APPENDICES



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 63
APPENDICES

OCR for page 63
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page 63
Appendix A Workshop Participants, Agenda, and Discussion Materials Participants Alejandro Adem Professor Mathematics Department University of Wisconsin Louis Auslander Professor Mathematics Graduate School City University of New York M. Salah Baouendi Professor Mathematics Department University of California-San Diego Hyman Bass Professor Department of Mathematics Columbia University Lynne Billard Professor Department of Statistics University of Georgia Spencer Bloch Professor Department of Mathematics University of Chicago Joseph E. Brandenburg Principal Engineer Intel Corporation William Browder Professor Department of Mathematics Princeton University Lawrence Brown Professor Department of Statistics University of Pennsylvania Robert L. Bryant Professor Department of Mathematics Duke University Jennifer Tour Chayes Professor Mathematics Department University of California-Los Angeles Ralph Cohen Professor and Chair Department of Mathematics Stanford University James Crowley Executive Director Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Ronald G. Douglas Executive Vice President, Provost Texas A&M University

OCR for page 63
Robert Fefferman Professor and Chair Department of Mathematics University of Chicago Walter Feit Professor Department of Mathematics Yale University Avner Friedman Director Institute for Mathematics and Its Applications University of Minnesota Donald Goldfarb Professor and Chair Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research Columbia University David Goldston Legislative Director Office of Representative Sherwood Boehlert U.S. House of Representatives John Guckenheimer Professor Department of Mathematics Cornell University Philip Hanlon Professor Department of Mathematics University of Michigan Richard Herman Dean, College of Computer, Mathematical and Physical Sciences University of Maryland-College Park Ettore F. Infante Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs University of Minnesota Arthur Jaffe Professor Department of Mathematics Harvard University Stephen Kennedy Assistant Professor Mathematics Department Carleton College Jon R. Kettenring Executive Director Software Technology Integration Bellcore Joseph J. Kohn Professor and Chair Department of Mathematics Princeton University Donald J. Lewis Director Division of Mathematical Sciences National Science Foundation William James Lewis Professor and Chair Department of Mathematics and Statistics University of Nebraska-Lincoln Mary Montgomery Lindquist Professor School of Education Columbus College Robert MacPherson Professor School of Mathematics Institute for Advanced Study Marilyn E. Mays Professor Department of Mathematics North Lake College

OCR for page 63
David W. McLaughlin Professor and Director Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences New York University Donald St. P. Richards Professor and Chairman Division of Statistics University of Virginia Hugo Rossi Professor Mathematics Department University of Utah Michael Schrage Science Writer MIT Media Lab, Los Angeles Times, Wired Magazine Frank Stillinger Technical Staff Bell Laboratories Dewitt Sumners Professor Department of Mathematics Florida State University John R. Tucker Director Board on Mathematical Sciences National Research Council James C. Turner, Jr. Professor and Chair Department of Mathematics Florida A&M University Michael Waterman Professor Department of Mathematics University of Southern California Andrew B. White, Jr. Program Director, High Performance Computing and Communications Advanced Computing Laboratory Los Alamos National Laboratory Shmuel Winograd IBM Fellow IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Margaret H. Wright Distinguished Member, Technical Staff Bell Laboratories

OCR for page 63
Agenda Friday, May 17, 1996 11:00 am-1:00 pm Registration 1:00 to 1:30 INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS Avner Friedman, Chair, Board on Mathematical Sciences 1:30 to 2:15 NEW OPPORTUNITIES Expectations and New Opportunities at DMS Donald J. Lewis, Director, Division of Mathematical Sciences, National Science Foundation Communicating Mathematics to the Public Michael Schrage, MIT Media Lab/Sloan School; Columnist, Los Angeles Times 2:15 to 2:30 Discussion 2:30 to 3:15 THE WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENT The Washington Environment Viewed from OSTP Ernest Moniz, Associate Director for Science, Office of Science and Technology Policy A View from Capitol Hill David Goldston, Legislative Director for Representative Sherwood Boehtert 3:15 to 3:30 Discussion 4:00 to 4:45 THE VIEW OF SCIENTISTS Physical Scientists Are from Mars, Mathematicians Are from Venus; How on Earth Can We Communicate? Frank Stillinger, Member of Materials Chemistry Research Department Technical Staff, Bell Laboratories The Growing Impact of Mathematics in Molecular Biology Michael S. Waterman, Professor of Mathematics and Biological Sciences, University of Southern California 4:45 to 5:30 PERSPECTIVES ON EDUCATION Education (for the Public and Students), and the Mathematical Scientist's Role in It Hyman Bass, Adrain Professor of Mathematics, Columbia University Educating Mathematical Sciences Graduate Students Ronald Douglas, Executive Vice President and Provost, Texas A&M University

OCR for page 63
6:30 to 8:00 Dinner Mathematical Sciences and National Needs: Roles and Implications Judith S. Sunley, Assistant to the Director for Science Policy and Planning, National Science Foundation 8:00 to 10:00 pm Initial Meeting of Break-out Groups to Discuss General Theme: Needed Changes and Action Guidelines to Achieve Them Saturday, May 18 9:00 to 10:00 am Reports from Friday Evening Small Group Discussions 10:00 to 12:00 noon Break-out Session on Specific Topics 12:00 to 1:30 pm Lunch A View of Major Trends at Research Universities Ettore Infante, Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs, University of Minnesota 1:30 to 4:00 Break-out Discussions, and Preparation of Written Reports Guidelines That Will Work and Be Acted On 4:30 to 5:30 pm Written Reports from Small Groups and Discussion Sunday, May 19 9:00 to 10:00 am Presentation of Draft Summary Document Group Leaders, Avner Friedman, and John Tucker 10:00 to 11:45 Reaction to the Draft, Discussion, and Modifications/Adjustments to Gain Consensus 11:45 to 12:00 Closing Comments Avner Friedman 12:00 noon Adjourn

OCR for page 63
Discussion Materials Small Group Discussion1 Each of the four groups will focus on one of these topics (recognizing that the topics have areas of overlap, and that all have as a subtheme undergraduate education): Discussions should address Needed Changes & Action Guidelines to Achieve Them How to Assure that Guidelines Will Work and Be Acted On 1. Communication (within and outside the discipline) Group Leader: Margaret H. Wright (Bell Labs) The mathematical sciences occupy an unusual position in the public consciousness. Essentially all adults studied mathematics in school, but many disliked it; most people would say that mathematics is important, but, if pressed, they might have difficulty explaining why; abstraction is one of the chief virtues of the mathematical sciences, but nonexperts understand science best if it is described using concrete examples related to their daily lives. Our community therefore has an especially challenging obligation to clarify the many ways in which the mathematical sciences are beneficial to society. We have an equally compelling responsibility to convey to our colleagues in other disciplines the contributions that research and education in the mathematical sciences have made and continue to make to advancing their fields. Our community needs to articulate its contributions in three areas: general education (K-12); undergraduate and graduate education; and research. Possible questions to be addressed include: What efforts are being made in public awareness? How effective have these been? Which have been most and least successful? What lessons can be learned from these experiences? Which public awareness activities can be expected to appeal to various segments of the public? What kinds of activities in public awareness are mathematical scientists willing to support and join? How can such activities be organized for maximum impact and participation? How can we in the mathematical sciences build stronger connections with other disciplines and with nonacademic organizations? How can our community work effectively with other disciplines to convey the benefits of education and research in the mathematical sciences? 1   These guidelines (as well as the background materials mentioned at the beginning of the summary on page 51 of the main text) were distributed to all invited speakers and participants two weeks before the workshop.

OCR for page 63
2. How to Improve the Educational Program Group Leader: Hugo Rossi (University of Utah) Last year, the National Academy Press published a report of the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP) entitled Reshaping the Graduate Education of Scientists and Engineers (NAS/NAE/IOM, 1995). It is appropriate to take this report as background for the discussion. Findings of the COSEPUP report: There is a changing pattern of employment of graduate students: growth in faculty positions is slowing down; expect a reduction in demand for traditional researchers; new R&D needs in industry result in emerging production, service, and information enterprises; in government labs, research foci are shifting (i.e., from defense to energy), and the labs are challenged to build linkages with industry and universities. There are far more seekers of jobs as professors and primary researchers than there are positions; however, the number of positions in applied R&D is increasing. about 50% of new Ph.D.s are employed in academic departments; the number of Ph.D.s in mathematics fell during the 1970s, but since has increased to boom-time levels. Almost 50% of Ph.D.s awarded in the 1990s have gone to foreign students. Employment of Ph.D.s in academic positions has steadily decreased over the past 12 years, while other employment has remained level. We have not, as a nation, paid adequate attention to the function of the graduate schools in meeting the country's needs. The simplifying assumption has been that the primary mission of graduate programs is to produce the next generation of researchers. Recommendations of COSEPUP: Offer a broader range of academic options that allow students to gain a wider variety of skills. mechanisms of support should include education/training grants to departments. Provide better information and guidance, directed toward possible career goals. Devise a National Human Resource Policy, beginning with a national discussion of goals and policy, system characterization, and contemporary issues. Curricular: ''tighten" time to degree. At present, the average time to degree in the mathematical sciences is about 6 years. provide options: at the time of qualifying examinations, students should choose from (a) a viable master's degree, (b) proceed to a Ph.D. and a position in research, (c) a "designed" dissertation for work in nontraditional fields.

OCR for page 63
create interdisciplinary programs. introduce internships outside academics. devise and implement steps to increase participation of women and minority groups. Questions and Possible Action Items Accept, reject, or modify with some detail the recommendations of COSEPUP for the mathematical sciences. How can the mathematical sciences community develop mechanisms for information about successful programs, and develop networks of people who will help provide advice? Is there a changing pattern of how mathematics research is done: individual to group and interdisciplinary? How can graduate programs encourage versatility? What curriculum changes are high priorities? time to degree interdisciplinary programs computer competency teaching competency Should there be a strengthened and revitalized professional master's degree? Should there be optional internships (in other departments or in industry)? What should be their character, and how should their implementation be facilitated? Should NSF broaden its sabbatical programs (for faculty or students); should the mathematical sciences move toward a postdoctoral system, as exists in other sciences? 3. Shrinking Funding (external and internal), and What Should Be Done in Light of It Group Leader: Arthur Jaffe Harvard University) The NSF Division of Mathematical Sciences is under stress because funding (in recent years, in constant dollars) is diminishing. Mission-oriented research funding agencies are even more focused on deliverables. Advantage needs to be taken of interdisciplinary avenues and information provided on what possibilities are coming, what has worked, and what people are doing; guidance is needed on how funds should be spent. Possible questions to be addressed: Where are the new opportunities for mathematical sciences research (e.g., mathematics with materials science, statistical analysis and modeling of DNA, topological and geometric methods for molecular biology, software engineering, high-performance computing, and combining information—including linkage of databases, combining

OCR for page 63
results from independent studies, and in geographic information systems for spatial analysis)? How can the mathematical sciences community encourage entrepreneurs? How can the mathematical sciences community set in place mechanisms for lecture series, reports, symposia, and committees to explore ways to further increase research opportunities? How can the community be made aware of promising opportunities? How can more of the community be positioned to take advantage of those opportunities? What are appropriate modes of support? 4. Evaluating Performance (both educational and interdisciplinary) Group Leader: Robert MacPherson (Institute for Advanced Study) Traditional evaluation in most departments is based first on research, then on education and on interdisciplinary work. Since such a criterion does not encourage faculty who wish to contribute more in the way of teaching innovations, interfacing with other departments, and engaging in extra-university activities, questions naturally arise. While change is needed with regard to what is rewarded and what the culture values (JPBM, 1994), it has to come from the grassroots. Possible questions to be addressed: How to develop a more appropriate evaluation process? What are the impediments to effecting such a process? How can departments overcome such impediments? What role should NSF play here? What ways of evaluating teaching, or interdisciplinary research are working? How can the value of interdisciplinary work be better conveyed? What are some specific actions that can be taken concerning this? References Joint Policy Board for Mathematics (JPBM). 1994. Recognition and Rewards in the Mathematical Sciences. Committee on Professional Recognition and Rewards. Providence, R.I.: American Mathematical Society. National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering/Institute of Medicine (NAS/NAE/IOM). 1995. Reshaping the Graduate Education of Scientists and Engineers. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.