Abstract
Divergent and convergent thinking are needed to construct ideas that are both novel and useful or effective. Yet, how children apply divergent and convergent thinking to a mathematical creativity task (MCT) still remains largely unknown. The current study therefore aspired to illuminate the use of creative thinking in mathematics through divergent and convergent thinking. Twenty-eight upper elementary school children were observed while doing mathematical tasks and asked about their creative problem-solving process using think-aloud prompts. Two types of open mathematical tasks were used: a problem-posing task and a multiple-solution task. Using a coding scheme, the creativity of ideas was coded, as well as whether divergent thinking, convergent thinking, or a combination of both was used to conceive the idea. Qualitative content analysis suggested that children who used divergent thinking and complemented it with convergent thinking or a combination of divergent and convergent thinking were able to generate the most creative ideas. Generally, divergent and convergent thinking was a non-linear process: children first explored different ideas using divergent thinking, before switching to convergent thinking. Children with high mathematical achievement used more convergent thinking and combinations of divergent and convergent thinking than children with low mathematical achievement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Assmus, D., & Fritzlar, T. (2018). Mathematical giftedness and creativity in primary grades. In F. M. Singer (Ed.), Mathematical creativity and mathematical giftedness (pp. 55–81). Springer.
Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. (2016). The generality-specificity of creativity: Exploring the structure of creative potential with EPoC. Learning and Individual Differences, 52, 178–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.06.005
Bokhove, C., & Jones, K. (2018). Stimulating mathematical creativity through constraints in problem-solving. In N. Amado, S. Carreira, & K. Jones (Eds.), Broadening the scope of research on mathematical problem solving (pp. 301–319). Springer.
Brophy, D. R. (2001). Comparing the attributes, activities, and performance of divergent, convergent, and combination thinkers. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 439–455. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_20
Corazza, G. E. (2016). Potential originality and effectiveness: The dynamic definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 28, 258–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1195627
Cortes, R. A., Weinberger, A. B., Daker, R. J., & Green, A. E. (2019). Re-examining prominent measures of divergent and convergent creativity. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 90–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.09.017
Crookes, G. (1990). The utterance, and other basic units for second language discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics, 11, 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.183
Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13
De Vink, I. C., Willemsen, R. H., Lazonder, A. W., & Kroesbergen, E. H. (2021). Creativity in mathematics performance: The role of divergent and convergent thinking. British Journal of Educational Psychology, e12459, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12459
Glăveanu, V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The Five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 17, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029528
Guilford, J. (1973). The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Hadamard, J. (1954). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Dover Publications.
Hadamard, J. (1996). The mathematician’s mind: The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton University Press.
Hop, M., Scheltens, F., Janssen, J., & Engelen, R. (2016). Wetenschappelijke Verantwoording Rekenen-Basisbewerkingen voor groep 3 tot en met 8 van het primair onderwijs [Scientific justification of mathematics-basic calculations for Grade 1 to 6].. Cito.
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, K. B., & Treffinger, D. J. (2011). Creative approaches to problem solving: A framework for innovation and change. Sage.
Janssen, J., Scheltens, F., & Kraemer, J. (2007). Rekenen-Wiskunde. Handleiding [Mathematics test manual]. Cito.
Jeon, K. N., Moon, S. M., & French, B. (2011). Differential effects of divergent thinking, domain knowledge, and interest on creative performance in art and math. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.545750
Kattou, M., Kontoyianni, K., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2013). Connecting mathematical creativity to mathematics ability. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45, 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0467-1
Kozlowski, J. S., Chamberlin, S. A., & Mann, E. (2019). Factors that influence mathematical creativity. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 16, 505–540. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1471&context=tme
Kroesbergen, E. H., & Schoevers, E. M. (2017). Creativity as predictor of mathematical abilities in fourth graders in addition to number sense and working memory. Journal of Numerical Cognition, 3, 417–440. https://doi.org/10.5964/jnc.v3i2.63
Leikin, R. (2009). Exploring mathematical creativity using multiple solution tasks. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 129–145). Sense Publishers.
Leikin, R. (2013). Evaluating mathematical creativity: The interplay between multiplicity and insight. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 55, 385–400. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/25760616.pdf
Leikin, R., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.). (2017). Creativity and giftedness. Springer.
Levenson, E. (2013). Tasks that may occasion mathematical creativity: Teachers’ choices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16, 269–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-012-9229-9
Lubart, T. (Ed.). (2018). The creative process: Perspectives from multiple domains. Springer.
Mann, E. (2005). Mathematical creativity and school mathematics: Indicators of mathematical creativity in middle school students (Doctoral dissertation). http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/Dissertations/Eric%20Mann.pdf
Medeiros, K. E., Partlow, P. J., & Mumford, M. D. (2014). Not too much, not too little: The influence of constraints on creative problem solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 198–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036210
Moreau, C. P., & Engeset, M. G. (2016). The downstream consequences of problem-solving mindsets: How playing with LEGO influences creativity. Journal of Marketing Research, 53, 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0499
Noteboom, A., Aartsen, A., & Lit, S. (2017). Tussendoelen rekenen-wiskunde voor het primair onderwijs [Yearly mathematics goals for primary education]. SLO.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Sampling designs in qualitative research: Making the sampling process more public. Qualitative Report, 12, 238–254. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ800181.pdf
Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton University Press.
Reed, H. C., Stevenson, C., Broens-Paffen, M., Kirschner, P. A., & Jolles, J. (2015). Third graders’ verbal reports of multiplication strategy use: How valid are they? Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.010
Robinson, K. M. (2001). The validity of verbal reports in children’s subtraction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 211–222. https://oce.ovid.com/article/00004760-200103000-00017/HTML
Schindler, M., & Lilienthal, A. J. (2020). Students’ creative process in mathematics: Insights from eye-tracking-stimulated recall interview on students’ work on multiple solution tasks. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18, 1565–1586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10033-0
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1982). Some thoughts on problem solving research and mathematics education. In F. K. Lester & J. Garofalo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving: Issues in research (pp. 27–37). Franklin Institute Press.
Schoevers, E. M. (2019). Promoting creativity in elementary mathematics education (Doctoral dissertation). https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/386072/proefschriftevelineschoevers.pdf?sequence=1
Schoevers, E. M., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Kattou, M. (2018). Mathematical creativity: A combination of domain-general creative and domain-specific mathematics skills. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54, 242–252. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.361
Schoevers, E. M., Leseman, P. P., & Kroesbergen, E. H. (2019). Enriching mathematics education with visual arts: Effects on elementary school students’ ability in geometry and visual arts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18, 1613–1634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10018-z
Sheffield, L. (2009). Developing mathematical creativity—questions may be the answer. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 87–100). Sense.
Sriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness and creativity synonyms in mathematics? Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 20–36. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-389
Sternberg, R. (2007). Creativity as a habit. In Creativity: A handbook for teachers (pp. 3–25). https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812770868_0001
Stolte, M., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. (2019). Inhibition, friend or foe? Cognitive inhibition as a moderator between mathematical ability and mathematical creativity in primary school students. Personality and Individual Differences, 142, 196–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.08.024
Tabach, M., & Levenson, E. (2018). Solving a task with infinitely many solutions: Convergent and divergent thinking in mathematical creativity. In N. Amado, S. Carreira, & K. Jones (Eds.), Broadening the scope of research on mathematical problem solving (pp. 219–242). Springer.
Van Luit, J. E. H., Bloemert, J., Glanzinga, E. G., & Mönch, M. E. (2014). Protocol dyscalculie: diagnostiek voor gedragsdeskundigen: protocol DDG. Graviant Educatieve Uitgaven.
Van Zanten, M., & Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2018). Opportunity to learn problem solving in Dutch elementary school mathematics textbooks. ZDM – International Journal on Mathematics Education, 50, 827–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0973-x
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. Watts & Co.
Willemsen, R. H., De Vink, I. C., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Lazonder, A. W. (2021). The relation of creativity with science achievement. Unpublished manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Vink, I.C., Lazonder, A.W., Willemsen, R.H., Schoevers, E.M., Kroesbergen, E.H. (2022). The Creative Mathematical Thinking Process. In: Chamberlin, S.A., Liljedahl, P., Savić, M. (eds) Mathematical Creativity . Research in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14474-5_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14474-5_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-14473-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-14474-5
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)