Advertisement

What Have We Learned About Giftedness and Creativity? An Overview of a Five Years Journey

  • Demetra Pitta-PantaziEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to offer an overview of a series of studies conducted at the University of Cyprus, regarding the definition and identification of mathematically gifted students, the relation between mathematical creativity, practical and analytical abilities, as well as the relation between giftedness, creativity and other cognitive factors such as, intelligence and cognitive styles. During our research in the field of giftedness and creativity we developed material for nurturing primary school mathematically gifted students and also explored the possibilities that technology may offer in the development of mathematical creativity. Although our research is still evolving, this chapter offers a glimpse of some of our most important findings.

Keywords

Mathematical giftedness Mathematical creativity Identification of mathematical giftedness Cognitive factors Intelligence Cognitive styles 

References

  1. Al-Shabatat, A. (2013). A review of the contemporary concepts of giftedness and talent. The International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 2(12). Retrieved from search.shamaa.org
  2. Anderson, K. L., Casey, M. B., Thompson, W. L., Burrage, M. S., Pezaris, E., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2008). Performance on middle school geometry problems with geometry clues matched to three different cognitive styles. Mind, Brain, and Education, 2(4), 188–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bahar, A. K., & Maker, C. J. (2011). Exploring the relationship between mathematical creativity and mathematical achievement. Asia-Pacific Journal of Gifted and Talented Education, 3(1), 33–48.Google Scholar
  4. Baran, G., Erdogan, S., & Cakmak, A. (2011). A study on the relationship between six-year-old children’s creativity and mathematical ability. International Education Studies, 4(1), 105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Betz, J. A. (1996). Computer games: Increase learning in an interactive multidisciplinary environment. Journal of Technology Systems, 24(2), 195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Birch, J. W. (1984). Is any identification procedure necessary? Gifted Child Quarterly, 28(4), 157–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blazhenkova, O., & Kozhevnikov, M. (2009). The new object-spatial-verbal cognitive style model: Theory and measurement. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(5), 638–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chamberlin, S. A., & Mann E. L. (2014). A new model of creativity in mathematical problem solving. In G. Howell, L. Sheffield, & R. Leikin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th conference of MCG International Group for Mathematical Creativity and Giftedness (pp. 35–40). University of Denver: International Group for Mathematical Creativity and Giftedness.Google Scholar
  9. Cleanthous, E., Pitta-Pantazi, D., Christou, C., Kontoyianni, K., & Kattou, M. (2010). What are the differences between high IQ/low creativity students and low IQ/high creativity students in mathematics? In M. Avotina, D. Bonka, H. Meissner, L. Sheffield, & E. Velikova (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Creativity in Mathematics Education and the Education of Gifted Students (pp. 52–55). Riga: International Group for Mathematical Creativity and Giftedness (MCG).Google Scholar
  10. Clements, D. H. (1995). Teaching creativity with computers. Educational Psychology Review, 7(2), 141–161. doi: 10.1007/BF02212491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coleman, M. R. (2003). The identification of students who are gifted. (ERIC Digest #E644) The ERIC clearinghouse on disabilities and gifted education. Retrieved, from http://ericec.org/digests/e644.html
  12. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2000). New conceptions and research approach to creativity. Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monk, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 81–94). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  14. Demetriou, A., Christou, C., Spanoudis, G., & Platsidou, M. (2002). The development of mental processing: Efficiency, working memory and thinking. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 67(1, Serial No. 268). Retrieved from http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref = 0037-976x
  15. Dodge, B. (1991). Computers and creativity: Tools, tasks, and possibilities. Communicator: The Journal of the California Association for the Gifted, 21(1), 5–8.Google Scholar
  16. Dunham, P., & Dick, T. (1994). Research on graphing calculators. Mathematics Teacher, 87, 440–445. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/eresources/journal_home.asp?journal_id = 2
  17. Ervynck, G. (1991). Mathematical creativity. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 42–53). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  18. Gagné, F. (1991). Toward a differentiated model of giftedness and talent. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 65–80). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  19. Gagné, F. (2003). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  20. Gagné, F. (2005). From gifts to talents: The DMGT as a developmental model. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 98–119). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gardner, H. (1991). Multiple intelligences. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  23. Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. J. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: Explorations with gifted students. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  24. Gil, E., Ben-Zvi, D., & Apel, N. (2007). What is hidden beyond the data? Helping young students to reason and argue about some wider universe. In D. Pratt & J. Ainley (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth international research forum on statistical reasoning, thinking and literacy: Reasoning about statistical inference: Innovative ways of connecting chance and data (pp. 1–26). UK: University of Warwick. Retrieved from http://srtl.stat.auckland.ac.nz/srtl5/presentations
  25. Guilford, J. P. (1959). Traits of creativity. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation (pp. 142–161). (Reprinted in P. E. Vernon, Ed., 1970, Creativity, pp. 167–188, Penguin Books).Google Scholar
  26. Haylock, D. (1987). A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in school children. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18(1), 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haylock, D. (1997). Recognizing mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 29(3), 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoeflinger, M. (1998). Developing mathematically promising students. Roeper Review, 20(4), 244–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hollingworth, L. S. (1942). Children above 180 IQ Stanford-Binet: Origin and development. Yonkers-on-Hudson: World Book.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Iowa Department of Education. (1989). A guide to developing higher order thinking across the curriculum. Des Moines: Department of Education. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED 306 550).Google Scholar
  31. Kattou, M., Kontoyianni, K., Pitta-Pantazi, D., Christou, C. (2011). Does mathematical creativity differentiate mathematical ability? In M. Pytlak, T. Rowland, & E. Swoboda (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh conference of the European Research in Mathematics Education (Working group 7: Mathematical potential, creativity and talent) (pp. 1056–1065). Rzeszów: CERME.Google Scholar
  32. Kattou, M., Kontoyianni, K., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2013). Connecting mathematical creativity to mathematical ability. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 167–181. doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0467-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kirton, M. J. (Ed.). (1989). Adaptors and innovators: Styles of creativity and problem solving. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Klavir, R., & Gorodetsky, M. (2009). On excellence and creativity: A study of gifted and expert students. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 221–242). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  35. Kontoyianni, K., Kattou, M., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2011). Entering the world of mathematically gifted. Paper presented at the 19th biennial world conference of the WCGTC. Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
  36. Kontoyianni, K., Kattou, M., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2013). Integrating mathematical abilities and creativity in the assessment of mathematical giftedness. Psychological Assessment and Test Modeling, 55(3), 289–315.Google Scholar
  37. Kozhevnikov, M. (2007). Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychological Bulletin, 133(3), 464–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kozhevnikov, M., Kosslyn, S., & Shephard, J. (2005). Spatial versus object visualizers: A new characterization of visual cognitive style. Memory and Cognition, 33(4), 710–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kunzdorf, R. (1982). Mental images, appreciation of grammatical patterns, and creativity. Journal of Mental Imagery, 6, 183–202.Google Scholar
  41. Leikin, R. (2007). Habits of mind associated with advanced mathematical thinking and solution spaces of mathematical tasks. In D. Pitta-Pantazi & G. Philippou (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education – CERME-5 (pp. 2330–2339). http://ermeweb.free.fr/Cerme5.pdf
  42. Leikin, R. (2008). Teaching mathematics with and for creativity: An intercultural perspective. In P. Ernest, B. Greer, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Critical issues in mathematics education (pp. 39–43). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing Inc. & The Montana Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  43. Leikin, R., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2013). Creativity and mathematics education: Overview on the state-of-art. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 159–166. doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0459-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lev-Zamir, H., & Leikin, R. (2011). Creative mathematics teaching in the eye of the beholder: Focusing on teachers’ conceptions. Research in Mathematics Education, 13, 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lohman, D. F. (2009). Identifying academically talented students: Some general principles, two specific procedures. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 971–998). Amsterdam: Springer Science and Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Loveless, A. (2003). Creating spaces in the primary curriculum: ICT in creative subjects. The Curriculum Journal, 14(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mann, E. (2005). Mathematical creativity and school mathematics: Indicators of mathematical creativity in middle school students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/Dissertations/Eric%20Mann.pdf
  48. Mann, E. (2006). Creativity: The essence of mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(2), 236–260. doi: 10.4219/jeg-2006-264.Google Scholar
  49. Martinsen, Ø., & Kaufmann, G. (1999). Cognitive style and creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 273–282). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  50. Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1992). How and how much can cooperative logo environments enhance creativity and social relationships? Learning and Instruction, 2(3), 259–274. doi: 10.1016/0959-4752(92)90012-B.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Milgram, R., & Hong, E. (2009). Talent loss in mathematics: Causes and solutions. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 149–163). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  52. Nakakoji, K., Yamamoto, Y., & Ohira, M. (1999). A framework that supports collective creativity in design using visual images. In E. Edmonds & L. Candy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 166–173). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  53. National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE). (1999). All our futures: Creativity, culture and education. London: DfES.Google Scholar
  54. Pardamean, B., & Evelin, (2014). Enhancement of creativity through logo programming. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 11(4), 528–533.Google Scholar
  55. Pehkonen, E. (1997). The state-of-art in mathematical creativity. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 29(3), 63–67. doi: 10.1007/s11858-997-0001-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pelczer, I., & Rodríguez, F. G. (2011). Creativity assessment in school settings through problem posing tasks. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 8(1&2), 383–398. Retrieved from http://www.math.umt.edu/tmme/
  57. Piirto, J. (1998). Themes in the lives of successful contemporary U.S. women creative writers. Roeper Review, 21, 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2010). Spatial versus object visualisation: The case of mathematical understanding in three-dimensional arrays of cubes and nets. International Journal of Educational Research, 49(2–3), 102–114. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2010.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pitta-Pantazi, D., Christou, C., & Sophocleous, P. (2010). Analytical, practical and creative abilities: The case of nets and three-dimensional arrays of cubes. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9(2), 57–73.Google Scholar
  60. Pitta-Pantazi, D., Christou, C., Kontoyianni, K., & Kattou, M. (2011). A model of mathematical giftedness: Integrating natural, creative and mathematical abilities. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 11(1), 39–54. doi: 10.1080/14926156.2011.548900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pitta-Pantazi, D., Christou, C., Kattou, M., & Kontoyianni, K. (2012). Identifying mathematically gifted students. In R. Leikin, B. Koichu, & A. Berman (Eds.), Proceedings of the international workshop of Israel Science Foundation: Exploring and advancing mathematical abilities in secondary school achievers (pp. 83–90). Haifa: University of Haifa.Google Scholar
  62. Pitta-Pantazi, D., Sophocleous, P., & Christou, C. (2013). Spatial visualizers, object visualizers and verbalizers: Their mathematical creative abilities. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 199–213. doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0475-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Preckel, F., Holling, H., & Wiese, M. (2006). Relationship of intelligence and creativity in gifted and non-gifted students: An investigation of threshold theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(1), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180–184. Retrieved from http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/index.htm
  65. Riding, R. J. (1997). On the nature of cognitive style. Educational Psychology, 17, 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ripple, R. E., & May, F. B. (1962). Caution in comparing creativity and IQ. Psychological Reports, 10, 229–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sak, U., & Maker, C. J. (2006). Developmental variations in children’s creative mathematical thinking as a function of schooling, age, and knowledge. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2001). Assessment (8th ed.). Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  69. Shavinina, L. V. (2009). A new approach to the identification of intellectually gifted individuals. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 1017–1031). Amsterdam: Springer Science and Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 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. Rotterdam: Sence Publishers.Google Scholar
  71. Shriki, A. (2010). Working like real mathematicians: Developing prospective teachers’ awareness of mathematical creativity through generating new concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73(2), 159–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity though instruction rich mathematical problem solving and problem posing. International Reviews on Mathematical Education, 29(3), 75–80. doi: 10.1007/s11858-997-0003-x.Google Scholar
  73. Silverman, L. K. (1991). Leta Hollingworth’s educational principles for the gifted. Satorian (Nebraska Association for Gifted Children Journal), 6(4), 11–17.Google Scholar
  74. Sinclair, N., de Freitas, E., & Ferrara, F. (2013). Virtual encounters: The murky and furtive world of mathematical inventiveness. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 239–252. doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0465-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sophocleous, P., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2011). Creativity in three-dimensional geometry: How an interactive 3D-geometry software environment enhance it? In M. Pytlak, T. Rowland, & E. Swoboda (Eds.), Proceedings of seventh conference of the European Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1143–1153). Rzeshów, Poland: University of Rzeszów.Google Scholar
  76. Sriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness and 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
  77. Sriraman, B. (2008). Are mathematical giftedness and mathematical creativity synonyms? A theoretical analysis of constructs. In B. Sriraman (Ed.), Creativity, giftedness, and talent development in mathematics (pp. 85–112). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, INC.Google Scholar
  78. Sriraman, B. (2009). The characteristics of mathematical creativity. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41, 13–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Srivastava, S., & Thomas, A. (1991). Creativity of pre-school childreneffect of sex, age, birth order and intelligence. Journal of Psychological Researches, 36(2), 92–98.Google Scholar
  80. Stanley, J. C. (1990). Leta Hollingworth’s contributions to above-level testing of the gifted. Roeper Review, 12(3), 166–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Successful intelligence. New York: Plume.Google Scholar
  83. Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Sternberg, R. J. (2003). A broad view of intelligence: The theory of successful intelligence. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 55(3), 139–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Sternberg, R. J. (2005). The theory of successful intelligence. Revista Interamericana de Psicologia/Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 39(2), 189–202.Google Scholar
  86. Sternberg, R. (2012). The assessment of creativity: An investment-based approach. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 3–12. doi:10.1080/10400419.2012.652925
  87. Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  89. Sternberg, R. J., & O’Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251–272). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2004). Successful intelligence in the classroom. Theory Into Practice, 43(4), 274–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Sternberg, R. J., Ferrari, M., Clinkenbeard, P., & Grigorenko, E. L. (1996). Identification, instruction, and assessment of gifted children: A construct validation of a triarchic model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., Ferrari, M., & Clinkenbeard, P. (1999). A triarchic analysis of an aptitude-treatment interaction. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 15, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Sternberg, R. J., Castejon, J. L., Prieto, M. D., Hautamaki, J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Sternberg Triarchic Ability Test (multiple-choice items) in three international samples: An empirical test of the triarchic theory of intelligence. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Sternberg, R. J., Lipka, J., Newman, T., Wildfeuer, S., & Grigorenko, L. (2006). Triarchically-based instruction and assessment of sixth-grade mathematics in a Yup’ik cultural setting in Alaska. Gifted and Talented International, 21(2), 9–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Subhi, T. (1999). The impact of logo on gifted children’s achievement and creativity. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(2), 98–108. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2729.1999.152082.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Tannenbaum, A. J. (2003). Nature and nurture of giftedness. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 45–59). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  98. Terman, L. M. (1916). The measurement of intelligence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Terman, L. (1924). The physical and mental traits of gifted children. In G. M. Whipple (Ed.), Report of the society’s committee on the education of gifted children (pp. 157–167). The twenty third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Bloomington: Public School Publishing.Google Scholar
  100. Torrance, E. P. (1974). The Torrance tests of creative thinking-norms-technical manual research edition-verbal tests, forms A and B- figural tests, forms A and B. Princeton: Personnel Press.Google Scholar
  101. Torrance, E. P. (1994). Creativity: Just wanting to know. Pretoria: Benedic Books.Google Scholar
  102. Torrance, E. P. (1995). The ‘beyonders’ in why fly? A philosophy of creativity. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
  103. Usiskin, Z. (2000). The development into the mathematically talented. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 11, 152–162.Google Scholar
  104. Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2000). Theory and research on curriculum development for the gifted. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monk, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 345–366). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  105. Winner, E. (1997). Exceptionally high intelligence and schooling. American Psychologist, 52(10), 1070–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Woodman, R. W., & Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1990). An interactionist model of creative behavior. Journal of Creative Behavior, 24(4), 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Yang, Y. C., & Chin, W. K. (1996). Motivational analysis on the effects of type of instructional control on learning from computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 25(1), 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Yushau, B., Mji, A., & Wessels, D. C. J. (2005). The role of technology in fostering creativity in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Pythagoras, 62, 12–22.Google Scholar
  109. Ziegler, A. (2009). Research on giftedness in the 21st century. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 1509–1524). Amsterdam: Springer Science and Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations