The American Association of University Professors' (AAUP) expanded participation on behalf of faculty in court litigation is outlined for seven areas: free speech and academic freedom, collective bargaining, use of AAUP standards, financial exigency, governance, employment discrimination, and confidentiality of tenure votes and evaluations. (MSE)

Legal decisions and other arguments support the argument that the exclusion of creationism from school curricula is not the result of censorship or bias. Equal-time legislation for creationism has the potential to entangle the state and religion and to make the task of teachers, textbook authors, and publishers nearly impossible. (PP)

The memorandum opinion constituting the district court's findings in the case of Arkansas' state law mandating instruction on creation in public schools is presented. Plaintiffs in the suit include Jewish and Christian individuals and organizations and those concerned with academic freedom issues. Defendants include state education officials and…

Teachers are facing political pressure from both the left and the right regarding their right to choose appropriate instructional materials. The experiences of several teachers who have been involved in censorship arguments are reported. A checklist of items concerning school policies and public relations activities to counter censorship is…

Discusses the nature of the movement to include scientific creationism in the school curriculum and science textbooks, explains the extent of scientists' acceptance of evolution, and describes actions being taken to counteract creationist efforts in an organized and effective manner. (PGD)

The extension of Title VII to college faculty provided a mechanism for relief in cases where faculty were denied reappointment, promotion, or tenure for reasons unrelated to their job performance. The standards of review in Title VII cases and the court's role in academic Title VII cases are discussed. (MLW)

The issue of constraints on the publication of research results is discussed from the perspective of clashing values: free speech versus censorship in protection of national defense. The problems of secrecy as well as of disclosure are examined. Greater conflict between academe and military interests is foreseen. (MSE)

Right-wing conservatives and religious groups have mobilized grass roots support for a campaign to eradicate sex education from schools. To meet the challenge posed by these groups, the nature of this opposition and what they are saying, must be understood. (FG)

Student religious groups and individuals have rights equal to those of any other student groups or individuals to expression and exercise of their beliefs. Available from the Christian Legal Society, Box 2069, Oak Park, Illinois 60303; $5.00 per year. (Author/IRT)

Cases considered for imposition of censure and cases considered for removal of censure by the American Association of University Professors are outlined. Revisions of Association policy involving discrimination against faculty members and graduate assistants are printed. (MLW)

Some kind of coalition of universities, corporations, and other private organizations, it is argued, will be necessary to gain sufficient credibility to influence public policy. The complexities of modern mass media communication and of public policy issues have reached levels that justify a review of university and corporate roles. (MLW)

The susceptibility of students (in loco parentis), the protected status of higher education regarding academic freedom, and higher education's operation as a public trust are three reasons for the special ethical responsibilities of college and university administrators. Ethical behavior as an extension of legal doctrine is examined. (Author/MLW)

An analysis of related cases since the Supreme Court case "Branzburg v Hayes," which concerned the news reporter's privilege question, shows that state and federal courts have been inconsistent in their decisions and that every decision in favor of journalists has been a qualified one. (GT)

A test of the knowledge of 378 high school publications advisers, editors, and principals regarding First Amendment rights revealed that advisers had the most knowledge, followed by editors and then by principals. Characteristics of the most knowledgeable advisers were then identified. (GT)