Role of spatial reasoning in engineering and the design of spatial instruction

Journal of Engineering Education

Volumn 86, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 151-158

  Hsi, Sherry ^a   Linn, Marcia C ^a   Bell, John E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; PROBLEM SOLVING; PROFESSIONAL ASPECTS; VISUALIZATION;

SPATIAL REASONING SKILLS;

ENGINEERING EDUCATION;

EID: 0031119301     PISSN: 10694730     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00278.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. 1 Agogino, A.M., and M.C. Linn, Retaining Female Engineering Students: Will Early Design Experiences Help?, in NSF Directions, M. Wilson, Editor. 1992 May‐June, National Science Foundation. p. 8–9.
2. 2 Tartre, L.A., “Spatial Skills, Gender, and Mathematics,” in E. L. Fennema (ed.) Mathematics and Gender, Teachers College Press Columbia University 1990, pp. 27–59.
3. 3 Friedman, L., “The Space Factor in Mathematics: Gender Differences,” Review of Educational Research, vol. 65, no. 1, 1995, pp. 22–50.
4. 4 Connor, J.M., and L.A. Serbin, Mathematics, Visual‐Spatial Ability, and Sex Roles, State University of New York, Binghamton, NY 1980.
5. 5 Cooper, L.A., and R.J. Mumaw, “Spatial Aptitude,” Individual Differences in Cognition, Academic Press Inc. 1985, pp. 67–94.
6. 6 Peters, M., P. Chisholm, and B. Laeng, “Spatial Ability, Student Gender, and Academic Performance,” Journal of Engineering Education, no. 1, 1995, pp. 69–73.
7. 7 Mundy, Ferrini J., “Spatial Training for Calculus Students: Sex Differences in Achievement and in Visualization Ability,” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, vol. 18, no. 2, 1987, pp. 126–140.
8. 8 Lohman, D.F., “Spatial Abilities as Traits, Processes, and Knowledge,” in R. J. Sternberg (ed.) Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ 1988, pp. 181–248.
9. 9 Lohman, D.F., and P.D. Nichols, “Training Spatial Abilities: Effects of Practice on Rotation and Synthesis Tasks,” Learning & Individual Differences, vol. 2, no. 1, 1990, pp. 67–93.
10. 10 Baenninger, M., and N. Newcombe, “The Role of Experience in Spatial Test Performance: A Meta‐Analysis,” Sex Roles, Vol. 20, no. 5–6, 1989, pp. 327–344.
11. 11 Schiano, D.J., and D. Barch, “A New Strategy for Studying Spatial Aptitude,” Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers, vol. 22, no. 2, 1990, pp. 136–137.
12. 12 Law, D.J., J.W. Pellegrino, and E.B. Hunt, “Comparing the Tortoise and the Hare: Gender Differences and Experience in Dynamic Spatial Reasoning Tasks,” Psychological Science, vol. 4, no. 1, 1993, pp. 35–40.
13. 13 Moore, M., and N. Newcombe, “The Role of Experience in Spatial Test Performance: A Meta‐Analysis,” Paper presented at Sex‐related Differences in Spatial Ability: Recent Meta‐Analyses and Future Directions, Baltimore, 1987.
14. 14 Linn, M.C., “Designing Computer Learning Environments for Engineering and Computer Science: The Scaffolded Knowledge Integration Framework,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 4, no. 2, 1995, pp. 103–126.
15. 15 Linn, M.C., and A.C. Petersen, “Emergence and Characterization of Sex Differences in Spatial Ability: A Meta‐Analysis,” Child Development, Vol. 56, 1985, pp. 1479–1498.
16. 16 Kail, R., P. Carter, and J. Pellegrino, “The Locus of Sex Differences in Spatial Ability,” Perception and Psychophysics, Vol. 26, 1979, pp. 182–186.
17. 17 Ref. 15.
18. 18 Vandenberg, S.G., and A.R. Kuse, “Mental Rotations: A Group Test of Three‐Dimensional Spatial Visualization,” Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 47, 1978, pp. 599–604.
19. 19 Ref. 15.
20. 20 Ref. 16.
21. 21 Cooper, L.A., “Strategies for Visual Comparison and Representation: Individual Differences,” in R. J. Sternberg (ed.) Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ 1982.
22. 22 Ref. 14.
23. 23 Ibid.
24. 24 Ref. 21.
25. 25 Schoenfeld, A.H., “Beyond the Purely Cognitive: Belief Systems, Social Cognitions, and Metacognitions as Driving Forces in Intellectual Performance,” Cognitive Science, vol. 7, no. 4, 1983, pp. 329–363.
26. 26 Pressley, Forrest D.L., G.E. MacKinnon, and T.G. Waller, Metacognition, Cognition, and Human Performance, Academic Press, New York 1985.
27. 27 Vygotsky, L.S., Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1978.
28. 28 Collins, A., J.S. Brown, and A. Holum, “Cognitive Apprenticeship: Making Thinking Visible,” American Educator, vol. 15, no. 3, 1991, pp. 6–11, 38–39.
29. 29 Newman, D., P. Griffin, and M. Cole, The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School, Cambridge University Press, London 1989.
30. 30 Knudsen, T., Blockstacking 1.3 Users Manual, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 1993.
31. 31 Osborn, J., and A.M. Agogino, “An Interface for Interactive Spatial Reasoning and Visualization,” Proceedings of the ACM CHI92 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference, 1992, pp. 75–82.
32. 32 Ref. 15.
33. 33 Ref. 31.
34. 34 Agogino, A.M., and S. Hsi, “Learning Style Based Innovations to Improve Retention of Female Engineering Students in the Synthesis Coalition,” Engineering Education for the 21st Century: Proceedings of Frontiers in Education, FIE95 ASEE/IEEE, 1995, pp. 4a2.1–4a2.4.
35. 35 Linn, M.C., “Cognition and Distance Learning,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 47, No. 11, in press.
36. 36 Hernandez, A., Strategy Preference in Spatial Reasoning Problem Solving, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 1993.
37. 37 Roberts, T.A., “Gender and the Influence of Evaluations on Self‐Assessments in Achievement Settings,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 109, no. 2, 1991, pp. 297–308.
38. 38 Ref. 34.