11/2017 vol. 13
Stats
CC-BY 4.0
Get citation
RESEARCH PAPER
3D Creative Teaching-Learning Strategy in Surveying Engineering Education
Carlos Carbonell-Carrera 1
,
 
Jose Luis Saorin 1
,
 
Dámari Melian 1
,
 
Jorge de la Torre Cantero 1
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
University of La Laguna, SPAIN
 
 
Online publication date: 2017-11-08
 
 
Publication date: 2017-11-08
 
 
Corresponding author
Carlos Carbonell-Carrera   

University of La Laguna, Avenida Ángel Guimerá Jorge, s/n. Escuela Politécnica Superior de Ingeniería., 38200 La Laguna, Spain
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(11):7489-7502
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/78757
 
 
Article (PDF)
References (45)
 
KEYWORDS
3D teaching-learning strategy
3D digital fabrication
creativity
spatial reasoning (relief interpretation)
 
TOPICS
Teacher Training/Education
Teaching/Learning Strategies
Instructional Design
Educational Technology
Technology Education
 
ABSTRACT
For the acquisition of spatial reasoning, content is learned more quickly by means of the use of 3D objects. In the field of surveying engineering education, research has been carried out to promote the ability to interpret relief using 3D terrain representations with positive results, in which the instructor provided these 3D-models to the student. In the present research a change is proposed in the teaching-learning strategy in which the student ceases to be a passive subject who is asked to exercise with a 3D-model to adopt a creative role, since the student creates the object of learning using 3D tools. Under this approach can be measured also the impact of this strategy on creative competence. Results of 2 workshops performed with 115 engineering studies shows that this strategy help them to interpret the relief, and their creativity is improved in 36 points measured with the Abreaction Test of Creativity.
REFERENCES (45)
1.
Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación. (2004). Libros Blancos.
Google Scholar
 
 
2.
Álvarez Prozorovich, F. V. (2011). Rastrear proyectos, contar historias. Diagonal, (2011), 10-13.
Google Scholar
 
 
3.
Andrade-Lotero, L. A., Espitia-Gómez, C., Huertas-Franco, E. A., Aldana-Ahumada, D. R., & Bacca-Pachón, P. A. (2012). Tocar o mirar: comparación de procesos cognitivos en el aprendizaje con o sin manipulación física. Revista de Psicología Educativa, 18(1), 29-40.
Google Scholar
 
 
4.
Boardman, D. (1989). The development of graphicacy: Children’s understanding of maps. Geography, 321-3.
Google Scholar
 
 
5.
Canessa, E., Fonda, C., & Zennaro, M. (2013). Low-cost 3D printing: for science, education & sustainable development. ICTP—The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics.
Google Scholar
 
 
6.
Carazo E., & Galván N., (2014). EGA. Revista de expresión gráfica arquitectónica. Aprendiendo con maquetas. Pequeñas maquetas para el análisis de arquitectura, (24), 62–71.
Google Scholar
 
 
7.
Carazo, E., Martínez, S. (2013). La generación digital. Más notas para el debate sobre una cibernética de la arquitectura. EGA. Revista de expresión gráfica arquitectónica, 18(22), 50-59.
Google Scholar
 
 
8.
Carbonell Carrera, C., & Bermejo Asensio, L. A. (2017). Augmented reality as a digital teaching environment to develop spatial thinking. Cartography and geographic information science, 44(3), 259-270.
Google Scholar
 
 
9.
Carbonell Carrera, C., Avarvarei, B. V., Chelariu, E. L., Draghia, L., & Avarvarei, S. C. (2016). Map-Reading Skill Development with 3D Technologies. Journal of Geography, 116(5), 197-205.
Google Scholar
 
 
10.
Carter, G., Patrick, M., Wiebe, E. N., Park, J. C., & Butler, S. M. (2005). Middle grade students’ interpretation of topographic maps. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching NARST.
Google Scholar
 
 
11.
Charyton, C. (2005). Creativity (scientific, artistic, general) and risk tolerance among engineering and music students (Doctoral dissertation, ProQuest Information & Learning).
Google Scholar
 
 
12.
Charyton, C., & Merrill, J. A. (2009). Assessing general creativity and creative engineering design in first year engineering students. Journal of engineering education, 98(2), 145-156.
Google Scholar
 
 
13.
Charyton, C., & Snelbecker, G. E. (2007). General, artistic and scientific creativity attributes of engineering and music students. Creativity Research Journal, 19(2-3), 213-225.
Google Scholar
 
 
14.
Charyton, C., Jagacinski, R. J., & Merrill, J.A. (2008). CEDA: A research instrument for creative engineering design assessment. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(3), 147–54.
Google Scholar
 
 
15.
Chassell, L. M. (1916). Tests for originality. Journal of educational psychology, 7(6), 317.
Google Scholar
 
 
16.
Chueca, M., Salcedo, F., Ferrer, J., Galán, L., & Olivé, J. (2004). White paper title engineer degree in geomatics and surveying. National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA) Spain, 118-148.
Google Scholar
 
 
17.
Cropley, D. H. (2015). Promoting creativity and innovation in engineering education. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(2), 161–171. doi:10.1037/aca0000008.
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
18.
Cropley, D. H., & Cropley, A. J. (1999). Creativity and innovation in systems engineering (Doctoral dissertation, Systems Engineering Society of Australia).
Google Scholar
 
 
19.
Cropley, D. H., & Cropley, A. J. (2000). Fostering creativity in engineering undergraduates. High ability studies, 11(2), 207-219.
Google Scholar
 
 
20.
Daly, S. R., Mosyjowski, E. A., & Seifert, C. M. (2014). Teaching creativity in engineering courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(3), 417–449. doi:10.1002/jee.20048.
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
21.
De la Torre, S. (1991). Evaluación de la creatividad. Test de abreacción para evaluar la creatividad. TAEC.
Google Scholar
 
 
22.
Dewulf, S., & Baillie, C. (1999). CASE: Creativity in Art, Science and Engineering: How to foster creativity. Great Britain Department for Education and Employment.
Google Scholar
 
 
23.
Elliott, M. (2001). The well-rounded IE: Breakthrough thinking. IE Solutions.
Google Scholar
 
 
24.
George, D., & Mallery, M. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: a simple guide and reference. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Google Scholar
 
 
25.
Gobert, J. D. (2005). The effects of different learning tasks on model-building in plate tectonics: Diagramming versus explaining. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 444-455.
Google Scholar
 
 
26.
Kazerounian, K., & Foley, S. (2007). Barriers to creativity in engineering education: A study of instructors and students perceptions. Journal of Mechanical Design, 129(7), 761-768.
Google Scholar
 
 
27.
Kirkpatrick, E. A. (1907). A broader basis for psychology necessary. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 4(20), 542-546.
Google Scholar
 
 
28.
Knoll, W. & Hechinger, M. (2005). Maquetas de arquitectura, Técnicas y construcción. 6ª Ed. Barcelona: Ed. Gustavo Gili S.A.
Google Scholar
 
 
29.
Lanca, M. (1998). Three-dimensional representations of contour maps. Contemporary educational psychology, 23(1), 22-41.
Google Scholar
 
 
30.
Lifante Gil, Y. (2011). Ingenieros Creativos. Valencia: Editorial Alfa Delta Digital.
Google Scholar
 
 
31.
Liu, Z., & Schonwetter, D. J. (2004). Teaching creativity in engineering. International Journal of Engineering Education, 20(5), 801-808.
Google Scholar
 
 
32.
Project, Competences Tuning. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.unideusto.org/tunin....
Google Scholar
 
 
33.
Saorín, J. L., De La Torre, J., Melián, D., Meier, C., & Lifante,Y. (2015). Competencia creativa en estudios de Grado en Ingeniería. Artículo presentado al congreso al III Congreso sobre aprendizaje, innovación y competitividad. CINAIC. Madrid, Spain.
Google Scholar
 
 
34.
Saorín, J. L., Melián Diaz, D., Bonnet, A., Carbonell-Carrera, C., Meier, C., & De la Torre, J. (2017). Makerspace teaching-learning environment to enhance creative competence in engineering students. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 23, 188–198. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2017.01.004.
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
35.
Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361-388.
Google Scholar
 
 
36.
Spanish Cabinet’s Office. (2007). Royal Decree 1393/2007 from October 29th. State’s Official Bulletin. Retrieved on 1 May 2013 from http://www. boe.es/buscar/pdf/2007/BOE-A-2007-18770-consolidado.pdf.
Google Scholar
 
 
37.
Stavric, M., Sidanin, P., & Tepavcevic, B. (2013). Architectural scale models in the digital age: design, representation and manufacturing. Basel: Birkhäuser.
Google Scholar
 
 
38.
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Estilos de pensamiento. Paidos Iberica, Ediciones S. A..
Google Scholar
 
 
39.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. Free Press.
Google Scholar
 
 
40.
Stouffer, W. B., Russell, J. S., & Oliva, M. G. (2004, June). Making the strange familiar: Creativity and the future of engineering education. In Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 20-23).
Google Scholar
 
 
41.
Tulla, A., Busto, J. R., Gabilondo, A., Ruiz-Rivas, C., Laka, J. P., & Roselló, G. (2004). White Paper Degree in Geography and Planning, 177-186. Madrid: National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA).
Google Scholar
 
 
42.
Weisberg, R. (1986). Creativity: Genius and other myths. WH Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.
Google Scholar
 
 
43.
Zappe, S. E., Reeves, P. M., Mena, I. B., & Litzinger, T. A. (2015), A cross-sectional study of engineering students’ creative self-concepts: An exploration of creative self-efficacy, personal identity, and expectations. Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.23373.
Google Scholar
 
 
44.
Zappe, S., Mena, I., & Litzinger, T. (2013, January). Creativity is not a purple dragon. In National Collegiate Inventors and Innovators Alliance. Proceedings of the... Annual Conference (p. 1). National Collegiate Inventors & Innovators Alliance.
Google Scholar
 
 
45.
Zevi, B. (1997). Storia e controstoria dell’architettura in Italia. Newton & Compton.
Google Scholar
 
 
Share
Send by email
RELATED ARTICLE
The State of South African Mathematics Education: Situating the Hidden Promise of Multiple-solution Tasks
Effects of STEM Inquiry Method on Learning Attitude and Creativity
The Design of a Teaching-Learning Sequence on Simple Machines in Elementary Education and its Benefit on Creativity and Self-Regulation
Enhancing creativity in genetics using three teaching strategies-based TPACK model
Reshaping technology-based projects and their exploration of creativity
Indexes
 
Keywords index
Topics index
Authors index
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
Scroll to top