| Title |
Think3d!: Improving mathematics learning through embodied spatial training
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41235-017-0052-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heather Burte, Aaron L. Gardony, Allyson Hutton, Holly A. Taylor |
| Abstract |
Spatial thinking skills positively relate to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) outcomes, but spatial training is largely absent in elementary school. Elementary school is a time when children develop foundational cognitive skills that will support STEM learning throughout their education. Spatial thinking should be considered a foundational cognitive skill. The present research examined the impact of an embodied spatial training program on elementary students' spatial and mathematical thinking. Students in rural elementary schools completed spatial and math assessments prior to and after participating in an origami and pop-up paper engineering-based program, called Think3d!. Think3d! uses embodied tasks, such as folding and cutting paper, to train two-dimensional to three-dimensional spatial thinking. Analyses explored spatial thinking gains, mathematics gains - specifically for problem types expected to show gains from spatial training - and factors predicting mathematics gains. Results showed spatial thinking gains in two assessments. Using a math categorization to target problems more and less likely to be impacted by spatial training, we found that all students improved on real-world math problems and older students improved on visual and spatial math problems. Further, the results are suggestive of developmental time points for implementing embodied spatial training related to applying spatial thinking to math. Finally, the spatial thinking assessment that was most highly related to training activities also predicted math performance gains. Future research should explore developmental issues related to how embodied spatial training might support STEM learning and outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 187 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 11% |
| Researcher | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 33 | 18% |
| Unknown | 58 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 32 | 17% |
| Mathematics | 23 | 12% |
| Arts and Humanities | 7 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 63 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2024.
All research outputs
#8,646,468
of 25,791,949 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#234
of 373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,247
of 324,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#10
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,791,949 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 41.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.