You are here:

Effects of 3D Printing and Design Software on Students’ Interests, Motivation, Mathematical and Technical Skills
ARTICLE

Journal of STEM Education Volume 18, Number 4, ISSN 1557-5284 Publisher: Laboratory for Innovative Technology in Engineering Education (LITEE)

Full Text

Abstract

Technology is changing the way students learn in amazing ways. Researchers found that student-centered, technology-integrated learning environments help to produce students who are better able to think critically, solve problems, collaborate with others, and engage deeply in the learning process. In addition, the emergence of technology-rich classrooms helps diverse learners understand conceptual ideas and apply those ideas and skills to real-life. When teachers know how to effectively use the unique features of technologies, they can address the varying cognitive strengths and needs of different students. Because understanding the impact of technology and finding the best ways to integrate technology into the classroom is critical, an investigation was conducted to determine whether the use of 3D printers and 3D design software in a summer camp setting had a positive effect on student\u2019s motivation, interests, mathematical and real-life skills.

Citation

Kwon, H. (2017). Effects of 3D Printing and Design Software on Students’ Interests, Motivation, Mathematical and Technical Skills. Journal of STEM Education, 18(4),. Laboratory for Innovative Technology in Engineering Education (LITEE). Retrieved August 13, 2022 from .

© 2017 Laboratory for Innovative Technology in Engineering Education (LITEE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bakar, K.A., Ayub, A.F.M., & Tarmizi, R.A. (2010). Exploring the effectiveness of using GeoGebra and e-transformation in teaching and learning mathematics. Proceedings of the 6th WSEAS/IASME International Conference on Educational Technologies.
  2. Ching, C.C., Basham, J.D., & Planfetti, E.S. (2005). Technology in education, technology in life. In C. Vrasidas& G.V. Glass (Eds.), Current perspectives on applied information technologies: Preparing teachers to teach with technology (pp. 225-240). Greenwich,
  3. Lacey, G. (2010). 3D printing brings designs to life. Tech Directions, 70(2), 17-19.
  4. Lavin, A., Korte, L., & Davis, T. (2010). The impact of technology on student behavior. The Journal of Technology Research, 2, 1-13.
  5. Segerman, H. (2012). 3D printing for mathematical visualization. The Mathematical Intelligencer, 34(4), 56-62.
  6. Sinclair, G.B. (2009). Is Larry Cuban right about the impact of computer technology on student learning? Journal of Language& Communication, 3(1), 46-54.
  7. Suh, J.M. (2010). Tech-knowledgy diverse learners. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 15(8), 440-447.
  8. Thompson, B. (2006). Foundations of behavioral statistics: An insight-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  9. Vanscoder, J. (2014). 3D printing as a tool for teaching and Learning in STEAM education. In M. Searson&
  10. Ziden, A.A., Zakaria, F., & Othman, A.N. (2012). Effectiveness of AutoCAD 3D software as a learning support tool. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 7(2), 57-60.
  11. Dede, C. (1996). Emerging technologies and distributed learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 10(2), 4-36.
  12. Dix, K. (1999). Enhanced mathematics learning: Does technology make a difference? Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, 2, 192-199.
  13. Dror, I.E. (2008). Technology enhanced learning: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Pragmatics& Cognition, 16, 215-223.
  14. Erkoç, M.F., Erkoç, C., & Gecü, Z. (2013). The effects of using Google Sketchup on the mental rotation skills of eighth grade students. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 1285-1294.
  15. Falck, O., Mang, C., & Woessmann, L. (2015). Virtually no effect? Different uses of classroom computers and
  16. Hollenbeck, R., & Fey, J. (2009). Technology and mathematics in the middle grades, Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 14, 430-435.
  17. Jones, K. (2000). Proving a foundation for deductive reasoning: Students’ interpretations when using dynamic geometry software and their evolving mathematical explanations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 4, 55-85.
  18. Jones, C. (2001). Tech support: Preparing teachers to use technology. Principal Leadership, 1(9), 35-39.
  19. Karner, A.M., & Bell, B.S. (2013). Guiding learners through technology-based instruction: The effects of adaptive guidance design and individual differences on learning over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1067-1081.
  20. Kilic, H. (2013). The effects of dynamic geometry software on learning geometry. Proceedings from CERME 8:

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Links

Also Read

Related Collections