1 A "It's hard for me to guess. If I were a member of

2 the scientific community myself at that time, what I think

3 other members would do is that they would strenuously

4 object to that."

5 Q Would it be impossible for the Little Rock School

6 District to develop materials which would present a

7 balanced view?

8 A My answer to that is that it would be impossible

9 for teachers in the Little Rock School District to develop

10 scientific materials, a unit, a science unit that would

11 present a balanced view.

12 Q Okay. And that presupposes in your definition that

13 creation science is not science, does it not?

14 A It does.

15 Q And you've been unable to discern any evidence

16 anywhere which would support any of the six definitions of

17 Section 4 (a) of the Act?

18 A Well, I have a problem with the word `evidence'.

19 I think of `evidence' as facts, whatnot, things like that,

20 I think that some of these are legitimate things that

21 appear in scientific journals and are legitimately within

22 the realm of science. But I think when you back off and

23 look at the facts together, yes, I can't imagine any, and

24 I haven't observed or come across any that would support

25 creation science.


1 Q And is your concern with the creation science the

2 interpretation of the information?

3 A Interpretation of what, all the information that's

4 in it, or what?

5 Q Yes.

6 A No. That's not my main objection to it at all.

7 Q What is your bottom line objection to it?

8 THE COURT: Wait a second. We went over about

9 forty-five minutes of his objections to it.

10 MR. CHILDS: I don't think I asked him--

11 A My objection is--

12 MR. CHILDS: Wait, Mr. Glasgow. Excuse me.

13 THE COURT: Nobody ever said, `What's his bottom

14 line objection,' but that was his whole direct testimony,

15 was his objections to it or his problems with it.

16 MR. CHILDS: Let me go on to another question.

17 MR. CHILDS: (Continuing)

18 Q Does the state of Arkansas have a recommended list

19 of textbooks?

20 A It has-- Yes, I guess you would call it that. It

21 does have a list of textbooks from which you can make

22 selections.

23 Q Have you yourself or are you aware of anybody that

24 has made a comprehensive literature search for information

25 published in the area of creation science?


1 Q (Continuing)

2 Let me ask, have you done that?

3 A I have not made a comprehensive literature review,

4 no.

5 Q At the time of your deposition I asked you what you

6 had done, and at that time, as I understood it, you had

7 read basically three or four different authors.

8 A I think three or four would be limited. I think,

9 as far as read, I haven't read from front to back any that

10 know of. I have scanned through to get a general

11 overall picture of maybe ten or twelve different

12 publications.

13 Q At your deposition, Mr. Glasgow, my recollection

14 and notes indicate that you could only refer me to Gish,

15 Morris, and maybe two other authors in the creation

16 science field.

17 A I don't think I could refer you to any more than

18 that now.

19 Q Could you refer me to any more titles?

20 A Well, I saw a book over on the desk a minute ago

21 called Scientific Creation. I don't know who the author

22 is. I don't recall if that's one of' the books that I've

23 looked through.

24 Q Any other books you can tell me that you've looked

25 through?


1 A Other than those that I mentioned to you before?

2 Q I don't think you named any names of any books that

3 you've read.

4 A I didn't remember the names of the books, no.

5 Q Do you presently remember the names of any of those

6 books?

7 A Evolution: The Fossils Say No, was one that I

8 read. I remember there was a book or two by Doctor

9 Slusher that I looked through. No, I can't remember

10 anymore.

11 Q Okay. Now, then, during your deposition, when we

12 went over these materials that Mr. Cearley has moved into

13 evidence as exhibits, and the particular books in the

14 Little Rock School District, did I ask you about each one

15 of those books as to whether or not it could be balanced?

16 A Yes. And in each of those cases, I said that it

17 could be balanced, but not with legitimate appropriate

18 scientific information.

19 Q Not with what you would consider legitimate

20 scientific information?

21 A That's correct.

22 Q Would you ever recommend textbooks with religious

23 references?

24 A Probably not.

25 Q Would you ever recommend any kind of teaching


1 Q (Continuing) materials which would be footnoted to

2 the Bible?

3 A Probably not.

4 Q Would you ever recommend any kind of teaching

5 materials in the Little Rock School District which dealt

6 with the words `Genesis', `Adam and Eve', or `Noah's

7 Flood'?

8 A No.

9 Q Can a science teacher ignore your curriculum guide?

10 A No, I don't think they can ignore it.

11 Q In subsequent adoptions of textbooks, would you

12 have to choose textbooks with a more balanced view?

13 A You mean if Act 590 is implemented?

14 Q If Judge Overton rules it is constitutional?

15 A Right. Yes, I would think that we probably would.

16 Q Is the reason that you are down here is because you

17 are personally and professionally offended that the

18 legislature would remove your discretion?

19 A Partially.

20 MR. CHILDS: I have nothing further, your Honor.

21 THE COURT: Any redirect?

22 MR. CEARLEY: No, sir.

23 THE COURT: The court will be adjourned until 9:00

24 o'clock in the morning. I'd like to see the attorneys

25 back in chambers.

(Thereupon, Court was in
recess at 5:20 P.M..)




3 Witness:

4 On Behalf of the Plaintiffs:



7 Direct Examination by Mr. Cearley Page 720

8 Cross Examination by Mr. Clark Page 755

9 Redirect Examination by Mr. Cearley Page 808

10 Recross Examination by Mr. Clark Page 813



13 Direct Examination by Mr. Crawford Page 816

14 Cross Examination by Mr. Childs Page 835



17 Direct Examination by Mr. Kaplan Page 867

18 Cross Examination by Mr. Childs Page 928



21 Direct Examination by Mr. Kaplan Page 879

22 Cross Examination by Mr. Clark Page 920



25 Direct Examination by Mr. Cearley Page 931






4 Plaintiffs' No. 129 735 735

5 Plaintiffs' No. 15 747 747

6 Defendants' No. 4 785 785

7 Plaintiffs' No. 28 819 819

8 Plaintiffs' No. 71 824 824

9 Plaintiffs' No. 72 824 824

10 Plaintiffs' No. 73 824 824

11 Plaintiffs' No. 77 824 824

12 Plaintiffs' No. 79 824 824

13 Plaintiffs' No. 80 824 824

14 Plaintiffs' No. 81 824 824

15 Plaintiffs' No. 82 824 824

16 Defendants' No. 5 846

17 Defendants' No. 6 865

18 Defendants' No. 7 865

19 Plaintiffs' No. 36 - 39 879 879

20 Plaintiffs' No. 34 881 881

21 Plaintiffs' No. 26 886 886

22 Plaintiffs' No. 27 887 887

23 Plaintiffs' No. 24 903 903

24 Plaintiffs' No. 25 903 903

25 Plaintiffs' No. 18 - 23 909 909

Plaintiffs' No. 92 932 932


1 (December 10, 1981)

2 (9:00 A.M.)


(In Chambers)

4 THE COURT: Gentlemen, Judge Byrd represents some of

5 the witnesses that we talked about yesterday afternoon.

6 He originally intended to introduce their testimony by

7 deposition. Apparently there were some records that the

8 witnesses had in their possession that the witnesses do

9 not want to turn over to the attorneys for plaintiffs.

10 Judge Byrd, do you want to make a motion about that as

11 attorney for the witnesses?

12 For one thing, I think we probably ought to identify the

13 witnesses.

14 JUDGE BYRD: Well, the witnesses are Mr. W. A.

15 Blount, Curtis Thomas and Carl Hunt.

16 I've been informed by the Attorney General that in my

17 absence yesterday afternoon-- I offered to be present with

18 counsel, and they agreed we could show up at 8:30 this

19 morning. I understand that yesterday afternoon the Court

20 ordered the Attorney General to turn the records over to

21 counsel for the plaintiffs and let them be copied.

22 This is a violation of' my clients' rights. My clients

23 have a right of political association, and they demand the

24 records back and all the copies. They have the right,

25 after the Court rules on our motion, to refuse and take


1 JUDGE BYRD: (Continuing) whatever consequences the Court

2 gives.

3 But if the Court will remember back when the state was

4 trying to make the teachers list their associations and

5 produce their records of associations, the Supreme Court

6 said they had a freedom of association that was protected

7 by the Fourteenth Amendment, the due process clause. They

8 pointed out this is a political freedom that's each man's

9 privacy, and the courts have to give them wide elbow room.

10 It's very unfair for the ACLU to come in--

11 THE COURT: Pardon me, Judge Byrd. Before we get

12 into the argument, I don't know what documents you are

13 talking about. I don't know--

14 JUDGE BYRD: It's my clients' personal records.

15 THE COURT: Mr. Cearley, maybe you tell me how the

16 matter came up, specifically.

17 MR. CEARLEY: Yes, sir. Your Honor, there was a

18 document request attached to each subpoena that asked

19 basically for any records or documents or written

20 communications or literature in the possession of each of

21 the witnesses that emanated from a list of creation

22 science publishers or some specified individuals that have

23 to do with the creation science movement.

24 It was directed toward establishing where the

25 information came from that resulted in the bill that was

drafted by Paul Ellwanger and what was done with that bill.


1 MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing) after it reached Mr. Blount's

2 hands.

3 I have not examined the documents that were furnished,

4 although co-counsel has looked at that or looked at those

5 documents.

6 But I think the Court has previously ruled that we could

7 introduce testimony and exhibits to establish the source

8 of Act 590 or the Model Bill and the motivation or the

9 purpose behind it, and that is what the document request

10 was directed toward.

11 THE COURT: Well, off the top of my head, I-- Is

12 Mr. Hunt the one that Senator Holstead identified as being

13 a source of the bill?

14 MR. CEARLEY: Yes, sir.

15 JUDGE BYRD: He is.

16 THE COURT: Okay. And what connection do the other

17 two witnesses have.

18 MR. CEARLEY: My understanding is that Reverend

19 Blount received the bill from Paul Ellwanger; he gave it

20 to Reverend Thomas who gave it to Mr. Hunt. Then it was

21 given to Senator Holstead.

22 And the purpose of that was to establish that line of

23 transmittal, flow and why it was done. And that was the

24 reason for the document request.

25 JUDGE BYRD: The deposition showed that Curtis


1 JUDGE BYRD: (Continuing) Thomas got the Act from

2 Ellwanger and gave it to Hunt, and Hunt delivered it to

3 Holstead.

4 THE COURT: Okay. Well, let me get this sequence

5 down again. Mr. Hunt gave it to Senator Holstead. What

6 did Mr. Blount have to do with it?

7 JUDGE BYRD: Mr. W. A. Blount and Mr. Thomas Delong

8 to some kind of a loosely held alliance, some sort of

9 Christian alliance, the exact name I cannot recall right

10 now.

11 THE COURT: On Schedule A, is that the list of

12 documents?

13 MR. CEARLEY: Yes.

14 JUDGE BYRD: No. The list of documents are on what

15 you are looking at there, and A is supposed to be

16 definitions.

17 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, there were two separate

18 document requests. One was attached to the first subpoena

19 which was issued and served last week requesting that each

20 of the witnesses appear for deposition.

21 And after contact was made by Kathy Woods who

22 represented each one of the witnesses at that time, that

23 document request was narrowed. And I don't know which of

24 the requests it is here that you've been furnished with.

25 THE COURT: (Handing document to Mr. Cearley)


1 JUDGE BYRD: I've got a copy.

2 MR. CEARLEY: This would be the second one.

3 THE COURT: Okay. This is the final request?

4 MR. CEARLEY: Yes, sir.

5 THE COURT: If these three witnesses were the

6 sources of the information that was given to Senator

7 Holstead and resulted in the introduction of this bill in

8 the Arkansas Legislature, I don't see how they could claim

9 any sort of privilege about the material which was the

10 source of the information they gave him.

11 JUDGE BYRD: The witnesses do not object to

12 testifying. They did so freely. But this asks for any

13 program, plan, strategy, tactic, policy or procedure

14 regarding efforts to introduce creation in the public

15 schools. And that gets back to freedom of association.

16 Your Honor messed around with the Legislature for a

17 session or two, and you are well aware that politics makes

18 strange bedfellows.

19 THE COURT: That was one of the lessons I learned.

20 JUDGE BYRD: A preacher's associations or how he

21 goes about associating or getting folks to do something is

22 a freedom of association. And in the Tucker case that

23 came out of the school integration crisis, they pointed

24 out that the teachers had a freedom of association and



1 JUDGE BYRD: (Continuing) didn't have to list their

2 associations.

3 And here you are making these folks produce and show how

4 they campaigned to get this done. It's wrong.

5 THE COURT: Well, I think and--

6 JUDGE BYRD: Would the Court like the cases?

7 THE COURT: Wait just a second. We both can't talk

8 at the same time.

9 As I recall the matter of the teachers, it seems to me

10 like that turned on the question of whether or not the

11 state had a compelling interest in making teachers

12 disclose all organizations to which they belonged.

13 And I think it was determined that there was no such

14 compelling interest. And there were some other acts, some

15 other protections in that particular situation.

16 But it seems to me like the materials sought by this

17 subpoena goes to the very heart of what the plaintiffs are

18 trying to prove in this case; that these organizations,

19 which are basically religious organizations with a

20 religious purpose, have prepared this material and they've

21 tried to get it passed in the legislature, and they've set

22 out plans for doing that and strategy for doing that. And

23 that's what this subpoena is calculated to try to produce,

24 as I understand it.

25 JUDGE BYRD: Well, I disagree with his Honor's


1 JUDGE BYRD: (Continuing) interpretation of Shelton vs.

2 Tucker. It had nothing to do with a compelling interest

3 of the state, and I'll read from the case, if the Court

4 would like.

5 THE COURT: Well, it's been fifteen years or twenty

6 years, I guess, so I might not remember much about that.

7 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, might I--

8 JUDGE BYRD: Let me finish. There's another case,

9 Gibson vs. Florida Legislative Committee, where the NAACP

10 president was, they subpoenaed his list of people who

11 belonged to it, and he refused to bring it, but he went up

12 and testified. And the Supreme Court specifically held

13 that he had the right of freedom of association not to

14 produce the list.

15 And this is what we are complaining about. We don't

16 think we need to educate the plaintiffs in this case how

17 to go campaign with the legislature because it affects our

18 associations. And they can go around, and they've

19 publicly criticized my folks in the paper, called them the

20 Moral Majority.

21 And they go around and gouge and put pressure. It's a

22 subtle pressure, but it's there.

23 THE COURT: Are you suggesting this is a membership

24 list that will be produced in response to this subpoena?

25 JUDGE BYRD: I didn't say it was a membership, but


1 JUDGE BYRD: (Continuing) it asked for who they

2 associated, contacted, and the records they had of who

3 they contacted. And that's just as important as a

4 membership list because it affects these folks' ability in

5 the future.

6 THE COURT: Mr. Cearley.

7 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, in the first place, I

8 think Shelton vs. Tucker was a case that dealt with the

9 rights of public employees. And the thrust of that case

10 was that public employees can't give up their constitu-

11 tional rights just by virtue of their public employment.

12 And there was no compelling interest on the part of the

13 state to ask for disclosure in the form of the loyalty

14 oath, as I recall.

15 I don't know about the Florida case, but I do know that

16 this is a subpoena arising out of a specific lawsuit and

17 directed toward a specific end. It's not a blanket

18 fishing expedition. There is a purpose for it, and I

19 think it's a legitimate purpose.

20 I simply know of no insulation from disclosure that

21 would be available to these people.

22 JUDGE BYRD: The Florida lawsuit was specifically

23 directed to whether or not certain communists were

24 involved in the associations. And that's what they are

25 trying to get here is, `How did you associate and with


1 JUDGE BYRD: (Continuing) which legislator,' and what

2 have you.

3 And unfortunately, these folks are preachers. They are

4 not politicians. As you know, politicians don't keep

5 records, but preachers do.

6 THE COURT: As I understand it, the Attorney General

7 has the material?

8 MR. CEARLEY: The Attorney--

9 JUDGE BYRD: Unfortunately, they've been turned over

10 to these folks, and we want them back.

11 THE COURT: I directed the Attorney General to turn

12 those records over to the plaintiffs. He didn't do it

13 gratuitously.

14 JUDGE BYRD: I understand.

15 THE COURT: Where is the material you are talking

16 about?

17 MS. KERR: It is being copied, your Honor.

18 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, this is Peggy Kerr,

19 co-counsel.

20 We've not even examined the materials. We sent it out

21 to have it copied, and I can't even tell the Court what's

22 in those materials at this point in time.

23 THE COURT: Well, the analogies you draw, Judge

24 Byrd, I don't see are applicable to this situation, but I

25 will look at the material. And direct the attorneys to


1 THE COURT: (Continuing) turn it over to me, and I'll

2 look at it before we proceed any further with that part of

3 the case.

4 JUDGE BYRD: If they would have asked for particular

5 records, we would have given them particular records.

6 This does not ask for particular records. It asks for

7 their strategy.

8 Now, if they just want to know if they've got something

9 from Ellwanger, I'll be glad to pull it out of the record

10 and give it to them.

11 THE COURT: I don't think they are interested in

12 limiting their request to just what they got from

13 Ellwanger.

14 JUDGE BYRD: Well, your Honor, I feel like I've been

15 taken advantage of. We had an agreement with counsel.

16 Mr. Clark was there. And I told him we would seal them

17 up, and Mr. Clark would hold the records until we got a

18 ruling.

19 THE COURT: I made that ruling yesterday afternoon.

20 JUDGE BYRD: And the problem is that now my clients

21 don't have a choice of whether they refuse to turn over

22 the records or not. And this is what the NAACP president

23 refused. He was convicted of contempt, and won.

24 And my clients don't have that choice.

25 THE COURT: I don't understand what you are


1 THE COURT: (Continuing) proposing to me at this point.

2 JUDGE BYRD: Well, I propose that they are still my

3 clients' records. And after the Court rules, my clients

4 have a right to sit down and make a decision whether they

5 turn them over or not.

6 They can take the consequences if they don't want to,

7 but that's their choice.

8 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, I might add I don't recall

9 that these records were sealed in any manner, and they

10 were given to the Attorney General.

11 It's not a question of privacy. They just don't want to

12 give them to us.

13 JUDGE BYRD: They weren't given to him to review.

14 MR. CLARK: Your Honor, when they were given to me,

15 they were not sealed, actually, in an envelope. That's

16 correct. I did not examine them. We tied them up in

17 rubber bands or strings or whatever and just left them

18 alone, not to be examined until there was some ruling by

19 the Court, which there was. And at that point, they were

20 given to Mr. Cearley for copying, the originals to be

21 returned today.

22 THE COURT: Judge Byrd, I don't see any legal

23 argument to what you are making. And the records

24 certainly aren't privileged in any way. It seems to me

25 like they are properly sought under the subpoena.


1 THE COURT: (Continuing)

2 I don't quite understand the point about your clients

3 didn't have the opportunity to be in contempt. I

4 certainly don't want anybody in contempt of Court, but--

5 JUDGE BYRD: They do not either, but they have a

6 right to make a choice on their records. And this is my

7 complaint with the Court. I was available-- I offered to

8 make myself available, and it was agreed I'd be here at

9 8:30 this morning for a ruling.

10 THE COURT: Well, I didn't know that. Nobody told

11 the Court.

12 JUDGE BYRD: I understand that, but counsel knew

13 that, and they evidently got a ruling.

14 MR. CEARLEY: I didn't know that either, your Honor.

15 MS. KERR: The problem is that I agreed to call

16 Judge Byrd when this was going to come before the Court

17 for a ruling.

18 THE COURT: Well, that is something that wasn't

19 brought to my attention. Why don't you get the materials

20 back, and I will take a look at them.

21 MS. KERR: They will be available at noon today.

22 They are being copied right now.

23 THE COURT: Where are they?

24 MS. KERR: At a printer's a couple blocks from here.

25 THE COURT: Why don't you send somebody to pick them


1 THE COURT: (Continuing) up, and I will take a look at

2 them.

3 (To Judge Byrd) I would suggest that until we resolve

4 this maybe you ought to stay around.

5 JUDGE BYRD: Plan on it.

6 (9:20 a.m.)


(Open Court)

8 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, Plaintiffs call Ron Coward.

9 Thereupon,



11 called on behalf of the plaintiffs herein, after having

12 been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined and

13 testified as follows:




16 Q Will you state your full name for the record, please?

17 A Ronald W. Coward.

18 Q And your occupation, Mr. Coward?

19 A I'm a teacher with the Pulaski County Special School

20 District.

21 Q How long have you been employed in that capacity?

22 A I'm currently in my nineteenth year.

23 Q What subjects do you teach?

24 A I currently teach biology and psychology.

25 Q Will you tell the Court - briefly , Mr. Coward , what


1 Q (Continuing) your educational background is?

2 A I have a Bachelor of Science in Education and also a

3 Master's of Science in Education from the University of

4 Central Arkansas.

5 Q And can you tell the Court what subjects you have

6 taught over the past several years?

7 A Yes. On the high school level, I have taught

8 general biology, botany, zoology, human physiology,

9 environmental biology and psychology.

10 Q You are currently teaching which of those courses?

11 A General biology, environmental biology and

12 psychology.

13 Q Are you familiar within the context of your

14 employment in the Pulaski Special School District with how

15 textbooks are selected?

16 A Yes, I am.

17 Q Will you tell the Court how that is done?

18 A The State of Arkansas, the State Department of

19 Education for the State of Arkansas selects a number of

20 books that are certified to be on the State adoption list.

21 When adoption time comes around for the school district,

22 teachers, representative of each high school in the

23 district, are selected to evaluate the contents, the

24 format of individual textbooks.

25 That committee, then, makes a recommendation to the school board which has the final approval on that textbook.


1 Q What textbooks do you currently use in the courses

2 that you teach and in the biology course that you taught

3 last year?

4 A Use the textbook entitled Modern Biology by Madnick,

5 Otto and Towle. It's published by Holt, Rhinehart,

6 Winston.

7 Q How about in psychology

8 A Psychology, I use the book entitled The Invitation

9 to Psychology. I believe that book is published by Scott

10 Orsman.

11 Q And in the advance Biology course that you teach?

12 A It is entitled Biology. It's by Arms and Camp. I

13 believe it's published by H. R. W. Saunders and Company.

14 Q Will you tell the Court, please, sir, how the

15 subject matter within a course is determined in the

16 Pulaski County Special School District?

17 A Within each individual course, teachers, more or

18 less, have free rein or no restraints in deciding what the

19 course content of that particular course should be.

20 Generally, the philosophy of the school district is that

21 we are the professional educators; we know best what is

22 current in our particular discipline or our field.

23 Therefore, that judgment is left entirely to us as

24 educators.

25 Q Does the county produce any curriculum guides similar to what Mr. Glasgow testified to yesterday?


1 A There are no curriculum guides produced by the

2 county, but on different occasions the county has

3 published a supplemental publication to extend beyond the

4 scope of the textbook, particularly in relation to types

5 of activities that might be carried on within the

6 classroom.

7 I think this was designed primarily for beginning

8 teachers or teachers that are having a great deal of

9 difficulty in learning to budget their time over the course

10 of the school year.

11 It's not a curriculum guide, as such, that is to be

12 followed. It's strictly a supplement.

13 Q Well, what constraints are there on you as a science

14 teacher in determining what is going to be taught in your

15 classroom?

16 A There are none. Again, I might add that the

17 County's viewpoint or the District's viewpoint is that we

18 as professional educators certainly are supposed to have

19 the professionalism and the ethics to decide what is

20 current in our field, what is relevant or pertinent to the

21 lives of our students, and therefore, we are given wide

22 scope to do pretty well as we see.

23 There could be limitations if you, perhaps, if you

24 exceeded your ethical authority, I should say, within my

25 discipline.


1 Q Within your own discipline in the area of science,

2 how do you go about determining what is taught in the

3 classroom?

4 A Well, there again, I have to decide what is good

5 science and what is not, and at the same time, base my

6 opinion upon the types of students that I have in a

7 particular course, their ability levels, their

8 backgrounds, what their aspirations or future plans or

9 goals might be. This helps me to determine or set my

10 course curriculum.

11 Q Are you familiar as a biology teacher, Mr. Coward,

12 with the term "creation science"?

13 A As a science educator, I am familiar with it. I do

14 not consider it a science term.

15 Q Will you tell the Court when you first became aware

16 of that term?

17 A I had not heard the science term until approximately

18 eleven months ago. It would have been in January or

19 February of this year, when I was asked by the Pulaski

20 County School District to become part of the committee to

21 investigate into creation materials to determine whether

22 or not these materials had any validity or any substantial

23 scientific content, and if so, to possibly incorporate

24 this into our curriculum.

25 Q As member of that committee, what did you personally


1 Q (Continuing) do, Mr. Coward?

2 A We were presented with a creation science format

3 very similar to Act 590) with very little modifications to

4 it. At the same time, we requested to have presented to

5 us numbers of creation science publications, textbooks,

6 any type of pamphlets or literature that they had. And

7 these were provided for us.

8 Q Was there any particular textbook that you reviewed

9 as a member of that Committee?

10 A Yes, there was.

11 Q Do you recall the name of that textbook?

12 A Yes. I have it here.

13 Q I have placed in front of you, Mr. Coward, a copy of

14 the textbook, Biology: A Search for Order in Complexity,

15 published by Zondervan that's labeled as Plaintiffs,

16 Exhibit Number 129 for identification?

17 A That is correct.

18 Q Is that what you have there in front of you?

19 A Yes, it is.

20 Q Did you report to the Pulaski County Board of

21 Education with regard to your findings?

22 A Yes, we did.

23 Q And I think you've testified that you did review

24 that particular textbook?

25 A Yes. I think we met on two different occasions as a


1 A (Continuing) committee. And then on one occasion,

2 we were allowed to take the materials home with us between

3 meetings to preview for approximately a two week period of

4 time.

5 Q Did you do that with that book?

6 A Yes. I did take this book.

7 Q What was your report back to the Board of Education

8 with regard to that book?

9 A The committee-- Well, the committee made one final

10 report back to the Board of Education. The committee

11 reconvened following the examination of the materials.

12 Each person on that committee then was given an

13 opportunity to express their viewpoints based on the

14 materials which they previewed.

15 The general-- Not just general consensus, but the

16 unanimous decision of that committee was that none of the

17 materials previewed had any scientific merit or any

18 scientific validity to it, and more often than not, seemed

19 to advance the cause of religion more than it did science.

20 This was the unanimous vote of this committee.

21 Q What about your own personal reaction to the

22 materials presented in Biology: A Search for Order in

23 Complexity?

24 A Well, I was surprised at the number of religious

25 references that were made in this particular book. Also,


1 A (Continuing) I was surprised to find out things

2 they considered science. Due to my science background, I

3 did not perceive it to be science at all.

4 Q With reference to that textbook, Mr. Coward, can you

5 give the Court any illustration of the kinds of statements

6 that you found in that book upon which you based your

7 report?

8 A I sure can.

9 Q Please refer to the page number, if you will, Mr.

10 Coward.

11 A This is on page 12.

12 Q If you will refer to the page number and tell the

13 Judge where on the page you are reading from?

14 A This is on page 12, your Honor. It is the lower

15 left hand paragraph, second from the bottom.

16 Q What appears there?

17 A If I might read-- They are speaking of flowers

18 closing up at night to protect themselves, and why roots

19 grow geotrophically towards the center of the earth.

21 Reading, "We talk of flowers that close up at night to

21 protect their pollen from insects that cannot effect

22 pollination. We talk of roots that grow toward water to

23 supply the plant with this necessary substance. Flowers

24 and roots do not have a mind to have purpose of their

25 own; therefore this planning must have been done for


1 A (Continuing) them by the Creator."

2 Q How does that statement compare with your under-

3 standing as a biology and botany teacher?

4 A As a biology and botany teacher, a creator does not

5 enter into the subject matter at all. I think that there

6 are natural laws and natural processes which are easily

7 explained as to why roots grow toward the center of the

8 earth. I think geotropism would be the appropriate term

9 here. It's a physical law of nature.

10 Q Would you just thumb through that book, Mr. Coward,

11 to other illustrations that you've marked. And in like

12 fashion, identify the page number and location on the

13 page, and read to the Court?

14 A Yes. On page 147, lower left hand paragraph. In

15 other words, there are latent recessive genes that later

16 become expressed. Also, some variation (from this

17 viewpoint) is simply an expression of the Creator's desire

18 to show as much beauty of flower, variety of song in

19 birds, or interesting types of behavior in animals as

20 possible.

21 Q Is there any similar explanation of those phenomena

22 in the biology or botany text that you have known in your

23 experience as a biology and botany teacher?

24 A I think each of these can be explained through

25 natural processes.


1 A (Continuing)

2 One other significance would be found on page 363.

3 Q Go ahead.

4 A This is a quote from the book of Matthew.

5 Q What is the context that appears in, Mr. Coward?

6 A They first cite a poem here by, I believe this is

7 Wordsworth, if my literature is correct. "The exquisite

8 beauty of color and shape in flowers exceeds the skill of

9 poet, artist, and king. Jesus said (from Matthew's

10 gospel) ..."

11 Q And that is presented there to illustrate what?

12 A That the beauty of the earth far exceeds the

13 perception of poets, artists.

14 Q Do you find like expressions in any biology or

15 botany text with which you are familiar?

16 A I certainly do not.

17 Q What were your objections about that material in is

18 that book?

19 A That I would consider this to be very religious in

20 nature, which is certainly out of the scope of my

21 classroom.

22 Q Did you have any other objections to that book? To

23 the language or the overall order and presentation of the

24 subject matter?



1 A The overall presentation or format of it probably

2 would be very similar as far as sequential that you'd find

3 in an ordinary textbook. But I find, again, no scientific

4 content of any value. Fragmented pieces of science

5 information are found at random, out there again, unless

6 you associate scientific facts together, then really all

7 you have, you have nothing.

8 It's like individual bricks do not make a house until

9 you can associate these pieces together and build

10 something from that.

11 I find that to be the case in this textbook.

12 Q What do you find to be the case? What is the

13 unifying theme of that textbook?

14 A It seems to be that most of the science that is

15 attempted to be used is pointing toward the fact that

16 there is a sudden creation or inception of the earth;

17 that man is apart from ancestral forms that relate him to

18 earlier primates.

19 I would say it readily supports the theme as depicted in

20 the book of Genesis.

21 Q Do you know of any other textbook that's on the

22 market, Mr. Coward, that it has such a theme in it?

23 A No, I do not.

24 Q And by that, I mean any other biology text to which

25 you've been exposed?


1 A No, I do not. This is the only biology text that I

2 have seen, actual text that I have seen from creation

3 publications. I've seen a number of soft cover

4 publications.

5 As far as biology text that I have ever examined on the

6 state textbook adoption list that are put out by major

7 publishing houses, I've never seen anything with this type

8 of science or religion.

9 Q Is the subject of evolution, biological evolution,

10 treated in that textbook?

11 A If you call it that, yes, it is.

12 Q In what fashion is it presented?

13 A Well, there again, most of the information that is

14 used is used to conveniently present or to support the

15 creation viewpoint of recent inception of the earth,

16 catastrophic flood, and there again, man separate from

17 apes.

18 Q Are you thinking of any particular example or just

19 the overall presentation?

20 MR. CLARK: If I may interject just a moment, for

21 the record, we are going to tend to object to this whole

22 line of questioning as being irrelevant from the

23 standpoint that there's been no proof offered that this

24 text or any of these other materials are going to be used

25 to teach under Act 590.


1 MR. CLARK: (Continuing)

2 I understand the point that counsel is trying to

3 demonstrate to the Court; that these are the only kinds

4 of materials there. We have had cumulative testimony to

5 this effect time and time again.

6 I don't see the relevancy of going through all this.

7 THE COURT: I will note the objection.

8 MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

9 Q Did you have any particular reference in mind or

10 were you referring to the presentation of evolution in

11 general?

12 A It was the presentation of evolution in general. I

13 might cite a particular instance. This will be found on

14 page 444.

15 Q Were is that located on the page, Mr. Coward.

16 A Bottom paragraph under subheading 23-4.

17 Q Will you read that, please?

18 A The subtopic here is "Differences Between Man and

19 Apes." To show an example of the type of scientific

20 information that they use, the major differences in man

21 and apes, according to them, is the fact that an ape has a

22 broader pelvis than man. They cite this as being evidence.

23 The fact that a man's feet are flat on the bottoms and

24 not designed for grasping, and the apes or the primates

25 still have the grasping type foot, they cite this as


1 A (Continuing) evidence.

2 On the very next page, on 445, I believe it is, they

3 point out that there are differences in man and apes other

4 than physical. For an example, if I may read here -- This

5 is 445, left hand side, middle paragraph: "There are

6 physical distinctions that set man apart from the animals,

7 but of much greater magnitude are the difference in

8 behavior. An ape will not put a stick of wood on the fire

9 even if he is about to freeze. He may use a stick or

10 stone as a tool, if it is handy; but he does not make

11 tools or foresee future use for a tool."

12 I don't think the fact that an ape would not put a stick

13 on the fire to warm himself is hardly evidence that

14 indicates our ancestor.

15 Q How does that compare with your understanding of

16 presentation of evolution in the biology text that you

17 normally are exposed to?

18 A Well, any theory of evolution is supported in the

19 biology text. There again, it has some scientific

20 evidences to support that theory.

21 I don't believe any one field of science could cite any

22 evidence to support this as a scientific viewpoint.

23 Q Are the passages that you quoted to the Court

24 illustrative of the presentation of the subject of

25 creation or creation science and evolution in that


1 Q (Continuing) textbook?

2 A This seems to be the general thrust throughout the

3 book in skimming through. I might also point out one

4 other modification in this text. When I first received

5 this text at that previous meeting, this was not found on

6 the inside cover (Indicating). This is a disclaimer that

7 has been added since I first reviewed this textbook.

8 May I read it?

9 Q Yes, sir. For the record, Mr. Coward, are you

10 referring to a pasted in label that appears just inside

11 the hard cover of that textbook?

12 A Yes, I am.

13 Q Yes, sir. What does that say?

14 A "This book is not designed or appropriate for public

15 school use, and should not be used in public schools in

16 any way." That's the main topic of that.

17 Shall I read the entire disclaimer?

18 Q Yes, sir, if you would.

19 A "Books for public schools discuss scientific

20 evidence that supports creation science or evolution

21 science. This book, instead, discusses religious concepts

22 or materials that support creationist religions or

23 evolutionist religions, and such religious materials

24 should not be used in public schools."

25 Q Now, your statement was, with regard to the book,


1 Q (Continuing) that you first reviewed-- What was

2 your statement with regard to that book?

3 A The first book that I was given to preview and kept

4 for some two weeks did not have this disclaimer.

5 Q And when was that, Mr. Coward?

6 A This would have been in either January or February

7 of this year.

8 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, I would like to note for

9 the record that the book from which Mr. Coward was reading

10 was furnished to the plaintiffs pursuant to a request for

11 production of documents that was served upon the Institute

12 for Creation Research and Creation Life Publishers in

13 California pursuant to these proceedings in court.

14 And I would move the admission of Plaintiffs' Exhibit

15 129.

16 THE COURT: It will be received.

17 MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

18 Q Now, Mr. Coward, you've examined Act 590, have you

19 not?

20 A Yes, I have.

21 Q Is the subject of creation science, as you under-

22 stand it, presented in any of the science textbooks that

23 you currently use or have ever used in the past?

24 A No, it is not.

25 Q Do you know why not?


1 A I think probably because the writers, authors of

2 these books, also the publishers and publishing companies

3 that put the books out, such as Holt, Rhinehart, et

4 cetera, they do not view this as science or part of the

5 scientific community. Therefore, they chose not to put it

6 in their publications.

7 Q You testified earlier that the work that you did for

8 the Pulaski County School Board was with regard to a

9 proposal or resolution that was put to that Board, is that

10 right?

11 A That's correct.

12 Q How does Act 590 compare to that?

13 A I can't say if it is a word for word, but the

14 general thrust or scheme of Act 590 is closely parallel to

15 the earlier resolution, which I did see it.

16 Q Have you reviewed Act 590 to determine what its

17 provisions would require of you as a classroom teacher in

18 the area of science?

19 A Yes, I have.

20 Q I call your attention specifically to the provisions

21 of Section 7. There is a statement at Section 7(b) that

22 public schools generally censure creation science and

23 evidence contrary to evolution.

24 Is creation science censured in the Pulaski County

25 Special School District?


1 A No, sir. I've taught School for nineteen years, and

2 I had never even heard of creation science until this

3 year, so there is certainly no censuring process.

4 If it is censured at all it is because creation science

5 censures itself by its very nature.

6 Q And what do you mean by that?

7 A The fact that it is religion and does not contain

8 any science. It is self-censuring.

9 Q In your effort to determine what Act 590 would

10 require of you in the classroom, Mr. Coward, have you

11 determined the meaning of the term "balanced treatment"?

12 A I have attempted to. My interpretation of it

13 probably stems from having somewhat of a science

14 background. To me balanced" means "even" or "equal."

15 There again, when I first think of this, I think of,

16 again, emphasis on equal time, equal thrust or teaching

17 with an equal zeal, and also attempting to be bipartial

18 or neutral.

19 Q Turn, if you will, Mr. Coward, to Section 4? Do you

20 have that Act in front of you?

21 A Yes, I do.

22 Q Turn to the definition, Section 4, and tell the

23 Court, if you will, what you interpret 4(a)(1) to mean,

24 "the sudden creation of the universe, energy and light

25 from nothing"?


1 A Well, there again, I interpret this to be an

2 instantaneous creation of matter and life forms on earth

3 from, without any preexisting matter or life forms.

4 Q What does the term "creation" mean to you?

5 A I think it refers to the fact that something is

6 being born or formulated which would indicate to me there

7 must be a creator or a force which is doing so.

8 Q Do you have available to you, either in your

9 experience or in the way of teaching materials, textbooks,

10 audiovisual aids or anything of that sort that would

11 constitute scientific evidence in support of sudden

12 creation of the universe, energy and light from nothing?

13 A Absolutely none.

14 Q Do you have any way to explain that or to support

15 that proposition to your students?

16 A Not from a scientific point of view, no.

17 Q From what point of view, then?

18 A It would strictly be from a religious point of view.

19 Q Look, if you will, to 4(a)(5), "explanation of the

20 earth's geology by catastrophism, including the occurrence

21 of a worldwide flood." Do you see that?

22 A Yes, I do.

23 Q Do you have any scientific evidence available to you

24 in any fashion that would tend to support the occurrence

25 of a worldwide flood at some time in the past?


1 A No. I have never seen a science textbook, film,

2 film strip, cassette tapes or any type of audiovisual

3 materials that would give a scientific explanation of this

4 concept.

5 Q Have you ever seen any support at all for that

6 concept?

7 A Not in the scientific community. I see it as a

8 strictly religious concept.

9 Q Well, specifically, to what do you relate the

10 proposition of a worldwide flood, if anything?

11 A I assume this is from the book of Genesis, speaking

12 of the Noah flood.

13 Q Is there any other place in your experience or your

14 education where you've been exposed to the concept of a

15 worldwide flood?

16 A Only in my own religious background.

17 Q How would you, Mr. Coward, explain to your students,

18 if any inquired, about the occurrence of a worldwide flood?

19 A As far as scientific explanation, I could not. I'd

20 have to refer them, if they wanted to pursue this matter a

21 little further, they'd have to go beyond the classroom and

22 pursue this from some religious authority because I have

23 no knowledge of it or no evidence or no type of literature

24 that I could present this to them in a scientific manner.

25 Q Will you look, Mr. Coward, to 4(a)(6), "a relatively


1 Q (Continuing) recent inception of the earth and

2 living kinds"?.

3 A Yes.

4 Q What does the word "kinds" mean to you as a science

5 teacher?

6 A "Kinds" is not a scientific term. Usually in

7 science, particularly in dealing with taxonomy or

8 classification system, you refer to a specific level of

9 classification, such as species, families, orders, classes

10 or so forth.

11 "Kinds" as a science term really has no meaning or

12 significance at all.

13 Q Is it a science term?

14 A Definitely not.

15 Q Have you ever seen the word "kinds" used in that fashion?

17 A Used in the context that it is in the sentence, I

18 think it is a Biblical usage.

19 Q Do you have available to you any scientific evidence

20 that would tend to support the thought that the earth and

21 living kinds are of relatively recent inception?

22 A No, none whatsoever.

23 Q Do you know what "relatively recent inception" means?

24 A Well, this has been debated in this court as to what

25 kind of time frame that this is put into. The literature


1 A (Continuing) that I previewed on this committee,

2 most of the literature that I looked at, insisted on

3 approximately ten thousand years.

4 But "relative", there again is, the word "relative" is

5 relative in a sense.

6 Q Do you present any information in your classroom

7 with regard to the age of the earth or living kinds or

8 plants, animals, man?

9 A I do relate information to my students from a

10 scientific viewpoint as to what is depicted as the age of

11 the earth and the beginnings of time in relation to

12 certain classifications of organisms. Strictly from a

13 scientific viewpoint.

14 Q And if you recall, what generally appears in the

15 scientific literature?

16 A In regards to what?

17 Q In regard to the age of the earth?

18 A Well, there again, generally in the vicinity of four

19 and half billion years plus.

20 Q Is that relatively recent in your mind?

21 A Not in my perception of the word "relatively", no,

22 sir.

23 Q Mr. Coward, you've testified about 4(a)(1), 4(a)(5)

24 and 4(a)(6). If you don't have any scientific information

25 that would support that, what are you going to do if your


1 Q (Continuing) students ask you questions about those

2 particular items?

3 A There again, all I would be able to say to my

4 students would be that there are no scientific evidences,

5 to my knowledge, that would support any of these six

6 points. Therefore, I assume that since I cannot support

7 that scientifically, I cannot get into it from a religious

8 point of view, and I assume that I have to also not teach

9 them anything about evolution.

10 Q Let me back up for a moment and ask you, if a

11 student asks you about a worldwide flood, how will you

12 handle that?

13 A I would simply say to that student that as far as

14 the scientific community is concerned, as far as my

15 knowledge is concerned, there is no scientific evidence to

16 support a worldwide flood.

17 'If you chose to read on it further, then I suggest

18 there is, obviously, there are religious sources which you

19 might go to.'

20 And quite often if a student were to ask me question

21 like this, I might suggest that, well, you need to talk

22 probably about this with your parents or perhaps talk with

23 your minister, which is strictly a religious viewpoint.

24 It's definitely not a scientific one.

25 Q How does that kind of explanation fit in with your


1 Q (Continuing) understanding of the requirement of

2 "balance treatment"?

3 A We'll, there again, I can't use or cannot implement

4 balance treatment in regard to creation science unless I

5 can present scientific evidences.

6 I think the bill itself is emphatic that I cannot get

7 into the realm or scope of religion. Without any

8 scientific evidences, I don't see how I can implement Act

9 590.

10 Q Tell the Court, Mr. Coward, how, in your experience

11 as a biology teacher, Act 590 would affect the way you

12 teach students in your classroom and your relationship

13 with your students?

14 A I think several problems would probably be created

15 as a result of implementing Act 590 in my classroom. One

16 alone would simply be the time frame. Most textbooks

17 generally have a unit, as such, on the theory of evolution

18 and natural selection. But even aside that, evolution is

19 interwoven throughout the fabric, really, of every chapter

20 within the textbook, virtually on every page.

21 At the time I made any statement at all regarding the

22 development of fishes or amphibians or whatever lines of

23 development, I'd have to stop again and attribute time to

24 the creationist viewpoint.

25 I would spend probably half of my time trying to make a


1 A (Continuing) statement of a scientific nature, then

2 attempting to give balance to the other viewpoint.

3 There is not time as it is to teach all the things we

4 would like to do within a given school year. I would meet

5 myself coming and going in circles attempting to do this.

6 Q You mentioned evolution as a theme in biology?

7 A Yes, I did.

8 Q I have placed in front of you a document labelled

9 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 15 for identification, and ask if you

10 can tell the Court what that is, Mr. Coward?

11 A Yes. That is a photostat of the advanced biology

12 textbook that is used. It's entitled Biology by Arms and

13 Camp, publishers H. R. W. Saunders.

14 Q Is that book used by you?

15 A Yes, it is.

16 Q In a course on advance biology?

17 A Yes, that's correct.

18 Q How is the subject of evolution presented in that

19 book?

20 A In this particular book, there are seven explicit

21 chapters on the theory of evolution. Some are dealing

22 with primates, some chapters are dealing with flowering

23 plants and so forth. But the scope of the book in all

24 includes seven predesignate chapters.

25 Beyond those chapters, the entire concept of


1 A (Continuing) evolutionary theory and natural

2 selection, again, is interwoven throughout the chapters.

3 Virtually, every page makes references to some type of

4 ancestry or lines of descendance.

5 That is the very fabric or fiber that bonds the

6 scientific information together. It's the glue that holds

7 it all together.

8 Q Have you, at my request, extracted from that

9 textbook several pages that illustrate how evolution is

10 treated?

11 A Yes, I have.

12 Q Would you just very quickly refer to Plaintiffs'

13 Exhibit 15 and tell the Court what is illustrated there?

14 A An example might be found on the very inside cover

15 of the text, which there is a full two page overview of

16 the entire geological time scale dating the various types

17 of organisms and when they appeared on earth. Also dating

18 even the emergence of the various mountain ranges,

19 particularly in regards to the North American continent.

20 And all of this is done on a geological time scale or

21 time clock.

22 Q Is that kind of presentation unusual in a biology

23 text, Mr. Coward?

24 A No. In fact, it is standard in a biology text. I

25 don't recall, offhand, seeing one that did not present


1 A (Continuing) some type of display such as this.

2 Sometimes it will be put into, like, a twenty-four hour

3 face of a clock, and everything will be put into a time

4 sequence, out generally it is displayed in some fashion,

5 yes.

6 Q What other illustrations have you selected? Just

7 pick one or two, if you would.

8 A Okay. Beyond the chapters of evolution? I think,

9 which would speak for themselves, there are numerous

10 references made throughout the book in scattered

11 chapters. These would be some at random. This will be

12 page 323.

13 Q And what is illustrated there?

14 A It's talking about the evolution of fishes, but this

15 is not in an evolution chapter, as such. It's strictly as

16 a chapter regarding fish development, talking about the

17 three major classes of fish.

18 These two groups, speaking of Chondrichthyes, which are

19 the cartilaginous fish, and the Osteichthyes, which are

20 the bony fish, these two groups of fish have made two

21 major evolutionary advances over their agnathan ancestors.

22 Agnathan ancestors is referring to the jawless fish,

23 which we think was the first fish group on earth.

24 I think that would trigger Act 590.

25 Q In addition to the illustrations that you've pointed


1 Q (Continuing) out, there are seven full chapters on

2 evolution, is that correct?

3 A Yes, there is.

4 Q Are the illustrations you've mentioned consistent

5 with the manner in which evolution is presented in that

6 textbook?

7 A Yes, they are.

8 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, I move the introduction or

9 admission of Plaintiffs' Exhibit 15.

10 THE COURT: It will be received.

11 MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

12 Q How, Mr. Coward, will you balance the treatment of

13 evolution with creation science in those courses that you

14 teach?

15 A I see it as an impossibility.

16 Q Do you have materials available with which to do

17 that?

18 A No, I do not. I have none.

19 Q Do you know of any?

20 A None that I have previewed I would consider of a

21 scientific nature enough that be acceptable for my

22 classroom.

23 Q You also stated that you teach the subject of

24 psychology, is that right?

25 A That's correct.


1 Q What grade level students take psychology?

2 A These would be juniors and seniors.

3 Q Have you also thought about the effect that Act 590

4 would have on methods and manner in which you present the

5 subject of psychology?

6 A Yes. I have given that some thought.

7 Q And will you tell the Court how Act 590 will affect

8 your presentation of psychology?

9 A Well, as we all know, there are a number of

10 experiments that are done in psychology based on behavior

11 comparisons of man to other forms of animals, particularly

12 in regards to primates.

13 I might cite as an example Jane Goodall's studies of

14 chimpanzees or Dianne Fossi's studies of gorillas or Harry

15 Harlow's study with monkeys on surrogate mothers,

16 Skinner's experiments with rats, pigeons and so forth.

17 These are examples which if there are no inner-

18 relationships between these organisms, either

19 biochemically, genetically or from a behavioral

20 standpoint, then these studies would have no relevance to

21 our lives at all. It would be a study in futility. It

22 would prove nothing.

23 If Act 590 stands and I have to present the idea of the

24 concept to my students that man and other primates do not

25 have common ancestry, then the first question I will get


1 A (Continuing) from them is, 'what is the

2 significance of this study'. And there I'm caught with

3 really nothing to tell them. It would be no significance,

4 I assume.

5 Q How could you balance that presentation?

6 A I could not balance it.

7 Q What would be left for you to do?

8 A I would, more or less, have to disregard these

9 studies and not make reference to that, or have a negative

10 viewpoint and just tell the students up front, 'well, this

11 study doesn't really mean anything because there are no

12 common similarities or relationships between man and

13 primates. So the study is really irrelevant. I just

14 thought I'd tell you about it.'

15 That's about what the effect would be.

16 Q How do you think that would affect your teaching

17 psychology and your relationship with your students?

18 A I think it would have a great handicap on the

19 teaching of the subject of psychology because I think

20 these are relevant and important studies.

21 At the same time, if I tried to be impartial and not

22 take sides on this issue, as I assume Act 590 insinuates

23 that I should be, I think very quickly, students are very

24 bright people, and they perceive a great deal.

25 I think the students would see in a hurry that I am