Skip navigation.
The Critic's Resource on AntiEvolution

Testimony of Dennis R. Glasgow

Testimony of Dennis R. Glasgow, Supervisor of Science in Little Rock schools (Plaintiffs Witness) - transcript paragraph formatted version.


A: (Continuing) forms of life were created as we find them was the usual opinion. That's merely a historical fact; there have been two. It's also a historical fact or we wouldn't be in this room, and many people in this country still believe that.

But sociological fact and science are different phenomenon.

Q: Perhaps whether those are historical facts is what this trial is about, Doctor Gould.

MR. WILLIAMS: I have no further questions.

THE COURT Any redirect?

MR. ENNIS: We have no further questions.

THE COURT You may be excused.



called on behalf of the plaintiffs herein, after having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined and testified as follows:



Q: Will you state your name and occupation, please, for the record?

A: I am Dennis R. Glasgow, and I am Supervisor of Science in Little Rock schools.


Q: Will you tell true Court briefly what your educational and professional background is?

A: I have a Bachelor of Science in Education degree with emphasis in biology from Southern State College. I have a Master of Science in Education, also with emphasis in biology and a minor in education, from Arkansas State University. And in addition, I have an Educational Specialist Degree in educational administration from the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.

Q: Would you describe for the Court, and if you will, Mr. Glasgow, pull that microphone a little bit closer to you and speak right into it, will you describe for the Court, please, what your present duties and responsibilities are?

A: As supervisor of science, basically I'm the staff administrator for science. That involves serving as a consultant to classroom teachers, coordinating the process through which textbooks are selected, coordinating the process through which curriculum guides are developed, organizing and planning for in-service training for teachers, serving as the chief advisor to the superintendent of schools and the board on matters concerning science education.

Q: Can you tell the Court appropriately how many science teachers there are in the Little Rock school


Q: (Continuing) district?

A: I would say approximately five hundred.

Q: Can you tell the Court, in size, how the Little Rock school district ranks among those in the state of Arkansas?

A: I believe the Little Rock school district is the second largest in the state.

Q: Do you, sir, in your capacity as science supervisor, have authority over the determination or development of curriculum in the area of science in the Little Rock school district?

A: Yes. I think that would be a fair statement, in the sense that I'm the administrator that coordinates and plans and originates things along that line.

Q: Do you do that at all levels of public education in the Little Rock school district?

A: My duties include the span from kindergarten through twelfth grade.

Q: Do you also have any additional employment in the area of science or science education, Mr. Glasgow?

A: Yes. I teach introductory biology at UALR.

Q: How long have you been doing that?

A: About four years.

Q: How long have you served in your present capacity for the Little Rock school district?


A: Two and a half years.

Q: Prior to that time, did you teach in the area of science?

A: Yes, I have, at times in the past.

Q: What subjects have you taught?

A: I've taught physics, chemistry and biology in the Newport public schools.

Q: How long did you do this?

A: For five years.

Q: Will you tell the Court, please, what science courses are required in the Little Rock school district? And if you can divide your answer between the elementary level and junior high or middle school and senior high, I would appreciate that.

A: Well, in essence, at the elementary level, all of the science courses, and we have science at each level, kindergarten through grade six are required. There are no graduation requirements from elementary to junior high as such, but, indeed, they are required.

At the junior high level, all three science courses, life science in seventh grade, physical science at the eighth grade, and earth science in the ninth grade, are required courses.

At the senior high level, there is not a required course as such. The students have an option to take either an


A: (Continuing) additional science course or an additional math course. I would say the vast majority of the students elect to take an additional science course rather than the math.

Q: And which science course among those available is most popular?

A: It's typically biology.

Q: At what grade level is that offered?

A: The course I'm referring to that students usually take to meet that requirement is tenth grade biology.

Q: Are there other biology courses available in the Little Rock district?

A: Yes, there are several.

Q: Can you tell the Court what those are?

A: Yes. There is an advanced biology course that's offered. It's essentially a twelfth grade course. There is a human physiology course which is an eleventh grade course.

Q: Are there any others?

A: Well, the subject of biology is dealt with in general science, which is also taught at the tenth grade level.

Q: How, within your area of responsibility in the Little Rock school district, is the curriculum determined in the area of science?


A: Well, essentially, I would say a major part of the science curriculum is determined through the process of textbook selection, in that to a large extent we utilize the textbooks as our curriculum. In addition to that, we have committees of teachers that develop curriculum guides that specify to some degree what teachers should deal with in a particular course.

We also have in-service institutes and courses that are offered from time to time that would deal with curriculum.

Q: I have placed in front of you, Mr. Glasgow, an item that has been previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 40, and ask you if that is a copy of the curriculum guide for science or biology at the tenth grade level?

A: It is the curriculum guide for tenth grade regular biology.

Q: Does that curriculum guide function in any manner to mandate curriculum within a particular course in science?

A: Well, I hate to say that it mandates it as such, but I think this gives directions and gives boundaries within which teachers can operate.

Q: Is the theory of evolution as you have heard it described in the testimony in this courtroom presented or treated at all in that curriculum guide?

A: It is.


Q: In what manner?

A: In this particular section of the curriculum guide, there are eighteen concepts or skills that deal with the theory of evolution.

Q: Does the curriculum guide, together with the textbook that is selected, more than any other factor determine curriculum in the classroom?

A: That is correct.

Q: Does the Little Rock school district select textbooks for use in its science classrooms?

A: Yes, it does.

Q: With regard to the biology text currently in use and with regard to the curriculum guide that you have just referred to, is there any presentation of what is identified in Act 590 of creation science?

A: There is none.

Q: Has there ever been, in your history with the Little Rock public schools?

A: No, there has not.

Q: In addition to the—

THE COURT Pardon me, Mr. Cearley, would you ask that question again?

MR. CEARLEY: Yes, I will.

THE COURT There were two questions you asked that I didn't get.


MR. CEARLEY: Yes, sir.

MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

Q: You have testified, Mr. Glasgow, that textbook selection largely determines curriculum within a given subject?

A: Yes.

Q: And additionally, the district makes suggestions about curriculum in the curriculum guide, is that right?

A: That's correct.

MR. CHILDS: Your Honor, I hate to interpose an objection during Mr. Cearley's eloquent presentation of Mr. Glasgow, but I would like to interpose an objection on the ground of relevancy of this testimony as to the constitutionality of Act 590 or relating to the possible implementation of Act 590. I fail to see the relevance of this testimony.

THE COURT That's overruled.

MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, could I have the reporter read my question back? I have lost my place and my train of thought.

THE COURT Well, the point I've missed, and I wish you'd repeat it, is how 590 relates to the curriculum guide.

MR. CEARLEY: I'll ask that question again.

MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

Q: You've described textbook selection and curriculum


Q: (continuing) guides, and you testified that the theory of evolution appears a number of times in the curriculum guide; is that correct?

A: That's correct.

Q: My question was, does the subject of creation science as it is defined in Act 590 appear anywhere in the curriculum guide that you've described?

A: It does not.

MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, I would move admission of Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 40, which is the curriculum guide that has been—

THE COURT It will be received.

Q: Has the subject of creation science ever appeared in a curriculum guide in this subject, Mr. Glasgow, within your tenure at the Little Rock school district?

A: No, it hasn't.

Q: Will you tell the Court whether, in the Little Rock district, there are any other restraints or constraints on you or on the district with regard to developing curriculum for science courses?

A: Well, first, there would be some constraints in the area of time and money. We essentially use the textbooks that are available because they are there; we can purchase them through state money. We do not have the time to develop curriculum to any large extent ourselves. We


A: (Continuing) reserve that for the scientists to have input into the development of textbooks. There is only a certain amount of time that is available during a school year, and of course, our curriculum must be scaled down to some extent, and only certain things are selected for inclusion because of the limited amount of time.

Q: How are those decisions generally made with regard to the educational aspects of the science curriculum?

A: Well, as far as the educational aspects are concerned, I think that we would certainly want the curriculum to reflect the level of development of the student.

Students at certain ages are only capable of handling concepts that are so sophisticated. So we deal with things that are appropriate for the developmental level of the individual students in the classes.

Q: Is there any particular order of presentation of science courses for students in your district?

A: I'm not sure I understand your question.

Q: Is there any particular order or sequencing of science courses? Must a student take biology before chemistry, or anything of that sort?

A: Generally, yes.

Q: Is that a factor in the selection of curriculum?


A: Yes, it is.

Q: With regard to the textbooks that are used in the Little Rock District, Mr. Glasgow, will you tell the Court how the district goes about purchasing textbooks and what mechanism is used?

A: Yes. Generally, we purchase textbooks using state money The state has a committee that every five years goes about selecting textbooks for inclusion on a state list. And usually there are quite a few alternatives to choose from there.

As far as the Little Rock schools are concerned, we convene a committee of teachers, and frequently I'm included on these committees, that would look at the choices available from the state list and then we would make our selections from that list.

This way we would be reimbursed by the state for the cost of the textbooks.

Q: Is the local district prohibited in any manner from purchasing books that do not appear on a state approved list?

A: It's not prohibited, it's just that they do not receive state money for those books.

Q: Is there, to your knowledge, on the state list right now a book available that gives what Act 590 terms `balanced treatment' to creation science?


A: No, there certainly is not.

Q: Does the State of Arkansas Department of Education produce anything in the way of a curriculum guide for science courses?

A: Sort of, yes. They have, and I forget the name of it at the moment, some sort of science guidelines that are used by individual school districts simply as a model or a guide within which they can formulate their own curriculum.

Q: Is there any coercive aspect to that? Does the state tell a local district be their curriculum guide how it should teach a subject?

A: No. I don't think that's the intent whatsoever.

Q: Are there any mandatory guidelines or regulations or policies at all from the State Department of Education to a local school district about curriculum content?

A: Not to my knowledge.

Q: Are any subjects required by the State in the area of science, required to be taught on a local level?

A: No.

Q: Are any subjects required to be taught in any other area of public education, to your knowledge?

A: I think that perhaps American History, Arkansas History, and maybe Civics are required.

Q: With regard to the Little Rock District, can you tell the Court how you, as science supervisor, control or


Q: (Continuing) supervise what is actually taught in the classroom?

A: Well, as you recall my statement earlier, including the elementary teachers, there are perhaps five hundred teachers that teach science in the district. I have no way to control what these teachers teach directly. Indirectly, through the selection of competent, capable, professional teachers, I'm assuming that they will teach appropriate things in the class.

THE COURT: Mr. Cearley, where are you going with this testimony?

MR. CEARLEY: Well, your Honor, one of the allegations of the plaintiffs' complaint is that Act 590 violates the rights of academic freedom of both students and teachers, in that it represents an attempt by the state-

THE COURT: I'm aware of the allegation.

MR. CEARLEY: —to circumvent the process. Mr. Glasgow's testimony will go to establish that what the legislature has done, what the state has done, is unprecedented in the area of education. And that there is no method or manner within the context of the local district to monitor what goes on in the classroom in order to keep religion out of the classroom under a statute like this, that the effect on science education of teaching


MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing) creation science as it is defined in this Act is damaging to the understanding of science of students in a classroom situation.

THE COURT: Why don't we move on to those, direct to those points, if you would.

MR. CEARLEY: All right, sir.

MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

Q: Have you, at my request, Mr. Glasgow, carefully read Act 590 of 1981?

A: I have.

Q: And have you done that with a view toward determining what will be required of you as the science supervisor in the Little Rock School District?

A: I have.

Q: Have you also surveyed the textbooks that are approved for use and are currently in use in the area of science in the Little Rock School District?

A: Yes.

Q: Can you tell the Court what science courses would be affected by Act 590?

A: I think that all science courses from kindergarten through the twelfth grade would be affected by Act 590.

MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, I have placed before the witness exhibits labeled Plaintiffs' 40 through 50, which are excerpts from textbooks. And I don't wish to prolong


MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing) this or try the Court's patience.

There are several parts of specific textbooks that I would like to be reflected in the record. I would like all of it in the record, if Mr. Glasgow can identify it. But there are specific passages that I would like to have him refer to, and I can move through that very quickly and then offer all of the exhibits into the record.

Q: Mr. Glasgow, would you refer first to Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 41. Do you have that in front of you?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: Is that an elementary science, or excerpts from an elementary science book for use in the second grade in the Little Rock School District?

A: Yes.

Q: Will you tell the Court specifically what language in the excerpts that you have selected would, in your view as science supervisor, require some sort of balanced treatment under Act 590?

A: Yes. On page 111, for instance, there is a side note in the teacher's edition that talks about dinosaurs as a group of reptiles known to live on the earth long ago. "These animals could not adapt to the changing conditions and, became extinct about sixty-five million years ago." In my mind that would certainly be something


A: (Continuing) that would be covered under Act 590.

Q: Do you have any materials available to teachers in the Little Rock District with which they could balance a presentation of that sort pursuant to the Act?

A: No, I do not.

Q: Will you refer, please, to Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 42.

Can you tell the Court whether that is copies of pages out of the elementary science text for use in the fourth grade?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Have you identified specific ideas there that would trigger implementation of Act 590?

A: Yes. There is one chapter that is talking about continental drift. There is a general discussion several pages long on the continental drift and plate tectonics. It indicates that the continents perhaps split apart about two hundred million years ago.

There is another part concerned with the erosion of the Grand Canyon. I think that that possibly could trigger Act 590. There is one other aspect that indicates that dinosaurs survived for over sixty million years and there is not a single dinosaur alive today.

Those are some examples of types of things that are in that particular textbook.


Q: Will you refer, Mr. Glasgow, to Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 43 and just tell the Court briefly why, in your opinion, Act 590 would require balanced treatment?

A: Yes. It talks about three ideas as to how everything in space was formed. One of these particular theories talks about one of these particular theories suggests that the universe explodes, comes together, explodes again, and this happens about every eighty billion years.

Are there any materials available on either the fourth or fifth grade level with which to balance such a presentation under the Act right now, Mr. Glasgow?

A: I don't think so, no.

Q: Will you look, please, sir, at Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 44.

Does that represent excerpts that you've selected from the sixth grade elementary science book?

A: Yes.

Q: Can you tell the Court what concepts are presented there that are also found in the definition section of Act 590?

A: Yes. There is a general discussion of the earth's past, including a discussion of dinosaurs which states that they lived long ago. There is some information or a chapter or two on fossils that indicate or that states


A: (Continuing) that, "Life and environmental processes operating today have also operated in the past, and based upon the fossil record, the scientists conclude," or geologists, I guess, "conclude that simple forms of life probably appeared first on the earth, complex forms developed later."

Q: Will you look now, sir, at Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 45 and just tell the Court simply whether that also represents a presentation of the concept that appears in the definitions under Act 590?

A: Yes, I think it does.

Q: Would the same be the of the excerpts that appear labeled as Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 47?

A: Yes. Exhibit Number 47 is our earth science book, and I would say the major part of the earth science book would trigger Act 590.

Q: And that's taught in what grade, Mr. Glasgow?

A: The ninth grade.

Q: Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 48 is excerpts from a text called Modern Biology. Is that selected passages or pages from the text that is used in the tenth grade biology class?

A: Yes, indeed.

Q: What part does the theory of evolution play in the organizational structure of that book?


A: Well, the chapters dealing with plants and animals are arranged in a phylogenetic manner with the simpler plant, the chapter dealing with simpler plants appearing first and then the chapters on simple animals appearing first and proceeding in a manner that is consistent with phylogenetic thought.

Q: Do you have any outside materials or other materials available of sufficient quality to balance the treatment that's presented there?

A: There aren't any materials available at all that I know of.

Q: Would the same thing be true, Mr. Glasgow, of Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 49, advanced biology? The name of that book is Biology.

A: Yes. The same thing would be the. This book is similar in the format to the Modern Biology book that is taught at tenth grade.

Q: And lastly, Mr. Glasgow, will you go to what has been labeled Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 50 and turn to the second page inside, page number 18. Can you tell the Court what is printed there as a statement of principle of evolution?

A: Yes. "The principle of evolution is reinforced by analysis at all levels of organization in nature. That is why the principle of evolution is the major unifying theme


A: (Continuing) of this book."

Q: How would you describe the presentation of evolution in that book?

A: I think it's pervasive throughout.

THE COURT: What exhibit are you referring to?

MR. CEARLEY: 50, your Honor.

Your Honor, I would move the admission of Plaintiffs' Exhibits 41 through 50.

MR. WILLIAMS: No objection.

THE COURT: Those will be received. Why don't we take a recess for ten minutes or so.

(Thereupon, Court was in

recess from 4:00 p.m. until

4:10 p.m.)

MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

Q: Mr. Glasgow, do you have in front of you a copy of Act 590?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: And you have studied that Act, have you not?

A: I have.

Q: You have testified that in the Little Rock School District you will be the one who is responsible for implementing Act 590; is that correct?

A: Well, I'll be the one that is responsible for initiating the process. I'll have the overall


A: (Continuing) responsibility for this, although I would assume I would have help.

Q: Do you know what the term `balanced treatment' means?

A: Well, really, I don't know. When I first looked at this, I was in a quandary as to what that meant. I might say, however, that since I am responsible, or would be the primary person responsible in the Little Rock schools for implementing this, that I've been forced to make some assumptions or something of an operational definition from my own mind. It's not based on anything, other than I just had to make a decision one way or another. The way I've interpreted `balanced treatment' is that equal emphasis or equal legitimacy must be given to what is called in the Act creation science and evolution science.

Q: Does that allow, from your point of view, a teacher to express a professional opinion or a personal opinion contrary to a balanced treatment or equal legitimacy?

A: Well, from the standpoint of the operational definition that I've used for `balanced treatment', no, I do not think that would be allowed. I simply, from the standpoint, you could present two things; you could even spend equal time on those two things. But if at the end of that the teacher said, "This is science and this is


A: (Continuing) something else," I don't agree with this, then certainly I don't think the two would be given equal emphasis or equal legitimacy.

Q: What do you interpret the term `creation' as it appears in creation science in Act 590 to mean?

A: To me it implies creation by God.

Q: What do you interpret the term `deals in any way with origins of life, man, or the universe' to mean with regard to the language of Section 1 of the Act?

A: Again, I think as would be true of many of these areas, it's not clear to me exactly what it means. But again, I'm the person that's responsible for implementing this in the Little Rock schools, and that would be next September that that would have to be done, so I've had to make some assumptions regarding that. I think on that basis that what it means is that anytime you deal with organic evolution, anytime you deal with theories about the formation of the universe or the solar system, the earth/moon system, anytime you deal with natural selection, anytime you deal with things that date the age of the earth, then these would be areas that would refer to that statement.

Q: And I take it that your view of the meaning of that statement is reflected in the textbook selections that you made as Exhibits 41 through 50?


A: Yes, it is.

Q: Section 2 of the Act prohibits religious instruction. What do you interpret that to mean?

A: I think that prohibiting religious instruction would prohibit topics or instruction that deals with religious beliefs. It would prohibit documents or curricula or books or whatever that use religious writings as their references. Basically anything that is religious in nature, I think, would be prohibited.

Q: Section 3 of the Act states that public schools within the state or their personnel shall not discriminate against the student who demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of evolution science and creation science. Is there such discrimination in the Little Rock School District how?

A: Certainly not to my knowledge.

Q: Is there any discrimination against students in the area of science or religion at all in the Little Rock School District?

A: To my knowledge, and I feel rather comfortable with this, there is no discrimination against students who profess an understanding of the principles of science or who profess various religious beliefs.

Q: Do you recognize in 590 the definitions section which is Section 4 of the Act, and in particular, do you


Q: (Continuing) have any recognition of the elements of the definitions of creation science and evolution science that appear there?

A: Do you mean do I recognize the definition prior to—

Q: Yes, sir. Have you ever seen those in some other source?

A: From some other source?

Q: Yes, sir.

A: Certainly. I have seen basically the identical definitions in creation science pamphlets and booklets and so forth that I have examined. And in particular there is a, I guess you'd call it a curriculum guide or curriculum plan that was given to me by Doctor Richard Bliss which has these definitions almost verbatim from those that are listed in Act 590.

Q: How did that occur?

A: Well, sometime after Act 590 was passed in the Legislature, I was called and asked if I would be willing to meet with Doctor Bliss concerning this, and I said that I would.

And when I met with him, I learned that he was giving a workshop. I think it was at Central Baptist College, or whichever Baptist college is in Conway. And I indicated to him that I would not be able to attend that workshop, which, by the way, was being held for teachers and other


A: (Continuing) interested people from around the state.

And I asked him if he had any material that he could leave with me. And he said that he had the outline of the workshop that he was presenting to the teachers and other interested people, and that I could have a copy of that. As I recall, I got his copy and ran down to the duplicating machine and copied that for my use.

Q: Did you later receive a letter from Doctor Bliss including teaching materials and materials that refer to creation science?

A: No. I did receive a letter from him expressing his thanks for, you know, being, finding the time to meet with him, and suggesting that if I had any problems with this or whatever, that I could give him a call and he would attempt to help.

Q: I have marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 128 for identification, Mr. Glasgow, what appears to be a copy of that letter. Do you have that in front of you?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: Is that a copy of a letter dated April 28, 1981, from Doctor Richard Bliss?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Does it bear what purports to be his signature as Curriculum Development Professor of Science and Director


(Continuing) of the Institute for Creation Research?

A: Director of Curriculum Development and Professor of Science, I believe, yes.

Q: I see.

Are you aware of the outlets in this country for creation science materials for the use in schools?

A: Generally, yes.

Q: Is the Institute for Creation Research among those?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Have you determined whether any creation-science materials are available from other sources?

A: Other than a handful of creation research of one variety or another numbering maybe five or six, I'm not aware of any other source from which materials can be obtained.

Q: Attached to that letter, Mr. Glasgow, is what appears to be on the first page a two model classroom approach to origins. Is that the material to which you referred that was given to you by Doctor Bliss?

A: Yes, it is.

Q: Would you turn to pages 10 and 11 of that material and tell the Court whether that is the definitions section that you referred to?

A: Yes. Page 10 is scientific creation and there is


A: (Continuing) six definitions. Page 11 is evolution, and there are also six definitions.

Q: How do they compare to the definitions that appear in Act 590?

A: Well, except for the change of a word or two, they appear to be identical.

Q: What did you do with this information after you received it?

A: Well, after I received it, I looked through the information, I studied it for some time. At, oh, I don't know, maybe a week or two after that, the school board has an education committee, and of course, they were aware that Act 590 had been passed at that time and they wanted an update on that.

And I went to the school board education committee and I brought this material with me, and I expressed some concern that if this were the manner in which we were to implement Act 590, that I had some very severe reservations about it. I didn't feel that it was at all appropriate for use in the science classes.

MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, I would move admission of Plaintiffs' Exhibit 128.

THE COURT: It will be received.

Q: Mr. Glasgow, will you refer to that, please, sir, and tell the Court what your objections were to that


Q: (Continuing) presentation or that two model classroom approach?

A: Well, my first objection-

THE COURT: What page are you on?

THE WITNESS: I'm looking at page 4. It's not numbered sequentially all the way through.

THE COURT: Okay. I've got that page.

A: At the top of that page it says that the two models should be explained as alternative and mutually exclusive. "Either of the data support random mechanistic processes, no creator, or the data supports non-random intelligent design or a creator." I found that extremely objectionable.

Q: Are there any other science courses in the Little Rock School District that even mention a creator?

A: No.

Q: Will you turn to page 6 and tell the Court whether there is anything there that you have previously identified?

A: Yes. I might mention that the pages prior to that are discussing the two model approach, which is the basic gist of the entire document. But at the bottom of page 6, the last sentence, "Each individual should then prepare a paper of at least five hundred words giving their personal view."


Q: How does giving personal views on a scientific concept fit into the scheme of science education which applies to—

A: It has no place in the scheme of science.

THE COURT: Let me be sure I understand this, Mr. Cearley. Is he suggesting that a student may be taught that there is a creator or there is not, and that they have to then give a paper stating their personal views on whether or not there is a creator or not?

THE WITNESS: That's my understanding.

Q: Move on through that, if you will, Mr. Glasgow, and let me call your attention particularly to what is labeled, it's about five or six pages from the back on an unnumbered page, the label being "Likert Preference Scale"

A: Yes, I have that.

Q: Did you have any comment about that to the committee?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: Will you tell the court what that is, please?

A: Yes. First of all, a Likert Preference Scale is a series of statements in which you put an X on the blank next to the statement that you feel comes closest to your own ideas, and you mark only one X on this sheet. And it has a series of eleven statements.


A: (Continuing) Statement number five is that evolution occurred—

THE COURT: Excuse me. What page are you referring to?

MR. CEARLEY: It's an unnumbered page, your Honor, that from the back is page 7.

THE COURT: Is it at the Pre and Post test?

THE WITNESS: No, sir. It's eight pages from the back. I think it's immediately before the Pre-Post test.

MR. CEARLEY: It's labeled Likert Preference Scale.

THE COURT: Likert Preference Scale?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

Q: To what language are you referring on that page, Mr. Glasgow?

A: Number 5. The statement made is that, "Evolution occurred with the help of God." Number 10 is that, "Creation is a fact that has been proven by scientific studies." Number 11 is that, "Creation is a fact because God has revealed it to us." Keep in mind this is a series of statements that the students are supposed to respond which one, "Which statement do you feel comes closest to your ideas?"

Q: Are there other choices of that sort presented in the pre and post test for biology students?


A: Yes, I would say that there are. Your Honor, on the very next page, which is the pre and post test page, at the bottom of that page, part C, number 4, is the statement, one of several choices to choose from, I might add, "Life is the result of a creator's design."

Q: Is there another statement of that sort on page 4, Mr. Glasgow, of that text?

A: Yes. Under letter T, number 2, the question is, "Which one of these creation concepts seems most doubtful to you?" And number 2 is "A god of creation specially designed all life on this planet."

Q: Now, Mr. Glasgow, is this kind of presentation a part of any science course in the Little Rock District now?

A: No, it's certainly not.

Q: What effect do you think, as science coordinator supervisor, presentation of this kind of material would have on science education in Little Rock?

MR. CHILDS: Your Honor, I don't think there's been a showing that Mr. Glasgow would ever, in his professional opinion, institute anything such as this. And during his deposition he advised me that he would never recommend anything to anybody that had religious references. And I think that the plaintiffs are building a straw man and then very thoroughly kicking it.

And I don't think there's any showing—


THE COURT: Is Doctor Bliss going to be a witness in this case?

MR. CEARLEY: No, sir. But the plaintiffs' proof intends to establish that there are no other sources for this information other than these institutes.

THE COURT: Did Doctor Bliss actually hold this seminar?

THE WITNESS: As I mentioned earlier, I did not attend, but yes, that was my understanding.

THE COURT: Did anybody attend?

MR. KAPLAN: One of the witnesses attended.

MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, we will also have a deposition to offer into the record that indicates that the Fort Smith School District, in response to a request from its superintendent to prepare teachers to teach creation science, wrote to this same organization and received back material similar, if not identical, to these materials, in response to the fact that there is no other place to get materials.

MR. CHILDS: Well, your Honor, I think in Mr. Glasgow's deposition he indicated that it would be possible, as hard as it might be to believe, that the Little Rock School District people could actually develop their own materials. And I think that the plaintiffs are attempting to prove to the negative.


MR. CHILDS: (Continuing) They are trying to prove that in the whole universe there is no possible way that this material can be developed and it's impossible.

MR. CEARLEY: That's what our testimony will be, your Honor.

THE COURT: What's your objection? I understand you're making an argument, but do you have a legal objection to the evidence being legally inadmissible in some way?

MR. CHILDS: Yes, your Honor. I'm saying that this information, until there has been a showing that what Mr. Glasgow has been testifying about is going to be instituted in the Little Rock schools, that it's premature and it is irrelevant. And unless there is a showing that this is the only material that can be incorporated in the curriculum, it is also irrelevant.

THE COURT: Okay. That objection is overruled.

MR. CEARLEY: May I move on, your Honor?


MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

Q: My question, Mr. Glasgow, was what effect teaching pursuant to this kind of model would have on science education in the Little Rock District?

A: I think it would be extremely damaging to science


A: (Continuing) education in the Little Rock School District.

Q: Can you implement — Let me rephrase that. How would you, as science supervisor, implement the requirements of Act 590 to give balanced treatment to creation science?

A: I don't know. I don't think I can implement the provision of Act 590 to give balanced treatment.

Q: For what reasons? Can you do it without teaching religion or without religious references?

A: No. You see, there are religious references in the materials that are available, to my knowledge. I would object very strenuously to including religion. Of course, that wouldn't be allowed under any law that currently exists that I know of. And that's the only thing that's available, to my knowledge.

Q: Do you know whether there are materials available of a scientific nature that would be acceptable to you that would support creation science?

A: I haven't examined all of the scientific materials that are available, but I have found none whatsoever that would be suitable.

Q: Would teaching creation science, Mr. Glasgow, have any differing effect on students in the primary grades as opposed to junior high as opposed to high school?


A: In my opinion, it would.

Q: Would you tell the Court how and why?

A: I think at the primary level students are very trusting of their teachers. In fact, many primary students accidently, a slip of the tongue, I guess, call the teacher mom or daddy. And that they think the teacher is the authority in the classroom.

And when you present something like balanced treatment as far as Act 590 is concerned, I think the teacher is put in the standpoint of not really being able to present what is, what I would consider, science. Or they're really not able to say, this is the way or that's the way. They just have to throw it out there. And for students this young, just to throw it out there for them, in my opinion, would cause them to be insecure.

Secondly, even students at the primary level watch TV and they look at encyclopedias and other things such as this, and I think that looking at these sources of information, they would certainly have been aware at some time or other that most scientists think that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago.

And if the teacher is required to say something different than that, and if the teacher is not able to say when they ask, "Well, which is it? Why are you saying this and that and the TV show that I saw and the


A: (Continuing) encyclopedia that I read said that dinosaurs are millions of years old and you won't tell me?" I think it's damaging to the security of the student, and I think it lowers the students' opinion of the teacher. I think it causes great difficulty for the teacher in a situation like that.

Q: How do elementary school students or primary grade students relate to the concept of time?

A: Well, time is a skill which is developed or a skill in which development begins at that level. In fact, there is a very conscious attempt on the part of the school to develop concepts of time and space and distance and things of this sort. So in answer to that, they do not have a good concept of time and space.

Throughout the primary years and even in the intermediate schools, these are things that are tried to, that teachers try to deal with.

Q: Have you dealt with that in any workshop fashion for the primary grades?

A: Well, we have as far as teachers are concerned. We have an elementary science mini-course. By mini-course, I mean a short course lasting three hours, in this case, for primary teachers, that allows them to present the concept of geological time to students.

And in this workshop for teachers, one activity that we


A: (Continuing) undertake is the use of a string to indicate geological time.

Q: In what grade do you do this, Mr. Glasgow?

A: I can't say for sure. Second grade, I believe. Second or third, right at that level.

Q: Go ahead.

A: Two students get up at opposite ends of the room and they are holding a string that is stretched across the room. One student represents the beginning of the earth. Other students are placed along that string in accordance to the, like the first appearance of plants on earth, the first appearance of animals, whatever, the first appearance of the species, amphibians or reptiles, et cetera, and the first appearance of man.

And I might indicate that man is located at the opposite end from the beginning of the earth. There is just a short distance between the appearance of man on earth and the present.

This gives the student an idea of geological time, in that of all the geological time that scientists and geologists recognize, the appearance of man is just a very small part at the opposite end.

Q: Are these students who are involved in that demonstration are seven years old, eight years old?

A: Basically, yes. About that age.


Q: Would that require a balanced presentation under Act 590?

A: I think definitely that it would.

Q: How would you do that?

A: Well, other than getting a short string maybe a fraction of an inch long—

Q: If you had to do that, Mr. Glasgow, how would you try to do it?

A: I couldn't do it.

Q: Would there be a differing effect on students at the junior high school level?

A: In my opinion, there certainly would be. Junior high students teenagers, are sort of rebellious by nature. And I think they would go to almost any end — some of them would, not all — some of them would go to almost any end to catch the teacher in telling a falsehood of some sort.

And I think that if you had to implement Act 590 in the room, there would certainly be ample opportunity for students to try to catch the teacher doing wrong. And when they caught the teacher doing wrong, the teacher, in my opinion, wouldn't even have the option of explaining, well, this or that. It's just out there and, as I understand it, you lay it out and the student choose, more or less.


A: (Continuing) I think the students in this sort of a circus atmosphere would lose respect for the teacher, the teacher would lose respect for himself or herself, and it would be very degrading and very damaging to the science classes.

Q: And would your thoughts differ on high school students, say, in an advanced biology course?

A: I think we have fairly sophisticated students at the twelfth grade level in advanced biology. Many of these students go off to the major universities throughout the country. I think that they could see through this attempt to try to give legitimacy to two things that in the scientific community aren't equally legitimate. In fact, one has no legitimacy at all.

And I think that they would just, you know, think, `Well, teacher doesn't know what they're talking about. I don't buy that.' And perhaps because of that attitude, they might not buy into other things that might be presented during that course.

Q: Does the subject of religion ever come up in biology classes?

A: Well, I can't answer that for sure. I would say that in the context of presenting religion as a integral part or, indeed, any part of a science course, no. I would say, also, that since Act 590 has been in the


A: (Continuing) news, I'm sure that almost all of our biology teachers in the district have informed the students as to what Act 590 is and what it's all about so that they could keep up with it on the news, et cetera.

Q: What is the educational purpose as you see it in teaching creation science under Act 590?

MR. CHILDS: Your Honor, I really don't think that would be in this particular witness' area of expertise. It would be pure speculation, and I would object to that very much.

THE COURT: It's overruled.

A: I do not think there would be an educational purpose at all. In fact, it would be damaging as far as education is concerned.

Q: What is the situation within the Little Rock School District right now with regard to its ability to hire qualified science teachers?

A: Well, oddly enough, the supply of teachers in the nation as a whole and certainly in Arkansas is such that usually you have quite a few to select from. But in the areas of science and math, there is still a shortage of teachers in the state of Arkansas, and we have a great deal of difficulty in getting qualified teachers in those areas.

Q: Do primary grade science teachers have a solid


(Continuing) science background?

A: No, they do not, unfortunately.

Q: Do you perceive any effect on the district's ability to hire science teachers by implementation of Act 590?

A: There is no question in my mind that it would greatly hinder the district's effort to hire science teachers.

Q: Finally, Mr. Glasgow, can you tell the Court, if you know, what you will do or if you have any plans to implement Act 590?

A: Do I have any present plans? The answer is certainly no. Do I have any future plans? I don't know. I can't see any way that I can do it. I don't know how I can do it. I can't formulate plans if I don't know how. It's rather difficult to answer that question.

MR. CEARLEY: No further questions.

THE COURT: Let me ask you a couple of questions dealing with the definition of sections. In section 4 (a), I assume you've given this some thought and read what little material there is, but how do you propose to explain the `sudden creation of the universe' unless you have reference to the creator, or divine creation? Do you know of any way? Is there anything in the literature anywhere?


THE WITNESS: No, sir. I might mention regarding all these definitions, I grew up in Nashville, Arkansas, in a Baptist church, a very, you might classify it a fundamentalist religion. The first time I came across any of these particular ideas, as such, was in my Sunday School class.

THE COURT: I appreciate that, but I'm trying to figure out if there is any way you've thought of to accommodate some practical questions that I can imagine will come from the students about, for instance, the worldwide flood. How are you going to suggest to the teachers that they respond to those questions?

THE WITNESS: I can't suggest. There is no scientific evidence that I have ever heard of that would indicate that there was a worldwide flood. I would have extreme difficulty in thinking or imagining how water could cover the entire earth, all the tall mountains, et cetera all over the earth at one time.

I don't know— I can't think of any way. I know of no materials that could be used. I couldn't even suggest to the teachers how they could give balanced treatment to that without bringing in religion.

THE COURT: What is your interpretation of `relatively recent inception of the earth and living kinds'?


[Page is missing.]

Transcript continued on next page