Schools not ‘proxy arenas’

I believe this is the way to go, as highlighted earlier by some parents who vehemently argued that there should be this choice, given that some of the topics in secondary schools are very, very sensitive, and could spell the child’s future as ‘good’ or ‘bad’…

----------

Facts must be taught in the context of mainstream society’s values: Minister

Alicia Wong, alicia@mediacorp.com.sg

THERE will be new layers of stringent vetting, periodic classroom audits, and more information laid out for parents concerned about just what exactly their children are learning about sex and sexuality in school.

Prior to yesterday’s announced enhancements to the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) sexuality education framework, schools had had the autonomy to engage external organisations, both faith-based and secular, to conduct the courses. Two-thirds did so last year.

But recently, some parents were shocked to learn that the Association of Women for Action and Research’s (Aware) programme used by some schools, depicted anal sex as “natural” and “healthy”, and termed “homosexuality” a neutral word.

Clearing all doubt about his ministry’s stance yesterday, Dr Ng emphasised that the guiding principles of the MOE’s framework for sexuality education remained the same as when they were spelt out in 2000: Parents would bear the main responsibility, and facts must be taught in the context of mainstream society’s values.

“Let me make it clear to you what this means, so that there is no ambiguity. This means encouraging heterosexual married couples to have healthy relationships and to build stable nuclear and extended family units,” Dr Ng stressed. At the same time, he warned against groups seeking to use the schools as “proxy arenas” to push their own beliefs.

Citing how schools were dragged into the recent melee, Dr Ng said parents have the right to express concern if they thought groups like Aware were teaching liberal values “ahead of the mainstream”. But Singapore “must not go down” the United States way, “where schools become the proxy battleground for the Christian right and gay interest groups to settle arguments. Issues will not be resolved that way”.

And likewise, while some parents may learn to embrace their homosexual children, “schools are not the place to try to push for these outcomes, which are ahead of present societal norms”, he said.

Which is why parents will soon be empowered with more information about the programmes being taught, as well as opt-out choices, so they can decide if they want their children to partake of specific activities, or even the entire programme.

But can a programme espousing mainstream values truly engage youth questioning or experimenting with their sexual orientation, or engaging in pre-marital sex?

Dr Ng said, parents of students who require more help will be notified, and given the choice to attend workshops and even have their children provided more information on contraception.

As for students who don’t want their parents to be informed, teachers will have to help in “practical” ways. “Those are problems on the ground ... systems-wise, we would want to stick to a principle where parents must still be responsible for their children,” said Dr Ng.

Mr Edward Ong, president of The Singapore Planned Parenthood Association (SPPA), suggests that students who “develop different sexual orientation or experiment with alternative practices can be referred for appropriate counseling and expert advice that would be most helpful for them”.

The SPPA has offered sexuality education programmes for over 20 years, and Mr Ong believed the new requirements – which include a stringent vetting process of external vendors by the MOE and periodic audits – would not hamper the group’s continued involvement. It is important to reassure parents “considering the recent overblown issues”, he said.

And some parents are, indeed, pleased. Mrs Peggy Ng, in her 40s, said: “It is important that MOE tightens control and vet through the content thoroughly. The teachers teaching these topics should also be screened and trained to teach based on guidelines.”

From TODAYOnline.com – Friday, 22-May-2009; see the source article here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama On LGBT Issues: Reverses US Position At UN Conference (huffingtonpost.com)
• Obama Opposes LGBT Discrimination at UN (firedoglake.com)
• Warning over narcissistic pupils (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Obama Admin To Endorse UN Gay Rights Declaration That Bush Refused To Sign (huffingtonpost.com)
• The heterogeneity of homosexuality. (slate.com)
• The problem with "having sex" (northbynorthwestern.com)
• The One About Gay Marriage Opponents Seem To Want It Both Ways. (the-one-about.blogspot.com)
• Sex education 'to be compulsory' in all state schools (telegraph.co.uk)

Aware’s, other sex-ed courses put on hold

Ong Dai Lin and Alicia Wong, dailin@mediacorp.com.sg

-----

THE schools had found the workshops appropriate and did not get any negative feedback from pupils and parents.

But now, the Ministry of Education (MOE) has suspended the sex education programme by the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) after looking at its instructors' guide.

Sex education programmes by all other external vendors have also been suspended so they can be subjected to a more stringent vetting process.

The MOE has found a need for improvement in the "internal processes" for selecting and monitoring vendors to ensure they follow its framework for sexuality programmes.

Aware's Comprehensive Sexuality Education programme did not conform "in some aspects" to these guidelines, the MOE said in a letter to the media. In particular, parts of Aware's instructors' guide "convey messages which could promote homosexuality or suggest approval of pre-marital sex".

Aware president Dana Lam told Today she is "not surprised" by the MOE's decision. "It goes to reason MOE will have to do something (given the public interest in the programme). We're also open to seeing what has to be done," said Ms Lam.

As the women's group prepares to review and modify its instructor guide if needed, it will keep the CSE's key principle of informing young people to make choices according to the values of their upbringing, Ms Lam added. "We stand by the programme. After all, we've been running it for almost two years."

In a statement yesterday, Aware said, "Like all instructor guides, ours contains far more information than is used.

"The guide includes possible responses for instructors should certain topics, such as homosexuality and premarital sex, be raised during the sessions. They're not necessarily the responses actually used, as our instructors always use language and terms appropriate to their audience."

Ms Charlotte Wong, vice-president of the ousted Aware executive committee, told Today that MOE "is doing the right thing".

"Aware keeps shouting about providing choice and empowering the youth in decision-making in their sexual life ... On the other hand, CSE does not talk about abstinence; they steer clear from abstinence as choice," said Ms Wong on a personal note. Saying that she felt a "sense of calm" after hearing the news, she added that if the CSE sticks to MOE guidelines and caters to a majority of conservative parents, "we shall be all right".

For some parents, the suspension of the CSE programme is a welcome move. Ms Geraldine Wee, a mother of a seven-year-old boy, said: "It's good that people's views are respected ... Asian parents are generally conservative."

The 29-year-old scriptwriter said: "I was an unwed mother so it's even more important for me that my child has the right values and doesn't make the same mistake."

Soon, parents will know more about the sex education programmes in their child's school. The MOE is looking at ways to provide this information — which Ms Wee welcomed because "we should have a role to decide what the child is taught".

When contacted for further queries on its letter, a MOE spokesperson told Today it has received more than 100 emails and phone calls, "many providing similar feedback".

An online petition expressing concerns about Aware's CSE programme, and supposedly to be given to MOE, is also being circulated — with 7,000 signatories so far.

The debate caused by Aware's workshops for secondary schools has even generated argument about sexuality issues being raised in General Paper (GP) classes in junior colleges.

MOE is investigating materials used during these lessons that carry information on alternative lifestyles.

Pioneer Junior College principal Tan-Kek Lee Yong, for example, told Today the school had removed a presentation slide on family and culture, which showed two females kissing, after feedback from a parent.

Mrs Tan said the context of the slide was "sociological" and "clearly academic" with "factual information next to the picture".

She added: "Such materials, which students can easily retrieve (when they do research for GP), should be contextualized within societal norms for discussion so that students receive appropriate guidance."

-----

From TODAY, News – Thursday, 07-May-2009

Related articles by Zemanta

• Christian Teacher Ousted After Complaining About Gay Tolerance Training (queerty.com)
• Sex education 'to be compulsory' in all state schools (telegraph.co.uk)
• Teenage girls don't choose pregnancy (guardian.co.uk)
• Parental Notification Bill: Not in Children's Best Interests (bilerico.com)
• Faith schools and their errors (guardian.co.uk)
• Carnal knowledge (boston.com)