 |
National Committee for Mathematics
Activities in 1998 |
 |
|
February Meeting The ARC and the Minister IMU General Assembly Staff, Students and Statistics Research Funding |
A number of changes in the 1998 membership of the National Committee have occurred. First, Tony Guttmann has been invited to join the Committee. Currently Tony is the Chair of the Education Standing Committee of the Australian Mathematical Society and is actively involved in many aspects of National Education. Secondly, Richard Brent has departed Australia to take up a chair of Computer Science at Oxford and hence no longer represents the Computer Science Association. This role will be taken over by Brian Molinari. Finally, Erhan Kozan replaces Paul Lochert as the representative of the Australian Society for Operations Research. |
A dinner meeting of the National Committee took place in Canberra
on the 24th February on the eve of the FASTS Forum
`University Science: Crisis or Crossroads?' at the National Press Club.
The meeting was attended by Noel Barton, Garth Gaudry,
Alf van der Poorten, Derek Robinson, Ian Sloan and Jan Thomas.
Apologies were received from Richard Brent, Paul Lochert, Will Morony
and Jane Watson.
In addition Tony Thomas from Adelaide University and Rodney Baxter
from ANU were invited to attend on behalf of the Institute of Physics
for discussion of a joint strategy concerning funding of National Centres.
Various topics were considered.
National Centres
The major item for discussion was the development of National Centres.
The Discipline Reasearch Strategies sponsored by the Australian Research
Council (ARC) which resulted in the reports `Physics: A Vision for the Future', Australian Government Publishing
Service, Canberra, February 1993, and
`Mathematical Sciences: Adding to Australia', Australian Government Publishing
Service, Canberra, January 1996, recommended the establishment of National
Centres for Theoretical Physics and the Mathematical Sciences, respectively.
The organizations envisaged shared many common features,
active visitors programs,
regular workshops on topical areas and rapidly developing
themes of national importance, and many common
aims, rationalization of national activities,
coordination of postgraduate training, enhancement of international and regional
links, etc.
Unfortunately plans for both Centres have foundered at the funding stage.
Similar problems have been encountered in the foundation of a National Centre for
the Humanities.
International Mathematical Union
The General Assembly of the International Mathematical (IMU) takes place in
Dresden on August 15-16, 1998.
According to the agreed International formula Australia has three voting delegates.
In 1997 Alan Carey, Derek Robinson and Ian Sloan were tentatively
recommended to the Council of the Academy of Science, the nominating committee,
as the Australian delegates.
Unfortunately Ian Sloan has had to withdraw due to commitments to the ARC.
Therefore it was decided to nominate Alf van der Poorten as his replacement.
WMY 2000
Following Jane Watson's suggestion there was some discussion of possible
events for World Mathematics Year in 2000.
This had already been debated at a meeting of the Australian
Subcommission of the International Commission
for Mathematical Instruction (ACISMI) in Melbourne on the 20th February.
One proposition which grew out of that meeting was for a large national conference
to showcase and highlight the many uses of mathematics--from the esoteric to the
practical, including areas such as finance, engineering, education, etc.
The conference would aim to attract a significant number of institute teachers in
addition to members of the public to selected sessions.
For that reason it was tentatively proposed to hold the meeting in late
January 2000 and to approach the University of Melbourne to sponsor the
conference.
The sponsorship would guarantee the provision of some financial and personnel
support.
The Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers Inc. (AAMT) and the
Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA) had already endorsed
this proposal and after some discussion it was agreed that the National Committee
should also lend their support.
Other topics
Some discussion also took place about the Science Show planned for Melbourne and the FASTS Forum.
The current ARC programs do not provide a funding mechanism for National Centres
of the type envisaged since they do no fall within the guidelines of Special
Research Centres or of Key Centres.
The previous Chair of the ARC, Prof. Max Brennan,
had advised both Review Committees that the ARC would consider broadening
the rules for Special Research Centres to allow competitive applications
for National Centres.
But this has not happened.
There has been no modification of the ARC rules.
It was resolved to approach the new Chair of the ARC, Professor Vicki Sara,
to reopen discussion of these funding difficulties.
Noel Barton and Tony Thomas agreed to draft a letter to Professor Sara.
It was also resolved to approach the Academy of the Humanities for their support.
On the 1st July the Chair of the NCM met with the new Chair of the ARC,
Professor Vicki Sara, and subsequently with the Junior Minister of Education,
Employment and Training, the Hon. Christopher Ellison.
The meeting with Professor Sara was in the company of Robert Bartnik,
for the Heads of Departments of Mathematical Sciences,
Noel Barton, representing the AMSC and as
Executive Officer of the Strategic Review, and Jan Thomas for the
Australian Mathematical Society.
Concerns were expressed for the operations of the ARC Large Grants
and ARC Fellowships schemes and these concerns were discussed at length.
The possibility of funding of a new program of Networked National Centres
was also discussed and this is being pursued in cooperation with the
Australian Society for Physics and the Academy of the Humanities.
Professor Sara also provided a confidential briefing on the current
ARC Strategic Planning processes.
The meeting with the Hon. Christopher Ellison was in the company of
Noel Barton and Jan Thomas and was attended by Evan Arthur representing
the DEETYA department responsible for the present institute benchmarking processes.
A number of concerns were raised about the very minimal standard of the
Years 3 and 5 benchmarks being trialled this year.
The current preparatory plans for Year 7 benchmarks
were seen as even more problematic, expecially in states
where these students are beginning secondary instituteing.
The delegation suggested that it may be more positive to consider
benchmarking against the Year 8 tests being developed in the USA.
Other issues such as the increasing percentage of unqualified teachers
at the year 7 level were raised and the disincentive that the
HECS presented for teachers wishing to improve their qualifications.
The 13th General Assembly of the International Mathematical Union (IMU)
took place in Dresden on the 15th and 16th August, 1998.
The Australian delegation, as mentioned above, was made up of
Alan Carey, Alf van der Poorten and Derek Robinson.
The formal minutes of the meeting will no doubt appear on the
IMU Webpage and an informal commentary
is given on the Dresden Webpage of this site.
The main points of discussion were as follows:
Staff, Students and Statistics
At a meeting of Heads of Departments of the Mathematical Sciences held
at the University of New South Wales in February it was decided to gather
statistics on the level of enrolments, staffing levels, funding etc. with
the University system.
Early results of this survey, focussed on student numbers and staffing changes,
were released on the occasion of the Winter Meeting of the Australian Mathematical
Society, a meeting held at the University of Sydney in September.
The replies to the survey from 26 departments showed that over the past four
years there had been
As a consequence of these statistics it was decided that the National Committee and
the Mathematical Society should issue a joint press release highlighting their
concerns.
A statement `Water, gas,......, now mathematics? The clumsy country', alluding to
the management problems with the Sydney water supply and the Melbourne gas supply,
was released on the 29th September during the AustMS meeting.
This led to significant interest by the media including an ABC interview with
the Chair of the NCM, Derek Robinson, which was broadcast nationally both on
AM and FM radio.
The current government, now in its second term, has not yet issued a statement
on its research policy for the University sector.
A statement of this nature was promised for mid-1998 but was delayed by the
Federal elections.
it was confidently expected that a policy statement would be part of the election
process but this was not the case.
Subsequently, there were indications that a policy would be issued in the latter
half of 1998 and finally December the 21st, the longest day, was specified as
the release date.
But the 21st came, lingered and left without a statement and it is now
scheduled for `early 1999'.
Despite these prevarications there were firm indications that policy options
were being considered in late 1998.
University research is supported by a dual funding mechanism.
Part of the funds are included in the base grant given by the government and
their magnitude is calculated by a formula assessing the individual institute's
research performance and this includes its success in ARC and NHMRC competitive
processes.
These funds are then distributed within each institute according to the priorities
and whims of the Executive Officers.
The second important source of funds is the ARC and NHMRC programs.
These funds are awarded through peer reviewed competition and are largely placed
at the direct disposal of the successful researcher.
One policy option which appeared to have been seriously considered in October 1998
was to abolish the competitive programs of the ARC and to distribute the corresponding
funds through the base grant mechanisms.
It was reliably reported that this option was considered by the Vice-Chancellors
of the so-called Great Eight universities and seven of them supported the option.
Naturally they expected that they would receive a large part of the redistributed
funds and these would be at their direct control rather than that of the
researchers.
After extensive consultation with senior mathematicians, the President
of the Australian Mathematical Society, the Chair of the Australian
Mathematical Sciences Council and the Board of FASTS it was decided
to write a letter to Minister Kemp expressing concern at these mooted
reforms.
On the 21st November the following letter was sent by the Chair of the NCM.
Considerable concern has been expressed within the Australian mathematical
community about mooted reforms of research funding. Rational debate has been
hindered by lack of public information on the views of the major stakeholders.
It is, however, known that far reaching structural changes
have been proposed for the Australian Research Council (ARC).
This is particularly disconcerting because of the
dearth of consultation with staff, particularly research staff,
and with professional organisations.
It is certainly the opinion of an overwhelming majority of
researchers in the mathematical sciences that Australia
should maintain adequately funded, national, peer reviewed,
competitive funding schemes for research grants
and research positions.
The views of the Australian mathematical community on
research funding have been expressed at length in
The National Committee for Mathematics (NCM) believes
that any debate on future research funding should take account
of the views of particular disciplines.
It should not be restricted to the interests of
the administrations of Academic Institutions and
Government Instrumentalities. Any restructuring of the
national research system requires the full involvement of
all practitioners for an optimal outcome.
The NCM looks forward to the opportunity of contributing to
an open debate on these topics.
No reply was received but Minister Kemp announced in December that
he had no intention of abolishing the ARC peer reviewed schemes.
It will be of interest to see whether the long awaited policy statement
confirms this statement and whether the current inadequate funding of
the schemes will be supplemented.
The new Executive consists of
The membership is meant to reflect geographical distribution and
an even representation of diverse areas of mathematics.
S.Mori (Vice-President)
These figures are worrying for several reasons.
It is clear that the quality of mathematics teaching withing the University sector
is under threat if enrolments increase and staff numbers decrease.
It also augurs badly for the educational system if the numbers of students taking
higher courses continues to decline.
It is hard to reconcile these statistics with the claims by the Minister for Education,
Training and Youth Affairs that
The startling change in the staff/student ratio over the four year period
surely contradicts at least one of these assertions.
Dear Minister Kemp,
Similar letters were sent by the other organizations.
These views, in particular with respect to National Centres
and networking, have been refined in several meetings with the
Hon. Peter McGauran and the Chair of the ARC, Prof. Vicki Sara
during 1997 and 1998.