There is a perception that mathematical ability/knowledge among science and engineering students is declining. This issue was approached from several angles in this project by: examining staff and student perception, evaluating evolving qualification profiles of incoming students and tracking student progression through representative degree courses.

Mismatches between staff and student perception and the reality of mathematical performance were a possibility. To test this hypothesis questionnaires were issued to staff (in Chemistry, E&EE, Maths) and to students (E&EE). Examination data (including year averages, degree classification and selected module marks) were obtained from each school and matched to A-level grades. Statistical analysis was performed on the matched data sets.

Clear correlation was observed between responses to staff questionnaires in Chemistry and E&EE. It was perceived that student handling of mathematics had declined significantly and continues to decline. The perceived decline is steeper with home students and should be addressed via Government policy at pre-University level. By contrast while Maths academics broadly agreed with some of the above opinions, a significant proportion considered standards were invariant.

Significantly, first year E&EE students indicated that the mathematics level experienced was approximately as expected, but by year two this perception had shifted significantly. Systematic statistical analysis of A level results and university performance supported the importance of mathematics in science and engineering degrees from qualification to graduation.

Whereas Government policy shifts at the pre-University level may be necessary; other approaches may also be effective. The success in Chemistry in implementing mathematics modules dependent on intake mathematics qualification and the experiences of first year E&EE students stresses the positive outcomes from matching the level of material to mathematics ability. Were it not for the assumed constraints of maintaining degree quality and limiting overall degree duration, the implication would be to teach at the appropriate current mathematical level of the students. A solution, given these constraints, is to delay higher-level mathematics material until the students have the necessary skills. Given the broad mathematics ability range, it is debatable whether deferring material across the whole cohort is effective. The alternative is to (partially) stream students in mathematics.
Accessibility of data has been a major impediment to the efficient execution of the original project proposal. It is our contention that certain data should be retained, while respecting data protection issues, in a standard way across Schools, to facilitate its interrogation. Future work might include understanding the nature of the student experience when struggling with mathematics, in order to provide coping mechanisms.