Mailed on 30 October 2017.

Newsletter, October 2017.
This issue of the newsletter reports on the third and fourth quartile of last year. Due to unforeseen circumstances it comes with a rather big delay. We apologize fro that.

Module 3 (’16-’17)
Module 3 was very similar to a year earlier. The switch to English posed some extra work: from translating old exams to websites but since the core material was already in English this was manageable. 

The main issue this year was the project. In stark contrast with the previous year we got signals early on that the collaboration within groups did not go as smoothly as we hoped. For instance, there were ambitious students who wanted high grades in a group where others were happy with just passing the module. In previous years, we had some dropouts early on which caused some issues but that was all.  To respond to this issue, we came up with the idea that groups would get an average grade and could reward the hard workers with higher grades. But this of course required honest reflection in each group. Persons who did not work hard had to agree on a lower grade. This issue did not work well in all groups. In some groups, the persons who contributed most got a much higher grade but in other groups this differentiation did not pan out. Emotions clearly ran high. Also for us as teachers this was very difficult. We had the gut feeling that some students did not get the grade they deserved but we did not see how we could verify this. In the end, we felt that differentiation largely had the effect of more closely matching grades and individual contribution but the process was far from perfect.

A main improvement for next year is of course to communicate this process earlier. But we also want to discuss this openly early on in the collaboration workshops. It will remain difficult since it is impossible to know for the teachers who has worked the hardest or had the strongest contribution unless the group members reflect on this honestly.

Anton Stoorvogel, module coordinator.

Module 4 (’16-’17)
Module 4 is conducted jointly with the Applied Physics program and consists of three closely related parts: vector calculus, electricity and magnetism, and a project. The project focusses on the historical context, in particular the struggle of Maxwell, and other researchers, to understand the physics of electricity and magnetism and the strong impetus this presented to the development of new mathematics in the nineteenth century. Each group of students will build a historic experiment that was important to gain insight into the physics of electricity and magnetism.

The topics in this module are closely related, which is generally appreciated by the students, although there are always some students that say there is too much physics or mathematics in this module. In the project we always mix students from Applied Mathematics and Applied Physics and, after some time, this generally results in a nice interaction. Especially, many people get excited when the historical experiment they are building start to work. It is also interesting to see how quickly students from these two programs develop a different approach to solving problems. This year we visited with all students the Teylers Museum in Haarlem to see many of the original instruments used for the historical experiments studied during class.

The module is relatively difficult and requires some serious work, but the results were this year quite reasonable. It is interesting to see that there is a very strong correlation between the grades for E&M and vector calculus, both for the Applied Mathematics and Applied Physics students. Every there is, however, year a problem is that in the first few weeks the main focus has to be on vector calculus, which is very intense, since many of the topics in vector calculus are necessary to understand electricity and magnetism. Next year part of the calculus will be moved to the second quarter, which will make the program less compact, and will probably solve this problem. Unfortunately, next year the module will not be together with Applied Physics, which is a pitty, since the interaction between AM and AP was very useful and interesting, both for the students and staff.

Module 7 (’16-’17)
Module 7 counted more than 100 participating students, the majority of which was from Computer Science, then Mathematics, Atlas, as well as students from the so-called Nedap University. Capacity-wise, this large number of students has posed quite a challenge to the coordinator, as particularly the project of the module requires an intensive coaching by staff. In future years, in could feel be that “lighter” solutions have to be taught since the number of students is still increasing.

As in previous years, the first two weeks have a very dense schedule. Next to lectures and tutorials in Discrete Mathematics and Algorithms & Data Structures, the students’ agenda is packed with a sort of crash course into Python, focussed on the very topics and requirements for the subsequent project of the module. That means that, next to a very interactive and basic introduction into Python (for Mathematicians), there is practical sessions to work with some beautiful assignments from the collection of problems of the Euler Project, as well as some basics to be able to work with both permutations and graphs. This activity is finished with individually checking a functioning implementation of shortest path algorithms.

Starting from week 3, the module continues to lay out the underlying mathematical concepts in Discrete Mathematics, Formal Languages & Machines, as well as Algebra in the form of lectures, tutorial sessions, and practical sessions. The complete Wednesday is reserved for the project of this module, in which the students, in groups of at most 4, implement their own algorithm for the notorious graph isomorphism (GI) problem. There is so-called project instructions in the morning, in which some of the most important algorithmic ideas are explained, and each of these Wednesdays continues with a 4 hour practical session to implement these ideas (and more) in Python. 

Next to the implementation of an algorithm for the GI problem, each group works on a research project the results in a brief paper and a final presentation. The in total 26 presentations are held in the 9th week in two parallel sessions, and as in previous years mark one of the highlights of the module: Of course, some of the chosen research topics resemble those of other groups, yet listening to the stream of 13 10-minute presentations show an amazing variety of different topics related to the GI problem and its applications. Another highlight of the module is the programming “competition”, also in week 9, in which student groups can earn bonus points if they are able to solve some of the hardest GI problem instances in a time limit of about 2 minutes. 
The biggest changes with respect to the 2016 edition of Module 7 have been the following, with a brief evaluation of its success:

- A matchmaking “borrel" was organised in week 2 by student associations Abacus and Inter-Actief, to facilitate the formation of (mixed) students groups. Even though not al issues have been resolved in that afternoon session, and the composition of mixed teams can not always be guaranteed, this activity was positively received and will be continued.

- A brainstorm session was organised (by Rom Langerak) in week 3 in which student groups select a topic for the research project. This to overcome a time delay in making such a choice, and subsequent time issues in finishing the project, let alone starting it in time. This has the disadvantage of not having much knowledge of the subject (the GI problem and possible options to do research), yet on average this activity is positively received as students groups “know” what they will work on early on. One possible improvement for this activity would be a more fine-grained written proposal for possible topics (yet running danger of taking away the creativity in coming up with new, own ideas).

- The bonus points (and final grading formula) have been differently set up to facilitate easier introduction into the Osiris system; students obersve that there is still a large amount of bonus possible, and probably the bonus for the programming competition will be slightly reduced next year.

- One of the issues that was mentioned in past and present evaluations is that, due to the fact that we have 2 exams consisting of different topics each, one can pass the module (even with a reasonable grade) w/o really having studied one of these subjects. This will be re-evaluated and possibly addressed in future editions by imposing a lower limit per topic.

- Most of the module was taught in English; and where this caused a problem that was solved by individual arrangements for the respective students. With respect to the next year, we foresee no problems in realising the complete switch to English. 

Marc Uetz
Modulecoordinator

Module 11 (’16-’17)
In module 11 students select 2 out of 4 elective courses, and follow a course on Reflection to mathematical research. Also, each student is assigned to a bachelor assignment based on his/her preferences.

Last year the resits of the courses took place in the final weeks of module 12. The students mentioned that they did not like this because they would like to spend their time then on finishing their bachelor assignment. Hence, we arranged that the resits take place after the end of module 12.

Unfortunately the response rate to the evaluation was only 33%, so we did not receive evaluations of all elective courses. The students remark that the available time for the courses was sufficient. Further they remark that some of the courses provide enough challenges. All these remarks are communicated to the teachers, who use the remarks to improve their courses.

Judith Timmer, module coordinator.

Module 8
We will report on Module 8 in the next newsletter.

Module 12
Module 12 is the final module of the Bachelor Applied Mathematics programme. This module was organized for the second time and went well. The students spent time on Reflection on
Mathematical research II, Complex Function Theory and their Bachelor assignments.

Due to last year's feedback by the students we changed the following. Last year some students had a resit of module 11 in the final week of module 12. This did not go well with finishing module 12. To improve upon this, this year the resits of module 11 took place after module 12. Furthermore, we improved the information about the presentations at the Bachelor conference.

Finally, students of both Applied Mathematics and of the double degree programme Applied Mathematics & Applied Physics presented the results of their bachelor assignments at our annual Bachelor conference. It was very interesting to see such a wide range of mathematics represented by the bachelor theses. The Classroom of the Future turned out to be a very suitable room for this event.
During the conference each student gave a pitch, and thereafter, during the poster session, there was time for discussion and questions. This event was, from our point of view, very successful. We are very proud of the students, their results and their presentations!

Currently we are working on a similar scheme, but then in the first semester. This will most probably take effect in the next academic year.

Judith Timmer, module coordinator