Kathryn Spink has performed an analysis of the steps we might need to take in order to make Biology 225 a BSL-2-compliant course. That analysis is here. I am grateful to Katie for undertaking this analysis, but it leaves us with unresolved questions. It is worth noting that our current Biosafety Plan excludes BSL-2 experiments and organisms from being used in undergraduate courses. This limitation could be overcome if we need it to, provided that we're willing to undertake the changes in our paperwork that would be required and that we successfully make the changes to our lab configurations that are necessary to bring us into compliance with BSL-2 rules.
In my view, we have three options: (a) decide to leave the course as a strictly BSL-1 course and exclude all BSL-2 organisms and procedures; (b) come into full compliance (including training of faculty and TAs) with BSL-2 rules and procedures, and teach the course using one or more BSL-2 organisms and one or more BSL-2 procedures; and (c) structure the course as if we were using BSL-2 organisms, but in fact use only BSL-1 organisms.
The advantages and disadvantages of these three approaches are as follows. Option (a) is the simplest, cheapest, and the one that leaves us the easiest path toward training instructors and TAs; but it fails to provide the enrolled students to any familiarity with BSL-2 procedures and organisms. Option (b) is the most expensive and requires the most training, but it would provide our students with training that they could then use in graduate school or in industry. Option (c) is intermediate in cost and effort, and students could plausibly assert afterward (when applying to jobs or graduate school) that they had been trained in BSL-2 procedures.
Currently my preference is for option (c), but we have an opportunity to weigh the options. I plan to talk further about these options with Todd Diehl.