2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Solving problems goes beyond simply “doing the math”. Before applying formulas and/or solving equations, most engineering problems require that a diagram or visual representation of the problem be developed first, e.g. a free-body diagram or vector addition triangle. The ability to generate an appropriate representation of the problem is often referred to as representational competence, which is heavily influenced by spatial visualization skills (SVS).
Spatial visualization skills refer to the ability to mentally manipulate and transform 3D objects and other spatial information. The importance of strong SVS in engineering is well established, but the mechanisms behind this link are not well understood. We aim to investigate whether certain concepts in engineering mechanics can be identified as requiring strong SVS for mastery, or put differently, whether certain errors or misconceptions in solving statics problems can be attributed to poor spatial ability. This could inform how we teach statics concepts and help guide us in providing supplemental instruction and developing targeted hands-on activities and labs to improve conceptual understanding (and perhaps build spatial skills) among low visualizers.
In a prior study, we investigated the level of mastery of fundamental statics concepts, specifically force vectors and moments of forces in the first exam, among low, medium, and high visualizers. Preliminary results indicated that the majority of students, regardless of spatial ability, were able to solve both exam problems completely accurately. We also observed, however, that low visualizers master concepts at a lower rate than high visualizers. This suggests that low SVS does not prevent a student from mastering a concept, but perhaps makes it more difficult to do so.
In this study, we expand on our previous study by focusing on the following two research questions:
• RQ1. Do students with lower SVS simply need more time to grasp the concept?
• RQ2. What other skills / concepts in statics require strong visualization skills?
We will identify and categorize errors on subsequent exam problems (focusing on rigid body equilibrium and truss analysis) in the second exam to address both research questions. By comparing performance on these first and second exams, we can track progress of students who were unable to demonstrate mastery of early statics concepts initially. By comparing performance on the second exam problems among low, medium, and high visualizers, we can make some observations on the role of SVS in mastery of rigid body equilibrium and truss analysis.
We hypothesize that students with low SVS have more difficulty with conceptual understanding and therefore resort to ineffective learning strategies such as memorization of example problems. This superficial comprehension is revealed by the type of errors that are made when confronted with a new problem that is too dissimilar from the pool of example problems they have become familiar with.