Improvements in Spatial Ability as a Result
of Targeted Training and Computer-Aided
Design Software Use: Analyses of Object
Geometries and Rotation Types
RICHARD M. ONYANCHA
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
MATTHEW DEROV
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of New Hampshire
BRAD L. KINSEY
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of New Hampshire
ABSTRACT
Spatial ability, which affects retention and achievement in engi-
neering and science disciplines, has been shown to improve
through training and simply from enrollment in a Computer-
Aided Design (CAD) course. However, detailed analyses of the
specific object geometries and rotation types that cause difficulty
for students on standardized spatial ability tests or which ones
improve based on training has not been performed. This infor-
mation may assist in determining the optimal training methods to
improve the spatial ability skills of students and thus provide the
most significant benefits for the training time committed. In this
paper, scores from a standardized spatial ability test, which was
administered before and after training and/or enrollment in a
CAD course, are compared. The results show that the targeted
training produced a significant improvement in the spatial ability
test scores of students and that these improvements occur across
all object geometries and rotation types.
Keywords: computer-aided design, spatial ability, training methods
I. INTRODUCTION
Spatial ability has been defined as the ability to generate, retain,
retrieve, and transform well-structured visual images (Lohman,
1993). These skills are extremely important in engineering practice
and many other professions as well such as Chemistry, Physics, etc.
(Devon, Engel, and Turner, 1998; Coleman and Gotch, 1998;
Carter, LaRussa, and Bodner, 1987; Pallrand and Seeber, 1984;
April 2009
Lord, 1990; Smith, 1964). Spatial ability has been shown to improve
during a CAD course or through training (Sorby and Baartmans,
2000; Sorby, 2005, Hsi. Linn, and Bell, 1997; Miller, 1992; Kinsey
et al., 2007). The targeted training can take different forms such as
semester long spatial skills course or short targeted training. Sorby
and Baartmans (2000) developed a course at Michigan Technolog-
ical University entitled “Introduction to Spatial Visualization.” Stu-
dents who scored poorly on standardized spatial ability tests were
invited to enroll in the course; however, the course was open to any
interested student. The course includes topics such as isometric and
orthographic sketching, flat pattern development, and rotation of
objects. Data analyses showed that the spatial ability of the students
who enrolled in the course (i.e., the Experimental Group) was
significantly higher than that of the students who opted not to take
the course (i.e., the Control Group). Also, the retention rates at
Michigan Tech increased from 70.0 percent to 76.8 percent for
male students and from 71.7 percent to 87.4 percent for female stu-
dents, for the Control (N  173, 120 men and 53 women) and
Experimental (N  169, 82 men and 87 women) groups respec-
tively (Sorby, 2005). Finally, the overall Grade Point Average
(GPA) of students who opted to take the spatial ability training
course was significantly better, 2.64 and 3.00 for the Control and
Experimental Groups respectively (Sorby, 2005). Subsequent re-
search has investigated the effect of such training on non-engineering
students (Sorby, 2007), K-12 students (Sorby, 2006) and women
(Sorby, 2001) in engineering. Similarly, Study (2006) provided re-
mediation over a semester long course to minority students and
found an improvement in their spatial ability test scores between
the beginning and end of the semester.
As opposed to semester-long training, more targeted training
efforts that require less time commitment have also been investi-
gated. Hsi et al. (1997) identified at-risk students in an introduc-
tory design course due to poorly developed spatial skills and pro-
vided targeted training. Data analyses showed that pre-course
gender differences were eliminated and that the overall course
grade was improved as a result of the targeted spatial ability training.
However, such gender improvement was not found in other studies
(Sorby, 2005; Kinsey et al., 2007). Women typically score lower on
spatial ability tests than men (Sorby, Leopold, and Gorska, 1999).
While investigating the improvements noted in spatial ability
scores before and after training, the question of which shapes and
rotations were the most difficult for students and showed the most
significant improvement due to training has not been studied. This
may be important for the design of appropriate training programs
Journal of Engineering Education 157
 Table 1. Number of subjects in each group.
that can provide targeted instruction to mitigate any spatial ability
concerns. If certain questions are providing difficulty to students,
then an array of training activities directed towards these concerns
could be developed. To provide data with respect to this question,
portions of the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test (PSVT) (Guay,
1977) were administered to mechanical engineering freshmen, who
were enrolled in a CAD course within the College of Engineering
and Physical Sciences at the University of New Hampshire in the
beginning of the fall semesters in 2006 and 2007. Students whose
average percentage correct PSVT score was less than 60 percent
were invited to participate in a special training program. This
60 percent criterion was selected to obtain a reasonable sample size
for testing and based on a standard assessment of competence typi-
cally used. Those who responded as willing to participate in the
training formed the Experimental Group and the rest were included
in the Control Group. The subjects were again tested using the
same instrument at the end of the semesters and their scores were
compared to those obtained at the beginning of the semesters.
The hypothesis for this research was that students with initially
poor spatial ability skills who were involved in targeted training
would perform better than students who opted not to be involved
in training. An additional goal of the research was to identify the
question types that caused the improved spatial ability scores and
those that students continued to struggle with. This information
would thus identify the types of problems to target for further
training.
The results obtained show that there is no difference between the
Experimental and Control Groups at the beginning of the semester
for all categories of object geometries and/or rotation types for the
PSVT questions. However, at the end of the semester, students in
the Experimental Group scored statistically better than those in the
Control Group. These improvements existed for almost all question
types, both easy and difficult. Furthermore, the Experimental
Group’s average percentage correct PSVT score increased such that
there was no statistical difference between a group of students who
initially scored higher than them at the beginning of the semester.
This demonstrates the effectiveness of the targeted training.
I. METHODOLOGY
A Web-based version of the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test
(Guay, 1977) was used to obtain a measure of a student’s spatial
158 Journal of Engineering Education
ability. The Web-based software recorded the radio button the stu-
dent selected for each of the multiple choice test questions. To en-
sure anonymity, an encrypted university identification code was
used as opposed to the student’s name for data analyses.
A. Participants
The Web-based test was administered to 190 Mechanical
Engineering students (Males  174 and Females  16) at the
University of New Hampshire during the fall semesters of 2006
and 2007. These students were all enrolled in a freshman level
3D CAD course. The subjects were divided into three groups
based on how they scored on the PSVT at the beginning of the
semester, i.e., Low Group (those whose percentage correct
PSVT score was less than or equal to 60 percent), Intermediate
Group (those who scored between 60 percent and 80 percent),
and High Group (those who scored above 80 percent). The stu-
dents in the Low Group were invited to receive targeted train-
ing. Approximately half of the students opted for the training
(Experimental Group), while the remaining students did not
(Control Group). This critical score (60 percent) was selected
based on the distribution of scores. Note that these groups were
self-selected.
Since the spatial ability of women improves at different
rates than men (Sorby, 2005; Kinsey et al., 2007) and there
were a disproportionate number of women in the various
groups, the data for males only were used when comparing the
scores. Table 1 shows the distribution of the subjects in the
different groups.
B. Web-Based Test
The subset of PSVT questions which were administered to stu-
dents consisted of 20 questions from the mental rotation of the ob-
ject section and 20 questions from the mental rotation of perspec-
tive section (Guay, 1977). The test consists of three dimensional
representations of different objects in both solid and no hidden line
representations. See Figures 1 and 2 for examples of PSVT rota-
tions questions and Figure 3 for an example of a PSVT perspective
question, where the student selects the correct perspective of the
object if it was viewed from the corner of the transparent cube with
the dot. The questions were subdivided further according to the ob-
ject’s geometry and nature of the rotation in the questions. This was
done so that an understanding could be obtained as to how the
training affected the student performance with different object
April 2009

Figure 1. Question from the PSVT mental rotation of an object
section (Guay, 1977) which includes the top right angle only object
and the bottom object that contains both a cylindrical surface and an
inclined plane.
Figure 2. Question from the PSVT mental rotation of an object
section (Guay, 1977) which includes the top right angle only object
and the bottom object that contains multiple inclined planes.
Figure 3. Question from the PSVT mental rotation of perspec-
tive section (Guay, 1977) which includes an object with an
oblique plane.
April 2009
geometries and rotation types. Note that in Figure 1, the object in-
cludes both a single inclined plane and a cylindrical surface and is a
solid image of the object undergoing a single, 180 rotation about
the standard isometric axes of the object. Alternatively, Figure 2 is a
multiple inclined plane object shown in a line representation under-
going a double rotation (both 90 rotations). Finally, Figure 3 is of
an object with an oblique plane and is also shown in a line represen-
tation. The questions were presented to all of the students in the
same order with the type of question (i.e., object geometries, rota-
tion type, and whether the object was a solid or line representation)
randomly mixed.
Table 2 shows the various object geometries (e.g., Right Angle
Only, Cylindrical, etc.) and rotation (e.g., Single Rotation, 180
Rotation, etc.) question types in the PSVT. Only questions from
the original PSVT were used in this study. The questions in the
subset used were selected to achieve a balance for the question
types. However, a limited number of Right Angle Only and
Oblique questions existed in the PSVT and all were used in our
study. The number of questions in each type is also provided in
Table 2. Note that only the rotation of view PSVT questions were
used when determining the Single or Double Rotation types
while the object geometry type and the 90 or 180 Rotations were
determined from all 40 questions of the PSVT subset. Also, note
that some questions included more than one object type (e.g., the
object in Figure 1 includes both an Inclined Plane and Cylindrical
surface). Thus, the number of object geometry questions does not
sum to 40.
C. Targeted Spatial Ability Training
The training consisted of two tools, the Physical Model Rotator
(PMR) and Alternative View Screen (AVS). The PMR, which is
shown in Figure 4, rotates an object in synchronous motion with
the same object in the CAD software. This assists the student in in-
terpreting the three dimensional object from the two dimensional
representation in the software. The AVS software provides two
representations of the object in the CAD software and rotates them
in synchronous motion. This assures that the student is not having
difficulty perceiving the various representations (i.e., solid, hidden
line, no hidden line, etc.) of the object. See Figure 5 for a screen
capture from the AVS software. Further details related to these de-
vices can be found in Towle (2005) and Onyancha, Towle, and
Kinsey (2007).
The targeted training consisted of two 1-hour sessions working
with the AVS system, and two 1-hour sessions working with the
PMR over a four week period. The students were provided with
written instructions, introductory support in the use of the tools,
and additional help as required from a graduate teaching assistant
for all the four sessions. The training exercises consisted of four ac-
tivities each session, such as creating engineering drawings, rotating
to a specified view (e.g., isometric), and using the devices to check
the results (Towle, 2005). The students were again tested at the end
of the semester with the same PSVT questions used at the begin-
ning of the semester.
II. RESULTS
Figure 6 compares the average percentage correct PSVT
scores at the beginning and end of the semester for the various
Journal of Engineering Education 159
 Table 2. Information regarding various object geometry and rotation types.
Figure 4. Picture of the Physical Model Rotator device (Towle,
2005; Onyancha, Towle, and Kinsey, 2007).
Figure 5. Screen capture from the Alternative View Screen de-
vice (Towle, 2005; Onyancha, Towle, and Kinsey, 2007).
groups (i.e., High, Intermediate, Experimental (trained), and
Control (not trained)). As is evident from this figure, at the be-
ginning of the semester, the Experimental and Control Groups
had equivalent PSVT scores (p  0.8 based on an independent
samples t-test). However, by the end of the semester, the Exper-
160 Journal of Engineering Education
Figure 6. Comparison of the average percentage correct PSVT
scores of the students in the various groups at the beginning and at
the end of the semester.
imental Group performed significantly better on the PSVT
compared to the Control Group (p  0.013). Furthermore, the
Experimental Group improved their scores to the point that
there was no statistically significant difference between them
and the Intermediate Group (p  0.22) at the end of the semes-
ter, while at the beginning of the semester there was a difference
(p  0.000). The data and p-values comparing the beginning of
the semester to the end of the semester average percentage cor-
rect PSVT scores for all 40 questions are provided in Table 3. As
is evident from this data, the only group whose spatial ability
scores did not significantly improve from the beginning of the
semester to the end of the semester was the High Group. Inde-
pendent samples t-tests were performed to compare the average
percentage correct PSVT scores between the various groups.
The p-values comparing the Experimental Group versus Con-
trol Group and the Experimental versus Group Intermediate
Group are provided in Table 3. In addition, paired samples t-tests
were performed to compare the beginning of the semester to the
end of semester scores for the individual groups. All p-values
reported in this paper are two-tailed. Finally, Cohen’s d-values
are presented to assess effect size.
In order to determine if there were specific question types
that caused these effects to occur, the various object geometries
and rotation types were considered (see Table 4 and 5). Again,
April 2009
 Table 3. Comparison of the average percentage correct PSVT scores on all 40 questions for the students in the various groups at the be-
ginning and at the end of the semester. Also, included are the p-values from independent and paired samples t-tests and Cohen’s d-values
to assess effect size.
the p-values comparing the Experimental Group versus Control
Group and the Experimental Group versus Intermediate Group
are provided in Tables 4 and 5 as well as independent samples
t-tests to determine if a given group improved their spatial abili-
ty scores from the beginning to the end of the semester.
In order to further evaluate these results and to provide graphical
representations of the improvements, the questions were grouped
into Easy and Difficult Categories for both the object and rotation
question types based on the average PSVT scores for the various
question types shown in Table 6.
With these groupings, the various groups were compared
with respect to their beginning and end of semester scores for
the Easy and Difficult Categories of questions. Figures 7 and 8
show the result of these analyses. As these results show, the Ex-
perimental Group performed better than the Control Group on
all question types. Furthermore, their improvements on all ques-
tion types allowed them to improve their scores such that there
was no statistically significant difference between them and the
Intermediate Group. Table 7 has the data for these analyses as
well as p-values comparing the beginning of the semester to the
end of the semester spatial ability scores for the various cate-
gories and groups.
While it was somewhat subjective to include the single inclined
plane problems in the Easy Category for the object shapes, multi-
ple colleagues from both psychology and engineering provided the
same designations for all cases when asked to categorize the ques-
tions. The end of the semester scores in Table 4 justify this deci-
sion more than the beginning of the semester scores in Table 6.
Even if the single inclined plane problems were included in the
Difficult Category, Figure 7 was not considerably affected by this
designation.
III. DISCUSSION
A. Improvements Based on CAD Training
The spatial ability scores of students in the Intermediate and
Control Groups who received CAD software training (but not
the targeted spatial ability training with the PMR and AVS) im-
proved over the course of the semester with respect to the total av-
erage correct PSVT scores (see Figure 6 and data in Table 3). This
April 2009
is consistent with past research results that show spatial ability
scores improving based on CAD training (Miller, 1992; Kinsey
et al., 2007). These improvements were observed for all questions
(both easy and difficult categories) except for easy rotation ques-
tions (see Figures 7 and 8 and data in Table 7). If individual ques-
tion types are investigated (see Tables 4 and 5), these trends hold
except for lack of improvements in easy Right Angle Only and
Cylindrical questions and difficult Oblique objects, where im-
provements from the beginning to the end of the semester were
not found for the Intermediate and Control Groups. Also, the In-
termediate Group did not improve on the easy single rotation
questions.
The Experimental Group that received both targeted training as
well as CAD training was the only group that had a statistically sig-
nificant improvement for all question types and categories (see
Tables 3–5 and 7). Alternatively, the only category that the High
Group improved on was the difficult rotation category, i.e., the 180
and double rotations. These last two points are further discussed
below.
B. Experimental Group Improvements due to Targeted Training
If individual question types in Tables 4 and 5 are considered, at
the beginning of the semester, there was no statistically significant
difference between the Experimental (trained) and Control (not
trained) Groups who both scored below 60 percent initially on the
PSVT. (See the p-value for Expermimental vs. Control in Tables 4
and 5.) However, by the end of the semester, there was a statistically
significant difference with the Experimental Group scoring higher
than the Control Group on all question types except for Right
Angle Only and Single Rotation problems, which are two of the
easiest question types. (It is noteworthy that a marginally significant
effect (p  0.065) was obtained for the Double Rotation ques-
tions.) For the easy and difficult categories (see Table 7), the Exper-
imental Group did significantly better in every category by the end
of the semester. Thus, the training produced a significant increase
in the spatial ability scores of the students.
The improvements by the Experimental Group from the be-
ginning of the semester to the end of the semester were so consid-
erable that their spatial ability scores were statistically equivalent
to those of the Intermediate group by the end of the semester on
all question types except the Single Rotation (p  0.008) and 180
Journal of Engineering Education 161
 Table 4. Comparison of the average percentage correct PSVT scores of the students in the various groups at the beginning and at the end of
the semester for the object question types. Also, included are the p-values from independent and paired samples t-tests.

Rotation questions (p  0.052). At the beginning of the semester,
the Intermediate Group’s scores were statistically higher than the
Experimental Group’s scores. (See p-values for Experimental vs.
Intermediate) For the easy and difficult categories (see Table 7),
the Experimental Group scored equivalently to the Intermediate
Group in every category by the end of the semester.
The Experimental Group improved on every object and rota-
tion type question in the PSVT. (See p-values comparing the be-
ginning and end of the semester scores.) They were the only group
to improve significantly on the Right Angle Only, Cylindrical,
Oblique, and 90 Rotation questions. These improvements were
the cause of the change in their scores relative to the other groups.

162 Journal of Engineering Education April 2009

 Table 5. Comparison of the average percentage correct PSVT scores of the students in the various groups at the beginning and at the end of
the semester for the rotation question types. Also, included are the p-values from independent and paired samples t-tests.

The improvements by the Experimental Group were similar to
the improvements observed through the semester long course at
Michigan Tech (Sorby, 2005). In their study, the average percent-
age correct on the PSVT increased from 48.3 percent at the begin-
ning of the semester to 73.7 percent at the end of the semester.
It is noteworthy that the scores for the High Group were signifi-
cantly higher than any other group at the beginning and end of the
semester on all question types ( p  0.05). Similarly, the Intermedi-
ate Group’s scores were significantly higher than the Control
Group at the beginning and end of the semester ( p  0.01). So the
improvements by the Experimental Group were the only ones that
changed the relative differences between the groups.
C. Ceiling Effect of Spatial Ability Scores
It is interesting to note that all groups, even the High
Group, improved their spatial ability scores for the difficult
questions (both object and rotation). However, for the easy
questions, the High Group did not improve. This represents a
ceiling effect where the High Group did not improve from the
beginning to the end of the semester. In fact, in all except the
Single Incline questions of the easy question cases (e.g., Right
Angle Only, Cylindrical, etc.), the average percentage correct
for the High Group decreased on the Easy Category questions
from the beginning of the semester to the end of the semester.
This is likely due to the students spending less time and making
careless errors on these less challenging questions. However, for
the Difficult Category questions where they were engaged, the
scores for the High Group improved (e.g., the Multiple Incline,
180 Rotation, and Double Rotation questions). These im-
provements were statistically significant on the Difficult Rota-
tion Category questions (p  0.01). Additional ceiling effects
may have occurred for the Intermediate and Control groups

April 2009 Journal of Engineering Education 163

 Table 6. Groupings of various questions into Easy and Difficult Categories based on average percentage correct PSVT scores at the
beginning of semester.

Figure 7. Comparison of the average percentage correct PSVT Figure 8. Comparison of the average percentage correct PSVT
scores of the students in the various groups at the beginning and at scores of the students in the various groups at the beginning and at
the end of the semester for the (a) Easy and (b) Difficult Object Cat- the end of the semester for the (a) Easy and (b) Difficult Rotation
egories of questions. Categories of questions.

164 Journal of Engineering Education April 2009

 Table 7. Comparison of the average percentage correct PSVT scores of the students in the various groups at the beginning and at the end of
the semester for the categories of questions. Also, included are the p-values from independent and paired samples t-tests.

who did not improve their spatial ability scores for easy ques-
tions such as the Right Angle Only, Cylindrical Surface, and
90 rotation questions.
D. Additional Comments
Based on Stanley and Hopkins (1972), practice effects for tests ad-
ministered within three months will improve scores by 0.2 times the
standard deviation or less. For our study, the standard deviations for
the groups that improved from the beginning of the semester to the
end of the semester (i.e., the Intermediate, Experimental, and Control
Groups) were 11.4, 15.1, and 17.9 respectively. Thus, the improve-
ments in the spatial ability scores were 0.50, 1.66, and 0.56 times the
standard deviation respectively. While some of the improvement
could be attributed to practice effects, improvements in the spatial
ability scores due to the CAD and targeted training did occur based on
this analysis, in particular for the Experimental Group.
Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) were not performed as the
data showed an obvious main effect between groups and begin-
ning and end of semester scores. Thus, the t-tests were conducted
to provide more specific information related to the improvements
found.
Note that the PSVT is only one measure of spatial ability. Other
measures could be used to further assess the improvements based on
the CAD software use and targeted training.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Spatial ability has been shown to correlate with retention and
achievement in engineering and science courses. Thus, improving
the spatial ability skills of students is essential. The data analyses
show the significant improvements in spatial ability which were

April 2009 Journal of Engineering Education 165

achieved by the students who underwent training with the PMR
and AVS devices. These improvements caused them to have signif-
icantly higher spatial ability scores by the end of the semester than
the Control Group who declined training and equivalent scores to
students who scored higher than them at the beginning of the se-
mester. The questions that they improved their scores on compared
to the other groups included questions that were designated as both
easy and difficult. Thus, the training improved their abilities across
an array of questions. However, the scores of the students potential-
ly could still be improved. Therefore, further training on difficult
questions (e.g., mulitple incline and oblique objects and 180 and
double rotations) may be beneficial.
It is possible that there is a limit to the potential improvements
of students with spatial ability concerns as measured by a particular
instrument such as the PSVT. The spatial ability of the High
Group that scored above 80 percent correct on the PSVT questions
only improved on difficult rotation questions from the beginning of
the semester to the end of the semester. In the research by Study
(2006), remediation improved the spatial ability of students in the
experimental group, but further 3D CAD training did not improve
the scores of the experimental group while the scores of the control
group continued to increase. However, the targeted training de-
scribed in this paper may provide significant improvements in the
least amount of time and with the least resources spent and thus
would be desirable for students.
Finally, as was found in past research, the spatial ability scores of
students improved from use of CAD software during a course.
These improvements were most pronounced in questions that were
difficult for students at the beginning of the semester.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Support from the National Science Foundation, Engineering
Education and Centers Division (EEC- 0343862) is gratefully ac-
knowledged. Also, the assistance of Edward O’Brien from the
Pyschology Department at UNH is appreciated.
REFERENCES
Carter, C.S., M.A. LaRussa, and G.M. Bodner. 1987. A study of
two measures of spatial ability as predictors of success in different levels
of general chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 24 (7):
645–57.
Coleman, S.L., and A.J. Gotch. 1998. Spatial perception skills of
chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Research 75 (2): 206–09.
Devon, R., R. Engel, and G. Turner. 1998. The effects of spatial visual-
ization skill training on gender and retention in engineering. Journal of
Women and Minorities in Engineering 4 (4): 371–80.
Guay, R. 1977. Purdue spatial visualization test: Rotations. West
Lafayette, IN: Purdue Research Foundation.
Hsi, S., M. Linn, and J. Bell. 1997. The role of spatial reasoning in en-
gineering and the design of spatial instruction. Journal of Engineering Edu-
cation 86 (2): 151–58.
Kinsey, B.L., E. Towle, E.J. O’Brien, and C. Bauer. 2007. Analysis of
self-efficacy and ability related to spatial tasks and the effect on retention
for students in engineering. International Journal of Engineering Education
24 (3): 488–94.
166 Journal of Engineering Education
Lohman, D.F. 1993. Spatial ability and gender. First Spearman
Seminar, University of Plymouth, July 21.
Lord, T.R. 1990. Enhancing learning in the life sciences through spa-
tial perception. Innovative Higher Education 15 (1): 5–16.
Miller, C. 1992. Enhancing visual literacy of engineering students
through the use of real and computer generated models. Engineering Design
Graphics Journal 56 (1): 27–38.
Onyancha, R.M., E. Towle, and B.L. Kinsey. 2007. Improvement of
spatial ability using innovative tools: Alternative view screen and physical
model rotator. Engineering Design Graphics Journal 71 (4): 1–8.
Pallrand, G.J., and F. Seeber. 1984. Spatial ability and achievement in
introductory physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 21 (5): 507-16.
Smith, I.M. 1964. Spatial ability-its educational and social significance.
London: University of London.
Sorby, S., C. Leopold, and R. Gorska. 1999. Cross-cultural compar-
isons of gender differences in the spatial skills of engineering students. Jour-
nal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 5 (2): 279–91.
Sorby, S., and B. Baartmans. 2000. The development and assessment of
a course for enhancing the 3-d spatial visualization skills of first year engi-
neering students. Journal of Engineering Education 89 (3): 301–07.
Sorby, S. 2001. A course in spatial visualization and its impact on the
retention of female engineering students. Journal of Women and Minorities
in Science and Engineering 7 (2): 153–72.
Sorby, S. 2005. Assessment of a “new and improved” course for the de-
velopment of 3-d spatial skills. Engineering Design Graphics Journal 69 (3):
6–13.
Study, N. 2006. Using remediation to improve the visualization abilities
in minority engineering and technology students. In Proceedings of the 2006
American Society of Engineering Education Conference. Chicago, Illinois.
Sorby, S. 2006. Developing 3-d spatial skills for K-12 students. Engi-
neering Design Graphics Journal 70 (3): 1–11.
Sorby, S. 2007. A longitudinal study of the impact of spatial skills train-
ing for non-engineering students. In Proceedings of the 2007 American Soci-
ety of Engineering Education Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii.
Stanley, J.C., and K.D. Hopkins. 1972. Educational and psychological
measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Towle, E. 2005. Design, implementation, and validation of a device to
improve the spatial ability of engineering students. MS Thesis, University
of New Hampshire.
AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES
Richard M. Onyancha is an assistant professor at Rose-Hulman
Institute of Technology. He received his Bachelor’s degree from the
University of Nairobi, Kenya in 1987, his Master’s degree from
Brunel University, London, in 1990, and his Ph.D. from the Uni-
versity of New Hampshire in 2007. His awards include the 2007
Chair’s Award for the Best Paper, Engineering Design and Graph-
ics Division, ASEE.
Address: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rose-
Hulman Institute of Technology, 5500 Wabash Avenue, Terre
Haute, IN 47803; e-mail: richard.m.onyancha@rose-hulman.
edu.
Matthew Derov received his Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees
from the University of New Hampshire in 2006 and 2008 respec-
tively, in Mechanical Engineering. He is currently employed by
SolidWorks Corporation.
April 2009
 Brad L. Kinsey is an associate professor in the Mechanical Engi-
neering Department at the University of New Hampshire. He re-
ceived his Bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan in
1992 and his Master’s and Doctoral degrees from Northwestern
University in 1998 and 2001 respectively, all in Mechanical Engi-
neering. His awards include a CAREER Award from NSF in
2007, the UNH Assistant Professor of the Year Award in 2006–07,
April 2009
the 2007 Chair’s Award for the Best Paper, Engineering Design
and Graphics Division, ASEE, and the 2006 Ralph R. Teetor
Award from the Society of Automotive Engineers.
Address: Mechanical Engineering Department, University of
New Hampshire, Kingsbury Hall, Room S256, 33 College Road,
Durham, NH 03824; telephone: (1) 603.862.1811; e-mail:
bkinsey@unh.edu.
Journal of Engineering Education 167