Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning to think spatially in an undergraduate interdisciplinary computational design context: a case study

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Spatial thinking skills are vital for success in everyday living and work, not to mention the centrality of spatial reasoning in scientific discoveries, design-based disciplines, medicine, geosciences and mathematics to name a few. This case study describes a course in spatial thinking and communicating designed and delivered by an interdisciplinary team over a three-year period to first-year university students. Four major elements provide a framework for the sequencing of instruction and acquisition of 2D and 3D spatial thinking and reasoning skills in a computational design context. We describe the process of introducing students to computational design environments beginning with a fun and familiar tool in preparation for a more complex, industry-standard system (SolidWorks). A design project provides diverse student teams an opportunity to integrate and apply foundational spatial concepts and skills including sketching, 2D and 3D representations, as well as digital and physical modeling. Samples of student work illustrate the scaffolding necessary for students to successfully draw upon the spatial thinking and communication skills required to complete their team projects beginning with applying sketching techniques; modeling individual 3D parts; creating digital assemblies; and finally building the equivalent 3D physical model. Key instructional principles provide a framework for the analysis of what worked and what didn’t in relation to spatial skills development in students. The lessons learned are identified along with potential future directions for teaching and learning scholarship in spatial thinking development within a computational design context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashraf, M. (2004). A critical look at the use of group projects as a pedagogical tool. Journal of Education for Business, 79(4), 213–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, R. E. (1999). Planning the EDG curriculum for the 21st century: A proposed team effort. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 63(2), 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben Youssef, B., Berry, B., Sjoerdsma, M., Dill, J., Erhan, H., & McCracken, J. (2009, May 12–14). Engaged faculty yields engaged students. In Proceedings of the 35th McGraw-Hill Ryerson teaching and learning conference, first year in focus: Engaging students in their first year and beyond, (p. 40). Vancouver, Canada.

  • Bertoline, G. R., & Wiebe, E. N. (2005). Fundamentals of graphics communication (5th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Graphics Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connolly, P. E. (2009, January 4–7). Spatial ability improvement and curriculum content. In 63rd annual ASEE/EDGD mid-year conference proceedings. Berkeley, California, USA.

  • Cooper, H. M., & Good, T. L. (1983). Pygmalion grows up: Studies in the expectation communication process. New York, NY: Longman Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dassault Systèmes (2010, May 10). Retrieved from http://www.solidworks.com.

  • Do, E. Y-L. (2010, April 22). GIS 172: Visual reasoning. Retrieved from http://code.arc.cmu.edu/visual.

  • Dunwoody, A. B. (2010, May 10). APSC 151: Computer-aided engineering graphics. Retrieved from http://courses.engineering.ubc.ca/apsc151.

  • Erhan, H., Ben Youssef, B., Sjoerdsma, M., Dill, J., Berry, B., & McCracken, J. (2008, July 27–29). Spatial thinking and communicating: A course for first-year university students. In Proceedings of the fifth CDEN/RCCI international design engineering conference [CD-ROM]. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

  • Field, B. (1999). A course in spatial visualization. Journal of Geometry and Graphics, 3(2), 201–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finke, R., & Shepard, R. N. (1986). Visual functions of mental imagery. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance, (Vol. II, pp. 19–55). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, M., Lavy, I., & Elata, D. (2003). Implementing the project-based learning approach in an academic engineering course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 273–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, E. (2007, April 28–May 3). Improvization principles and techniques for design. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2007) (pp. 1069–1072). San Jose, CA, USA.

  • Golledge, R. G. (2010, May 28). GEOG 581: Concepts for spatial thinking and GEOG 583: Spatial analysis and modeling. Retrieved from http://college.usc.edu/geography/courses/graduate.html.

  • Golledge, R. G., & Stimson, R. J. (1997). Spatial behaviour: A geographical perspective. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1997). Looking in classrooms. New York, NY: Longman Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hespanha, S. R., Goodchild, F., & Janelle, D. G. (2009). Spatial thinking and technologies in the undergraduate social science classroom. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33(S1), 17–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hochberg, J. (1978). Perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastens, K. A., & Ishikawa, T. (2006). Spatial thinking in the geosciences and cognitive sciences: A cross-disciplinary look at the intersection of the two fields. In C. A. Manduca & D. W. Mogk (Eds.), Earth and mind: How geologists think and learn about the earth (pp. 53–76). Boulder, CO: The Geological Society of America.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kruck, S. E., & Teer, F. P. (2009). Interdisciplinary student teams projects: A case study. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(3), 325–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, D., Seery, N., & Gordon, S. (2009). The understated value of freehand sketching in technology education. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 73(3), 13–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, K., Oehlberg, L., & Agogino, A. (2009). Sketching in design journals: An analysis of visual representations in the product design process. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 73(3), 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lego Digital Designer. (2010, June 22). Retrieved from http://ldd.lego.com.

  • Leutner, D. (2000). Double-fading support—A training approach to complex software systems. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 347–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohman, D. F., & Nichols, P. D. (1990). Training spatial abilities: Effects of practice on rotation and synthesis tasks. Learning and Individual Differences, 2(1), 67–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. In D. G. Oblinger (Ed.), EDUCAUSE learning initiative: Advancing learning through IT innovation (pp. 1–12). Retrieved June 10, 2010 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf.

  • Martin-Dorta, N., Saorin, J., & Contero, M. (2008). Development of a fast remedial course to improve the spatial abilities of engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 505–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathewson, J. H. (1999). Visual-spatial thinking: An aspect of science overlooked by educators. Science Education, 83(1), 33–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKim, R. H. (1980). Experiences in visual thinking. Boston, MA: PWS Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaren, S. V. (2008). Exploring perceptions and attitudes towards teaching and learning manual technical drawing in a digital age. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 18, 167–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (2009). First principles of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models, Vol. III (pp. 41–56). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. L. (1996). A historical review of applied and theoretical spatial visualization publications in engineering graphics. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 60(3), 12–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohler, J. L. (1997). An instructional method for the AutoCAD modeling environment. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 61(1), 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohler, J. L. (2007). An instructional strategy for pictorial drawing. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 44(3), 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohler, J. L. (2008a). A review of spatial ability research. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 72(3), 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohler, J. L. (2008b). Examining the spatial ability phenomenon from the student’s perspective. Engineering Graphics Design Journal, 72(3), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohler, J. L., & Miller, C. L. (2008). Improving spatial ability with mentored sketching. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 72(1), 19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2006). Learning to think spatially. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, K., Kift, S., Humphreys, J., & Harper, W. (2006). A blueprint for enhanced transition: Taking a holistic approach to managing student transition into a large university. In Proceedings of the first year in higher education conference (pp. 1–12). Gold Coast, Australia.

  • Norman, K. L. (1994). Spatial visualization—A gateway to computer-based technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12(3), 195–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novick, L. R., & Bassok, M. (2005). Problem solving. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 321–349). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olkun, S. (2003, April). Making connections: Improving spatial abilities with engineering drawing abilities. International Journal of Mathematics Teaching and Learning, Center for Innovation in Mathematics Teaching, University of Plymouth, UK.

  • Onyancha, R. M., Derov, M., & Kinsey, B. L. (2009). Improvements in spatial ability as a result of targeting training and computer-aided design software use: Analyses of object geometries and rotation types. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(2), 157–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., Kim, D-E., & Sohn, M. H. (2010). 3D simulation technology as an effective instructional tool for enhancing spatial visualization skills in apparel design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. Published online. Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/content/47122p3n40t03428/fulltext.pdf.

  • Peppé, R. (2002). Automata and mechanical toys. Marlborough, Wiltshire: Crowood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1956). The Child’s conception of space (F. J. Langdon & J. L. Lunzer, translators). New York: Norton (Original Work Published in 1948 as La Représentation de L’Espace chez L’Enfant).

  • Pleck, M. H., McGrath, M. B., Bertoline, G. R., Bowers, D. H., & Sadowski, M. A. (1990). Factors affecting the engineering design graphics curriculum: Past, present, future. Proceedings of the NSF symposium on modernization of the engineering design graphics curriculum, Austin, TX, 43–52.

  • Sharp, J., & Zachary, L. W. (2004). Using the van Hiele K-12 geometry learning theory to modify engineering mechanics instruction. Journal of STEM Education Innovations and Research, 5(1&2), 35–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, R. N. (1984). Ecological constraints on internal representations: Resonant kinematics of perceiving, imagining, thinking, and dreaming. Psychological Review, 91(4), 417–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shneiderman, B. (2007). Creativity support tools: Accelerating discovery and innovation. Communications of the ACM, 50(12), 20–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shortis, M., Leahy, F., Ogleby, C., Kealy, A., & Ellis, F. (2002). Learning spatial design and analysis concepts. Retrieved June 6, 2010 from: http://www.geomsoft.com/markss/papers/Shortis_etal_spatDA.pdf.

  • Sorby, S. A. (1999). Developing 3-D spatial visualization skills. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 63(2), 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorby, S. A. (2005). Assessment of a “new and improved” course for the development of 3-D spatial skills. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 69(3), 6–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorby, S. A. (2009). Educational research in developing 3-D spatial skills for engineering students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 459–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorby S. A., & Baartmans, B. J. (2000). The development and assessment of a course for enhancing the 3-D spatial visualization skills of first year engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(3), 301–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorby, S. A., & Gorska, R. A. (1998). The effect of various courses and teaching methods on the improvement of spatial ability. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on engineering design graphics and descriptive geometry (pp. 252–256). Austin, TX.

  • Sternberg, R. J., Lubart, T. I., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2005). Creativity. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 351–369). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strong, S., & Smith, R. (2001). Spatial visualization: Fundamentals and trends in engineering graphics. Journal of Industrial Technology, 18(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • TechBytes (2010, June 9). Retrieved from http://www.sfu.ca/techbytes/.

  • TechOne Program (2010, April 26). Retrieved from http://students.surrey.sfu.ca/techone.

  • Tickoo, S., & Maini, D. (2007). SolidWorks 2007 for designers. CADCIM Technologies.

  • Tsiplakides, I., & Keramida, A. (2010). The relationship between teacher expectations and student achievement in the teaching of English as a foreign language. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 22–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, B. (2005). Functional significance of visuospatial representations. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 1–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J. F., & Wiley, J. (1995). Acquiring intellectual skills. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 155–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickens, C. D., Vincow, M., & Yeh, M. (2005). Design applications of visual spatial thinking: The importance of frame of reference. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 383–425). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe, E. N. (1999). 3-D constraint-based modeling: Finding common themes. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 63(3), 15–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe, E. N., Branoff, T. J., & Hartman, N. W. (2003). Teaching geometry through dynamic modeling in introductory engineering graphics. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 67(2), 12–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge our colleagues: Mike Sjoerdsma, Halil Erhan, John Dill, and Janet McCracken for their collaboration in designing, developing, and teaching TECH 106; as well as the TechOne Program and the School of Interactive Arts and Technology at Simon Fraser University and their staff for their support. We further wish to acknowledge the many students whom we learned with and from during our experiences in teaching this course. The authors would like also to thank the anonymous referees for their helpful suggestions and comments on this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 51178, Riyadh, 11543, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    Belgacem Ben Youssef

  2. School of Interactive Arts and Technology, Simon Fraser University, Surrey, BC, Canada

    Belgacem Ben Youssef

  3. TechOne Program, Simon Fraser University, Surrey, BC, Canada

    Belgacem Ben Youssef

  4. Teaching and Learning Centre, Simon Fraser University, 250-13450 102nd Avenue, Surrey, BC, V3T 0A3, Canada

    Barbara Berry

Authors
  1. Belgacem Ben Youssef
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Berry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Belgacem Ben Youssef.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ben Youssef, B., Berry, B. Learning to think spatially in an undergraduate interdisciplinary computational design context: a case study. Int J Technol Des Educ 22, 541–564 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9151-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9151-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation