Summary of Recommendations Workshop on Quantitative Training of Life Science Students University of Tenneessee, Knoxville May 19-21, 1994 This Workshop was designed to bring together a group of life science, mathematics, and statistical researchers and educators to focus on the inclusion of more quantitative concepts directly in life science undergraduate courses. The Workshop was supported by NSF Grant USE-9150354 to the University of Tennessee. It was a follow-up to a previous workshop which focused mostly on entry-level and advanced quantitative courses for undergraduates in biology, health science (e.g. nursing, pre-medicine, etc.), and agricultural science. The prior workshop developed guidelines for content of an entry-level course sequence but additionally emphasized that it is not sufficient to isolate quantitative components of the curriculum in a few courses on such topics, rather, quantitative methods should be a component of courses throughout the undergraduate life science curriculum. General Recommendations: 1. The quantitative component of upper division life science courses can readily be enhanced through the addition of modules, perhaps in conjunction with field or laboratory execises. These modules would contain brief applications of quantitative methods to a particular biological problem appropriate to the course topic. The modules might utilize a software product, if appropriate. The Workshop therefore urges the construction of sets of course modules, dealing with biological topics appropriate to a variety of upper division life science courses, that illustrate the utility of quantitative approaches in analyzing biological problems. 2. Workshops should be organized along topical lines for standard upper division life science courses (e.g. cell biology, ecology, physiology, etc.) to allow biology faculty who are not quantitatively oriented to see how these modules could be incorporated in their courses, and how the use of particular software might aid a students appreciation of the material of the course. These workshops should be organized at meetings of the appropriate specialized scientific societies most likely to draw the teachers of these courses, as well as at larger gatherings of biology teachers. Such workshops also allow faculty members to learn of the success stories of their colleagues as well as the details of how quantitative concepts may be incorporated within the courses. The workshops could include role-playing, in which the faculty would take the student role, for example involving certain software-based exercises. 3. Regarding General Biology, ideally what should be available to instructors is an accessible set of modules, at a relatively simple mathematical level, that could be coupled to either lab or field exercises or used as a complement to specific topics within lectures. These modules would contain brief examples of how quantitative methods can lead to non-intuitive, biologically significant results. The modules would cover the range of topics addressed in most General Biology sequences, and might be assembled in a text or pulled out of the text and coupled to lab or field work in the course or used as a complement to specific topics within the lectures. 4. We recommend the formation at each institution of interdisciplinary quantitative biology teaching circles consisting of a small group of committed faculty from the life sciences and mathematics. These will aid in the incorporation of quantitative modules within life science courses, but additionally will encourage the use of more biological examples in the quantitative courses taken by life science students. They will provide for more effective coupling between quantitative and life science courses, and may lead to the development of truly interdisciplinary courses at institutions where these are appropriate. These teaching circles are particularly important for institutions with little prior quantitative experiences for life science students, in which life science faculty may not feel comfortable with the inclusion of more quantitative topics. 5. This workshop concurred with the recommendation of the 1992 Workshop that math faculty, particularly those teaching entry level courses, should be encouraged to include more biological examples in these courses, because the students are perhaps more attuned to them than to examples from the physical sciences. In some, but not all institutions, the development of specialized entry-level quantitative courses for life science students, such as those suggested by the 1992 Workshop, are appropriate, and should be encouraged. At the same time, many institutions may not offer such courses, and in these cases the mathematics courses should at least contain sufficient biological examples so that students realize the linkages between the material and the life sciences. 6. The importance of communication between colleagues in different disciplinary units within an institution to foster quantitative concept development for life science students cannot be underestimated. However, at the same time communication should be fostered between like-minded individuals at different institutions. We therefore urge that an electronic list-serve or other group be set up to allow these faculty to make reference to a common body of knowledge. Similarly, we urge the formation of consortia of institutions to deal with quantitative aspects of life science training, in a similar manner to the calculus reform groups which were established and became successful progenitors of new teaching methods and materials. For further information about this Workshop or on quantitative curricular development for the life sciences, use gopher, ftp, or WWW to connect to: archives.math.utk.edu or http://archives.math.utk.edu/ or contact: Dr. Louis J. Gross, Department of Mathematics and Graduate Program in Ecology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-1300. 615-974-4295 (Voice) 615-974-2461 (Secretary) 615-974-6576 (FAX) gross@math.utk.edu.