A Call for Hybrid Conferences in Mathematics

This statement has been abbreviated by the authors; view the full text and a list of signatories here: https://sites.google.com/view/hybridmathconferences.

We are calling on the AMS and the MAA to include the option for meaningful hybrid mode participation in conferences and mathematical gatherings.

The crises created by reactionary laws affect the ability of mathematicians to participate in the conferences needed for their career development. We are focusing on hybrid mode now, not as something that will alone solve those problems, but because it is an important first step that can help in a number of different situations.

The pandemic brought terrible loss and trauma for many people, including members of the mathematical community. COVID-19 restrictions and closures forced us to learn about new ways to host academic events, such as through online participation.

The process of familiarizing ourselves with these new ways to organize mathematical meetings was very challenging, but we now have the knowledge to run hybrid and remote events. This has opened up possibilities of participation to folks who would otherwise be excluded from scientific meetings (for example, a mathematician with an illness, a new parent, or the dozens of students and faculty who have been banned from campuses due to participating in Gaza Solidarity Encampments).

Several institutes such as SLMath (MSRI), Banff International Research Station (BIRS), the Institute for Advanced Study (IAS), and the Renyi Institute have enabled the use of hybrid options as a default for their conferences.

Hybrid events in many cases support the participation of mathematicians with disabilities, those seeking to avoid exposure to COVID, those who may not be able to secure a visa or funding to travel, and those who cannot travel due to their caregiving responsibilities. Moreover, with the recent reactionary laws passed in the US and globally criminalizing being trans, getting abortion care, as well as being an undocumented immigrant, hybrid options make it safer for many mathematicians to participate in scientific meetings. The attacks on civil rights were (some of) the reasons preventing many mathematicians from attending MAA Mathfest 2023 (see, for example, Dr. Keri Ann Sather-Wagstaff’s and Dr. Spencer Bagley’s pieces in MAA Focus and this open letter to the MAA).⁠¹ While hybrid mode is not sufficient on its own to support the participation of minoritized mathematicians at conferences it should be an important consideration when claiming accessibility and allyship as explained, for example, in this call to defend bodily autonomy in the math community, and in this Spectra statement.

¹

We are not asking for a boycott of specific US states because in a country such as the US, founded on the genocide and enslavement of indigenous and black peoples, we do not believe there is a list of states that are safe for all marginalized groups, and a number of conferences are local in scope without the option to move to a new state. This does not mean boycotts are never effective nor that the risks associated with different locations should be ignored for the conferences that can relocate, but rather mathematicians instituting boycotts should take cues from local organizers so that boycotts are strategic.

✖

Unfortunately, many professional organizations have gone back to only hosting events in person, with some, such as the AMS, forbidding the use of hybrid modes in their sectional meetings.⁠² The AMS has justified the adoption of this policy by pointing to the offering of entirely online events. We note however, that these do not mitigate the lack of access produced by the AMS policy especially given how sparse AMS online events have been in recent years.⁠³

²

We know of individuals who were told by AMS leadership in writing that they were not allowed to participate virtually.

✖

³

There was only one virtual offering in 2023 and there are no virtual sectionals scheduled for 2024.

✖

While it would be ideal if all conferences provided a hybrid mode option, the responsibility falls hardest on the AMS and the MAA because they have more workforce and resources to support it. Additionally, their policies set the guidance for all other mathematical meetings and thus, we believe that their refusal to accommodate virtual participation has important negative consequences for our professional gatherings.

We call on the AMS, the MAA, the AWM, and other large mathematical organizations to provide meaningful virtual participation options at all of their conferences and events.

Jayadev Athreya, University of Washington Seattle
Padi Fuster Aguilera, University of Colorado Boulder
Matthew Gentry Durham, University of California Riverside
Seppo Niemi Colvin, Indiana University Bloomington
Florencia Orosz Hunziker, University of Colorado Boulder
Daniel Reinholz, San Diego State University
Keri Ann Sather-Wagstaff, Clemson University
Noelle Sawyer, Southwestern University
Chad M. Topaz, Institute for the Quantitative Study of Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity
Ila Varma, University of Toronto

Response

We appreciate the concerns expressed in the open letter, published in abbreviated form above. We want to start by stating clearly that we agree with the fundamental instinct advanced in this letter—that we, collectively, must provide multiple avenues for members of our community to participate and thrive in their professional lives. We are aware of the travel concerns raised in this letter and they are a factor the American Mathematical Society and the Mathematical Association of America—including the staff, our governing bodies, and membership broadly—consider in the development of our conferences and programs.

The AMS and the MAA continually evaluate how best we can serve the mathematics community. Our efforts include our publications programs (books, journals, and periodicals); committees that provide leadership across a range of policy and practice that are central to the mathematical sciences community; research and professional development programs such as the AMS Mathematics Research Communities and MAA Project NExT; and, of course, our annual and Sectional meetings.

All of these programs require the investment of resources from organizers, staff, and participants. Balancing the range of potential features incorporated into any particular program against the resources required to include those features is always a work in progress.

In particular, we evaluate the viability of hybrid and virtual modes for conferences as well as many other venues for professional engagement. We are also in conversation with other professional societies about their approaches, seeking promising practices that we might incorporate into our own events. As one example, the AMS and MAA are jointly creating a series of professional development webinars. While streaming costs are decreasing, implementing fully hybrid national conferences remains challenging. Additionally, while there are some hybrid models, such as those employed at relatively small workshops hosted at institutes, applying these models to large mobile conferences impacts the overall experience and doesn’t deliver key benefits like active participation and networking, which are essential features of these events. The fact that we do not have practical and effective virtual options for our conferences does not mean that we have stopped looking for alternate approaches to engaging the mathematics community.

We will continue to provide multiple paths for our members to engage. We will continue to adapt as our professional landscape evolves. And we encourage everyone to volunteer and engage with colleagues to help meet the collective needs of our community.

John Meier
CEO of the American Mathematical Society

Michael Pearson
Executive Director of the
Mathematical Association of America