TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No.

4, 2003 199

Engineering mathematics
dare to
hope?
Nigel Steele
Accepted August 2003

Abstract
Some of the challenges encountered in the delivery of engineering mathe-
matics courses have their origins in the changing and often non-uniform
degree of mathematical preparedness of the recipients. In some cases,
these challenges arise in a positive way, as a result of a deliberate policy
of wider access to engineering courses. However, in others, they come
about following problems encountered with mathematics provision in
pre-university study, and as such are re£ecting a much larger problem,
one which has implications way beyond the boundaries of engineering
mathematics. Mathematics at school level is plagued with enormous
di⁄culties and uncertainties including a shortage of well-quali¢ed tea-
chers, and an ongoing debate on curriculum and assessment. A plethora
of ‘‘interesting’’ sounding degree titles and a high demand for graduates
in mathematics to enter lucrative careers, militates against the recruit-
ment of highly-quali¢ed teachers. Nevertheless, there are actions and
initiatives aimed at supporting and strengthening school-level mathe-
matics in various ways and this paper will describe and comment on
some of them. Moreover, it aims to show that University mathematics
departments/groups could play an important role in taking some of these
proposals forward.

1. Introduction
The aim of this paper is to consider some aspects of mathematics teaching in
schools and further education (FE) as they impinge upon Engineering Mathematics
in higher education (HE), and to report on some developments. We will present some
recent data reflecting recruitment/retention difficulties as well as qualification short-
falls. The establishment of the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education
(ACME) is an important development, and we discuss its first report on continuing
professional development for teachers of mathematics, which is already making an
impact.
The Government Inquiry into post-14 mathematics in the UK is a major oppor-
tunity for interested parties in influence developments in mathematics, and some
aspects of the IMA’s evidence to that Inquiry are described.

Teaching Mathematics and its Applications 22(2)
The Institute of Mathematics and its Applications 2003;
all rights reserved
200 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003

2. Problem, what problem?

In this country (as well as elsewhere) there is a shortage of pupils engaging with
mathematics, particularly at the post-16 stage. Whilst this is by no means the end of
the story, this disengagement shows itself in the number of ‘A’ level entries in
mathematics as shown in Table 1.
The latest dip in the figures is brought about to some extent by the recent AS
debacle, but the long term trend indicates that there is much more to worry about
concerning the state of mathematics education in the UK. We are all well aware of the
direct impact of these figures on Engineering, and thus Engineering Mathematics,
through:
. a reduced pool of traditional recruits,
. competition for this reduced pool from ‘new’ courses,
. lower levels of achievement on entry,
. changes in entry requirements to increase the pool.
There is also a welcome drive to increase participation and this will also produce
entrants who are likely to need extra support in the early part of a mathematics-
dependent study. Obviously, it is not possible for universities to be inflexible in the
face of events, and if courses are to survive HE has to adapt as best it can. A large
part of the adjustment has to be made by those groups teaching Engineering
Mathematics and these groups are reservoirs of subject expertise, many with acknowl-
edged high-quality teaching activities. However, a number of mathematics depart-
ments (or groups), as a result of factors including recruitment difficulty to
mathematics and mathematics-rich courses in HE, find themselves under threat of
reduction in size or, in some cases, closure. Provided that closure is avoided and
research potential/achievement remains a key requirement for appointment, this
reservoir can be maintained. Of course, should research be removed from the
portfolio of activities of some universities, then recruitment of staff with such high
subject expertise would be difficult, if not impossible, and key resources would then
be lost.
Flexibility and adjustment in HE should take place to accommodate ‘‘new’’
categories of entrant. However, a large amount of ‘‘support effort’’ is currently
directed at entrants from traditional backgrounds, yet their level of preparation is
inadequate. In addition, the figures in Table 1 indicate quite clearly that we are losing
the battle for the hearts and minds of many pupils who are voting with their feet and
not taking A-level mathematics. There is a clear need to investigate possible causes for
this, and if possible reverse the trend.

Table 1 A level entries (thousands), source QCA website (1992–2001).

Year 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Total 662 684 699 731 734 733 726 739 778 794 784 772 749 701
Maths 85 80 75 72 66 65 62 67 69 71 70 67 66 54
% 12.8 11.7 10.7 9.8 9.0 8.9 8.5 9.1 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.7 8.8 7.7
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003 201

3. Mathematics teachers
The role of the teacher at all levels is critical; uninformed comment can cause both
offence and demotivation amongst practising teachers. Nevertheless, there is evidence
of teacher shortage and a lack of qualification. Informative data has been gathered in
the OU/Kings/NAMA survey (1), involving 22 LEAs and with responses from 1571
maths teachers in 228 secondary schools.
There are various horror stories, including the fact that 24% of those who
responded had what were categorised as weak or no maths qualifications (of those
teaching A-level, 34 had just maths A level and three just GCSE in mathematics).
There is evidence of the increasing use of part-time teachers and use of teachers
qualified in another subject and based in another department. Eight percent of those
responding were about to retire. Overall, the conclusion is that there is a shortfall of
15% in the numbers of serving teachers qualified to teach maths, and this is broadly in
line with other studies carried out at about the same time. The data masked real
shortages supported by evidence from recruitment ‘‘drives’’ in the 2002 calendar year
by the individual schools. The report cited the following:
. One school had advertised for six maths teachers.
. 25% of responding schools have advertised for more than three maths teachers in
the period.
. In one case, recruitment was necessary to replace the entire maths department who
had left (through retirement, move to the independent sector and a career change to
become a tax inspector).
The result of these and other recruitment efforts was summarised as:
. for 22.4% of the maths posts advertised—no appointment,
. for 10.6% of the maths posts advertised—no choice of candidate for appointment,
and an ‘‘unsatisfactory’’ appointment made,
. for 10.9% of the maths post advertised—the candidate appointed needed addi-
tional ‘‘support’’
. for 37.1% of the maths posts advertised—the appointments made were considered
to be good!
The tentative conclusion drawn from this survey was that the situation on the
ground was ‘‘patchy’’, but certainly raised concern. Teachers themselves had ex-
pressed the need for continuing professional development (CPD) and the survey
results supported their views.
There is some positive news. There were more recruits to maths initial teacher
training (ITT) again in 2002, and more graduates (more than 350) had applied for
maths PGCE courses in autumn 2002 than ever before. The number of unfilled
vacancies in mathematics fell slightly in 2002. Nevertheless there were still more than
400 vacancies for 2002 [420 (2001), 240 (2000), 150 (1999), 140 (1998)]. These numbers
do, of course, mask the ‘‘hidden’’ vacancies, that is, maths posts filled by non-maths
trained teachers, and it has to be of concern that a significant number (30%) of maths
teachers are over 50.
The situation in secondary education may not be satisfactory and the Roberts
Report, ‘‘SET for Success’’ (2) identifies the need for action to increase the level of
202 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003

subject expertise in mathematics (and physical science) in both ITT and CPD
programmes for primary teachers.
Whilst many factors have no doubt contributed to the figures seen in Table 1, it
would seem that an important, but not the only, step has to be an examination of the
needs for CPD for the existing teaching force.

4. ACME and CPD for mathematics teachers

The mathematics profession, in its widest sense, suffers from a plethora of bodies with
differing opinions and agendas claiming to speak on its behalf. This ‘‘diversity’’
(fragmention, dis-unity) has often been exploited, either deliberately or accidentally,
especially when educational initiatives are proposed, by use of an appropriate body
with sympathetic views for consultation purposes. This has long been realised by the
profession and the dangers were highlighted not least by the late Professor David
Crighton as a member of the ‘‘Howson’’ group. This group in its report ‘‘Tackling the
Mathematics Problem’’ (3) called for the establishment of a Government—recognised
national committee for matters related to mathematics education. Response was by
no means immediate, and many of us had quietly given up hope. However, others,
notably Chairs and those serving as members of the Joint Mathematical Council,
maintained the pressure, and in 2002, ACME was founded. The work of this
committee is funded for the first three years by the Gatsby Foundation and the first
Chair is Sir Christopher Llewellyn-Smith, a distinguished physicist. Initially at least,
the work of this committee is project-based and it has recently published its first
report (4) on a study on the needs for continuing professional development for
teachers of mathematics.
The first recommendation made in this report called on the Government to obtain
data on the number of teachers needed over the next 10 years, and on the
qualifications of existing teachers, and also to examine international best practice
in CPD. According to the report, CPD programmes should contain an element of
broadening and deepening of mathematical knowledge as well as pedagogical
elements. As well as calling for proper resourcing of a CPD programme, the report
makes an explicit recommendation in terms of an expectation that teachers of
mathematics will engage in CPD.
The recommended mechanism for delivery of CPD programmes is through a
network of Local Mathematics Centres in conjunction with a National Academy
for Teachers of Mathematics. In March 2003, the Secretary of State for Education,
Charles Clarke, announced that he had accepted the need for such an Academy, and
that it would be set up.
For the time being ACME has suspended its project work to focus on the work of
the Inquiry into post-14 mathematics.

5. The Smith Inquiry into post-14 mathematics

‘‘The aim of the Inquiry will be to ensure that the UK has a strong supply of young
people with good mathematical knowledge and skills that meet the wide-ranging needs of
employers and further and higher education.’’
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003 203

The then Secretary of State for education announced in early 2002 the
establishment of an inquiry into post-14 mathematics in the UK. After some
delay, the Chair of the Inquiry, Professor Adrian Smith, Principal of Queen Mary
College, was appointed. Very soon, the broad aim of the inquiry was announced and
requests were sent out to various bodies, seeking their views. The invitation to
contribute was originally in the form of various questions for consideration. How-
ever, the Institute chose to respond to the request by considering the aim of the
Inquiry and identifying some of the factors which currently militate against this aim
being achieved. We also suggested some directions which should be followed to meet
the aim more closely.
As a guiding principle, the Institute believes that it must be a major government
priority to ensure that a stimulating, high-quality education in mathematics is
available for all pupils and students at both the compulsory and all later stages in
their education.
‘‘SET for Success’’, the report of Sir Gareth Robert’s review (2) is clear on the need
for more graduates in mathematics and the physical sciences to meet the requirements
of the UK economy. The Institute of Mathematics and its Applications believes that
meeting this ‘‘top end’’ requirement, vital for major areas of employment and
research, can only be achieved through actions aimed at all stages of the education
process, and such actions cannot be restricted to high achievers in the subject alone.
The sections below contain a selection of what the Institute considered to be
important issues/points for consideration by the Inquiry.

5.1. Some key factors

5.1.1. There exists a widespread general lack of appreciation on the part of the public
(including, in some cases, employers and potential employers), of the pivotal
role of mathematics.
In the sciences, social sciences, finance, IT, business, engineering, technology
and so on, mathematics plays a crucial role in day-to-day operations. This role
is also important in making the developments or technological advances
necessary in business to maintain a competitive edge.
Results of studies, including the Science, Technology and Mathematics Council
(STM) ‘‘Mathematics Skills in the Workplace’’ report (5), and direct evidence
from employers, demonstrate that such a role is increasing in these and other
areas, including health care and tourism.
The STM report states that ‘‘. . . mathematical skills in the workplace are
changing, with increasing numbers of people involved in mathematics-
related work, and with such work involving increasingly sophisticated
mathematical activities.’’ The Institute’s survey returns reflected the findings
of this report; one effect due in part to 5.1.2 below, is that skill shortages are
found.
The US Secretary for Education (6), has said that ‘‘The public must realize that
advances in technology and productivity necessary for the US to remain
competitive in the global economy, depend on all students learning more
mathematics and science than is currently required, and also on increasing the
number of students who extend their mathematical knowledge beyond algebra
204 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003

so they may proceed to more advanced scientific and technical subjects.’’ This
remark may be taken as applying equally to the UK.
5.1.2. Insufficient and declining numbers engaging with mathematics at all levels of
education.
5.1.3. Deliberate understating of the mathematical demands in different areas of
study in order to accommodate.
5.1.4. Avoidance of development of mathematical understanding in technology and
other courses, for example using the device known as ‘‘embedding’’, serving to
undermine awareness of the central importance of the subject.

5.2. The role of the teacher

The major inter-dependent issues which have to be confronted are 5.1.1 and 5.1.2
above, and action needs to be taken at all levels to address these, starting with the
compulsory phase of education through to FE and HE. However, these cannot be
dealt with in isolation and positive actions in respect of 5.1.3 and 5.1.4 will also be
needed to support action on the major issues.
5.2.1. The key players in such action are teachers of mathematics. As mentioned
earlier, the OU/Kings/NAMA survey (1) indicates there is real cause for
concern over both the supply and the mathematics qualifications of some
teachers of mathematics.
5.2.2. There is also cause for serious concern in terms of subject awareness, by which
we mean an appreciation of the role of mathematics in some of the fields
mentioned in 5.1.1. Such an appreciation can serve to motivate and enthuse
pupils, notably those who are starting to think about employment. Clearly this
would be beneficial in addressing the issue of pupil engagement with mathe-
matics.
5.2.3. The retention and re-motivation of existing teachers is vital and to this end, the
ACME report (4) is both timely and welcome.
5.2.4. A key feature of a programme of CPD for teachers of mathematics must be
that it should be subject-specific and deal to a large degree with mathematics
itself, rather than with pedagogy alone.
5.2.5. Teacher shortage militates against the release of staff to pursue CPD
programmes, and ways have to be found to address this.
In addition to providing a valuable continuing support mechanism in its own
right, the provision of suitably (subject) prepared teaching assistants in
mathematics might provide the necessary capacity to allow release for the
purposes of CPD.
5.2.6. The Institute is fully in agreement with the view expressed by Heads of
Departments of Mathematical Sciences (HoDoMs) (7) that University mathe-
matics departments have a key role to play in the provision of CPD
programmes.
The loss or contraction of such departments represents a real threat to the
development of successful subject-based support for teachers.
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003 205

5.2.7. Mathematics and Computing specialist schools must serve as a positive

influence within the mathematics teaching profession, possibly by performing
the role of Local Mathematics Centres.
5.2.8. The IMA believes that the high degree of fragmentation of professionalism
within mathematics is not beneficial and needs to be addressed.

5.3. Curriculum and assessment

5.3.1. Education in mathematics should instil enthusiasm and provide the basics to
support and encourage life-long learning.
5.3.2. Curriculum design and organisation and the associated assessment regime
must support the education process. There is evidence that this is not always
happening, the most powerful example being the continuing drift away from
the subject.
5.3.3. Funding is a key factor in education. Current practices are felt to have
damaged valuable diversity of mathematics provision in FE, particularly for
the more modest achiever in mathematics.
5.3.4. The use of a single (tiered) GCSE examination aiming to cater for all levels of
previous achievement at KS3 has been unsatisfactory.
A practice which leads to a very large number of pupils embarking on a
programme which can only lead to a grade that will be considered as a fail by
most employers (and most others outside the world of school) is both de-
motivating and unfair.
5.3.5. There are also further unfortunate effects caused by the current availability
of intermediate level programmes leading to a restricted level of pass
at GCSE. The educational validity of the availability of a pass at grade B
on this route has been questioned, but the main concern is the effect of
league tables.
5.3.6. The STM ‘‘Mathematics Skills in the Workplace’’ report (5) defines the term
‘‘mathematical literacy’’ as involving high-level numeracy and understanding
of quantitative models. The current and growing importance of such abilities
in employment are apparent from the report.
5.3.7. There are those who would argue (8), based on the expressed needs of
employers and further education, that a course leading to a GCSE in such
mathematical literacy (or ‘‘practical maths’’), should be produced. This would
replace the current foundation level at GCSE.
5.3.8. At this stage any educational reform must have as a main objective increasing
the number of people studying mathematics in some form or other post-16.
5.3.9. The burden and type of assessment still needs to be monitored and where
possible reduced.
5.3.10. The need to challenge the most able students has to be recognised. As well as
the provision of Further Mathematics at AS and A level, there are other
opportunities based on the Seventh Term Entry Paper (STEP) examination
206 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003

and the Advanced Extension Award (AEA) concept as well as through the use
of Free-Standing Maths Qualifications (FSMQ)’s bearing UCAS points.
5.3.11. In HE there are two distinct aspects to be considered:
(a) Courses leading to degrees in mathematics, including mathematical
sciences, financial mathematics etc.
(b) Support for courses leading to degrees in engineering, science, economics,
business, social science and so on (‘‘Service’’ teaching).
5.3.12. In 5.3.11a, the majority of students will hold ‘‘top end’’ qualifications and
their programmes will come under the benchmarking statement for MSOR.
This allows for welcome diversity, having a definite core and possibly also a
focus on certain application areas, reflecting employer needs.
5.3.13. Although students on such courses may have high qualifications in mathe-
matics, it is not uncommon for some additional support in mathematics to be
needed in the early stages. Nevertheless, with this support and the provision of
the 4-year MMath programme in several universities, the courses are
successful and new graduates from these courses often attract high starting
salaries.
5.3.14. For ‘‘Service’’ courses, the position is complex, not least because the level of
mathematical preparedness at intake may be diverse. ‘‘Service’’ teaching is an
important part of HE activity and is a key part o the contribution of
mathematics to the UK economy. This point is further discussed in Section
5.4.
Support centres, often using IT-based material for part of their work, have an
important role to play in these courses in HE.
5.3.15. The Government has announced that further HE expansion will be through
the use of Foundation degrees. The Institute considers it vital that the
educational content of these degrees is appropriate in terms of basic
principles, and that due attention is paid in their design to the role of
mathematics as the language of technology.
Again, the use of support centres will be critical.
5.3.16. It will continue to be the job of HE to adjust to change as far as levels of
achievement in mathematics amongst its entrants are concerned.

5.4. Public perception

5.4.1. There needs to be a concerted effort to instil (or re-establish?) the wonder and
magic of mathematics in popular culture. The perception that mathematics is
difficult appears to be self-fulfilling, and thus to all intents and purposes it is
believed to be true.
5.4.2. The Roberts review (2) adds some credence to the perception of the relative
difficulty of mathematics (and science). The Review is adamant (recommenda-
tion 2.11) that if pupils generally find it more difficult to achieve high marks in
science and mathematics, then this needs to be corrected. The alternative is that
fewer will choose to study the subjects at higher levels.
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003 207

5.4.3. We live in an advanced, technologically-based society. The implication of the

lack of understanding of relevance and the perceived difficulty of mathematics
has to be addressed in a responsible attempt to influence the education of
young people so as to serve their own best interests and those of the country
and its economy.
5.4.4. For some types of education or training programme the level of mathematical
competence needed has either been misrepresented or the nature of the
programme has been altered to reduce its challenge. The effect of this is to
limit its utility, particularly as a foundation for continuing professional
development.
The case for ‘‘embedded’’ core mathematics teaching is not made. This approach
serves to reinforce the negative perception of the value of mathematics and the
pressure to achieve high pass rates may manifest itself through the interpretation of
‘‘embedded’’ as meaning ‘‘absent’’.

5.5. Employer needs

5.5.1. The Institute of Directors in its document ‘‘Education and Training: A
Business Blueprint for Reform’’ (10) states bluntly that ‘‘There is evidence
aplenty that employers favour maths because it is so fundamental to the basic
skill of numeracy without which employees are hardly employable’’ (Section
5.10.3 refers).
5.5.2. A number of sectors have experienced a need for employees with higher
mathematical skills including awareness and appreciation of models, estima-
tion, recognition of anomalies etc.
5.5.3. Employer’s returns highlight concern for the results of the mathematics
education process rather than for its detail. The skills of problem formulation
and problem-solving (at all levels), and the commercial value of such skills, are
recurring themes in their comments.
Employer’s also mention concepts like mathematical ‘‘fluency’’ at various
levels, related for example to the ability to read and communicate scientific
and other complex ideas. At the higher level and for more specialist courses
employers do make suggestions on detailed content.

5.6. Raising the profile of mathematics

5.6.1. Mathematics needs to be marketed through raising public awareness of the
importance of the subject to everyday life, to wealth generation and to the
economy as well as to research and development.
5.6.2. The profession of ‘‘Mathematician’’ must also be acknowledged and
publicised. Those who have reached professional status in mathematics
should be encouraged to describe themselves as ‘‘A mathematician, working
in . . .’’
208 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003

6. Conclusion: dare we hope?

In this paper we have reported on a survey which gives major cause for concern over
the recruitment, retention and the qualifications of teachers of mathematics. On the
other hand, we have noted the establisment of a unifying committee for matters to do
with mathematics education, and we are in the middle of a Government Inquiry into
post-14 mathematics, led by a mathematician. The Secretary of State for Education
studied mathematics to a high level at university, and is convinced of its value.
Anyone not experienced in these matters would be convinced that although we have
serious problems, the ‘‘cure’’ is in sight.
Yes we can dare to hope, but there will be no magic or even full cure. There will
always be a role for maths support centres in HE and in FE—maybe they should be
developed in schools too? There is also a role to be played by HE mathematics
departments/groups in the CPD exercise and we should be assertive in that role in
ensuring that the envisaged element aimed at increasing subject knowledge is explicit
and not ‘‘embedded’’.
In terms of subject expertise, mathematics in HE is a strong resource, and it must
be kept that way. The failure to take a long-term, informed view of implications of the
‘‘predicament’’ of mathematics in many schools has led to the current state of affairs.
It would be a tragedy if, at a time when the government accepted and promoted the
importance of mathematics, HE resources in the subject were reduced in response to
unregulated market forces and unfortunate post-Research Assessment Exercise
(RAE) funding decisions.

References
1. ‘‘Teachers of Mathematics: their qualifications, training and recruitment’’. A report of a
survey of secondary mathematics departments carried out in the acedemic year 2001–2002.
Johnston-Wilder, S., Allen, B., Thumpston, G., Cooke, H., Brown, M. and Burton, L.
Open University, National Association of Mathematics Advisers, King’s College London,
February 2003.
2. ‘‘SET for Success’’. The supply of people with science, technology, engineering and
mathematics skills. The report of Sir Gareth Robert’s Review. HM Treasury, April 2002.
3. ‘‘Tackling the Mathematics Problem’’. LMS/IMA/RSS, October 1995.
4. ‘‘Continuing Professional Development for teachers of mathematics’’. ACME PR/01,
Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education, December 2002.
5. ‘‘Mathematicsl Skills in the Workplace’’. Final Report to the Science, Technology and
Mathematics Council. Hoyles, C., Wolf, A., Molyneux-Hodgson, S. and Kent, P. Science,
Technology and Mathematics Council, June 2002.
6. The Secretary’s Mathematics and Science Initiative, Report of ‘‘Mathematics Summit’’. US
Department of Education, February 2003.
7. Letter from the Chair to Rt Hon. Charles Clarke MP, Secretary of State for Education and
Skills, November 2002.
8. James, D. J. G. (2002) Mathematics in Schools: implications for undergraduate courses in
engineering and other numerate disciplines. Mathematics Today, 38, 140–146.
9. ‘‘Maths Problem’’. New Civil Engineer. Institution of Civil Engineers, 16th January 2003.
10. ‘‘Education and training. A business blueprint for reform’’. IOD Policy paper. Lea R.
Institute of Directors, June 2002.
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 22, No. 4, 2003 209

Nigel Steele is Professor of Mathematics at Coventry University. He is also an Honorary

Secretary of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, with responsibility for
education matters.
Address for correspondence: Professor N. C. Steele, School of Mathematical and
Information Science, Coventry University, Priory Steet, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK. email:
nsteele@coventry.ac.uk