  A common feature of the recent calls for reform of the undergraduate biology
curriculum has been for better coordination between biology and the courses
from the allied disciplines of mathematics, chemistry, and physics. Physics has
lagged math and chemistry in creating new biologically oriented curricula,
though much activity is now taking place and significant progress is being
made. In this article we consider a case study: a multi-year conversation
between a physicist interested in adapting his physics course for biologists
(Redish) and a biologist interested in including more physics in his biology
course (Cooke). These extended discussions have led us both to a deeper
understanding of each others' discipline and to significant changes in the way
we each think about and present our classes. We discuss two examples in detail:
the creation of a physics problem for a biology class on fluid flow, and the
creation of a biologically authentic physics problem on scaling and dimensional
analysis. In each case, we see differences in how the two disciplines frame and
see value in the tasks. We conclude with some generalizations about how biology
and physics look at the world differently that help us navigate the minefield
of counterproductive stereotypical responses.
