**6. Conclusions**

This work presented a new Koestler/Prabhu theory of creativity within learning and provided some investigations suggested by the theory. One of them was to investigate whether the bisociation frame as the central component of the theory of the creativity of Aha! Moment can be identified within the constructivist and the sociocultural approaches to learning. Our discussion in the first section where Koestler's theory is discussed indicates that the term and the concept of bisociation derive from the observation and analysis of individual insights. On the other hand, sociocultural approach places the emphasis on learning within collaborative teams rather than on the individual activity. Consequently, to find the space within that theory where social creativity can be understood with the help of bisociation as the theory of the individual insight is very important especially from the point of view of classroom teachers of mathematics, where both individual as well as collaborative learning are taking place.

Section 1 examined bisociation theory, interweaving it with the constructivist framework and followed by the preliminary discussion of the nature of creativity of Aha! Moment/Eureka experience. In Section 2, we presented Koestler/Prabhu's theory of creativity in mathematics following [17] who formulated the requirements for a theory in mathematics education. Koestler/Prabhu's theory stands on three principles: (1) the definition of an Aha! Moment as the object of our investigations, (2) the bisociative frame and (3) the measurability of creativity as the assessment of DoK reached during the insight.

At present, the theory has established four horizons of its investigations:


investigation of the relationship between interiorization and internalization in the context of bisociative creativity. As interiorization is a constructivist concept while internalization is a Vygotskian, sociocultural concept, this section has a bearing upon the goal of unifying individual and sociocultural approaches to creativity in mathematics education. In the section, we show the method of our approach and note its limitation due to it being too rigidly bound with the concept of ZPD as a framework for mentor–mentee social interaction. We discovered that the much more useful concept to investigate bisociative creativity within that approach is the concept of appropriation, and in particular that of deviation during the process of appropriation. As we indicated there within deviation of the concept of the individual learner from that of the community, the bisociative frame can be identified as two matrices of thought, which are different due to their historical and cultural constraints.

