Abstract
Several years ago, our biology program decided to develop a new second-year “Fundamentals of Genetics” course to replace the third-year course that was our legacy from David Suzuki and Tony Griffiths. Although our new syllabus radically altered how the core concepts are taught, I now think the changes were much too conservative because we'd ignored how drastically the role of genetics has changed. Below I first describe the problems we originally identified and how we addressed them, and then consider the bigger problem of moving introductory genetics courses into the 21st century.
Highlights
Several years ago, our biology program decided to develop a new second-year ‘‘Fundamentals of Genetics’’ course to replace the third-year course that was our legacy from David Suzuki and Tony Griffiths
Analysis of genetic crosses gradually revealed all the standard concepts—linkage and crossing over, gene mapping, sex linkage, epistasis, chromosome changes. Some instructors supplemented these topics with a smattering of molecular genetics, but serious treatment was left to a later course using the second half of the textbook
Seeing how genetic analysis has revealed the mechanisms of inheritance should show students its value in dissecting other biological phenomena
Summary
Our biology program decided to develop a new second-year ‘‘Fundamentals of Genetics’’ course to replace the third-year course that was our legacy from David Suzuki and Tony Griffiths. The committee responsible for developing our new course thought that the historical approach was making genetic analysis harder for our students to learn, not easier.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
