Spatial skills are associated with mathematics skills, but it is unclear if spatial training transfers to mathematics skills for preschoolers, especially from underserved communities. The current study tested (a) whether spatial training benefited preschoolers’ spatial and mathematics skills, (b) if the type of feedback provided during spatial training differentially influenced children’s spatial and mathematics skills, and (c) if the spatial training’s effects varied by socioeconomic status (SES). Preschoolers (N = 187) were randomly assigned to either a ‘business-as-usual’ control or one of three spatial training groups (modeling and feedback [MF]; gesture feedback [GF]; spatial language feedback [SLF]). Three-year-olds were trained to construct puzzles to match a model composed of various geometric shapes. New models were created similar to the 2-dimensional trials of the Test of Spatial Assembly (TOSA). Training was given once per week for 5 weeks. Preschoolers were pretested and posttested on 2D and 3D TOSA trials, spatial vocabulary, shape identification, and 2 mathematics assessments. Results indicate that first, any spatial training improved preschoolers’ 2D TOSA performance, although a significant interaction with SES indicated improvement was driven by low-SES children. Furthermore, low-SES children showed greatest gains on the 2D TOSA with MF and GF. Second, MF and GF improved low-SES children’s performance on the 3D TOSA. Third, only low-SES children with MF saw improvements in far-transfer to mathematics (Woodcock-Johnson: Applied Problems, but not the Test of Early Mathematical Ability). Results indicate that, especially for low-income learners, spatial training can improve children’s early spatial and mathematics skills.

No abstract

Understanding how students learn is crucial for helping them succeed. We examined brain function in 107 undergraduate students during a task known to be challenging for many students—physics problem solving—to characterize the underlying neural mechanisms and determine how these support comprehension and proficiency. Further, we applied module analysis to response distributions, defining groups of students who answered by using similar physics conceptions, and probed for brain differences linked with different conceptual approaches. We found that integrated executive, attentional, visual motion, and default mode brain systems cooperate to achieve sequential and sustained physics-related cognition. While accuracy alone did not predict brain function, dissociable brain patterns were observed when students solved problems by using different physics conceptions, and increased success was linked to conceptual coherence. Our analyses demonstrate that episodic associations and control processes operate in tandem to support physics reasoning, offering potential insight to support student learning.

Modeling Instruction (MI) for University Physics is a curricular and pedagogical approach to active learning in introductory physics. A basic tenet of science is that it is a model-driven endeavor that involves building models, then validating, deploying, and ultimately revising them in an iterative fashion. MI was developed to provide students a facsimile in the university classroom of this foundational scientific practice. As a curriculum, MI employs conceptual scientific models as the basis for the course content, and thus learning in a MI classroom involves students appropriating scientific models for their own use. Over the last 10 years, substantial evidence has accumulated supporting MI's efficacy, including gains in conceptual understanding, odds of success, attitudes toward learning, self-efficacy, and social networks centered around physics learning. However, we still do not fully understand the mechanisms of how students learn physics and develop mental models of physical phenomena. Herein, we explore the hypothesis that the MI curriculum and pedagogy promotes student engagement via conceptual model building. This emphasis on conceptual model building, in turn, leads to improved knowledge organization and problem solving abilities that manifest as quantifiable functional brain changes that can be assessed with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We conducted a neuroeducation study wherein students completed a physics reasoning task while undergoing fMRI scanning before (pre) and after (post) completing a MI introductory physics course. Preliminary results indicated that performance of the physics reasoning task was linked with increased brain activity notably in lateral prefrontal and parietal cortices that previously have been associated with attention, working memory, and problem solving, and are collectively referred to as the central executive network. Critically, assessment of changes in brain activity during the physics reasoning task from pre-vs. post-instruction identified increased activity after the course notably in the posterior cingulate cortex (a brain region previously linked with Brewe et al.Modeling Instruction and the Brain episodic memory and self-referential thought) and in the frontal poles (regions linked with learning). These preliminary outcomes highlight brain regions linked with physics reasoning and, critically, suggest that brain activity during physics reasoning is modifiable by thoughtfully designed curriculum and pedagogy.

The current study explores change in mental rotation skills throughout the pre-kindergarten year in a Hispanic population to better understand the development of early sex differences in mental rotation. Ninety-six Hispanic children (M = 4 years 8 months) completed a mental rotation task at the beginning and end of pre-kindergarten. Results suggest Hispanic boys and girls differed in gains on mental rotation ability, with boys improving significantly more than girls during pre-kindergarten on a mental rotation task. This study highlights the significance of studying mental rotation abilities in a Hispanic population of pre-kindergarten aged children and suggests the importance of examining sex differences in mental rotation over time, rather than at one time-point, to better understand when sex differences in spatial skills develop. We discuss various factors that potentially affect the growth of spatial skills including the role of early education, spatial experiences, and spatial language input.