| The problem. The technology of three-dimensional computer-assisted drafting and design (3D CADD) previously was not considered as a tool for enhancing spatial ability. Therefore the purpose of this study was to determine whether instruction in 3D CADD was more effective in enhancing spatial ability than instruction in 2D CADD.;Method. A quasi-experimental, pretest, posttest, nonequivalent control group design was used in this study. The sample consisted of 50 community college students. The instrument used in this study was a researcher-developed, computer-generated, 3D cube rotations test. The test was designed to measure accuracy and latency scores on spatial rotation tasks. The study ran for a duration of thirteen weeks.;Results. The first hypothesis, which predicted that students instructed in 3D CADD would be more accurate on the 3D cube rotations test than students instructed in 2D CADD was supported. The mean averages were significantly different using the.05 level of confidence. The second hypothesis, which predicted that students instructed in 3D CADD would be faster on the 3D cube rotations test than students instructed in 2D CADD was not supported. The mean averages showed no significant differences using the.05 level of confidence.;The results of this study led to the conclusion that instruction in 3D CADD is a more effective method of enhancing spatial ability than instruction in 2D CADD. Furthermore, it was noted that mean latency scores of the experimental group were significantly faster on the more difficult dual stimuli section of the test than were the scores of the control group. |
