The guide lists resources for the provision of vocational education to handicapped students. Each entry includes information on title, specific concern, groups served, intended users, contents, source, cost, availability, and ease of use. Entries are organized into the following four areas (sample subtopics in parentheses): exceptional students…

Although it is well settled that a student may not be expelled without a prior hearing, principals in many localities are authorized by statute or board rules to suspend students for periods ranging from 1 to 10 days or more without notice, hearing, or any of the other trappings of due process. Such suspensions are subject to challenge under the…

The authors examine the legal issues and administrative implications, under British law, of the Tameside case, in which local school authorities resisted the Secretary of State for Education's order to implement the comprehensive schools plan. (SJL)

Examines the different procedural safeguards which students enjoy in connection with the various disciplinary measures imposed by public school officials: procedural due process rights of students when they are subject to suspensions of up to 10 days, 10 days to three months, more than three months, and expulsions. (JT)

An Idaho court case in which a tenured faculty member with seniority was dismissed for financial exigency became two trials, one concerning the university's burden of proof for financial exigency and the other concerning deprivation of the faculty member's due process. The decisions are examined. (MSE)

The article discusses problems that may arise in relation to identification, evaluation, Individualized Education Programs, related services, and due process protection for inmates eligible for special education. Problems include failure to identify and evaluate adequately and issues related to discipline, suspension, and exclusion. (Author/CL)

The increasing number of court decisions dealing with classroom and academic matters attests to the growing judicial sensitivity to students' rights in academic affairs. The advisors' job falls within this academic affairs arena, and they must understand legal issues. (MLW)

Litigation and the issues surrounding the use of behavioral procedures to handicapped persons are reviewed. Attention is directed to the use of aversive techniques, e.g., corporal punishment, electric shock, timeout, and restraint. (SEW)

A Florida experiment demonstrated that cameras can operate in a courtroom without causing the disruption experienced in previous courtroom cases. The more difficult question--whether the more subtle effects of the camera hamper a fair trial--is open to debate. (GT)

This note briefly outlines the legislative purposes and the general procedural requirements of Title VII, including the ambiguity of the time limitations on filing. It is suggested that the time limitations with the EEOC should not be rigidly construed and that tolling of the limitation periods is often justified. (Author/LBH)

Since Congress has enacted no statutes of limitations for the governance of claims brought under the older civil rights acts, various state limitation provisions must be applied. Aspects of the problem of uncertainty are examined, and several means of resolution are suggested. (LBH)

In cases of cheating, plagiarism, or violations of the law in dental education, a very high level of due process is required. University counsel can help administrators determine whether an accused student is professionally suited to dentistry by characterizing as many corrective actions as possible as academic under the rubric of "suitability to…

In an era promulgating "zero tolerance" of school violence, courts are giving considerable latitude to school officials in administering student discipline. The vast majority of student due process claims arising from suspensions and expulsions, including a recent marijuana possession case in Alabama, have failed in recent years. The…

The Sixth Circuit Court approved an expulsion process even though the student was "convicted" on hearsay testimony alone and denied the opportunity to confront and cross-examine witnesses. The explanation and rationale for the court's orientation is viewed against prior case law. (MLF)