Meeting Summaries
This diary entry draws together some of the key areas of interest from the CMS’s work in recent months, and reports on a number of recent meetings which relate to them. Policy submissions referred to below are available on the CMS website at www.cms.ac.uk
Research Excellence Framework
The CMS meeting on 29 May was supplemented by a lunchtime discussion session on the development of the Research Excellence Framework. David Sweeney (Director of Research, Innovation and Skills, HEFCE) and Malcolm MacCallum (Member, REF Expert Advisory Group) joined the usual CMS attendees for a stimulating debate on some of the particular features of mathematical sciences research that HEFCE should be aware of as it develops the detail of the assessment system to replace the Research Assessment Exercise.
One area of discussion was the number and makeup of assessment panels; we were told that there was likely to be a move towards smaller numbers of panels in the REF in order to demonstrate to the Treasury that there has been a reduction in the burden of the process. With this in mind, it was the general consensus that a combined mathematical sciences panel covering pure maths, applied maths, statistics and OR would make sense. In particular, it was felt that it would make much more sense than combining mathematics with engineering, for instance, given the imbalances between the disciplines in grant income and the number of doctoral students.
Those who have been following the development of the REF on HEFCE’s website and in the media will be aware that there is now much less emphasis on bibliometrics, with peer review panels informed by such data as appropriate for their disciplines. Citation data are particularly difficult to interpret in mathematical sciences research, with long lead times before research has an impact, which often manifests itself in an unexpected way. ‘Impact’ is a big theme in research funding at the moment – in both Research Councils and Funding Councils – but the CMS suggested caution in HEFCE assigning too much weight to the assessment of impact in the REF, given the difficulty in measuring this in mathematical sciences over any short timescale. We also encouraged ‘impact’ to be viewed in the broadest terms by both researchers and funders – economic, social, cultural and academic impact are all valid measures of the significance of research and justification for public investment.
Support for ‘blue skies’ research
In a similar vein, the CMS has been working on producing a paper that makes the case for supporting ‘blue skies’ research in mathematical sciences, giving concrete examples of curiosity-driven research that has had a substantial impact in a surprising way many years after first being published. Examples in our current draft include brain imaging, face recognition and digital communications technologies, all of which rely on ‘blue-skies’-generated mathematics and statistics. We are very grateful to Nigel Peake (IMA) and David Hand (RSS) for their work on this document - reflections from readers on fundamental mathematical sciences research that has had a big pay-off further downstream are very welcome – the more examples we can quote in our meetings the better.
Support for Masters courses and liaison with EPSRC
The CMS-EPSRC Liaison Group has been working EPSRC’s Mathematical Sciences Programme on support for masters training in mathematical sciences, following the replacement of ‘Collaborative Training Accounts’ with ‘Knowledge Transfer Accounts’ as a possible funding mechanism. Unfortunately experience on the ground suggests that, in practice, very few Masters courses will be funded in this way and the difficult decision of either funding a course through a department’s Doctoral Training Allocation (and therefore at the expense of the number of PhD students) or cutting the course entirely is being made already.
The Liaison Group has been working with the Programme team to see what support can be provided for masters training in mathematical sciences within the scope of EPSRC’s overarching policy of funding only via either KTAs or the DTA. As a result David Harman (Programme Manager) was able to secure a total of £500k for one-off, one-year ‘parachute funding’ to support courses that would have suffered from the timing of the announcement of the KTA allocation process. This breathing space has been gratefully received by a number of departments and will help to keep these courses alive while further consideration of what support can be provided – and at what cost – takes place.
We’ve also been lobbying the Innovation Universities, Science and Skills Select Committee to investigate the wider issue of responsibility for funding masters courses, and remain active in raising awareness of this issue. The creation of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills two years ago brought both sides of the Dual Support System under one roof under the auspices of Adrian Smith and represented a great opportunity for ‘joined up thinking’ on this issue. The merging of DIUS into the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) this summer preserves this, and we hope that the opportunity for a coherent approach will be exploited before a reshuffle separates them again!
Centres for Doctoral Training
Readers may also be aware of EPSRC’s recent call for bids for ‘Centres for Doctoral Training’ in mathematical sciences – the shortlisting process is underway at the time of writing and the results will be announced on EPSRC’s website soon. Centres for Doctoral Training aim to provide an exciting environment for PhD study with a larger cohort of students than might otherwise exist; the current mathematical sciences-focused process follows a general call last year in which none of the winning bids had an explicitly mathematical focus. The CMS lobbied EPSRC and a separate call was announced early this year, with some tweaks to the rules to make the process more suitable for these subjects. The CMS is cautious in supporting policies that encourage further concentration of facilities but was disappointed that mathematical sciences missed out last year – clearly it is important for these subjects to take advantage of this scheme where the opportunity exists.
Mathematical Sciences and Multidisciplinary Research ‘Themes’
The CMS held a one-day event in March to encourage mathematical sciences researchers to explore opportunities to fund their research through the multidisciplinary research ‘themes’ identified in EPSRC’s strategic plan. The workshop focused on mathematical sciences in the ‘Energy’ and ‘Digital Economy’ themes, with EPSRC Theme Leaders in attendance in engage in discussion. The event included presentations from researchers who are already funding their research in this way and break-out groups explored opportunities in more detail.
The CMS-EPSRC Liaison Group has been giving some thought to how to promote and support opportunities in these areas further, and plans for a similar event looking at some of the other themes listed by RCUK. Other themes include Healthcare, Nanoscience and Security – full details are available from the RCUK website.
If you are running or are thinking of running an event associated with these themes why not get in touch – we would be pleased to hear more about mathematical sciences research in these areas.
A full report of the Energy and Digital Economy workshop and slides from the presentations are available to download from the CMS website.
Financial mathematics and the city
Various articles have been produced recently about the role of mathematics in the city and the extent to which the recession is a direct result of the use of mathematics. RSS President David Hand, in particular, has written in the LMS Newsletter and Mathematics Today to argue that the economic downturn is more a result of a misuse of mathematics than of mathematics itself. Mathematics can be used to model behaviour given certain parameters, but uncritically using this tool as a crystal ball can only lead to disaster in the long term. Mathematics has a lot to offer, and even has a role in the development of financial regulation.
As part of our support for these arguments, Sir David Wallace wrote as Chair of CMS to Lord Turner (Financial Services Authority) to seek a dialogue on the role of mathematics, and his letter was reported in the Financial Times. As a result a small group of academics led by Tim Johnson (Heriot-Watt) is expected to meet with Lord Turner over the summer.
Other meetings
Under the banner of ongoing engagement the CMS has met with Adrian Smith (DIUS) and John Beddington (Government Chief Scientific Advisor), and plans to meet with Sir Alan Langlands, the new Chief Executive of HEFCE, over the summer.
Martin Smith
CMS Secretariat
June 2009
cms@lms.ac.uk
The Council for the Mathematical Sciences met most recently on 28 May 2008. This issue of the CMS Diary reflects business discussed at several recent meetings and provides updates on some recent developments in policy issues of interest to the CMS.
Funding for Equivalent or Lower Qualifications
The CMS was pleased to note that its evidence to the House of Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Select Committee inquiry into the withdrawal of funding for Equivalent or Lower Qualifications (ELQs) had been referred to in the Committee’s report. The CMS had argued that the ELQ policy worked against government targets to increase the number of specialist mathematics teachers by introducing financial barriers to upskilling those who had already completed a PhD in a different subject. However, the Government’s response to the report has affirmed that the policy will be implemented. The CMS remains concerned that the attractiveness of integrated masters courses (and even a university’s willingness to promote them) will be threatened by the policy, given that universities would not be entitled to claim HEFCE funding for students with this qualification who subsequently wished to study for an MSc course. Further information on the implementation of the policy and the exemptions and ‘targeted allocations’ for Strategically Important and Vulnerable Subjects is available from www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/circlets/2008/cl07_08; the Select Committee’s report is available to view at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmdius.htm.
Seeking meetings with Chief Scientific Advisors
For some time the CMS has intended to pursue arranging informal meetings with the Government’s Chief Scientific Advisors (CSAs). A key recommendation of the Cross-Cutting Review of Science and Research produced for the Treasury in the run up to the Spending Review in 2002 was that Departments that use science should appoint a Departmental CSA, with this network headed by the Government Chief Scientific Advisor (currently John Beddington). CSAs have been appointed in 17 Departments and the CMS hopes to establish a relationship with key players on this list to reinforce the importance of mathematical sciences to evidence-based policy making and the economy in general. A working group is being assembled to discuss the best strategy and schedule for this and to ‘tune’ our message to the role of each department.
EPSRC Mathematical Sciences Programme
The CMS learnt in January of the EPSRC Council’s decision to reduce Programme budgets as part of a restructuring of the budgets which will see money directed towards research relating to four multidisciplinary ‘themes’ that EPSRC is leading on: Energy, Nanoscience, The Digital Economy and Next Generation Healthcare. Themes led by other Councils include Living with Environmental Change and Global Threats to Security. The Mathematical Sciences Programme budget had been reduced to £16m, from £18.5 in 2007/08 and more than £20m in previous years. The CMS has been working with the Mathematical Sciences Programme team to understand the impact of these figures, and has written to David Delpy (Chief Executive, EPSRC) to express concerns at the apparent shift away from funding fundamental research. However, it should be noted that the headline figures for the Programme do not convey the whole picture. Notwithstanding the overall reductions in budget, the Programme has maintained funding for responsive mode at the 2007/08 level – in the recognition that Responsive Mode is the highest priority for the community. The Mathematical Sciences Programme is striving to maintain and protect the core element of the Programme, and we are grateful to David Harman and his team for their efforts to achieve this. In addition to Responsive Mode funding, it is important to appreciate the opportunities that the multidisciplinary themes offer and take advantage of these where possible. The CMS-EPSRC Liaison Group has been discussing what kinds of event can be organised to disseminate this message and provide useful advice to the community on how mathematical sciences research can obtain funding through these themes. It is appreciated that encouraging researchers to look outside the Programme will require a degree of ‘culture change’ by some - look out for further announcements in society newsletters and of course EPSRC’s Connect bulletins.
Mathematical Sciences throughout the UK
Readers will be aware that the enhanced CMS membership helps us to ensure that the CMS is effective in its role of pursuing issues relating to mathematical sciences in research, business and industry throughout the UK. The Edinburgh Mathematical Society keeps us in touch with issues north of the border, but as there is no national mathematical society for Wales the Chair has written to heads of departments in Welsh HEIs to invite them to let CMS know direct if there are issues of which CMS should be aware. There are several areas where the separation between England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales has an impact on the CMS: it is interesting to note, for instance, that the Scottish and Welsh Funding Councils (SFC and HEFCW respectively) are not bound by HEFCE’s development of the ‘Research Excellence Framework’ and will be making their own decisions on whether to participate and (if so) the timetable for using this to inform funding. Both ran their own consultations on the issue in late 2007 and fed responses back to HEFCE; the CMS sent its response to all of these last year.
Liaison with HEFCE
The CMS held it annual liaison with the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) on 25 June. Sir David Wallace, Peter Cooper and I met with Professor David Eastwood (Chief Executive) and Dr John Selby (Director of Education and Participation) for a relatively informal discussion and exchange of ideas, providing CMS with an opportunity to give HEFCE a 'heads-up' on current issues that were important to the mathematical sciences community and to understand some of the pressures that HEFCE itself faced. Issues such as the development of the 'Research Excellence Framework' and the ELQ policy were high on the agenda, along with the evolution of the Full Economic Costing (fEC) model and the extent to which this shifted the balance of the Dual Support System towards Research Council funding. It will be important for the CMS to have a clear statement on the importance of Quality-Related (QR) funding to subjects that are not 'project-rich' to feed into the next Spending Review. The meeting also referred to data collected through the CMS-HoDoMS annual survey of mathematical sciences departments; the response rate by departments is still lower than in 2007; if they have not already done so, I encourage any head of department to complete a form for this year, so that we can get an accurate picture of trends in students, staff and the overall ‘health’ of departments to inform CMS policy statements and interactions at meetings such as this.
Professor Eastwood was receptive to points that were raised and willing to engage with the CMS on these issues. It is encouraging that the CMS is establishing itself as a contact point for issues such as these and it is hoped that the relationship will be maintained with Professor Eastwood's successor in April 2009, when he becomes the Vice-Chancellor at the University of Birmingham. Liaison in this form is very helpful in raising the level of awareness of mathematical sciences within important organisations.
Back to top
Spring 2008
The Council for the Mathematical Sciences met in De Morgan House on 20 February, meeting for the first time as an enhanced CMS with five Members (the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, the London Mathematical Society, the Royal Statistical Society, the Edinburgh Mathematical Society and the Operational Research Society).
As part of an annual planning exercise, the meeting reflected on achievements during 2007 and gave thought to its priorities for 2008. Regular readers will recall that the CMS met David Eastwood (Chief Executive, HEFCE) in June 2007 to discuss Nigel Steele’s report on provision of mathematics courses on a regional level. This looks set to become an annual liaison between CMS and HEFCE, and a second meeting has been scheduled for June this year. The meeting gave thought to the agenda for this occasion and will be developing suggestions for topics to discuss.
Alongside the expanding regular business of engaging with the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), it is hoped that the CMS will be able to begin its planned engagement with the Scottish and Welsh Funding Councils (SFC and HEFCW).
With the success of Nigel Steele’s report in mind, it was suggested that the 2008 Business Plan might include another proactive project or study on an emerging issue affecting mathematical sciences. As the CMS had already given some thought to matters arising from the HEFCE Research Excellence Framework consultation during 2007, it was suggested that such a project might focus on Measuring Excellence in Mathematics, including giving thought to suitable ‘measures of esteem’ and other aspects; the CMS will be developing its ideas over the coming months as to what the report might encompass.
The CMS held its annual meeting with the EPSRC Chief Executive (David Delpy) and members of the Mathematical Sciences Programme team on 17 January 2008. The focus of this meeting was EPSRC’s strategic priorities for 2008/09–2010/11; David Delpy explained that EPSRC intended to place a greater emphasis on the multidisciplinary themes of Energy, The Digital Economy, Nanoscience and Next Generation Healthcare, and ‘signpost’ this emphasis via an increase in calls for proposals which relate to these. Whilst the overall allocation to EPSRC had increased following the Comprehensive Spending Review, much of the extra money went towards meeting Full Economic Costs; the EPSRC Council had agreed to allocate more money for the multidisciplinary themes by shifting funding away from Programme budgets. As a result, the CMS learnt that the Mathematical Sciences programme budget would decrease to £16M in April, from £18.5M in the current (2007/08) year and more than £20M in previous years. The CMS agreed to write to David Delpy to express its concerns that there will be less responsive mode funding available to support true ‘blue-skies’ research, but pledging to work with EPSRC to ensure that Mathematical Sciences is well-prepared to take advantage of funding available through the cross-cutting themes.
The CMS was pleased to note that the Chair, Sir David Wallace, FRS, had been invited to join the DCSF/DIUS STEM High Level Strategy Group. This group was created as a result of the 2004 Science and Innovation Next Steps review. The meeting was pleased at the recognition that the CMS is a key player and will be looking at how it can make the most of this opportunity.
Policy submissions noted included responses to HEFCE’s Research Excellence Framework consultation and an earlier consultation on the withdrawal of funding for students studying Equivalent or Lower Qualifications (ELQs) (and the subsequent Select Committee inquiry). These are now available to view on the CMS website at www.cms.ac.uk.
The Council for the Mathematical Sciences met in De Morgan House on 12 November.
Those who have followed the development of the CMS in recent years will know that the Council has for some time been considering how its membership can be enhanced to reflect better the mathematical sciences in the UK as a whole, both in terms of subject breadth and geographic representation. To this end, the CMS has welcomed representatives of the Operational Research Society (ORS) and the Edinburgh Mathematical Society (EMS) to its meetings in 2007, and has been working with them to develop a model for formalising their position.
The subject was considered in detail over the summer by each of the Founder Members, and with the approval of the IMA, LMS and RSS, the Council for the Mathematical Sciences agreed to offer Membership to the ORS and the EMS. The CMS looks forward to building on the societies’ expertise in issues faced by the mathematical sciences in Scotland and in representing Operational Research.
Regular readers of this diary will recall that some of the more recent meetings have been dominated by education issues. The Council reaffirmed that its core remit is issues affecting the mathematical sciences in UK higher education, research, business, industry and the public sector. In matters of mathematics education in schools and colleges, its wish is to work as a complement to the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education (ACME) supporting and enhancing ACME’s stance from the perspective of CMS’s core audiences. CMS reviewed its own plan of work and agreed that proactive engagement with Chief Scientists in various government departments was a key activity for 2008.
The meeting noted the results of the first annual CMS-HoDoMS survey of the health of mathematical sciences departments. The level of response to the survey was pleasing, and the Council is grateful to those who replied. The aim of the survey is, over several years, to monitor and respond to trends as they emerge and produce robust information to inform policy statements and activities. Departments’ comments on their overall health were diverse, ranging from ‘very healthy and expanding’ and ‘small but vibrant’ to ‘very hard pressed’ and even ‘critical’. The next survey will be distributed shortly – all departments are encouraged to respond to help us create as full a picture as possible.
The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) has recently launched consultations on proposals to withdraw funding for ‘Equivalent or Lower Qualifications’ and on the assessment and funding of higher education research post-2008 in the form of ‘metrics’. The CMS has assembled working groups to engage with both of these issues – submissions will appear on the CMS website as they are made.
The CMS will meet with Professor David Delpy, the new Chief Executive of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, on 17 January 2008. Matters to be considered are likely to include the role of mathematics within EPSRC’s focus on strategic themes and the impact of the Comprehensive Spending Review and any resulting effects on the mathematical sciences programme budget.
Back to top
The Council for the Mathematical Sciences met in De Morgan House on 22 May. A considerable amount of time at this meeting was devoted to a discussion of some current issues in education. The CMS remains concerned that not all schools will offer ‘GCSE2’ mathematics when the new two-GCSE system is introduced, and reaffirmed its belief that all pupils should be entitled to take the second qualification. It was noted that a legal entitlement to study three separate science subjects existed for all pupils achieving a Level 6 at Key Stage 3 – it was felt that entitlement could work on a similar basis for mathematics. The CMS plans to pursue this issue with government and to raise awareness amongst other bodies of the possible negative consequences of not including an entitlement in the proposals.
The publication of the House of Commons Select Committee Inquiry’s report on the Bologna Process prompted a media release from the CMS welcoming the emphasis on creating comparability and compatibility – rather than homogenisation – of Higher Education within a European Higher Education Area (EHEA). However, our release also expressed some disappointment that the report had failed to resolve the question of which body will fund the second cycle, despite the issue having been raised by several organisations in their written evidence to the Committee.
The Bologna Process also featured high on the agenda for our meeting with the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) on 20 June. Sir David Wallace, Nigel Steele and I met with David Eastwood (Chief Executive, HEFCE) and John Selby (Director – Widening Participation, HEFCE) to present some areas of current concern to the CMS and to give a ‘heads up’ on issues that may shortly be coming into focus. David Wallace presented our risk analysis of the implementation of the Bologna Process, which focused on the consequences and probability of MSc and Integrated Master’s courses not fulfilling the requirements to be considered as Second Cycle qualifications, and the fact that funding issues raised have still not been addressed by government. David Eastwood replied that he thought that the likelihood of UK courses not meeting the requirements of Bologna was low but stressed that the quality of Master’s courses must be preserved by HEIs: any erosion of the perception of course quality would be very serious for the UK Master’s market and could heighten the risk of courses being deemed insufficient to comply with the Bologna Process or simply failing to compare favourably with other courses in the EHEA. David Eastwood highlighted the work undertaken by the UK HE Europe Unit, which the Funding Councils (together with Universities UK, the Quality Assurance Agency and Guild HE) fund; Peter Giblin (as Chair of the CMS Bologna Working Group) and I have met with Jessica Olley (Acting Manager, Europe Unit) to discuss our concerns and the potential for bodies across the science community to be brought together to explore Bologna issues of common concern.
Another ‘hot topic’ discussed at the meeting with HEFCE was the issues raised by Nigel Steele’s report “Keeping HE Mathematics Where it Counts: The decline in provision of mathematical sciences courses with more moderate entry requirements – drivers and implications”, which described how mathematics ‘deserts’ were beginning to appear in areas of the UK. Nigel Steele explained how the closure of a mathematics department affected the local economy and worked against the government’s targets for recruiting specialist mathematics teachers on a regional level. It was also noted that students who, for various reasons, could not travel far from their home town to study would be disadvantaged if mathematics courses were not available throughout the country. David Eastwood suggested that more imaginative methods of delivering HE courses could help with this problem – the EPSRC Collaborative Training Centres currently being developed were a good example of universities working together to allow students to participate in courses being held some distance away.
The HEFCE meeting also took the opportunity to discuss recent concerns about the sustainability of academic staffing in the mathematical sciences in relation to a reliance on international recruitment. Preliminary data from a recent CMS-HoDoMS survey of departments had indicated that over half of Research Associates in mathematics departments had completed their first degree abroad. Whilst it was acknowledged that the ability of the UK to attract the best mathematicians from around the world was very encouraging, a stronger ‘home-grown’ supply was needed. The meeting reflected on how the financial draw of well-paid city jobs and the competition for junior positions in universities could be dissuading students from choosing a career in academe or even from studying at the post-doctoral level. The CMS plans to investigate trends in employment and their impact in more detail, and discuss our findings with HEFCE.
We were pleased to have the opportunity to discuss these issues with the Chief Executive of HEFCE, and are hopeful that this meeting will lead to future interaction at this level. In the meantime, issues such as GCSE 1 and 2 and the Bologna Process will continue to occupy our thoughts over the summer period.
Back to top
The CMS met in De Morgan House on 14 February; an appropriate date, perhaps, given that UCAS had announced that morning that Mathematics was now back in the top 20 subjects at university (by number of applications) – it would appear that students are beginning to ‘fall in love’ with the subject again. The CMS hopes that the increase in applications will be mirrored in a few years by an increase in the numbers graduating.
Sir David Wallace welcomed several observers to the meeting: Colin Campbell ( President, Edinburgh Mathematical Society) and Jeff Griffiths ( President, Operational Research Society) had been invited to attend following a discussion of the CMS’s future development in November 2006. The Chair also welcomed Alice Rogers, who was attending as the new ACME observer, and Nigel Steele, who attended to present his report on the regional provision of mathematics departments.
Others present were: David Abrahams ( President-Designate, IMA), Tim Holt ( President, RSS), John Toland ( President, LMS), Peter Cooper (Executive Secretary, LMS), Brian Davies ( President-Designate, LMS), Jon Forster (RSS), Ivor Goddard (Director General, RSS), Charles Goldie (General Secretary, LMS), David Hand ( President Elect, RSS), Tim Pedley (Past President, IMA), Martin Smith (Secretariat, CMS) and David Youdan (Executive Director, IMA).
The CMS Bologna Group’s final report mentioned in the last diary entry has now been circulated to the Physics, Chemistry and Engineering societies and other bodies. The meeting noted replies from these organisations, which included their responses to the recent Select Committee Inquiry into the Bologna Process. There were some significant differences between their submissions, particularly in relation to sustainability of the integrated masters courses as a second cycle qualification.
The Bologna Group’s report had indicated that resolving the issue of second cycle funding was critical to the successful implementation of the Process; however, a response to a letter sent to Bill Rammell (Minister of State for Lifelong Learning, Further and Higher Education, DfES) stated that the Minister ‘did not think that now was the right time to review the current funding arrangements’. This was disappointing. The CMS will now be looking at how it can work with other bodies in the science community to press this issue further, and present a stronger and more coherent voice on other aspects of the Bologna Process.
Nigel Steele presented his report on the regional provision of mathematics departments and courses in the UK, explaining that whilst areas of heavy population appeared to be well catered for there were, for example, areas in the east of England and in Wales that were not so well covered. The issue will be explored further, and the concept of ‘accessibility’ developed to span social as well as geographic and academic factors. The CMS plans to take these and other current issues forward with the relevant bodies, and seek meetings with policy-makers as appropriate.
The meeting noted media releases from both ACME and the CMS in relation to the new two-GCSE format for mathematics. ACME had stated that there should be a national expectation that all students who achieve at least National Curriculum Level 6 at Key Stage 3 (currently almost 60%) should be entered for both qualifications. The CMS release supported ACME’s statement, and went on to stress the importance of ensuring that all schools should offer both GCSEs, or else risk limiting their pupils’ future success in many sectors. It is essential that these changes do not result in fewer pupils being adequately prepared for mathematics post-16, both for the government to meet its Science and Innovation Framework targets and in order to support the economic tower that is built on the UK’s outstanding mathematical achievements. The CMS received some coverage of its statement on the BBC News website at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6322367.stm.
Back to top
The CMS met in De Morgan House on 2 November, with Professor Sir David Wallace CBE FRS FREng as the new independent Chair of the CMS. The appointment of a Chair who was independent from the three societies was just one of moves to enhance and make CMS more effective agreed by the societies in June 2005.
Others attending were: Peter Grindrod (President, IMA), Tim Holt (President, RSS), John Toland (President, LMS), Norman Biggs (General Secretary, LMS), Peter Cooper (Executive Secretary, LMS), Ivor Goddard (Director General, RSS), David Hand (President Elect, RSS), Tim Pedley (Past President, IMA), Chris Robson ( ACME observer), Martin Smith (Secretariat, CMS), Nick von Behr ( ACME Secretariat) and David Youdan (Executive Director, IMA).
The meeting considered a draft ‘Business Plan’, which proposed an ambitious programme of activities for the following year, matched against its strategic objectives. Actions included seeking meetings with several key policy makers and influencers, alongside the continuing ‘reactive’ responses to consultations.
The latest of these submissions includes RCUK’s consultation regarding how peer review could be made more effective and efficient. The importance of preparing a good response to such requests is well understood; following a CMS statement on the DfES-DTI STEM Programme Report the CMS was pleased to note that concerns regarding the lack of representation of mathematics on the STEM Strategy Group have now been addressed. Other recent submissions include a robust response to the consultation on a ‘metrics-based’ RAE.
Another item of great interest to the meeting was the approval of the final report of the Bologna Group. The CMS was very grateful for the Group’s work on this important issue and will be taking this report forward to the relevant people in Government. The full report appears on the CMS website. The CMS Bologna group will continue to monitor this crucial issue in 2007 and beyond.
The meeting expressed ongoing concerns regarding the introduction of a two-GCSE structure for mathematics, and received an update from ACME following its workshop on Functional Mathematics and Specialised Diplomas in October. The CMS recognizes ACME’s role in speaking for mathematics education in England, and will be liaising closely with ACME to ensure that a coherent and consistent message is presented.
With the matter of an independent chair now completed the CMS looked at other aspects of the planned enhancement, including how the CMS engages with stakeholder organisations and other bodies in the wider mathematical community. In the first instance, invitations were issued to the Operational Research Society and the Edinburgh Mathematical Society to send a representative to the next two CMS meetings, with the intention that CMS would discuss the issue of membership after that. In the meantime, a model that would allow other CMS to inform, and be informed by other bodies in the wider community is to be prepared for consideration.
Back to top
The CMS met at De Morgan House on 25 May. John Toland, President of the LMS, was in the chair, and others attending were: Peter Green (Past President, RSS), Peter Grindrod (President, IMA), Tim Holt (President, RSS), Norman Biggs (General Secretary, LMS), Alice Rogers (Vice-President, LMS), Nigel Steele (Honorary Secretary, IMA), Peter Cooper (Executive Secretary, LMS), Ivor Goddard (Director General, RSS), Chris Robson ( ACME observer), Martin Smith (Secretariat, CMS), Nick von Behr ( ACME Secretariat) and David Youdan (Executive Director, IMA).
It has been a very active time since the last meeting of the CMS in February, particularly with plans to enhance and develop CMS, and CMS’ meeting with Ruth Kelly, Secretary of State for Education and Skills, which took place on 28 March. The main business of the May CMS meeting began with the noting of a report of the meeting with the Secretary of State: each of the themes of the meeting were addressed in turn, and both the DfES response to the issue and the CMS follow-up actions were considered in each case.
One of the topics raised with the DfES was the potential for Bologna compliance of the integrated masters course. In this light, the CMS Bologna/MMath Working Group presented its May report to the meeting, which had been prepared taking into account the DfES’ assurances that the MMath, and similar courses, were not under threat from the Bologna agreement. The Working Group’s report, and its response to the Burgess consultation, will be available on the CMS website www.cms.ac.uk, and the meeting noted that there were still some causes for concern in this issue.
To follow up on the Bologna theme, and to raise the issues of regional provision and threats to mathematics departments, the CMS will be seeking a meeting with Sir Alan Wilson. A policy paper on these items is in preparation: the CMS will also be comparing with similar in Physics and Chemistry, and whether joint action may be appropriate.
The CMS was pleased that, following the meeting with the Secretary of State, the DfES accepted that the numbers of mathematics undergraduates are not increasing dramatically but are at best level. A letter to Lord Sainsbury, who had also been quoting these erroneous figures, will go towards correcting previously publicised statements. Changes in HESA methodology and definitions had led to misleading comparison of data between some years.
A topical theme from the Ruth Kelly meeting was our offer to produce a brief note on the aims and possible hazards of the development of a second mathematics GCSE, which had been announced at an ACME conference earlier in that month. The CMS agreed that acting as an Advisory Committee, it would provide a balanced and objective note as a set of ‘traffic lights’ for the development, but without being overly prescriptive. The CMS will be liaising with ACME regarding creating a response.
Acting as an advisory board was at the heart of the plans to develop and fund an enhanced CMS along the lines recommended in the Smith report. The form, and the potential for independence, of this body was a considerable item for discussion, and the aims, objectives, structure, membership, funding and programme for a new body were all considered in detail. The CMS assessed a proposed model for development along these lines, and is now be able to approach a candidate for the position of independent chair. The body would aim to provide a view from the mathematical sciences – not just drawing on the expertise and position of the three societies, but also from users, employers and other beneficiaries from mathematics. Other organisations would also be affiliated or associated with the new body. However, the existence of this body would not preclude the IMA, RSS and LMS from making their own statements on an issue.
In March, the Government released the report Science and innovation investment framework 2004-2014: next steps. The CMS has now assembled a Working Group to prepare a response to this document, including the proposals for a post-RAE system in respect of a metric-based approach to research quality (which raises particular concerns for the mathematical sciences). The group will be asked to prepare a response to the Eastwood-Wilson consultation on this topic when it is published.
Continuing the Progression to… series of UCAS guides, the CMS has now completed its contribution to the Mathematical Science and Engineering edition, which was produced together with the ETB. UCAS expects to publish in the next few weeks.
The bid for a HEFCE-funded study, in response to an invitation to develop profile-raising activities in the mathematical sciences, has now been submitted: a decision would be made by HEFCE in June. The study aims to widen participation from groups of learners who have not previously been well represented in Higher Education, and to increase the supply of mathematical science graduates in England so that the demands of industry, commerce and education might be better met.
A CMS-EPSRC liaison group has now been established to meet with representatives from the EPSRC Mathematical Sciences Programme. The April meeting saw discussion of such topics as Doctoral Training Grant allocation procedures and the CTA system, along with some reflections on the implementation of Full Economic Costing. The group will meet again in July.
The CMS plans to meet with Sir Peter Williams, Chair of ACME, in July, and it has been suggested that a similar interaction with HEFCE might be arranged. The CMS next meet in De Morgan House on 2 November.
Back to top
Spring 2006
The CMS met in De Morgan House. John Toland, President of the LMS, was in the chair, and others attending were: Peter Grindrod (President, IMA), Tim Holt (President, RSS), Peter Green (Past President, RSS), Peter Cooper (Executive Secretary, LMS), Ivor Goddard (Director General, RSS), David Youdan (Executive Director, IMA), Norman Biggs (General Secretary, LMS), Nigel Steele (Council Member, IMA) and Martin Smith (Secretariat, CMS).
Having welcomed Mr Smith, who had been recruited by the LMS to work half-time on CMS, the first item of business that the meeting considered was the CMS Strategic Objectives. A review of the CMS’s objectives was needed in the light of its work to date and of the changes in the external environment resulting from the Adrian Smith report, the Government framework for science and innovation, and others.
Many aspects were considered, but notable was the sentiment that the CMS should be a voice for mathematical science, not just of the three societies. It should embrace the role of the mathematical sciences in all sectors – industry, commerce, regional and local government, the public sector, and others. However, it was generally acknowledged that in respect of mathematics in schools, CMS worked mainly with and through the societies’ links with ACME.
An additional objective considered was that of enthusing and demonstrating careers options to young people, as the CMS has a role in the public’s appreciation of and engagement in mathematical sciences.
The revision is ongoing, and further discussion will take place amongst the three societies before the next meeting.
ACMRI
Following on from this, the meeting discussed the current situation regarding the possible formation of an Advisory Committee on Mathematics in Research and Industry (ACMRI), as suggested in Adrian Smith’s report Making mathematics count.
Partners in government had not been forthcoming, but the CMS agreed that the needs of mathematics and statistics warranted an active body that could speak to, advise and inform Government and its agencies.
In this vein, the CMS agreed to set up an ‘Enhanced CMS’, funded by the three societies, with the aim, over time, of developing the type of relationship with Government proposed by Adrian Smith.
An independent chair, driving the enhanced CMS agenda, was essential to the new model: a candidate for the chair will be approached when the purpose and activities of the new CMS have been more clearly defined and the role and responsibilities of the chair laid out.
As envisaged in the Smith model, the enhanced CMS must bring in stakeholders from other areas and sectors, and must establish mechanisms for interaction with a wide range of other parties and societies. The details of that wider network are still to be agreed, but the criteria for participation must relate to CMS’s objectives and span of influence.
EPSRC Liaison
The meeting next considered the current arrangements for interaction with the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). These involved an annual meeting with the EPSRC Chief Executive, quarterly meetings of a smaller team and a separate LMS- IMA liaison group.
It was agreed that the regular quarterly meetings would improve information exchange and enable issues to be taken forward on a more immediate way, as well as preparing for the annual meeting.
Individuals from the three societies will be nominated to form a wider “virtual” group to provide a wider input to and sounding-board for the members of the quarterly team. The groups will also address issues arising that relate to other Research Councils and the Funding Councils, but EPSRC will be its core concern.
Postgraduate training will remain a key issue for CMS in its discussions with the EPSRC. The LMS had made a response to the Consultation Document issued by EPSRC during 2005, and the CMS noted a recent Call for Short-Course Centres for PhD students. Regrettably it did not seem that these would be adequately funded to resolve some of the difficulties in postgraduate training.
Most Research Councils are aware of the importance that the mathematical sciences played in their own research areas, and the CMS and individual societies needed to be ready to press the arguments for enhancing mathematical sciences research whenever opportunities arise.
DfES
The CMS was pleased to note that the Secretary of State for Education and Skills had agreed to a meeting, and that the secretariat was working to arrange a date with her office. The CMS had had a very productive meeting with Charles Clarke in July 2004 that resulted in mathematics being listed as a ‘strategic subject’, and relished the opportunity to speak to Ruth Kelly about a number of issues relating to mathematical study.
It was reported that the Secretary of State was scheduled to speak at an ACME seminar on 8 March. The conference would review what had been achieved since the Adrian Smith report was published – the establishment of the NCETM, curriculum development, exploration of the two-tier and dual-award proposals, and others. It is clear that the DfES still supports the Smith recommendations and is keen to see change implemented.
Other Activities
The HEFCE-funded study into increasing uptake of maths-related HE courses made a report on the progress of the project – the Widening Participation agenda of DfES and HEFCE are the main drivers and the proposals must hit that target.
Other initiatives of the societies included a Frameworks Study to consider routes to a possible merger of the LMS and the IMA. A UCAS Progression to… guide aimed at 16-18 year olds covering engineering and mathematical science is to be prepared by the CMS and ETB.
The CMS will next meet on 23 May and 2 November 2006 and with EPSRC on 21 November 2006.