Mathematical creativity (MC) plays an important role in mathematics and education; however, its conceptualization and assessment remain inconsistent across empirical studies. This systematic review examined how MC has been defined, conceptualized, and assessed across 80 empirical studies involving K-12 populations. Through thematic analysis, the study identified three definition types: divergent thinking, problem-solving, and problem-posing, as well as affective–motivational emphasis. We organized theoretical frameworks into three categories: domain-general, domain-specific, and multidimensional frameworks. Results showed that the most common definitions emphasized divergent thinking components while fewer studies highlighted affective and dispositional factors. Domain-specific frameworks were the most frequently used, followed by multidimensional frameworks. Regarding assessment, studies predominantly relied on divergent-thinking scoring. Most assessments used criterion-referenced rubrics with norm-based comparisons. They were delivered mainly in paper-pencil format. Tasks were typically open-ended multiple-solution problems with fewer studies using self-reports or observational methods. Overall, the field prioritizes product-based scoring (e.g., fluency, flexibility, originality) over evidence about students’ solution processes (e.g., reasoning, metacognitive monitoring). To improve cross-context comparability, future work should standardize and transparently report age, grade, and country coding and scoring practices.
Sipahi et al. (Sat,) studied this question.