Sex Education Classes Continued, Expanded

Sex education in the Ann Arbor elementary schools will remain. By a 5-2 vote, the Ann Arbor Board of Education voted last night to continue the family life and sex education program and to enlarge it to include all youngsters in kindergarten, first and fifth grades at all local elementary schools during the 1969-70 school year. The program had previously been conducted in 11 pilot schools. Next year's program will be slightly revised. The expansión will not take place until a number of revisions recommended by Asst. Supt. for Instruction Sam M. Sniderman and the Office of Instruction have been implemented. Sniderman told the board that the revised Ann Arbor program dovetaüs closely with the guidelines on sex education which have been recommended to the State Board of Education. Of these 68 guidelines applicable to the Ann Arbor program, 58 have been included, he said. The guidelines have not yet been adopted. The board also approved the development of a sex education curriculum guide for grades two and six. The program in these grades may be piloted during the 1970-71 school year. The controversial sex education program, which triggered a campaign by se'veral local groups to hav e i t scrapped, was adopted over the strenuous objectioms of Trustee Paul H. Johnson. Johnson called the program a ''monster which you are trying to turn into a prftace charming." Voting in favor of the gram, which followed a lowkeyed 2 % - hour discussion attended by about 40 persons, were President Harold J. Lockett and Trustees Charles H. Good, Cecil W. Warner, Ronald Bishop and Henry Johnson. Casting negative ballots were Ted Heusel and Paul Johnson. Absent were Trustees Richard M. Wood and Joseph T. A. Lee. The sex education program which will be offered next year- probably during the second semester - is essentially the same program offered during the past two years. But several changes have been included, such as: I -The first-grade program will put "major focus" on "family role definitions and body anatomy," with only "minimum coverage" of the reproductive process. During the past two years the first-grade program gave quite detailed information on reproduction. A survey taken last month by the schools' Office of Research, however, indicated that 58 per cent of the parents who responded feel that the topic of human reproduction should not be introduced until sometime after the first grade. - More emphaiss on "value systems" related to human sexuality will be included in the fifth-grade program. - ' - More "correlated ties" for school and home i regarding the program will be developed for students in kindergarten, first and fifth grade. . -Opportunities for parental involvement in the program wil be expanded. This will include parent meetings by grade level at each school, during which the parents wilí be able to review the i ais and concepts presented chanem ! Suestins for teSuouuLrevï: of the aPPropriateneïfo g;naSUdree tevel and concepts íau'ght Coegraanm: mPOrtant - -in-service education for -A consultant in health development of all aspects of Jucation $L Most of the school board Jr n ' ■ Sc,Ott Waterman Jr spoke in favor of continumg and expanding the pro gram. Westerman saM the 1 rev,sions were the product of l "long evaluation' and ave his "support and acouragement " d The superintendent a 1 s o gave his personal opinión on sex education in the elementary schools, saying he thinks it is needed to give youngsters a "healthy perspective" on sex. He added that sex education doesn't "develop fears" in children but instead 'allays fears." School Board President Lockett called the revised program a "good" one and a "highly acceptable" one. He stressed that constant review of the materials is one of the "most vital" aspects of the program. Paul Johnson blasted the program as "the most cleverly organized sale of a shoddy product I have ever seen in my legislative experience." Johnson said the majority of "concerned" parents were not against sex education I grams per se, but were opposed to the Ann Arbor method of instruction and materials and to the age at which the subject is I duced to the children. Johnson decried the program for killing "childhood innocence," and added: "When we créate a monster, we haven't got the guts to kill it, and I think we have created a monster here . . ." Heusel said he could not vote for the program because of the large number of Ann Arborites apparently opposed to it. He reminded the board that Ivan R. Kemp, a school board candidate last month whose main platform was opposition to sex education, polled more than 6,000 votes I June 9 - about one-third of I the electorate. 1 Warner, while voting l'of the program, said he still was not convinced formal sex education is needed before the fourth or fifth grade. Warner said the courses shouldn't be given to the children "if they're not ready for it." The small crowd which attended last night's meeting seemed about equally divided for and against the sex education program. One father charged that the questionnaire sent to the parents last month were "very general and ambiguous," making the conclusions "relatively invalid." This survey said that 74 per cent of parents who responded to the questionnaires said the present Ann Arbor sex education program should be continued "with little or no revisión." A physician was very critical of the program, citing the "general moral decay" ín Denmark and Sweden which he elaimed was the result of general sex education. And he said the same thing could be expected in the United States if the programs are "not properly done." A Thurston School father, Jerry Zalenka, said there has been more "negative response" to sex education then to any other issue except high taxes. "But you're not listening,"he told the trustees. Mrs. Sara Hellwarth cited statistics that the venereal disease rate in Genesee I ty is nearly doublé that of the Michigan average, and she said that county has had I eral sex education since 1962. I She called it a "God-given privilege" to edúcate her children on the subject I self.