This recent research is pertinent to Elmbrook’s ongoing discussion of Human Growth and Development curriculum in the classroom. From Reuters:
“However, our research shows that this supposed substitution of oral sex for vaginal sex is largely a myth. There is no good evidence that teens who have not had intercourse engage in oral sex with a series of partners.”
Back to the drawing board, Elmbrook. Your premise has just been ruled false.
20 responses so far ↓
1 Kathryn // May 20, 2008 at 1:23 pm
I’m guessing you didn’t read the whole article. It said that teens don’t choose oral sex in order to claim that they are technically virgins. It did claim that 55% of teens surveyed admit to engaging in the practice, and that the numbers were higher among more-affluent white teens.
2 Cindy Kilkenny // May 20, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Kathryn, of course I read the article.
The point is that Elmbrook has been claimed this very premise - that students substitute oral sex because they don’t call it sex - as a reason to teach children as young as 6th grade the details of oral sex. This research debunks the premise.
That students are sexually active is another issue.
3 Dan Harland // May 20, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Well Cindy, I think the article strongly concludes that there SHOULD be education for oral sex:
“Counseling and education should take into account total STI risk by addressing the full range of behaviors that teens engage in, including oral and anal sex.”
4 Cindy Kilkenny // May 20, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Yes, the article did. Jeez. Can’t you guys get to the idea of one false premise? All I’m saying is that Elmbrook can’t use that one anymore.
I’m sure they’ll think of something else.
5 Kathryn // May 20, 2008 at 1:56 pm
I’ve made that claim (not calling it sex) to anyone who would listen; I’m not sure if the district did.
Not calling it sex (ala Monica) is not the same as looking for a loophole to claim virginity. (Why would anyone do that? Abstinence pledge?) The article only says they aren’t looking for a technicality to claim virginity. Either way, the claim that teens need information because they are sexually active really IS the issue.
6 Kelly Frank // May 20, 2008 at 2:09 pm
So, what is more important in this debate, I’m confused. Is it the reason that is given by the district as to why kids are doing what they are doing or the fact that kids are doing what they are doing. Let’s not squabble over the details.
Kids are having oral sex at an age younger than most of us would like to believe. We can’t turn a blind eye to it. Teens and pre-teens need to have the best information that they can be given in order to keep themselves safe. While I think that parents should be the ones to have these conversations, I can’t trust that every parent will actually sit down and talk to their children about it.
My parents didn’t talk to me about it, I got it from school and friends. My parents handed me the “Where did I come from?” book, told me to read it, then asked if I had any questions. That was it for sex ed from my parents. In the cartoon drawings of that book, there was no teaching on OS, STDs, or anything else of any consequence. I don’t think that I was alone in my experience of “the sex talk” (or lack thereof) with my parents.
That said, I believe that schools have a responsibility to teach the FACTS. As far as OS, kids are doing it and need to know what the consequences can be from engaging in this type of behavior. If you would prefer to have these conversations with your kids on your own, opt out of the school teachings. But, the rest of the kids in the class probably would benefit from the lessons.
7 Libby // May 20, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Kelly -
Why do you believe/insist schools have the “responsibility” to teach the facts? Schools are not responsible for our children’s education. WE (as parents) are responsible for our children’s education. “Schools” are just one method of providing that education.
8 Kelly Frank // May 20, 2008 at 9:27 pm
To a certain extent I disagree with that statement, Libby. It is our responsibility as a parent to be sure that our children receive a good education. But, is it my responsibility to review every specific lesson plan or to read the text books cover to cover so that I know every detail of what my kids are learning? No, that’s where I have to trust my district and teachers. That’s where their responsibility comes in. The schools’ responsibility is not to parent my children, but to educate them. The facts are a part of that education.
I believe that a public school has a responsibility to teach sex ed. I think that it is a public safety issue. Kids need to learn what sex is, how parts work, what can go wrong, and future implications of decisions made now. Why is this a public safety issue? If kids don’t have the necessary information to make good choices in terms of their health, the consequences of their actions affect others around them. STDs can be passed to others, families and the public will have to support unintended pregnancies, our medical systems have to support people who contract terminal diseases.
These are all preventable with education and the facts. If you don’t agree, then private schools, homeschooling, or pulling your kids out of the public school classes where facts are discussed are your options. I understand that people are uncomfortable with the earlier age that these facts need to be discussed, but we can’t put our head in the sand on this. The information needs to get out in order for teens to make the choices. It does no good to introduce these topics to 16 year olds - we are years too late and have failed the kids.
9 Cindy Kilkenny // May 20, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Oh, Kelly, we’ve a major disagreement here. Public education is meant for everyone. I feel that your comment, “If you don’t agree, then private schools, homeschooling, or pulling your kids out of the public school classes where facts are discussed are your options” is very arrogant.
If a majority influencing the curriculum for the district feels that restraints are in order, then restraints are to be ordered. It’s not the administration’s decision. Or even yours.
10 Kelly Frank // May 20, 2008 at 10:05 pm
I agree with you that the majority of parents can “decide” the curriculum. But, until you survey all parents, you have no idea who is in the majority. You and I can sit here all night arguing that each of our views are the majority, but neither of us know for sure.
I’m just putting out there that there is a differing viewpoint than yours. I don’t believe that I am alone in my opinion on this subject. And, if by stating my opinion it is viewed as arrogant, then I am in great company with many posters on this blog.
11 Cindy Kilkenny // May 20, 2008 at 10:08 pm
I’m sorry, I should have been more articulate. I would consider a “majority influencing” to be the current board and to some extent the HG&D group. It appears they are leaning more conservative than the initial administrative plans, and that pleases me.
I agree, my opinion is certainly not the only opinion.
12 Libby // May 20, 2008 at 10:47 pm
Kelly,
Can you even begin to imagine what our teachers and students could accomplish if schools did not have to waste precious educational time picking up the slack for parents who are either too lazy or too immature to cover “public safety issues” at home? When are we going to stop letting parents get away with this “hands off” approach to parenting start demanding that they take responsibility for their own children’s education and social well-being? We live in a community where an over-whelming majority of parents are educated. Many of them are HIGHLY educated. They are not incapable of teaching their children the “facts.” If we were talking about a community with a high number of teen parents, or uneducated families - then your argument MIGHT hold water. That, however, is not the case in here. There is no NEED for the schools to take over. We are simply allowing it to happen.
The problem, Kelly, is that it is not just sex ed that the schools have taken over for parents - it is dental health, shoe tying, alcohol and drug prevention curriculum, abuse curriculum, stranger curriculum, basic nutrition - the list of social topics goes on and on and on. It is a wonder our children have any time left in the day to learn the basics of education, because every minute spent on topics that *could* (and I would argue, *should*) be easily addressed at home is a minute taken away from the core subjects.
When I was teaching, my district asked each classroom to devote time during National Education Week to creating projects that would promote our public schools. My school expected that each classroom would take time out of the school day to color educational themes on to grocery bags that would then be used at the local store. What a waste of time. Every year I made the same proposal, “How about the district celebrates National Education Week by simply allowing us to actually TEACH!” My suggestion repeatedly fell on deaf ears. Why? Schools have also bought into the idea that it is their “responsibility” to provide these community service messages to students.
Are you at all familiar with home schooling? Home schooling families typically spend only a couple of hours a day on school work, and yet manage to cover the same amount of material - if not more. How? Simple…they don’t have to add in all of the other “social” junk in to their school day.
Our public schools could certainly learn a thing or two from this model.
13 Libby // May 20, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Sorry Kelly, one more thing.
You said, “It is our responsibility as a parent to be sure that our children receive a good education.”
You then went on to say, “But, is it my responsibility to review every specific lesson plan or to read the text books cover to cover so that I know every detail of what my kids are learning?”
How can you be certain your child is receiving a “good” education if you don’t know exactly what it is that they are learning? Is it simply because someone told you your child was getting a “good” education? This is what I mean by “hands off” parenting. Parents don’t want to take responsibility for their children’s learning. They are all too willing and eager to “trust” that someone else will pick up the slack.
14 Kelly Frank // May 20, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Perhaps I need to go to medical school to ensure my child is receiving adequate medical care as well. I “trust” that the teachers in our district are hard working, smart and well educated. I do not intend for them to pick up the “slack” I expect them to do their job and do it well. I am involved in my kids education and will continue to be. If not reading every textbook cover to cover makes a parent “hands off” I am afraid you have a small number of parents that will achieve your high standards. I will be able to judge the value of my childrens’ education for myself, namely by watching their progession. I do not agree your standards are reasonable or necessary.
15 Shawn Matson // May 21, 2008 at 1:01 am
Libby, because education is a holistic journey, not a to-do list of facts to be memorized or lessons to be taught.
(in response to your question about not checking every lesson plan)
And can I just throw in that in families where both parents work 40 or more hours a week, it’s kind of hard to scrutinize every single lesson etc.
16 Libby // May 21, 2008 at 7:53 am
Kelly,
I never suggested that the teachers in our district were not hard working, smart or well educated. My point was that schools have been burdened with teaching subjects that could and should be covered at home. Some in society argue that schools must because parents don’t. I argue that parents don’t because they know they won’t have to - the school will do it for them. (Pick up the slack.)
Allow me to rephrase my second point. Not reading every textbook or lesson plan does not make one a “hands off” parent. Simply “trusting” that your children are receiving a “good”, accurate or complete education because they are attending a highly-rated school or have a good teacher does. (For that matter, simply “trusting” that a doctor is infallible and all-knowing also falls short. This is why second opinions are so important.)
If you believe that all one needs to do is observe your child’s “progression” to fully understand the scope and quality of education he/she receives, then you will LOVE the district’s new report card system. It will tell you all you apparently want or need to know.
Shawn -
Education is a holistic journey? Perhaps the concept of “learning” could be considered a holistic journey…but education is primarily systematic and sequential. Furthermore, are you suggesting that working parents are absolved from taking responsibility for their children’s education simply because they are too busy?
17 Dan Harland // May 21, 2008 at 10:10 am
Hell I was IN the schools and never read the text books cover to cover! And Kelly look in to the medical school thing, its worthwhile having a doctor in the family - turns out they make good parents too.
I think we need to find a happy medium between the views presented here. Parents shouldn’t just send their kids to school and expect that in a few years the Elmbrook Farm System will raise up a college bound 18 year old. I am where I am today because of a excellent group of teachers and two excellent parents who invested heavily in my education. They didn’t just check my report cards or sign my notebook when I said they needed too, they were involved in the process. That being said, I don’t think my parents were behind the scenes checking my algebraic proofs or brushing up on The Whiskey Rebellion while I was at school.
Libby and Kelly - ya gotta meet in the middle on this one. And Shawn, I hear ya on the 40-hour week thing - think too about the dedication in single parent homes!
18 Libby // May 21, 2008 at 11:29 am
You have to remember, Dan, that this conversation started in relation to the teaching of “social” issues and where a parent’s responsibility ends or a school’s begins.
That being said, however, who do we ultimately assign blame to if a child doesn’t learn something? The school, because it wasn’t taught…or the parent, because they did not make certain it was learned?
19 Libby // May 21, 2008 at 11:31 am
Yikes, “…it was learned” sounds awkward there. Any ideas how that could have been worded differently?
20 Shawn Matson // May 21, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Libby, I never said parents were absolved. I said it’s A LOT easier said than done.
Leave a Comment