A Systematic Review of Creative Teaching Approaches in Mathematics Education

Creative teaching plays an important role in enhancing the teaching and learning of mathematics by fostering students’ engagement, flexibility of thinking, and meaningful understanding. Teachers are encouraged to adopt creative teaching approaches to support students’ interest and creative thinking in mathematics classrooms. However, despite the growing attention to creative teaching, the literature remains fragmented in terms of how creative teaching approaches in mathematics education are conceptualised and reported. Therefore, this study aims to conduct a systematic review of the existing literature to identify and synthesise the creative teaching approaches reported in mathematics education. This study employed a systematic literature review following established review procedures. Articles were retrieved from two leading academic databases, namely Scopus and Web of Science. A total of 40 empirical studies published within the selected time frame were included for analysis. The selected studies were analysed using thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns and similarities in the reported creative teaching approaches. The findings reveal that creative teaching approaches in mathematics education can be synthesised into five major themes: technology-enhanced and AI-supported teaching, student-centred and inquiry-oriented learning, problem-solving and conceptual understanding approaches, project-based and STEAM/STEM-oriented learning, and visual, manipulative, and context-based learning. Among these, technology-enhanced and student-centred approaches were the most frequently reported in the literature. Overall, this review provides a comprehensive synthesis of creative teaching approaches in mathematics education and highlights prevailing trends and gaps in the existing literature. The findings offer valuable insights for educators, researchers, and curriculum developers in understanding how creative teaching is currently enacted in mathematics classrooms and suggest directions for future research on creative pedagogy in mathematics education.

Creative teaching; Mathematics education; Teaching approaches

1. Abdullah, A. H., Zakaria, M. I., Mokhtar, M., Khairuddin, N. K., Rasol, N. I. A. M., Hanafi, N. H., Suhaimee, N. R. A., Syahri, I., Antoni, Apriana, Susanti, R., & Yuliarni. (2025). The impact of ethnomathematics activities using Zapin and Kuda Kepang dances on students’ academic achievement and appreciation of isometric transformations. Mathematics Education Journal, 19(2), 299–322. https://doi.org/10.22342/mej.v19i2.pp299-322 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ahmad Fuad Khoo, N. A. K., Qi, H. W., & Osman, S. (2025). Innovative teaching strategy of using the “Transcard” model in conceptualizing fraction and decimal for primary mathematics education. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20(1), em0806. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/15735 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. AlAli, R. M., & Al-Barakat, A. A. (2024). Utilizing pre-service mathematics teachers to implement effective teaching and learning practices during their field experience. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 8(6), 1228–1239. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v9i1.2203 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. AlAli, R., Wardat, Y., Saleh, S., & Alshraifin, N. (2024). Evaluation of STEM-aligned teaching practices for gifted mathematics teachers. European Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), Article 08. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/14625 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Alhazzani, N. S. (2024). Enhancing mathematics teachers’ pedagogical skills by using ChatGPT. International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 7(4), 1614–1627. https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v7i4.3460 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Alhusna, A., Gistituati, N., & Ardi, H. (2025). Inquiry learning innovation: Efforts to develop inquiry-based teaching materials to increase mathematical and language literacy for mathematics students at university. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi, 9(2), 546–561. https://doi.org/10.22437/jiituj.v9i2.41592 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Alkouri, Z., & Wardat, Y. (2025). Digital integration in preschool math: Assessing the efficacy of a structured curriculum in classroom settings. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20(4), Article em0845. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/16662 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Ardianto, A., Effendi, M., Zainal, N. F., & Buchari, A. (2024). Towards effective learning: Understanding the connections of vocabulary, reasoning, and mathematical word problem-solving in Islamic elementary education. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 15(6), 2109–2116. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1506.36 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cahyono, A. N., Masrukan, M., Albar, W. F., Lavicza, Z., & Burnard, P. (2025). Creativity in designing virtual STEAM tasks with artificial intelligence mathematical dance. SN Computer Science, 6, Article 98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-024-03632-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Canonigo, A. M. (2024). Levering AI to enhance students’ conceptual understanding and confidence in mathematics. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13065 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Chang, C.-Y., Du, Z., Kuo, H.-C., & Chang, C.-C. (2023). Investigating the impact of design thinking-based STEAM project-based learning on students’ creativity and computational thinking. [Preprint manuscript]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Danlami, K. B., Zakariya, Y. F., Balarabe, B., Alotaibi, S. B., & Alrosaa, T. M. (2025). Improving students’ performance in geometry: An empirical evidence of the effectiveness of brainstorming learning strategy. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1577912. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1577912 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Dominguez, A. (2024). Teaching dynamics to enhance critical thinking and knowledge socialization in the mathematics classroom. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1388720. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1388720 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Elhilal, A. (2025). Cracking the math code: The impact of flipped classroom on problem-solving, digital fluency and self-directed learning. Cogent Education, 12(1), Article 2580767. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2580767 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Ersoy, E., & Kara, D. Z. (2026). The effect of the creative problem-solving approach on creative thinking skills. Frontiers in Psychology, Article 1734855. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1734855 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ferguson-Patrick, K., & Liebech-Lien, B. (2025). Implementing collaborative problem-solving in primary school mathematics: Action research. Educational Research, 67(4), 461–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2025.2571226 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Gruber, M., & Faßbender, S. (2025). Digital educational escape game design for STEM higher education. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1497291. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1497291 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Habiyaremye, H. T., Ntivuguruzwa, C., & Ntawiha, P. (2024). Implications of using reflective pedagogy and integrating technology in Rwandan teacher training to improve mathematics proficiency. Cogent Education, 11(1), Article 2428574. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2428574 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Hetmanenko, L. (2024). Applying Hamilton’s vector formula in mathematics education: Enhancing student mathematical skills through innovative teaching methods. Sapienza: International Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 5(3), Article e24050. https://doi.org/10.51798/sijis.v5i3.784 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hiwarekar, A. P. (2023). Innovative teaching–learning method for engineering mathematics through video lectures in rural areas. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 37(2), 210–223. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2023/v37i2/23162 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ion, T.-C., & Popescu, E. (2025). An innovative distance learning platform for mathematics education in secondary schools: Design, development and preliminary studies. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 5529–5560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13040-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Janardhanan, J., & Charles, M. A. A. (2024). Effectiveness of innovative techniques on pupils’ achievement in mathematics among higher secondary students in selected schools. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 8(6), 5562–5575. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v8i6.3230 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Johar, R., Ikhsan, M., Idami, Z., Khairunnisak, C., Ellianti, E., Rohaizati, U., & Ghazali, M. (2025). Enhancing mathematical communication and Islamic values in Islamic and regular schools through interactive worksheets. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1633056. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1633056 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Johar, R., Mailizar, Safitri, Y., Zubainur, C. M., & Suhartati, S. (2023). The use of mathematics comics to develop logical-mathematical intelligence for junior high school students. European Journal of Educational Research, 12(2), 1015–1027. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.2.1015 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Krishnan, K., Nasri, N. M., & Sadan, M. K. B. (2023). STEM approaches in teaching and learning process: A systematic literature review (SLR). International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v12-i4/19882 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Kusumandari, R. B., Triluqman, H. B., & Martitah, M. (2025). Enhancing critical thinking and student independence through interactive math media: An Articulate Storyline-based study in Indonesian elementary education. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 15(5), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2025-0178 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Lee, S. W.-Y., Tu, H.-Y., Chen, G.-L., & Lin, H.-M. (2023). Exploring the multifaceted roles of mathematics learning in predicting students’ computational thinking competency. International Journal of STEM Education, 10, Article 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00455-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Liu, D., Tan, X., Yan, H., & Li, W. (2024). Improving mental arithmetic ability of primary school students with schema teaching method: An experimental study. PLOS ONE, 19(4), e0297013. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0297013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Mišútová, M., & Mišút, M. (2025). Enhancing student success in engineering programs through the innovative teaching model. TEM Journal, 14(1), 540–550. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM141-48 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Nasir, M. A., Talib, R., Abdul Latif, A., Abdul Hanid, M. F., & Harmeni, H. A. (2023). STEM productive learning of lower secondary school in Southern Zone, Malaysia. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(2), 281–301. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.2.16 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Nasran, N. A. H. N., & Zakaria, M. I. (2025). Implementation of 4C skills through problem solving: A study among mathematics teachers in Malaysia. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 19(4), 2088–2096. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v19i4.22621 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Ncube, M., & Luneta, K. (2025). Concept-based instruction: Improving learner performance in mathematics through conceptual understanding. Pythagoras, 46(1), Article a815. https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v46i1.815 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Ntsanwisi, S. (2024). Bridging gaps in STEM education: The case for dedicated learning centres in South African townships and rural areas. European Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/15481 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Nungu, L., Mukama, E., & Nsabayezu, E. (2023). Online collaborative learning and cognitive presence in mathematics and science education: A case study of the University of Rwanda, College of Education. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11607-w [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Saparbayeva, E., Abdualiyeva, M., Torebek, Y., Kostangeldinova, A., Tursynbayev, A., Takibayeva, G., & Sabalakhova, A. (2025). Transforming mathematics education in Kazakhstan: Evaluating the impact of innovative teaching methods on student outcomes in technical universities. Cogent Education, 12(1), Article 2461978. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2461978 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Sasmita, F. E., Siswono, T., & Mariana, N. (2025). Exploring students’ creative thinking through collaborative problem-posing activities. Perspectives of Science and Education, 67(5), 18. https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2025.5.18 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Sierra-Correa, P. C., Ricardo, J., & Kintz, C. (2015). Ecosystem-based adaptation for improving coastal planning for sea-level rise: A systematic review for mangrove coasts. Marine Policy, 51, 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.09.013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Szilágyi, S., Körei, A., & Vaičiulytė, I. (2025). Teaching and learning trochoid curves: The importance of LEGO® drawing robots and educational robotics in tertiary mathematics education. Education Sciences, 15(11), Article 1472. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15111472 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Torrance, E. P. (1974). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-Technical Manual. Princeton, NJ: Personal Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Triet, L. V. M., Loc, N. P., & Ngan, N. N. T. (2024). Effect of GeoGebra-supported 5E learning model on students’ understanding of the area of a trapezium: A quasi-experimental study. Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, 16(6), 190–213. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Ukobizaba, F., Maniraho, J. F., & Uworwabayeho, A. (2025). Lesson observation tool for project-based learning: A useful tool for learner-centered pedagogy enhancement. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1623269. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1623269 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Weigand, H.-G., Trgalová, J., & Tabach, M. (2024). Mathematics teaching, learning, and assessment in the digital age. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 56, 525–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01612-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Xuan, S. H., Nguyen, A. T., Nguyen, T., Nguyen, L., Nguyen, H., Pham, N., Phung, T., Ngo, B., Nguyen, V., Nguyen, M., Tran, T., Le, T., Nguyen, K., & Pratima, F. N. U. (2025). Evaluating the impact of generative AI in mathematics education: A comparative study in Vietnamese high schools. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2025, Article 8886206. https://doi.org/10.1155/hbe2/8886206 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study