Comment

Comment by Sue M. Ford on September 24, 2012 at 2:05pm

Caroline- I'm jealous of your Mathematical Biosciences Institute!  Is there a formal mechanism for the math department to work with the biology department to develop the courses using biologically-relevant examples?  Is there a tutoring function associated with the Institute? 

Comment by Caroline Breitenberger on August 28, 2012 at 4:23pm

At Ohio State, we have a Mathematical Biosciences Institute. In part because of the influx of faculty and postdocs associated with the MBI, the Mathematics Department has been willing and eager to develop new courses (and curricula) specifically addressed to the needs and interests of biology students. Instead of taking engineering-based calculus, our B.S. biology majors take a course that delves into biologically relevant examples. Instead of the typical second semester of calculus, these students can take a Mathematical Modeling for Life Sciences or Statistics for Biological Sciences course. (They have also developed a mathematical biology track for students majoring in mathematics.)

We just changed many courses and the biology requirements at Ohio State as a result of our conversion from quarters to semesters (this is our very first autumn semester!), so the effects of these math courses have not been formally assessed. Because of AP testing credit, students switching majors, etc., we have a reasonably large group of biology students who substitute regular calculus courses for these biologically based courses. It will be interesting to use these two populations of biology students to study the effects of traditional and non-traditional math courses. I would appreciate any suggestions for good research questions we could ask (I know there have been recent papers about biologists' math avoidance.)

Funny story - the first year we had students taking a trial version of the biological sciences version of calculus, I asked a student majoring in biology how he liked the math course, and he frowned and answered, "There are too many biology examples." It seems he thought it wasn't real math if it wasn't using physics and engineering examples.

By the way, I disagree with the NYT suggestion that only long division is necessary - if our students don't know the mathematical tools are there, they won't seek out the higher math they need later on, much less be able to learn it.

Comment by Sue M. Ford on August 1, 2012 at 5:07pm

The ability to use quantitative reasoning is one of the core student competencies delineated in the V&C document.  Yet Andrew Hacker (see link) thinks that requiring students to acquire competency in algebra and calculus is unnecessary, and only the ability to do long division (with a calculator?) should be required.  He indicates that those in STEM fields can acquire whatever higher math they need on the (future) job.

NYT opinion: Is algebra necessary?

He does start to hit on what I've felt is a solution, in suggesting that math should be taught in the context of the students' interests/disciplines.  Rather than leaving the burden on the math departments as he suggests, we should work with the math departments to come up with introductory courses that use more biology-relevant examples.  In addition, we should make an effort to incorporate actual math in our own courses at every level so that students will absorb it as an integral component of science.