Appendix G — Course Syllabus Template

A syllabus template for graduate seminars, professional development programs, and institutional training. Faculty may adapt the structure, readings, and assignments to their specific context and audience.

Using This Template
  • 12-week format: Standard graduate semester structure
  • 6-week intensive format: Combine weeks as indicated for accelerated programs
  • Modular use: Individual weeks can be extracted for focused workshops
  • Supplementary readings: Each week includes optional readings beyond the handbook

Course Overview

Course Title: Biosecurity in the AI Era: Fundamentals, Governance, and Emerging Challenges

Level: Graduate seminar (MPH, MS, PhD) or professional development

Prerequisites: Basic biology or public health background recommended. No prior AI knowledge required.

Primary Text: Tegomoh, B. (2025). The Biosecurity Handbook: Biological Security in the AI Era. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18252920

Learning Objectives:

By the end of this course, students will be able to:

  1. Distinguish biosecurity from biosafety and explain their complementary roles
  2. Evaluate biological threats across natural, accidental, and deliberate categories
  3. Analyze dual-use research governance frameworks and their limitations
  4. Assess how AI capabilities are changing biological risk landscapes
  5. Apply red-teaming and evaluation frameworks to AI-biosecurity questions
  6. Identify governance gaps in existing international and national frameworks
  7. Develop policy recommendations for AI-biological convergence challenges

12-Week Syllabus

Week 1: Foundations of Biosecurity

Theme: What is biosecurity, and why does it matter now?

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Define biosecurity and distinguish it from biosafety
  • Explain the Global Health Security Index methodology
  • Identify the three categories of biological threats

Discussion Questions:

  1. How does the biosecurity/biosafety distinction affect policy design?
  2. What are the limitations of the Global Health Security Index as a preparedness measure?
  3. Why might public health professionals and AI safety researchers approach biosecurity differently?

Week 2: The Biological Threat Landscape

Theme: Natural, accidental, and deliberate threats

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Categorize biological threats by origin and intent
  • Analyze historical bioweapons programs (Soviet Biopreparat, Aum Shinrikyo)
  • Evaluate the 2001 anthrax attacks as a case study in attribution challenges

Discussion Questions:

  1. Why did Aum Shinrikyo’s bioweapons program fail despite substantial resources?
  2. What does the 2001 anthrax case reveal about attribution in biological incidents?
  3. How should pandemic preparedness differ from bioterrorism preparedness?

Week 3: Pathogens and Laboratory Biosafety

Theme: What makes pathogens dangerous, and how do we contain them?

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Explain pathogen characteristics that drive concern (transmissibility, virulence, treatability)
  • Describe BSL-1 through BSL-4 containment levels
  • Analyze the Select Agent Program and its limitations

Discussion Questions:

  1. How should we prioritize pathogen threat assessment when characteristics trade off against each other?
  2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the tiered containment approach?
  3. How effective is the Select Agent Program at preventing misuse?

Week 4: Dual-Use Research of Concern

Theme: The DURC governance framework and its limits

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Define the seven DURC categories from the Fink Report
  • Analyze the 2011-2012 H5N1 controversy and its policy aftermath
  • Evaluate DURC-PEPP framework and its current status

Discussion Questions:

  1. Was the NSABB correct to initially recommend against publication of the H5N1 studies?
  2. How should institutional biosafety committees balance scientific openness with security?
  3. What does the Executive Order 14292 pause on DURC-PEPP implementation signal?

Assignment: Policy memo analyzing a proposed dual-use research project (1,500 words)

Week 5: Surveillance and Medical Countermeasures

Theme: Detection and response infrastructure

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Describe genomic surveillance infrastructure and its biosecurity applications
  • Explain the Strategic National Stockpile and BARDA’s role
  • Analyze the “100-day mission” for pandemic countermeasures

Discussion Questions:

  1. How did genomic surveillance change outbreak response during COVID-19?
  2. What are the equity implications of MCM stockpiling strategies?
  3. Is the 100-day vaccine development goal achievable? At what cost?

Week 6: The Democratization of Biology

Theme: Synthetic biology, DNA synthesis screening, and gain-of-function research

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Analyze how declining costs and increasing accessibility affect biological risk
  • Evaluate DNA synthesis screening as a biosecurity intervention
  • Assess gain-of-function research governance and the P3CO framework

Discussion Questions:

  1. How do benchtop DNA synthesizers change the screening landscape?
  2. What are the gaps in the OSTP Framework for DNA synthesis screening?
  3. Should gain-of-function research be more tightly restricted, and if so, how?

Midterm: Take-home exam covering Weeks 1-6

Week 7: AI Fundamentals for Biosecurity

Theme: AI/ML concepts for non-AI audiences

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Explain core AI/ML concepts (training, inference, parameters, architectures)
  • Describe how large language models work at a conceptual level
  • Understand why AI capabilities have advanced rapidly since 2020

Discussion Questions:

  1. What aspects of AI capability advancement are most relevant for biosecurity?
  2. How should biosecurity professionals stay current on AI developments?
  3. What AI knowledge do biosecurity policymakers need vs. what can they delegate?

Week 8: AI as Biosecurity Risk Amplifier

Theme: How AI might lower barriers to biological misuse

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Analyze the “AI uplift” hypothesis and empirical evidence (RAND, OpenAI, Anthropic studies)
  • Distinguish demonstrated from theoretical from unknown AI-biosecurity risks
  • Apply Harry Collins’ tacit knowledge framework to AI-biology questions

Discussion Questions:

  1. What did the RAND and OpenAI uplift studies actually find? What didn’t they test?
  2. How should we weight theoretical risks against demonstrated capabilities?
  3. Does tacit knowledge remain a meaningful barrier if AI can provide step-by-step guidance?

Week 9: LLMs, Information Hazards, and Pathogen Design

Theme: Specific AI-biosecurity risk vectors

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Evaluate LLM biosecurity evaluations and their methodological limitations
  • Analyze AlphaFold and protein structure prediction implications
  • Assess the Urbina toxic molecule generation case

Discussion Questions:

  1. What should AI labs test for in biosecurity evaluations?
  2. How should dual-use tools like AlphaFold be governed?
  3. What does the MegaSyn case teach about unintended dual-use applications?

Week 10: AI for Defense and Emerging Technologies

Theme: AI applications for biosecurity improvement

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Identify AI applications that strengthen biosecurity
  • Analyze cloud laboratory governance challenges
  • Evaluate autonomous AI agent risks in laboratory contexts

Discussion Questions:

  1. Do defensive AI applications outweigh offensive risk amplification?
  2. How should cloud laboratories implement biosecurity screening?
  3. What guardrails are needed for autonomous AI agents with laboratory access?

Week 11: Red-Teaming and Evaluation Frameworks

Theme: How to assess AI systems for biosecurity risks

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Design red-teaming protocols for AI biosecurity evaluation
  • Analyze existing evaluation frameworks (ASL, model cards)
  • Identify gaps in current evaluation approaches

Discussion Questions:

  1. What should a comprehensive AI biosecurity evaluation include?
  2. How do we avoid information hazards in publishing evaluation results?
  3. Should AI labs be required to conduct biosecurity red-teaming?

Assignment: Design a red-teaming protocol for a hypothetical AI system (2,000 words)

Week 12: Governance Futures and Career Pathways

Theme: International governance gaps and professional opportunities

Required Reading:

Learning Objectives:

  • Analyze BWC verification gaps and reform proposals
  • Evaluate existing governance frameworks for AI-biological convergence
  • Identify career pathways in biosecurity

Discussion Questions:

  1. Is BWC verification achievable, and at what cost?
  2. Which governance gap is most urgent to address?
  3. What skills will biosecurity professionals need in the next decade?

Final Assignment: Policy brief on an AI-biosecurity governance challenge (3,000 words)

Assessment Structure

Component Weight Due
Class participation 15% Ongoing
Policy memo (Week 4) 15% Week 4
Midterm exam 20% Week 6
Red-teaming protocol (Week 11) 20% Week 11
Final policy brief 30% Week 12

6-Week Intensive Format

For accelerated professional development programs, combine weeks as follows:

Intensive Week Standard Weeks Focus
1 1-2 Foundations and threat landscape
2 3-4 Laboratory biosafety and DURC
3 5-6 Surveillance, MCMs, and democratization
4 7-8 AI fundamentals and risk amplification
5 9-10 AI-specific risks and defense applications
6 11-12 Evaluation, governance, and futures

Supplementary Reading Lists

Classical Biosecurity

AI Safety and Governance

Policy and Governance

Adaptation Notes for Instructors

For public health programs (MPH): Emphasize Weeks 5-6 (surveillance, MCMs, democratization) and reduce technical depth in Week 7 (AI fundamentals).

For AI safety programs: Expand Week 7-11 content and add technical AI evaluation exercises. Reduce historical biosecurity content.

For policy programs: Emphasize governance chapters (Weeks 4, 12) and add simulation exercises (BWC negotiation, DURC review committee).

For laboratory management training: Expand Weeks 3-4 (laboratory biosafety, DURC) with practical scenarios and incident response exercises.

License

This syllabus template is released under the same CC BY 4.0 license as The Biosecurity Handbook. Faculty may adapt freely with attribution.