The effects of 3-dimensional CADD modeling software on the development of the spatial ability of

146 Pages·2017·5.2 MB·English

LLoouuiissiiaannaa SSttaattee UUnniivveerrssiittyy
LLSSUU DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmoonnss
LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School
2007
TThhee eeffffeeccttss ooff 33--ddiimmeennssiioonnaall CCAADDDD mmooddeelliinngg ssooffttwwaarree oonn tthhee
ddeevveellooppmmeenntt ooff tthhee ssppaattiiaall aabbiilliittyy ooff nniinntthh ggrraaddee tteecchhnnoollooggyy
ddiissccoovveerryy ssttuuddeennttss
K. Lynn Basham
Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations
Part of the Human Resources Management Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Basham, K. Lynn, "The effects of 3-dimensional CADD modeling software on the development of the
spatial ability of ninth grade technology discovery students" (2007). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 875.
https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/875
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It
has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU
Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected].
THE EFFECTS OF 3-DIMENSIONAL CADD MODELING SOFTWARE
ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPATIAL ABILITY OF NINTH GRADE
TECHNOLOGY DISCOVERY STUDENTS

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Louisiana State University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy

in

The School of Human Resource Education and Workforce Development

by
K. Lynn Basham
B.S., University of Southern Mississippi, 1977
M.S., University of Southern Mississippi, 1985
May 2007
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I want to thank the Mississippi Technology Discovery teachers for their support through
the years. Their dedication to teaching is invaluable to their students. I especially want to thank
those who assisted me with this research. You truly helped make a difference by gathering much
needed data!
Thank you to my committee chair, Dr. Joe Kotrlik, for his patience and support in
unusual and trying circumstances. His optimism is a definite asset to completing a study
interrupted by a hurricane and finished over long distance calls and email.
I owe a sincere thank you also to the other members of my committee for their
exceptional patience, help, interest in, and support of my work. Dr. Reid Bates, Dr. Michael
Burnett, Dr. Krisanna Machtmes, and Dr. Jerry Willis: Thank you!
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..............................................................................................................ii

LIST OF TABLES..........................................................................................................................v

LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................................vii

ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1
Background and Significance.....................................................................................................5
Limitations of the Study..............................................................................................................6
Statement of the Problem............................................................................................................7
Research Questions.....................................................................................................................7
Definitions of Terms...................................................................................................................9

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE................................................................................11
Introduction...............................................................................................................................11
Importance of Spatial Ability....................................................................................................12
Effect of Spatial Abilities on Academic Achievement.............................................................14
Intelligence and Spatial Ability................................................................................................17
Categories of Spatial Abilities..................................................................................................19
Spatial Strategies.......................................................................................................................21
Acquiring Spatial Information..................................................................................................22
Development of Spatial Ability................................................................................................23
Gender and Spatial Ability........................................................................................................26
Improving Spatial Ability.........................................................................................................28
Designing Instructional Material..............................................................................................33

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS.....................................................................................37
Research Design........................................................................................................................37
Description of Instructional Method Groups............................................................................37
Identification of the Population................................................................................................38
Population and Sample.............................................................................................................39
Assignment to Treatment..........................................................................................................40
Procedure Development............................................................................................................41
Treatment Development............................................................................................................42
Teacher Preparation for the Study............................................................................................44
Instrumentation.........................................................................................................................45
Data Collection.........................................................................................................................46
Data Analysis............................................................................................................................47

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS.............................................................................................................48
Schools Participating in the Study............................................................................................48
Reduction of Data.....................................................................................................................49
iii
Research Question 1: Characteristics of Population................................................................50
Sample Characteristics................................................................................................50
Research Question 2: Differences in Spatial Ability Posttest Achievement with Pretest
Covariate............................................................................................................................54
Research Question 3: Differences in Spatial Ability Posttest Achievement with Multiple
Covariates..........................................................................................................................57

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.........................61
Summary...................................................................................................................................61
Conclusions...............................................................................................................................62
Research Question 1...................................................................................................62
Research Question 2...................................................................................................63
Research Question 3...................................................................................................68
Recommendations for Further Research...................................................................................71
Recommendation for Practice...................................................................................................72

REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................73

APPENDIX A: SURVEY............................................................................................................78

APPENDIX B: CONSENT FORMS...........................................................................................79

APPENDIX C: STUDENT INFORMATION SHEET...............................................................84

APPENDIX D: GROUP 1 DESIGN LESSON............................................................................85

APPENDIX E: TEST INSTRUMENT........................................................................................92

APPENDIX F: MISSISSIPPI PRO/DESKTOP CADD MODULE..........................................101

APPENDIX G: INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL FORM..........................134

VITA...........................................................................................................................................135
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Instructional Treatment Components for the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD
on the Development of Spatial Ability.........................................................................8
Table 2. Initial Survey Response for the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the
Development of Spatial Ability..................................................................................39
Table 3. Instruction Provided to Teachers Participating in the Study of the Effect of
3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability....................................................44
Table 4. Schools Assigned to Instructional Treatment Groups for the Study of the Effect
of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability...............................................49
Table 5. Overall Participation of Mississippi Schools in Instructional Methods for the
Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability...............49
Table 6. Treatment, Number, and Percentage of Students per School in the Study of the
Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability.....................................51
Table 7. Total Number and Percentage of Students per Instructional Method in the Study
of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability..........................51
Table 8. Instructional Method and Ethnic Background of Students Participating in the
Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability................51
Table 9. Gender of Participants in the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the
Development of Spatial Ability..................................................................................52
Table 10. Participants Co-enrolled in Art and/or Geometry by Instructional Method for
the Study of Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability................52
Table 11. Ethnic Background and Gender Reported by Instructional Method for
Participants in the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of
Spatial Ability.............................................................................................................53
Table 12. Gender of Participants Co-enrolled in Art and/or Geometry by Instructional
Method for the Study of Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial
Ability.........................................................................................................................53
Table 13. Analysis of Covariance for Interaction Between Instructional Method and Pretest
Covariate in the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial
Ability.........................................................................................................................55
Table 14. ANCOVA Test for Differences Between Means for Method with Pretest Covariate
in the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability......56
v
Table 15. Posttest Unadjusted and Adjusted Mean Scores of Students per Instructional
Method with Pretest Covariate in the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the
Development of Spatial Ability..................................................................................56
Table 16. Pairwise Comparison of Instructional Methods with Pretest Covariate for the
Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability................56
Table 17. Correlation Between Covariate, Independent Variables, and Posttest for the
Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability................57
Table 18. Analysis of Covariance for Interaction Between Posttests by Instructional
Method Groups with Pretest Covariate and Explanatory Factors in the Study
of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability..........................58
Table 19. Analysis of Covariance for Differences among Posttests by Instructional Method
Groups with Pretest Covariate and Explanatory Factors in the Study of the Effect
of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability...............................................59
Table 20. Posttest Unadjusted and Adjusted Mean Scores of Students per Instructional
Method in the Study of the Effect of 3-D CADD on the Development of Spatial
Ability.........................................................................................................................59
Table 21. Pairwise Comparison of Instructional Methods for the Study of the Effect of 3-D
CADD on the Development of Spatial Ability...........................................................60
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Round Profile Revolving Around an Axis..................................................................32
Figure 2. Sample Question from Purdue Visualization of Rotations Test.................................46

vii
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this quantitative study was to determine if there is a difference in the
development of spatial abilities of ninth grade Technology Discovery students in Mississippi as
measured by the Purdue Visualization of Rotations Test. Students experienced one of three
differing instructional methods utilizing Pro/Desktop® 3-D CADD solid modeling software.
Participants were students in Mississippi schools operating on a 4 x 4 block schedule during
either fall or spring semesters during the 2005-2006 school year, and a control group of students
whose schools did not offer CADD. Instructional material designed by the researcher was used
for two instructional treatment methods, with existing instructional materials available for the
software were used in the third instructional method.
Demographic information was collected for students from 14 schools in the study. The
primary research question asked if differences existed by instructional treatment method when
spatial ability pretest scores, gender, ethnicity, co-registration in art, and co-registration in
geometry were controlled. Analysis of Covariance was conducted to analyze the data for this
research question, using the pretest as the covariate and instructional method as the fixed factor.
The dependent variable was the posttest score. The other independent variables of gender,
ethnicity, and co-enrollment in art and/or geometry were included in analysis. No affects
concerning these additional variables was found.
A statistically significant difference existed concerning the method used to instruct
students on the use of 3-D CADD modeling software. The instructional consisting of method of
teacher-lead instruction using the software in a design lesson, followed by student-directed
modular instruction, was found to be effective. These lessons included 3-D physical models
manipulated by the teacher and students. The group of students taught using this method had
viii
higher mean posttest scores than students instructed with other methods. The other instructional
methods did not significantly affect student achievement on the test of spatial ability.

ix