My prof was a biophysicist from John's Hopkins and his emphasis was making sure we understood physically what was going on various topics such as mas spec (which we didn't go too in depth into b/c we have a grad class called mass spec), chromatography, electrophoresis, biocalorimety, proteomics, and my prof's favorite 3D structure determination of macromolecules. No math was needed b/c it is understood that we could do derivatives and you can always look at the original research paper to see the derivation of the equation not to mention that most instrumentation have software that does the math for you. Yes he did use some math to help explain the physics of the different methods (mainly b/c the guys in the room wouldn't understand the concepts w/o it) but there wasn't an emphasis put on math. When students ask for the derivation he would say to stop by his office hours and he would do it for them. I wish we had questions like identify the 20 aa in the ms spectrum (b/c that really does sounds easy) but we had questions like if you analyzed one compound (which was given) using 2 different methods (let's say COSY & NOESY) what would the spectra look like, how are they they same and how are they different in the way that they analyzed the compounds (i.e. explain how it analyzes the compound), what are the advantages & disadvantages of using those techniques, what other tests would you need to conduct to confirm the validity of your spectra (b/c there is no full proof test physically speaking)? Sometimes I did show math in my answer but you can always put into words what the equation is saying. Like I said it was an intellectually challenging class but it can be done w/o having all the math (& I hate calculus nor did I have the cal 2 background). I guess the big difference is I took a graduate level course which places emphasis on concepts which we could take and adapt to our own research or help us troubleshot when we did run into problems.