Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Telematics and Informatics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tele

From 3D modeling to 3D printing: Development of a

differentiated spatial ability teaching model
Tien-Chi Huang ⇑, Chun-Yu Lin
Department of Information Management, National Taichung University of Science and Technology, No. 129, Sec. 3, Sanmin Rd., Taichung 40401, Taiwan, ROC

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: 3D modeling technologies and related techniques are emerging core competencies due to
Received 22 August 2016 the increasing popularity of 3D printers. Traditional methods of teaching 3D modeling
Received in revised form 14 October 2016 mostly depend on the use of three-view diagrams to guide students in the construction
Accepted 15 October 2016
of a spatial cognition. However, a lack of three-dimensional and spatial ability on the part
Available online 15 October 2016
of the learners limits the effectiveness of this type of teaching material, and instructional
effectiveness is also restricted by the existing spatial ability among students. In traditional
Keywords:
approaches to technical education, students assume a largely passive role, while instruc-
Improving classroom teaching
3D printing
tion adopts methods that emphasize rote learning, but these approaches are in the process
CDIO of being transformed. Accordingly, the present study attempts to combine the Conceive,
Pedagogical issues Design, Implement, Operate (CDIO) educational framework and 3D printing-tangible
Differentiated spatial ability teaching model teaching materials for college students to explore potential improvements in learning out-
comes. Experimental results indicate that different teaching materials (three-view dia-
grams and 3D printed solid models) result in the development of different spatial
abilities (specifically, mental rotation and spatial visualization) and learning outcomes.
In addition, the use of solid models results in 3D model learning outcomes better than
those achieved using traditional three-view diagrams. Inspired by theories of perception
and motivation and dual coding theory, this study developed a set of differentiated spatial
ability teaching models to improve learning effectiveness for 3D modeling. The results
provide guidance for the development of teaching materials and models appropriate to
learners’ spatial abilities.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

3D technology breaks the boundaries of real and virtual worlds. However, applications of this technology have been
largely confined to industrial prototyping, such as the use of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing
(CAD-CAM) to manufacture virtual models. Today, 3D printers are increasingly available, partly driven by the trend towards
OpenSource technologies (Kostakis et al., 2015; Rayna et al., 2015; West and Kuk, 2015), dramatically increasing access to 3D
technologies and democratizing the production chain of design, molding, and manufacturing (Rayna and Striukova, 2015). In
the process, 3D modeling techniques have emerged as important core competencies, and innovations developed through the
widespread application of 3D technologies have led to breakthroughs in medical science and machinery automation (Bassett
et al., 2015; Hackett and Proctor, 2016; Katsioloudis et al., 2014; Kostakis and Papachristou, 2014; Zhang et al., 2015).

⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tchuang@nutc.edu.tw (T.-C. Huang), bellec77115@gmail.com (C.-Y. Lin).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.10.005
0736-5853/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613 605

Reacting to this trend, technical and vocational education programs that previously focused on teaching core technologies
have begun to introduce 3D modeling programs.
3D modeling programs focus on skill development, using a teaching model that puts equal emphasis on theory and prac-
tice. The concept of CDIO (Conceive, Design, Implement, Operate) covers establishing basic knowledge, knowledge transfer,
application of knowledge acquired, and problem solving (Jianfeng et al., 2013), combining theoretical knowledge and voca-
tional training to meet the demands of higher technical and vocational education. Moreover, it fosters skills in observation,
design and information processing needed for 3D modeling.
However, differences among individual learners will affect learning outcomes, and training in 3D modeling relies heavily
on the student’s innate spatial ability. Past studies have indicated that 3D modeling students need to view things from dif-
ferent angles to construct cognitive abstract spaces (Carroll, 1993; Kurtulus, 2013; McGee, 1979), thus highlighting the
importance of spatial ability.
Accordingly, this study investigates the use of traditional three-view diagrams and solid models in improving learners’
spatial ability. The study further develops a CDIO set for integration into a 3D modeling teaching model. 3D printed models
are used to aid learners in developing modeling techniques, providing a scaffolding effect to help learners develop their abil-
ity to create models on their own.

2. Literature review

2.1. 3D printing in educational context

The popularization of computer-aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) and the implementation of
computer numerical controls (CNC) and robotic arms has significantly reduced production costs and improved production
efficiency (Pedersen et al., 2015; Xiao et al., 2015). As new manufacturing technologies become increasingly mature, tech-
nologies for rapid modeling and customization have begun to receive increased attention (Berman, 2012).
In recent years, the rise of the Open Source movement (Kostakis et al., 2015; Kostakis and Papachristou, 2014; West and
Kuk, 2015) has driven the spread of techniques for rapid prototyping (RP), also known as 3D printing, to meet the demands of
industrial manufacturing. Rapid prototyping entails layer-by-layer molding, as opposed to traditional subtractive manufac-
turing (Baumers et al., 2015). In recent years, several RP methods have been developed including Fused Filament Fabrication,
Fused Deposition Modeling, Stereo Lithography, Selective Laser Sintering, and PolyJetTM technology (Berman, 2012; Kumar
and Kumar, 2015; Oropallo and Piegl, 2016; Yap and Yeong, 2015).
The increasing popularization of 3D printing technology has had a gradual impact on the industrial hardware and soft-
ware industries, driving changes to educational training and business operations (Berman, 2012; Bassett et al., 2015;
Chua and Leong, 2015; Rayna and Striukova, 2015; Oropallo and Piegl, 2016). In medical science, for example, 3D printing
has overcome the high cost of customization to allow doctors to design and use customized medical stents (Adams et al.,
2015; Zhang et al., 2015).
As early as 1997, researchers had used multimedia materials to present the RP material in a more cohesive and interactive
manner in educational settings (Chua et al., 1997). Over the years, multimedia approaches have emerged to play an
important role in enhancing the education process for rapid prototyping technology (Lim et al., 2004; Chua et al., 2010).
In addition, the concepts of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and Career and Technical Education
have driven the integration of 3D printing technology in education (Bharti et al., 2015; Schelly et al., 2015). Teaching aids
produced using 3D printing technology (Telegenov et al., 2015) facilitate learning in fields ranging from medical science,
engineering and science to art (AbouHashem et al., 2015; Casas and Estop, 2015; Farooqi and Sengupta, 2015). Kostakis
and Papachristou (2014) developed a RepRap-based, Lego-built 3D printing-milling machine to demonstrate the concept
of ‘‘global design and local manufacturing”. The following year, Kostakis et al. (2015) brought 3D-printers into high schools
to help students develop collaborative and creative design practices. The broad and deep impact of 3D printing technology in
industry and education has driven the need to help students develop independent 3D modeling abilities. Accordingly, this
study explores the impact of integrating 3D printing into the 3D max modeling program on learning outcomes among
learners with different spatial abilities.

2.2. CDIO

Technical and vocational education should help learners acquire soft and hard skills to meet industry needs and expec-
tations. However, social changes and technological advances are raising significant challenges for technical and vocational
education (Jianzhong, 2008). This trend is forcing educators to refocus on the school curriculum as the foundation of
application knowledge, and instill in learners the ability to learn autonomously and practice innovation. In 2000, the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology collaborated with three Swedish universities – Chalmers University of Technology,
Linköping University and the Royal Institute of Technology – to establish the Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate (CDIO)
Initiative (Bankel et al., 2005). CDIO is an innovative, four-phase educational framework (Fig. 1). As learners develop profes-
sional skills, they also cultivate practical thinking skills (Bankel et al., 2005; Crawley et al., 2014).
606 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613

Fig. 1. CDIO educational framework.

Conceiving is the first stage. ‘‘The Conceive stage involves defining customer needs and then developing conceptual, technical
and business plans to meet those needs while considering the technology, enterprise strategy, and regulations that apply.” (Crawley
et al., 2014). Unlike the general teaching model, CDIO starts from the customer’s perspective and emphasizes the importance
of business practice to close the gap between learning and practical application. The second stage is ‘‘design.” ‘‘The Design
phase focuses on creating the plans, drawings and algorithms that describe the product, process or system that will be imple-
mented.” It is not just a fanciful creation but an innovation with value. CDIO emphasizes that, during the design stage, the
feasibility of final output should be taken into consideration. The Implement stage ‘‘refers to the transformation of the design
into a product. It includes hardware, manufacturing, software coding, testing and validation”. Learners need to take into account
manufacturing processes including software, hardware and testing. The Operate phase ‘‘uses the delivered, implemented
product, process or system to satisfy the intended value, that is, to satisfy the customer need. It includes maintaining, servicing,
evolving, recycling and retiring the product”. In the past, technical schools neglected operations ability due to divisions among
educational disciplines. However, in a rapidly changing global society, the rise of online communities, e-commerce, and
FinTech (Financial Technology) raises the need among IT professionals to operate effectively in multidisciplinary contexts
(e.g., IT and business operations).
The CDIO framework is widely used in engineering education (including specialties such as aerospace, mechanical and
electrical engineering) and in IT education. Implementing the CDIO educational framework has been found to enhance learn-
ers’ technical knowledge and also improve leadership and problem-solving abilities (Babuscia et al., 2012; Liang et al., 2011).
It can be used to improve teaching strategies, thus helping learners to raise their learning efficacy and develop innovative
thinking approaches which will ultimately contribute to improved problem-solving ability.
3D modeling is a complex learning task which is a crucial part of 3D printing. This study integrates the CDIO framework
into curriculum planning to provide a systematic learning framework to train learners in modeling techniques, using solid
3D printed models as learning aids. One of the goals of this study is to implement the CDIO educational framework so that
learners can not only establish a solid basis for modeling techniques, but also apply their acquired knowledge to create
models on their own.

2.3. Spatial ability

Spatial ability is defined the ability to ‘‘mentally manipulate, rotate, twist, or invert a pictorially presented stimulus
object” and is one aspect of multiple intelligences (Carroll, 1993; Gardner, 2011; McGee, 1979). Spatial ability can be
subdivided into elements of spatial cognition including spatial visualization, spatial orientation, spatial relation or speeded
rotation, mental rotation, closure speed, flexibility of closure, perceptual speed, and visual memory (Carroll, 1993; Linn and
Petersen, 1985; Lohman, 1979; McGee, 1979).
Spatial ability is closely related to today’s 3D printing industry (Contero et al., 2007; Gallimore and Brown, 1993), and the
development and application of teaching and teaching materials (e.g., videos, multimedia animations, and computer
applications) to improve spatial ability has gradually emerged as a focus of research (Morán et al., 2008; Hung et al.,
2012; Price et al., 2014; Sanchez and Wiley, 2014; Passig et al., 2016). Katsioloudis et al. (2014) proposed the use of 3D
printed building blocks as teaching aids for engineering and spatial ability, and found that 3D solid models help to enhance
students’ understanding of the modeling tasks. Furthermore, students were more capable of comprehending visual data from
3D solid models over 2D drawings. However, few studies have examined the effects of 2D versus 3D teaching material on the
influence of the spatial ability (Katsioloudis et al., 2014). Similarly, past studies on 3D printing teaching materials (e.g., 3D
printed building blocks), and spatial ability did not include a systematic teaching model or a theoretical basis in educational
psychology. Accordingly, this study adopts the CDIO teaching strategy that considers both theory and practice, and integrates
3D printing models as practical teaching materials into a 3D modeling training program. We explore the lifting effect of two
indicators of spatial ability, namely mental rotation and spatial visualization. This study explores the theoretical basis of this
innovative teaching strategy.

3. Methodology

This study adopts a one-group pretest-posttest design to explore the impact on spatial ability of an innovative teaching
model integrating the CDIO teaching strategy and 3D printer modeling into 3D Max program. The subjects were 13 college
 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613 607

Fig. 2. Experimental procedures.

Fig. 3. Three-view diagram (traditional material).

students in non-design-related departments: 6 males and 7 females, with an average age of 20. None of the subjects had
prior experience using 3D MAX or other related modeling software. They enrolled in a 4-week/36 h course taught in four
stages where each stage corresponded to an individual CDIO phase. The teaching and experimental flow is shown in
Fig. 2. In each week, the first three hours of instruction entailed lectures, illustration of samples, and 3D MAX exercises.
The following six hours required learners have to develop a project concept on their own and finally complete 3D modeling
and produce the finished product.
The CDIO innovative 3D modeling teaching model is divided into four phases. Phase one (1st week) focuses on concept
generation. In addition to generating concepts for their own projects, learners also learn fundamental knowledge about mod-
eling. Traditional teaching material, three-view diagrams, are adopted as shown in Fig. 3.
In phase two (week two), learners capture design principles via rendering various basic models and reflect on the feasi-
bility of their designs to prepare for modeling their projects. In phase three (week three), 3D printer models are integrated
into the teaching material and solid models replace traditional three-view texts as shown in Fig. 4. In this phase, learners
learn the details of making models through observation, rotating and touching solid models. Following in-depth discussion
with their classmates, students begin to practice 3D modeling (as shown in Fig. 5) using a Delta Kossel printer with polylactic
acid (PLA), a degradable bioplastic derived from plants which allows for higher maximum printing speeds, sharper printed
corners, and lower layer heights. In the final phase (week four), learners print out their project design using the 3D printer,

Fig. 4. 3D model instructional sample.

608 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613

Fig. 5. 3D model serves as the focus of teaching-learning practices.

Fig. 6. Sample item from the mental rotation test (MRT).

Fig. 7. Sample item from the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Rotations (PSVT: R).

introduce their products to their classmates and instructors via commercial marketing approaches with an emphasis on
practical and market value.
This study explores the two spatial sub-abilities, namely mental rotation and spatial visualization. We use the mental
rotation test (MRT) developed by Vandenberg & Kuse to measure mental rotation ability (as shown in Fig. 6). The test
includes a total of 24 questions over 10 min. During the test, the subject is provided with an original 3D object, and is asked
to identify two 3D objects that match it from 4 options. Performance is assessed based on cognition of 3D objects in rotation
(Vandenberg and Kuse, 1978).
We measure spatial visualization using Guay’s Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Visualization of Rotations (PSVT: R) (see
Fig. 7). The test includes a total of 30 questions over 20 min. The subject is given a sample 3D object rotated in two different
directions; s/he then needs to determine how another 3D object will appear following the same rotation as the sample
object. This test evaluates the subject’s ability to understand spatial inversion (Bodner and Guay, 1997). Both tests are con-
ducted prior to, during, and after the experiment.
 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613 609

4. Results & discussion

This study evaluates the development of the mental rotation and spatial visualization components of spatial ability. The
13 learners participated in three phased tests. Collected data was analyzed using R (programming language) with paired
sample t-tests run on the pretest-midtest and midtest-posttest of MRT and PSVT:R with t-test function to assess the effect
of different teaching materials on spatial ability.
Table 1 summarizes the MRT and PSVT:R test results. The differences on MRT pretest-midtest and midtest-posttest scores
are significant. The difference on PSVT:R pretest-midtest is not significant, but the difference on midtest-posttest is statis-
tically significant.
Both traditional three-view diagrams and solid models are found to be effective learning aids for mental rotation, which
runs counter to the results found by Katsioloudis et al. (2014). The spatial visualization results highlight the difference on
criterion validity of PSVT: R and mental rotation. In PSVT: R, subjects need to complete all questions correctly which required
them to not only need know the three dimensional structure of the original object, but also to be aware of the angle and
direction of the object’s rotation. In other words, spatial ability indicated by spatial visualization is different from mental
rotation in terms of both quality and quantity. Spatial visualization requires a higher level of spatial ability than mental rota-
tion and is a very important ability for 3D modeling. Students cannot touch or rotate traditional three-view diagrams, thus
limiting their utility as teaching materials. Hence, students’ cognitive abilities for building 3D stereoscopic images are lim-
ited. However, subjects can freely rotate and touch solid models to experience and construct irregular multi-faceted and
multi-angled three-dimensional concepts. Later they can refer to this experience during the test to mentally rotate the per-
spective view of an object, thus exhibiting a higher degree of spatial visualization mastery.
To explore whether differences in learner ability affects improvement of spatial ability, this study categorized the pretest
scores (median) of MRT and PSVT:R into MR High Score (MR-H, n = 5), MR Low Score (MR-L, n = 8), SV High Score (SV-H,
n = 5), and SV Low Score (SV-L, n = 8). The analysis is shown in Table 2. In the two Low Score groups, both traditional
three-view diagram or solid models effectively improve the mental rotation and spatial visualization abilities of students
with lower ‘‘prior spatial ability.”
Interestingly, the results of the High Score groups are not consistent with those of the Low Score groups. First of all, there
was a significant difference between the MR pretest and midtest scores, indicating that three-view diagrams are useful to
learners with good spatial ability. However, using solid models as teaching aids did not improve the spatial ability of subjects
in the High Score group who scored high in the midtest. In the SV tests, the difference in pretest-midtest scores of the High
Score group was not significant for the three-view diagram material; nevertheless, when solid models are used, the differ-
ence in midtest-posttest is significant. This result suggests that continuous improvement brought on by tactile and cognitive
experience using solid models is limited to relatively simple mental rotation (MR) tasks among High Score students.
However, for subjects with better prior spatial ability, the effect of solid models is more significant in the more difficult
aspect of spatial visualization.

Table 1
MRT and PSVT: R t-test on pretest-midtest and midtest-posttest.

Pair Mean 95% confidence interval df t p-Value

Lower Upper
Pre-MRT – mid-MRT 3.62 2.10 5.13 12 5.21 0.00⁄
Mid-MRT – post-MRT 2.15 0.36 3.95 12 2.61 0.02⁄
Pre-PSVT – mid-PSVT 2.23 0.12 4.59 12 2.06 0.06
Mid-PSVT – post-PSVT 6.0 4.5 7.5 12 8.71 0.00⁄
⁄
p < 0.05.

Table 2
MRT t-test on pretest-midtest and midtest-posttest.

Group Pair Mean 95 percent confidence interval df t p-Value

Lower Upper
Low Pre-MRT – mid-MRT 5.13 3.49 6.76 7 7.4 0.00⁄
Mid-MRT – post-MRT 3.25 0.50 6.0 7 2.8 0.02⁄
Pre-PSVT – mid-PSVT 3.38 0.89 5.86 7 3.21 0.01⁄
Mid-PSVT – post-PSVT 5.88 3.45 8.3 7 5.73 0.00⁄
High Pre-MRT – mid-MRT 1.2 0.64 1.76 4 6.0 0.00⁄
Mid-MRT – post-MRT 0.4 -1.02 1.82 4 0.78 0.48
Pre-PSVT – mid-PSVT 0.4 -5.59 6.4 4 0.19 0.86
Mid-PSVT – post-PSVT 6.2 3.81 8.59 4 7.20 0.00⁄
⁄
p < 0.05.
610 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613

5. Implications and conclusions

5.1. Technical teaching model that combines both thinking and practice

This study develops a CDIO-integrated 3D modeling teaching model to explore learners’ spatial ability. Solid models were
found to effectively enhance learners’ spatial ability and could be used to address a new overemphasis on theory over
practice in technical and vocational education.
In addition, the instructional program based on the proposed CDIO teaching strategy allowed learners to use 3D printing
to turn their ideas into virtual 3D models and construct them into solid objects in the final week. During the planning phase,
each learner developed a unique design project. For example, one student creatively designed a model dinosaur (Fig. 8a) to
serve as an earphone cable holder, making the product both entertaining and practical. Another student created a set of
stamps based on a Halloween theme (Fig. 8b). These examples indicate that the program provides learners with positive
feedback and fulfills the purpose of the CDIO curriculum.

5.2. Auxiliary effect of three-view diagram and solid models on spatial ability

The three-view diagram is generally effective in helping learners comprehend turning plane information into three-
dimensional images. That learners could apply the skills they learned in the MRT test further suggests that three-view
diagrams help students improve their mental rotation ability (Katsioloudis et al., 2014). However, three-view diagrams have
a limited impact on spatial visualization since learners not only need to construct three-dimensional models in their minds
but also need to rotate the model at multiple angles. Three-view-diagrams only display three angles, making it difficult for
learners to obtain rotational information, thus making it difficult to apply experience in using three-view-diagrams in the
PSVT:R test. However, the use of 3D printing models allows learners to freely flip and rotate objects and to change their
perspective on and distance from the object, thus enhancing their understanding of three-dimensional rotation. Learning
stimulus increases from the original visual to tactile media, allowing learners to apply what they’ve learned in the test
and effectively improving their mental rotation and spatial visualization abilities. According to Information-Processing
Theory, humans perceive the world through multiple sensory stimuli; greater diversity in stimuli sources produces more
solid knowledge (Mayer, 1997; Shams and Seitz, 2008).
Furthermore, according to Bruner (1966), in childhood, individual perception motivation is enactive and action-based. As
individuals grow into adolescence and adulthood, their perception motivation changes from action-based to iconic and even
abstract symbolic. Piaget holds similar views on the stages of cognitive development (Wood et al., 2001). This is indeed in
line with most university educators’ expectations for learners; for example, when students enter higher education they
should be able to think in abstractions and have a certain degree of spatial ability. In fact, assumptions of what cognitive
abilities should be acquired by each stage may be quite arbitrary. A crucial issue is that different learners bring different prior

Fig. 8a. Project: earphone wire collector.

Fig. 8b. Project: creative stamp.

 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613 611

Fig. 9. Differentiated spatial ability teaching model.

knowledge to the classroom, and individuals learn at different paces. Many mature adults still exhibit low levels of mastery
of abstract symbols and spatial awareness. Accordingly, this study proposes a differentiated spatial ability teaching model
(Fig. 9) for use by instructors working in fields involving spatial ability, such as engineering, architecture, medical science
and 3D animation.
Teaching materials and support provided to learners should vary with their spatial ability and task difficulty. Since three
dimensional space is as abstracted as a form of ‘‘symbolic recognition,” we decoded the link between ‘‘age” and ‘‘cognitive
development” and adopt the view of dual coding theory which holds that learning outcomes are improved through simul-
taneous visual and verbal learning. We construct a link between ‘‘spatial ability-cognition” and ‘‘spatial task difficulty-
coding” and propose that learners with low spatial ability should be given teaching aids focusing on practical operation.
For tasks with higher levels of spatial difficulty, visual and tactile-dual coding teaching aids can be provided. However, only
abstract and single coding assistance is required for learners with high spatial ability or for easy tasks, and the focus can be
put on output creativity.
The difficulty of a modeling task could be relative or absolute. Relative difficulty means the same task is assigned for
subjects with different degrees of ability. People with high ability would feel the task is easy, while those with relative
low ability would regard the task as hard. In this situation, ability is linked with spatial task difficulty. Absolute difficulty
involves designing a series of tasks with different degrees of difficulty in terms of the complexity and the scale of the target
output (e.g., basic model and complex model). Therefore, spatial ability should also be considered while designing and
forming tasks. According to our argument, the lower difficulty tasks would simply require learners to adopt visual assistant
materials (e.g., three-view diagram), while higher difficulty tasks would require learners to use both three-view diagrams
and printed solid models to enhance their learning effectiveness.

5.3. Beyond 3D printing – dawn of 4D printing

While 3D printing has become increasingly widespread, researchers have been developing the concept of 4D printing
(Tibbits et al., 2013; Pei, 2014; Khoo et al., 2015). According to Pei (2014), 4D printing is inter-changeable with
‘‘self-assembly”. He defined 4D printing ‘‘as the process of building a physical object using appropriate additive manufacturing
technology, laying down successive layers of stimuli-responsive composite or multi-materials with varying properties. After being
built, the object reacts to stimuli from the natural environment or through human intervention, resulting in a physical or chemical
change of state through time.” In other words, 4D printing adds a ‘‘time” factor to 3D printing technology, allowing the printed
objects to possess ‘‘smart” behavior such as self-sensing, self-actuating and shape changing over time (Bogue, 2014; Pei,
2014). In 2015, Khoo et al. made a thorough review of recent progress in 4D printing, including developments with different
kind of materials, 4D bio-printing, and possible challenges (Khoo et al., 2015).
As 4D printing technologies mature, new applications will stimulate new approaches in educational settings. More specif-
ically, the time dimension of 4D printing will inspire different approaches to the development of teaching aids. For instance,
a dynamic 4D printing model could demonstrate epeirogenic movement (i.e., movement of the earth’s crust), concretize the
transformation of chemical elements during chemical reactions, and activate instruction of geometry. For any application,
the dynamic nature of 4D printing materials is a key consideration, and may require enhanced spatial ability and logical
deductive thinking. Given the exploratory nature of this study, any teaching/learning implications based on these prelimi-
nary findings should be treated with caution. These findings form the basis for continued research and further investigation
is needed under present experimental conditions.
612 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of China for financially supporting this
research under Contract Nos. MOST 104-2511-S-025-002-MY3, and MOST 103-2511-S-025-001-MY3.

References

AbouHashem, Y., Dayal, M., Savanah, S., 2015. The application of 3D printing in anatomy education. Med. Educ. Online 20.
Adams, J., Bertram, J., McMenamin, P., 2015. Anatomy and additive manufacturing: imaging methods and 3D printing in anatomy education and research.
FASEB J. 29 (1_Supplement), 692.12.
Babuscia, A., Craig, J.L., Connor, J.A., 2012. Teaching practical leadership in MIT satellite development class: CASTOR and exoplanet projects. Acta Astronaut.
77, 138–148.
Bankel, J., Berggren, K.F., Engström, M., Wiklund, I., Crawley, E.F., Soderholm, D.H., Östlund, S., 2005. Benchmarking engineering curricula with the CDIO
syllabus. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 21 (1), 121–133.
Bassett, K., Carriveau, R., Ting, S.K.D., 2015. 3D printed wind turbines part 1: design considerations and rapid manufacture potential. Sustainable Energy
Technol. Assess. 11, 186–193.
Baumers, M., Dickens, P., Tuck, C., Hague, R., 2015. The cost of additive manufacturing: machine productivity, economies of scale and technology-push.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 102, 193–201.
Berman, B., 2012. 3-D printing: the new industrial revolution. Bus. Horiz. 55 (2), 155–162.
Bharti, N., Gonzalez, S., Buhler, A., 2015. 3D technology in libraries: applications for teaching and research. In: Emerging Trends and Technologies in
Libraries and Information Services (ETTLIS), 2015 4th International Symposium on. IEEE, pp. 161–166.
Bodner, G.M., Guay, R.B., 1997. The Purdue visualization of rotations test. Chem. Educ. 2 (4), 1–17.
Bogue, R., 2014. Smart materials: a review of capabilities and applications. Assembly Autom. 34, 3–7.
Bruner, J.S., 1966. Toward a Theory of Instruction, vol. 59. Harvard University Press.
Carroll, J.B., 1993. Human Cognitive Abilities. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Casas, L., Estop, E., 2015. Virtual and printed 3D models for teaching crystal symmetry and point groups. J. Chem. Educ. 92 (8), 1338–1343.
Chua, C.K., Leong, K.F., 2015. 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing: Principles and Applications. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd, Singapore.
Chua, C.K., Leong, K.F., Cheng, H.K., Chow, L.M., 1997. A multimedia approach to teaching rapid prototyping systems. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 13 (2), 108–116.
Chua, C.K., Leong, K.F., Lim, C.S., Vu, T.T., 2010. Multimedia courseware for teaching of rapid prototyping systems. Rapid Prototyp. J. 16 (2), 80–89.
Contero, M., Etsii, D., Saorín, J.L., 2007. Learning support tools for developing spatial abilities in engineering design. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 22 (3), 1–12.
Crawley, E.F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D.R., Edström, K., 2014. Rethinking Engineering Education. Springer, US, New York.
Farooqi, K.M., Sengupta, P.P., 2015. Echocardiography and three-dimensional printing: sound ideas to touch a heart. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 28 (4), 398–
403.
Gallimore, J.J., Brown, M.E., 1993. Visualization of 3-D computer-aided design objects. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 5 (4), 361–382.
Gardner, H., 2011. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, New York.
Hackett, M., Proctor, M., 2016. Three-dimensional display technologies for anatomical education: a literature review. J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 1–14
Hung, P.H., Hwang, G.J., Lee, Y.H., Su, I.H., 2012. A cognitive component analysis approach for developing game-based spatial learning tools. Comput. Educ.
59 (2), 762–773.
Jianfeng, B., Hu, L., Li, Y., Tian, Z., Xie, L., Wang, L., Xie, H., 2013. The progress of CDIO engineering education reform in several China universities: a review.
Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 93, 381–385.
Jianzhong, Z., 2008. On CDIO model under ‘‘learning by doing” strategy. Res. Higher Educ. Eng. 3, 1–6.
Katsioloudis, P., Jovanovic, V., Jones, M., 2014. A comparative analysis of spatial visualization ability and drafting models for industrial and technology
education students. J. Tech. Educ. 26 (1), 88–101.
Khoo, Z.X., Teoh, J.E.M., Liu, Y., Chua, C.K., Yang, S., An, J., Yeong, W.Y., 2015. 3D printing of smart materials: a review on recent progresses in 4D printing.
Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 10 (3), 103–122.
Kostakis, V., Papachristou, M., 2014. Commons-based peer production and digital fabrication: the case of a RepRap-based, Lego-built 3D printing-milling
machine. Telemat. Inform. 31 (3), 434–443.
Kostakis, V., Niaros, V., Giotitsas, C., 2015. Open source 3D printing as a means of learning: an educational experiment in two high schools in Greece.
Telemat. Inform. 32 (1), 118–128.
Kumar, K., Kumar, G.S., 2015. An experimental and theoretical investigation of surface roughness of poly-jet printed parts. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 10 (1),
23–34.
Kurtulusß, A., 2013. The effects of web-based interactive virtual tours on the development of prospective mathematics teachers’ spatial skills. Comput. Educ.
63, 141–150.
Liang, Z., Deng, H., Tao, J., 2011. Teaching examples and pedagogy of mechanical manufacture based on the CDIO-Based teaching method. Procedia Eng. 15,
4084–4088.
Lim, C.S., Chua, C.K., Leong, K.F., Lau, M.L., Tan, K.W., 2004. Enhanced learning of rapid prototyping systems through multimedia. Int. J. Mech. Eng. Educ. 32
(2), 115–125.
Linn, M.C., Petersen, A.C., 1985. Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: a meta-analysis. Child Dev. 56 (6), 1479.
Lohman, D.F., 1979. Spatial Ability: A Review and Reanalysis of the Correlational Literature. Stanford University School of Education, California.
Mayer, R.E., 1997. Multimedia learning: are we asking the right questions? Educ. Psychol. 32 (1), 1–19.
McGee, M.G., 1979. Human spatial abilities: psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychol. Bull. 86 (5),
889–918.
Morán, S., Rubio, R., Gallego, R., Suárez, J., Martín, S., 2008. Proposal of interactive applications to enhance student’s spatial perception. Comput. Educ. 50 (3),
772–786.
Oropallo, W., Piegl, L.A., 2016. Ten challenges in 3D printing. Eng. Comput. 32 (1), 135–148.
Passig, D., Tzuriel, D., Eshel-Kedmi, G., 2016. Improving children’s cognitive modifiability by dynamic assessment in 3D Immersive Virtual Reality
environments. Comput. Educ. 95, 296–308.
Pedersen, M.R., Nalpantidis, L., Andersen, R.S., Schou, C., Bøgh, S., Krüger, V., Madsen, O., 2015. Robot skills for manufacturing: from concept to industrial
deployment. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 37, 282–291.
Pei, E., 2014. 4D Printing: dawn of an emerging technology cycle. Assembly Autom. 34 (4), 310–314.
Price, C.A., Lee, H.S., Malatesta, K., 2014. Stereoscopy in static scientific imagery in an informal education setting: does it matter? J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 23 (6),
721–734.
Rayna, T., Striukova, L., 2015. From rapid prototyping to home fabrication: how 3D printing is changing business model innovation. Technol. Forecase. Soc.
102, 214–224.
Rayna, T., Striukova, L., Darlington, J., 2015. Co-creation and user innovation: the role of online 3D printing platforms. J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 37, 90–102.
Sanchez, C.A., Wiley, J., 2014. The role of dynamic spatial ability in geoscience text comprehension. Learn. Instr. 31, 33–45.
 T.-C. Huang, C.-Y. Lin / Telematics and Informatics 34 (2017) 604–613 613

Schelly, C., Anzalone, G., Wijnen, B., Pearce, J.M., 2015. Open-source 3-D printing technologies for education: bringing additive manufacturing to the
classroom. J. Visual Lang. Comput. 28, 226–237.
Shams, L., Seitz, A.R., 2008. Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends Cogn. Sci. 12 (11), 411–417.
Telegenov, K., Tlegenov, Y., Shintemirov, A., 2015. A low-cost open-source 3-D-printed three-finger gripper platform for research and educational purposes.
IEEE Access 3, 638–647.
Tibbits, S., Linor, S., Dikovsky, D., Hirsch, S., 2013. 4D printing: multi-material shape change. Archit. Design 84, 116–121.
Vandenberg, S.G., Kuse, A.R., 1978. Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Percept. Mot. Skills 47 (2), 599–604.
West, J., Kuk, G., 2015. The complementarity of openness: how Makerbot leveraged Thingiverse in 3D printing. Technol. Forecase. Soc. 102, 169–181.
Wood, K.C., Smith, H., Grossniklaus, D., 2001. Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology, Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development.
Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology, University of Georgia, Georgia, USA.
Xiao, W., Zheng, L., Huan, J., Lei, P., 2015. A complete CAD/CAM/CNC solution for STEP-compliant manufacturing. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 31, 1–10.
Yap, Y.L., Yeong, W.Y., 2015. Shape recovery effect of 3D printed polymeric honeycomb: this paper studies the elastic behaviour of different honeycomb
structures produced by PolyJet technology. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 10 (2), 91–99.
Zhang, L.G., Fisher, J.P., Leong, K., 2015. 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. Academic Press, London.