Using Virtual Reality Tools in Design and Technical Graphics Curricula

Using Virtual Reality Tools in Design and Technical Graphics Curricula: An Experience in Learning Shana Smith1, Kay Taylor2, Travis Green3, Neil Peterson4, Cynthia Garrety1 1 2

Iowa State University

State University of New York, SUNY Fredonia 3

Des Moines Area Community College 4

Iowa Central Community College

ABSTRACT – This paper presents findings from a

I. Introduction

project for introducing virtual reality (VR)

Three-dimensional visualization ability, to a

technology into design and technical graphics

great extent, determines students’ performance in

curricula. In particular, findings are presented

design and technical graphics courses. Prior

that show how the implementation of VR

research shows that 3-D visualization ability

technology affected and changed pedagogical

greatly influences students’ future career success

practices between instructors and students in

in science, engineering, and technology (McKim,

classrooms at three educational institutions.

1980; Norman, 1994; Pleck et al., 1990). Students

Classroom observations were obtained from a

without sufficient 3-D perception ability may

team of curriculum and instruction experts, who

become frustrated and drop out of CAD programs,

provided

VR

or may be advised to pursue studies in areas that

technology in the classrooms. Student surveys,

do not require CAD skills. However, if students

both before and after using VR tools, and focus

could improve and gain confidence in their 3-D

group

conducted.

visualization skills, they would enjoy CAD

Quantitative and qualitative evaluation data was

instruction more and become more engaged.

analyzed and used to plan for future use of VR

Fortunately, prior research also shows that

technology.

provide

visualization is a skill that can be learned,

insights into how to use VR technology in design

developed, and improved with proper instruction

and technical graphics education, which can help

and methods (Bishop, 1973; Gagon, 1985;

instructors effectively introduce the new VR tools

McKim, 1980). Thus, to help our students remain

in their classrooms.

in and succeed in CAD programs and to succeed

feedback

interviews,

concerning

were

Implementation

also

use

findings

of

2

in their future careers, it is essential to find

reading textbooks and listening to lectures, VR

effective methods for delivering graphics concepts

allows students to see images and move around in

and for enhancing student 3-D spatial visualization

a virtual environment. Prior studies report that VR

skills.

is especially effective when students use VR tools

One way to enhance students’ ability to

to create virtual objects, rather than to just look at

visualize 3-D objects is to make their experience

objects or worlds which have already been created

of the objects as realistic as possible while

(Byrne et al., 1994). The new learning paradigm

learning. Recently, virtual reality has brought

could create a dramatic benefit for all students,

learners closer to a natural learning environment.

particularly for visual learners.

VR immerses viewers in computer-generated stereoscopic

environments.

Using

Using new technology in education can both

special

improve learning and make learning more

equipment such as data gloves and joysticks, users

enjoyable. Some prior studies showed that VR

can interact directly, and more realistically, with

appears to improve student motivation (Byrne et

virtual models in a virtual environment.

al., 1994; Sulbaran & Baker, 2000). In one study,

In industry, VR has proven to be an effective

82% of learners rated a VR learning environment

tool for worker training and helping designers

more engaging than learning from reading books

evaluate product designs. For example, GE

or lectures with overheads containing graphics or

Corporation used VR to determine part removal

pictures (Sulbaran & Baker, 2000). At the same

paths for machine maintenance (Abshire &

time, new technologies demand critical evaluation

Barron, 1998). Motorola developed a VR system

to determine their proper and vital role in

for training workers to run a pager assembly line,

transforming educational styles. For example, due

and they discovered that participants trained in VR

to

environments perform better on the job than those

multimedia now provides greater flexibility in

trained for the same time in real environments

teaching and learning.

(Wittenberg, 1995).

advances

Although

in

prior

information

short-term

technology,

experimental

In academia, the potential of VR has

programs conclude strongly that VR can enhance

especially drawn the interest of mathematics and

learning, educators still must overcome several

science educators. Several prior experiments have

technological and educational challenges to bring

shown that VR can help students understand

VR into regular classroom use: •

abstract spatial data and scenes that cannot be physically

realized

(Bell

&

Fogler,

1997;

When, where, and how should we introduce VR into existing curricula?

Haufmann, Schmalstieg & Wagner, 2000; Winn &

•

How can VR be used as a communication

Bricken, 1992). VR can also improve users’

tool, rather than just a visual aid, in the

visualization skills (Osberg, 1997). In contrast to

classroom?

3

•

How should we teach students to use VR

Inventor does not have VR display capability,

tools?

Inventor CAD models were converted to file formats that VRCADViewer could recognize, for

Introducing new technology into classrooms

example, .3ds, .osg, .wrl, and .iv.

also brings in the requirement for course reformation. This paper describes a teaching and

Participating instructors were invited to attend

learning experience in which VR tools were

each other’s classes to provide peer-observations.

introduced into design and technical graphics

Several curriculum and instruction experts were

courses at three educational institutions. In

also invited to each class to provide feedback

particular, findings are presented that show how

concerning instructional delivery and pedagogical

the implementation of VR technology affected and

practices.

changed pedagogical practices between instructors

In the first test class, held at the four-year

and students in classrooms at the three educational

university, basic information concerning 3D

institutions.

provide

engineering graphics was introduced. Example 3D

insights into how to use VR technology in design

models, corresponding to printed images from the

and technical graphics education, which can help

course textbook, were used to present the

instructors effectively introduce the new VR tools

concepts. Rather than using traditional CAD

in their classrooms.

model viewing methods, the new VR tool was

Implementation

findings

used to help students visualize 3D models from different views (Figure 1). After the students

II. Implementation

acquired 3-D spatial concepts, they were asked to

The project was a collaborative effort, which involved two community colleges and one four-

sketch projection views of the models.

year

Immediately

university.

A

VR

software

tool,

following

the

test

class,

the

VRCADViewer, was developed using open source

curriculum and instruction experts held a meeting

software

OpenSceneGraph

to discuss their experiences and to develop

(www.openscenegraph.org). VRCADViewer can

recommendations for improving instructional

create and separate left-eye and right-eye images

delivery and pedagogical practices. The team of

of a CAD model, so that the model can be viewed

experts recommended using virtual models for

stereoscopically.

participating

real-world mechanical parts for instruction, rather

instructors developed instructional VR models for

than less-meaningful models from the textbook.

topics they planned to cover in their classes. For

They also recommended allowing students to

this project Autodesk Inventor was used for CAD

create

model creation, because all three participating

recommendations were followed for a second test

institutions already owned the Autodesk Inventor

class.

from

Each

of

the

CAD software tool. However, since Autodesk

4

and

manipulate

models.

Both

(a)

Figure 2. Second test class. Using conventional 2D viewing methods, most students struggle to grasp the true shape of the surface line. The VR tool gave a better spatial realization of the objects and what the surface line actually looked like in 3D space.

(b)

In the fourth test class, held at the second

Figure 1. First test class.

community college, the instructor covered using Visual Basic programs to drive a CAD software

In the second test class, the concept of pictorial views was covered. Students were invited

tool

to

create

generic

geometric

forms

to personally manipulate models and to explore

representing mechanical parts. First, students were

the models from different views (Figure 2). Real-

asked to develop a program that would produce a

world mechanical parts, with more complex

cylinder and a sphere with specific dimensions.

geometries and moving parts, were used. Students

They were then asked to verify their results

involved in the test classes made positive

against a VR model. Next, they were asked to

comments about using the VR equipment during

modify their programs to make the center of the

lectures.

sphere coincident with the center of the cylinder.

In the third test class, held at one of the

Again, students used a VR model to verify that the

community colleges, descriptive geometry was

output met their expectations. Finally, students

covered. The instructor explained how to find and

were asked to visualize shortening the cylinder by

draw a surface line that represents the intersection

a specific amount and to produce the change by

of two cones. The instructor first used a

editing their programs. After their programs

SMARTBoard™ to explain the concept using 2D

produced the change, they were again asked to

sketches (Figure 3(a)). He then used the VR tool

examine a virtual model and to compare their

to show the 3D relationship between the two cones

results with their expectations.

(Figure 3(b)).

5

(a)

Figure 4. Fourth test class. III. Classroom Impacts and Pedagogical Change The most obvious impact that using VR technology had in the test classes was increased student motivation. Students appeared to be

(b)

excited about using a new technology, which

Figure 3. Third test class

previously was not available in the classrooms. The purpose of the learning exercise in the

Within the first few minutes of using the VR tool,

fourth test class had two goals: (1) to enhance

students often made comments that they were

logical thinking and design processes through

either surprised about or felt affirmed in their

programming, (2) to use a 3D virtual model to

expectations by what they were seeing. A handful

verify and illustrate the results of logical thinking

of students made casual comments comparing

and design processes, and (3) to begin to develop a

what they were seeing to video games they used at

visual and conceptual ‘sense’ for the effects of

home. The correlation was interesting, because it

change in both the local and global state of a

indicated that students were attempting to adapt to

component’s form. All three goals rest upon the

a new instructional technique by relating their

precept that students, when offered a model with

classroom experience to a familiar personal

which to compare their own concepts, will

experience. They were attempting to create a zone

develop a sense of how change creates impact on a

of comfort by drawing on what they saw to a

design. After the first change exercise, students

similar technology that they had already used.

were led through a full series of model changes

Students’ engagement with their instructors

and given an opportunity to compare their

and other students increased, due to several

‘mental’ expectations against a virtual model

factors. The first factor was a significantly shorter

illustrating the change impact.

mental feedback cycle. Students could produce a model and see the result using the VR tool. As a result, they had a realistic virtual 3-D product that

6

IV. Evaluation Instruments

was similar to a real object that they could hold in their hands. Their minds were no longer forced to

To assess students’ VR experiences and

mentally convert 2-D images into mental 3-D

learning gains, several evaluation instruments,

scenes, before they could develop and accurate

such as a student survey, focus group interviews, a

concept of an object’s shape and dimensions.

VR literacy test, and a mental rotation test were

Instead, they had a virtual product right in front of

developed and conducted.

their eyes.

Student survey

A second factor which had an impact on

A survey was used to examine students’

classroom interaction was that students appeared

perceptions of the effectiveness of using VR in the

to accept the technology as an instructional tool

course curricula, as well as to investigate issues

rather than as a tool for critiquing their work.

related to physical comfort associated with VR.

Students who were normally reticent about sharing

Students were asked how many years of graphics

their CAD drawings with other students seemed

experience they had, including school and/or

more willing to share their models and images. On

work, and what their previous experiences were

the surface, it seems that one reason for the change

with graphics software programs. The survey

in classroom behavior was that, since the

items were developed based upon prior published

technology was new to the classroom, most

research findings. For example, the following

students felt they were on equal footing; they were

survey items:

all embarking on a journey together. As a side

(a) I considered dropping out of the program;

point,

(b) My instructor encouraged me not to major

students

may

also

have

felt

more

comfortable sharing virtual models because they

in CAD;

generally require less explanation than 2-D

were based on prior research by McKim (1980),

drawings.

Norman (1994), and Pleck et al. (1990), which

Virtual models also created a stronger

demonstrates that student 3-D visualization ability

connection between instructors and students, since

greatly influences students’ future career success

they were able to explore ‘what-if’ scenarios

in science, engineering, and technology.

together. The instructors and students, for the first

Research by Bishop (1973), Gagnon (1985),

time, were able to share a common ‘mindspace’

and McKim (1980) found that visualization is a

together as they proposed changes and saw the

skill that can be learned, developed, and improved

immediate impact of the changes. Receiving

with instruction. The survey items based on their

immediate virtual results allowed instructors to

findings include:

use

even

faulty

expectations

as

teachable

(a) The class improved the way that I learn;

moments.

(b) The

course

improved

communication skills.

7

my

graphics

Osberg (1997) found that a 3-D class

(b) VR helped me better remember how to do

culminating in a virtual experience can enhance

something again the next time I used it.

spatial processing skills, and Winn and Bricken

Survey items also were worded in the opposite

(1992) found that VR has the potential for making

vernacular to determine the consistency of

a significant improvement in the way students

responses, for example, (a) The VR program was

learn [mathematics]. The survey items based on

dull and uninteresting and (b) The VR was not

their findings include:

easy to understand.

(a) I

gained

confidence

in

my

Focus groups

3-D

visualization skills in this course;

Focus groups were conducted to probe for a

(b) My 3-D spatial visualization skills

deeper understanding about students’ experiences

improved as a result of this course.

with the VR technology in the classroom. Focus

Haufmann, Schmalsteig, and Wagner (2000)

groups were conducted with the participating

found that VR is a very good playground for

classes from the university and two community

experiments. In their study, all participants wanted

colleges after students completed the post-mental

to experience VR again, and students thought it

rotation test (MRT) and the survey. Focus group

was easier to view a 3-D world in VR than on a

protocol was implemented and topics were

flat screen. The survey items based on their

explored in more depth through a variety of

findings include:

questions such as:

(a) VR is a good playground for experiments;

(a) How was your experience in this class

(b) I want to experience VR again;

different using the VR tool than in classes

(c) It is easier to view a 3-D world in VR than

that did not use it?

on a flat computer screen.

(b) What do you believe the strengths are of

Sulbaran and Baker (2000) found that learners

using the VR tool?

thought learning with VR was more engaging than

Focus group responses from each class were

learning from reading books and listening to

recorded and then analyzed according to the

lectures using overheads containing graphics or

questions posed during the focus group. The

pictures and that in a follow-up survey, learners

responses were then analyzed and compared to

strongly agreed or agreed that their learning

determine thematic relationships, if any.

experiences benefit from the use of VR. The

Visual literacy tests and mental rotation tests

survey items based on their findings include:

In order to examine students’ conceptual

(a) Learning with VR is more engaging than

growth and changes in their knowledge base about

learning from reading books and listening

VR, pre- and post- visual literacy tests were

to lectures using overheads containing

developed. A mental rotation test was used to

graphics or pictures;

assess students’ growth in spatial visualization

8

over the course of the semester. The mental

and was exciting. Weaknesses reported by

rotation test was drawn from Vandenberg and

students included expense, size of equipment,

Kuse (1978).

needed better resolution, difficult to work with, lag time and inconsistency of the program, more V. Evaluation Results

time consuming, some people not being able to

Student survey

see the stereoscopic view, location not mobile,

Demographics A total of 8 females and 30 males

dizziness and sickness as a result of viewing the

from the three institutions participated in the

VR models.

student survey. Students ranged in age from 18-

Q: Please describe your previous experience

57. Nineteen students were freshman, 11 students

using VR and provide detailed examples.

were sophomores, 5 students were juniors, 1

Previous experiences using VR cited by

student was a senior, and 2 students identified

students included Disneyland, CAVE, and one

themselves as other.

student who was epileptic and could not wear the

Students’ graphics experience

3D eyewear or participate in the VR experience

Students’ years

of graphics experience ranged from 0 to 8 years.

because of the physical condition. Eight students

Open-ended questions

had never used VR before and it was their first

Students were asked to

respond to 3 open-ended questions.

Overall,

experience with the technology.

responses to the questions were positive. The

Student survey results and existing research

questions, with a summary statement, follow.

findings

Survey results from the three

Q: Describe the ways in which you found the

institutions support existing research findings. A

VR models effective for your learning and

Likert scale was used for the survey, with 1 =

provide examples

strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = undecided, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree. Table 1 details

Students’ responses described their learning

the aggregate means for survey items.

experience with the VR models as fun, more realistic, engaging them in their learning, and

The results of the survey show that students agreed or strongly agreed that the course

providing them with visualization enhancements. Q: Describe two major strengths and two

improved their graphics communication skills;

major weaknesses of the VR models and

students agreed that they gained confidence in

give examples for each.

their 3-D visualization skills in the courses;

Students’ described the strengths of the VR

students agreed or strongly agreed that VR is a

models as realistic, good for visualization, easy to

good playground for experiments and that they

understand, retained attention, made learning fun,

wanted to experience VR again; students agreed

gave ability to rotate objects and parts, improved

or strongly agreed that learning with VR is more

depth perception, created better understanding,

engaging than learning from reading books and

9

Table 1. Aggregate means for common survey items.1

Survey Items The course improved my ability to design products. The course improved my problem-solving ability. The course improved my presentation skills. The course improved my graphics communication skills. I considered dropping out of the program. My instructor encouraged me not to major in CAD. I gained confidence in my 3-D visualization skills in this course. I enjoyed the 3-D instruction in this course. I was fully engaged in the instruction in this course. This method of delivering graphics concepts is the most effective. My experiencing of the 3-D objects was realistic. The class stimulated my interest in leading-edge technology. The class improved the way that I learn. VR is a good playground for experiments. I want to experience VR again. It is easier to view a 3-D world in VR than on a flat computer screen. Learning with VR is more engaging than learning from reading books and listening to lectures using overheads containing graphics or pictures. VR helped me better remember how to do something again the next time I used it. VR technology is a useful tool for design and technical graphics education. I can now use VR technology in product design. My 3-D spatial visualization skills improved as a result of this course. The instructional materials for this course were clear. The instructional materials for this course contributed to my learning. The VR is easy to use. The VR program is user-friendly. I believe that I could learn more in other subjects if VR programs like this one were available. The VR program was dull and uninteresting. The VR was not easy to understand I could not clearly understand the material presented in VR. I prefer to learn multi-view projections using 2-D pictures rather than VR 3-D simulation. Viewing the VR model makes me feel dizzy. I cannot see the stereoscopic view of the VR model. I feel physically uncomfortable when using VR. Using VR makes my eyes hurt.

1

Scale: 1=strongly agree, 2=agree, 3=-undecided, 4=disagree, 5=strongly disagree

10

Aggregate Mean (n=38) 1.83 2.03 2.47 1.90 4.50 4.43 2.00 1.73 2.03 2.23 1.93 2.00 2.33 1.73 1.67 2.13 1.83 2.50 1.90 2.77 2.20 2.17 2.10 2.33 2.53 2.20 4.03 3.77 3.77 3.53 3.77 3.93 4.03 4.00

listening to lectures using overheads containing

they did not have access to it for product design

graphics or pictures. Further, students from the

for their assignments or projects. They all were

three institutions disagreed with the item, “The

cognizant that their access to and experience with

VR program was dull and uninteresting,”

VR over the course of the semester was primarily

(mean=4.03).

as a visual aid by the instructor. Some students

Focus Groups

speculated on the usefulness of VR for product

Focus groups were conducted to probe for a

design and others interchanged the idea of VR

deeper understanding about students’ experiences

with 3D modeling software.

with the VR technology in the classroom. A total

Q: Do you feel that you are now a better

of five focus groups were conducted, which

candidate to join the workforce because of

involved students enrolled in classes at the three

your experiences using VR technology?

institutions. Consistent focus group protocol was

Limited experience with and exposure to VR

used for each focus group at the participating sites.

was again the prominent factor in students’

The questions posed to students during the focus

responses. Students’ frames of references were

group follow with a summary statement for each

primarily to the different software programs they

question.

learned during the semester, however, some

Q: How was your experience in this class

students saw the value of VR’s use to their future

different using the VR tool than in classes

in the workforce.

that did not use it?

Q: What do you believe the strengths are of

All students stated that the use of the VR tool

using the VR equipment/technology?

in their classes was a positive experience. All

Students identified visualization, the ability to

students reported that the use of VR in their

manipulate and rotate objects, the depth and

classrooms was primarily in the form of a visual

perspective created through the use of VR, and

aid by the instructor, but unfortunately, they did

advantages for product design as strengths of the

not have access to the technology or equipment on

VR

their desktop computers for their own use. Several

infrequency of use, no hands-on experience, and

students mentioned that the use of the VR

lack of exposure to VR as obstacles to providing a

equipment by their instructors enhanced their

completely informed response.

ability to visualize models and that it made the

Results for pre- and post-visual literacy tests

experience more realistic.

equipment/technology.

Students

cited

In order to examine students’ conceptual

Q: Are you now able to use VR tools in

growth and changes in their knowledge base about

product design?

VR, pre- and post-visual literacy tests were

Because the students did not have the VR

developed. The test used includes 50 items,

capability on their desktop computers in class,

weighted at 2 points each, for a total of 100 points.

11

Twenty-five students took the pre-visual

instructors were all open to providing more

literacy test. Students’ scores ranged from a low

opportunities for students to gain hands-on

of 18 out of 100 to a high of 66 out of 100, with a

experience with the VR tool, as recommended by

mean score of 39.00. Post-test scores ranged from

the curriculum and instruction experts. To provide

a low of 28 out of 100 to a high of 70 out of 100,

more hands-on opportunities, the instructors

with a mean score of 52.96. The mean increase

suggested developing an independent lab, separate

for the students was 14.23%.

from

Results for pre- and post-mental rotation tests

classroom facilities, where students could work

the

instructors’

computers

and

their

A mental rotation test was used to assess

with their design models and then bring them into

students’ growth in spatial visualization over the

a VR environment. To connect use of the VR tool

course of the semester. Twenty-nine students took

with authentic meaningful activities for the

the pre- and post-MRT tests. Pre-test MRT scores

students, it is important to invite representatives

ranged from a low of 2 to a high of 34. Post-test

from industry, who are currently using VR in for

MRT scores ranged from a low of 6 to a high of

product testing and development, to speak with the

39. The mean for the pre-MRT test was 17.69,

students and to demonstrate possibilities for use of

and the mean for the post-MRT test was 24.17.

similar VR tools in the business world.

VI. Discussion

VII. Future Directions

All instructors and students were enthusiastic

For the given study, typically, students were

about using the VR tool in their classrooms. The

usually in a passive role, however, they expressed

use of VR models was connected to overall

interest in more hands-on opportunities for

curricula taught in the classes. Thus, the use of VR

working with the software. The instructors need to

models seemed to have a purpose, and was not just

redesign their existing lectures and labs to provide

an add-on to the lessons. Students seemed more

more

engaged in collaborative groups formed to solve

students, opportunities that will give them more

problems during the lessons.

control over their own learning and that will create

Primary suggestions made by the curriculum and

instruction

opportunities

for

a cognitively active learning environment. The course contents need to include more problem-

opportunities for students to have more hands-on

based learning lessons using VR. Integrating VR

experiences with the VR tools, increasing student

in the classroom, beyond using VR as a visual aid

group activity, increasing opportunities for student

during lectures, needs to be studied. Applying VR

to manipulate the VR models, and increasing

in other courses will also be explored.

engagement

included

interactive

providing

student

experts

hands-on

during

class

sessions.

To shift students from a passive role to a more

Evaluation results confirmed the suggestions. The

active role, students need to explore current uses

12

Communications and Technology Journal, 33 (4), 263-275.

of VR in their particular areas of interest. Students also need to learn how to use VR to evaluate other students’ designs. Finally, further research is

Haufmann, H., Schmalstieg, D. & Wagner M. (2000). Construct3D: A Virtual Reality Application for Mathematics and Geometry Education, Education and Information Technologies, 5 (4), 263-276.

needed to determine how the VR tool affects students’ engagement in the subject matter and changes that can be made in both software design and in pedagogical methods to make the tool more

McKim, R. H. (1980). Experiences in visual thinking, Boston, MA:PWS Publishers.

useful and available to students, at a level comparable to other multimedia tools now used in

Norman, K. L. (1994). Spatial visualization – A gateway to computer-based technology, Journal of Special Educational Technology, XII (3), 195-206.

education. Acknowledgements

Osberg, K. M. (1997). Spatial Cognition in the Virtual Environment. Human Interface Technology Laboratory, University of Washington, Retrieved June 10, 2002, from http://www.hitl.washington.edu/publications/r-9718/.

Support for this work, Grant 0302832 from the National Science Foundation and Grant 0404 from the Iowa Science Foundation, is greatly appreciated. VIII. References

Pleck, M. H., Mcgrath, M. B., Bertoline, G. R., Browers, D. H. & Sadowski, M. A. (1990). Factors affecting the engineering design graphics curriculum: Past, present, future. Proceedings of the NSF Symposium on Modernization of the Engineering Design Graphics Curriculum, Austin, Texas, 43-52.

Abshire, K. J. & Barron, M. K. (1998). Virtual maintenance; Real-world applications within virtual environments, IEEE Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 132137. Bell, J. T. & Fogler, H. S. (1997). Ten steps to developing virtual reality applications for engineering education, Proceedings of the 1997 ASEE Annual Conference, Retrieved February 15, 2002, from http://www.vrupl.evl.uic.edu/vrichel/.

Sulbaran, T. & Baker, N. C. (2000). Enhancing Engineering Education Through Distributed Virtual Reality, 30th ASEE/IEEE frontiers in Education Conference, October 18-21, Kansas City, MO, S1D-13 – S1D-18.

Bishop, A. J. (1973). The use of structural apparatus and spatial ability – A possible relationship, Research in Education, 9, 4-49.

Vandenberg, S. G. & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599-604.

Byrne, C., Holland, C., Moffit, D., Hodas, S. & Furness, T. A. (1994). Virtual Reality and "At Risk" Students, Retrieved June 15, 2002, from http://www.hitl.washington.edu/publications/r-945/.

Winn, W. & Bricken, W. (1992, December). Designing Virtual Worlds for Use in Mathematics Education: The Example of Experiential Algebra, Educational Technology, 32 (12), 12-19. Wittenberg, G. (1995). Training with virtual reality, Assembly Automation, 15 (3), 12-14.

Gagnon, D. (1985). Videogames and spatial skills: An exploratory study, Educational

13