Preliminary Analysis of Spatial Ability Improvement within an Engineering Mechanics Course: Statics

Abstract

Spatial ability has been an area of research for decades. Distinct correlations have been discovered regarding research into spatial ability and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics disciplines (STEM). However, spatial ability is a term that can be confusing to practitioners. For this purpose, spatial ability, a measure of an individual's capability to exercise a specific construct of spatial thinking, will be defined explicitly in this paper. Spatial ability has been positively correlated to success in the professional engineering world as well as within engineering coursework. In view of this correlational evidence, an argument forms for the academy to develop a more refined understanding of the improvement in spatial ability and underlying impacting mechanisms of spatial thinking within undergraduate engineering courses. This paper presents preliminary research into spatial ability's correlation to performance in an engineering Statics course. Statics is a fertile engineering course to research as it is a gateway course where students often determine if they will persevere in engineering. It is the first class in the Engineering Mechanics Series and is required by most mechanical, civil, environmental, biological, and aerospace engineering programs.Results indicate that spatial ability does improve significantly in a Statics course for both sexes. Data was collected using two spatial instruments, the Mental Cutting Test and the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Visualization of Rotations, and a demographic survey. A pre-and post-test design was used for both tests where tests where given in the first week and in the final week of the course. A series of paired t-tests are used to statistically analyze for improvement and the potential correlation between the spatial pre-and post-tests demographic variables. Additionally, the study was replicated in an Anatomy class to address potential risks to the study. Results indicate that spatial ability of the students in the Anatomy class does not significantly improve. Further research is suggested in looking into the demographic factors of each study including previous and concurrent course experience.

An Initial Exploration of Engineering Students’ Emotive Responses to Spatial and Engineering Statics Problems

“…For the Statics problem-set, the average performance was 66%. MCT and PSVT:R correct responses paralleled previous findings reported by Wood et al, [27].…”

“…PSVT:R problems require a student to mentally rotate an object represented with a 2-D drawing and to then select the proper solution orientation for that object [26]. These spatial problems were chosen due to their capability to represent two fundamental components of force addition, direction and magnitude, that are proposed to correlate with orientation (rotation) and proportion and that are represented with vector mathematics in a Statics course [27]. The Statics problem-set represents a traditional introductory Statics problem where a student must identify the resultant force consequential to two or three component forces.…”

Spatial Ability Instrument Ceiling Effect and Implications

“…Participants were recruited from an Engineering Statics class and an Anatomy class, just as in work by Wood, Goodridge, Call, & Sweeten 6 . Previous investigations with the Statics class had revealed that scores for engineering students were quite high on the PSVT:R and MCT.…”

“…Indeed some research indicates their potential as more substantive than SAT math and verbal scores 4,5 . Current work is now just beginning to investigate why and where spatial ability is so important within engineering curricula 6 .…”

Students Engagement and Learning through the Development of Didactic Models for Mechanical Engineering

“…Changing sometimes that environment from a traditional classroom to a metal workshop, collaborative spaces give students tools that will help them in the real world [3], and changing books for didactic models helps meet more diverse students' needs, as a variety in tasks is recommended to address the different learning styles [4]. Using physical materials in a learning task might change the nature of the knowledge gained, also stimulates the students' multiple senses and thus provides a more complete view increase students' interest in learning" [5] [6]. All the previous enhances student behavior and achievement, since it depends on how the student makes use of his/her environmental resources, and makes teachers more satisfied with their job.…”