Engineering Design Graphic Journal (ASEE - American Society for Engineering Education)
Not a member yet
430 research outputs found
Sort by
Gender Differences in Visualization Skills - An International Perspective
Get PDFThree-dimensional visualization skills are critically important for success in engineering careers. A variety of strategies have been implemented to enhance the spatial visualization skills of engineering students. Along with these strategies, standardized tests such as the MCT (Mental Cutting Test), the MRT (Mental Rotations Test) and the PSVT:R (Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Rotations) have been utilized as a means for measuring spatial ability. This paper examines the factors which seem to be significant in the development of visualization skills and also examines gender differences in background and in visualization ability for students enrolled in U.S., German and Polish technical universities. Thus, gender differences in visualization skills which cross international boundaries can be studies
Editor's Award
Get PDFThe volume 73 EDGJ Editor’s Award recipients include N. L. Veurink, A. J. Hamlin, J.C. M. Kampe, S. A. Sorby, D. G. Blasko, K. A. Holliday-Darr, J. D. Trich Kremer, L. V. Abe Harris, P. E. Connolly, M. A. Sadowski, K. S. Harris, C. P. Brus, L. N. Boyle, N. E. Study, and T. W. Knot for Enhancing Visualization Skills-Improving Options aNd Success (EnViSIONS) of Engineering and Technology Students, which was published in the Spring issue (number 2)—see http://www.edgj.org/index.php/EDGJ/article/viewFile/16/15. Accepting the award at the 2010 ASEE Annual is the lead author Norma L. Veurink (photo by Ted Branoff).DescriptionThe Editor’s Award recognizes the outstanding paper published in the previous volume of The Engineering Design Graphics Journal.DetailsPapers may be authored by EDGD members or non-members.All papers published in the Autumn, Winter, and Spring issues of the Journal will be automatically entered into consideration.This award will be given annually.ProcedureThe Editor will identify a minimum of three (3) reviewers from the current EDGD Board of Review to serve as a review panel. The Editor will prepare a document containing copies of the papers for each of the reviewers. The papers will be arranged by issue and by order they appeared in the issue. The reviewers will rank the papers on the following criteria: Graphic Illustrations/Figures-the manner in which illustrations, figures, photographs, or screen displays add to the understanding of the paper’s topic.Scholarship-the level of research, testing, validation, and inference involved in preparing the paper or its findings.Authorship-the craft of writing, illustrating, and elaborating the technical information contained in the paper.AwardThe award will be a framed citation and a cash award. The Editor will notify the awardee by mail no later than April 30th of the next volume year. Additionally, notice of the award will be published in the next Spring Issue of the Journal (next volume year) and announced at the following Annual Meeting.Complete List of Awardeeshttp://edgd.asee.org/awards/editors/awardees.htmSourcehttp://edgd.asee.org/awards/editors/index.ht
Drafting the Basics
Get PDFThis paper outlines the work in progress undertaken by the School of Engineering Technology faculty to identify, assess, and develop a course to address the depth and breadth of drafting/plan preparation and plan reading skills required by the various engineering technology programs offered at Youngstown State University. The methodology used to establish course outcomes and the techniques proposed to accomplish the outcomes are identified. Metrics are developed to evaluate and assess the student’s understanding and application of drafting basics
Attitudes and Motivation of Students in an Introductory Technical Graphics Course: A Meta-analysis Study
Get PDFHigh School Graphics Experience Influencing the Self-Efficacy of First-Year Engineering Students in an Introductory Engineering Graphics Course
Get PDFToday's students enter engineering colleges with different technical backgrounds and prior graphics experience. This may due to their high school of provenience, which can be technical or non-technical. The prior experience affects students’ ability in learning and hence their motivation and self-efficacy beliefs. This study intended to evaluate the role of prior high school graphics experience in first-year engineering students' self-efficacy beliefs in an introductory engineering graphics course. It also intended to evaluate the relationship between such freshmen's self-efficacy beliefs and their performance. Two assessment instruments were used in this study. The first is the eight-item Course Interest Survey (CIS) Confidence subscale, which was used to assess self-efficacy beliefs. The second is a multiple choice questionnaire designed on the course topics, which was used to assess performance. Ninety-nine students of the University of Brescia (Italy) participated in the experiment. Significant differences in self-efficacy were found between engineering freshmen from the technical high school versus engineering freshmen from the non-technical high school. A significant relationship between self-efficacy and performance was found only for engineering freshmen from the technical high school
Effects of Light Reflection on Spatial Visualization Ability and implications for Engineering Technology Students
Get PDFResults from a number of studies indicate that the type of light generated by the reflection on the surface of different types of surfaces can influence the spatial visualization ability; however, research provides in¬consistent results. Considering this, a quasi-experimental study was conducted to identify the existence of statistically significant effects on spatial visualization ability as measured by the Mental Cutting Test and Sectional View drawing ability due to the impacts of light reflection. In particular, the study compared three types of light reflection; mirror, specular and diffuse and whether a significant difference exists among engineering technology students. According to the results of this study it is suggested that the type of light reflection provides statistically significant differences
Message from the Editor
No full textDear Members: The four articles in this issue approach issues in engineering graphics education from two different directions: from inside the classroom and from industry practice. By reading the articles, you will see both approaches of something to offer educators and educational practice. The first article by Hartman attempts to understand the process of modeling better by looking at the mental model of the experienced operator and the virtual model created on the computer; each influenced by the eventual physical model the company will produce. The results of this study provides a fascinating insight into techniques used by professionals, but also what are the critical thinking skills our students need. The fourth article by Ault and Giolas also looks at industry practices. As with Hartman, the differences found in modeling practices are a combination of external forces of software and company practice and internal decisions of strategy and habit. This article also provides a renewed look at industry standards, but for 3D models rather than 2D drawings. The second article by Smith, et al. is the second in this Journal on an ongoing project looking at the integration of virtual reality (VR) into the engineering graphics classroom. Again, a central motivation is exploring ways to improve the visualization abilities of students so they can more effectively create and use models and drawings created with engineering graphics software. Not surprisingly, Smith is finding no easy answers when it comes to addressing the needs students with diverse abilities and interests. The final article by Connolly and Maicher notes that multiview drawings and orthographic projection is still a primary tool engineering graphics educators use to help develop visualization ability. To this effort, the authors have been developing an interactive tutor to help students develop their abilities. The papers by these two authors and the one by Smith demonstrate that successful, effective technological implementation in the classroom is all in the details! By the time you receive this issue, the Annual ASEE conference will probably have just taken place. I hope that you attended and, if you did, you were able to attend the EDGD sessions and support your fellow Division members. I plan on using the conference to find some new and exciting scholarship to publish in the upcoming issues of the Journal. See you all in Orlando for the Mid-year meeting
