Elida school board debates sexual abuse awareness instruction – LimaOhio.com
Elida school board debates sexual abuse awareness instruction LimaOhio.com
sdgtalks
Elida Schools to Show Sexual Abuse Prevention Videos to Students
Former Elida High School principal Darren Sharp asks the Elida school board to reject a proposal that would require parents to provide written consent for their children to watch sexual abuse prevention videos. The district, which currently allows parents to opt out of the program, will show the videos to K-6 students next week, in accordance with state law.
Mackenzi Klemann | The Lima News
Introduction
Elida schools will be implementing a new state law by showing sexual abuse prevention videos to students in kindergarten through sixth grade this week.
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
- Goal 4: Quality Education
- Goal 5: Gender Equality
- Goal 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
Background
Last year, Ohio lawmakers passed legislation requiring schools to provide age-appropriate sexual abuse instruction for children in grades K-6 and teen dating violence and sexual violence instruction for grades 7-12.
Parent Complaints
The Elida school board held a special session to address parent complaints about the age appropriateness of some of the videos. The debate centered around parental consent and board oversight of instructional materials.
Approved Videos
- The videos are produced by the Barbara Sinatra Children’s Center.
- They are one of nine lesson plans approved by the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce as age-appropriate for elementary students.
Concerns Raised
Board member Jaired Birks raised concerns about two videos from the Fight Child Abuse program, which parents flagged as potentially inappropriate for elementary-age children due to discussion of grooming, online sexual exploitation, and sexting.
Opt-In Policy Proposal
Birks and another board member, David Peters, proposed a motion to postpone the program and revise district policy so parents would need to opt their child in before students could watch the videos. They argued that parents should have the right to decide whether their children should watch such material.
Video Content for K-6 Students
The videos for K-6 students cover simpler topics like safe vs. unsafe touching and cyberbullying. They do not describe sex acts.
Parent Notification
Elida schools notified parents of the upcoming lessons via email on April 24, providing a link for parents to review the materials ahead of time. Parents who wish to excuse their children must notify the district in writing by Monday.
Opt-Out vs. Opt-In
The district currently allows parents to opt their children out of sexual abuse prevention instruction, but does not require permission slips to be signed. Birks and Peters argued for an opt-in policy instead, but Superintendent Joel Mengerink cautioned against it, citing the potential for abusive parents to exploit the opt-in approach.
Board Oversight of Curriculum
Peters and Birks pushed for greater board oversight of curriculum, questioning why the board did not review or approve the Fight Child Abuse program in advance. They cited a board policy requiring adoption of an evidence-based awareness-prevention curriculum approved by ODEW, which they claimed had not been followed in this case.
Board Authority and Meeting Necessity
Debate arose regarding the board’s authority to approve curriculum versus instructional materials, as well as the
SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis
1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?
- SDG 4: Quality Education
- SDG 5: Gender Equality
- SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
The article discusses the implementation of sexual abuse prevention videos in Elida schools, which is related to SDG 4 (Quality Education) as it aims to provide age-appropriate instruction on sexual abuse prevention. It also touches on SDG 5 (Gender Equality) as it addresses the importance of teaching children about consent and preventing sexual violence. Additionally, the article mentions the role of the school board in overseeing instructional materials, which relates to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions) in terms of ensuring accountability and transparency in educational decision-making.
2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?
- Target 4.7: By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles.
- Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.
- Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels.
Based on the article’s content, the specific targets that can be identified are Target 4.7, which emphasizes the acquisition of knowledge and skills needed for sustainable development, including education on sexual abuse prevention. Target 5.2 focuses on eliminating all forms of violence against women and girls, including sexual exploitation, which is addressed through the implementation of sexual abuse prevention videos. Target 16.7 highlights the importance of inclusive and participatory decision-making, which is discussed in relation to the school board’s oversight of instructional materials.
3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?
- Indicator 4.7.1: Extent to which (i) global citizenship education and (ii) education for sustainable development are mainstreamed in (a) national education policies; (b) curricula; (c) teacher education; and (d) student assessment.
- Indicator 5.2.1: Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to physical, sexual, or psychological violence by a current or former intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by form of violence and by age.
- Indicator 16.7.1: Proportions of positions (by sex, age, persons with disabilities, and population groups) in public institutions (national and local legislatures, public service, and judiciary) compared to national distributions.
The article does not explicitly mention indicators related to the identified targets. However, Indicator 4.7.1 can be used to measure progress towards Target 4.7 by assessing the extent to which education on sustainable development and global citizenship is integrated into national education policies, curricula, teacher education, and student assessment. Indicator 5.2.1 can measure progress towards Target 5.2 by examining the proportion of women and girls who experience physical, sexual, or psychological violence by an intimate partner. Indicator 16.7.1 can assess progress towards Target 16.7 by comparing the proportions of different population groups in public institutions to national distributions.
4. Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators
| SDGs | Targets | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| SDG 4: Quality Education | Target 4.7: By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles. | Indicator 4.7.1: Extent to which (i) global citizenship education and (ii) education for sustainable development are mainstreamed in (a) national education policies; (b) curricula; (c) teacher education; and (d) student assessment. |
| SDG 5: Gender Equality | Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation. | Indicator 5.2.1: Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to physical, sexual, or psychological violence by a current or former intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by form of violence and by age. |
| SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions | Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels. | Indicator 16.7.1: Proportions of positions (by sex, age, persons with disabilities, and population groups) in public institutions (national and local legislatures, public service, and judiciary) compared to national distributions. |
Copyright: Dive into this article, curated with care by SDG Investors Inc. Our advanced AI technology searches through vast amounts of data to spotlight how we are all moving forward with the Sustainable Development Goals. While we own the rights to this content, we invite you to share it to help spread knowledge and spark action on the SDGs.
Fuente: limaohio.com
Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.
