Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Creativity in Question and Answer Digital Spaces for Mathematics Education: A Case Study of the Water Triangle for Proportional Reasoning

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Creativity and Technology in Mathematics Education

Part of the book series: Mathematics Education in the Digital Era ((MEDE,volume 10))

Abstract

As digital spaces evolve, mathematics educators must develop an awareness of the ways in which these environments can facilitate discussion and foster creativity. Question and Answer (Q&A) sites such as Mathematics Educators Stack Exchange (MESE) provide a platform through which those interested in the teaching and learning of mathematics can harness new technologies to address novel queries, and engage collaboratively with others who share their interests. This chapter aims to trace one example of a question-answer combination on MESE as situated in the broader context of technology and creativity in mathematics education, and to utilize the example as a lens through which we can critically examine the current state of digital environments and reflect on their potential use by mathematics educators.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    (http://mathforum.org/).

  2. 2.

    (http://mathforum.org/dr.math/abt.drmath.html).

  3. 3.

    (https://www.reddit.com/r/math).

  4. 4.

    http://matheducators.stackexchange.com/q/29.

  5. 5.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_reasoning.

  6. 6.

    https://mathematicsteachingcommunity.math.uga.edu/index.php/685/the-water-triangle-proportional-reasoning-task.

  7. 7.

    http://www.proquest.com/.

References

  • Amabile, T. M. (1983). A consensual technique for creativity assessment. In The social psychology of creativity (pp. 37–63). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 173–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J., & McKool, S. (2009). Assessing creativity using the consensual assessment. In Handbook of assessment technologies, methods, and applications in higher education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, M. C. (2001). Composing a life. New York, NY: Grove Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, M. C. (2004). Composing a life story. In Willing to learn: Passages of personal discovery (pp. 66–76). Hanover, NH: Steerford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brizuela, B. (1997). Inventions and conventions: A story about capital numbers. For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 2–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (2005). The art of problem posing (3rd ed.). London, UK: Psychology Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xn95AgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1.

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–338). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Angelis, V., Kang, K., Mahavier, W. T., & Stenger, A. (2008). Nerd is the word. Math Horizons, 16(1), 28–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncker, K., & Lees, L. S. (1945). On problem-solving. Psychological Monographs, 58(5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Erlwanger, S. H. (1973). Benny’s conception of rules and answers in IPI mathematics. Journal of Children’s Mathematical Behavior, 1(2), 7–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, U. (1992). The real world of technology. Concord, ON: House of Anansi Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Getzels, J. W. (1975). Problem-finding and the inventiveness of solutions. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 9(1), 12–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, H. E., & Barrett, P. H. (1974). Darwin on man: A psychological study of scientific creativity. New York, NY: EP Dutton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, H. E., & Davis, S. N. (1988). 10 inching our way up Mount Olympus: The evolving-systems approach to creative thinking. The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives, 243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, H. E., & Wallace, D. B. (1999). The case study method and evolving systems approach for understanding unique creative people at work. Handbook of Creativity, 93, 115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, R., & Froelich, M. (1994). Defining technology and technological education: A crisis, or cause for celebration? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4(2), 179–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, M. H. (2015a). Worldmaking: Psychology and the ideology of creativity. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, M. H. (2015b). The ideology of creativity and challenges of participation. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 369–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, B. A. (1994). The consensual assessment technique: An examination of the relationship between ratings of product and process creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 7(2), 193–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1999). Consensual assessment. Encyclopedia of Creativity, 1, 347–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karplus, R., & Fuller, R. G. (2002). A love of discovery: Science education—The second career of Robert Karplus. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick, J. (1987). Formulating the problem: Where do good problems come from? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 123–147). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, B. L. (1976). A study of teaching for proportional reasoning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Berkeley, CA: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, B., & Karplus, R. (1979). Intellectual development beyond elementary school VII: Teaching for proportional reasoning. School Science and Mathematics, 79(5), 387–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobato, J., Ellis, A., & Zbiek, R. M. (2010). Developing essential understanding of ratios, proportions, and proportional reasoning for teaching mathematics: Grades 6–8. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J. H. (2003). The value of creativity: The origins and emergence of a modern belief. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noche, J. R. (2013). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in proportional reasoning of undergraduate students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of the Philippines Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noche, J. R., & Vistro-Yu, C. P. (2015). Teaching proportional reasoning concepts and procedures using repetition with variation. In Paper Presented at the 7th ICMI—East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematics Education, Cebu City, Philippines.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 179–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, A. (1999). Technology meets math education: Envisioning a practical future forum on the future of technology in education. Retrieved June 11, 2017 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED453055.pdf.

  • Runco, M. A. (Ed.). (1994). Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A. (2010). Divergent thinking, creativity, and ideation. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 413–446). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2011). Structure and improvisation in creative teaching. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K., & DeZutter, S. (2009). Distributed creativity: How collective creations emerge from collaboration. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(2), 81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2010). How we think: A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, P. D. (2005). Creativity from constraints: The psychology of breakthrough. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, P. D. (2010). Using constraints to develop creativity in the classroom. In R. A. Beghetto & J. C. Kaugman (Eds.), Nurturing creativity in the classroom (pp. 88–112). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tausczik, Y. R., Kittur, A., & Kraut, R. E. (2014, February). Collaborative problem solving: A study of mathoverflow. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 355–367). New York, NY: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourniaire, F., & Pulos, S. (1985). Proportional reasoning: A review of the literature. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16(2), 181–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treffinger, D. J. (1996). Creativity, creative thinking, and critical thinking: In search of Definitions. Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treffinger, D. J., Young, G. C., Selby, E. C., & Shepardson, C. (2002). Assessing creativity: A guide for education. Sarasota, FL: The National Research Center on the gifted and talented.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. (1986). Creativity: Genius and other myths. New York, NY: WH Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking: Enlarged edition. New York, NY: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. New York, USA

    Benjamin Dickman

Authors
  1. Benjamin Dickman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin Dickman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Université de Moncton, Moncton, NB, Canada

    Viktor Freiman

  2. Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY, USA

    Janet Lynne Tassell

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dickman, B. (2018). Creativity in Question and Answer Digital Spaces for Mathematics Education: A Case Study of the Water Triangle for Proportional Reasoning. In: Freiman, V., Tassell, J. (eds) Creativity and Technology in Mathematics Education. Mathematics Education in the Digital Era, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72381-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72381-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-72379-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-72381-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation