical studies of the development of science, the sociology and language of science, the psychology of the teaching and learning of science. Second, it has entailed a greater commitment to collaborative ways of working and to a reflection on the contextual nature of the understandings that are forged. Within the Centre, smaller sets of members often collaborate in particular areas of interest and expertise. This has given rise to the three main areas of interest that are reflected in the Sections of this book.Although the common language is presented in detail in Chapter I, it may be helpful to readers if the components of the framework and the agenda are summarised here. A model has been taken to be 'a representation of an idea, object, event, process, or system'. Mental modelling is defined as an activity undertaken by individuals, whether alone or within a group. The results of that activity can be expressed in the public domain through action, speech, writing or other symbolic form. Those expressed models-, as we term them, which gain social acceptance following testing by the community of professional scientists playa central role in the conduct of both research and development, becoming consensus models. Whilst those consensus models which are currently in use at the frontiers of science may be termed scientific vii Vlll Developing Models in Science Educationr models, those produced in specific historical contexts may be called historical models. Curricular models are those versions of consensus models which are included in science curricula. Teaching models are those developed ...

show abstract

“…Bezzi (1991) obteve muitas questões sem resposta, mas percebeu que a capacidade de visualização espacial era geralmente baixa e parecia relacionada ao nível educacional; por exemplo, alguns estudantes de doutorado tiveram desempenho inferior ao de alunos de graduação. Para Bezzi (1991), muitos fatores podem controlar a capacidade de visualização espacial, incluindo a genética (CHADWICK, 1978), mas ele não estabeleceu uma relação clara entre fatores que controlam o desenvolvimento da habilidade espacial e o nível de desempenho. Kali & Orion (1996) aplicaram o "Teste Geológico de Habilidade Espacial"…”

Section: Pesquisa Sobre Visualização Tridimensional No Ensino-aprendi...unclassified

“…Assim, a dificuldade de perceber estruturas em três dimensões é o principal obstáculo para a construção da história geológica de uma determinada área. (BEZZI, 1991).…”

Section: Visualização Tridimensionalunclassified

Visualização 3D como condição para aprendizagem significativa em Geologia Estrutural

Miguel¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Para Leandro e Kevin, minha amada família, sempre ao meu lado. AGRADECIMENTOSAgradeço primeiramente ao Prof. Dr. Celso Dal Ré Carneiro que foi mais que meu orientador, foi realmente um mentor durante esta jornada. Agradeço pela dedicação, paciência, estímulo, apoio e sábias recomendações, que foram essenciais para a construção do meu conhecimento e deste trabalho.Ao Prof. Dr. Pedro W. Gonçalves e aos demais professores do programa de Pós-Graduação em Ensino e História de Ciências da Terra que contribuíram fortemente com meu crescimento intelectual no ramo da educação em Geociências. Aos professores Dr. Norberto Morales e Dra. Rosely A. L. Imbernon por comporem minha banca de qualificação e oferecerem excelentes críticas que fortaleceram e enriqueceram a finalização desta dissertação.Aos funcionários da secretaria de pós-graduação que sempre se dispuseram a ajudar nas mais diversas situações.A meus amigos de curso: Joemes Simas, Darlan Neves e Claudio Marinho pela amizade, conversas construtivas e apoio.Agradeço a todos os participantes das oficinas porque sem eles não haveria dados para analisar. Obrigada pela participação crítica e construtiva.Aos estudantes de graduação em Geologia da Unicamp, que cursaram a disciplina de Desenho Geológico em 2016 e cooperaram com este estudo.Ao meu querido esposo Leandro Braga pelo amor, incentivo, apoio e companheirismo.Aos meus pais, Osvaldo e Luiza, que sempre apoiaram meus projetos.

show abstract

A Macintosh Program for Improving Three-Dimensional Thinking

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Spatial abilities of high-school students in the perception of geologic structures

Spatial abilities of high-school students in the perception of geologic structures

Developing Models in Science Education

Visualização 3D como condição para aprendizagem significativa em Geologia Estrutural

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About