Advertisement

Mathematical Creativity: Product, Person, Process and Press

  • Demetra Pitta-PantaziEmail author
  • Maria Kattou
  • Constantinos Christou
Chapter
Part of the ICME-13 Monographs book series (ICME13Mo)

Abstract

In this chapter we provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in mathematical creativity. To do so, we will use as a road map the 4Ps theory proposed by Rhodes in which four strands are used to capture the definition of creativity. In particular, (1) product: the communication of a unique, novel and useful idea or concept; (2) person: cognitive abilities, personality traits and biographical experiences; (3) process: the methodology that produces a creative product; and (4) press: the environment where creative ideas are produced. In this chapter we will first discuss the four strands in the framework of general creativity and then transfer and adapt these considerations to the field of mathematics education. In an attempt to define and describe mathematical creativity we will present several examples drawn from various research studies, and highlight some of the main findings, hoping to offer a springboard for further developments. We suggest that although these strands can be studied in isolation, it is only when their overlap and interconnections are considered that we may get a clearer picture of the complex concept of creativity.

Keywords

Mathematical creativity Creative product Creative person Creative process Creative press 

References

  1. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2010). The Australian Curriculum: Mathematics. Australia. http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/generalcapabilities/critical-and-creative-thinking/introduction/introduction. Accessed 26 March 2017.
  2. Babij, B. J. (2001). Through the looking glass: Creativity and leadership juxtaposed (Unpublished Master’s thesis). State University at Buffalo, USA.Google Scholar
  3. Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 75–105.  https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01289.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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
  5. Basadur, M. S., & Hausdorf, P. A. (1996). Measuring divergent thinking attitudes related to creative problem solving and innovation management. Creativity Research Journal, 9(1), 21–32.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj0901_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Batey, M. (2012). The measurement of creativity: From definitional consensus to the introduction of a new heuristic framework. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 55–65.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.649181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Intellectual estuaries: Connecting learning and creativity in programs of advanced academics. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20(2), 296–324.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X0902000205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boden, M. (2001). Creativity and knowledge. In A. Craft, B. Jeffrey, & M. Leibling (Eds.), Creativity in education (pp. 95–102). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  9. Chamberlin, S. A., & Moon, S. M. (2005). Model-eliciting activities as tool to develop and identify creativity gifted mathematicians. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(1), 37–47.  https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Charles, R. E., & Runco, M. A. (2001). Developmental trends in the evaluative and divergent thinking of children. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3&4), 417–437.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coxbill, E., Chamberlin, S. A., & Weatherford, J. (2013). Using Model-Eliciting Activities as a tool to identify creatively gifted elementary mathematics students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36(2), 176–197.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353213480433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391–404.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cropley, A. J., & Urban, K. K. (2000). Programs and strategies for nurturing creativity. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  14. Cropley, D. H., Westweel, M., & Gabriel, F. (2017). Psychological and neuroscientific perspectives on mathematical creativity and giftedness. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 183–200). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–338). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Davis, G. A. (2004). Creativity is forever (5th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  17. Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  18. Dellas, M., & Gaier, E. L. (1970). Identification of creativity: The individual. Psychological Bulletin, 73(1), 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Evans, E. W. (1964). Measuring the ability of students to respond in creative mathematical situations at the late elementary and early junior high school level. Dissertation Abstracts, 25(12), 7107.Google Scholar
  20. Freiman, V. (2009). Mathematical enrichment: Problem-of-the-week model. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 367–382). Rotterdam: Sense Publishing.Google Scholar
  21. Freiman, V., & Sriraman, B. (2011). Interdisciplinary networks for better education in mathematics, science and arts. In B. Siraman & V. Freiman (Eds.), Interdisciplinarity for the Twenty-First Century: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Mathematics and Its Connections to Arts and Sciences (pp. xi–xvi). USA: Information Age Publishing Inc. & The Montana Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  22. Ganihar, N. N., & Wajiha, A. H. (2009). Factor affecting academic achievement of IX standard students in mathematics. Edutracks, 8(7), 25–33.Google Scholar
  23. Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. J. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: Explorations with gifted students. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Gnedenko, B. V. (1991). Introduction in specialization: Mathematics (Введение в специальность: математика), Nauka, p. 235. (In Russian).Google Scholar
  25. Goldin, G. A. (2002). Affect, meta-affect, and mathematical belief structures. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 59–72). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Goldin, G. A. (2009). The affective domain and students’ mathematical inventiveness. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 181–194). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Guilford, J. P. (1959). Traits of creativity. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation (pp. 142–161). New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  28. Guilfrod, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  29. Hadamard, J. (1945). Essay on the psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Haylock, D. (1997). Recognizing mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 27(2), 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hersh, R., & John-Steiner, V. (2017). The origin of insight in mathematics. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 135–146). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hershkovitz, S., Peled, I., & Littler, G. (2009). Mathematical creativity and giftedness in elementary school: Task and teacher promoting creativity for all. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 255–269). Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2010). Creative thinking ability: Domain generality and specificity. Creativity Research Journal, 22(3), 272–287.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.503535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Idris, N., & Nor, N. M. (2010). Mathematical creativity: Usage of technology. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences. ISI/SCOPUS Cited Publication.Google Scholar
  35. Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, S. G., & Treffinger, D. J. (2011). Creative approaches to problem solving (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  36. Isaksen, S. G., Murdock, M. C., Firestien, R. L., & Treffinger, D. J. (1993). Understanding and recognizing creativity: The emergence of a discipline. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  37. Jang, S. J. (2006). Research on the effects of team teaching upon two secondary school teachers. Educational Research, 48(2), 177–194.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880600732272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jensen, L. R. (1973). The relationships among mathematical creativity, numerical aptitude and mathematical achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34(05), 2168.Google Scholar
  39. Johnson, H., & Carruthers, L. (2006). Supporting creative and reflective processes. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(10), 998–1030.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Kattou, M., Christou, C., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2012). Technology as a means to differentiate prospective teachers’ mathematical creativity. In L. Gómez Chova, I. Candel Torres, A. López Martínez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (pp. 1974–1984). Barcelona, Spain: International Association of Technology, Education and Development.Google Scholar
  42. Kattou, M., Christou, C., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2015). Mathematical creativity or general creativity? In K. Krainer & N. Vondrová (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1016–1023). Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University in Prague.Google Scholar
  43. Kattou, M., Christou, C., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2016). Characteristics of the Creative Person in Mathematics. In G. B. Moneta & J. Rogaten (Eds.), Psychology of creativity: Cognitive, emotional, and social processes (pp. 99–124). Hauppauge, New York: Nova Science Pub Inc.Google Scholar
  44. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0467-1.
  45. Kaufman, J. C., Cole, J. C., & Baer, J. (2009). The construct of creativity: A structural model for self-reported creativity ratings. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43(2), 119–134.  https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01310.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kaufman, J. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2011). Intelligence and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg & S. B. Kaufman (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 771–783). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kaufman, J. C., Plucker, J. A., & Russell, C. M. (2012). Identifying and assessing creativity as a component of giftedness. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(1), 60–73.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282911428196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kilgour, M. (2006). Improving the creative process: Analysis of the effects of divergent thinking techniques and domain specific knowledge on creativity. International Journal of Business and Society, 7(2), 79–102.Google Scholar
  49. Kim, K. H. (2008). Meta-analyses of the relationship of creative achievement to both IQ and divergent thinking test scores. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 106–130.  https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01290.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kim, K. H. (2011). The creativity crisis: The decrease in creative thinking scores on the Torrance tests of creative thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 23(4), 285–295.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.627805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kim, K. H., & Pierce, R. A. (2013). Torrance’s innovator meter and the decline of creativity in America. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of innovation education (pp. 153–167). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. 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
  53. Klavir, R., & Gorodetsky, M. (2011). Features of creativity as expressed in the construction of new analogical problems by intellectually gifted students. Creative Education (CE), 2(3), 164–173.  https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2011.23023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kleiman, P. (2005). Beyond the tingle factor: Creativity and assessment in higher education. Paper presented at the ESRC Creativity Seminar. University of Strathclyde, 7th October. Retrieved from the Open Creativity Centre. Accessed 26 March 2017.Google Scholar
  55. Koichu, B., & Orey, D. (2010). Creativity or ignorance: Inquiry in calculation strategies of mathematically disadvantaged (immigrant) high school students. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9(2), 75–92.Google Scholar
  56. Kontorovich, I., Koichu, B., Leikin, R., & Berman, A. (2011). Indicators of creativity in mathematical problem posing: How indicative are they? In M. Avotiņa, D. Bonka, H. Meissner, L. Ramāna, L. Sheffield, & E. Velikova (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference Creativity in Mathematics Education and the Education of Gifted Students (pp. 120–125). Latvia: Latvia University.Google Scholar
  57. Kwon, O. N., Park, J. S., & Park, J. H. (2006). Cultivating divergent thinking in mathematics through an open-ended approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 7(1), 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 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). USA: Information Age Publishing Inc. & The Montana Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  59. Leikin, R. (2009a). Bridging research and theory in mathematics education with research and theory in creativity and giftedness. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 383–409). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  60. Leikin, R. (2009b). 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). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  61. 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). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  62. Leikin, R., & Kloss, Y. (2011). Mathematical creativity of 8th and 10th grade students. In M. Pytlak, E. Swoboda, & T. Rowland (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1084–1094). Rzeszów, Poland: University of Rzeszów.Google Scholar
  63. Leikin, R., & Lev, M. (2007). Multiple solution tasks as a magnifying glass for observation of mathematical creativity. In J. H. Woo, H. C. Lew, K. S. Park, & D. Y. Seo (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 161–168). Korea: The Korea Society of Educational Studies in Mathematics.Google Scholar
  64. Leikin, R., & Sriraman, B. (2017). Introduction to interdisciplinary perspectives to creativity and giftedness. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 57–76). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Leikin, R., Subotnik, R., Pitta-Pantazi, D., Singer, F. M., & Pelczer, I. (2013). Teachers’ views on creativity in mathematics education: An international survey. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 309–324.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0472-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lev, M., & Leikin, R. (2017). The interplay between excellence in school mathematics and general giftedness: Focusing on mathematical creativity. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 225–238). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Levav-waynberg, A., & Lekin, R. (2012). The role of multiple solution tasks in developing knowledge and creativity in geometry. The Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 31(1), 73–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Liljedhal, P. (2004). Repeating pattern or number pattern: The distinction is blurred. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 26(3), 24–42.Google Scholar
  69. Liljedhal, P. (2013). Illumination: An affective experience? ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 253–265.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0473-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Livne, N. L., & Milgram, R. M. (2006). Academic versus creative abilities in mathematics: Two components of the same construct? Creativity Research Journal, 18(2), 199–212.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1802_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Loveless, A., Burton, J., & Turvey, K. (2006). Developing conceptual frameworks for creativity, ICT and teacher education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 3–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2005.07.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Lubart, T. I. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3–4), 295–308.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_07.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Ma, C. E., & Rapee, R. M. (2014). Differences in mathematical performance, creativity potential, and need for cognitive closure between Chinese and Australian students. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(4). doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.67.
  74. MacDonald, C. J., Stodel, E. J., Farres, L. G., Breithaupt, K., & Gabriel, M. A. (2001). The demand-driven learning model: A framework for web-based learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 4(1), 9–30.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(01)00045-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. (2007). An exciting-but not necessarily comprehensive-tour of the globe: A review of the international handbook of creativity. Psychology of Aestetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 49–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Mann, E. (2005). Mathematical creativity and school mathematics: Indicators of mathematical creativity in middle school students (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Hartford.Google Scholar
  77. Mann, E. L. (2006). Creativity: The essence of mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(2), 236–260.  https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2006-264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Mann, E. L. (2009). The search for mathematical creativity: Identifying creative potential in middle school students. Creativity Research Journal, 21(4), 338–348.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410903297402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Mann, E., Chamberlin, S. A., & Graefe, A. K. (2017). The prominence of affect in creativity: Expanding the conception of creativity in mathematical problem solving. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 57–76). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 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
  81. Mooney, R. L. (1963). A conceptual model for integrating four approaches to the identification of creative talent. In C. W. Taylor & F. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 331–340). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  82. Mumford, M. D. (2003). Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2&3), 107–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
  84. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
  85. Neumann, C. J. (2007). Fostering creativity—a model for developing a culture of collective creativity in science. EMBO Reports, 8(3), 202–206.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Nuessel, F., Van Stewart, A., & Cedeno, A. (2001). A course on humanistic creativity in later life: Literature review, case histories, and recommendations. Educational Gerontology, 27(8), 697–715.  https://doi.org/10.1080/036012701317117929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving: Students’ skills in tackling real-life problems (Vol. V). PISA, OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012-results-volume-V.pdf. Accessed 26 March 2017.
  88. Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination (3rd ed.). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  89. Palsdottir, G., & Sriraman, B. (2017). Teacher’s views on modeling as a creative mathematical activity. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness (pp. 47–55). Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  90. Pelczer, I., & Rodriguez, F. G. (2011). Creativity assessment in school settings through problem posing tasks. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 8, 383–398.Google Scholar
  91. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2011.548900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction does not matter. In R. J. Steinberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 153–167). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Plucker, J. A., & Zabelina, D. (2009). Creativity and interdisciplinarity: One creativity or many creativities? ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(1–2), 5–11.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0155-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Poincaré, H. (1948). Science and method. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  95. Presmeg, N. (2003). Creativity, mathematizing and didactizing: Leen Streefland’s work continues. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54(1), 127–137.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000005255.04769.89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Prouse, H. L. (1964). The construction and use of a test for the measure of certain aspects of creativity in seventh-grade mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts, 26(01), 394.Google Scholar
  97. Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305–311.Google Scholar
  98. Rudowicz, E. (2003). Creativity and culture: A two way interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 273–290.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830308602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Runco, M. A. (2007). Creativity. Theories and themes: Research, development and practice. Philadelphia, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  100. Sak, U., & Maker, C. (2006). Developmental variation in children’s creative mathematical thinking as a function of schooling, age and knowledge. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 279–291.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Savic, M., Karakok, G., Tang, G., Turkey, H., & Naccarato, E. (2017). Formative assessment of creativity in undergraduate mathematics: using a creativity-in-progress rubric (CRP) on proving. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 23–46). Springer.Google Scholar
  102. Schindler, M., Lilienthal, A. J., Chadalavada, R., & Ögren, M. (2016). Creativity in the eye of the student. Refining investigations of mathematical creativity using eye-tracking goggles. In C. Csíkos, A. Rausch, & Szitányi, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 40th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 163–170). Szeged, Hungary: PME.Google Scholar
  103. Selby, E. C., Shaw, E. J., & Houtz, J. C. (2005). The creative personality. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(4), 300–316.  https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620504900404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 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: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  105. Shneiderman, B. (1999). Creating creativity for everyone. User’ interfaces for supporting innovation. UM Computer Science Department: CS-TR-3988 UMIACS: UMIACS-TR-9910, Digital Repository at the University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  106. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9212-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 29(3), 75–80.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-997-0003-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Silvia, P. J. (2008). Creativity and intelligence revisited: A latent variable analysis of Wallach and Kogan (1965). Creativity Research Journal, 20(1), 34–39.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410701841807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Smith, G. J. W., & Carlsson, I. (1983). Creativity in early and middle school years. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 6(2), 167–195.  https://doi.org/10.1177/016502548300600204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Smith, G. J. W., & Carlsson, I. (1985). Creativity in middle and late school years. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 8(3), 329–343.  https://doi.org/10.1177/016502548500800307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 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
  112. Sriraman, B. (2004). The characteristics of mathematical creativity. The Mathematics Educator, 14(1), 19–34.Google Scholar
  113. Sriraman, B. (2005). Are mathematical giftedness and mathematical creativity synonyms? A theoretical analysis of constructs. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(1), 20–36.  https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 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). USA: Information Age Publishing INC.Google Scholar
  115. Sriraman, B. (2009). The characteristics of mathematical creativity. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(13), 13–27.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0114-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Steinberg, R. (2013). A mathematically creative four-year-old—what do we learn from him? Creative Education, 4(7), 23–32.  https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.47A1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Sternberg, R. J. (2006). Creativity is a habit. Education Week, 25(24), 47–64.Google Scholar
  118. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 677–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Sternberg, R. J., & O’ Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251–272). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  120. 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). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  121. Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Torrance, E. P. (1968). A longitudinal examination of the fourth grade slump in creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 12(4), 195–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 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, NJ: Personnel Press.Google Scholar
  124. Treffinger, D. J. (1991). Creative productivity: Understanding its sources and nurture. Illinois Council for Gifted Journal, 10, 6–8.Google Scholar
  125. Vidal, R. V. V. (2005). Creativity for operational researchers. Investigação Operacional (Portugal), 25, 1–24.Google Scholar
  126. Voica, C., & Singer, F. M. (2013). Problem modification as a tool for detecting cognitive flexibility in school children. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 267–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Walia, P. (2012). Achievement in relation to mathematical creativity of eighth grade students. Indian Streams Research Journal, 2(2), 1–4.  https://doi.org/10.9780/22307850, http://isrj.org/UploadedData/808.pdf.
  128. Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity-intelligence distinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
  129. Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.Google Scholar
  130. Weisberg, R. (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 226–250). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  131. Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Expertise and reason in creative thinking: Evidence from case studies and the laboratory. In J. C. Kauffman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity and reason in cognitive development (pp. 7–42). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Wessels, H. (2014). Levels in mathematical creativity in model-eliciting activities. Journal of Mathematical Modeling and Application, 1(9), 22–40.Google Scholar
  133. Wheeler, S., Waite, S., & Bromfield, C. (2002). Promoting creativity through the use of ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 18(3), 367–378.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.00247.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Yang, Y., & Chin, W. (1996). Motivational analyses on the effects of type of instructional control on learning from computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Technology System, 25(1), 25–35.  https://doi.org/10.2190/H6JU-05G8-XRPW-8EP5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Yerushalmy, M. (2009). Educational technology and curricular design: Promoting mathematical creativity for all students. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Mathematical creativity and the education of gifted students (pp. 101–113). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publisher.Google Scholar
  136. 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

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Demetra Pitta-Pantazi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Maria Kattou
    • 2
  • Constantinos Christou
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus
  2. 2.Ministry of Education and CultureNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations