# Interactive Technology to Foster Creativity in Future Mathematics Teachers

## Abstract

This chapter discusses ways in which the use of interactive technology in a problem-based course that integrates mathematics, science, and technology fosters creativity among future secondary mathematics teachers in their first year in college. The course was built on research-based principles to learn mathematics for understanding. We found that creativity is fostered naturally by teaching mathematics based on those principles. Creativity is fostered, promoted and developed when (a) learners themselves grapple with concepts and make concepts explicit; (b) learners actively build new understanding on previous knowledge; (c) learners engage with mathematics as a social process; (d) learners use multiple representations and connections to enhance their understanding; (e) learners pose and solve problems; and (f) learners exercise multiple modes of learning—when they read, talk, write, draw, analyze, apply, present, and reflect. We discuss the use of technology and issues related to future teachers’ creativity as they solve problems; design experiments and collect, represent, and analyze data; develop mathematical models for phenomena in the physical, biological, and social sciences; and build and program their own robot.

## Keywords

Preservice mathematics teachers Integrated mathematics, science, and technology Teamwork Communication GeoGebra Python Mathematical modeling## Notes

### Acknowledgements

The course discussed in this chapter was funded in part by the National Science Foundation (TUES grant, award number 1140702): Bernhardt, S., Flores, A., Park, J., and Shipman, H. (2012–2016). *Integrated Science and* *Mathematics Education* *: A Model Course for Pre*-*Service Teachers*. The statements in this chapter are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of NSF.

## References

- Abramovich, S. (2014).
*Computational experiment approach to advanced secondary mathematics curriculum*. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Aiken, L. R. (1973). Ability and creativity in mathematics.
*Review of Educational Research*,*43*, 405–432.Google Scholar - Allen, D. H., Donham, R. S., & Bernhardt, S. A. (2011). Problem-based learning.
*New Directions for Teaching and Learning,**2011*(128), 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Aralas, D. (2008). Mathematical creativity and its connection with mathematical imagination. In
*Proceedings of the Discussion Group 9: Promoting Creativity for all Students in Mathematics Education*, Section 1, 23–32.*The 11th International Congress on Mathematical Education Monterrey, Mexico, July 6–13, 2008*. http://www.dg.icme11.org/document/get/255. - Artzt, A. F., & Newman, C. M. (1990).
*How to use cooperative learning in the mathematics class*. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Banghart, F. W., & Spraker, H. S. (1963). Group influence on creativity in mathematics.
*The Journal of Experimental Education,**31,*257–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007).
*Teaching for quality learning at university*(3rd ed.). Berkshire, England: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Retrieved from http://www.umweltbildung-noe.at/upload/files/OEKOLOG%202014/2_49657968-Teaching-for-Quality-Learning-at-University.pdf. - Boden, M. A. (2004).
*The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms*(2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar - Bryan, J. (2014).
*Back to school means back to STEM*. Retrieved from http://www.arborsci.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Pull-Back-Car.pdf. - Bu, L., & Schoen, R. (Eds.). (2011).
*Model-centered learning: Pathways to mathematical understanding using GeoGebra*. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar - Buteau, C., & Muller, E. (2006). Evolving technologies integrated into undergraduate mathematics education. In C. Hoyles, J. Lagrange, L. H. Son, & N. Sinclair (Eds.),
*Proceedings for the Seventeenth ICMI Study Conference: Technology Revisited, Part 2: Contributions*(pp. 74–81). Hanoi, Vietnam: Hanoi Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://www.mathunion.org/fileadmin/ICMI/files/Digital_Library/icmi-study-17/ICMI17proceedingsPart2.pdf. - Buteau, C., & Muller, E. (2014). Teaching roles in a technology intensive core undergraduate mathematics course. In A. Clark-Wilson, O. Robutti, & N. Sinclair (Eds.),
*The mathematics teacher in the digital era*(pp. 163–185). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Butler, A., Phillmann, K.-B., & Smart, L. (2001). Active learning within a lecture: Assessing the impact of short, in-class writing exercises.
*Teaching of Psychology,**28,*57–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Cakir, M. P., & Stahl, G. (2013). The integration of mathematics discourse, graphical reasoning and symbolic expression by a Virtual Math Team. In D. Martinovic, V. Freiman, & Z. Karadag (Eds.),
*Visual mathematics and cyberlearning*(pp. 49–96), Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2321-4. - Clark-Wilson, A., Robutti, O., & Sinclair, N. (2014).
*The mathematics teacher in the digital era*. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, National Research Council. (2000).
*How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded Edition).*Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. E-book. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/read/9853/. - Contreras, J. N. (2013). Fostering mathematical creativity through problem posing and modeling using dynamic geometry: Viviani’s problem in the classroom.
*Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers College,**42,*66–72.Google Scholar - Cory, B. L. (2010). Bouncing balls and graphing derivatives.
*Mathematics Teacher,**104*(3), 206–213.Google Scholar - Council of Chief State School Officers Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (2011).
*InTASC model core teaching standards: A resource for state dialogue*. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2011/InTASC_Model_Core_Teaching_Standards_2011.pdf. - Davidson, N. (Ed.). (1990).
*Cooperative learning in mathematics*. Menlo Park, CA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar - Davidson, D., & Pearce, D. (1990). Perspectives on writing activities in the mathematics classroom.
*Mathematics Education Research Journal,**2,*15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Drabick, D. A. G., Weisberg, R., Paul, L., & Bubier, J. L. (2007). Keeping it short and sweet: Brief, ungraded writing assignments facilitate learning.
*Teaching of Psychology,**34,*172–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Enthought Scientific Computing Solutions. (2016).
*Enthought canopy: Easy python deployment plus integrated analysis environment for scientific computing, data analysis and engineering*. Retrieved from https://store.enthought.com/downloads/#default. - Ernest, P. (2005). Agency and creativity in the semiotics of learning mathematics. In M. H. G. Hoffmann, K. Lenhard, & F. Seeger (Eds.),
*Activity and sign: Grounding mathematics education*(pp. 23–34). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar - Flores, A. (2014). Integrating computers, science, and mathematics—A course for future mathematics teachers. In
*Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education*(pp. 246–251). Setúbal, Portugal: Scitepress. https://doi.org/10.5220/0004942402460251. - Flores, A., Bernhardt, S. A., & Shipman, H. L. (2015). Rowing competitions and perspective.
*International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology,**46,*284–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Flores, A., & Park, J. (2016). Students’ guided re-invention of definition of limit of sequence with interactive technology. In
*Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education*,*16(2)*. Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/volume-16/issue-2-16/mathematics/students-guided-reinvention-of-definition-of-limit-of-a-sequence-with-interactive-technology/. - Flores, A., Park, J., & Bernhardt, S. A. (2016). Learning mathematics and technology through inquiry, cooperation, and communication: A learning trajectory for future mathematics teachers. In M. L. Niess, S. Driskell, & K. Hollebrands (Eds.),
*Handbook of research on transforming mathematics teacher education in the digital age*(pp. 324–352). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Freudenthal, H. (1971). Geometry between the devil and the deep sea.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics,**3,*413–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Fryer, M. (2006). Facilitating creativity in higher education: A brief account of National Teaching Fellows’ views. In N. Jackson, M. Oliver, M. Shaw, & J. Wisdom (Eds.),
*Developing creativity in higher education: An imaginative curriculum*(pp. 74–88). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar - Gibb, E. G. (1970).
*Creative problem solving*(Preliminary edition). Austin, TX: University of Texas, Research and Development Center for Teacher Education. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED037367.pdf. - Gordon, S. P., & Gordon, F. S. (2010).
*Functions, data, and models: An applied approach to college algebra*. Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar - Gravemeijer, K., Cobb, P., Bowers, J., & Whitenack, J. (2000). Symbolizing, modeling, and instructional design. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel, & K. McClain (Eds.),
*Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms*(pp. 225–273). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar - Groff, J. (2013).
*Technology-rich innovative learning environments*. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/Technology-Rich%20Innovative%20Learning%20Environments%20by%20Jennifer%20Groff.pdf. - Griffiths, M. (2014). Encouraging imagination and creativity in the teaching profession.
*European Educational Research Journal*,*13*, 117–129. Retrieved from http://eer.sagepub.com/content/13/1/117.full.pdf+html. - Güçler, B., Hegedus, S., Robidoux, R., & Jackiw, N. (2013). Investigating the mathematical discourse of young learners involved in multi-modal mathematical investigations: The case of haptic technologies. In D. Martinovic, V. Freiman, & Z. Karadag (Eds.),
*Visual mathematics and cyberlearning*(pp. 97–118). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Habre, S. (2012). Improving understanding in ordinary differential equations through writing in a dynamical environment.
*Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications,**31,*153–166. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrs007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Hadamard, J. (1945).
*Essay on the psychology of invention in the mathematical field*. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar - Hake, R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses.
*American Journal of Physics,**66,*64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Hanna, G. (1991). Mathematical proof. In D. Tall (Ed.),
*Advanced mathematical thinking*(pp. 54–61). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Hanna, G., & Winchester, I. (Eds.). (1990). Creativity and mathematical proof. Special issue
*Interchange, 21*(1).Google Scholar - Hashimoto, Y., & Becker, J. (1999). The open approach to teaching mathematics—Creating a culture of mathematics in the classroom: Japan. In L. J. Sheffield (Ed.),
*Developing mathematically promising students*(pp. 101–119). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Haylock, D. W. (1987). A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in schoolchildren.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics,**18*(1), 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Henderson, K. B., & Pingry, R. E. (1953). Problem-solving in mathematics. In H. F. Fehr (Ed.),
*The learning of mathematics: Its theory and practice*(pp. 228–270). Washington, D.C.: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.),
*Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning*(Vol. 1, pp. 371–404). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar - Hoyles, C., & Lagrange, J.-B. (Eds.). (2010).
*Mathematics education and technology—Rethinking the terrain. The 17th ICMI Study*. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar - International GeoGebra Institute. (2017).
*GeoGebra*. Retrieved from https://www.geogebra.org/cms/download. - Jackson, N. (2006). Imagining a different world. In N. Jackson, M. Oliver, M. Shaw, & J. Wisdom (Eds.),
*Developing creativity in higher education: An imaginative curriculum*(pp. 1–9). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar - Jackson, N., & Sinclair, C. (2006). Developing students’ creativity: Searching for an appropriate pedagogy. In N. Jackson, M. Oliver, M. Shaw, & J. Wisdom (Eds.),
*Developing creativity in higher education: An imaginative curriculum*(pp. 118–141). London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Kattou, M., Kontoyianni, K., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2013). Connecting mathematical creativity to mathematical ability.
*ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education*,*45*(4), 167–181.Google Scholar - Krutetskii, V. A. (1976).
*The Psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren*(J. Teller, Trans.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar - 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). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar - Leikin, R., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2013). Creativity and mathematics education: The state of the art.
*ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45*(2), 159–166.Google Scholar - Mann, E. L. (2006). Creativity: The essence of mathematics.
*Journal for the Education of the Gifted*,*30*(2), 236–260. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ750778.pdf. - Manuel, D. (2009). Does technology help building more creative mathematical environments? In B. Sriraman, V. Freiman, & N. Lirette-Pitre (Eds.),
*Interdisciplinary, creativity, and learning: Mathematics with literature, paradoxes, history, technology and modeling*(pp. 233–247). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar - Marrongelle, K. A. (2008). Enhancing meaning in mathematics: Drawing on what students know about the physical world. In P. E. Elliott & C. M. Elliott Garnett (Eds.),
*Getting into the mathematics conversation: Valuing communication in mathematics classrooms*(pp. 295–307). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Martinovic, D., Freiman, V., & Karadag, Z. (2013). Visual mathematics and cyberlearning in view of affordance and activity theories. In D. Martinovic, V. Freiman, & Z. Karadag (Eds.),
*Visual mathematics and cyberlearning*(pp. 209–238). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Mason, J., & Watson, A. (2008). Mathematics as a constructive activity: Exploiting dimensions of possible variation. In M. P. Carlson & C. Rasmussen (Eds.),
*Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics education*(pp. 191–204). Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Meissner, H. (2005). Challenges to provoke creativity. In
*The Third East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematics Education.*Retrieved from www.math.uni-muenster.de/didaktik/u/meissne/WWW/mei135.doc. - Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge.
*Teachers College Record,**108*(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., Driskell, S. O., Harper, S. R., Johnston, C., et al. (2009). Mathematics teacher TPACK standards and development model.
*Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education*,*9*(1), 4–24. Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/mathematics/article1.cfm. - Oehrtman, M. (2015).
*Sequences that converge to 5. Sequences that don’t converge to 5*. Retrieved from https://clearcalculus.okstate.edu/images/Guided%20Reinvention/Graphs%20-%20with%20Epsilon%20and%20N%20Lines/Sequence%20Graphs.html. - Paulus, P. B. (2000). Groups, teams, and creativity: The creative potential of idea-generating groups.
*Applied Psychology: An International Review,**49*(2), 237–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Poincaré, H. (1920).
*Science et méthode*. Paris, France: Flammarion. Retrieved from https://archive.org/stream/scienceetmthod00poin#page/42/mode/2up. - Polya, G. (1954).
*Mathematics and plausible reasoning*. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar - Polya, G. (1957).
*How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method*(2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar - Polya, G. (1962).
*Mathematical discovery: On understanding, learning, and teaching problem solving*(Vol. 1). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar - Powell, N. N., Anderson, M., & Winterroth, S. (1994). Reflections on miniature golf.
*Mathematics Teacher,**87*(7), 490–495.Google Scholar - Presmeg, N. (2003). Creativity, mathematizing and didactizing: Leen Streefland’s work continues.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics,**54,*127–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Rivera, F. D. (2011).
*Toward a visually-oriented school mathematics curriculum*. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sacristán, A. I., Calder, N., Rojano, T., Santos-Trigo, M., Friedlander, A., Meissner, H., et al. (2010). The influence and shaping of digital technologies on the learning—And learning trajectories—Of mathematical concepts. In C. Hoyles & J.-B. Lagrange (Eds.),
*Mathematics education and technology—Rethinking the terrain*(pp. 179–226). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar - Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Smart technology for self-organizing processes.
*Smart Learning Environments, 1*(1). Retrieved from http://www.slejournal.com/content/1/1/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0001-8. - Sealey, V., Deshler, J. M., & Hazen, K. (2014). Strengthening student understanding of mathematical language through verbal and written representations of the intermediate value theorem.
*PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies*,*24*(2), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2013.858282. - Sheffield, L. J. (1994).
*The development of gifted and talented mathematics students and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Standards*. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.Google Scholar - Sheffield, L. J. (2003).
*Extending the challenge in mathematics: Developing mathematical promise in K-8 children*. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar - Sheffield, L. J. (2008). Promoting creativity for all students in mathematics education: An overview. In
*Proceedings of the Discussing Group 9: Promoting Creativity for All Students in Mathematics Education, The 11th International Congress on Mathematical Education Monterrey, Mexico*, pp. 369–381. Retrieved from http://dg.icme11.org/tsg/show/10. - Sheffield, L. J. (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*(pp. 87–100). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar - 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.Google Scholar - Sriraman, B. (2004). Characteristics of mathematical creativity.
*The Mathematics Educator, 14*(1), 19–34. Retrieved from http://math.coe.uga.edu/tme/Issues/v14n1/v14n1.Sriraman.pdf. - 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M. (1996).
*How to develop student creativity*. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/196073/chapters/Introduction@-Theory-of-Creativity.aspx. - Stewart, T. L., Myers, A. C., & Culley, M. R. (2010). Enhanced learning and retention through ‘writing to learn’ in the psychology classroom.
*Teaching of Psychology,**37,*46–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Torrance, E. P. (1979). A three-stage model for teaching for creative thinking. In A. E. Lawson (Ed.),
*1980 AETS Yearbook: The psychology of teaching for thinking and creativity*(pp. 226–253). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.Google Scholar - Uribe-Zarain, X. (2015).
*TUES Math 267 Observations and interviews report*. Newark, DE: Delaware Education Research and Development Center.Google Scholar - Van Oortmerssen, L. A., Van Woerkum, C. M. J., & Aarts, N. (2015). When interaction flows: An exploration of collective creative processes on a collaborative governance board.
*Group Organization & Management,**40*(4), 500–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Von Glasersfeld, E. (1995).
*Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning*. New York, NY: Routledge/Falmer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Voica, C., & Singer, F. M. (2013). Problem posing as a tool for the development of mathematical creativity in school children.
*ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45*(4), 267–279.Google Scholar - Whiley, T., & Tellup, E. (2015).
*The math and physics of Joshua*. Newark, DE: Final project presentation for Math267, University of Delaware.Google Scholar - Winchester, I. (1990). Introduction—Creativity, thought and mathematical proof.
*Interchange*,*21*(10), 1–6.Google Scholar