Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Professional Development Webinar
January 27, 2011 2 PM EST ENGAGE Research-based Strategies to Retain Undergraduates in Engineering Part 3: Improving Students’ Spatial Visualization Skills
2
Housekeeping Information
The webinar will use Voice Over Internet. If the sound quality is not good, a teleconference line is available: To be notified of future webinars: Sign up for the Knowledge Center newsletter at: Survey following webinar—please respond!
3
How to Ask a Question Participant microphones are muted for webinar quality Type your question in the “Question” space in the webinar control panel A presenter will respond as time allows
4
Who’s on the Call Today We have almost 200 registered participants from around the world! Thank you to IEEE WIE, ASEE WIED, ASEE ERM, NAPE Stem Equity Pipeline, PGEList, National Girls Collaborative Project and others for promoting!
5
What’s WEPAN? www.wepan.org
WEPAN is the nation’s leading organization for transforming culture in engineering education to promote the success of all women. Translates research into practice Inspires a network of advocates Mobilizes diverse stakeholders Fosters diversity in engineering graduates
6
WEPAN Knowledge Center http://wepanknowledgecenter.org
Goal: Increase the number, scope and effectiveness of initiatives to advance women in engineering. Catalogued and fully cited resources Research, reports, data and statistics, agenda papers, bibliographies, best practices, key programs, and more—1,000+ Online Professional Community Network, collaborate, identify experts, share information Special online events Feature WKC Professional Community and networking opportunities Use the research, information & data, Submit & suggest resources, Share the WKC with colleagues
7
Webinar Series – Part 3: Improving Spatial Visualization Skills
Host: Diane Matt, Co-PI ENGAGE; Executive Director, WEPAN (Women in Engineering ProActive Network) Moderator: Susan Metz, Principal Investigator, ENGAGE; Stevens Institute of Technology Presenter: Sheryl Sorby, Ph.D., Professor; Director, Engineering Education Innovation Research Group; Director, Solid Mechanics Area, Michigan Tech Funded by the National Science Foundation. Opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the funder.
8
ENGAGE is an extension services project, funded by NSF GSE (Research on Gender in Science & Engineering). These projects are modeled after the Cooperative Extension Services of Land Grant Universities They provide useful, practical and research-based information to those who can use it. The goal is to put more research into practice. Funded by the National Science Foundation. Opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the funder.
9
Goal To increase the capacity of engineering schools to retain undergraduate students (1st and 2nd year) by facilitating the implementation of research-based strategies to improve the educational experience.
10
Research-Based Strategies
#1 Improve and increase interaction between faculty and students. #2 Use everyday examples in engineering to teach technical concepts. #3 Improve spatial visualization skills of students with weak skills.
11
POLL: Who is on the call today?
11
12
Our Featured Presenter
Sheryl Sorby, Ph.D. Professor and Director, Engineering Education Innovation Research Group; Director, Solid Mechanics Area, Michigan Tech
13
Preparing the Next Generation of Innovators
Published by the National Science Foundation in 2010 Innovators typically have strong spatial skills as well as strong: Verbal Skills Math Skills Expressed the need to look merely beyond verbal and math skills when identifying STEM talent
14
As quickly as you can, determine the correct response to:
Problem taken from the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Rotations (Guay 1976)
15
Poll A: How do you feel about spatial problems like this?
16
Poll B: What do you think about spatial skills?
17
Poll B was a trick question:
All of the preceding statements were FALSE Not all of your students have well-developed spatial skills Spatial skills are important to success in engineering The spatial skills of women typically lag behind those of the men Holds true for students from lower SES groups, too Spatial skills can be learned!!!!!
18
A significant portion of students fail the PSVT:R
Approximately 10-15% of Michigan Tech students fail the PSVT:R during orientation each year ~10% of the male students ~30% of the female students Nearly one third!
19
From studies conducted with 64,000 professionals:
Source: Johnson O’Connor Research Foundation
20
Gender Differences are Robust and Consistent
21
Spatial Skills Course Initially developed with funding from the National Science Foundation Second grant obtained to develop multimedia software and a workbook for developing spatial skills Offered continuously since 1993 From , students who failed the PSVT:R (60% or lower) during orientation were encouraged to enroll in the course Beginning in 2009, students who fail are required to enroll in course
22
Course Format One 1.5-hour lab session per week for one credit
Short mini-lecture (~10-15 minutes) at beginning of session Students work through software module in teams of two Students complete workbook pages for remainder of time
23
Multimedia Software
24
Assessment of Gains on Spatial Skills Test-PSVT:R
Pre-Test Post-Test Gain Significance of Gain Original Course 186 50.5 76.9 26.4 p<0.0001 Modified Course 157 48.3 73.7 25.4
25
Long Term Assessments Several longitudinal studies have been conducted over the years to look at the long-term impact of the spatial skills course Grades in key courses have been examined Retention rates tracked
26
General Results from Longitudinal Studies
Students who failed the PSVT:R and enrolled in the spatial skills course, earn better grades in: Calculus (and Pre-Calculus) Chemistry Computer Science Engineering/Graphics Physics Overall when compared to students who failed the PSVT:R and did not enroll in the course
27
For Example: Average GPAs for Students who initially failed the PSVT:R—2000-2002
Course Enrolled in Spatial Course Did not Enroll in Spatial Course Significance of Diff of Means Engineering I 3.04 2.62 p<0.0005 Engineering II 2.94 2.71 p<0.001 Calculus I 2.78 2.35 Chemistry I 2.70 2.56 p<0.1 Physics I 2.25 2.02 p<0.02 Overall 3.00 2.64
28
Additional Results Students who failed the PSVT:R and enrolled in the spatial skills course earned better grades than Those who failed the PSVT:R and did not take the course Those who passed the PSVT:R with a score between 60 and 70%
29
For example: Average GPAs in courses 1996-98 and 2000-02
Failed PSVT:R, enrolled in course Passed PSVT:R with score 60-70% Failed PSVT:R, did not enroll in course Pre-Calculus 2.74 2.41 p=0.002 2.19 p<0.0001 Calculus I 2.59 2.48 N.S. 2.25 p=0.004 Chemistry I 2.64 2.47 p=0.02 2.31 Computer Science I 3.16 2.88 2.53 Overall 3.01 2.84 p=0.0005 2.63
30
Self-Selection Bias? Prior to 2009, students who enrolled in the course chose to do so Results could be influenced by self-selection bias VERY preliminary results show a positive impact on grades, for students who got the spatial skills training
31
Fall 2009 Data—no self selection
Course Passed PSVT:R score of 60-70% Failed PSVT:R and took spatial skills course Engineering Ia 2.26 N.S. 2.32 Engineering Ib (strong graphics/CAD content) 2.40 p=0.009 3.06 Pre-Calculus 2.12 2.24 Calculus I 2.16 p=0.026 2.62
32
Retention rates In general, students who failed the PSVT:R and enrolled in the spatial skills course were retained: At the university Within engineering at higher rates than: Those who failed the PSVT:R and did not enroll in the course Those who passed the PSVT:R with a score of 60-70% Particularly true for women!
33
For example: Retention Rates 1996-1998
34
For Example: Retention Rates at University by Gender
Women Men Failed PSVT:R-Took course Failed PSVT:R-Did not take course Passed PSVT:R score of 60% or higher Retention Rate 87.4% 71.1% 83.2% 76.8% 70.0% 73.4% Retention Rate 88.9% 68.3% 87.2% 75.3% 69.0% 72.4%
35
Conclusions Well-developed math and verbal skills are readily recognized as necessary to success in engineering According to a recent publication by the National Science Board, perhaps we should add “spatial skills” to this list We don’t encourage students not ready for calculus to enroll in calculus in their first semester Shouldn’t spatial skills training be available for those who need the help? By implementing a course to help students develop their spatial skills, we believe we have helped them to be more successful in engineering
36
What should you do? Assess the spatial skill level of your incoming engineering students Identify those with weak skills Target your efforts at those students
37
What shouldn’t you do? Provide spatial skills training to all of your students Those who don’t need it may be bored Those who do need it may become even more discouraged Self-efficacy will be diminished Offer voluntary spatial skills help sessions Voluntary supplemental instruction never works
38
Formats for Implementation that will work
Offer course for credit for spatial skills training Require supplemental instruction sessions for students with weak skills Similar to requiring tutoring sessions for students with weak math skills Provide spatial skills training as part of a summer bridge program Integrate spatial skills training into a required course Caution! Use this approach only if most of your students have weak spatial skills and NOT if only a small percentage of students require this training.
39
A final reflection…… Engineering faculty are hesitant to add one credit to an already full curriculum Which is better? Which is more costly? Asking students to take one extra credit that improves their chances of success in engineering by a significant margin OR Ignoring the problem and hoping your students will survive to graduation
40
Questions ????
42
2010 ENGAGE Schools Kettering University Purdue University
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Stevens Institute of Technology The University of Texas at Austin The Ohio State University University of Louisville University of Maryland University of South Carolina Virginia Tech
43
2011 ENGAGE Schools Arizona State University Boise State University
California State University, Fullerton Louisiana Tech University New Jersey Institute of Technology North Carolina State University University of Colorado, Boulder University of Dayton University of Illinois, Chicago University of New Mexico
44
For More Information: Website:
45
Thank You! We will E-mail the PowerPoint to you
We will the link to the recorded webinar to you—share with your colleagues! Sign up for more webinar notifications at:
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.