Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategy creativity and outcome creativity when solving open tasks: focusing on problem posing through investigations

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
ZDM – Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the well-known approaches to creativity differentiates between creative person, process, product, and press. In the study presented in this paper we focus on creative process and product associated with Problem Posing through Investigation (PPI) by experts in mathematical problem solving. We link the creative process to creativity of PPI strategies and the creative product to PPI outcomes (i.e., strategy creativity and outcome creativity). Furthermore, we draw a connection between the openness of tasks and their power for the evaluation of strategy creativity and outcome creativity, demonstrate the aptness of PPI tasks for the evaluation of both types of creativity, and examine the connections between them. The model for the evaluation of creativity that we used in this study, was initially designed and validated using analysis of problem-solving strategies when solving multiple solution tasks. We previously extended the model to evaluation of PPI outcomes, and we here demonstrate its implementation to evaluation of creativity of PPI strategies. To examine connections between creativity of PPI strategies and creativity of PPI outcomes, we focused on PPI by eight experts in mathematical problem solving who were members or candidates of the Israeli IMO team. We present empirical evidence for the distinctions between strategy creativity and outcome creativity, and for the connections between them. We analyzed strategy creativity as a unique characteristic of problem-solving experts. We found that higher strategy creativity does not necessarily lead to higher outcome creativity, and that a high level of strategy originality correlates with outcome flexibility. We conclude that creative product and creative process are two distinct characteristics of cognitive processing linked to creativity-directed problem solving.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amado, N., Carreira, S., & Jones, K. (Eds.). (2018). Broadening the scope of research on mathematical problem solving: A focus on technology, creativity and affect. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2015). Promise and pitfalls in differentiating amongst the C’s of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 27, 240–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besemer, S. P., & O’Quin, K. (1987). Creative product analysis: Testing a model by developing judging instruments. In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research (pp. 341–357). Bearly Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 325–339). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving (L. S. Lees, Trans.). Psychological Monographs, 58(5), 1–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgrably, H., & Leikin, R. (2021). Creativity as a function of problem-solving expertise: Posing new problems through investigations. ZDM—Mathematics Education 53(4), 891–904.

  • Ervynck, G. (1991). Mathematical creativity. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 42–53). Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gontijo, C. H. (2018). Mathematics education and creativity: A point of view from the systems perspective on creativity. In N. Amado, S. Carreira, & K. Jones (Eds.), Broadening the scope of research on mathematical problem solving (pp. 375–386). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, P. E., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (2012). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadamard, J. (1945). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleiman, P. (2005). Beyond the tingle factor: Creativity and assessment in higher education. Paper presented at the ESRC Creativity Seminar, University of Strathclyde. Accessed 5 Jan 2021. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.576.6056&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

  • Klein, S., & Leikin, R. (2020). Opening mathematical problems for posing open mathematical tasks: What do teachers do and feel? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105(3), 349–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koichu, B., & Andžaāns, A. (2009). Mathematical creativity and giftedness in out-of-school activities. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and education of gifted students (pp. 285–308). Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R., & Elgrably, H. (2015). Creativity and expertise—The chicken or the egg? Discovering properties of geometry figures in DGE. In The Proceedings of the Eighth Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, CERME-9 (pp. 1024–1031).

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R. (2014). Challenging mathematics with multiple solution tasks and mathematical investigations in geometry. In Y. Li, E. A. Silver, & S. Li (Eds.), Transforming mathematics instruction: Multiple approaches and practices (pp. 59–80). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R. (2018). Openness and constraints associated with creativity-directed activities in mathematics for all students. In N. Amado, S. Carreira, & K. Jones (Eds.), Broadening the scope of research on mathematical problem solving: A focus on technology, creativity and affect (pp. 387–397). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R., & Elgrably, H. (2020). Problem posing through investigations for the development and evaluation of proof skills and creativity skills of prospective high school mathematics teachers. International Journal of Educational ResEarch. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R., & Grossman, D. (2013). Teachers modify geometry problems: From proof to investigation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(3), 515–531.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R., Leikin, M., Paz-Baruch, N., Waisman, I., & Lev, M. (2017). On the four types of characteristics of super mathematically gifted students. High Ability Studies, 28(1), 107–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.). (2016). Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 1–3). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levav-Waynberg, A., & Leikin, R. (2012). The role of multiple solution tasks in developing knowledge and creativity in geometry. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31, 73–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liljedahl, P., & Sriraman, B. (2006). Musings on mathematical creativity. For the Learning of Mathematics, 26, 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lytton, H. (1971). Creativity and education. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nohda, N. (1995). Teaching and evaluating using “open-ended problem” in classroom. ZDM—the International Journal on Mathematics Education, 27(2), 57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2019). Framework for the assessment of creative thinking in PISA 2021. Accessed Nov 2020. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA-2021-creative-thinking-framework.pdf.

  • Pehkonen, E. (1995). Introduction: Use of open-ended problems. ZDM—the International Journal on Mathematics Education, 27(2), 55–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, J.W., & Hilton, M.L. (2012). Educating for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. NRC, the National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13398.

  • 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(2), 83–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheffield, L. J. (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 Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, E. A. (1995). The nature and use of open problems in mathematics education: Mathematical and pedagogical perspectives. ZDM—the International Journal on Mathematics Education, 27, 67–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. ZDM—the International Journal on Mathematics Education, 3, 75–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, E. A., Mamona-Downs, J., Leung, S. S., & Kenney, P. A. (1996). Posing mathematical problems: an exploratory study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 293–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, F. M., & Voica, C. (2015). Is problem posing a tool for identifying and developing mathematical creativity. In N. F. Ellerton & J. Cai (Eds.), Singer FM (pp. 141–174). Mathematical problem posing. from research to effective practice. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness & creativity synonyms in mathematics? An analysis of constructs within the professional and school realms. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 20–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Star, J. R., & Newton, K. J. (2009). The nature and development of experts’ strategy flexibility for solving equations. ZDM—the International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(5), 557–567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (2000). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 93–115). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoyanova, E., & Ellerton, N. F. (1996). A framework for research into students’ problem posing in school mathematics. In P. C. Clarkson (Ed.), Technology in mathematics education (pp. 518–525). MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Scholastic Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usiskin, Z. (2000). The development into the mathematically talented. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 11, 152–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L.S. (1930/1982). Imagination and its development in childhood. In V. V. Davydov (Ed.), Vol. 2: General problems of psychology. The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (pp. 438–454). Pedagogika (in Russian).

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1930/1984). Imagination and creativity of the adolescent. In D. B. Elkonin (Ed.), Vol. 4: Child psychology. The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (pp. 199–219). Pedagogika (in Russian).

  • Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, S. M., et al. (2018). Creative and critical thinking: Independent or overlapping components? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 114–122.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RANGE Center, Department of Mathematics Education, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Roza Leikin & Haim Elgrably

Authors
  1. Roza Leikin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haim Elgrably
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roza Leikin.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leikin, R., Elgrably, H. Strategy creativity and outcome creativity when solving open tasks: focusing on problem posing through investigations. ZDM Mathematics Education 54, 35–49 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01319-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01319-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation