Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pre-service primary teachers’ conceptions of creativity in mathematics

  • Published:
Educational Studies in Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Teachers in the UK and elsewhere are now expected to foster creativity in young children (NACCCE, 1999; Ofsted, 2003; DfES, 2003; DfES/DCMS, 2006). Creativity, however, is more often associated with the arts than with mathematics. The aim of the study was to explore and document pre-service (in the UK, pre-service teachers are referred to as ‘trainee’ teachers) primary teachers’ conceptions of creativity in mathematics teaching in the UK. A questionnaire probed their conceptions early in their course, and these were supplemented with data from semi-structured interviews. Analysis of the responses indicated that pre-service teachers’ conceptions were narrow, predominantly associated with the use of resources and technology and bound up with the idea of ‘teaching creatively’ rather than ‘teaching for creativity’. Conceptions became less narrow as pre-service teachers were preparing to enter schools as newly qualified, but they still had difficulty in identifying ways of encouraging and assessing creativity in the classroom. This difficulty suggests that conceptions of creativity need to be addressed and developed directly during pre-service education if teachers are to meet the expectations of government as set out in the above documents.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The full questionnaire is available from the lead author at d.s.bolden@durham.ac.uk.

  2. One trainee stated that there was no subject more creative than mathematics. He had a degree in mathematics.

  3. GCSE stands for General Certificate in Secondary Education and is the standard examination taken by pupils at approximately 16 years of age. GCE ‘O’ level stands for General Certificate in Education Ordinary level and was the GCSE’s predecessor.

References

  • Aiken, L. R. (1973). Ability and creativity in mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 43(4), 405–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Johnson, D., & Wiliam, W. (1997). Effective teachers of numeracy: Report of a study carried out for the Teacher Training Agency. London: King’s College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bassey, M. (2001). A solution to the problem of generalisation in educational research: Fuzzy prediction. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1), 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beghetto, R. A. (2007). Does creativity have a place in classroom discussions? Teachers’ response preferences. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beswick, K. (2004). The impact of teachers’ perceptions of student characteristics on the enactment of their beliefs. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, Vol. 2 (pp. 111–118). Bergen: Bergen University College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerstedt, A. (1976). Explorations in creativity. Lund: LiberLaromedel/Gleerup.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind—myths and mechanisms. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolden, D. S. (2006). Primary teachers’ epistemological beliefs about the teaching and learning of mathematics: The link with and implications for their classroom pedagogy. Unpublished doctoral thesis: University of Durham.

  • Carruthers, E., & Worthington, M. (2005). Making sense of mathematical graphics: The development of understanding abstract symbolism. European Childhood Research Journal, 13(1), 57–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craft, A. (2002). Creativity and early years education. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, A. J. (1992). More ways than one: Fostering creativity. New Jersey: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, A. J. (2001). Creativity in education and learning: A guide for teachers and educators. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, D., Howe, A., Rogers, M., & Fasciato, M. (2004). How do trainee primary teachers understand creativity? In E. Norman, D. Spendlove, P. Grover & A. Mitchell (Eds.), Creativity and innovation — DATA international research conference 2004. Wellesbourne: The Design and Technology Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • DfES (Department for Education and Skills). (2003). Excellence and enjoyment. London: DfES.

    Google Scholar 

  • DfES/DCMS (Department for Education and Skills and Department for Culture, Media and Sport). (2006). Nurturing creativity in young people. London: DfES/DCMS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diakidoy, I.-A. N., & Kanari, E. (1999). Student teachers’ beliefs about creativity. British Educational Research Journal, 25(2), 225–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernest, P. (1994). Constructivism: Which form provides the most adequate theory of mathematics teaching? Journal of Mathematics, 15(3), 327–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Euster, J. R. (1987). Fostering creativity and innovation. College Research Library, 48, 287–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J. (1996). The measurement of creativity. In M. A. Boden (Ed.), Dimensions of creativity (pp. 199–242). Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fryer, M., & Collings, J. A. (1991). Teachers’ views about creativity. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 207–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15–46). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, H. E., & Wallace, D. B. (2000). The case study method and evolving systems approach for understanding unique creative people at work. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 93–115). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harries, T., & Barmby, P. (2007). Representing and understanding multiplication. Research in Mathematics Education, 9, 33–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haylock, D. (1987). A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18(1), 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haylock, D. (1997). Recognising mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. International Journal on Mathematical Education, 29(3), 68–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., & Aqui, Y. (2004). Cognitive and motivational characteristics of adolescents gifted in mathematics: Comparisons among students with different types of giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(3), 191–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. (2005). Inside teaching: How classroom life undermines reform. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwang, N. A. (2001). Why Asians are less creative than Westerners. Singapore: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, O. H., Park, J. S., & Park, J. S. (2006). Cultivating divergent thinking in mathematics through an open-ended approach. Asia-Pacific Education Review, 7(1), 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerman, S. (1983). Problem solving or knowledge centred: The influence of philosophy on mathematics teaching. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 14(1), 59–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerman, S. (1990). Alternative perspectives on the nature of mathematics and their influence on the teaching of mathematics. British Educational Research Journal, 16(1), 53–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, E. L. (2006). Creativity: The essence of mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(2), 236–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography—describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1999). Fifty years of creativity research. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 449–460). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NACCCE (National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education). (1999). All our futures: Creativity, culture and education. London: DfEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, D. P. (2000). Teaching for understanding. London: Routledge-Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education). (2003). Expecting the unexpected: Developing creativity in primary and secondary schools. London: Ofsted.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education). (2006). Creative partnerships: Initiative and impact. London: Ofsted.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pehkonen, E. (1997). The state-of-art in mathematical creativity. International Journal on Mathematical Education, 29(3), 63–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potential, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). (2003, 2005). Creativity: Find it! Promote it!. London: QCA/DfEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • QCA/DfEE (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority/Department for Education and Employment). (1999). The national curriculum handbook for primary teachers in England. London: QCA/DfEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., & Johnson, D. J. (2002). Parents’ and teachers’ implicit theories of children’s creativity: A cross cultural perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 427–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Olafson, L. (2002). Teachers’ epistemological world views and educational practices. Issues in Education: Contributions from Educational Psychology, 8(2), 99–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • SEED (Scottish Executive Education Department) (2006). Promoting creativity in education: Overview of key national policy developments across the UK. http://www.hmie.gov.uk/documents/publications/hmiepcie.html.

  • Shepard, L. A. (1991). Psychometricians’ beliefs about learning. Educational Researcher, 20(6), 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. A. (2002). The role of assessment in a learning culture. In C. Desforges & R. Fox (Eds.), Teaching and learning: The essential readings (pp. 229–253). London: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness and creativity synonyms in mathematics? The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 27(1), 20–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B. (Ed.), (2008). Creativity, giftedness, and talent development in mathematics. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

  • Sriraman, B. (2009a). Mathematical paradoxes as pathways into beliefs and polymathy: An experimental inquiry. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41, 29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B. (2009b). The characteristics of mathematical creativity. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41, 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), (1988). The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Strauss, S. (1993). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge about children’s minds and learning: Implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 28, 279–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, A.-G. (2000). A review of the study of creativity in Singapore. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34(4), 259–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatarkiewicz, W. (1980). A history of six ideas: An essay in aesthetics. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. G. (1984). The relationship of teachers’ conceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instructional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 105–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tillema, H. H. (1997). Promoting conceptual change in learning to teach. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 25(1), 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treffinger, D. J., Young, G. C., Selby, E. C., & Shepardson, C. A. (2002). Assessing creativity. Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). A radical constructivist view of basic mathematical concepts. In P. Ernest (Ed.), Constructing mathematical knowledge: Epistemology and mathematical education (pp. 5–8). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. W. (1988). Problem solving and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 148–176). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthington, M., & Carruthers, E. (2003). Children’s mathematics: Making marks, making meaning. London: Paul Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the reviewers of an earlier draft of this paper for the useful comments and references they supplied.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Durham University, Leazes Road, Durham, DH1 1TA, UK

    David S. Bolden, Tony V. Harries & Douglas P. Newton

Authors
  1. David S. Bolden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tony V. Harries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Douglas P. Newton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David S. Bolden.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bolden, D.S., Harries, T.V. & Newton, D.P. Pre-service primary teachers’ conceptions of creativity in mathematics. Educ Stud Math 73, 143–157 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9207-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9207-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation