Embedded Files
This summer I surpassed 100 total publications. It seems like too many, but then I realized I've been writing in math/math education for 20 years!
Looking back, here are my Top Ten personal favorites:
10. Otten, S., & Zin, C. (2012). In a class with Klein: Generating a model of the hyperbolic plane. PRIMUS, 22(2), 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2010.494153
I spent several years working in pure mathematics and this is one of the articles that emerged from that time, written with my good friend and one of my favorite people, Chris Zin. It shares a new idea about non-Euclidean geometry, with some connections to how that idea might be used by college math instructors.
9. Otten, S., & Wambua, M. M. (2022). The advantages of algebra for learning proof. Colorado Mathematics Teacher, 54(1), article 2. https://digscholarship.unco.edu/cmt/vol54/iss1/2/
This is a little article that almost no one has read, but I love it! It makes the case that, pedagogically, it would probably be better to start proof in algebra rather than geometry. Speaking of algebra...
8. Otten, S., de Araujo, Z., & Baah, F. (2024). Mathematical tasks from 141 secondary algebra lessons: A preponderance of procedures without connections. In K. W. Kosko, J. Caniglia, S. Courtney, M. Zolfaghari, & G. A. Morris (Eds.), Proceedings of the 46th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 83–88). PME-NA.
Along with my research teams, I've watched hundreds of algebra lessons from 60+ teachers across the country. In this paper, we wanted to share with the research community that there continues to be a massive divide between the kinds of tasks math ed scholars recommend and the tasks teachers actually use in classrooms (and, more and more, I find myself siding with the teachers!). I'm hoping to publish an updated summary of trends in algebra lessons soon. Speaking of watching lots of math lessons...
7. Wonsavage, F. P., Otten, S., Candela, A. G., & de Araujo, Z. (2025). The modality of mathematics lesson observations: Comparing the results of live and video-based coding. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 48(1), 84–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2024.2350068
Most of my research over the 20 years has involved observing math classrooms, and so in this article we took a careful look at the similarities and differences between observing lessons in person versus observing them remotely via a video recording. The latter is, of course, much more feasible for large projects, but we wanted to make sure we weren't getting a skewed impression by only using video recordings rather than being there in the room.
6. Koestler, C., Felton, M. D., Bieda, K. N., & Otten, S. (2013). Connecting the NCTM Process Standards and the CCSSM Practices. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://www.nctm.org/Store/Products/Connecting-the-NCTM-Process-Standards-and-the-CCSSM-Practices/
My first book! I was honored as a graduate student to be included on the author team for this NCTM book, which helped explain these new (at the time) Standards for Mathematical Practice that emerged with the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Many years later, my work still often connects to the SMPs.
5. Otten, S., & Otten, A. A. (2016). Selecting systems of linear equations. Mathematics Teacher, 110(3), 222–226. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacher.110.3.0222
This is an absolute banger of a lesson idea for systems of equations, written with my younger brother, and math-teacher-extraordinaire, Andrew.
4. Otten, S., Gilbertson, N. J., Males, L. M., & Clark, D. L. (2014). The mathematical nature of reasoning-and-proving opportunities in geometry textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 16, 51–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2014.857802
An analysis that I undertook with grad school colleagues at Michigan State, we added what I think is an important new dimension to the reasoning-and-proving textbook analyses that were going on, an attention not just to what students were asked to prove but also to how general or particular the claim was that was being proved. We found most geometry textbooks put general claims in the narrative section and then the student exercises are overwhelmingly particular in scope. No wonder students dislike proof and fail to see the point of it!
3. Otten, S. (2011). Cornered by the real world: A defense of mathematics. Mathematics Teacher, 105(1), 20–25. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sKIDr32lCQi_3lqnp77dT9RYjPlOkFd-/view?usp=sharing
My first article that garnered emails and feedback from teachers across the country and even internationally, and it gave me a feeling of legitimacy in the field when Dan Meyer (prominent math ed influencer) specifically called it out in his presentations and NCTM nominated it for a best-article award. It's basically just me sharing my thoughts on the age-old question in math, "When am I ever going to use this?" And I caution against just trying to name some specific careers or contrived real-world applications.
2. Otten, S., Webel, C., & de Araujo, Z. (2017). Inspecting the foundations of claims about cognitive demand and student learning: A citation analysis of Stein and Lane (1996). Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 45(1), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.12.008
This is the sort of article that I want to continue writing in the future. In it, we take a careful look at some of the claims being made in the math ed field and the actual evidence behind those claims. Turns out one of the bedrock beliefs in math ed scholarship may not be as well justified as we all seem to presume. Speaking of pushing back against the field...
1. Otten, S., de Araujo, Z., & Candela, A. G. (2025). The benefits of modesty: Considering incremental professional development for mathematics teachers. Education Sciences, 15(4), 473. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040473
This is my favorite piece thus far and what I've been working on the most intently for the past 5 years. This article lays out some critiques of the typical ways university math educators have been doing professional development with teachers and also specifies a few ideas about a different, incremental approach to PD. We have been trying one particular incremental approach (our PDPD project) and are very excited by how it's going and the positive response from teachers and school leaders. (A new book should be coming out in 2027!)
So that's my Top Ten at 100. And I've been lucky to have so many wonderful co-authors (n=66, from 7 different countries) over the past 20 years! I give my appreciation to all of them, including...
My most frequent co-author: Zandra De Araujo (38)
My most formative co-author: Beth Herbel-Eisenmann
My mathiest co-author: Filiz Dogru
My most relatable co-author: Andrew Otten
My most distant co-author: Wenmin Zhao
My amazing advisee co-authors: Wenmin again, Mitchelle Wambua-Oyuchi, Kimberly Conner, Ruveyda Karaman Dundar, Faustina Baah, Courtney Vahle, Beka Hanak, Olumide Banjo, JP Han
And so many others, including Amber Candela, Michelle Cirillo, Maria Stewart, Chris Engledowl, Kate Johnson, Lorraine Males, Tiffany LaCroix, Corey Webel, and more!
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse