A comparison of instructional methods for improving the spatial-visualization ability of freshman technology seminar students

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of three methods of instruction for improving the spatial-visualization (SV) ability of freshmen enrolled in a technology seminar course at Western Carolina University. Specifically, this study was designed to determine the following: (a) What is the effect of the combined instructional use of engineering drawing coupled with hand-held and computer-generated mechanical dissection manipulatives on SV ability (Treatment EMC)? (b) What is the effect of the combined instructional use of engineering drawing and hand-held mechanical dissection manipulatives on SV ability (Treatment EM)? (c) What is the effect of the instructional use of engineering drawing on SV ability (Treatment E)? (d) What is the difference in the effectiveness of the three treatments? (e) What is the relationship between major and the effectiveness of treatments? (f) What is the relationship between prior SV experiences and the effectiveness of treatments? (g) What is the relationship between gender and the effectiveness of treatments?; The conceptual framework that guided this study involved four interrelated concepts. For industry to remain competitive in the global marketplace, students graduating from engineering and technology programs must have strong SV abilities. Programs must address Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology criteria to insure graduating students possess the basic abilities necessary to contribute and grow professionally in industry. To meet this demand, researchers have investigated instructional methods for improving SV ability. Only a small number of studies have been conducted, with no clear consensus showing the superiority of a certain approach.; The three course sections were randomly assigned to one of three, five-week (15 hours total) instructional methods developed to influence the SV ability of the 48 students. The researcher developed and administered a demographic and experience survey at the beginning of the study to obtain information on the participant's SV-related activities. The Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Rotations (PSVT:ROT) was used as the pre-post measure of SV ability.; This study yielded several major findings. There was a statistically significant difference in the pre-post scores for Group EM, but no significant difference in the pre-post scores for Groups E or EMC. There was no significant difference in the effectiveness of the three group treatments E, EM, and EMC.; Due to the small group sizes, the remaining questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Within Group E, STEM majors had greater PSVT:ROT gains than non-STEM majors. Conversely, within groups EM and EMC, non-STEM majors had greater gains than STEM majors. On average, Group E High Previous Experience participants had greater PSVT:ROT gains than Low Previous Experience Participants and Group EM and EMC Low Previous Experience participants had greater PSVT:ROT gains as compared to High Previous Experience participants. There was no pattern evident in relationship of gender to the effectiveness of treatment EMC.