S
S
S.07-3
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
V-is a'd
Senate Committee on University Priorities
Memorandum ?
- ?
c
TO: Senate ?
FROM: ?
John Waterhouse
Chair, SCUP
Vice President, Academic
RE:
Department of Mathematics
?
DATE: ?
December 19, 2006
External Review
The Senate Committee on University priorities (SCUP) has reviewed the External
Review Report on the Department of Mathematics, together with responses from the
Department and Faculty, and input from the Associate Vice-President, Academic.
Motion:
That Senate approve the recommendations from the Senate Committee on
University Priorities concerning advice to the Department of Mathematics and the
Dean of the Faculty of Science on priority items resulting from the external review.
The report of the External Review Committee for the Department of Mathematics was
submitted in April, 2006 following the review team's site visit, which took place April 5 -
7, 2006. The response of the Department was received in early October, 2006 and the
response from the Dean on October 18, 2006.
The Review Committee found the department to be 'in very good condition' and was
very impressed by the significant improvements that have taken place since the last
review. The Committee made a number of recommendations and there was general
agreement on these recommendations from the Department and the Dean.
SCUP recommends to Senate that the Department of Mathematics and the Dean of
Science be advised to pursue the following as priority items.
1. Faculty
• Consider targeting its searches on faculty that can make connections and
bridge across different research groups in the Department.
•
Addrcee-the-tnec
representation of female faculty in the Department.
/Depa
rtment.
Ensure appropriate recognition is made of excellence in teaching in the
-h
0
affeMlpf+u
c-tUu2.
0
2.
Research Centres
Continue to support PIMS, IRMACS and MITACS.
3.
Undergraduate Education
• Rather than offering certain advanced courses only every second year
consider the possibility of consolidating some of these courses and
running them each year.
• Form a joint committee with the School of Computing Science to review
issues of overlap and discuss opportunities for future cooperation.
• Re-evaluate the workload of lecturers and with the Dean, consider the
adequacy of resources for the running of Q courses.
• Review the adequacy of resources for promotional material for
undergraduates.
4.
Graduate Education
• Review recruitment packages for PhD students for their competitiveness.
• Explore the possibility of offering more research topics courses.
• Ensure that PhD students are involved in a regular and systematic
evaluation of their progress towards graduation.
5.
Space
Provide a centrally located student common room for undergraduates and
other improvements as inventory becomes available.
6.
Staff
Review the levels of staff both for secretarial and systems support.
Review the process to improve the coordination of faculty activity around
undergraduate advising and the staff appointed for this purpose,
particularly during registration periods.
7.
Faculty Restructuring
• Participate fully in the process initiated by the Vice President Academic for
reviewing the effectiveness of the Faculty structure at SFU.
Cc;
?
Mike Plischke, Dean Faculty of Science
Tom Archibald, Chair, Department of Mathematics
au
•
?
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
Office of the Dean of Science
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Krane, Associate VP ?
FROM:
Dr. Michael Plischke, Dean
Academic ?
Faculty of Science
RE:
External Review of Mathematics ?
DATE: October 18, 2006
if
I have now received the response of the Department of Mathematics to the report of the
External Review Committee (ERC) and will briefly comment on both documents. Since
the Department has accepted in whole, or in part, all but one of the formal
recommendations, there is no need for a lengthy discussion on my part. The ERC's
report is very positive, especially in regard to the strategic plan of the Department to
•
distinguish
niche in Canadian
itself from
Mathematics.
local and national
The three
competitors
main research
and thus
groups
to carve
in the
out
Department
a unique
(discrete mathematics, number theory, algebra and applied mathematics) are all
characterized as very strong in an international context.
In its response to the ERC report, the Department highlights an issue that it feels was
not adequately addressed in the report, namely the acute shortage of space. There is
no question that both Mathematics and Statistics and Actuarial Sciences are woefully
under resourced as far as space is concerned. This applies to all categories (faculty
offices, support staff space, graduate student seating, undergraduate student society
space). However, it must be pointed out that there is no obvious "quick fix" that is
possible within the Science space envelope. Schools in the Faculty of Applied Sciences
bound the two departments on all sides and, unless there is the political will in the
higher administration to do some reallocation between Faculties, there is no attractive
solution available. Both Mathematics and Statistics and Actuarial Sciences are keen to
grow and I support their ambitions. However, the only new office space available to
Science is located in Chemistry and TASC II and I don't imagine that new faculty hired
into the mathematical departments will find it attractive to be housed there.
I will now comment on a selection of the ERC's recommendations.
Recommendation 2: A position, preferably senior, should be targeted to address the
under representation of female faculty members.
.
The Department and I agree that this should be a priority. I am prepared to fund a more
senior appointment if a suitable female candidate can be identified.
Recommendation 4: Since mathematics plays a key role within SFU and should
continue to do so, any anticipated reorganization of faculties and departments should
engage the Department in its planning and in particular should guarantee that the
unique strengths in Mathematics are preserved.
?
0
I
believe
that the natural home for Mathematics is in the Faculty of Science. The
Departmental response, however,
is more ambiguous.
Recommendation 6: The Centre for Experimental and Constructive Mathematics should
report directly to the Chair of the Department of Mathematics, since CECM space is
considered to be part of the space of the Department of Mathematics. Currently CSC
occupies no departmental space, however if that situation were to change it also should
report to the Chair of the Department of Mathematics.
The
Department
does not accept this recommendation.
My sense is
that the
Department
and the
CECM
have come to an arrangement for the use of the
CECM
space that is
equitable
for both
parties
and I therefore
agree
that
a change in reporting
structure is not
necessary
at this time. The CSC is a Schedule B Center and it would
not be appropriate to have it report
to the
Chair
of Mathematics.
Recommendation 9: Mathematical courses in computational areas should remain under
the control (or joint control) of the Department of Mathematics. This is crucial to sustain
the health of the mathematics educational mission.
I assume
that this recommendation stems from a feeling in
the Department that faculty
in Computing
Science
would
like
to have preferential access to the
MACM
courses that
were
in
large part
developed
by mathematicians. I agree with the Department that its
emphasis
on
computational aspects of mathematics should
continue
to
be reflected in
the
undergraduate teaching that its members do.
Recommendation 11: Resources to support the Mathematics endeavours at Surrey
should be allocated as quickly as possible, with direct involvement from the
Mathematics Department in determination of these. The success at the Surrey campus
requires prompt attention to resources allocation.
I believe
that this
recommendation
has
its
origin in opinions provided
to
the committee
by
an
intermittently disgruntled
faculty member based at Surrey. I am
certain
that the
situation, as far as clerical support at Surrey is
concerned
is well in hand.
Recommendation 12: The workload of the lecturers should be reevaluated. In particular,
their already heavy schedules will be affected by new remedial courses; therefore
resources should be allocated to provide the additional undergraduate advising that will
be needed.
The workload of
teaching
faculty is an issue throughout the Faculty and will be
discussed
at a
higher level
in the near future.
Recommendation 20: Employ an adequate number of permanent systems support
personnel. A permanent systems manager is indispensable for the proper functioning of
the Department, both for its educational mission as well as to support research
activities.
If CECM reports to the Department (Recommendation 6) then the Panel recommends
that 11/2 systems support positions be allocated to support the Department.
The funding from my office for the existing limited term systems support person came
from carryover funds in a previous fiscal year. Carryover funds will not exist at the end
of the current fiscal year. The cost of a systems consultant is roughly the same as an
Assistant Professor, Step 4 and this is the trade-off that will be necessary if the position
is to be base-funded.
Michael Plischke
C: ?
Tom Archibald
L
Department of Mathematics
?
Response to 2006 Departmental Review
The review of the Department of Mathematics was found by the Department to be a
useful exercise. It gave us an opportunity to think about our direction and to consider
what our greatest needs are. We were likewise very content with the professionalism of
the team, as well as with the assistance we received from the office of the Vice-President
Academic. And for the most part we were ver y
content with the recommendations, which
we interpreted as saying, in essence, that we were on a good course and should continue
to make decisions much as we have been doing. We were particularly pleased by the
general tenor of comments such as the following:
The fundamental observation is that the Department of Mathematics is in very good
condition. It plays a central role in the educational and research activities of the
University and it is well positioned to keep doing so along the major strategic lines of
SFU . . .The Review Panel is quite impressed by the significant improvements that
have taken place since the last review in 1998. ... The Department of Mathematics
now contains predominantly young, vibrant faculty members who are extremely
enthusiastic; collegiality among different research areas and groups is evident."
While the review did bring most of our perceived problems to the fore, it neglected to
speak as strongly as we would have like concerning our space problems. Together with
S ?
the Dept. of Statistics and Actuarial Science we face very serious space resource
problems, and this has been brought to the attention of the Dean repeatedly. This is
currently being explored by the Dean and finding some resolution will continue to be a
major priority for us.
Apart from space issues, the main resource-related issues brought up by the reviewers
had to do with staff. Their recommendations for improved advising, reduction of lecturer
workload, and secretarial backup imply additional staffing, given the fact that existing
staff, though highly experienced, has really no latitude for additional work. Their
recommendation for ongoing computing technical support also would imply continuing
our temporary technician position. We support both of these ideas.
While all of the recommendations seemed to us thoughtful and well-intended, there were
a few places where full agreement was not possible. The main suggestion we reject is that
the Centre for Experimental and Constructive Mathematics should report directly to the
department. Otherwise, our detailed responses to are given below.
Recommendations and responses
Research Faculty
Recommendation 1: The Department of Mathematics should target its faculty searches on
faculty who can make connections and bridge across different research groups in the
Department. The Department is in a hiring mode, with at least 2 untargeted positions at
S ?
this point. This represents an important opportunity.
Response: Since this writing we have been asked to restrain hiring due to the financial
situation of the university. However, we currently plan one hire at Burnahy
,
as area open,
and we will be looking for exactly this kind of opportunity. We see the Industrial
Mathematics program currently under development as a further opportunity fbr
departmental integration.
Recommendation 2: A position, preferably senior, should be targeted to address the
underrepresentation of female faculty members. There is a need to enlarge the
representation of women among the faculty. This is a problem that is hard to solve at
SFU or elsewhere, in particular if there is some degree of seniority in the position.
Success in this recruitment requires special incentives and the support of the SFU
administration.
Res
ponse: We strongly support the idea that we need additional female
.
faculiy at all
levels, with the need at senior level being particularly critical. We note that at present we
have no authorization for a senior-level hire, and Jiirther that senior women frequently
present the additional obstacle
of
a spousal hire in mathematics. We have explored the
potential in some cases but so far we have not found a solution here. It is our plan
to
continue to investigate this.
Recommendation
3:
Untenured faculty should be relieved of service duties as much as
possible. Particular attention should be paid to those faculty members whose research
productivity is apparently suffering.
Response: Since a very large percentage
of
the department is not tenured, we can't agree
to follow this suggestion. We need the energy and imagination
of
newer faculty in making
departmental practices current. However, we do aim to provide teaching relieffor those
faculty early in their careers who are taking on significant service assignments. The
Chair has looked carefully at the committee assignments
of
those with research
productivity problems and adjustments have been made which should greatly alleviate
this problem.
Recommendation 4: Since mathematics plays a key role within SFU and should continue
to do so, any anticipated reorganization of faculties and departments should engage the
Department in its planning and in particular should guarantee that the unique strengths in
Mathematics are preserved.
Response: The Department
of
Mathematics agrees wholeheartedly that our effectiveness
should not be reduced by any faculty reorganization. We currently are jinctioning well
within science, though this does not mean that a reorganization would not present
significant opportunities. We hope for
full
consultation in this regard.
Research Centres
Recommendation 5: SFU should continue its investment and support of PIMS, IRMACS
and MITACS. Each plays a pivotal role in the national and international visibility of
mathematics at SFU. In particular, it is of fundamental importance that IRMACS
continues to develop as a resource for the entire university.
Response: The Department benefits significantly from these entities in a variety
of
ways
and will continue to support them
fully.
?
9
Recommendation 6: The Centre for Experimental and Constructive Mathematics should
report directly to the Chair of the Department of Mathematics, since CECM space is
considered to be part of the space of the Department of Mathematics. Currently CSC
occupies no departmental space, however if that situation were to change it also should
report to the Chair of the Department of Mathematics.
Response: The Department does not support this recommendation. It would muddy the
staff resource situation with CECit'I. At present CECi%'I looks after its own technical
support in an agreement with IRMA CS
.
As for space, we have a symbiotic relationship
with CECi
2
vI that makes it an attractive site for housing graduate students of CECJ\'J
members in the department. The fact that this is treated as our space in some contexts has
not posed planning or resource problems thus far.
Education and Training
Recommendation 7: A departmental colloquium and/or a Distinguished Lecture Series
should be initiated. These provide an avenue to get together in a common scientific
activity faculty and students with possibly different research interests.
Response: We support this recommendation and are taking the opportunity of the PIMS
anniversary symposia this year to try to generate a broader departmental interest in
speakers.
Recommendation 8: if more frequent offerings of advanced undergraduate courses are
. ?
not possible then existing courses should, in some cases, be consolidated.
This is offered as a possible solution to the current practice of offering some courses only
in alternate years.
Response: We support this recommendation, emphasizing the words "in some cases". Our
template of offerings is posted on the webs ite, and we attempt to plan requirements so
that prerequisites can be met even when courses are offered only every other year. This
does entail planning on the part of the student, and the fact that this has emerged as a
problem seems to point to the fact that for some students our system
of
advising is
ineffective. We are currently examining ways to improve undergraduate advising, and
with revisions to our undergraduate offerings we hope to be able to identify potential
ma/ors while they are in first or second year and meet with them to discuss their plans.
Recommendation 9: Mathematical courses in computational areas should remain under
the control (or joint control) of the Department of Mathematics. This is crucial to sustain
the health of the mathematics educational mission.
Response: We completely agree with this statement.
Recommendation 10: The University, Faculty, and Department should move quickly to
provide a centrally located small student common room for undergraduates with generous
hours available. The current (partial) solution to the undergraduate student lounge is
totally unacceptable and a speedy solution is crucial to ensure the (social) quality of life
for mathematics students and to help build a sense of community.
•
?
Response: We accept this recommendation. We are currently investigating the possibility
of using a portion of rebuilt graduate student space as space for our undergraduate
student union on a trial basis. While we can ill afford to give up the space for grads,
temporary graduate student office space may be found in CECM or JRM4CS. Thi would
permit us to house the MSU, provided that they can use the space appropriately.
Recommendation 11: Resources to support the Mathematics endeavours at Surrey should
be allocated as quickly as possible, with direct involvement from the Mathematics
Department in determination of these. The success at the Surrey campus requires prompt
attention to resources allocation.
Response: We would very much like to see the spirit of this recommendation put in place
as soon as possible. We now have access to secretarial support at Surrey for the
equivalent of two days weekly. Surrey faculty are also being encouraged, we hope
effectively, to make use of Burnaby staff as appropriate. We now have representation on
the steering committee of the Learning Commons at Surrey, which is helping in the
planning of workshop/lab space. However, direct intervention of the Department Chair
with the Surrey Executive Director seems to he necessary frequently for problems that
ought to be possible to resolve at the staff level. We look forward to the evolution of the
reporting structure in a way that will allow a clearer input of departmental priorities.
Recommendation 12: The workload of the lecturers should be reevaluated. In particular,
their already heavy schedules will be affected by new remedial courses; therefore
resources should be allocated to provide the additional undergraduate advising that will
be needed.
Response: The Department is keenly aware that the lecturers are a valuable resource
that it is tempting to overuse. Lecturer workload is mandated by the university policies.
The Department has worked, and will continue to work, to try to identify more clearly the
service component of the lecttirerjob, so that the distinction between teaching-related
activity and service will be clearer. The Department is also working to move jobs that
can be handled by staff away from the lecturers (for example, web inaintenance) to the
extent that this is possible given
staff
workload and capacities. The idea that we should
have a staff-level advisor is an attractive one to the Department. To some degree concern
about the demands from the new remedial courses has been allayed by the fact that
student demand was lower than anticipated, together with the fact that good advance
planning by the lecturers made the diagnostic procedures go smoothly.
Recommendation 13: The Department and University should consider nominating
Malgorzata Dubiel for a national 3M Teaching Award.
Response: We plan to do this. We congratulate her as a recent recipient of a national
ai+-ardftoin the Pacific Inst itute for Mathematical Sciences.
Recommendation 14: Funding should be allocated for adequate promotion of the
undergraduate programs and initiatives of the Department, including glossy brochures,
leaflets, posters, etc.
Response: We accept the spirit of this recommendation. It is certainly true that our paper
promotional material is lacking. Our web site also needs work in this regard and we have
been devoting resources to this.
Recommendation 15: Ph.D. recruitment packages should be reviewed in light of the
current situation in mathematics nationwide to determine if they are competitive and, if
not, to make them competitive.
Response: We increased our PhD and MSc funding commitments beginning this fall so
that students making satisfactory progress will receive funding guarantees for 4 and 2
years respectively. The amounts are still lower than we would like. In particular it is
dijjIcult to compete with the UBC tuition waiver for doctoral students.
Recommendation 16: The Department should explore mechanisms to offer more research
topics courses.
Response: We agree with the idea that we should diversify our graduate offerings and the
ways in which graduate credit may be obtained. Discussion is ongoing and this
recommendation has already been useful.
Recommendation 17: The Department should ensure that students are involved in a
regular and systematic evaluation of their progress towards the PhD degree, including
periodic meetings with the Supervisory Committee. This is currently done but its
application is not uniform across the graduate student body.
Response: We agree, and have modified the nature
of
written reporting so that annual
progress is more clearly monitored. Faculty have been informed that regular meetings
are expected. We have also mandated the Graduate Studies Committee to make sure that
student progress and reporting is taking place on schedule.
fl
Staff
Recommendation 18: Provide adequate backup for the secretarial work. This almost
certainly entails the allocation of additional staff.
Response: We agree that backup is necessary. Staff have met and agreed to take on
modified duties, within the terms of their job descriptions, in order to ensure that critical
tasks are backed up when possible. Additional staff would certainly be helpful in this
regard and this would be an additionalfunction for a staff member charged with advising.
in connection with the new remedial courses we have had an additional staff member/or
the period from mid-July to mid-October, and it has made a tremendous difference to the
good functioning of the department since she has been providing some backup for the
undergraduate secretary as well as doing advising for the remedial course.
Recommendation 19: Explore better means to coordinate between the faculty members
doing undergraduate advising and the staff responsible for undergraduate advising, in
particular during registration periods.
Response: We agree that this should be done as smoothly as possible. The
recommendation wiliform part of our general effort to redesign our advising.
Recommendation 20: Employ an adequate number of permanent systems support
personnel. A permanent systems manager is indispensable for the proper functioning of
the Department, both for its educational mission as well as to support research activities.
If CECM reports to the Department (Recommendation 6) then the Panel recommends that
1 1/2 systems support positions be allocated to support the Department.
Response: The Department strongly agrees that we need an ongoing systems support
position. At present
we
share 1.5 people with Statistics, one full-time and one part-time,
but the/ui/-time position is a temporary position which terminates in Aug 2007. Turning
this position into an ongoing one would make a great deal of sense to us. The shared-
resource support from the Network Support Group that we were using previously was not
popular fur a variety of reasons.
Respectfully submitted
Tom Archibald
0
L
Simon Fraser University
Report of the Department of Mathematics
External Review Panel
April 5-7, 2006
Charlie Colbourn
?
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
?
Arizona State University
Irene Fonseca
?
Mellon College of Science Professor of Mathematics
?
Director, Center for Nonlinear Analysis
?
Department of Mathematical Sciences
?
Carnegie Mellon University
• ?
Anthony Lan
Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences
?
University of Alberta
Richard Lockhart (Internal Member)?
Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science
?
Simon Fraser University
April 8, 2006
1 Overview
The members of the External Review Panel wish to voice their gratitude to the members
of time community at all levels including staff, undergraduate and graduate students, teach-
ing and research faculty, and administration for their hospitality, guidance and interactions
during their visit. Professor Torn Archibald and his faculty colleagues in the Department of
Mathematics were open, candid and most helpful in support of our exercise. The self-study
document was carefully prepared and provided an accurate assessment of the current situ.
at.ion in the Department. Many people expressed great praise for Professor Torn Archibald
for his leadership skills, for being a. consensus builder and for defending the faculty interests.
We certainly agree.
0
A short visit does not permit one to grasp the details of the manifold activities of the
?
40
Department of Mathematics fully. Nevertheless this panel presumes to make observations
and recommendations; once further elaborated upon by individuals within the institution
with more detailed knowledge, we trust that these will be helpful to the University and the
Department. Before stating particular strengths, weaknesses and recommendations, it is
desirable to indicate major observations from which these derive.
The fundamental observation is that the Department of Mathematics is in very good
condition. It plays a. central role in the educational and research activities of the University
and it is well positioned to keep doing so along the major strategic lines of SFU. Indeed
the key role that the Department pla
y
s within SPU is quite unusual in comparison to other
Departments of Mathcniat;ics in institutions of higher education in North America. This
unique key role of Mathematics deserves special mention and is central to our review.
The Review Panel is quite impressed by the significant improvements that have taken
place since the last review in 1998. In particular there was then perceived a tension between
the "Applied" and "Pure" Mathematics groups. Whatever polarization may have existed in
the past is certainly manageable now; the strengthening of the Industrial Mathematics area
with the second CRC Tier I appointment, will help further to bridge these two groups. The
Department of Mathematics now contains predominantly young, vibrant faculty members
who are extremely enthusiastic; colle
g
iality among different research areas and groups is
evident.
The Department is relatively small, with no pretensions to cover the breadth of the math-
ematical sciences. It has strong programs in three areas: Applied Mathematics (including
PDEs. Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computation), Number Theory and Algebra (iii-
eluding Computational Algebra, Computational Number Theory and Pure Number Theory),
and Discrete Mathematics (including Graph Theory, Combinatorics, and Combinatorial Al-
gorithms). These areas enjoy commonality that outweighs their differences: Each has an
applied focus and a coniput.atioiial approach. By investing in this profile the Department
has secured a valuable scientific niche in Canada and elsewhere.
2 Strengths
The Panel heard directly from the undergraduate students that the Department is among
the 'greatest departments in SFU". The faculty are available, knowledgeable, helpful, and
enthusiastic. They go out of their way to enhance the educational and research experience
for undergraduates. This strong endorsement from the students was unsolicited, and speaks
strongly to the strength of the Department.
2.1 Research Faculty
The discrete mathematics group is among the top ten such groups in the world. The CRC
Tier I appointment of the distinguished scholar Bojan Mohar has occurred, along with very
strong recent hires at junior levels. The group has high visibility internationally, and its
members are often found
found as keynote speakers at major conferences amid workshops. They
2
?
0
have successfully rejuvenated and maintained the long-standing excellence of the group in
this area at SFU.
The group in number theory and algebra has developed a unique ongoing collaboration
(including shared grants, seminars, students, arid postdocs) with UBC, forming together
one of the largest and more influential number theory groups in North America. Their
computational and theoretical research themes are both of excellent caliber. They also
have a distinguished scholar at the helm, Peter Borwein. The panel notes particularly their
excellent recent hires, including one who was awarded one of the largest entry level grants
in Canada. This group has received national recognition through the award of a Leadership
Strategic Initiative grant from NSERC in a highly selective competition.
The applied mathematics group is currently led by an internationally recognized scholar in
iriunerical analysis and scientific computation, Bob Russell. It has an eniergiiig younger group
in partial differential equations, working at the forefront of mathematical problems issuing
from materials science. The new Tier I CRC appointment for which the recruitment process is
well underway will add leadership (which will be needed when Bob Russell retires) and further
strength in the applied analysis area. Evidence of their strength includes their involvement
in the organization of the major international conference in applied mathematics, ICIAM
2011.
Funding levels in all three groups are above national averages and all research faculty
members are currently being funded.
The Department of Mathematics is well positioned to play a central role in the 2005-
10 SFTJ Strategic Research Plan, in particular in the Communication, Computation and
Technology initiative.
2.2 Research Centres
The reputation of the Department of Mathematics has attracted to SFU three major research
centres for mathematics: PIMS, IRMACS and MITACS. Mathematics at SFU serves as a. key
site for the Pacific Institute of Mathematical Sciences (PIMS), the central site for a Networks
of Centres of Excellence program in Mathematics of Information Technology arid Complex
S
y
stems (MITACS), and houses the Interdisciplinary Research in the Computational and
Mathematical Sciences Centre (IRMACS). This concentration of large international centres
is
unique.
They put SFU "on the map'", and represent major scientific resources at the
national and international levels.
The commitment of these centres to SFU is a remarkable strength, impacting everything
from forefront research endeavours to outreach initiatives. Equally the commitment of the
senior administration to these centres is a key strength of Mathematics at SFU. The De-
partment is taking an active role in using these centres; one particular benefit of PII\IS is
the engagement; of faculty members in Collaborative Research Groups that support ongoing
collaboration among researchers who are separated by geography or institution.
Each of these centres makes a signihcrunt contribution, and we must emphasize that; their
contributions are
complementar
y
.
What differentiates all of these centres?
PIMS is at present a collaborative arrangement among six universities in western Canada,
funded by NSERC as well as the provincial governments. Recently it received the largest.
c
. ?
3
grant by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the United States ever awarded to a
proposal submitted frorn outside the United States. This is an exceptional endorsenient
of its international impact, and the major role of SFU in PENIS is key to the strength of
Matheniatics at SFU. PIMS provides strong support for graduate students, postdoctoral
fellows, seminars, and sciellt.ih: Iliect igs (among other things in a list too long to include
here!).
Using funds from the Canada Foundation for Innovation, IR
y
IACS has changed dramat-
ically the quality of life among faculty, postdocs and grad students of the Department of
'Mathematics by providing space and facilities to support advanced research and educational
projects. The research faculty iii Mathematics have found good ways to benefit from it, and
the university as a whole should appreciate IRIvIACS as a tremendous resource to conduct
and encourage interdisciplinary research within a mathematical context.
MITACS is among the largest Networks of Centres of Excellence of Canada. It plays
a crucial role in graduate student internships, funding research projects that are cutting
edge applicable and industrial niathematics, and forming collaborative ventures that span
industry, government, and all levels of the academic institutions. It, collectively coordinates
activities at 48 Canadian universities, and it is housed at SFU. This national visibility is
a great strength for Mathematics and indeed for all of SFU. SFU is a major per capita
recipient of MITACS funding, and its presence at SFU has served to attract. CRC chairs,
and enable the new Industrial Mathematics major. The industry internships at MITACS
serve to supplement the academic experience strongly.
Although it may seem that there are many centres connected to the Mathematics Depart,-
ment at SFU, the spirit of cooperation makes them work together and with the Department.
very effectively. Tangible evidence of this close collaboration includes: the upcoming interna-
tional workshop on sequences and codes, with support from PIMS, facilities from IRI\1ACS,
and the involvement of faculty members in the Department; and the collaboration among
MITACS, IRMACS, PIMS, and the Department on the applied and industrial mathematics
programs, including involvement in the hosting of ICIAM 2011 in Vancouver (indeed two
faculty members serve on the Organizing Committee). The visibility at the international
level is beyond question, and the healthy relationship among these centres, the Department,
and the senior administration is an unquestionable strength.
The Department participates in two smaller centres. CECM, the Centre for Experimental
and Constructive Mathematics, serves as a development site for internationally used MAPLE
software and hence provides a strong profile in the symbolic algebra discipline. CSC. the
Centre for Scientific Computation, organizes a well attended seminar series with PIMS fund-
ing. These are focal points of specific departmental strength, serving a more local need than
the three main centres.
2.3 Education and Training
The Department has an
excellent and committed
group of lecturers! These individuals carry
a. large and complex workload professionally and remain enthusiastic. Relations between
research faculty and lecturers are very healthy.
There is an excellent outreach program (for example, the Taste of
it
program). The
4 ?
. ?
I
lecturers and research facult
y
work together on outreach, and indeed this is a]o a joint
effort of the Department with PIMS, MITACS. and IRMACS. The panel applauds thein all
not just for the outreach efforts, but also for the very effective collaboration among such a
wide variety of groups. It is great to
see
them all working together so well.
The new undergraduate curriculum revision is a strength, and the interest in maintaining
it is a further strength. The new program in Industrial Mathematics, and the concentration
in Operations Research at Surrey, deserve particular mention here, but efforts across time
curricular spectrum are strong.
The graduate program has a very healthy ratio of graduate students to research faculty.
The extensive involvement of undergraduates in research is a very real strength, and to
us reflects the truly applied and computational profile of the Department.
A strength provided by both SFU and the presence of MITACS is the availability of co-op
placements and MITACS internships.
3 Weaknesses
In this section, some issues that do not warrant separate recommendations later are also
included.
3.1 Research Faculty
The faculty of the Department of Mathematics is a relatively small group engaged in a
remarkable number of activities spanning undergraduate education, graduate supervision,
0
postdoctoral me.ntoring and research. The fact that junior faculty are heavily involved in
service duties may lead to fragility and may impair the expected progress of their research
prografliS.
Although different groups in the Department have a well thought out vision for education,
training and research, there remains a need for planning at the
departmental
level as it
particularly impacts curricula and the coherence of the research programs.
There are few
departmental
scientific activities that may attract lacult.y and students
from different areas of research such as a colloquium of the Dcpait.mnent and a Distinguished
Lecture Series.
3.2 Research Centres
Time recent, proliferation of centres may put the Department in a vulnerable position con-
cerning future space and resource allocation for day-to-day operations in teaching. As an
example, the CECM space is considered to be departmental space although currently it. is
not directly under the control of the Department of Mathematics.
3.3 Education and Training
Fragnientat.ion of space is detrimental for collegiality, for the integration of students and
postdocs in the fabric of time Department, and may have an adverse effect; in the quality of
0 ?
5
educational. scientific and social life of the Department.
?
0
3.3.1 Undergraduate Education
The undergraduate students associated with the mathematics prograni have lost their cen-
trally located common space; the current undergraduate student lounge is unacceptable.
This is crucial to the quality of social life for students and to help building a sense of com-
munity. This is an essential part of mathematics education that is not achieved in the same
manner as in the sciences through shared laboratory activities. Recruiting and maintaining
mathematics majors requires a central place to meet informally.
Undergraduate instructors should be reminded of the importance of choosing the right
textbook and, more importantly, they should he urged to use the book that they have
selected. This is an intermittent problem.
The Department should investigate the reasons why the GPA of upper level mathematics
courses is below the norm in related disciplines, as this may negatively impact opportunities
for students' graduate and job placement.
The students expressed frustration with the current departmental practice of oftemuig
some courses only in alternate years. To some extent, entering the program in an even or
an odd calendar year may determine what their academic preparation ends up to be. Vv'hile
faculty members thought (in all programs) that advising for this is adequate, students (in
all programs) voiced this as a concern.
The workload of lecturers should be revisited in light; of their tremendous and invaluable
involvement in teaching, advising, and outreach activities. As their duties evolve, their
workload requires continuous reassessment.
In a number of interviews the Panel was told that the Department has not been ade-
quately involved in the planning at the Surrey campus, and that allocations of resources
are based on program FTEs instead of enrollment FTEs. This a serious problem, whether
real or perceived. We did not visit the Surrey campus, and cannot personally attest to the
problems, hut the perception of difficulties is widespread.
Promotional materials of undergraduate programs and related activities (for example,
glossy brochures, posters, etc.) seem to be lacking, in sharp contrast to the excellent pro-
motional material for the centres.
3.3.2 Graduate Education
Ph.D. recruitment packages are not perceived (by both graduate students and faculty mem-
bers) as being competitive with what other Canadian mathematics departments offer.
The graduate programs should offer research topics courses on a more frequent basis.
This is needed to enhance and even maintain the quality of the current graduate programs.
A progress assessment, including an annual meeting with the Supervisory Committee
and a thorough progress report, is not currently expected from all graduate students on a
regular basis.
Some graduate students are unaware of departmental mechanisms for dealing with aca-
demic problems.
6 ?
.
I
The Ph.D. time to graduation is a concern that the Department. seems to be currently
addressing.
3.4 Staff
A back-up secretarial staff member is non-existent. This may threaten the functioning of
the Department and may prevent, students being well served in a. timely fashion. Even staff
vacations may currently disrupt departmental operations in an unacceptable manner.
Bct.t.cr
coordination hct.wc n staff involved in registration and availability of
ate advisors
advisors is needed, mostly during registration periods. Students can experience difficulty
Finding a faculty advisor during periods when there is time pressure to complete time regis-
tration process.
The current systems support is totally inadequate. Having a full-time systems manager is
fundamental for the educational mission of a department. that is proud of its computational
character, for bringing that into the classroom, anti for research activities of the faculty
umemnbers unaffiliated with a centre.
4
RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Research Faculty
Recommendation.
1:
The Department of Mathematics should target its faculty
searches on faculty who can make connections and bridge across different re-
search groups in the Department.
The Department is in a hiring mode, with at least 2
untargeted positions at this point. This represents an important opportunity.
Recommendation 2: A position,
preferably senior, should be
targeted to address
the underrepresentation of female faculty members.
There is a need to enlarge the
representation of women among the faculty. This is a problem that. is hard to solve at SFU
or elsewhere, in particular if there is some degree of seniority in the position. Success in this
recruitment requires special incentives and the support of the SFU administration.
Recommendation 3: Untenured
faculty should be relieved of service duties
as
much as possible.
Particular attention should be paid to those faculty members whose
research productivity is apparently suffering.
Recommendation 4: Since mathematics plays a key role within SFU and should
continue to do so, any anticipated re-organization of faculties and departments
should engage the Department in its planning and in particular
should guarantee
that the unique strengths in Mathematics are preserved.
0 ?
7
I,
U
4.2
Recommendation
Research Centres
5: SFU should
?
continue
its investment and support of
.0
PIMS,
IRMACS and MITACS. Each plays a. pivotal role in the national and international vis-
ibilit y
of mathematics at SFU. In particular,
it is of
fundamental importance that
IRI\/IACS
continues to develop as a
resource for the
entire university.
Recommendation 6: The Centre for Experimental
and Constructive Mathemat-
ics should report directly to the Chair of the Department of
Mathematics, since
CECM space is considered to be part of the space of the Department of Mathematics. Cur-
rentl y
CSC occupies no departmental space, however
if that situation
were to change it
also should report to the
Chair of the Department of Mathematics.
4.3 Education and Training
Recommendation
7: A
departmental
colloquium and/or a
Distinguished Lecture
Series should be initiated.
These provide an avenue to get together in a common scientific
activity faculty and stmideut.s with possibly different research interests.
4.3.1 Undergraduate Education
are
Recommendation
not possible then
8: If
existing
more frequent
courses
offerings
should,
of
in
advanced
some cases,
undergraduate
be consolidated.
courses
0
'fhis is offered as a possible solution to the current practice of offering soiiie courses only in
alternate years.
Recommendation 9: Mathematical courses in computational areas should remain
under the
control (or joint control) of the Department of Mathematics.
This is
crucial to sustain the health of the mathematics educational mission.
Recommendation 10: The University, Faculty, and Department should move
quickly to provide a centrally located small student common room for under-.
graduates with generous hours available.
The current (partial) solution to the under-
graduate student lounge is totally unacceptable and a speedy solution is crucial to ensure
the (social) quality of life for mathematics students and to help build a sense of community.
Recommendation 11: Resources to support the Mathematics endeavours at Sur-
rey should be allocated as quickly as possible, with direct involvement from
the Mathematics Department in determination of these.
The success at the Surrey
campus requires prompt attention to resources allocation.
Recommendation 12: The workload of the lecturers should be re-evaluated. In
particular, their
already
heavy schedules will he affected by new
remedial
courses: therefore
8 ?
0
p
resources should be allocated to provide the additional undergraduate advising
that will be needed.
Recommendation 13: The Department and University should consider nominat-
in-
Ma]gorzata Duhiel
for a national 3M Teaching Award.
Recommendation 14: Funding should be allocated for adequate promotion of
the undergraduate programs and initiatives of the Department, including glossy
brochures, leaflets, posters, etc.
4.3.2 Graduate Education
Recommendation 15: Ph.D. recruitment packages should be reviewed in light
of the current situation in mathematics nationwide to determine if they are
competitive and, if not, to make them competitive.
Recommendation 16: The Department should explore mechanisms to offer more
research topics courses.
Recommendation 17: The Department should ensure that students are involved
in a regular and systematic evaluation of their progress towards the PhD degree,
including periodic meetings with the Supervisory Committee. This is currently
is
done but. its application is not uniform across the graduate student body.
5
Staff
Recommendation 18: Provide adequate backup for the secretarial work. This
almost certaiiily entails the allocation of additional staff.
Recommendation 19: Explore better means to coordinate between the faculty
members doing undergraduate advising and the staff responsible for undergrad-
uate advising, in particular during registration periods.
Recommendation 20: Employ an adequate number of permanent systems sup-
port personnel. A permanent systems manager is indispensable for the proper functioning
of the Department, both for its educational mission as well as to support research activities.
If CECM reports to the Department (Recommendation 6) then the Panel recommends that;
1 1/2 systems support positions be allocated to support. the Department.
0
?
9
