| This page in the original is blank. |
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
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
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
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 |
|
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 |
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?
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.
- 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
- 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.
