ZDM – Mathematics Education

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01578-8

ORIGINAL PAPER

Problem solving in mathematics education: tracing its foundations

and current research-practice trends
Manuel Santos-Trigo1

Accepted: 18 April 2024

© The Author(s) 2024

Abstract
In tracing recent research trends and directions in mathematical problem-solving, it is argued that advances in mathematics
practices occur and take place around two intertwined activities, mathematics problem formulation and ways to approach
and solve those problems. In this context, a problematizing principle emerges as central activity to organize mathematics
curriculum proposals and ways to structure problem-solving learning environments. Subjects’ use of concrete, abstract,
symbolic, or digital tools not only influences the ways to pose and pursue mathematical problems; but also shapes the type
of representation, exploration, and reasoning they engage to work and solve problems. Problem-solving foundations that
privilege learners’ development of habits of mathematical practices that involve an inquiry method to formulate conjec-
tures, to look for different ways to represent and approach problems, and to support and communicate results shed light on
directions of current research trends and the relevance of rethinking curriculum proposals and extending problem-solving
environments in terms of teachers/students’ consistent use of digital tools and online developments.

Keywords Mathematical problem solving · Conceptual frameworks · Digital and semiotic tools- · Mathematical
reasoning · Mathematics education developments · Digital technologies

1 Introduction and rationale to approach mathematical problems and to generate math-

Mathematical problem solving has been a prominent theme
and research area in the mathematics education agenda
during the last four decades. Problem-solving perspec-
tives have influenced and shaped mathematics curricu-
lum proposals and ways to support learning environments
worldwide (Törner et al., 2007; Toh et al., 2023). Various
disciplinary communities have identified and contributed
to connect problem-solving approaches with the students’
learning, construction, and application of mathematical
knowledge. The mathematics community recognizes that
the formulation and resolution of problems are central
activities in the development of the discipline (Halmos,
1980, Polya, 1945). Indeed, the identification and presenta-
tion of lists of unsolved mathematical problems have been
a tradition that has inspired the mathematics community
Manuel Santos-Trigo
msantos@cinvestav.mx
1
Centre for Research and Advanced Studies, Mathematics
Education Department, Mexico City, Mexico
ematical knowledge (Hilbert, 1902; Devlin, 2002). Thus,
mathematical problems, results, and solution attempts pro-
vide information regarding what areas and contents were
studied at different times during the development of the dis-
cipline (Santos-Trigo, 2020a, b). Cai et al. (2023) stated that
“ …[E]ngaging learners in the activity of problem posing
reflects a potentially strong link to the discipline of mathe-
matics” (p. 5). Thurston (1994) recognized that understand-
ing and applying a mathematical concept implies analysing,
coordinating, and integrating diverse meanings (geometric,
visual, intuitive, and formal definition) associated with such
concept and ways to carry out corresponding procedures
and operations in problematic situations.
The centrality of problem-solving in mathematicians’
own work and in their teaching, is incontrovertible.
Problem-solving is also a central topic for math-
ematics educators, who have developed conceptual
frameworks to formulate general ideas about problem-
solving (as opposed to the specific ideas needed for
solving specific problems) (Fried, 2014; p.17).

13

That is, the mathematics education community is interested
in analysing and documenting the students’ cognitive and
social behaviours to understand and develop mathematical
knowledge and problem-solving competencies. “…the idea
of understanding how mathematicians treat and solve prob-
lems, and then implementing this understanding in instruc-
tion design, was pivotal in mathematics education research
and practice” (Koichu, 2014). In addition, other disciplines
such as psychology, cognitive science or artificial intelli-
gence have provided tools and methods to delve into learn-
ers’ ways to understand mathematical concepts and to work
on problem situations. Thus, members of various communi-
ties have often worked in collaboration to identify and relate
relevant aspects of mathematical practices with the design
and implementation of learning scenarios that foster and
enhance students’ mathematical thinking and the develop-
ment of problem-solving competencies.
2 Methods and procedures
Research focus, themes, and inquiry methods in the math-
ematical problem-solving agenda have varied and been
influenced and shaped by theoretical and methodological
developments of mathematics education as a discipline
(English & Kirshner, 2016; Liljedahl & Cai, 2021). Further,
research designs and methods used in cognitive, social, and
computational fields have influenced the ways in which
mathematical problem-solving research are framed. An
overarching question to capture shifts and foundations in
problem-solving developments was: How has mathemati-
cal problem-solving research agenda varied and evolved in
terms of ways to frame, pose, and pursue research ques-
tions? In addressing this question, it was important to iden-
tify and contrast the structure and organization around some
published problem-solving reviews (Lester, 1994; Törner et
al., 2007; Rott et al., 2021; Liljedahl & Cai, 2021; Toh et
al., 2023) to shed light on a possible route to connect semi-
nal developments in the field with current research trends
and perspectives in mathematical problem-solving develop-
ments. The goal was to identify common problem-solving
principles that have provided a rational and foundations
to support recent problem-solving approaches for learn-
ers to construct mathematical knowledge and to develop
problem-solving competencies. The criteria to select the
set of published peer-reviewed studies, to consider in this
review, involved choosing articles published in indexed
journals (ZDM-Mathematics Education, Educational Stud-
ies in Mathematics, Mathematical Thinking and Learning,
Journal of Mathematical Behavior, and Journal for Research
in Mathematics Education); contributions that appear in
International Handbooks in Mathematics Education; and
13
M. Santos-Trigo
chapters published in recent mathematical problem-solving
books. The initial search included 205 publications whose
number was reduced to 55, all published in English, based
on reviewing their abstracts and conclusions. Around 100 of
the initial selection appeared in the references of an ongo-
ing weekly mathematical problem-solving doctoral seminar
that has been implemented during the last six years in our
department. In addition, some well-known authors in the
field were asked to identify their most representative publi-
cations to include in the review list. Here, some suggestions
were received, but at the end the list of contributions, that
appears in the references section, was chosen based on my
vision and experience in the field. The goal was to iden-
tify main issues or dimensions to frame and analyse recent
research trends and perspectives in mathematical problem-
solving developments. Thus, seminal reviews in the field
(Schoenfeld, 1992; Lester, 1994; Törner et al., 2007) pro-
vided directions on ways to structure and select the ques-
tions used to analyse the selected contributions. Table 1
shows chosen issues that resemble features of an adjusted
framework that Lester (1994) proposed to organize, summa-
rize, and analyse problem-solving developments in terms of
research emphasis (themes and research questions), meth-
odologies (research designs and methods), and achieved
results that the problem-solving community addressed dur-
ing the 1970–1994 period. Furthermore, relevant shifts in
the mathematical problem-solving agenda could be identi-
fied and explained in terms of what the global mathematics
education and other disciplines pursue at different periods.
It is important to mention that the content and struc-
ture of this paper involve a narrative synthesis of selected
articles that includes contributions related to mathematical
problem-solving foundations and those that address recent
developments published in the last 9 years that involve the
use of digital technologies. Table 1 shows themes, issues,
and overarching questions that were used to delve into prob-
lem-solving developments.
To contextualize the current state of art in the field, it is
important to revisit problem-solving principles and tenets
that provide foundations and a rationale to centre and sup-
port the design and implementation of learning environments
around problem-solving activities (Santos-Trigo, 2020a, b).
The identification of mathematical problem-solving founda-
tions also implies acknowledging what terms, concepts, and
language or discourse that the problem-solving community
has used to refer to and frame problem-solving approaches.
For example, routine and nonroutine tasks, heuristic and
metacognitive strategies, students’ beliefs, mathematical
thinking and practices, resources, orientations, etc. are com-
mon terms used to explain, foster, and characterize students’
problem-solving behaviours and performances. Recently,
the consistent use of digital technologies in educational
Problem solving in mathematics education: tracing its foundations and current research-practice trends

Table 1 Main issues and dimensions to trace mathematical problem-solving developments

Categories or dimen- How do contextual issues and global mathematics education developments shape the mathematical problem-solv-
sions that influence and ing agenda? How have research methods varied and evolved to analyse students’ problem-solving competencies?
shape problem-solving To what extent have research results in the field influenced curriculum proposals and teaching/learning scenarios?
developments
Contextual issues Themes and research orientations in mathematical problem-solving emerge and are characterized within a context
that is influenced by the international trends and theoretical advances of the mathematics education as a field of
inquiry (Törner et al., 2007; Liljedahl & Cai, 2021; Toh et al., 2023). Thus, in tracing problem-solving develop-
ments and research results, it is relevant to identify what research interest and themes were or are part of the
global mathematics education research and practice agenda and the extent to which they influenced the research
questions posed during the corresponding period.
Themes, relevant ques- At different times, research in the field has identified different themes and posed research questions that the
tions, and main results mathematical problem-solving community considers that are significant to pursue. Further, it is important to
discern and address the extent to which problem-solving developments in different periods have contributed to
identify and follow new research areas and directions in the field. Koichu (2014) pointed out that problem-solving
research has entered a new developmental cycle that “it seeks to provide new answers to some old questions; …by
employing and bridging methods, models and theories that have been produced both within and outside mathe-
matics education” (p. 132). Specifically, the use of different digital tools opens new ways to work on mathematical
tasks and to gather and analyse information regarding students’ problem-solving behaviours (Santos-Trigo, 2023).
Research methods to frame Quantitative and qualitative research designs and paradigms have permeated and used to frame mathematical
problem-solving studies problem-solving research. Each research methodology provides a rationale for aims and posing research questions
and for selecting a set of criteria to design tools for collecting data and to validate and fulfil the trustworthiness
and consistency of results. The goal is to identify possible relationships between methods used in mathematics
education and those applied in problem-solving research. In addition, individual and collective ways to develop
problem-solving proficiency demand that researchers constantly develop tools and conceptual frameworks that
integrate research methodologies from different fields such as cognitive science, computer fields, or psychology.
Features of curriculum How have research results in the field influenced the design and implementation of curriculum proposals? It
proposals and teaching/ is important to discuss the extent to which research results in mathematical problem-solving have shaped and
learning scenarios based influenced the design of mathematics curriculum and ways to structure and implement problem-solving learning
on problem-solving scenarios. Specifically, ways in which curriculum proposals endorse problem-solving approaches and what role
perspective. teachers and students play during the implementation of problem-solving approaches. Recently, a hybrid approach
that combine learners’ remote and face-to-face work requires changes or adjustments in curriculum proposals and
ways to assess students’ learning (Engelbrecht & Borba, 2023).

tasks has extended the problem-solving language to include
terms such as subjects’ tool appropriation, dynamic models,
dragging or moving orderly objects, tracing loci, visual or
empirical solution, ChatGPT prompts, etc.
3 On mathematical problem-solving
foundations and the problematizing
principle
There might be different ways to interpret and implement a
problem-solving approach for students to understand con-
cepts and to solve problems (Törner, Schoenfeld, & Reiss,
2007; Toh et al., 2023); nevertheless, there are common
principles or tenets that distinguish and support a problem-
solving teaching/learning environment. A salient feature
in any problem-solving approach to learn mathematics is
a conceptualization of the discipline that privileges and
enhance the students’ development of mathematical prac-
tices or reasoning habits of mathematical thinking (Cuoco,
et, al., 1996; Dick & Hollebrands, 2011; Schoenfeld, 2022).
In this context, students need to conceptualize and think of
their own learning as a set of dilemmas that are represented,
explored, and solved in terms of mathematical resources
and strategies (Santos-Trigo, 2023; Hiebert et al., 1996).
Furthermore, students’ problem-solving experiences
and behaviours reflect and become a way of thinking that
is consistent with mathematics practices and is manifested
in terms of the activities they engage throughout all prob-
lem-solving phases. Thus, they privilege the development
of mathematics habits such as to always look for different
ways to model and explore mathematical problems, to for-
mulate conjectures, and to search for arguments to support
them, share problem solutions, defend their ideas, and to
develop a proper language to communicate results. In terms
of connecting ways of developing mathematical knowledge
and the design of learning environments to develop math-
ematical thinking and problem-solving competencies, Polya
(1945) identifies an inquiry approach for students to under-
stand, make sense, and apply mathematical concepts. He
illustrated the importance for students to pose and pursue
different questions around four intertwined problem-solv-
ing phases: Understanding and making sense of the problem
statement (what is the problem about? What data are pro-
vided? What is asked to find? etc.), the design of a solution
plan (how the problem can be approached? ), the implemen-
tation of such plan (how the plan can be achieved? ), and

13

the looking-back phase that involves reviewing the solution
process (data used, checking the involved operations, con-
sistency of units, and partial and global solution), generaliz-
ing the solution methods and posing new problems. Indeed,
the looking-back phase involves the formulation of new or
related problems (Toh et al., 2023). “For Pólya, mathemat-
ics was about inquiry; it was about sense making; it was
about understanding how and why mathematical ideas fit
together the ways they do” (cited in Schoenfeld, 2020, p.
1167).
Likewise, the Nobel laureate I. I. Rabi mentioned that,
when he came home from school, “while other moth-
ers asked their kids ‘Did you learn anything today?’ [my
mother] would say, ‘Izzy, did you ask a good question
today?’” (Berger, 2014, p.67).
Thus, the problematizing principle is key for students
to engage in mathematical problem-solving activities, and
it gets activated by an inquiry or inquisitive method that
is expressed in terms of questions that students pose and
pursue to delve into concepts meaning, representations,
explorations, operations, and to work on mathematical tasks
(Santos-Trigo, 2020a, b).
4 The importance of mathematical tasks
and the role of tools in problem-solving
perspectives
In a problem-solving approach, learners develop a way of
thinking to work on different types of tasks that involve a
variety of context and aims (Cai & Hwang, 2023). A task
might require students to formulate a problem from given
information, to estimate how much water a family spend
in one year, to prove a geometry theorem, to model genetic
sequences or to understand the interplay between climate
and geography. In this process, students identify mathemati-
cal resources, concepts, and strategies to model and explore
partial and global solutions, and ways to extend solution
methods and results. Furthermore, mathematical tasks or
problems are essential for students to engage in mathemati-
cal practice and to develop problem-solving competencies.
Task statements should be situated in different contexts
including realistic, authentic, or mathematical domains, and
prompts or questions to solve or respond or even provide
information or data for students to formulate and solve their
own problems (problem posing). Current events or prob-
lematic situations such as climate change, immigration, or
pandemics not only are part of individuals concerns; but
also, a challenge for teachers and students to model and
analyze those complex problems through mathematics
and others disciplines knowledge (English, 2023). Santos-
Trigo (2019) proposed a framework to transform exercises
13
M. Santos-Trigo
or routine textbook problems into a series of nonroutine
tasks in which students have an opportunity to dynami-
cally model, explore, and extend, the initial problem. Here,
the use of technology becomes important to explore the
behavior of some elements within the model to find objects’
mathematical relationships. That is, students work on tasks
in such a way that even routine problems become a start-
ing point for them to engage in mathematical reflection to
extend the initial nature of the task (Santos-Trigo & Reyes-
Martínez, 2019). Recently, the emergence of tools such as
the ChatGPT has confirmed the importance for learners to
problematize situations, including complex problems, in
terms of providing prompts or inputs that the tool processes
and answers. Here, students analyze the tool’ responses and
assess its pertinence to work and solve the task. Indeed, a
way to use ChatGPT involves that students understand or
make sense of the problem statement and pose questions
(inputs or prompts) to ask the tool for concept information
or ways to approach or solve the task. Then, students ana-
lyze the relevance, viability, and consistency of the tool’s
answer and introduce new inputs to continue with the solu-
tion process or to look for another way to approach the task.
Based on the ChatGPT output or task solution, students
could always ask whether the tool can provide other ways
to solve the task.
5 Main problem-solving research themes
and results
In this section the focus will be on identifying certain prob-
lem-solving developments that have permeated recent direc-
tions of the field. One relates to the importance of extending
research designs to analyse and characterize learners’ prob-
lem-solving process to work on different types of tasks.
Another development involves ways in which theoretical
advances in mathematics education have shaped the math-
ematical problem-solving research agenda and the extent to
which regional or national educational systems or traditions
influence the developments of conceptual frameworks in
the field and ways to implement problem-solving activities
within the corresponding system. Finally, research results in
the field have provided directions to design and implement
curriculum proposals around the world and these proposals
have evolved in terms of both content structure and class-
room dynamics including the use of digital technologies.
Santos-Trigo (2023) stated that the teachers and students’
systematic use of digital technologies not only expands
their ways of reasoning and solving mathematical problems;
but also opens new research areas that aim to analyse the
integration of several digital tools in curriculum proposals
and learning scenarios. The focus of this review will be on
Problem solving in mathematics education: tracing its foundations and current research-practice trends
presenting problem-solving directions and results in the last
9 years; however, it became relevant to identify and review
what principles and tenets provided bases or foundations to
support and define current research trends and directions in
the field. That is, accumulated research that has contributed
to advance and expand the problem-solving research agenda
included shifts in the tools used to delve into learners’ prob-
lem approaches, the development of conceptual frameworks
to explain and characterize students’ mathematical thinking,
the tools used to work on mathematical tasks (from paper
and pencil, ruler and compass or semiotic tools to digital
apps), and in the design of curriculum proposals and the
implementation of problem-solving learning scenarios.
5.1 Relevant shifts in problem-solving
developments and results
Questions used to analyse important developments in the
field include: What research designs and tools are used to
foster and analyse learners’ problem-solving performances?
How have conceptual frameworks evolved to pose and
frame research questions in the field? How have accumu-
lated research results in the field been used to support cur-
riculum proposals and their implementation?
5.1.1 Methodological and research paradigms
Research designs in problem-solving studies have gradu-
ally moved from quantitative or statistical paradigms to
qualitative perspectives that involve data collection from
different sources such as task-based interviews, fieldnotes
from observations, students’ written reports, etc. to analyse
students’ problem-solving approaches and performances.
Trustworthiness of results included triangulating and inter-
preting data sources from students’ videotapes transcrip-
tions, outside observer notes, class observations, etc. (Stake,
2000). Hence, the work of Krutestkii (1976) was seminal in
providing tools to delve into the students’ thinking while
solving mathematical tasks. His research program aimed
to study the nature and structure of children’ mathematical
abilities. His methodological approach involved the use of
student’s task-based interviews, teachers, and mathema-
ticians’ questionaries to explore the nature of mathemati-
cal abilities, the analysis of eminent mathematicians and
physicists regarding their nature and emergence of their
talents and case studies of gifted children in mathematics. A
major contribution of his research was the variety of math-
ematical tasks used to explore and analyse the mathemati-
cal abilities of school children. Recently, the mathematical
problem-posing agenda has been revisited to advance con-
ceptual frameworks to enhance the students’ formulation of
problems to learn concepts and to develop problem-solving
competencies (Cai et al., 2023). In general, the initial quali-
tative research tendency privileged case studies where indi-
vidual students were asked to work on mathematical tasks
to document their problem-solving performances. Later,
research designs include the students’ participation in small
groups and the analysis of students’ collaboration with the
entire group (Brady et al., 2023). Bricolage frameworks
that share tenets and information from different fields have
become a powerful tool for researchers to understand com-
plex people’ problem-solving proficiency (Lester, 2005;
English, 2023).
5.1.2 Theoretical developments in mathematics education
In mathematics education, the constructivism perspective
became relevant to orient and support research programs.
Specifically, the recognition that students construct math-
ematical concepts and ideas through active participation as
a part of a learning community that fosters and values what
they bring into the classroom (eliciting students’ under-
standing) and sharing and discussing with peers their ways
to work on mathematical activities. Further, it was recog-
nized that students’ learning of mathematics takes place
within a sociocultural environment (situated learning) that
promotes the students’ interaction in small groups, pairs,
and whole group discussions. Thus, problem-solving envi-
ronments transited from teachers being a main figure to
organize learning activities and to model problem-solving
behaviours to being centred on students’ active participa-
tion to work on a variety of mathematical tasks as a part
of a learning community (Lester & Cai, 2016). English
(2023) proposed A STEM-based problem-solving frame-
work that addresses the importance of a multidisciplinary
approach and experiences to work on complex problems.
Here, students develop a system of inquiry that integrates
critical thinking, mathematical modelling, and a creative
and innovative approach to deal with problematic situations
situated in contexts beyond school problems. The STEM-
based problem-solving framework enhances and favours
the students’ development of multidisciplinary thinking to
formulate and approach challenging problematic situations.
To this end, they need to problematize information to char-
acterize local and global problems and to collaboratively
work on feasible approaches and solutions. It integrates
21st century skills that include an inquiry problem-solving
approach to develop and exhibit critical thinking, creativity,
and innovative solutions.
13

5.1.3 Countries or regional education traditions and their
influence on the problem-solving agenda
The emergence of problem-solving frameworks takes place
within an educational and socio-cultural context that pro-
vides conditions for their development and dissemination,
but also limitations in their applications inside the math-
ematics education community. Brady et al. (2023) pointed
out that:
…shifts in the theoretical frameworks of mathemat-
ics education researchers favored a widening of the
view on problem solving from information-processing
theories toward sociocultural theories that encouraged
a conception of problem-solving as situated cognition
unfolding within a community of practice (p. 34).
In addition, regional or national educational systems and
research traditions also shape the problem-solving research
and practice agenda. For example, in France, problem-
solving approaches and research are framed in terms of
two relevant theoretical and practical frameworks: Theory
of Didactic Situation and the Anthropological Theory of
Didactics (Artigue & Houdement, 2007). While, in the
Netherlands, problem-solving approaches are situated
within the theory of Realistic Mathematics that encour-
ages and supports the students’ construction of meaning of
concepts and methods in terms of modelling real-life and
mathematical situations (Doorman et al., 2007). Ding et al.
(2022) stated that the Chinese educational system refers to
problem solving as an instructional goal and an approach
to learn mathematics. Here, students deal with different
types of problem-solving activities that include finding
multiple solutions to one problem, one solution to multiple
problems, and one problem multiple changes. Thus, ‘teach-
ing with variation’ is emphasized in Chinese instruction in
terms of “variations in solutions, presentations, and condi-
tions/conclusions” (p. 482). Cai and Rott (2023) proposed
a general problem-posing process model that distinguishes
four problem-posing phases: Orientation (understanding
the situation and what is required or is asked to pose); Con-
nection that involves finding out or generating ideas and
strategies to pose problems in different ways such as vary-
ing the given situation, or posing new problems; Genera-
tion refers to making the posed problem visible for others to
understand it; and Reflection involves reflecting on her/his
own process to pose the problem including ways to improve
problem statements. The challenge in this model is to make
explicit how the use of digital technologies can contribute
to providing conditions for students to engage in all phases
around problem- posing process.
13
M. Santos-Trigo
5.1.4 Curriculum proposals and problem-solving teaching/
learning scenarios
In the USA, the Common Core State Mathematics Standards
curriculum proposal (CCSMS) identifies problem solving as
a process standard that supports core mathematical practices
that involve reasoning and proof, communication, represen-
tation, and connections. Thus, making sense of problems
and persevering in solving them, reasoning abstractly and
quantitatively, constructing viable arguments and critiquing
the reasoning of others, modelling with mathematics, etc.
are essential activities for students to develop mathematics
proficiency and problem-solving approaches (Schoenfeld,
2023). In Singapore, the curriculum proposal identifies
problem solving as the centre of its curriculum framework
that relates its development with the study of concepts,
skills, processes, attitudes, and metacognition (Lee et al.,
2019). Recently, educational systems have begun to reform
curriculum proposals to relate what the use of digital tech-
nologies demands in terms of selecting and structuring
mathematical contents and ways to extend instructional set-
tings (Engelbrecht & Borba, 2023). Indeed, Engelbrecht et
al. (2023) identify what they call a classroom in movement
or a distributed classroom- that transforms traditional cubic
spaces to study the discipline into a movable setting that
might combine remote and face-to-face students work.
It is argued that previous results in mathematical prob-
lem-solving research not only have contributed to recognize
what is relevant and what common tenets distinguish and
support problem-solving approaches; but also have pro-
vided bases to identify and pursue current problem-solving
developments and directions. Hence, the consistent and
coordinated use of several digital technologies and online
developments (teaching and learning platforms) has opened
new routes for learners to represent, explore, and work on
mathematical problems; and to engage them in mathemati-
cal discussions beyond formal class settings. How does the
students’ use of digital technologies expand the ways they
reason and solve mathematical problems? What changes in
classroom environments and physical settings are needed
to recognize and include students’ face-to-face and remote
work? (Engelbrecht et al., 2023).
In the next sections, the goal is to characterize the
extent to which the consistent use of digital technologies
and online developments provides affordances to restruc-
ture mathematical curriculum proposals and classrooms or
learning settings and to enhance and expand students’ math-
ematical reasoning.
Problem solving in mathematics education: tracing its foundations and current research-practice trends
6 Current mathematical problem-solving
trends and developments: the use of digital
technologies
Although the use of technologies has been a recurrent
theme in research studies, curriculum proposals, and teach-
ing practices in mathematics education; during the COVID-
pandemic lockdown, all teachers and students relied on
digital technologies to work on mathematical tasks. At dif-
ferent phases, they developed and implemented not only
novel paths to present, discuss, and approach teaching/
learning activities; but also, ways to monitor and assess
students’ problem-solving performances. When schools
returned to teachers and students’ face-to-face activities,
some questions emerged: What adjustments or changes in
school practices are needed to consider and integrate those
learning experiences that students developed during the
social confinement? What digital tools should teachers and
students use to work on mathematical tasks? How should
teaching/learning practices reconcile students remote and
face-to-face work? To address these questions, recent stud-
ies that involve ways to integrate technology in educational
practices were reviewed, and their main themes and findings
are organized and problematized to shed light on what the
use of digital technologies contributes to frame and support
learning environments.
6.1 The use of technology to reconceptualize
students mathematical learning
There are different studies that document the importance
and ways in which the students’ use of tools such as CAS or
Excel offers an opportunity for them to think of concepts and
problems in terms of different representations to transit from
intuitive, visual, or graphic to formal or analytical reasoning
(Arcavi et al., 2017). Others digital technologies, such as a
Dynamic Geometry System1 DGS, provide affordances for
students to dynamically represent and explore mathemati-
cal problems. In students’ use of digital technologies, the
problematizing principle becomes relevant to transform the
tool into an instrument to work on mathematical tasks. San-
tos-Trigo (2019) provides examples where students rely on
GeoGebra affordances to reconstruct figures that are given
in problem statements; to transform routine problem into an
investigation task; to model and explore tasks that involve
variational reasoning; and to construct dynamic configura-
tions to formulate and support mathematical relations. In
1
The term Dynamic Geometry System is used, instead of Dynamic
Geometry Environment or Dynamic Geometry Software, to emphasize
that the app or tool interface encompasses a system of affordances that
combines the construction of dynamic models, the use of Computer
Algebra Systems and the use spreadsheet programs.
this process, students not only exhibit diverse problem-
solving strategies; but also, identify and integrate and use
different concepts and resources that are studied in algebra,
geometry, and calculus. That is, the use of technology pro-
vides an opportunity for students to integrate and connect
knowledge from diverse areas or domains. For instance,
Sinclair and Ferrara (2023) used the multi-touch application
(TouchCounts) for children to work on mathematical chal-
lenging tasks.
6.2 The use of digital technologies to design a
didactic route
There is indication, that the use of digital technologies
offers different paths for students to learn mathematics
(Leung & Bolite-Frant, 2015; Leung & Baccaglini-Frank,
2017). For instance, in the construction of a dynamic model
of a problem, they are required to think of concepts and
information embedded in the problem in terms of geomet-
ric representation or meaning. Thus, focusing on ways for
students to represent and explore concepts geometrically
could be the departure point to understand concepts and
to solve mathematical problems. In addition, students can
explore problems’ dynamic models (dragging schemes) in
terms of visual, empirical, and graphic representations to
initially identify relations that become relevant to approach
and solve the problems. Thus, tool affordances become rel-
evant for students to detect patterns, to formulate conjec-
tures and to transit from empirical to formal argumentation
to support problem solutions (Pittalis & Drijvers, 2023).
Engelbrecht and Borba (2023) recognized that the promi-
nent use of digital technologies in school mathematics has
produced pedagogical shifts in teaching and learning prac-
tices to “encourage more active students learning, foster
greater engagement, and provide more flexible access to
learning’ (p. 1). Multiple use technologies such as internet,
communication apps (ZOOM, Teams, Google Meet, etc.)
become essential tools for teachers and students to pres-
ent, communicate, and share information or to collaborate
with peers. While tools used to represent, explore, and delve
into concepts and to work and solve mathematical problems
(Dynamic Geometry Systems, Wolframalpha, etc.) expand
the students’ ways of reasoning and solving problems. Both
types of technologies are not only important for teachers and
students to continue working on school tasks beyond formal
settings, but they also provide students with an opportunity
to consult online resources such as Wikipedia or KhanAcad-
emy to review or extend their concepts understanding, to
analyse solved problems, and to contrast their teachers’
explanation of themes or concepts with those provided in
learning platforms.
13

6.3 Students’ access to mathematics learning
Nowadays, cell phones are essential tools for people or stu-
dents to interact or to approach diverse tasks and an educa-
tional challenge is how teachers/students can use them to
work on mathematical tasks. During the COVID-19 social
confinement, students relied on communication apps not
only to interact with their teachers during class lectures;
but also, to keep discussing tasks with peers beyond for-
mal class meetings. That is, students realized that with the
use of technology they could expand their learning space to
include sharing and discussing ideas and problem solutions
with peers beyond class sessions, consulting online learn-
ing platforms or material to review or extend their concepts
understanding, and to watch videos to contrast experts’ con-
cepts explanations and those provided by their teachers. In
this perspective, the use of digital technologies increases the
students’ access to different resources and the ways to work
on mathematical tasks. Thus, available digital developments
seem to extend the students collaborative work in addition
to class activities. Furthermore, the flipped classroom model
seems to offer certain advantages for students to learn the
discipline and this model needs to be analysed in terms of
what curriculum changes and ways to assess or monitor stu-
dents learning are needed in its design and implementation
(Cevikbas & Kaiser, 2022).
6.4 Changes in curriculum and mathematical
assessment
It is recognized that the continuous development and avail-
ability of digital technologies is not only altering the ways
in which individuals interact and face daily activities; but is
also transforming educational practices and settings. Like-
wise, people’s concerns about multiple events or global
problems such climate change, immigration, educational
access, renewable resources, or racial conflicts or wars are
themes that permeate the educational arena. Thus, curricu-
lum reforms should address ways to connect students’ edu-
cation with the analysis of these complex problems. English
(2023) stated that:
The ill-defined problems of today, coupled with unex-
pected disruptions across all walks of life, demand
advanced problem-solving by all citizens. The need to
update outmoded forms of problem solving, which fail
to take into account increasing global challenges, has
never been greater (p.5).
In this perspective, mathematics curriculum needs to be
structured around essential contents and habits of math-
ematical thinking for students to understand and make sense
13
M. Santos-Trigo
of real-world events that lead them to formulate, represent,
and deal with a variety of problem situations. “Educators
now increasingly seek to emphasise the practical applica-
tions of mathematics, such as modelling real-life scenarios
and understanding statistical data (Engelbrecht & Borba,
2023, p. 7). For instance, during the pandemic it was impor-
tant to problematize the available data to follow, analyze
and predict its spread behavior and to propose health mea-
sures to reduce people contagion. Thus, exponential func-
tions, graphics, and their interpretations, data analysis,
etc. were important mathematics content to understand the
pandemic phenomena. Drijvers and Sinclair (2023) recog-
nized that features of computational thinking share common
grounds with mathematical thinking in terms of problem-
solving activities that privilege model construction, the use
of algorithms, abstraction processes and generalization of
results. Thus, “a further integration of computational think-
ing in the mathematics curriculum is desirable”. In terms of
ways to assess and monitor students’ learning, the idea is
that with the use of a digital tool (digital wall or log), stu-
dents could organize, structure, register, and monitor their
individual and group work and learning experiences. That
is, they could periodically report and share what difficulties
they face to understand concepts or to work on a task, what
questions they posed, what sources consult, etc. The infor-
mation that appears in the digital wall is shared within the
group and the teacher and students can provide feedback or
propose new ideas or solutions (Santos-Trigo et al., 2022).
6.5 The integration of technologies and the
emergence of conceptual frameworks
Institutions worldwide, in general, are integrating the use
of different technologies in their educational practices, and
they face the challenge to reconcile previous pandemic
models and post confinement learning scenarios. “A peda-
gogical reason for using technology is to empower learners
with extended or amplified abilities to acquire knowledge…
technology can empower their cognitive abilities to reason
in novice ways (Leung, 2011, p. 327). Drijvers and Sinclair
(2023) proposed a five-dimensional framework to delve
into the rationale and purposes for the mathematics edu-
cation community to integrate the use of digital technolo-
gies in mathematical teaching environments and students
learning. The five interrelated categories address issues
regarding how teachers and students’ use of digital tech-
nology contributes to reconceptualize and improve math-
ematics learning; to understand and explain how students’
mathematics learning develops; to design environments
for mathematics learning; to foster and provide equitable
access to mathematics learning; and to change mathematics
curricula and teaching and assessment practices (Drijvers
Problem solving in mathematics education: tracing its foundations and current research-practice trends
& Sinclair, 2023). Schoenfeld (2022) stated that “The chal-
lenge is to create robust learning environments that support
every student in developing not only the knowledge and
practices that underlie effective mathematical thinking, but
that help them develop the sense of agency to engage in
sense making” (p. 764). Højsted et al. (2022) argue about
the importance of adjusting theoretical frameworks to
explicitly integrate the use of digital technologies such as
DGS and Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) in teaching
practices. They referred to the Danish “Competencies and
Mathematical Learning framework” (KOM) that gets artic-
ulated through tenets associated with the Theory of Instru-
mental Orchestration (TIO) and the notion of Justification
Mediation (JM). In general terms, the idea is that learners
get explicitly involved in a tool’ appropriation process that
transforms the artifact into an instrument to understand con-
cepts and to solve mathematical problems. That is, learners’
tool appropriation involves the development of cognitive
schemata to rely on technology affordances to work on
mathematical tasks. Koichu et al. (2022) pointed out that the
incorporation of problem-solving approaches in instruction
should be seen as a specific case of implementing innova-
tion. To this end, they proposed a framework of problem-
solving implementation chain that involves “a sequence of
actions and interactions beginning with the development of
a PS resource by researchers, which teachers then engage
with in professional development (PD), and finally, teachers
and students make use of in classrooms” (p. 4). In this case,
problem-solving resources include the design of problem-
atic situations (tasks) to engage students in mathematical
discussions to make sense of problem statements or to ask
them to pose a task.
7 Reflections and concluding remarks
Throughout different periods, the research and practice
mathematical problem-solving agenda has contributed sig-
nificantly to understand not only essentials in mathematical
practices; but also, the development of conceptual frame-
works to explain and document subjects’ cognitive, social,
and affective behaviours to understand mathematical con-
cepts and to develop problem-solving competencies. Leikin
and Guberman (2023) pointed out that “…problem-solving
is an effective didactical tool that allows pupils to mobi-
lize their existing knowledge, construct new mathematical
connections between known concepts and properties, and
construct new knowledge in the process of overcoming
challenges embedded in the problems” (p. 325). The study
of people cognitive functioning to develop multidisciplinary
knowledge and to solve problems involves documenting
ways in which individuals make decisions regarding ways
to organize their subject or disciplinary learning (how to
interact with teachers or experts and peers; what material to
consult, what tools to use, how to monitor their own learn-
ing, etc.) and to engage in disciplinary practices to achieve
their learning goals. Both strategic and tactic decisions
shape teachers and students’ ways to work on mathematical
tasks. Kahneman (2011) shed light on how human beings
make decisions to deal with questions and problematic
situations. He argues that individuals rely on two systems
to make decisions and engage in thinking processes; sys-
tem one (fast thinking) that involves automatic, emotional,
instinctive reasoning and system two (slow thinking) that
includes logical, deliberative, effortful, or conscious rea-
soning. In educational tasks, the idea is that teachers and
students develop experiences based on the construction
and activation of system two. Thus, how teachers/students
decide what tools or digital developments to use to work on
mathematical problems becomes a relevant issue to address
in the mathematics education agenda. Recent and consis-
tent developments and the availability of digital technolo-
gies open novel paths for teachers and students to represent,
explore, and approach mathematical tasks and, provide dif-
ferent tools to extend students and teachers’ mathematical
discussions beyond classroom settings. In this perspective,
it becomes important to discuss what changes the system-
atic use of digital technologies bring to the mathematics
contents and to the ways to frame mathematical instruction.
For example, the use of a Dynamic Geometry System to
model and explore calculus, geometry or algebra classic
problems dynamically not only offer students an opportu-
nity to connect foundational concepts such as rate of change
or the perpendicular bisector concept to geometrically study
variational phenomena or conic sections; but also, to engage
them in problem-posing activities (Santos-Trigo et al.,
2021). Thus, teachers need to experience themselves differ-
ent ways to use digital technologies to work on mathemati-
cal tasks and to identify instructional paths for students to
internalize the use of digital apps as an instrument to under-
stand concepts and to pose and formulate mathematical
problems. Specifically, curriculum proposal should be struc-
tured around the development of foundational concepts and
problem-solving strategies to formulate and pursue complex
problems such as those involving climate changes, wealth
distribution, immigration, pollution, mobility, connectivity,
etc. To formulate and approach these problems, students
need to develop a multidisciplinary thinking and rely on dif-
ferent tools to represent, explore, and share and continuously
report partial solutions. To this end, they are encouraged to
work with peers and groups as a part of learning community
that fosters and values collective problem solutions. Finding
multiple paths to solve problems becomes important for stu-
dents to develop creative and innovative problem solutions
13

(Leikin & Guberman, 2023). In this perspective, learning
environments should provide conditions for students to
transform digital applications in problem-solving tools to
work on problematic situations. Online students’ assign-
ments become an important component to structure and
organize students and teachers’ face-to-face interactions.
Likewise, the use of technology can also provide a tool
for students to register and monitor their work and learn-
ing experiences. A digital wall or a problem-solving digital
notebook (Santos-Trigo et al., 2022) could be introduced
for students to register and monitor their learning experi-
ences. Here, Students are asked to record on a weekly basis
their work, questions, comments, and ideas that include:
Questions they pose to understand concepts and problem
statements; online resources and platforms they consult to
contextualize problems and review and extend their under-
standing of involved concepts; concepts and strategies used
to solve problems through different approaches; the Identi-
fication of other problems that can be solved with the meth-
ods that were used to solve the problem; digital technologies
and online resources used to work on and solve the problem;
dynamic models used to solve the problem and strategies
used to identify and explore mathematical relations (drag-
ging objects, measuring object attributes, tracing loci, using
sliders, etc.; the formulation of new related problems includ-
ing possible extensions for the initial problem; discussion of
solutions of some new problems; and short recorded video
presentation of their work and problem solutions. That is,
the digital wall becomes an space for learners to share their
work and to contrast and reflect on their peers work includ-
ing extending their problem-solving approaches based on
their teachers feedback and peers’ ideas or solutions.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format,
as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the
source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate
if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless
indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended
use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted
use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright
holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/4.0/.
References
Arcavi, A., Drijvers, P., & Stacy, K. (2017). The learning and teaching
of algebra. Ideas, insights, and activities. NY: Routledge. ISBN
9780415743723.
Artigue, M., & Houdement, C. (2007). Problem solving in France:
Didactic and curricular perspectives. ZDM Int J Math Educ,
39(5–6), 365–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-007-0048-x.
13
M. Santos-Trigo
Berger, W. (2014). A more beautiful question. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Kindle Edition.
Brady, C., Ramírez, P., & Lesh, R. (2023). Problem posing and mod-
eling: Confronting the dilemma of rigor or relevance. In T. L.
Toh et al. (Eds.), Problem Posing and Problem Solving in Math-
ematics Education, pp: 33–50, Singapore: Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-981-99-7205-0_3.
Cai, J., & Hwang, S. (2023). Making mathematics challeng-
ing through problem posing in classroom. In R. Leikin (Ed.),
Mathematical Challenges For All, Research in Mathematics
Education, Springer: Switzerland, pp. 115–145, https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-031-18868-8_7.
Cai, J., & Rott, B. (2023). On understanding mathematical problem-
posing processes. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 56, 61–71.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01536-w.
Cai, J., Hwang, S., & Melville, M. (2023). Mathematical problem-
posing research: Thirty years of advances building on the publi-
cation of on mathematical problem solving. In J. Cai et al. (Eds.),
Research Studies on Learning and Teaching of Mathematics,
Research in Mathematics Education, Springer: Switzerland, pp:
1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35459-5_1.
Cevikbas, M., & Kaiser, G. (2022). Can flipped classroom pedagogy
offer promising perspectives for mathematics education on pan-
demic-related issues? A systematic literature review. ZDM – Math-
ematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01388-w.
Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, E. P., & Mark, J. (1996). Habits of mind: An
organizing principle for mathematics curricula. Journal of Math-
ematical Behavior, 15, 375–402.
Devlin, K. (2002). The millennium problems. The seven greatest
unsolved mathematical puzzles of our time. Granta.
Dick, T. P., & Hollebrands, K. F. (2011). Focus in high school math-
ematics: Technology to support reasoning and sense making.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, NCTM: Reston
Va. ISBN 978-0-87353-641-7.
Ding, M., Wu, Y., Liu, Q., & Cai, J. (2022). Mathematics learning in
Chinese contexts. ZDM -Mathematics Education, 54, 577–496.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01385-z.
Doorman, M., Drijvers, P., Dekker, T., Van den Heuvel- Panhuizen,
M., de Lange, J., & Wijers, M. (2007). Problem solving as a
challenge for mathematics education in the Netherlands. ZDM
Int J Math Educ, 39(5–6), 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11858-007-0043-2.
Drijvers, P., & Sinclair, N. (2023). The role of digital technologies in
mathematics education: Purposes and perspectives. ZDM-Math-
ematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01535-x.
Engelbrecht, J., & Borba, M. C. (2023). Recent developments in using
digital technology in mathematics education. ZDM -Mathematics
Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01530-2.
Engelbrecht, J., Borba, M. C., & Kaiser, G. (2023). Will we ever teach
mathematics again in the way we used to before the pandemic?
ZDM– Mathematics Education, 55, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11858-022-01460-5.
English, L. D. (2023). Ways of thinking in STEM-based problem
solving. ZDM -Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11858-023-01474-7.
English, L. D., & Kirshner, D. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of inter-
national research in mathematics education. NY. ISBN:
978-0-203-44894-6 (ebk). https://www.routledge.com/Hand-
book-of-International-Research-in-Mathematics-Education/
English-Kirshner/p/book/9780415832045
Fried, M. N. (2014). Mathematics & mathematics education: Search-
ing for common ground. In M.N. Fried, T. Dreyfus (Eds.), Math-
ematics & Mathematics Education: Searching for 3 Common
Ground, Advances in Mathematics Education, pp: 3–22. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7473-5_1. NY: Springer.
Problem solving in mathematics education: tracing its foundations and current research-practice trends
Halmos, P. (1980). The heart of mathematics. American Mathematical
Monthly, 87(7), 519–524.
Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Human, P., Mur-
ray, H., et al. (1996). Problem solving as a basis for reform in cur-
riculum and instruction: The case of mathematics. Educational
Researcher, 25(4), 12–21.
Hilbert, D. (1902). Mathematical problems. Bulletin of the American
Mathematical Society, 8, 437–479.
Højsted, I. H., Geranius, E., & Jankvist, U. T. (2022). Teachers’
facilitation of students’ mathematical reasoning in a dynamic
geometry environment: An analysis through three lenses. In
U. T. Jankvist, & E. Geraniou (Eds.), Mathematical compe-
tencies in the Digital era (pp. 271–292). Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-031-10141-0_15.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and
Giroux.
Koichu, B. (2014). Problem solving in mathematics and in mathemat-
ics education. In M.N. Fried, T. Dreyfus (Eds.), Mathematics &
Mathematics Education: Searching for 113 Common Ground,
Advances in Mathematics Education, pp: 113–135. Dordrecht:
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7473-5_8.
Koichu, B., Cooper, J., & Widder, M. (2022). Implementation of prob-
lem solving in school: From intended to experienced. Implemen-
tation and Replication Studies in Mathematics Education, 2(1),
76–106. https://doi.org/10.1163/26670127-bja10004.
Krutestkii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in
school children. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ISBN:
0-226-45492-4.
Lee, N. H., Ng, W. L., & Lim, L. G. P. (2019). The intended school math-
ematics curriculum. In T. L. Toh et al. (Eds.), Mathematics Educa-
tion in Singapore, Mathematics Education – An Asian Perspective,
pp: 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3573-0_3.
Leikin, R., & Guberman, R. (2023). Creativity and challenge: Task
complexity as a function of insight and multiplicity of solu-
tions. R. Leikin (Ed.), Mathematical Challenges For All,
Research in Mathematics Education, pp: 325–342. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-031-18868-8_17.
Lester, F. K. Jr. (1994). Musing about mathematical problem-solving
research: 1970–1994. Journal for Research in Mathematics Edu-
cation, 25(6), 660–675.
Lester, F. K. Jr. (2005). On the theoretical, conceptual, and philo-
sophical foundation for research in mathematics education. Zdm
Mathematics Education, 37(6), 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02655854.
Lester, F. K. Jr., & Cai, J. (2016). Can mathematical problem solving
be taught? Preliminary answers from 30 years of research. In P.
Felmer, et al. (Eds.), Posing and solving Mathematical problems,
Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 117–135). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28023-3_8.
Leung, A. (2011). An epistemic model of task design in dynamic geom-
etry environment. Zdm, 43, 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11858-011-0329-2.
Leung, A., & Baccaglini-Frank, A. (Eds.). (2017). (Eds.). Digi-
tal Technologies in Designing Mathematics Education Tasks,
Mathematics Education in the Digital Era 8, https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-43423-0_1.
Leung, A., & Bolite-Frant, J. (2015). Designing mathematics tasks:
The role of tools. In A. Watson, & M. Ohtani (Eds.), Task design
in mathematics education (pp. 191–225). New ICMI Study
Series. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09629-2_6.
Liljedahl, P., & Cai, J. (2021). Empirical research on problem solv-
ing and problem pos- ing: A look at the state of the art. ZDM —
Mathematics Education, 53(4), 723–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11858-021-01291-w.
Pittalis, M., & Drijvers, P. (2023). Embodied instrumentation in a
dynamic geometry environment: Eleven-year‐old students’
dragging schemes. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 113,
181–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-023-10222-3.
Pólya, G. (1945).; 2nd edition, 1957). How to solve it. Princeton Uni-
versity Press.
Rott, B., Specht, B., & Knipping, C. (2021). A descritive phase model
of problem-solving processes. ZDM -Mathematics Education, 53,
737–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01244-3.
Santos-Trigo, M. (2019). Mathematical Problem Solving and the
use of digital technologies. In P. Liljedahl and M. Santos-
Trigo (Eds.). Mathematical Problem Solving. ICME 13 Mono-
graphs, ISBN 978-3-030-10471-9, ISBN 978-3-030-10472-6
(eBook), Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Pp. 63–89 https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-030-10472-6_4.
Santos-Trigo, M. (2020a). Problem-solving in mathematics education.
In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp.
686–693). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0.
Santos-Trigo, M. (2020b). Prospective and practicing teachers and
the use of digital technologies in mathematical problem-solving
approaches. In S. Llinares and O. Chapman (Eds.), International
handbook of mathematics teacher education, vol 2, pp: 163–195.
Boston: Brill Sense, ISBN 978-90-04-41896-7.
Santos-Trigo, M. (Ed.). (2023). Trends and developments of mathe-
matical problem-solving research to update and support the use of
digital technologies in post-confinement learning spaces. InT. L.
Toh (Eds.), Problem Posing and Problem Solving in Mathemat-
ics Education, pp: 7–32. Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-981-99-7205-0_2.
Santos-Trigo, M., & Reyes-Martínez, I. (2019). High school pro-
spective teachers’ problem-solving reasoning that involves the
coordinated use of digital technologies. International Journal of
Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(2), 182–
201. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1489075.
Santos-Trigo, M., Barrera-Mora, F., & Camacho-Machín, M. (2021).
Teachers’ use of technology affordances to contextualize and
dynamically enrich and extend mathematical problem-solving
strategies. Mathematics, 9(8), 793. https://doi.org/10.3390/
math9080793.
Santos-Trigo, M., Reyes-Martínez, I., & Gómez-Arciga, A. (2022). A
conceptual framework to structure remote learning scenarios: A
digital wall as a reflective tool for students to develop mathemat-
ics problem-solving competencies. Int J Learning Technology,
27–52. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2022.123686.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem
solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D.
A. Grows (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching
and learning (pp. 334–370). Macmillan.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2020). Mathematical practices, in theory and prac-
tice. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52, pp: 1163–1175. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01162-w.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2022). Why are learning and teaching math-
ematics so difficult? In M. Danesi (Ed.), Handbook of cog-
nitive mathematics (pp. 1–35). Switzerland. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-030-44982-7_10-1%23DOI.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2023). A theory of teaching. In A. K. Praetorius, &
C. Y. Charalambous (Eds.), Theorizing teaching (pp. 159–187).
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25613-4_6.
Sinclair, N., & Ferrara, F. (2023). Towards a Socio-material Reframing
of Mathematically Challenging Tasks. In R. Leikin (Ed.), Mathe-
matical Challenges For All, Research in Mathematics Education,
pp: 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18868-8_16.
Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln
(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 435–454). Sage.
Thurston, P. W. (1994). On proof and progress in mathematics. Bull
Amer Math Soc, 30(2), 161–177.
Toh, T. L., Santos-Trigo, M., Chua, P. H., Abdullah, N. A., & Zhang, D.
(Eds.). (2023). Problem posing and problem solving in mathematics
13
 M. Santos-Trigo

education: Internationa research and practice trends. Springer Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
Nature Singpore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7205-0. dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Törner, G., Schoenfeld, A. H., & Reiss, K. M. (Eds.). (2007). Problem
solving around the world: Summing up the state of the art [Spe-
cial Issue]. ZDM — Mathematics Education, 39(5–6). https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11858-007-0053-0.

13