Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fostering Creativity through The goal of this paper is to argue for a different kind of
Instruction Rich in Mathematical experience for students – a form of instructional activity
Problem Solving and Problem Posing that is enriched by concepts connected to the notion of
creativity.
In this paper, I discuss creativity as it connects with the
Edward A. Silver, Pittsburgh (USA) activities of problem posing and problem solving, which
are both strong themes in contemporary discussions of
mathematics education. In particular, I show how mathe-
matical problem posing and problem solving are connected
to key aspects of the classic and contemporary conceptions
Abstract: Although creativity is often viewed as being associ- of creativity and also to the assessment of creativity. I il-
ated with the notions of “genius” or exceptional ability, it can be lustrate the connection between these ideas and those of
productive for mathematics educators to view creativity instead others who have argued for and demonstrated methods of
as an orientation or disposition toward mathematical activity that providing various forms of inquiry-oriented mathematics
can be fostered broadly in the general school population. In this
instruction. In this way, I hope to demonstrate the feasi-
article, it is argued that inquiry-oriented mathematics instruction
which includes problem-solving and problem-posing tasks and bility of bringing creativity-enriched instruction to all stu-
activities can assist students to develop more creative approaches dents. That is, the instructional principles and activities
to mathematics. Through the use of such tasks and activities, proposed and discussed in this article are not applicable
teachers can increase their students’ capacity with respect to the only to the teaching of exceptional individuals, but rather
core dimensions of creativity; namely, fluency, flexibility, and to the general student population.
novelty. Because the instructional techniques discussed in this
article have been used successfully with students all over the
world, there is little reason to believe that creativity-enriched 2. Creativity: What is it and who has it?
mathematics instruction cannot be used with a broad range of In the psychological literature there are literally thousands
students in order to increase their representational and strategic of commentaries offered or studies conducted on the na-
fluency and flexibility, and their appreciation for novel problems, ture of creativity, its distribution within the population,
solution methods, or solutions. and its origins and manifestations in human experience.
Kurzreferat: Kreativität fördern durch einen Unterricht, der Self-reports of exceptionally talented individuals, as well
reich ist an Situationen des mathematischen Problemlösens as analyses of their work provided by observers, have il-
und Aufgabenerfindens. Kreativität wird oft im Zusammen- luminated aspects of creativity in areas as diverse as liter-
hang gesehen mit Begriffen wie “Genie” oder außergewöhnliche ary or musical composition (Getzels & Csikszentmihalyi,
Fähigkeiten. Demgegenüber kann es für Mathematiklehrer je-
1976; Ghiselin, 1952), scientific discovery (Mansfield &
doch produktiver sein, Kreativität als Orientierung für mathema-
Busse, 1981; Rothenberg, 1979), and mathematical think-
tische Aktivitäten zu nehmen, die auf diese Weise bei der All-
gemeinheit der Schüler breit gefördert werden kann. In diesem ing (Hadamard, 1945; Helson, 1983). Unfortunately, what
Beitrag wird gezeigt, daß forschender Mathematikunterricht, der has garnered a great deal of attention in these accounts is
Aufgaben zum Problemlösen und zum Aufgabenerfinden bein- a so-called “genius” view of creativity.
haltet, Schüler dabei unterstützen kann, mehr kreative Zugänge According to the “genius” view of creativity, creative
zur Mathematik zu entwickeln. Durch solche Aktivitäten und acts are viewed as rare mental feats, which are produced
Aufgaben kann der Lehrer die Fähigkeiten seiner Schüler im by extraordinary individuals who rapidly and effortlessly
Hinblick auf die Kernaspekte von Kreativität erweitern, nämlich use exceptional thought processes (Weisberg, 1988). The
Gewandtheit, Flexibilität und Neues. Die hier diskutierten Un-
genius view of creativity suggests both that creativity is
terrichtsmethoden wurden weltweit erfolgreich angewendet, so
daß es keinen Grund gibt, daran zu zweifeln, daß solch
not likely to be heavily influenced by instruction and that
ein kreativitätsfördernder Mathematikunterricht nicht auch bei creative work is more a matter of occasional bursts of
einem großen Teil aller Schüler eingesetzt werden kann, um insight than the kind of steady progression toward com-
ihre Gewandtheit und Flexibilität im Hinblick auf Darstellung pletion which tends to be valued in school. Thus, there
und Strategien sowie ihr Interesse an neuartigen Aufgaben, have been limited attempts to apply ideas derived from
Lösungsmethoden oder Lösungen zu fördern. the study of creativity to the education of all students.
ZDM-Classification: C40, D40, D50
But this view of creativity has been questioned in recent
research, and it is no longer the only view of creativity
available for application to education.
1. Introduction A new view of creativity has emerged from contem-
Mathematics as an intellectual domain stands at or near porary research – one which stands in sharp contrast to
the top of any hierarchical list of intellectual domains or- the genius view. This research suggests that creativity
dered according to the extent to which creativity is evident is closely related to deep, flexible knowledge in content
in disciplinary activity or production. Thus, it is ironic domains; is often associated with long periods of work
that for most students throughout the world, mathematics and reflection rather than rapid, exceptional insight; and
would almost certainly be among the set of school subjects is susceptible to instructional and experiential influences
least associated with creativity. Although genuine mathe- (Holyoak & Thagard, 1995; Sternberg, 1988). The con-
matical activity is intimately interwoven with creativity, temporary view of creativity also suggests that persons
schooling provides most students with little opportunity who are creative in a domain appear to possess a creative
to experience this aspect of the domain of mathematics. disposition or orientation toward their activity in that do-
75
Analyses 97/3
main. That is, creative activity results from an inclination elty of the problem formulation or the problem solution,
to think and behave creatively. This emerging view of cre- the extent to which shifts in direction or focus were evi-
ativity provides a much stronger foundation on which to dent during the process of reformulation or solution, and
build educational applications. In fact, this view suggests the number of formulations or reformulations generated or
that creativity-enriched instruction might be appropriate the number of different solution paths explored or solu-
for a broad range of students, and not merely a few ex- tions obtained. These are precisely the forms of cognitive
ceptional individuals. activity assessed in tests of creativity.
The classical and contemporary views of creativity differ
with respect to the nature of such aspects of creativity as
“insight” and with respect to the distribution of a capacity 4. Key concepts underlying the assessment of creativity
for creative activity within the population. But there is The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) (Tor-
little disagreement between these views of creativity on the rance, 1966; 1974) have frequently been used to assess
centrality of the generative processes of problem posing the creative thinking of children and adults. An extensive
and problem solving in creative activity. program of research has validated this instrument as a pre-
dictor of creative production (Torrance, 1988). Three key
components of creativity assessed by the TTCT are flu-
3. The Relation of creativity to problem posing and ency, flexibility and novelty. Fluency refers to the number
problem solving of ideas generated in response to a prompt; flexibility to
Problem posing, or problem finding, has long been viewed apparent shifts in approaches taken when generating re-
as a characteristic of creative activity or exceptional talent sponses to a prompt; and novelty to the originality of the
in many fields of human endeavor. For example, Getzels ideas generated in response to a prompt. Note the simi-
and Csikszentmihalyi (1976) studied artistic creativity and larity between these components and the characteristics of
characterized problem finding as being central to the cre- creative activity evident in problem posing and problem
ative artistic experience. Related observations have been solving, as discussed above. In fact, problem posing and
made about professionals in various science fields (e.g., problem solving are often involved in the assessment of
Mansfield & Busse, 1981). And Hadamard (1945) iden- creativity.
tified the ability to identify key research questions as an The notions of fluency, flexibility and novelty were
indicator of exceptional talent in the domain of mathemat- adapted and applied in the domain of mathematics by
ics. Balka (1974), who asked subjects to pose mathematical
Problem posing, along with problem solving, is central problems that could be answered on the basis of informa-
to the discipline of mathematics and the nature of math- tion provided in a set of stories about real world situations.
ematical thinking (Silver, 1994). When mathematicians In his analysis of students’ responses, fluency referred
engage in the intellectual work of the discipline, it can to the number of problems posed or questions generated,
be argued that the self-directed posing of problems to be flexibility to the number of different categories of prob-
solved is an important characteristic (Pólya, 1954). Mathe- lems generated, and originality to how rare the response
maticians may solve some problems that have been posed was in the set of all responses.
for them by others or may work on problems that have Problem-posing and problem-solving tasks have also
been identified as important problems in the literature, been used by others to identify creative individuals. For
but it is more common for them to formulate their own example, Getzels and Jackson (1962) developed a battery
problems, based on their personal experience and interests of tests to measure creativity, of which one task asked
(Poincaré, 1948). Professional mathematicians, whether subjects to pose mathematical problems that could be an-
working in pure or applied mathematics, frequently en- swered using information provided in a set of stories about
counter ill-structured problems and situations which re- real world situations. Getzels and Jackson scored the sub-
quire problem posing and conjecturing, and their intellec- jects’ problems according to the complexity of the pro-
tual goal is often the generation of novel conjectures or cedures that would need to be used in order to obtain a
results (Pollak, 1987). Thus, unlike the situation in school solution (i. e., the number and type of arithmetic operations
mathematics, in genuine mathematical activity, problems used), and they used the results as a measure of creativ-
may occasionally be presented for solution by an outside ity. Other tasks used by Getzels and Jackson assessed the
source, but it is more common for them to arise out of fluency and originality of subjects as they solved prob-
attempts to generalize a known result, or as tentative con- lems that could have multiple answers or could be ap-
jectures for working hypotheses, or as subproblems em- proached from multiple directions. Thus, the activities of
bedded in the search for the solution to a larger problem. problem posing and problem solving, and the creative fea-
As these observations suggest, the connection to creativ- tures of such activity – fluency, flexibility, and novelty –
ity lies not so much in problem posing itself, but rather in are well established within the practice of assessing cre-
the interplay between problem posing and problem solv- ativity. These activities and features can also be incorpo-
ing. It is in this interplay of formulating, attempting to rated into the teaching of mathematics in order to develop
solve, reformulating, and eventually solving a problem that in students a more creative disposition toward mathemat-
one sees creative activity. Both the process and the prod- ics. And problem-posing and problem-solving activities
ucts of this activity can be evaluated in order to determine can serve as the mediating vehicles to achieve this goal
the extent to which creativity is evident. Among the fea- when they are used in inquiry-oriented mathematics in-
tures of this activity that one might examine are the nov- struction.
76
97/3 Analyses
77
Analyses 97/3
a problem in one way and then discussing and evaluating specifically designed to support this view of mathemat-
a variety of solution methods that have been developed ics instruction is small compared to the size of the set of
and presented by classmates. In one version of this ap- materials that supports a more procedural and mechanical
proach, problem posing also plays a prominent role, as view of school mathematics. Nevertheless, if teachers ex-
students pose mathematical problems that are related to amine the examples cited above and if they reflect on how
but different from another problem that was solved on a these models might be adapted to their teaching, it should
previous day (Hashimoto, 1987). The use of problems that be possible for many teachers to apply the ideas discussed
permit a class of students to generate multiple solutions above in a manner that develops their students’ creativity
is a key feature of this form of mathematics teaching, and and mathematical proficiency in appropriate ways through
it is clearly associated with the development of students’ problem-posing and problem-solving activities.
representational and strategic flexibility. Limitations in space available in this article constrains
Another example of an instructional approach that is the extent to which practical matters can be addressed
likely to encourage the development of flexibility has adequately, but a simple, concrete example of how these
been developed by Brown and Walter (1983), and is of- ideas might influence the planning and implementation of
ten called “What-if-not?” This method of instruction em- mathematics instruction seems warranted. Let us consider
phasizes having students generate new problems from a the following problem and a variety of ways in which it
previously solved problem using a process of varying the might be used in connection to the ideas discussed above
conditions or goals of the original problem. This instruc- and summarized in Figure 1: “Show that the product of
tional approach has been incorporated into mathematics any four consecutive integers is divisible by 24.”
teaching at the college and precollege levels, and it is
highly likely to develop creative flexibility in students, as Problem Solving Creativity Problem Posing
well as to foster a generally creative disposition toward
Students explore open- Students generate
mathematical activity. ended problems, with many problems to be
Many of the kinds of problem-solving and problem- many interpretations, solved
posing experiences discussed above as being associated solution methods, !Fluency
with the building of students’ representational and strate- or answers
gic fluency and flexibility can also be used to develop Students share their
in students an appreciation for and a capacity to produce posed problems
novel solutions, solution methods, or problems. For ex- Students solve (or Students pose
ample, in “What-if-not” instructional settings, as students express or justify) in problems that are
generate problems by varying the goals and conditions of one way; then in solved in different
an original problem, they could be encouraged to gener- other ways !Flexibility ways
ate a type of problem that is different from any that have Students use ”What-
been generated thus far. In “open approach” instructional Students discuss many if-not?” approach to
settings, as successive solution approaches are discussed, solution methods pose problems
students can identify and discuss the ways in which new Students examine Students examine sev-
solutions are similar to and different from those methods many solution meth- eral posed problems;
generated previously. And students in instructional settings ods or answers (ex- then pose a problem
in which they pose problems for classmates could be sim- pressions or justifica- !Novelty that is different
ilarly challenged to generate or evaluate the novelty of a tions); then generate
posed problem. another that is differ-
ent
78
97/3 Analyses
3, which means that the common factor must be at least flexibility and more creative approaches to their mathe-
24), and the smallest non-zero product of four consecutive matical activity.
integers is 24 (thereby ensuring that the largest possible
common factor of all such strings can be no greater than 7. References
24), and so we can conclude that the greatest common
Balka, D. S. (1974): Creative ability in mathematics. – In: Arith-
factor must be exactly 24. Other methods of solution and metic Teacher 21, p. 633–636
argument are also possible. Used in this way, the prob- Brown, S. I.; Walter, M. I. (1983): The art of problem posing. –
lem could build representational and strategic flexibility Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
by providing students with exposure to several different Getzels, J. W.; Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976): The creative vision.
– New York: Wiley
solution methods for the same problem. Getzels, J. W.; Jackson, P. W. (1962): Creativity and intelligence:
This problem could also be used in other ways to ac- Exploration with gifted children. – New York: Wiley
complish additional goals. For example, after solving the Ghiselin, B. (Ed.) (1952 ): The creative process. – New York:
original problem, a teacher could have students use the Mentor
Hadamard, J. (1945): The psychology of invention in the math-
“What-if-not” approach to vary the original problem’s goal ematical field. – Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
(e.g., What is the smallest guaranteed divisor? or What Hashimoto, Y. (1987): Classroom practice of problem solving in
are all the possible factors?) or conditions (e.g., What if Japanese elementary schools. – In: J. Becker; T. Miwa (Eds.),
there were 3 consecutive integers, 5 consecutive integers, Proceedings of the U. S.-Japan seminar on mathematical prob-
lem solving. Columbus, OH: ERIC/SMEAC Clearinghouse
or N consecutive integers? or If the 4 integers were not (ED 304 315), p. 94–119
consecutive, could a guaranteed largest divisor still be de- Hashimoto, Y.; Sawada, T. (1984): Research on the mathematics
termined?). teaching by developmental treatment of mathematical prob-
A different approach to using this problem might involve lems. – In: T. Kawaguchi (Ed.), Proceedings of the ICMI-
JSME regional conference on mathematical education. Japan:
stating it in a more open-ended fashion, such as “What Japan Society of Mathematical Education, p. 309–313
conclusions can you draw about the product of any four Healy, C.C. (1993): Creating miracles: A story of student dis-
consecutive integers?” This formulation of the problem is covery. – Berkeley, CA: Key Curriculum Press
non-goal-specific and less well defined, thereby offering Helson, R. (1983): Creative mathematicians. – In: R. S. Albert
(Ed.), Genius and eminence: The social psychology of cre-
students an opportunity not only to determine that 2, 3, ativity and exceptional achievement. Oxford: Pergamon Press,
4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 are factors of all such products, but p. 311–330
also perhaps to detect other interesting features of such Holyoak, K. J.; Thagard, P. (1995): Mental leaps: Analogy in
products. For example, students might be challenged to creative thought. – Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Lesh, R. (1981): Applied mathematical problem solving. – In:
generate some characteristic of products of four consec- Educ. Stud. in Math. 12, p. 235–264
utive integers that does not have to do with divisibility Mansfield, R. S.; Busse, T. V. (1981): The psychology of cre-
by some integer. In response, some student might generate ativity and discovery: Scientists and their work. – Chicago:
the novel, and correct, hypothesis that all such products Nelson Hall
Nohda, N. (1986): A study of “open-approach” method in school
are exactly one less than a perfect square. The solution of mathematics. – In: Tsukuba J. of Educ. Study in Math. 5,
this problem can itself be undertaken in a variety of ways. p. 119–131
Although only a single example of how these ideas Nohda, N. (1995): Teaching and evaluating using “open-ended
might be applied is given here, it should be clear that problems” in the classroom. – In: ZDM, Zentralblatt für Di-
daktik der Mathematik 27 (No. 2), p. 57–61
this example illustrates a process that can be applied quite Pehkonen, E. (1995): Use of open-ended problems. – In: ZDM,
generally to many mathematics problems. It should be pos- Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik 27 (No. 2), p. 55–57
sible for teachers to use or adapt this approach in plan- Poincaré, H. (1948): Mathematical creation. – In: Scientific
ning or implementing mathematics instruction in order to American 179, p. 54–57
Pollak, H. O. (1987): Cognitive science and mathematics edu-
build their students’ capacity for fluency, flexibility and cation: A mathematician’s perspective. – In: A. H. Schoenfeld
novelty, and to help students develop a creative disposi- (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education. Hillsdale,
tion toward mathematics. Interested readers are encour- NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
aged to consult the sources cited previously in discussing Pólya, G. (1954): Mathematics and plausible reasoning. – Prince-
ton, NJ: Princeton University Press
creativity-enriched, inquiry-oriented mathematics instruc- Rothenberg, A. (1979): The emerging goddess. – Chicago: Uni-
tion; many excellent practical instructional examples can versity of Chicago Press
be found in those references. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985): Mathematical problem solving. – Or-
In this article it has been argued that mathematics edu- lando, FL: Academic Press
Shimada, S. (Ed.) (1977): On lessons using open-ended problems
cators can view creativity not as the domain of only a few in mathematics teaching. – Tokyo: Mizuumishobo
exceptional individuals but rather as an orientation or dis- Silver, E. A. (1995): The nature and use of open problems in
position toward mathematical activity that can be fostered mathematics education: Mathematical and pedagogical per-
broadly in the general school population. Support for this spectives. – In: ZDM, Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathe-
matik 27 (No. 2), p. 67–72
claim can be inferred from the fact that the instructional Silver, E. A. (1994): On mathematical problem posing. – In: For
ideas discussed in this article have all been implemented the learning of mathematics 14 (No. 1), p. 19–28
with students in a variety of classroom settings around the Silver, E. A.; Adams, V. M. (1987): Using open-ended problems.
world. Through the use of inquiry-oriented mathematics – In: Arith. Teacher 34 (No. 9), p. 34–35
Silver, E. A.; Kilpatrick, J.; Schlesinger, B. (1990): Thinking
instruction that includes opportunities for problem pos- through mathematics: Fostering inquiry and communication
ing and problem solving, teachers can assist students to in mathematics classrooms. – New York: The College Board
develop greater representational and strategic fluency and Skinner, P. (1991): What’s your problem? Posing and solving
mathematical problems, K-2. – Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann
79
Analyses 97/3
Author
Silver, Edward A., University of Pittsburgh, LRDC 729,
3939 O’Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
80