1 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION In re: House Bill 2277 Parent and Pupil Protection Act

* * * *

Stenographic report of hearing held in auditorium of the Gateway High School, Monroeville Pennsylvania,

Friday October 14, 19 88 9:00 a.m.

HON. RONALD COWELL, CHAIRMAN

MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Hon. John Davies Hon. Victor Lescovitz Hon. Stephen Fremd Hon. jess Stairs Hon. Gerard Kosinski Hon. Paul Wass

Also Present: Hon. Joseph Markosek Frank Christopher, Executive Director Janice Bissett, Research Analyst Greg White, Research Analyst Vicki Keller, Committee Staff

Reported by: Ann-Marie P. Sweeney, Reporter

ANN-MARIE P. SWEENEY 536 ORRS BRIDGE ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 2 INDEX PAGE Dr. Paul Johnson, PA Assn. School Administrators 5 Beth Worstell, Senior, Woodlands Hills 15 School District William Logan, Deputy Commissioner, Office 20 of Basic Education, Dept. of Education R. Thomas Forr, Esquire, Altoona, PA 47 Edna Mills, Somerset, PA 57 Al Fondy, President, PA Federation of Teachers 62 Anne Barbera, Somerset, PA 85 James Stevens, Vice president, Pennsylvania 98 State Education Association Stanley Wills, Educational Services Division, 109 PA State Education Association Vivian Malits, Pittsburgh, PA 110 Mary Winter, Pittsburgh, PA 117 Mary Drumm, Erie, PA 118 Susan Greenberg, President, Board of Directors 131 Franklin Regional School District Pamela Cook, American Assn. of university Women 144 William p. Kimmel, Member, PA State Board 149 of Education Dr. Dennis E. Murray, Superintendent 156 Altoona Area School District Dr. Fred Smeigh, Asst. Supt. for Secondary 167 Education, Altoona Area School District Mary Ann Pekar, Pittsburgh, PA 174 Chris Niebrzydowski, President, PA NOW 180 Lee Ruffner, Jr., Ford City, PA 190 John Soboslay, Director of Governmental Liaison, 193 Pittsburgh Public School District Frances Reily, Pittsburgh, PA 199 Dr. George Dull, Guidance Counselor 207 3

INDEX (cont.'d) PAGE Fred Dean, Supervisor, Health, Phys. Education 220 Health Services, Gateway School District J. Kevin Scanlon, Pittsburgh, PA 235 Eunice Evans, Johnstown, PA 242 Mary Moses, president, people Concerned for 242 Quality Education in the Norwin School Dist. Elda Billings, Portage, PA 250 Cecile Hecker, Coalition for Parents' Rights 258 Alan Carson, Health and Phys. Education Dept. 264 Coordinator, Quaker valley School District Clarence McMillan, President, Pittsburgh Chapter 269 American Family Association Ruth Burig, School Nurse, Shaler Area School Dist. 279 Dr. C. Paul Banks II, School psychologist, 286 penn Hills School District Helen Cindrich, People Concerned for Unborn Child 289 Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, Pittsburgh, PA 304 Kathleen Greenawalt, Indiana, PA 318 Bethann Detwiler, Concerned Women for America 325 Anita Hoge, West Alexander, PA 333 Kathryn Forsyth, Pittsburgh, PA 346 Nancy Orban, Somerset, PA 352

INDEX TO EXHIBITS PAGE Dr. Paul Johnson 358 Al Fondy 388 James Stevens 390 Susan Greenberg 402 Pamela Cook 420 Dr. Dennis E. Murray 425 Chuck Pascal 444 J. Kevin Scanlon 453 Elda Billings 459 Anita Hoge 464 4 CHAIRMAN COWELL: The hour of 9:00 o'clock having arrived, we will call to order this public hearing which is being conducted by the House Education Committee. The subject of today's hearing is House Bill 2277, the proposed parent and Pupil Protection Act. I'm State Representative Ron Cowell, and I'm chairman of the Education Committee. During the course of the day we expect to be joined from time to time by other members of the committee. I do want to recognize and thank him for his presence, a member of the House who is not a member of our committee but who does represent the Gateway School District and surrounding communities, and that's Representative joe Markosek, who is over on the side here. Joe, thanks for being here. I also want to thank the Gateway School District for their kind hospitality. Our committee has had occasion to have public hearings in Allegheny County from time to time and on several occasions we have benefitted from the generous hospitality of the Gateway School District and the current superintendent, Dr. William Doyle. So we want to express our thanks to them. This is the third and final scheduled hearing in a series of hearings pertaining to House Bill 2277. We previously had hearings in Harrisburg and two 5 weeks ago we were in Philadelphia. Today's agenda is full. We have witnesses scheduled through approximately 5:15 this afternoon. I want to emphasize at the outset that the only way we will be able to accommodate a maximum number | r of people who have indicated a desire to offer testimony in today's hearing has been to create a very tight schedule. We've indicated to all witnesses that they have a certain period of time to offer their remarks. In a couple of occasions where there is somebody representing a statewide organization we have alloted 10 minutes, including for the Commissioner for Basic Education, but typically we have asked witnesses to take no more than five minutes for their prepared remarks. If they have more extended written testimony, we'll be glad to accept it and have it submitted for the formal record. That is the only way, again, that we can accommodate all the witnesses and also allow time for members and staff to ask any questions that may arise. Our first scheduled witness is Dr. Paul Johnson, who is representing the Pennsylvania Association of School Administrators. Dr. Johnson. DR. JOHNSON: Good morning, Representative Cowell and members of the House Education Committee. My name is Paul Johnson, Superintendent of the Franklin 6 Regional School District in Westmoreland County. Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on House Bill 2277. I am offering this testimony on the basis of my experience as superintendent of the Franklin Regional School District and as the Pennsylvania Association of School Administrators Legislative Committee representative for the Westmoreland County intermediate Unit. House Bill 2277 is a perplexing piece of legislation which seems to attempt to blend together several elements which impact on local school district operations, both in the short run and potentially long into the future. I The perplexing feature of the bill, to me, is the rationale for the need for additional State involvement in local school district operation as it regards sex education. Sex education is defined in the bill as, quote, "...any instruction that is given as part of any planned course, curriculum or other instructional program and that is intended to impart information or promote discussion or understanding in regard to human sexual behavior, sexual feelings and sexual values, human sexuality and reproduction, pregnancy avoidance or termination, or sexually transmitted diseases, regardless of whether such instruction is described as or 7 incorporated into a description of sex education, family life education, family health education, health education, family living, health, self esteem or other course, curriculum, program or goal of education," end quote. It appears to me that this definition is too broad. Local school districts have had the j responsibility to develop and implement programs for children within the constraints of the existing School Code. Local school districts should continue to operate responsibly in the development, implementation and evaluation of all curriculum, whether it stresses sex education or any other subject. The constraints of Act 2277 do not appear to be necessary. ' Local school districts can and should develop local policies on textbook selection, and for dealing with complaints from residents about programs and materials, in the Franklin Regional School District we responded to complaints voiced by residents about a component of our elementary guidance program which dealt with decisionmaking and increasing self-esteem. in February 1986, using the already established forum of a public school board meeting, and under the guidelines of the local school board which conformed to the now current Sunshine Law, residents expressed concern about the 8 components of the elementary guidance program. The school board appointed an ad hoc committee which consisted of members of the staff as well as residents, including some of the concerned parents, and directed the committee to review the concerns and make recommendations to the board regarding these concerns. in my opinion, that was the proper way to have proceeded in such a case. Subsequently, the board adopted policies on the selection of textbooks and other materials and adopted a policy on the reconsideration of programs and materials when concerns are raised, and you have those enclosures with your packet of those two policies developed locally by the board. Since the adoption of j i h those policies, no problems have arisen from the public j regarding the appropriateness of the issues of I decisionmaking and self-esteem within our various curriculum. Additionally, each school district in the Commonwealth was given a time line recently,for the implementation of AIDS education within each local school district. At the Franklin Regional School District we developed a curriculum at the State designated grade levels with residents serving on teacher/administrator curriculum committees developing those courses. The curriculum was then presented in meetings for public 9 reaction before being adopted by the local board of school directors. This was another example of a locally developed program with public involvement in the development of the program, and with the opportunity for parents to have children opt-out at their discretion. As you know, House Bill 2277 provides a much more cumbersome approach in Section 2505-A, the opt-in section of that. 4 | Why not approach the issue of sex education similarly to I the way we've approached them locally? j Perhaps most importantly, the implications j of this bill go beyond sex education in terms of establishing additional State controls and promoting a potentially litigious environment for special interest ! groups, which can result in the diminution of local curriculum, the intrusion into areas of academic freedom, j ! not to mention opening the way to censorship by special interest groups, and I've enclosed with your packet an article recently published entitled, "The AASA Librarians

i Urge policies on Censorship," which I think is instructive in terms of this issue nationally. What is the motive for incorporating a portion of the Federal Hatch Amendment, which is also attached? This section of House Bill 2277, which is Section 2506-A, needs to be re-examined in light of the national consequences of the Hatch Amendment, as well as 10 the lack of clear definition in House Bill 2277 of, quote, "psychiatric and psychological examination, testing, or treatment," closed quote. The sections of the legislation which provide additional checks and balances between the legislative and executive branches of State government, specifically the Department of Education, may be appropriate, but the involvement of the State in the local control of curriculum practices is questionable. It appears that the scope of House Bill 2277 is much broader than sex education curriculum, as evidenced by the inclusion of Hatch Amendment language in the bill. I Pennsylvania has had and should continue to foster respect for local control of educational programs. It also has protected academic freedom while permitting recently with the AIDS initiative opting out of courses not required for graduation. I would urge the committee to be cautious deliberating the implications of the various components of House Bill 2277 before enacting any or all of the various sections of the bill. I urge you to respect and strengthen local school districts in this Commonwealth by not enacting legislation that undermines responsible local school district decisionmaking and action. And the attachments which you have do include the policy which was locally 11 developed on the reconsideration of programs which have been questioned, a policy also on textbook selection is enclosed with the packet, as are the articles that I alluded to in the testimony. j (See index for exhibits of Dr. Johnson.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Dr. Johnson. By CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Dr. Johnson) f Q. Sir, it's clear from your testimony that \ policies and procedures in your own school district are certainly an attempt to be responsive to various opinions

! in your local community and an attempt to involve people of different opinions in the process of establishing policy. it's also clear to me after listening to people testify for I guess some 20 hours already, or pretty close to it, that that is not the practice in all districts. Admittedly, the exceptions that we've heard about have been rare, but they have been extraordinary exceptions, and in some cases, if the information is accurate that was given to us, they have been outrageous exceptions in terms of policies that basically preclude and do not welcome parental participation and involvement of various opinions of the community. I suspect that that's the kind of thing that prompted, at least in part, the sponsors and the advocates of this legislation. What can your association do? you 12 represent or are active with an association that represents superintendents from the 501 school districts. What can your association do to bring along some of those districts, whether it's 1 or 25 of them out there, that may have policies and procedures that are less exemplary than those that you've outlined in your own district?

A. Our organization does not really have a curriculum division per sef but since we do represent all the districts through the superintendents and assistant superintendents in the State, we have been successful in providing information and guidelines to local districts in areas that can be beneficial to them, and I would think that our organization would be very happy to act as a dissemination center for such policies as the ones you have included here. We would hesitate to attempt to intrude on local prerogatives of districts by dictating a particular policy to them, but I would think that Stinson Stroup and the Board of Governors of PASA would not have any difficulties urging the member districts to develop policies locally, similar to the experience that we've had at Franklin. Q. I would emphasize, and I appreciate the delicate situation that the respective associations find themselves in, the superintendents as well as the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, but as I've 13 mentioned to a number of representatives from both of those organizations, if you are reluctant to or simply cannot bring along some of the districts that may in fact be the exceptional cases, but again cases which have prompted this legislation, then the intrusion that you risk will come from State government rather than the more mild intrusion, if you will, from your respective associations. One other question. On page 4 of your testimony you make mention of Section 2506-A. You say that it "needs to be re-examined in light of the national consequences of the Hatch Amendment...." Would you elaborate on the "national consequences of the Hatch Amendment"? A. Yes, I'd be happy to. The article that's been included does touch on that as well, and it's really dealing with concerns about censorship of materials and programs which get into areas which are somewhat unclearly defined in your legislation when we talk about psychological and psychiatric testing, developing reasoning skills, developing self-esteem, decisionmaking issues that relate to those things. In some places throughout the nation, as it's mentioned m the attached article, those particular topics have been the basis for organized efforts to go 14

through library collections, removing books from

libraries, putting pressure on locally elected bodies, such as boards of education, in fact to respond by i censoring materials that have been considered classics in literature over the years. And it becomes something of an emotional reaction, I think, and stampede in places throughout the nation that have experienced that. I This particular amendment, the Hatch Amendment, has been recently the basis for those types of censorship activities by special interest groups J nationally, and I think that's whether the area is sex education or if it's some other particular value that an individual has that they would like to see addressed by a local board, we feel it should be done through a complaint procedure or in a reconsideration policy where all sides of an issue are heard before any premature decisions are made regarding the banning of books or that type of thing. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay, thank you very much. Are there any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, thanks for being here. We appreciate your testimony. DR. JOHNSON: Thank you. 15 i CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next scheduled witness is Beth Worstell, who is a senior at Woodland Hills School District. Beth. And while Beth is coming forward, let me 1 introduce a colleague and member of the committee who has joined us, a Representative from Berks County, John Davies. Go ahead, Beth. MS. WORSTELL: Hello. My name is Beth Worstell, and I am a senior at Woodland Hills High School. I am glad to have been given the opportunity to j testify today and tell you why I believe that sex education is needed in every school. Growing up can be a very emotional and turbulent time, and adolescents need help in } understanding what is happening to their bodies. Kids should be educated about their bodies while they are changing, not afterwards. Students need to be taught about their anatomy, how it works, sex, sexually transmitted diseases, peer pressure, relationships, and communication skills. A course that teaches these things in a factual and thoughtful manner could make a difficult time a little easier for many people. I feel that if kids learn about sex and the parenting responsibilities that sometimes go along 16 with it. they might have second thoughts about having sex. They also need to realize that it's okay to say no, that the confusion they feel is normal. The kids that want to have sex need to know how to be responsible and protect themselves against disease and pregnancy. They need to know that they can get birth control. Another important reason that sex education should be a part of every school curriculum is that not all parents have the facts they need to teach their children what they need to know about growing up. Other parents may have the information they need but are not comfortable discussing subjects relating to sex with j their kids. f I never had sex education in school but I was very lucky because my parents taught me a great deal about sex and growing up. I have always felt that I could talk to my mom and dad about anything. Not all j kids are as fortunate as I am. So many have parents who are too embarrassed to confront them about sex, or just j don't want to. Oftentimes these kids would never dream of asking their parents anything personal. j All kids deserve the opportunity to learn about their bodies and all the choices that they have regarding growing up. It's only by being well-informed that they will be able to make intelligent decisions 17 about their future. i CHAIRMAN COWELL: Beth, thank you very much. J First, let me apologize. I thought that somebody had misspelled your name on the agenda. They missed the "o". MS. WORSTELL: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: So we'll make sure that I i that's corrected. Secondly, I want to repeat something to you that I've said to, I guess, three other young women who have testified at the prior two hearings. I know I and I think all the members of the committee especially appreciate your testimony, hearing from students. This Education Committee too infrequently hears from the very people that our business is all about, and that would be students. So I always consider your testimony and testimony like it, regardless of the issue or the side that you take on a particular issue, to be especially valuable. I appreciate your coming forward and offering your testimony. Do we have questions from members or staff? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Ms. Worstell) 18

Q. Are there any school districts in the immediate area to your district that has sex education? A. I feel that it is supposed to be taught in my school, but it's not — I don't think it was required because it was like we never just got around to it at the end of the year. Other classes covered it, other students had it, but not my class. And it was never offered before my 11th grade year in high school. It was never offered in middle school or elementary school. Q. All right. What about the interjection of the AIDS instruction? Has that been put into the curriculum in your school? A. Yes. We talked somewhat about sexually transmitted diseases, AIDS, taking drugs, but never anything that dealt with sex or relationships, peer pressure. Nothing dealing with that. Q. Do you have any friends that had sex education in any neighboring districts? A. No. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you very j much.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Worstell) Q. Beth, I just have one general question. I 19 know you a little bit by name to be a fairly active person in your school so I ask, recognizing that you probably have some sense of, as best as any one person can, of what's going on in the school and maybe what your peers are thinking, DO you believe that any of your peers in your own class or younger students or those who may have graduated within the last year or two whom you know, do you believe that any of those students felt that they — in your school district, in your school buildings — that you had sex education or certain kinds of values imposed upon you by the teachers, by the administration, by policies of the school district?

A. No, I don't think so. I think that we are always allowed to think the way we wanted to think and they kind of just generalize things. There is a department in our school, the Student Center, where you can go in and talk to someone about it, but a lot of kids . don't know about it and they're afraid to go in and talk to these people about it because they don't think that their problems are important. But I think in the Student Center they let you feel the way you want to feel and they're not biased against your opinion. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Do we have any other questions? (No response.) 20

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Beth, thank you very much for being here. We appreciate your testimony. MS. WORSTELL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I am looking for Commissioner Donna Wall, and I understand that Bill Logan may be offering testimony on her behalf, is that correct? MR. LOGAN: Right. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Bill Logan is with the Department of Education and will be standing in for Commissioner Donna Wall. In the mean time, let me also introduce another member of the committee, Representative Steve Fremd. Steve, good to have you here. Go ahead, Bill. MR. LOGAN: Good morning. I'm William Logan, Deputy Commissioner of Basic Education, and I'm here this morning on behalf of Commissioner Donna Wall who anticipated that she would be with you to offer testimony from the Department but will be unable, and so on her behalf and on behalf of the Department I will be offering our views on House Bill 2277, which is titled Parent and Pupil Protection Act. Clearly, the Department supports the goal of protecting pupils and their families. Some aspects of X 21 the bill contribute to meeting that goal, but we believe others actually would be harmful. There appears to be two beliefs undergirding the bill which we share. First, premarital sex and promiscuity detract from the physical health of young people, and in this period can be killers in this age of AIDS. They contribute to the undermining of traditional values. Second, we believe that families must play a larger role in the educational and moral development of the children. However, the facts about the sexual activities of teenagers and about the nature of families make these beliefs insufficient weapons against the real problems which teenagers face. A 1986 poll of American teenagers by Louis Harris and Associates found that more than half of the teenagers say that they have had sexual intercourse by age 17. Only one-third of the sexually active teenagers regularly use contraceptives, and those teenagers with the fewest family supports are those least likely to use contraceptives. All of us want those facts to change, but we must start by facing those facts as they are, and some of them appear not to be reflected in some aspects of this bill. Let me say also that we support the March 22 18, 1988 "Statement of Christian Leaders of Central Pennsylvania," and I quote from that, quote, "We recognize that sexuality is the good gift of God, and we believe that persons may be fully human only when the gift is acknowledged and affirmed by themselves, the church and society. We affirm sex as a gift intended for use only in the context of marriage," closed quote. The Christian leaders advocate five specific efforts, including, quote, "encouraging the public schools to develop programs in human sexuality which affirm religious values." We think that some portions of House Bill 2277, presumably unwittingly, undermine just such efforts by the schools.

By way of background, a 1987 survey of school districts conducted by the Department of Education indicated that 90 percent of those responding provided some form of sex education at local discretion. There is no statutory, regulatory, or department requirement for | teaching sex education in Pennsylvania, except that the State Board of Education regulations require instruction in AIDS, with emphasis on abstinence from sex being the only sure way to avoid sexual transmission of the disease. There is also, as you know from earlier testimony by the State Board member Nick Panagoplos, a 23 1969 State Board policy statement on sex education, which calls upon school districts to develop sex education programs in conjunction with parents, clergy, physicians, and other community leaders. We believe that advice to schools still rings true nearly 20 years after its initial adoption. We believe the General Assembly was wise in delegating to local school boards much of the decisionmaking about curriculum - what to teach, when to teach it, what materials to use. This is particularly important in potentially sensitive but important areas such as sex education. Much of Section 2503-A of the bill, specifying the manner in which sex education I programs are to be approved locally, appears to be redundant. As you know, the School Code currently requires local school board approval of courses of study and texts used in those courses. The school board approves the planned courses, which are described in detail in Chapter 5 of the State Board of Education regulations. The public hearings and display of curriculum materials at school board meetings prior to the adoption of sex education programs do not appear to be related to the bill's stated purpose of protection of pupils and parents whose rights are spelled out elsewhere, in Section 2504-A. Rather, Section 2503-A 24

amounts to an unnecessary requirement on school boards, the real result of which will likely be to inhibit schools from providing meaningful sex education programs. We strongly support the bill's requirements that parents be informed of the curriculum and materials, reference to Section 2504-A, so that their choice of whether or not to exempt their child, currently provided in Chapter 11 of our State Board regulations, can be an informed choice. informing parents of their right to opt-out, the student is not mandatory on the district at this time. We would support a mandate that districts inform parents of their right to have the school provide alternate instruction if the parent has religious objections to the sex education program. However, the provisions of Section 2505-A requiring written parental permission for children to participate in sex education, the opt-m rather than the opt-out, is likely to result in those students with the least stable and supportive home situations being J s prevented from learning precisely what they need to know i [ most. We are also troubled by Section 2507-A, which limits the ability of school staff to provide advice to students. Many young people today need good, sound, accurate advice about the risks of their sexual 25 activity and about preventing pregnancy. They need encouragement to abstain from sexual activity. And some who, unfortunately, suspect they are pregnant need information about the prenatal and neonatal care of their babies. For those young people who cannot get such advice at home, the next best alternative is to turn to teachers or the school nurse or the guidance counselors. Section 2507-A of House Bill 2277 would prohibit these school people from helping. We think they can provide more knowledgeable and thoughtful information to young people who need it than the young people's peers. We should not make it impossible or illegal for I responsible adults to help needy youngsters. Finally, we would note some lack of clarity in Section 2506-A dealing with pupil rights. As you have heard in other testimony, those who would be called upon to implement this section in the schools believe it is written so broadly that they would not even discuss with the students possible cases of child abuse, for fear of being prosecuted. This, of course, flies directly in the face of an existing legislative mandate that school personnel report cases of suspected child abuse. We do not believe the General Assembly has in any way diminished its concern about child abuse and hope that you will not enact legislation now that would be so 26 interpreted. We feel compelled, in conclusion, to state once more for the record that this bill was engendered by the Family Health Curriculum guidelines, and materials which were recommended in those guidelines, issued by the prior administration, which we have now disavowed and recalled. Thank, you for this opportunity to present testimony. I would be glad to entertain any questions. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Bill, thanks very much. Let me first introduce two additional members who have joined us, Representative Jess Stairs from Westmoreland County; Representative Gerry Kosinski from Philadelphia; both members of the committee. I'll note, for the information of the committee members, we have one mike at this point, so we have to pass it back and forth as you ask your questions. Who has the first question? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Logan) Q. We heard some previous testimony that some local districts didn't seem to go through the process that had been outlined in the State Board things, which is reinforced rather dramatically in this legislation. Either from your experience in education or with the 27 department, do you have any comment on that or any kind of guidance or experience that you can relate about those facts? A. i made reference to the fact that approximately 90 percent of the schools claim they have some type of sex education program. The way that program evolves in those schools we are not fully aware of. Some of them, I think, use the State Board of Education statement that goes back those 20 years because we get many, many requests for a small document that verbatim contains that advice from the board and we have reissued it many times. I would assume that that document is used in many schools as the background for the preparation of sex education courses, but I would not know that for a fact. Q. Does the department or anyone in the department have any idea about or ever done any kind of survey in which the district may have something that would appear to be sex education? We heard in previous testimony they never seem to get there with a curriculum, or do you have any comments on that? A. No, I don't think that I could comment on it. Our curriculum people, I'm sure, would have sample sets of curricula in all areas that they would share with school districts. They might be able to say how 28 extensive those were. I could not. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Bill, two questions I have. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Logan)

Q. In your testimony you note that there are certain procedures provided for currently in the School Code that spell out a method for the adoption of a curriculum and review of textbooks and other materials by the school board. In a case where, for whatever reason, a parent or citizen believes that a school board is not following those procedures required by the School Code, what recourse do they have?

A. They would have recourse to the Department of Education in the Office of inquiry and Approval where they could file a complaint against the school district and where it would be investigated by a staff of three individuals. That might be one recourse, and many people do that when they feel that the Chapter 5 regulations are not being met or the procedures for the adoption of planned courses is not taking place. They could appeal directly also to the board. Every board would have a curriculum committee on it, which would be the proper 29 place to start with a complaint of that type. Q. Secondly, we have in prior hearings, the prior two hearings, been told about cases where parents, or some citizens anyway, were outraged or at least had criticisms of the process and sometimes the outcome of activities in some school districts with respect to the sex education programs. To the best of your knowledge, how frequently has the Department of Education received specific complaints about activities in specific school districts, say, over the last three years or so? A. I would say we receive one or two a year. We have had a greater frequency of complaints of this type since the Federal Hatch Amendment went into effect, many people looking at what is being taught in the school, looking at testing practices. So I would say that prior to a few years ago we hardly received any. Now we would get perhaps two or three a year. Q. In light of the complaints that you receive and other things that you know about what's going on on a statewide basis, do you believe that the problem, I'll call it a problem, of.major disagreement within school districts on the part of citizens and parents with respect to sex education processes, procedures, curriculum, curriculum content, do you believe that those issues are a major statewide problem or would you 30

characterize them in some other way? A. From my experience, I would say not. They are not a major problem. The kinds of things that we field in our Office of Inquiry and Approval, which is the central point for all parent and student allegations against the schools, those issues of curriculum would not be among the highest that we would receive comments and complaints about. But clearly, every year we do. Q. And you said every year it's been one or two complaints? A. one or two complaints in the area of sex education and a half a dozen or more in the area of failure to meet the Chapter 5 regulations. Again, that is a product of having the regulations so much on people's minds these days, with the emphasis on them and education and their recent enactment by the State Board. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Are there any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Let me introduce another member of the committee who just joined us, Representative Paul Wass from Indiana County. Paul. Our next scheduled witness is David Vodila, who is the principal of Slippery Rock High 31 School. Sir, go ahead. MR. VODILA: Good morning. My name is David Vodila, and I am the principal of Slippery Rock Area High School and an executive committee representative of the Pennsylvania Association of Secondary School principals. With me this morning is f Mrs. Christie Tishie, the vice president of the Slippery Rock Area School Board. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity j to meet with you and voice my opnion regarding House Bill 2277. In the spring of 1987/ the management team of the Slippery Rock Area School District determined that there j was a need to provide sexuality education for our | ! students. We were concerned about teenage pregnancy, j sexually transmitted diseases, sexual abuse, peer pressure, low self-esteem, causal attitudes regarding sexual activity as portrayed in the entertainment \ I industry, and a host of other problems associated with j human sexuality. I believe that we have succeeded in developing and implementing an outstanding educational

i program which will enable our district's children to better understand and cope with decisions and problems relating to sexuality. I would like to share with you the manner 32 in which our community's program was instituted without the direction, and in the case of House Bill 2277, the burdens which could be placed on a district by legislative directives. Additionally, I hope to offer for your consideration my viewpoint on a number of problems inherent with the parent and Pupil Protection Act. As an administrator who has had the responsibility for the development of the sexuality education curriculum, I hope that my insight will be helpful. The Slippery Rock plan began with the selection of a committee comprised of 12 members of the professional staff representing all areas from kindergarten through grade 12, the vice president of the I school board, Mrs. Tishie, and myself. Recognizing the controversial nature of any sexuality education program, and realizing that community support was a key element in the successful implementation of such a program, our plan made provisions for reducing community concerns. After developing a philosophy and goals for the prospective program, we scheduled an evening citizen's meeting to present our plans and to gather input from the community regarding their beliefs and their expectations. At this well-attended meeting, our goals were met. We were encouraged by the groups' [ understanding of the need for sexuality education, and we 33 categorized the opinions and expectations which were presented by people representing both liberal and conservative viewpoints. We also used this meeting as a forum to select a community advisory committee, which would be balanced both geographically and philosophically. The actual writing of the first draft of the sexuality education curriculum was completed after six months of hard work by the curriculum committee. The draft, along with a selected audio-visual material, was then reviewed by the parents' advisory committee. Numerous meetings were held between the curriculum and advisory committees until the entire parents' committee could endorse the curriculum. The unanimous adoption by the school board then followed. The program, which makes provision for dissenting parents to remove their children from either a portion or the entire program by simply submitting an exemption request letter, was implemented at the beginning of this school year. We in the Slippery Rock district are proud of our accomplishment. By making decisions at the local level with existing avenues for public input on curriculum and materials, we have developed a program which we believe is one of the finest in the Commonwealth. 34 As I review House Bill 2277, I find portions of the document acceptable to both myself and my community. It is my opinion that the sections regarding abstinence, prohibited health services, and restrictions on sex education guidelines are worthwhile. However, there are other portions of the bill which would create substantial hardships for Commonwealth school districts.

I am most concerned about the proposed requirement for parents to register students to participate in sexuality education classes. Provisions have always been made for parents to opt-out their students from classes to which they have moral objections. Since this involves a small minority of our citizens, this method for incorporating this option has been effective and manageable. The cost and logistical problems of having the majority of parents opt-in their children for sexuality education are significant and unnecessary. Postage and clerical/administrative time would make this requirement an expensive one, especially in larger school districts. Lost permission slips, late permission slips, forged permission slips, and signed but unreturned permission slips would create problems, but not nearly the problems of verifying that each student has a valid, signed, recorded, updated, and filed permission slip 35 stating that their parents, who form a majority, want f i jj their children in sexuality education class. I am sure that you can appreciate the magnitude of the paper chase that this portion of the bill would create. Why must the majority say, yes, you may instruct my child? Wouldn't it make sense to continue with what has worked for years - a successful opt-out program? I would like to address two other concerns that I have regarding House Bill 2277. They are parental notices and requirements for district approval. In my district, copies of our curriculum are available for unrestricted review by any interested citizen. This procedure is effective. But the copying and distributing process required by House Bill 2277 to annually present parents with an outline of our sexuality education program would be cumbersome and inessential. The extensive requirements for adoption of sexuality education programs, as described in the Parent Protection Act, are unnecessary in light of existing avenues for public input on curriculum and materials. The success of the Slippery Rock plan demonstrates that current law and procedures are adequate. I am sure that the intentions of those who support House Bill 2277 are good, but however good those intentions may be, the procedures set forth in House Bill 36 2277 will create, rather than alleviate, problems. Acceptable sexuality education programs can be developed, monitored, and implemented at the local level without the need of statewide legislation. Therefore, I believe that House Bill 2277 is not necessary, and I respectfully ask that it be rejected by this committee. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, thank you very much.

We have also been joined by Representative i Vic Lescovitz. Do we have questions? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Vodila) Q. How many opted out, out of how many students, in the offering of the program? A. Thus far, no parents have taken their children out of the program. A number of parents have ! come into the school libraries and have taken a look at j the program either at the library or by checking it out \ and taking it home. Thus far, everyone is still in it. Q. In the event that they would opt out, what alternate study do you plan on? A. The children would have an option, if they're removed from the entire program at the high ! 37 school level, they can take an elective or a study hall and it would not be held against them as for a graduation requirement. If a child is removed for just a portion of | the program that a parent thinks is objectionable, they could perhaps be sent to a library or to another class. Q. Okay. And in that community effort, that community group, did the clergy take any part? I f A. yes. Yes, sir, they sure did. Yes. j REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) J BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Vodila) i Q. Sir, let me ask at least one question. On page 1 of your testimony, in your introductory remarks about why you chose to take a position to begin with, you j said, "We were concerned about teenage pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, sexual abuse, peer pressure, low self-esteem, casual attitudes regarding sexual activity as portrayed in the entertainment industry," et cetera. As I listened to those remarks, I was reminded that we have had other witnesses who have testified at the previous two hearings who have argued, at least in part, that those items that were a concern to you and which led to the introduction of your sexuality program in fact were outcomes of sexuality programs. 38

For instance we had one lady at a Harrisburg hearing who testified that we had eradicated or almost eradicated venereal disease until sex education programs were instituted in schools, and the conclusion that she had reached was that sex education programs were causing the spread of venereal disease. We have had several witnesses who have in one way or another suggested that sex education programs have fostered the casual attitudes that were of concern to you and which led in part to your program. Could you respond to that issue, please? A. Well, perhaps the best response came from a member of our parental advisory committee, Reverend Steiner from the Prospect area, and his opinion was, ! hiding the truth from students never solves the problem. Hiding problems from students create problems, they never solve them. And to present information to students certainly does not imply that they are going to go out and participate in activities that we would not want them to participate in. We who work with children know that children are going to have sex education whether we provide it or not, and some of the sex education that is provided outside the classroom occurs in the school bus and on the playgrounds, and some of that information is inaccurate, and we feel that it's best for us to take a 39 stand and to present the information correctly and in a manner which supports what we hope is going on in our community's families. Q. Just one other question. You expressed concern about the cost of information programs, sending the curriculum outlines to all households. There was testimony at our Philadelphia hearing two weeks ago on the part of an advocate of the legislation that acknowledged that there would be costs — that estimated that the cost would be approximately four cents, it might have been five cents, but I think they said four cents per household. Could you react to that number and do you have some sense of what actual costs would be incurred?

A. I don't know. Unless postage is less expensive in Philadelphia, I think it would be a little more than four cents to send something home. To ask the children to carry it home would work, but then of course you run into the problem of a parent saying, my child never delivered it to me. And if we do it that way, are we then meeting the request of parents who want the material? I don't think that we are. If we're going to do this, we have to get it into their hands, and quite frequently, the best method of doing that is to not let it be carried home by the children. So I would think we would have to mail it 40 home. So I would think that that costs — in our district, four cents would be a little on the light side. It would probably cost more than that, just using the copying machine is more than that. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Kosinski. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: I don't need the microphone. BY REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: (Of Mr. Vodila) Q. There seems to be no problem getting any other material out to parents, though. A. Oh, we have problems. Q. But you do it. A. Oh, we do it, and it's not 100-percent effective. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Wass. REPRESENTATIVE WASS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Forgive me for being late. BY REPRESENTATIVE WASS: (Of Mr. Vodila) Q. Sir, I take much comfort in your testimony as you refer to two areas where you have parent involvement or community involvement. The management team, you do not have parents on the management team, do you? A. School board members. Q. School board members? 41 A. Yes. Q. In your testimony you talked about professionals. The other area, again, where you're j involving people and I take much comfort in is the community advisory committee. What is that committee? I j take a lot of satisfaction at any legislation that s regulations going through if the parents know it's happening, if they know it's happening, I'm satisfied. j I But there is a breakdown, I believe, in what's being jj taught in school and how it relates and how much the parents know about that, and I can deviate from sex education and that area. Now, what's the makeup of the community advisory committee? How often do they meet? A. They met, after the first draft was completed, I would say they met between 12 and 16 times for 3 hours a night, so it was an extensive meeting, and they reviewed every single word of that first draft, and there were a number of changes made because of their concerns. It was comprised of approximately 14 members of our community, who represented various areas of our district. We have a large district in square mileage and we wanted to have people from the major points so that people in the community can get a hold of them. We published their names and phone numbers, so they 42

represented their area. And philosophically, as I said, at our first parents' meeting where we had well over 100 people, and in Slippery Rock that's a large number, people coming in and viewing their concerns, their expectations, we were able to determine people of various philosophical backgrounds, both — I hate to use the words liberal and conservatives, perhaps this is a bad time of year to use jI those words. But we have people on the committee representing both viewpoints, and it was a good blend. We felt that to make this program work and to make it acceptable it had to be public and we couldn't hide anything. And we wanted every viewpoint that we possibly | could have represented on that advisory committee I meeting. And we did a good job of that and it worked i very well for us. A lot of negotiations went on as we

i looked at the document and we came up with a final copy, a final draft, that every parent endorsed and signed their name to it and presented it to our school board. Q. Every parent in this— A. Every parent on this committee endorsed the program, yes. Q. You make reference to House Bill 2277 as being cumbersome and inessential. is this the only bill or regulation that came down that was cumbersome or IB

43 inessential? A. Oh, no. I'm just referring to this j particular bill. REPRESENTATIVE WASS: Thank you. j CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? Representative Fremd. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. \ I'm not going to ask many questions today, not through indifference but because of the fact that j there is a very long schedule of people to testify and a lot of concerns both for and against the bill have been i previously expressed. I just want to touch on one or two points. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Mr. Vodila) Q. Right now, your parents have the right to opt-out, right? A. Yes. Q. And how do you transmit that right to them? How are they made aware of that right? A. We've sent a notice home with the students and we have put it in our newsletters and mailed it home to the parents, and it has also been publicized in the Butler Eagle, which is our local newspaper. Those are the methods, thus far, that we have used. And we 44 continue on doing that each year, sending something home, putting it on our school calendars, things like this. Q. And you think that's an adequate method? I mean, it seems to be working well? A. Yes, so far. Q. Why wouldn't it work well for opt-in? A. The problem with opting in, for us, we have 2,200 students who may be involved in the program. To collect 2,200 excuses and make sure that they're all valid and all right and correct, and some kids might bring theirs in late and they'll have to be excluded for a day or two, it would be a very difficult task to do that. It seems so much easier for us that if you're concerned and you don't want your child in a course, come in, let us know, we'll pull them out. We're dealing with, thus far, zero percent of our community's parents as opposed to 100 percent writing letters. So for us, for our program in Slippery Rock, it would be better if we had an opt-out program.

Q. Do you think that maybe one of the reasons though for the zero percent is the fact that when it's an opt-out there's a negative implication? it's almost a negative check-off. Do you think that might be a factor there? I mean, we've heard testimony about that. A. I don't think so because we've had 45 concerned parents come in and look — the parents are concerned. I mean, when we get into sexuality education, parents, and rightfully so, they should be concerned and they should come in, and we would hope that every parent would come in and look at our program. And they have been coming in and they have been looking at it and they're getting, of course, feedback from their children. There are no surprises. Everyone knows we have a program. If you don't read the paper or read the letters, we have assignments — or not assignments but little worksheets where the kids go home and work on communication skills with their parents. We have a very broad program. it's not sex ed. Ours is sexuality and self-esteem. So we feel that .our parents know about the program and if they're uncomfortable with it, we will graciously remove their children and support that.

Q. The other thing is, I'm sure — well, I'm not sure but I would assume that you do have opt-in provisions for a number of things at your school right now, such as someone who wants to be involved in an extracurricular activity such as football, such as soccer? They have to opt-in? The parents have to sign them into that, do they not? A. They have to have proof of insurance and physical forms, that's correct. 46

Q. And they have to send those in. How about field trips, same thing? A. Field trips we have parental permission slips for those too. Q. Right. So that's an opt-in now? A. yeah, that's an opt-in. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Greg White. MR. WHITE: One very quick question. BY MR. WHITE: (Of Mr. Vodlla) Q. You said in your testimony that — or in response to a question — that the curriculum was | available for review of parents in the library and that they could either come in and review it there or check it out and take it home. What hours is the curriculum available for public review and how long are the parents allowed to keep the material? A. Our building is open from 7:30 until 3:30. Q. There are no evening hours? A. No evening hours in our district. Q. Okay. A. And we have no time limit for parents to take it out. if they'd like to take it out, they can keep it as long as they'd like. We can always run off more copies if it starts to run low. 47 MR. WHITE: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, thank you very much. MR. VODILA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: We appreciate your testimony. Our next witness is Reverend James Adkins, pastor of Covenant Church in Wilkinsburg. is Reverend Adkins here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay, we'll move along then. Our next witness is R. Thomas Forr, from Altoona. MR. FORR: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the House Education Committee. Thank you for your willingness to listen to the concerns of a father of two whose wife is expecting any day now and who helped me type this last night at about 11:30, and a lawyer who is primarily concerned about the welfare of his family and family life throughout Pennsylvania. The Parent and Pupil Protection Act was drafted to insure that parents would have some significant say in areas of serious concern regarding the welfare of their children. The family is the cornerstone 48 of our civilization, and the cornerstone of the family is parental authority and responsibility. When our families disintegrate, society begins to crumble. When our families thrive, society as a whole thrives. As a father, I want and expect my children to be taught the essentials necessary for a good education. I do not want or desire that my children be presented with someone else's viewpoint of what is morally correct behavior in an effort to influence or sway them regarding their sexual attitudes. My children are not permitted to watch inappropriate television programs or attend risque movies, and I would hope that they would not be exposed to sexually stimulating literature or pictures under the guise of sex education instruction under any circumstances, let alone without my consent or knowledge. As a responsible father, it is my duty to communicate to my children the love and affection that I have for their mother in such a manner that they will develop an understanding and appreciation of the masculine and feminine roles necessary for the well-being of our society. it is furthermore my duty to communicate to my children the sacredness of sex and the proper use of our sexual faculties. it is not my desire to delegate this responsibility or duty to Playboy magazine, the 49 neighborhood children, or their local health teacher. As an attorney, I would think that the I various school districts of our Commonwealth would be relieved not to have to deal with or provide the prohibited health services set forth in Section 2507-A of the proposed bill. Research has shown that the more contraceptive programs are aimed at our young people, the more pregnancies, abortions, promiscuity, v.D., and cancer of the cervix result. We must recognize that early sexual I intercourse among women, young women, leads to a dramatic j increase in the incidence of cancer of the cervix. Can you imagine a young lady of 20 or 21 being told that she has cancer which resulted from sexual activity condoned and countenanced by her school district? Can you imagine a father or mother being advised that his or her daughter suffered a perforated uterus during an abortion performed in a school-based clinic or as a result of a referral by a school nurse to a local physician or clinic? Can you imagine the uproar over a child's acquisition of AIDS as a result of sexual activity encouraged by the child's participation in contraceptive counseling services? What if the pill or any other 50 contraceptive device provided by the school district would have lethal side effects not documented at the present time? Will the school district's general immunity from suit protect it from its deliberate and intentional acts? Would a referral to an abortionist that results in the death of a child lead to serious litigation problems for the referring agency? Why would the schools of this Commonwealth want to expose themselves to the potential liability that could result from the provision of any of the prohibited health services when their chief goal should be the education of our children? I encourage you, the members of the committee, to vote for the Parent and Pupil Protection Act as it now stands for the good of the parents, the pupils, the school districts, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, thank you for your testimony.

Do we have questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Let me ask a couple. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Forr) 51 Q. At what grade levels are your children? A. First grade and preschool — or Kindergarten and preschool. Q. Is it the Altoona school District? \ A. Altoona Area School District. Q. Because of their age, I assume the answer is in the negative, but let me ask the question anyway. Have you personally had any, your family, have you had any personal experience with the Altoona School District in terms of these issues? i A. Yes. I have had personal dealings with the Altoona School District concerning these issues but not with respect to my family. Several years ago, the Altoona School District had a sex education program that I know that some of the parents inquired about. The j literature was not permitted to be taken home. There was an indication that they only had so many books available and there was no indication that these parents were permitted to have that taken home. I know that from personal contact with an individual that had that problem. Q. Does that problem persist today? A. I am not certain if it persists today. I would hope that it does not. Q. The superintendent of the Altoona School 52

District is going to be a witness later this morning. A. I noticed that. Q. Are there any pertinent questions that you think we ought to direct to him? A. Well, as an attorney, I think that some of the pertinent questions that should be asked would deal with parental knowledge and consent for any of their j child's involvement with any of the services set forth in the prohibited health services section. I think that those issues are so serious that the schools should be prohibited from providing any of those services, and I think Dr. Murray would agree with that. I don't think he would go along with me. Q. As a parent — let me restate the question — as a parent, are there any particular programs or activities or policies of the Altoona School District of which you remain critical that we should raise questions about? A. Well, because my children are so young, I'm not familiar with what type of advanced knowledge that they send out to the parents at the present time. I know several years ago they were not doing that. And so I'm not critical of any particular program at the present time that I have personal knowledge of. Q. You raise a series of provocative I questions rhetorically in your testimony. For instance, you say, "Can you imagine a young lady of 20 or 21 being told that she has cancer which resulted from sexual activity condoned and countenanced by her school district?" Are you telling us that your school district ! condones and countenances sexual activity? \ A. No. I would go back and I would disagree I I with the prior speaker. I would say research has J indicated definitely that the more prevalent the sex | education programs are in the school systems, the more likely the valueless programming, presentation of the program, the more likely the children are to get involved in early sexual activity, and I believe that that's the basis of that position. Q. But I'm searching for some pattern of activity among school districts that exists that we should be especially concerned about, and I'm asking as a resident and a parent in the Altoona School District, and a taxpayer there, are you objecting to the policies of your school district? Is there something in Altoona that we ought to be concerned about? A. I am not familiar with what their specific sex education program is in the Altoona School District other than the information that I had about two years ago, three years ago, when the parents were not permitted 54

to have the information sent home to them, and the excuse given by the teacher at that time was there was not enough information available to send it home. Q. As an attorney, you raised the question, again, a provocative statement near the end of your testimony, "Why would the schools...expose themselves to the potential liability that could result from the provision of any of the prohibited Health Services'"? Since it has been suggested that should prohibit those services, it's not unreasonable for some of us to begin to believe that some school district must be providing some of those prohibited health services out there among the 501 districts. Wearing your attorney hat, are you aware of any school districts in the Commonwealth being sued or held liable in any other way for providing any of these health services that would be prohibited under the provisions of this legislation? A. I've been aware of referrals made by school nurses in conjunction with family planning

4 organizations where young ladies have been taken out of j the schools for the procurement of abortions without their parents' knowledge or consent. I think we're all aware of those things that have happened. As to whether or not those have resulted in civil suits, I do not believe that they have, or if they have, things were

i i 55 settled. But I believe that that is an area of concern and I think the parent and Pupil Protection Act would prohibit those types of activities and it would get that monkey off the school districts* backs. I don't see why the school districts would want to expose themselves to anything like that. For instance, if they would be providing contraceptive services, an IUD, what could happen 12 years from now as happened to the IUD that was provided j 12 years ago, not in school districts but to the general i; population? j Q. Well, the issue of liability, I think, I i would rightfully be of concern, and that's why I asked ij I i the question, are you aware of any situations in any school district in this State where in fact that has been a reality rather than just something that's potential out there in the prospective — in the future? A. No, I have not— Q. And your answer is you are not aware of any? A. I am not aware of any individual action in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, no. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? Representative Wass. 56 REPRESENTATIVE WASS: I thank you, Mr. Chairman. BY REPRESENTATIVE WASS: (Of Mr. Forr) Q. Sir, as one having a child in the school system— A. Yes. Q. —do you get any information from the schools about anything? is there a way of the information coming back to you as a parent from the school district? A. As of the present time, we are provided with schedules and things like that, but as far as this type of activity, maybe it's because of the age of my oldest child, we have not been provided any information about any type of sex education programs, no. Q. But this information is carried by the student or— A. Generally, it's carried by the student, yes. Q. Okay. A. Yes, the information that comes home from the school to us has been carried by the student. it's not sent out separately. REPRESENTATIVE WASS: Thank you. MR. FORR: Thank you. 57 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, thank you very much for being with us today. MR. FORR: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Edna Mills, of Somerset. MS. MILLS: May I correct my name as Elda Mills, please? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Sorry for that. Thank you. MS. MILLS: I want to thank you for the opportunity of being able to speak to you today. I come as a very concerned mother and grandmother. I also come to you on behalf of a group of children from a low-income housing development. I work with these children every week. House Bill 2277 would require that these parents be made aware of what is involved in the sex education of their children. The children would know that their parents have been informed. This would open the lines of communication between parent and child, which is vitally important. Planned parenthood has very subtly come into our children's lives through their clinics and now comes into our schools to teach them en masse about 58 sexual freedom, planned parenthood presents sex without restrictions and presents an invasion of parents' rights by giving children secrecy to all forms of birth control and abortion as a means of birth control. Wef as parents, need this parent and pupil protection Act so that we can be a part of our children's sex education in our schools. This bill would prohibit school districts from providing abortion-related or contraception-related services to students. Our children need the protection of House Bill 2277 so that they will not be discriminated against for not participating in sex education classes that are not in agreement with what we believe. We also need this bill to pass so that sex education classes include teaching the importance of students abstaining from pre-marital sexual relations and making them aware of the dangers of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, if this is the will of the parents and the community. Low-income families, because of their situation, have been targeted to be participants in Planned Parenthood's sex education program. I appeal to you to pass House Bill 2277 and provide the protection that we as families need. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. 59 Do we have questions? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Ms. Mills) Q. in what district is that program occurring where they're providing the services that you've stated? A. I am coming so that this won't happen. Planned Parenthood is wanting to do this in our school district and thus far they've not been permitted to do so, but if we don't have the protection as parents, this is very likely to happen. Q. And in what district is this? A. Somerset. Q. Somerset. A. yes. Q. And they have a program on sex education now? A. Yes. Not Planned parenthood, if that's what you're asking me. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Okay. Thanks. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Mills) Q. Ma'am, you note that you work with children from a low-income housing development. A. Yes. 60

Q. Could you tell us in what capacity you work with them? A. Through our church. We have a children's ministry there. Q. You spend time in their homes or do the kids come to the church? A. Well, they have a community room and we go there, but we also spend time in the homes. Q. Okay. This is a little bit redundant, but I just want to clarify. You say that, "planned Parenthood has very subtly come into our children's lives through their clinics and now comes into our schools...." You're not talking about your own schools, though? A. No. I'm talking about the possibility of this happening if we don't have the participation of the parents on any information, any planning that would be done by the school board. Q. Are there programs in any schools that you could identify for us in Pennsylvania where this problem j in fact is a reality today rather than something that you are prospectively concerned about in the future? I A. I believe if you refer to, you would be more acquainted with it than myself, the New Futures Initiative in Pittsburgh and Reading. j Q. Are you familiar with the New Futures 61 Program? A. Not as much as I'm sure you are, no. Q. Could you tell us what you're familiar with in terms of the New Futures program in Pittsburgh that you object to?

A. The fact that this is targeted towards low-income and the fact that just so many issues in it that are against what I personally believe. Q. Which things are part of it, that you believe are part of it, that you object to? A. I feel — I gather from what I understand, what I've read of it, that the ideas that are coming forth there are basically from the beliefs of planned Parenthood, taking away the parents* privilege and rights, the secrecy part where the children have that freedom to learn about sex and participate in the abortion services and in the free distribution of contraception methods. Q. Do you know for a fact that that is a part of the program in Pittsburgh? A. That's what I understand from the materials. Q. All right. We've had several people come before us during these hearings and they've cited that program in Pittsburgh. None of them have lived in 62 Pittsburgh, none of them have been parents or taxpayers in Pittsburgh, and none of them seem to be very familiar with the details of the Pittsburgh program. That's why I was just curious what particular details you objected to. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. We appreciate your being here. Our next scheduled witness is Mr. Al Fondy, President of the Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers. MR. FONDY: Good morning. While they're passing out the outline of my testimony, on behalf of the Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers and the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers, I just want to comment that I am from Pittsburgh, I am the President of the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers, I participated on the planning Board for the New Futures Program, I have a daughter in the Pittsburgh school system, and I didn't recognize that description of the New Futures program that I just heard at all. I'm amazed to hear that somebody would be opposed to the effort that's being made there with funding from the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Now, the object of that program is to help kids who have serious deficiencies in their home 63 backgrounds, to give them a chance to have some activities to engage in after school hours are over and in the evenings to supplement their education, try to keep them out of trouble on non-school hours, prepare them for jobs. I mean, the program is clearly motivated in a way to better enable our schools to help meet the problems that we have in our society and that our kids face. Participation in the program is voluntary. The school district does not disseminate information on abortion and contraceptives, and so on. Certainly, one of the concerns that the Casey Foundation had, in awarding grants to some 10 cities, was that one of the problems in our society is the very high incidence of teenage pregnancy, and that, among other concerns, is one of the things that they're hoping that this supplemental program will help to correct, help to eventually eliminate in our society, but in any event, move in the right direction toward reducing the incidence of teenage pregnancy. I So we certainly support, I support, the New Futures Program. We have a teacher, an active teacher on the New Futures board. It's a lot of work for teachers. It means extra time, but it's an opportunity for our students and it's something that I would think most parents would welcome, and especially parents who 64 themselves are having difficulty with their children or don't have enough means to provide added activity for their children and so on. It's a very positive kind of thing and one that I certainly would encourage that you look at in a favorable way.

Now, with regard to House Bill 2277, as I indicate in our outline here, we have not formally taken a position on the bill for one reason, that matters such as this and all curriculum matters, what's going to actually be taught in our schools, is a matter that certainly goes beyond the purview of employee — teacher in our case — teacher organization. It's a matter of public policy, it's a matter for school boards, for the State Board of Education, for the State legislature. We recognize that, and we would not at all attempt to impose what might be a view that our organization would have or that we would develop from trying to get a consensus from our executive board or from our members themselves. I can tell you that we have not made any assessment among our total membership, but as I say, this is a policy that even goes beyond an organizational concern, however, we certainly are willing to participate in discussion and to make observations on the whole issue of sex education and the intent of House Bill 2277. And as I read 2277, it certainly is 65 thorough in terms of specifying all sorts of things that schools ought to do in terms of providing necessary education for our children in terms of their years as \ I they grow up, in terms of them preparing to be adults and j learning about the things that face them not only in their school lives but in their social lives as well, and | I frankly, learning about what makes our society tick and learning about sex education. Now, we would agree that whatever is done j in schools, whether it be in the area of sex education, j or in any other area for that matter, has got to be value oriented. And in the American Federation of Teachers, we are very strongly in favor of a stress of values in our schools as part of everything we teach, and certainly as a part of any kind of sex education program. At the same time, we don't think that ignorance is the way to try to solve problems, and we believe that our children who know a great deal more than we want to give them credit for i knowing should know facts about their sex lives and so on j that if we don't give that information to them in schools, they're going to get from other sources and perhaps not get in the form that is accurate or is most useful to them. In looking at the specific items of 2277 that we do object to, certainly we would hope that there 66 would be teacher involvement in preparation of curriculum. Generally, that is the case in most school j districts. in reading 2277, there isn't any reference really to the role of teachers in this whole matter, and certainly that is one group that should be involved in developing a sex education curriculum within any school district that's going to be workable with our students. One of the things that we would say to you is that we would hope that we would not adopt any kind of a head-m-the-sand policy, and we recognize, and I certainly recognize, the tremendous volatility of these kinds of issues, but we've got serious public problems. j The incidences of teenage pregnancy, which is one of the tain things that prompted the Casey Foundation program that I referred to earlier, the problem of AIDS and so on clearly mean that we have a matter that is a broad issue that we can't ignore, that we can't hide from, that we j can't turn our heads from, and so on, and we've got to be willing to make some tough decisions in our schools and enable the schools to meet problems that exist in our society.

One of the ways that I try to describe this, I didn't go to public school, I went to Catholic school, and when I went to school, and I've said this a lot of times before, we learned that the cornerstone of

> 67 our society was the family, the church, and the State, and I believe that and I still believe it. However, the family is not what it was in 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950, 1960. It just isn't. It's changed. The majority of situations we have single-parent families at best, we have many parents who can't deal with their own children, not always through their own fault, certainly. Where we have two-parent homes, both parents very frequently work. ] We have a different family structure. The ability of the »I family to cope with some of the kinds of problems that \ \ our children have is not what it was once before. We can wish that it would be that way, but it isn't. With regard to the church, the church plays a very strong role in our society in many j circumstances, but again, in some situations, certainly in some that I'm familiar with, the church is not the entity that it was at one time in terms of its influence on families and its influence on children and so on. Not \ in all cases, certainly, but that's something that's JI changed. And that leaves the State. Well, when I talk about the State, in the best sense of the word we're talking about the schools. And all I can tell you is that to whatever extent the family can't handle some of the problems that I know you're trying to address, and to 68 whatever extent the church is not in the position to deal with those problems, there's only one thing left, and that's the schools as an extension of the State. And the schools can't run away from this problem. The schools have got to try to address this problem and other problems that we have in our society and have in our economy, and that makes the job of the schools and the job of teachers more difficult than it was historically, but we've got to do it. And that's why even though these kinds of issues are controversial and so on, certainly as president of our State and our local organization in Pittsburgh we have to, I think, take some positions on these issues that are different from what we might have said 20 years ago or 30 years ago. So I just hope that the legislature will look at this thing in terms of what is necessary in our society today and what do we have to do through our schools to make our society in the future a better society than it is right now. So having said that, certainly hearings on curriculum matters at a local school board level are always appropriate. I would say, though, on a sex education curriculum, there should be a substantial showing of interest in a curriculum matter before a hearing would be held. I hope a hearing is not simply 69 required every time a curriculum is adopted or changed within a school district. If somebody wants to have a hearing on that, then fine, they should have a right to do that. I can see that an opt-out provision, with regard to participation in sex education classes, may be necessary as a recognition of political reality. I don't think it's desireable and I noticed in the bill even that I i it says there if you have opt-out or whatever, if students don't participate in these classes, that it be done in a way that not draw attention to the students, j and that certainly makes sense. The fact is, though, it's not possible to do that. Opt-out programs are not the best thing at all for the children themselves. The concept that every parent should have to support, have to approve, participation by his or her children in a sex education class I don't think makes any sense, parents certainly should be able to object if they wish to object, but to say that you have to get the active approval of every parent before you can have classes I don't think makes sense at all. We would not support that. Again, I read the language on having parents receive a copy of the curriculum, or at least a guide, as it put it, but the cost of this and the 70 difficulty in doing that, if that had to be done with every parent, I don't think that makes any sense whatsoever. Certainly if a person, a parent, requests a copy, then indeed that should be their right to receive a copy of the curriculum. I attached to the outline of my testimony here a Pittsburgh press editorial which you probably saw, and in reading that myself and our Executive Board reading that, we felt that that pretty much expressed — not the references, by the way, to Representative Freind, but the sentiment on House Bill 2277, that that pretty much expressed our reservations, our feelings, about the breadth of what we read into this bill and the difficulty that it would create in what is already a tough problem for our schools in trying to meet the social problems that I referred to and the social problems that 2277 deals with.

(See index for exhibits of Mr. Fondy.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Al, thank you very much. Are there questions? Representative Wass. BY REPRESENTATIVE WASS: (Of Mr. Fondy) Q. Just to respond. If we go to the editorial, I'm very proud of Steve Freind for his legislation. I'm disappointed that I am not on it as one of the sponsors. I want to be. But, sir, there's over 71 100 sponsors to this legislation and if this legislation was put on the floor for a vote tomorrow, in my opinion, my personal opinion, it would be accepted. So I don't I want to concentrate on that particular news release or whatever it was.

Sir, could you expand on number 5? You touched on it a little bit, but could you just explain that just a little further? A. Well, only that I wasn't certain whether the bill requires that there be a hearing automatically on the curriculum in sex education each year or if there's any change to be made in that curriculum. It seems to me that what ought to be done is a notice is put out and if somebody requests a hearing, that that's all I'm saying there. That if there is a request for a hearing, then that it be held. That's what we do now in our school system in Pittsburgh. But if we say that a hearing is automatically required in every school J district, I don't believe that's necessary or sensible. After all, I think that when you do that, I mean, if somebody wants to make a political forum out of something like this, they can do so. And it seems to me there should be a showing of interest in having a hearing, and that's all I'm saying in number 5. Q. Just one more question. Sir, you said 72 after the notice is put out. What are you referring to, "after the notice is put out"? A. you mean on a hearing? Q. Yes. A. Well, just that— Q. How do you put the notice out that there's a hearing? A. Well, you certainly don't send a letter to every parent in the school district. You might make a posting in the school. There's 501 school districts, as you realize, and we put notices in the city of Pittsburgh and in the newspapers, and so on, but again, we do a news release and so on, but it is tough for everybody to be aware every time there's a curriculum change. There's a lot of curricula in school systems, and all I'm I suggesting is that if somebody is concerned about it or hears something and wants to have a hearing, then that should be what triggers a hearing. Now, I'm not certain what the proposed legislation requires in that regard, but it could be interpreted, as i see it, that you have to have a hearing automatically. The same way with saying that you give every parent a copy of the curriculum. What we're suggesting is that if a parent wants a copy of the curriculum, then they have to be given a copy, rather 73 than have to give one to every single parent. REPRESENTATIVE WASS: That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Lescovitz.

REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: Yeah, just one question.

BY REPRESENTATIVE LESCOVITZ: (Of Mr. Fondy) Q. On number 6, I wonder if you could explain that. Apparently you say an opt-out provision is not desireable but you do not support, I guess, an opt-in, so what— A. Yeah, because — you can say that you don't want to have a stigma on the children, you don't want to put pressure on the children, but the fact is, that's not possible to do. Every youngster in the classroom, in the school, knows whether somebody's parents have pulled him or her out of the class, whatever it might be. So from a student's standpoint, the opt-out thing is not desireable, but I recognize that, you know, it may well be necessary. And certainly there are some parents that are going to object no matter what curriculum you have, and certainly parents have rights as well and they have control over the children, but rather than to have an 74 opt-in, where everybody has to physically decide they want to enroll in a class, I don't think that makes any sense, is not practical at all, and indeed I think makes a situation that's already difficult infinitely more difficult. Q. So if you had to pick one or the other, your association would be more in favor of the opt-out? A. Right. Right. I think that's going to be necessary to have that. I can't imagine a bill passing without that. I'm not happy about it because I think it's tough on the kids, but I think that's going to be a political necessity. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Freind. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thank you. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Mr. Fondy) Q. I appreciate your testimony, Al. Basically, paFT has taken an official position on the bill, is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. So your testimony reflects the view of your board or— A. Right. Q. This is the board of directors? A. It's our State Executive Board, which is representative of some 28 leaders of our unions. 75 Q. Okay, fine. But number 3, you said the bill doesn't pay any attention whatsoever to the teachers. I think you're aware in development of all the 1 curriculum in the entire School Code there's no specific J reference to the teachers, but of course it's expected and implied that they'll be an integral part in the development of any curriculum, as is the kids with respect to this bill. So, I mean, were you asking for us to deviate from the School Code to do something j differently in this bill as opposed to the existing School Code? A. No, not necessarily, but I'm sure that there is not uniformity among school districts in terms of how curriculum — once a decision is made by a school board or by the legislature or by the State Board that a certain thing ought to be taught, then the actual approach to how to do that then becomes, it seems to me, a professional matter. We don't argue that teachers or I teacher organizations have any right to determine what it is that's going to be taught in the school, but once the decision has been made, public policy matter, then teachers ought to be responsible for the development of the curriculum. My concern is that if you don't spell that out, you know, this is a volatile kind of an issue. You 76 know, we get into the controversies about textbook selection and about supplemental reading materials having nothing to do with sex education even, and you could j imagine if you're going to start developing a curriculum now, once it's been determined that there's to be a sex education program, you can have parent groups that want to be involved in developing a curriculum, all the rest of that kind of thing. And what we're saying is that, and what I'm saying is that, once it's been determined that we're going to do something, then we ought to make it clear that it is the professionals, the teachers, and I J probably should have mentioned administrators here, but I don't represent them, who should have the responsibility for designing the actual curriculum guide and that sort of thing within a school district. Q. Well, of course, you're aware this bill doesn't mandate anything. I mean, it doesn't mandate sex education whatsoever, and it doesn't mandate the manner by which the curriculum is developed, and I guess you'd agree that it ought to be up to each local school district to mix and match, to have the people who sit down and work on the curriculum, be it teachers, be it administrators, be it input from parents, be it input from church groups, things like that—

ii 77 A. Well, you could have a real political circus though in an area like this if— Q. Well, I think a political circus sometimes also is described as democracy, but be that as it may— A. Well, if you were going to mandate anything, you, I would have to say, and I don't know of 1 teacher in 50 that doesn't agree that there is a need for something in our curriculum that addresses these kinds of matters, and I would think that a vast majority of our society believes that we ought to address these kinds of matters. As to how we do it can become controversial, but a redeeming feature of this thing would be if it said that districts ought to address these matters and indeed should do so. it doesn't say that. What it does say is if a district wants to address these kinds of matters, which it should, there's 9 million roadblocks in the way of doing it. That's how I interpret House Bill 2277.

Q. in other words, what you would like to see is for us, for the first time ever, to mandate by State law that there must be sex education in each school district? A. Well, I don't know how I would characterize it, but I would say that there clearly is a need for us to, through the school, to address these kinds of matters, certainly in a way that's acceptable to 78 the public, but that's why I said we can't stick our heads in the sand. We can't hide from what the reality is today. That's what I'm trying to say. Q. Well, I understand that, Al, but I'm not sure where you're coming from. Do you or do you not want to see a statewide mandate for sex education? We've never had that, the bill doesn't do that. It's up to each local school district, and I'm not sure exactly where you're coming from.

Q. Well, again, I don't mean to avoid your question. We haven't taken a position on that. Frankly, I think that there is a need for it and this bill, as I say, does not at all require it, but what it does do is if a district wants to move into this direction, which I believe it should, this specifies how they're going to do it and puts an awful lot of restrictions in the path. Q. You mention in 4 about problems, these type of problems that shouldn't be turned into a political issue and they transcend various biases and partisan political exploitation. Now, I'm not certain why you put it in there. is there any feeling on your part and that of the board that we have partisan political exploitation here? A. What I'm saying is that when you get into — I've been at school board hearings, I've been at 79 school board hearings in Pittsburgh and elsewhere, when you get into discussions of health clinics and so on and the kinds of matters that I believe we've got to try to address in our schools because they're not being addressed anyplace else, you get into all sorts of ideological considerations and everything else. And I know what public schools are, I understand very well. I j know what religion is, and so on, but again, I'm trying to say that I believe our schools have got to help to try j ! to solve this societal problem. That's why we support the efforts of the Annie Casey Foundation, and so on. j It's tough. It's tough. Representative j Freind. Every time that you try to address these problems issues are raised, you know, as if teachers and as if schools are not interested in values and as if we're going to counsel children that they should be promiscuous in terms of sex behavior and all. We don't believe that and we don't do that. What we're trying to do is, as teachers and as schools, trying to help in our society to meet a very, very serious problem. It's not getting less, it's getting greater. And if the schools can't contribute to solving that problem, I don't know who's going to. Q. Well, we could argue as to why it's getting greater, but my point is here though, certainly 80

then your implication is that the sponsorship of the 108 or 110 members of the House that sponsored 2277 in any way constitutes a partisan political—

A. No. No# because it's a bipartisan group. I would say this, if I were a legislator, my name wouldn't be on there. I wouldn't support the bill. Q. Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. Opt-out. It's your opinion that opt-out is not desireable, and I listened to your testimony and I understand you feel that an opt-out can be difficult for the child. A. Yeah, that's the only reason I say that. 0. But do you believe there's an inherent I right of a parent— A. I do. Yeah, I think political realities are such that— Q. Well, not just political reality. Don't you think that that's you're right as a parent? A. Well, yeah. You know, I don't think the curriculum is going to be such that it's the kind of thing that a parent would really need to object to, but there will be some who object to even a curriculum that is strong in terms of values and is clearly meeting our societal needs and all the rest of that. Nevertheless, i I 81 you're going to have people opt-out anyway. Q. Incidentally, I have not taken any position on this Annie Casey Foundation, and I appreciate your testimony. You indicate in your testimony that the foundation helps out children, it's voluntary, it has I nothing to do with counseling or providing of contraception and abortion, but then later on you said because one of the unwanted pregnancies, that was one of { i the driving forces behind the Annie Casey Foundation. So • how do you— A. Well, I wouldn't use the term "unwanted ! pregnancy," I'd use the term of "teenage pregnancy." Kids that aren't married are getting pregnant. Young \ children are becoming pregnant. Therefore, they're trying to find a way, through education and through other activities, so they don't become pregnant. Q. But it has nothing whatsoever to do with contraceptives or abortion or anything else? A. Well, it could have. Obviously, one of the things somebody could say ultimately is, well, once a person is pregnant, these are some of the recourses. But that's not why we're involved in it. Our idea is that we've got to provide understanding by children, activities for children, and so on, so that these kind of things don't occur in the first place. 82

Q. Listen, finally, anybody who gets into I i i this game has to have a thick skin, so the editorial, as far as the references to me, don't bother me in the ; slightest. I think they spelled the name right and when the Pittsburgh Press attacked me, I said, you know, what else is new? But to be really honest with you, to attach this, the editorial, besides attacking me, doesn't say a hell of a lot about the bill. I mean, it doesn't go into any detail whatsoever why it's not a good bill or the whole issue of sex education. I think you could find maybe a better editorial to use to buttress the opinion of your board. A. Well, I would have to say that the Press is a big newspaper. I didn't see one in the post- Gazette. There may have been one. But as I look at the first column, and I mentioned outside of the references to you— Q. Well, the whole damn thing makes j references to me, Al. Who are you kidding? j A. Well, where it says, "the reality is that I; the bill goes far beyond getting more adults t involved.... it seeks to give considerable power to small numbers of parents to discourage and block sex-education classes," I happen to think that that is a fair appraisal 83 i i of the bill. I really do, and that's what I tried to say i here. I A. Well, small numbers today is in the mind of the beholder, and whether or not it discourages or encourages, again, is in the mind of the beholder, and I i think reasonable people can differ. But it's not real j level. it's not a real detailed editorial. I appreciate j the advertising they gave to me, as they've done on \ i occasions too numerous to mention. Thanks for your testimony. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Fondy) Q. What is the sex education offered in the Pittsburgh District now, other than this program we were talking about? A. Yeah, that program is separate. It's only in a few schools. We have a curriculum, but it does not J include abortion counseling, I can tell you that, and contraceptive dispensing and all that sort of thing. It's a curriculum that was developed through the normal channels. There were teachers involved in it, there were administrators involved it. It's been reviewed by parents. I don't think it's a controversial curriculum. 84

Our board has dealt with the matter not only in terms of xts educational and social implications, but in terms of its political implications and has been narrowly divided but in favor of the posture that controversial issues such as contraceptives and abortion should not be included within the school. Q. How many years have you had the program? A. Gee, I don't know. It's been a while. I guess the basic program now, I know it's maybe two or three years. There's been other things prior to that time. Q. How many opt-out? Do you have any idea? A. I don't know that we have an opt-out provision. if we do, I'm not even aware of it. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Fondy) Q. Al, just clarify one thing, if you would. There has been mention made of the Casey Foundation program. My understanding of that program, its primary impetus is to reduce the drop-out rate. A. Right. Q. And teen pregnancy has been cited as one of the causes for drop-outs. 85 A. And jobs. Q. But the broad purpose is to help kids stay in school. A. Right. And frankly, to have kids, as a result of being in school, be employable and feel as ( ! though there's a job future for them, and so on. That's the basic thrust of the program. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MR. FONDY: Thank you. I CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Anne Barbera, from Somerset. » MS. BARBERA: Thank you for the opportunity to testify as to the need for parents to have an active part in the formal sex education of their children. As a parent, grandparent, youth leader, and former teacher in both public and private sectors, but especially as a foster parent to troubled youth, I fully realize that lack of parental input can cause very severe I emotional problems. My support for House Bill 2277 stems from the knowledge gained by serving on a sex education committee in our school district and the extensive research which resulted therefrom. One teacher, without the knowledge or consent of school board or school personnel, not only 86 brought Planned parenthood into her classroom to teach permissive sex, but she also brought in material that many parents found objectionable, and she would not allow the children to remove this material from the school classroom, for very obvious reasons. As a result of the great outcry of parents, and I would say there was over 500 of them, the sex education committee was formed. It I was chaired by the assistant superintendent, it was stacked with school personnel, and just a small tokenism was afforded to a couple of us in the community. The books and films that we reviewed degraded parents and elevated the teachers and the J clinics. Now, good material was available, but we on the j committee were not allowed to submit it. We need the | i Parent and Pupil protection Act so that parents and those in the community who are concerned enough to do research can seriously be involved with the implementation of sex education programs that will benefit, not harm, our children and build, not destroy, parent-child relationship. j One article that was given us to digest and assimilate dealt with supposed successful sex education programs and helpful organizations. Although the article was taken from an educational journal, the committee chairman had no knowledge of the sources in the 87 article. Because of research, I was able to submit to the committee a report concerning the major sex education program listed in the article we were reviewing. The report included the student survey which showed that as a result of participation in this so-called model sex education program, a large percentage of students were more likely to engage in sex and less likely to go to I parents for advice. ! Two of the four organizations listed in i ! the article for beneficial help were formed by former leaders and associates of planned parenthood, which was the very organization that the parents were objecting to. Now, one of these organizations, SIECUS, actually condones sex between children and adults, and they cite incest might be beneficial. A third organization listed was an affiliate of the national teachers union. So, so much for parental input. I'd like to ask, have any of you ever attended a workshop on sex education given for teachers, counselors, and school nurses? I wonder if you would be as shocked as I was when they showed nude films depicting every act of sex, from masturbation straight through homosexuality, and then they encouraged us to use it in our schools, because the facilitator told us that she used these same films in the schools in Philadelphia for 88 children as young as eight years of age because they were mature. In another seminar, we were told to push masturbation and homosexuality as these acts fulfill our needs but they do not beget children, because we were told and it was stressed that the worst crime a child could commit is to have a baby. So after all, if pregnancy did occur we were told to really push abortion. But in the seminar, none of the serious side effects of abortion or the complications of venereal diseases, or sexually transmitted diseases, as they're called, none of these were taught to us in the seminar. We were told by the professor incest should be decriminalized as it could be beneficial. Now, if our school board, we were told in this seminar, if our school board were to forbid teaching certain aspects of sexuality, we could get it into the class by supposedly answering children's questions, and that way we could cover any material we wanted to. Very recently, they formed a new sex education committee in our school district, but on that sex education committee there are no representatives from the school board, no representatives of parents, and no representatives from the community. A single teacher was granted the authority to write the program. The objectional Pennsylvania Health Curriculum Guide is 89 listed for teachers' reference and use, and no research had been done on the very successful sex education programs that are available that have proven to reduce teen promiscuity. I I I So in conclusion, I would like to state that the Parent and Pupil Protection Act is a bill that is long overdue. it is a bill that will guarantee parents the right to have a voice in the development of sex education curriculum for their children, and it will give the parents the opportunity to grant permission for their children to participate, based on knowledge of the exact contents of the program. House Bill 2277 is a bill very much needed to give parents the opportunity to exercise their primary right to guide their children's education, socialization and health care. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. Are there questions? Representative Kosmski. BY REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: (Of Ms. Barbera) Q. Ma'am, could you give me information on when that seminar was held that you attended? A. That particular — one of the seminars was held just about two years ago— Q. No, no. The one you attended that you 90 mentioned. A. Which one? I mentioned two of them. Q. Page 2, third paragraph. A. The one where they showed the films? Q. Yes. A. That was shown two years ago in Harrisburg at the Children's Abuse Conference. Q. Okay. Do you have the name of the facilitator? A. it was Ms. Gay, who is head of education for the Planned Parenthood Philadelphia office. REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Representative Stairs. .' BY REPRESENTATIVE STAIRS: (Of Ms. Barbera) Q. The beginning of your testimony mentions about a teacher. Was that in part of a class like home J ec, gym, or health? The first page I'm talking about. j I A. Oh, she brought it in a health class and j I also in a class that they were holding. She brought it j in two places, one for the health class in the high school and then also for another class which she held for the students who came every other week from vo-tech. They go to vo-tech one week and come back, and she had 91 them and covered various subjects. Q. And you mentioned, the last page, about the curriculum now that you have, there's one person that kind of singlehandedly drew it up. is that the same person?

A. No. No. But the same person who brought Planned parenthood in is still teaching sex education. REPRESENTATIVE STAIRS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Representative Davies. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Yeah. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Ms. Barbera) Q. Some 500 were upset at the first attempt. What happened when it went to the other plan where only the one— I A. Well, that was only instigated this year. Q. I'm sorry? A. That one only came in this year, so we have not really — they have not come to the sex education part for this year. Q. Okay. And do they have an opt-out provision? A. I think that you would be allowed to opt- out, but all the parents that I know, they're very frightened to opt their children out because when they 92 chose to opt their children out of taking the EQA test one year, say, the children were singled out. Their names were called out over the loud speaker, they were sent to one room, the teacher in charge of them there yelled at them, she would not let them talk to one another. They were treated totally different than they were in a regular study hall. The children were very, very embarrassed and very, very deeply hurt. And so a j lot of parents will not opt their children out of programs because they do not want their children set | aside, singled out, and made fun of by the teachers and j the other students. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Barbera) Q. Ma'am, in which district do you reside? A. Somerset School District. Q. And that's the district to which you refer in your testimony? A. Yes. Q. And is it reasonable for me to assume that ( the events that you're describing, the general circumstances, are current then? A. The new sex education course is starting 93 and they are going to teach contraceptives and so forth in this new course, but they have not given the parents notice of what is in the course, they have not — as a j matter of fact, i went — the end of last year I went and I got all the curriculum material and the outline, I reviewed the whole thing, and it is very sketchy, very | poorly done, to be truthful. And I did write a critique of it and handed it into the committee. I asked them if I I could come in and discuss some of the issues with them, and they don't want any part of any outside input or any parental input at all. I Q. Do you no longer serve on the sex ed committee? A. No. That particular sex education committee was disbanded and they set up this new one which — as a matter of fact, if you'd like to know, I went in to see the school superintendent and he serves on the committee for the AIDS education and had no idea that j there was another sex education committee set up. Q. To the best of your knowledge, have any of these issues been raised with your local State legislators, your House member or your Senator? A. No, because we were able to iron most of them out previously through the parents going to the school. The school did listen when the parents got 94 involved. Now they're starting an entirely new program/ so we will have to go through the process all over again, and I just feel that this bill will keep us from having to keep going back and go through the same process again. They consider us nuisances because we are parents and they are the so-called professionals. So we really favor this bill so that we don't have to continuously go back and bring the issue up with the school. Q. The seminar that you spoke of that Mr. Kosinski asked you about, who sponsored that seminar in Harrisburg? A. It's the — every year they have a Child Abuse Conference that's given in Harrisburg each year, and it is for State Children and youth caseworkers, teachers, nurses and so forth attend. Q. But who sponsors it? is it a private organization? A. No, no. I should have brought the slip with me, it is sponsored by the State because it's our State Children — I serve also on the Children and Youth board, and the Children and Youth caseworkers attend this every year. Q. If you would just be kind enough, I don't want to bother you about it now, but if you would be kind enough to send us any material that you have on it, if I 95 there was a brochure or something that would identify— A. Yes, I'll be very happy to. I have that at home. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony. MS. BARBERA: You're quite welcome. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I'm sorry. j Representative Freind. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. Barbera) Q. Thank you, Anne. Just very briefly, the conference in Harrisburg that you're referring to, I believe that's the one you sent me information on? A. Yes. Q. Sponsored, I believe, by the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, at least in part, right? A. Yes. Yes. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Okay. Thanks. MS. BARBERA: And the other seminar that I had attended that I mentioned where they pushed — where the professor actually told us that we could get around teaching anything we pleased by answering questions, that was put on by Penn State continuing education. We received credit for that. it was given by the professor who is a professor in the biology department at Penn 96

State University and a nurse. And in that — as a matter of fact, he did not even put in the brochure the subjects that he was going to cover. He covered other subjects. So that's when he got into masturbation, homosexuality and so forth. They were covered but they were not even listed in the brochures that were sent out. But it was an eye-opener to find out what he was telling the teachers to do. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thanks, Anne. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Just one other informational point, you may well be aware, you note that the objectional Pennsylvania Health Curriculum Guide is being listed on a reference sheet. I would observe that that guide which was distributed by the Department of Education during the previous administration, which was developed by an outside organization, has been disavowed, as was indicated by Mr. Logan's testimony this j morning. Secretary of Education Gilhool a year ago took J steps to withdraw any State sponsorship of that | i curriculum guide and asked that any existing guides are to be returned or destroyed. That is the position of the Department of Education. MS. BARBERA: I was aware of this when I went in to see the principal, and I did point this out. When I reviewed the curriculum, I did point this out to 97 the principal and he was not aware of it. He had no notice that it had been recalled, but he said he would do something about it. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. MS. BARBERA: But one other thing, I'd just like to mention very briefly why I feel parents have to be involved, because I don't think the so-called school professionals know it all, because when I sat on the sex education committee, I was very, very aware of I the sexually transmitted disease chlamydia, which was a fast growing, the fastest growing, sexually transmitted | disease at that time, and the nurses had no idea what I was talking about. But they were the ones who were going to go into the classroom and teach sexually transmitted diseases. All they knew about was gonorrhea and syphilis, and you could go and get penicillin to cure them, and I had to tell them that there were now certain strains of gonorrhea that were resistant to penicillin.

So, I mean, I think that parents and community members who have an interest have to be involved because we do take time out for research and we do go to the medical department and so forth, and so many of the teachers were not aware of all these issues. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much for your testimony. 98

MS. BARBERAs Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Mr. John Yarnovic, president of the Pennsylvania State Education Association. Neither of you folks is John. If you would identify yourselves for the record, please. MR. STEVENS: Good morning. I was just about to say that I'm obviously not John Yarnovic. My name is Jim Stevens, and I'm the Vice President of the Pennsylvania State Education Association. I am here representing John today. With me is Stan Wills, from our Educational Services Division, a member of our staff. I would like to thank the House Education Committee for the opportunity to present our testimony on House Bill 2277. The purpose of this testimony is to summarize the reasons for PSEA's opposition to this bill. First, the thrust of the bill is inconsistent with Pennsylvania's curriculum regulations. Chapter 5, Curriculum Regulations of the State Board of Education, Section 5.4, provides, in a pertinent part, that, and I quote, "It is the policy of the Board that Boards of School Directors have the greatest possible flexibility in curriculum planning...." House Bill 2277 moves in the opposite direction by impeding the 99 development of locally designed sex education curricula. Second, the definition of "sex education" in Section 2502-A is so vague and encompassing that litigation over its meaning is inevitable. it is not even clear who has the authority or the responsibility to define that meaning on a pragmatic, day-to-day basis in the schools. The result of the ambiguity in this already controversial area will necessarily be to stifle discussion, discourage the open interchange of ideas, and to channel all dialogue into a narrow and parochial funnel of noncontroversial, conformist ideas. The late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Learned Hand stated a century ago, and again I quote: j I "The classroom is peculiarly the ^marketplace of ideas.' The nation's future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth out of a multitude of tongues (rather) than through any kind of authoritative selection." The design of House Bill 2277 ignores this concept. As starters then, the bill will promote litigation, invite institutional timidity, stifle free discussion, and remove local control over the content of sex education curriculum. 100

Third, the bill will substantially reduce sex education curriculum offerings. The mandated public hearings are themselves so cumbersome and so burdensome that school districts will ultimately either eliminate the courses or not provide them at all. In addition, the public hearings will be burdened by those whose primary goal is to prevent schools from providing any meaningful sex education programs. A 1987 survey of school districts by the Department of Education, which was mentioned earlier today, indicated that 90-percent of those responding provided some form of locally designed sex education. That number would drop precipitously if this bill were enacted. Not only are the hearings burdensome by their mandate, they are designed to discourage sex education offerings. House Bill 2277 requires school boards to act affirmatively in a public hearing in order to add sex education to the curriculum. The same bill exempts the elimination or curtailment of sex education programs from the public hearings. In other words, it is much easier to eliminate a sex education program than it is to add one. There is no logical basis for this proposed process other than deterrence, since school

I 101 boards currently are required by State regulation to involve parents of school-age children in the process of developing their sex education curriculum. Section 2504-A, subsection (A), further requires all parents and guardians to receive annually a ' mass of information. Again, the result will be to discourage boards from providing this instruction. J If you imagine what it will cost for paper, printing, handling, collating, and postage to meet this requirement in the typical first class or major urban area school district, you begin to see the built-in deterrent. The requirement that mail notification occur 60 days prior to the beginning of such instruction is also unreasonable. Finally, there is the provision that, quote, "Any person shall be permitted to review" I curriculum material. There is absolutely no valid reason [ for this provision. Only parents or guardians have the | authority to remove their children from the class. This f open invitation has the potential of a witch hunt, thus embroiling districts in lengthy battles with people or organizations who have no legitimate interest in the curriculum. Again, the deterrent effort is obvious. Fifth, requiring prior written consent for 102 pupil participation may result in pupils with the least stable and supportive home situations being prevented from learning what they need to know. The bill implicitly assumes that students will get the information they need at home. What happens to the students who are unable or unwilling to discuss the issues of sexuality with their parents? No public education curriculum, including AIDS, requires prior written parental consent for pupil participation. There is a significant difference between allowing parents to excuse their child from class, opt- out, and requiring every parent to provide written permission, opt-in, to authorize their child to participate in class. This may set a precedent for other j choices of students. In 1974, SIECUS established a policy which stated, and again I quote: "Free access to full and accurate information on all aspects of sexuality is a basic right for everyone, children as well as adults. It is apparent that factual information and accurate knowledge about sexuality are essential to all individuals. It should be understandable also that "everyone' refers to all individuals including those with exceptionality." Teachers want students to become 103 responsible, mature adults, who exercise informed choices. Enactment of House Bill 2277 would not alleviate the social problems facing students in today's society. it would instead make it more difficult for school boards and educators to prepare young people to deal with those problems.

Sixth, the restrictions placed on psychiatric and psychological examination, testing, or treatment in Section 2506-A underscores the need to ,; define these broad terms. For example, does it include a student's conference with a guidance counselor? Counselors and other school personnel will have to be careful when talking with students about drug abuse, alcohol abuse, child abuse, or the like in order j to avoid surfacing, quote, "mental and psychological ) problems potentially embarrassing to the student or his family." A literal reading of this section makes it impossible for students to go to school personnel of their choice for help without prior written consent of their parent. This is especially true in situations where the parent is abusing the child. In turn, the teacher or guidance counselor would be placed in the position of having to choose between helping the student or violating the law. 104 In addition, this particular section conflicts with Federal law by restricting school personnel in identifying and placing students in appropriate classroom settings suited to their individual emotional and educational needs. For example. Public Law 94-142 requires local education agencies to provide testing for student placement not limited to intelligence testing. A question must be asked, what impact does Public Law 94-142 have in relation to this bill?

PSEA supports Public Law 94-142 and the existing Chapter 12 Pupil Rights and Responsibility Regulations of the State Board of Education. The imposition of House Bill 2277 would dilute those rights. Seventh, Section 2507-A is a particularly troubling section of this bill in that it causes personal, professional, and ethical concerns for school j employees. Sex education is a basic and primary responsibility of the home, unfortunately, this responsibility is often inadequately handled, neglected, and/or ignored.

Louis Harris and Associates, incorporated, conducted a 1986 nationwide poll of teenagers, age 12 through 17, and found that: 1. More than half of America's teenagers 105 report having had sexual intercourse by their 17th year. 2. Sexual activity begins earlier among those teenagers who have the fewest resources, and who j are thus the most vulnerable. I 3. Only one-third, 33 percent, of those teenagers who have had intercourse say that they use j contraceptives all the time. * 4. A major priority for society in dealing with the problem of teenage pregnancy is to find ways of increasing the information that teenagers have at their disposal. 5. It is important that both parents and schools play a greater role. i PSEA acknowledges the primary value-driven j i role of the parent in addressing teenage pregnancy. I However, there are trained, skilled, and experienced school personnel, including school nurses, and physicians, who know the medical significance of receiving early prenatal care. Adult, professional counseling is available and important. Sections 2508-A through 2511-A call for only abbreviated comment. No school program should assume the parents* responsibility to discuss the moral and religious aspects of sexuality with a child. However, sex education programs in the school can 106 supplement and complement the parents1 role. PSEA is supportive of the State Board of Education Chapter 5 Curriculum Regulations requiring instruction in AIDS to, quote, "stress that abstinence from sexual activity is the only completely reliable means of preventing the sexual transmission of AIDS." The restrictions specified in Section 2509-A are unnecessary. There are sufficient checks and balances within the legislature and various Commonwealth agencies, including the independent Regulatory Review Commission.

Section 2510-A. Enforcement would place a heavy burden upon the Department of Education staff. it should be noted that there has been an approximate 50- percent decrease in staff within the past decade. The requirements under this section are for purposes that are particularly limited in scope. This section also requires the department j to, quote, "conduct and complete an immediate investigation" upon receipt of a complaint. Again, time, money, personnel would be necessary to fulfill this requirement, thus impacting on an already depleted staff. To permit "any person" to file a complaint without identifying geographic residence appears unreasonable. As noted, this wording would extend beyond 107 the limits of the school district, community, or even the boundaries of the State. j i

i In conclusion, I believe it is obvious to j all here that our organization does not support this • bill. | PSEA recognized the changing student ; population, the changing family structure, and the absolute need for the public schools to meet the needs as \ they arise without imposition of laws or regulations that would prevent that need and at the same time protect the \ sanctity of personal and religious beliefs. In closing, PSEA supports the State Board | I of Education policy Statement on "Sex Education in the \ Public Schools of Pennsylvania" as adopted in 1969 and J

• amended in 1976 and which is attached to the copy of our jj testimony. (See index for exhibits of Mr. Stevens.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Are there questions? j Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Stevens) I Q. In your own district, are they offering | sex education? A. Yes, they are. Q. How many years has that been in? 108 A. I think it's been in K through 12th curriculum for two years. There's been sex education at the high school before that. It's been incorporated in the health program. Q. Do they have the opt-out provision? A. They have actually an opt-out and an opt- in provision. Q. And— A. Which is very cumbersome and does cause J the district a lot of administrative time and follow-up, and this is in a district that is very supportive of the concept. J Q. And have there been any problems with the opting out or opting in at all, as you described it? | A. As I understand it, and I haven't been active except as a parent in the district for the last | year, that during the first year of the implementation of the program, about 85 percent of the parents wanted their | i students involved, and in the second year that rose to j over 90 percent. J

i REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Kosinski. BY REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: (Of Mr. Stevens) Q. I had a little chuckle up here when I heard your testimony, and then at the end you mentioned 109 that you believe in the guidelines. Part of the reason we're here today and the bill is introduced is the guidelines aren't being followed in many school districts and we feel we need more legislative action in this area. \ Many of the people who testify, who have come in front of us the last few meetings, have basically, even though not talking about your guidelines specifically, have hit upon the same points as the guidelines. It's obvious from the testimony that we've heard that the guidelines are not being followed. A. One of the reasons that Stan's here is » I that he is very well versed in the laws and regulations that relate to this here, so I'm going to ask him to i respond. I MR. WILLS: Thank you. \ A very valid point that you raised, and I've heard this raised before in the hearings in Philadelphia and Harrisburg. I think it's extremely important to indicate that the Chapter 5 curriculum regulations in place today do require the development of a long-range plan which specifically identifies the inclusion of the curriculum, and it very specifically involves the composition of the body that develops that plan. And it says that it shall include but not be limited to, and in that inclusion of individuals it has 110 parents of school-age children and members of the community. Equally significant, I believe, in addressing a response to your question is the fact that a commissioned officer, the superintendent of each public school district, is required to sign one's name to a compliance document. Therefore, I would suggest that the question that you raise, which has been presented to you, is with merit and does in fact require an interaction with these commissioned officers to see that they in fact are in compliance so that it is not the issue that has been brought before you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Gentlemen, thank you for j being here. Our next witness is Vivian Malits, from Pittsburgh. REV. MALITS: Dear Chairman, and House Education Committee, I'm Reverend Vivian Lee Malits, wife and mother of seven daughters. Our oldest three have completed their schooling, two are in college, and two are yet in elementary school. Being founder and pastor of Living Branch Ministries, I've been called upon in five western Pennsylvania counties to counsel women and Ill children who are victims of abuse. I have worked with an J abuse center, doctors, lawyers and clergy in these ) counties, as well as speaking in school classrooms and elsewhere about domestic violence, dating violence and sexual abuse. My specialty in counseling have been those who have been termed "hard core" religious. Thus, I have also worked with victims of cult abuses. I strongly favor House Bill 2277 in its entirety. This bill is relevant to the needs of our current society's educational system. in the time alloted, I will speak only on a few of its mandates. One of my counseling sessions directly related to Section 2507-B. A public school girl was transported by her guidance counselor to an abortion clinic during school hours without her parents* knowledge j or consent. After the abortion, she was returned to school, spent the remainder of the day in the nurse's office before returning home at the regular school time. Two weeks later, she tried to commit suicide. The parents first learned of the abortion while their daughter was in therapy. These parents did not take legal action against the school. This illustrates a practice contrary to what parents would consider to be normal school policy. Since our school system requires medication given to a 112 student to be in its prescription container, most parents wouldn't suspect that any type of medical treatment such as an abortion would secretly be given to their child. When school officials have moved so far out of bounds as to make such a secret invasion into a family's personal life, as this instance shows, then regulation is needed to protect the family. Regulation is also needed to protect school districts from probable lawsuits.

I favor the provision requiring that sex education curriculum emphasize abstinence from premarital sexual relations as the only completely reliable means of preventing the transmission of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, as well as avoiding pregnancy. It is important that the local school boards, elected by local people who pay the taxes for the education of their children, be responsive to the standards of the local community in this especially sensitive area. This means that the local school board, i along with the ongoing, authorized input from parents and j the public, shall be responsible for the specific content of the sex education curriculum. So long as they do not abuse their role, it is the right of the parents to guide their own child's moral upbringing. Due to the frankness of our society to

i 113 talk about sex in all forms of the media, we don't have to teach anyone graphically different forms of sexual techniques. If they do not know them, it's freely given anywhere. Let's keep what individual families feel is sacred and personal - sex - the gift from God that it is, to be enjoyed in its proper place in our lives. instead, let us use our valuable school times for educating students in the skills they will need to live a productive life. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. Are there questions? Greg White. BY MR. WHITE: (Of Rev. Malits) Q. Just one quick question. I'm not going to ask you to name the school personnel involved, but could you give us the name of the school district where the— A. it was here in Allegheny County. Other than that, because I've counseled the parents and they do want to remain anonymous with their child, I can't give you anything more than that. MR. WHITE: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Wass. BY REPRESENTATIVE WASS: (Of Rev. Malits) Q. Ma'am, do you believe that we should have 114

any type of sex education in our school? A. Yes. Q. How would you involve the parents in that program or in that curriculum? A. As this bill states, letting them be able to have part in designing this education by meeting with their school boards or meeting with whatever committees that they have decided is going to formulate the sex education for their schools. Q. The personal notification, are you also insisting that every parent have access to what's being taught in the school environment? ] A. i think if the school has it available on the campus and they want to come and look at it, fine. I | i don't really feel that it has to be mailed out to each i parent. But if the parent is concerned about what I they're being taught, they'll go in and look at it. The j same as with PTAs or anything. If they're concerned about their child, they'll be a member. I i Q. So your only requirement would be that parents have access to the material and that they be involved in creating the material? A. yes. i REPRESENTATIVE WASS: That's all. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? 115 (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: I respect the need for the confidentiality in terms of the district. On the other hand, if you could speak with that family and ask them to at least consider, on a confidential basis, letting us know what district that is, or at least talking to myself or some other member of the committee J about that situation, it would be helpful, particularly because I would like to know what the policies in that district are. it is entirely possible that there is a policy in a district that was violated by some school personnel, just as that same school personnel might violate a law that we would establish then. On the other hand, I would be very interested in knowing if in fact that school district had a policy which permitted or condoned the type of activity that you described. So again, I respect the need for the confidentiality today, but if you could ask that family to at least consider giving us a call so that we could chat and maybe learn a little bit more from their experience. REV. MALITS: I do know that that school district, because I have gone to some of the school board members, and I know that school district did not approve of that action by the guidance counselor. 116 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you. Greg wants to do a follow-up. Greg White. BY MR. WHITE: (Of Rev. Maiits) Q. Do you know whether the school board took any disciplinary action against the school employee involved? A. They called the person in and reprimanded them, but they did not fire them. MR. WHITE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Stairs. BY REPRESENTATIVE STAIRS: (Of Rev. Maiits) Q. A question not on this last part but earlier you said about the local districts having the right and responsibility of making their own curriculum or own program for sex education, and of course rather than it be dictated to by Harrisburg or some larger governmental body, and I have no problem with that. The question I might ask you is, neighboring districts, neighboring counties, do you think there would be kind of a homogeneous type of program or do you think it would vary greatly throughout the Commonwealth? I mean, one district might have one philosophy, one district might have some other philosophy. Do you think they would be similar or be greatly different? A. No, I think they'd probably be similar 117 JJ because I know I helped work with an abuse program that j was set out in Alle-Kiski Area School District. It was j i taught last year and it was put in all the schools, and j it was taught from the local abuse center which I do ! volunteer work for and instigated and written by that person, their educational personnel, and is not in all the Pittsburgh Area School District schools this year. j So, you know, they just adopted the format that was I written up for Alle-Kiski Area and took it into the j Pittsburgh area schools and just changed a few things i according, you know, what youth center you would go to j and giving the students this kind of reference, and so forth. So it would be similar. REPRESENTATIVE STAIRS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much for being here. j Next on our agenda, this represents a j replacement witness. It's Mary Drumm, who is speaking on behalf of Mary Winter. MS. WINTER: Representative Cowell and members of the committee, I am Mary Winter from Pittsburgh, and it was my intention to come both as a parent and an educator to speak strongly in favor of the 118 bill and commend its sponsors, but I learned yesterday that this woman from Erie had rather dramatic— CHAIRMAN COWELL: Let me interrupt you. You may do that, but you have five minutes and you're j using up the five minutes. Go ahead. MS. WINTER: She has, I think, a more meaningful and dramatic testimony. Also, it gives someone from the northwestern part of the State an opportunity to speak. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Fine. MS. DRUMM: Hello. My name is Mary Drumm, J and I'm the mother of eight children, six of them still in school— CHAIRMAN COWELL: Let me interrupt one j more time, DO you have any written testimony to give the j members? MS. DRUMM: No. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Go ahead. MS. DRUMM: I have written testimony, but last night I decided to use the story of another parent who came to me yesterday because I felt, as Mary did, that her story was more valuable than the testimony that I had drafted to give to you today. This mother, who is willing to be 119 identified to you, I'm not going to use her name publicly here, but she is willing to identify herself to all of the members of the committee, and so is her husband. I I will not mention her daughter's name because her daughter has suffered a great amount of pain at the hands of the school district and the teachers, and I don't want to increase this kid's pain. What took place in the Erie School i District, at Tech Memorial High School on Cherry Street, just a few blocks from my house, I think is a very tragic j situation. This girl was a 17-year-old senior at Tech Memorial High School and her parents were very, very involved with their children. This is a mother who was still driving her daughter, at 17, to school every day. Drove her to school that day, as usual, dropped her off and watched her walk in the door of the school. That girl was pregnant, had decided to have an abortion, she did not discuss the pregnancy with her parents, although | she had discussed it with her homeroom teacher, the I principal, the guidance counselor, the school nurse, and even the lady in the attendance office. They were all aware that she was pregnant. She had been advised to go to Family planning previous to this day in mid-November, I believe the date was November 19, 1984. She had been advised to 120 go to Family Planning since she said she felt it difficult to discuss the pregnancy with her parents. As a result of that meeting with Family Planning, she had an abortion scheduled in Pittsburgh. This day that she showed up for school that her mother dropped her off, she went right to the principal's office and informed him that today is the day that I am going to have the abortion, and I would appreciate it if you would not call my house to verify, you know, the fact that I'm home sick. That was the general policy of that particular high school. The children that came in without written excuses from their parents to be excused early, those parents would be notified. And she said, "Please don't notify my parents. I'm going to have this abortion and I don't want to tell my mother about it." I

The principal took her then to the attendance office and m front of the student instructed the attendance office not to call the parent and explained why. Both the principal and the attendance office personnel reminded her that she should bring a slip from the doctor that performed the abortion at the clinic, she did not bring an excuse, written excuse, from him, she simply brought the receipt from the abortion clinic showing that she had paid for the abortion. Actually, the boyfriend had borrowed the money 121 from his brother and that's how the abortion was paid' for. The child came home from school at the normal time and the mother and the father had no idea that their child had been aborted, with the permission of the principal. The first sign that there was something wrong was with the child's personality, she became very depressed, she became very withdrawn, she stopped communicating with her parents, she stopped communicating J with her brothers and sisters, she became hostile. This happened just prior to Thanksgiving and she said, "Our j Thanksgiving vacation was awful."

She went back to school and did not do as well as she had been doing academically. The mother knew in the next few weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas | that something terribly wrong — that there was something terribly wrong with her daughter. At that time, she found the slip from Family planning and she called Family Planning and she said, "I found a slip in my daughter's room." She said, "We're very concerned about her. We've always had her under the care of the same pediatrician for 17 years. We don't know why she would come to you to use your services. Can you give me any information? We're very concerned about this child, her health, her emotional stability right now. Is there any information 122 you can give us so that we can help her?" And they said, no, and in effect told them it was absolutely none of their business, that at 17 years old she was perfectly capable of making decisions about, you know, seeking whatever services she wanted from Family Planning, and no, they couldn't tell her whether they had dispensed birth control pills, and no, they could not tell her whether she had been aborted or was pregnant or had gone to seek a pregnancy test. At that point, the younger sister told the mother, seeing how upset she was and how anguished she was over this child's behavior. She said, "Mommy, I know what happened to my sister. She had an abortion on this particular school day and the principal and everybody else knows about it and that's why she was excused from school and that's why you didn't get a call."

At that point, the mother called the school and asked, you know, the attendance office if they had any information about her daughter's absences, and the attendance office would not give her any information at all. She then called — later on when she got the report card it showed two excused absences and she called the attendance office and said, "I only excused this child once for the flu. What is the other excuse?" And j they said, "It's a medical excuse." And she said, "May I 123 come and see the excuse or who wrote it or what it said?" And they said, "No, you may not. It's none of your business. It's a medical excuse and it's valid." In fact, there was no excuse, simply the receipt from the > abortion clinic. She then called the principal at home during the Christmas holidays and when the sister had revealed that she had had the abortion, she said, "Mr. Tempestini, are you aware that my daughter had an abortion and are you aware that we did not know about j it?" And he said, "Yes, I am." And she said, "And was the homeroom teacher also aware and the attendance office?" And he said, "Yes." He admitted all of this to her. He said, "We had no right to tell you because we I would have violated laws of confidentiality." And he was not particularly sympathetic or apologetic about it. He felt that he was within his rights and that he was doing what he should be doing as a good school principal.

She made numerous calls to the school district office and was shuffled from person to person, none of whom gave her any satisfactory answers. No one seemed to be able to clearly outline a policy for her. She couldn't seem to find out if there was a policy, and if there was, what the policy was. So, in utter frustration, she called a 124 reporter at the Erie Times and she said, "Do you think, since you are the person that covers the education beat, do you think that you could find out for me what the policy is?" That reporter, she said, was the first person that took any interest in my daughter's problem, and she was the first person who said, "Yes, I will help you get some answers." And as a result, there was a story done and the mother and father and child's names were kept anonymous in the story. But a story was done, and at that point, the school district personnel really scurried, and everybody sat up and paid attention, and in fact the school superintendent, who didn't want to speak to her before, called her immediately. And there was a lot of — I have all the newspaper articles here and we will copy them. I was just given them last night or I would have had copies available for you today, but I will copy all of these and I give these to you. There was a succession of newspaper , stories with the superintendent saying one thing and the ] school board saying another thing and the solicitor for the school board saying another thing, and eventually it was decided that we have to develop some guidelines. And the last two news stories I have here are those guidelines, and then the editor's opinion of those 125 guidelines and the public's opinion of those guidelines that if I read them all to you, we'd be here all day. But I will submit them to you. I think that the final guideline that was written that still stands, at least as far as I know, I don't think anything supersedes this guideline, is that counselors and school nurses do have to, by the school district's desire, do have to obey the laws of confidentiality. However, teachers and principals do not. They may inform parents if a student is on drugs or is pregnant, I think they mentioned, or is in some kind j of trouble with the law that the parents might not be aware of. The opinion of most of the parents that were interviewed, and there was numerous interviews of students as well as parents on the 7:00 o'clock news and the 11:00 o'clock news. It went on for quite a few days. While all of this was going on, the young lady who had the abortion was suffering terribly. She had infection, she had hemorrhaging, she had a fever, she was treated with antibiotics, she was withdrawing more and more, she was showing lots of signs of depression, and finally she left the house, she moved in with her boyfriend. The school, who had previously been unwilling to contact the mother when she wasn't there, now was 126 calling and contacting, saying, do you know, Mrs. So-and- so, that your daughter isn't in school today? Do you know that we're worried about her? DO you know that she hasn't been well? she said, "Now that my daughter is 18 and now that my daughter is living on her own and now that you're having a problem with the aftermath of this abortion, now you're informing me? And you wouldn't I cooperate with me before?" I She was very, very upset, and I understood | her frustration and her pain as she told me this story last night with tears running down her face. She said, "You know, my daughter's life has been drastically altered because of that principal's decision." She said, "My daughter almost didn't finish high school." She graduated with a blank diploma and went to summer school, but she said she was a few short hours from taking her boards in cosmetology. The cosmetology teacher was so hostile to her that she dropped the class. She said, "The teachers in that school were so hostile to my daughter because of the newspaper article," she said, "that she suffered tremendously." For instance, one of her teachers the day after— CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, I'm sorry to interrupt, but I've allowed you to go on for 12 minutes, 127 and you were allotted 5 minutes, because I honestly feel that you have something unique to tell us. But to be i fair to everybody else where the five minutes is going to be imposed, I've got to ask you to summarize. I MS. DRUMMs Okay. Well, just to give you one illustration, and she gave me probably two dozen last night, to give you one illustration of the kind of pain i| ji this kid suffered at the hands of a teacher the day after this newspaper article, initial newspaper article, was printed, the teacher said, "We're going to spend the i class time today on critiquing newspaper articles," and j she handed each student a newspaper article to read. She handed this child the article about her own abortion. j And as she stood there horrified, reading her own story, she burst into tears and left the room. Her parents were j called and they came and picked her up, and she didn't return to school for a couple of days. So the injury didn't just end with the J abortion, it continued after she went back to school. Her relationship is still not good with her parents. She is still suffering tremendously from the effects of this abortion, and physically, they don't know what damage was done as a result of the infection. I just think that this House Bill 2277 is absolutely vital. I think that the section that 128 addresses the abortion related services and contraceptive services, that that section is a very, very important part of the bill and I hope it isn't removed. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELLs Thank you for your testimony. Are there questions? Representative Fremd. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. Drumm) Q. Mary, I find your testimony devastating, and I would appreciate you doing several things. Number one, you had indicated that what you will do is xerox copies of the articles and send them to us, and I would be grateful if you would do that. A. Yes. Q. The other thing that I would very much appreciate is that at your convenience, if you could reduce this to writing, your testimony, and send that to us also. A. I would be more than glad to do that. Q. And also, if there is some way, after talking to the parents, to find out some way that they might like to personally talk to us— A. They're very willing to talk to you. Their only concern and the only reason they are not here 129 today was the mother felt last night that if she came here today, she would have to identify herself and I therefore her daughter would be identified, and she said i since my daughter has still not worked through this problem and since she's still suffering from this and because her husband — she said this is a familial j devastation because she believes that the articles in the I newspaper were instigated by us because we wanted to punish her. She said nothing could be further from the j i truth. We wanted very much to protect her and she said J A ! our only reason for going to the paper was to find out what the policies were and to help this from happening to another child. But she said her husband now, you know, her relations are very strained with him simply because of the newspapers. But she said, "I am more than glad to talk to any member of the committee and you are more than welcome to give them my name and my telephone number," and she said, "if they wish to call me during the hearings today, I will stay by my phone." This is not a woman who is not cooperative. She just is a woman who wants to shield her child from further pain. Q. Thank you. The only other point is, from your testimony, the issue that we have here goes far j

130 beyond confidentiality of information given to a teacher, a counselor, or a principal. A. Um-hum. Q. The testimony you relate is in fact that school officials, a number of school officials, personally assisted this young lady to have an abortion without her parents even being notified. A. That's correct. They gave her permission to leave the school building, and although the principal later said that no one is excused ahead of time without, you know, a written medical, in fact he did just that, as did all the other people involved. Q. Thank you again very much. A. Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other ! questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Ma'am, thank you very much for being here. J MS. DRUMM: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And Ms. Winter, thank you for your cooperation. MS. WINTER: I'll send written. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Yes. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Excuse me one 131 minute, Ron. j That was the Erie School District, was it? MS. DRUMM: Yes, and the school was Tech j Memorial High School. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Tech Memorial High School. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next scheduled j witness is Susan Greenberg, President of the Board of , Directors of the Franklin Regional School District. j MS. GREENBERG: Mr. Chairman and members I of the House Education Committee, I am Susan Greenberg, ' President of the Franklin Regional School Board. I would like to thank you for providing this opportunity to comment on House Bill 2277, as well as to provide you with some insight into the procedures local school districts use to develop and implement curriculum. I have been authorized to speak against this bill, which we consider to be unnecessary, burdensome to the local school district, and potentially damaging in the long run to the concept of local development and adoption of curriculum. We are aware that this bill is an outgrowth concern regarding the unauthorized sex education guidelines which were distributed by the Department of Education several years ago. That 132 publication actually had little impact on local school districts because it is widely understood that few, if any, really used it, and the remainder, including our local district, rejected it as inappropriate and unsuitable for implementation. House Bill 2277 goes far beyond this concern, however, and contains provisions that appear to be addressing a potential problem or problems that haven't in fact been identified as needing remediation through the process of legislation. The bill makes several assumptions about parental involvement in local district procedures which are not accurate, parents presently do have the right to inspect curriculum materials. They have the right to attend public hearings on curriculum development and ] I adoption, and to express their views. Students currently have the right to opt-out of courses of study which may conflict with their religious or moral beliefs. Opting in, a dramatic departure from present procedure, would not only create an enormous burden for the local district, but would surely deprive some students of participation because parents failed to follow through in returning their forms, or because some parents are not as involved in their children's education as they should be. 133 Using my own school district as an example, over the seven years I have been a member of the board I have seen an increasing willingness to not just receive input from the public, but to actively solicit it. The revisions of the State Sunshine Law have opened up all our committee meetings to the public which would deal with courses of study and policymaking. j The most graphic example of how we deal j with the public in developing and adopting courses of i i study could be seen in the process we used to formulate our AIDS curriculum. In October 1986, our school board adopted a revised policy on dealing with AIDS, a copy of which I have attached to my presentation. In March, 1987, our school doctor was our guest speaker at the Parents Advisory Council meeting, discussing the disease of AIDS, ARC, and its impact on the school system, both in terms of future educational goals, as well as how to deal with the disease within the school setting. A committee of the school doctor, along with several administrators, our Health and Physical Education faculty, parents, and school nurses spent several months exploring the information available from all reliable sources, screening appropriate videotapes, looking at a wide variety of printed material, and 134 developing an outline of a proposed curriculum which meets the Department of Education's mandate of all students receiving instruction about AIDS at least three times over the course of their public school attendance. Three public meetings were held, one for each mandated grade level, and the age-appropriate material, including course outline and videotape, were j shown to the parents for their review. A question and answer period followed each presentation, and the issue i of opting out was included at some point in the j discussion each night. Following these meetings, a final draft of the course of study was presented to the school board in a regular meeting before the public, and it was officially adopted. I would be surprised to learn that other school districts around the State differ significantly from us in these procedures. The PSBA data suggest that in the estimated 80- to 90-percent of school districts now offering sex education classes, there has been no major disagreement with the procedures followed to develop and implement these programs. The reasonable assumption is that local school officials are acting responsibly in including input from parents and other concerned groups, and that the programs are operating I i 135 j successfully. It certainly has been the case in our district. And I would like to add parenthetically that there appears to be no logic in mandating an AIDS curriculum without any mention of a sex education curriculum.

Additionally, our district has developed a "selection policy of classroom and library materials," as i I well as a "reconsideration of program/instructional j materials" policy, which I have also attached. These policies have enabled our school district to deal with \ parental concerns in an orderly, businesslike manner, and were, in fact, an outgrowth of community concern about curriculum and materials. | Ultimately, our goal, as is the goal of every other school board around the State, is to provide an appropriate, thorough, up-to-date program of education for the students we are entrusted with to educate. It is i our opinion that House Bill 2277 is not a piece of legislation which will enhance this process, and in fact j may seriously undermine it. I urge you to reject it. Thank you. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Greenberg.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you for your testimony. 136 Are there questions? Representative Freind. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Just several, very briefly. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. Greenberg) Q. Thank you for your testimony. In the fourth paragraph of page 1, you indicate that the provisions of 2277 "appear to be addressing a potential problem or problems that haven't, in fact, been identified...." The only thing I point out here are a number of witnesses that testified, including the one immediately preceding you, whose testimony indicates that in fact we have a problem now. Also, and of course, problems are in the 3 mind of the beholder, but you indicate that from PSEA information it appears there are no— A. PSBA. | Q. PSBA. I'm sorry about that. A. Right. Q. All the difference in the world there, huh?

From the information they've provided you, in the 80- to 90-percent of the school districts which have sex education, that there doesn't appear to be any problems with respect to the procedure, and I only point t

137 out that that may be an opinion, that people have testified here that they have had problems with the procedure. A. Well, that was also reflected in the testimony of Mr. Logan and the testimony, most recent testimony, I can't remember the gentleman's name, several speakers ago. perhaps he was also quoting, Secretary Logan. But that was reflected that there appears to be I no real difficulty or complaints that have been reported at this point. I Q. But remember where that's coming from. That's coming from Mr. Logan— A. Department of Education. Q. But we've also been out in the trenches , with the parents also, some of whom feel that in various districts there are problems. I You added something in your testimony that J is not written. j A. Right. Q. Could you run that back for me? it's something about a lack of logic in AIDS— A. It's difficult to understand how you can mandate, on a State level, AIDS instruction, instruction on AIDS, without having a foundation of sex education with which to absorb the information that the students 138 would be getting on AIDS education. Q. Let me just pursue that for a minute. Number one, I don't think you're saying that you oppose the mandatory AIDS regulation that we have right now. A. Correct. Right. Q. You're supportive of those? A. Right. Q. Okay. In addition, as a school board president, I'm fairly certain that you support the concept of local control? A. Correct. I Q. You know right now in Pennsylvania we've never mandated sex education courses. That's a local option. A. Right. | Q.' Do you support the continuation of that to be a local option? A. At the present time I'd have to say yes because it's something I'd have to think through carefully. I would suggest that if 90 percent of the school districts in the State have sex education, then they are accepting the fact that it is a valuable education for the students and they're doing it on their own. We don't necessarily have to have it in writing to prove to us that we need it. We sometimes recognize 139 these things on our own. And if 90 percent of the districts have it, then I'd say that we're doing a good job. Q. And so we have no disagreement on the issue of local control, the AIDS regulations, and the fact, as I'm sure you realize, that 2277 doesn't mandate in any school district that they have to have sex education curriculum. A. Correct. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Fine. Thank you very much for your testimony. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Ms. Greenberg) Q. In that community based group, or that committee, rather, from the community, did the clergy have input into the— A. in the AIDS education? Q. —make-up of the curriculum? A. I can't say specifically. The clergy is involved in the parent Advisory Council, and they were involved in the presentation of the materials at the parent Advisory Council meeting, and at that time they had an opportunity to have their input. As to whether or not they were specifically involved in this committee, I 140 probably would have to say no, but they were not necessarily excluded. Q. And how many opt-out out of how many are offered the course? A. I understand that very few actually opt- out, and it is widely understood that they do have the opportunity to opt-out. Something like one or two students, something like that. Q. Okay. And then what are they offered? A. Generally, the students who opt-out usually either have a study hall or go to the library, and that appears to b,e functioning properly at this time. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Stairs. BY REPRESENTATIVE STAIRS: (Of Ms. Greenberg) Q. Ms. Greenberg, a question, and I don't know whether or not you can explain to me, in your AIDS curriculum now, how encompassing is that? Could you briefly expound on that a little bit? A. I don't know how to do that. Q. Without giving full details. What type of sex eduction would be involved in the AIDS curriculum, if any? A. Well, because AIDS is in part a sexually transmitted disease, therefore the knowledge of 141 appropriate sex education would appear to be essential in order to understand the ramifications of this disease. I would have to imagine that the students, for instance, on a fifth grade level, which is, I believe, where our sex education in our school district begins and the AIDS education occurs, must occur on the elementary level at least once, that the students, I believe, in our district receive the sex education first and have the AIDS education afterwards. Although there is, I believe, throughout our health curriculum some mention of AIDS, j the disease of AIDS.

Q. Now, you have an opting out program, is that correct? A. Correct. Q. Okay. What percentage of the student body or of a particular class— A. Generally very small. I believe there's one family who had come to our meetings and expressed an interest in educating their own children if they could borrow materials and do it their way, and we had no difficulty with that at all, and I believe there was something like three students involved there. Q. As a school board member, and you speak of the administration also, whether we have the opting in or the opting out, what's your feelings on this? I mean, 142

the bill says opting in, but what's your feeling? A. Opting out is much more practical, much more reasonable. As you can see, very few people take advantage of that, and it's widely known that it's possible. Opting in would create a great deal of difficulty both in getting information to the families, getting information back to the school, and making sure that everybody who really should get the education gets it. My concern is that information doesn't flow all that freely from students' book path to the household. I frequently don't get information from my own children. I If it's mailed to the individual homes, there is a tremendous burden on both the secretarial and administrative staff in dealing with it, and it appears | I to me the burden is in the wrong place. The burden j should be on those who wish to opt-out, because there are ' i so few, rather than those who wish to opt-in. j Q. If indeed this was changed, would that change your philosophy or feeling about the bill? Would j you support it then? j A. No. I believe that the bill really 1 t does — it covers much more than it needs to cover and it addresses issues that we do not see as problems in our i local school district. I can't speak for the rest of the State. 143 Q. is the State school Board Association, and I'm not aware of this, maybe you can enlighten me, have they had any movement afoot to recommend some type of parental or student rights or are they just going to stay away from it? A. I don't understand that. I Q. is your State association, the School j I Board Association— j A. Oh, you mean— Q. I mean, what's their feeling? if they're not going to embrace this legislation, do they have an alternative proposal or are they just going to stay away from it? A. I know that they are against the bill itself. Q. Okay, I realize that. A. Tom Gentzel I know has presented his testimony. Q. Do they have something to replace it? Do they have their own suggestion or anything? A. They really see the parental involvement as active and that the input is flowing from the parents to the school districts, that parents are not prevented, for the most part, in letting their feelings be known. They do not favor the opting in, they favor the opting 144 out, which does exist and which is reasonable. And I believe their feelings, as ours is, is that curriculum, as it has existed, the development at the local level, is most appropriate and it appears to be functioning well. Q. If it's not broke, don't fix it? A. That's a good way to look at it, REPRESENTATIVE STAIRS: Okay. Thank you. ! CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much for being here. Our next witness is Pamela Cook, representing the American Association of University Women.

MS. COOK: Mr. Cowell and members of the Education Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify before you this morning. My name is Pam Cook and I am speaking on behalf of the American Association of University Women. As a mother of two, a board member in the Franklin Regional School District, and a member of AAUWs national task force on "Promoting individual Liberties", I am testifying today in opposition to House Bill 2277. In my position with AAUW, and I'd like to add, in addition to my written comments, that I have 145 spoke before school superintendents and board members at meetings sponsored by the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, the Allegheny intermediate Unit, and before AAUW branch meetings across the State. On those occasions, I addressed the school censorship issue and have encouraged school districts to develop instructional materials selection policies and reconsideration policies to address and fairly resolve parental challenges to instructional materials. At these meetings, I have distributed copies of Franklin Regional1s selection and reconsideration policies, which have been provided to the committee this morning by Dr. Johnson and Mrs. Greenberg. AAUW, with its 8r000 members in Pennsylvania, has demonstrated its historical commitment to academic freedom, equity and excellence by supporting a strong system of public education which offers the freedom to teach, to learn, and to express ideas. Never has the need for sex education been greater than today. AIDS, adolescent pregnancy, child sexual abuse, pornography, and censorship are sexual health issues that affect all of us. Four of ten American teenage girls become pregnant, giving the U.S. one of the highest teen birth rates in the developed world. The correlation in Britain 146 and Sweden between early comprehensive sex education and low pregnancy rates is a strong indication that sex education in the U.S. is a prime example of too little too late. Using this legislation as a vehicle, a vocal minority is demanding that school administrators provide burdensome public hearings, annual distribution of curriculum outlines, and prior written consent for participation in sex education programs. This year it's sex education. Can we expect these same constraints next year in science classes with the debate that surrounds creationism and evolution, or in social studies classes regarding discussions of religion? Why must school officials shoulder the entire weight of insuring that parents are informed about the curriculum? When it comes to their children's education, parents must be just as accountable as teachers and administrators. This means attending parent meetings, it means reading school newsletters, programs of study, and community newspapers to become informed about the total educational program. It also means participating in curriculum development and coming into district offices to inspect courses of study and talk with school officials. Last, but not least, parental responsibility means speaking up at monthly school board 147 meetings which are open to the public but all too seldom attended by the public. Parents who are dissatisfied with their children's educational program have a responsibility to attempt an initial resolution of their concerns at the local level, rather than first filing a complaint with | the State Department of Education or court of common j pleas, as required by this legislation. Likewise, school districts should develop reconsideration policies to J resolve parental objections in a democratic manner and in j concern with local community values. AAUW agrees that the State sex education guidelines which prompted this legislation were both inappropriate and objectionable. However, no one person, i not even the Secretary of Education, should have the authority to unilaterally and arbitrarily censor such curriculum guidelines. it is AAUW1s position that the legislature should direct the Pennsylvania Department of Education to develop a broad-based review process, in much the same way as we are recommending that local school districts do through these policies, which would enable State officials to resolve future challenges to State level curriculum guidelines in an orderly and democratic manner. In an ideal world, all parents talk with 148 their children about sexuality, about mutual respect, responsibility, and accountability. But in the real world, many parents avoid such discussions. In the meantime, our children are at risk in a world where sex education is no longer only a matter of morality. Theirs is a world where AIDS has made sex a matter of life and death, a world where alarming teen pregnancy rates mean diminished life opportunities and poverty. In a world where many parents have abdicated their responsibility, where even well-intentioned parents are not well- informed, schools must provide our children with the information necessary to protect themselves and society. J Amidst the controversy, no one ever seems I to ask, what do the kinds think? What do they need and feel? One young girl spoke out in a recent New York Times Magazine feature story. She said, "They think they're protecting you, but they're hurting you. That's why sex education is so important. We've been leaving it up to the parents and they haven't been doing the job." parents must realize that they cannot protect children by keeping them ignorant. They must understand that explaining does not mean condoning. Our children are at risk and what they don't know can hurt them. The American Association of University 1 I I 149 Women respectfully urges the committee to reject this damaging and unnecessary legislation. Thank you. j CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Are there questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: I will note for the record that we have received some expanded remarks from | I ! [ you and they will become a part of the record as well. I (See index for exhibits of Ms. Cook.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much for being here. Our next witness is William Kimmel, a | member of the Pennsylvania State Board of Education, and f a school board member in the Altoona District. j MR. KIMMEL: Representative Cowell and members of the House Education Committee, good afternoon. | I am William Kimmel, a member of the Altoona Area School < District Board of Directors and member of the State Board I of Education, and I am here to testify against House Bill 2277. Back in 1969, when sex education came under the auspices of the State Board, I was president of the Altoona Area School Board and had to conduct hearings on our sex education course when it was extremely 150 unpopular to have sex education in any form. At those hearings, I met people who were very good people with high moral standards. However, having a district that incorporates many facets of a community, you soon realize that those who attend the hearings and take an interest in their children's education may be in the minority and that the people who are most ignorant of the facts and close-minded about the processes and who probably need it the most are the very people who are not attending the hearings. I I feel that this bill will encourage this problem. I am concerned that if you leave it up to the parents to sign their children into a program rather than out of it, if there is a valid religious objection, the people who need sex education the most will get it the least.

In addition to the ignorance and close- minded attitudes, there will be many youngsters who will fall through the cracks because the parental permission slips will never be seen by the parent, and if seen, will not be understood or will simply be forgotten or discarded. I think this would be a gross injustice to the people who look to the public schools for direction, and to youngsters who should be receiving sex education and may be deprived of it due to carelessness. 151 Another consideration the bill presents as set up is the tremendous increase in time and money that will be forced upon already overburdened school districts due to the intensive follow-up and notification procedures outlined in Section 2504-A. School districts are already grossly overburdened by governmental regulations, legalities, paperwork and postage costs, and jj Section 2504-A would be an incredible addition to that I I burden which would eventually cost the taxpayers dearly. j Having developed a curriculum for sex education, with review approximately every four years, I am convinced that the courses now in place meet the need better than ever. We have adjusted courses so that there are opt-out provisions for those desiring them, and added contemporary materials so that those who need the information so badly will still find it available. Over the years we have introduced teen pregnancy components and components for teen parenting j which have been tremendously successful in helping young j people cope with modern pressures. These pressures are probably a hundred-fold more serious than those we encountered and coped with in our day in school. The constant exposure to immorality and sex on television, videos, magazines, and other forms of entertainment enjoyed by the socially disadvantaged youth have 152 desensitized young people to the consequences of their actions, and those consequences desperately need to be addressed. I am opposed to this bill on the grounds that there are many things in the bill that are very destructive to sex education in the public schools and detrimental to addressing those issues that need addressed. I have been a board member for 20 years, and a member of the State Board for 10 years, and the decision we made when the problems with AIDS reached the State Board, it was probably the easiest decision we had to make that the warnings should be directed through the schools to stop this death march. It was easy to recognize the urgency and the need to put regulations in place so the schools could begin to educate youngsters about this dreadful d.isease.

There is an equally urgent, not easily recognizable, obligation to our young people and to future generations who, because of the ignorance of the current generation, will contract or be born with venereal disease, AIDS, or other related health problems, not to mention the socio-economic problems brought upon society by rampant and misinformed sexuality. Sex education should remain part of the health curricula and be updated and expanded on a regular 153 basis to reach the widest segment of the population and the greatest number of our youngsters possible. A greater effort should be made to educate the parents to the urgent need to have their youngsters be a part of this program, and in fact encourage more parents not to opt-out of a program rather than give them more opportunities to perpetuate the ignorance by being permitted to opt-into a program they may not understand as being beneficial. The State Board has safeguards in place to protect the legitimate rights of those with moral objections, so I urge you not to pass this bill and throw the baby out with the bath water. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Are there questions? Representative Freind.

REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Just a couple, very quickly. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Mr. Kimmel) Q. I noticed in the fourth paragraph on page 1, I'm under the impression that obviously you don't want opt-in— A. That's right. Q. —but do you support opt-out? A. Yeah. We have that in our school 154 district, opt-out. Q. But now you add something else here, and so I want to check on this. You indicate that you support opt-out if there's a valid religious objection. J I A. Or any objection, you know. Q. Okay. A. That's just not religious. Q. Okay, fine. A. you could expand that. I agree. I understand. Q. I just wanted to double-check on that. The other thing is, and I congratulate the State Board on the AIDS regs, but keep in mind when you say it was the easiest decision, that those State regs as they were initially promulgated, in the opinion of the House Education Committee, were deficient. It was the House Education Committee that extensively amended it to put in the warnings that abstinence is the only J completely reliable way to avoid AIDS, abstinence from both drugs and sex, and to put in the opt-out provision and also to put in the parental input provision. So it may have been the easiest decision i the State Board ever made or you ever made, but there was extensive work that went into it by the House Education Committee to make regs which were, to say the very least, I I 155 incomplete. A. Representative Freind, you and I both know that the partners that the legislature and the State Board formed to put education across this State has been [

ii a good one, and I would not deny the fact that there was j great input from that committee on that regulation. i jj However, it took less time for that regulation to pass j all of the regulatory review than any regulation that \ i I've ever worked on, even the review of regulations. So it was urgent and everybody knew that it had to happen. Q. And I will have to say that the State Board, after we amended it, was extremely responsive and moved very quickly, so I'm not trying in any way to criticize the State Board on that. A. Thank you very much. J Q. It was a working partnership there. A. As it always is. Q. I wouldn't go that far. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? Representative Davies.

BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Kimmel) Q. How does that opt-out — as long as you've had it, how has it worked? And what do they do if they do opt-out? Are they given alternates? 156 A. There is an alternative course, you will be spoken to by the next person who testifies who has more of the particulars than I do, but it's worked very well and we do find it's very minimal now for people to opt-out, the number of people.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MR. KIMMEL: Thank you, Representative Cowell. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Dr. j| Dennis Murray, the Superintendent of the Altoona Area School District. DR. MURRAY: Representative Cowell, members of the House Education Committee, I'm Dennis Murray, Superintendent of the Altoona Area School District. Of course, I'm here to testify on House Bill 2277. I have taken the liberty to invite Dr. j Fred Smeigh, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Education, to join me. I do that because I understand the Altoona Area School District was the focus of previous testimony. I've also taken the liberty to pass out in the manila folder, which is not in my testimony, 157 the Altoona Area School District curriculum for sex education so that you could have a first-hand view or review of what we are doing in sex education in the Altoona Area School District. (See index for exhibits of Dr. Murray.) As far as my own testimony is concerned, I will summarize rather than read the first sheet, and then I will address parts of the various sections of the bill i rather than read the entire testimony to you. ; First of all, it is my opinion that House Bill 2277 is unnecessary because there are presently many checks and balances in place. It's redundant, it's burdensome, it's confusing, and I'm not sure that the I j intent is not to encourage the removal of sex education from the public school. We are a nation of local schools, and local schools must adapt to local circumstances. j I I do agree that the primary responsibility j for teaching sex education rests with the family, and in particular the parents, but I must remind the members of the House Education Committee that today when we talk about the concept of family, in particular the nuclear family - the mother, the father, and the children - that constitutes 7 percent of all families. I must also remind you that the internal Revenue standards for the 158 concept of family lists 13 different classifications. In addition to that, we are charged in the public school, perhaps more than charged, we are the preferred provider, of dealing with other social problems such as drugs, tobacco, alcohol, character building, AIDS, child molestation, special education, at-risk students, school nutritional programs, just to identify a few. Turning to the next page, where we get into the law or the various sections, 2503-A, Board Approval for Sex Education instruction. In Altoona, the board does approve the sex education course of study. The other provision of Section 2503, that a public hearing must be offered or must be held in order to offer sex education, i think is a cumbersome regulation and in fact are we going to have to have public hearings on other social issues then such as drugs, tobacco, alcohol, character building, child molestation, nutritional programs, et cetera? Moving on to 2504, Parental Notice of Course Materials. I say and my reference here is that we J are already jumping through enough hoops or made to jump through enough hoops in terms of standards, regulations and law, and when I look at this, I identify five specific hoops that we're going to be asked to jump 159 through, starting with providing an outline of the relevant curriculum is one; two, supplying any guidelines and supplemental materials; three, permitting parents to take the material home for a seven-day period; four, notifying parents in writing of the right to review the materials; and five, providing parents with a 60-day notice prior to the commencement of any such instruction. I find this highly unrealistic and it really serves no instructional purpose. I am not, I make it clear in the next paragraph, I am not opposed to parents having the right and the opportunity to come into a school and review any material, any curriculum, relating to sex education. in fact, we can expand that to say review any curriculum relating to anything that the school offers. In Altoona, for example— CHAIRMAN COWELL: Excuse me for interrupting. We're at a pace that's going to take us far over the five minutes. DR. MURRAY: All right. CHAIRMAN COWELL: As I've tried to emphasize, with the exception of some folks representing statewide groups, we've got to keep everybody to five minutes to accommodate all the witnesses. Perhaps you can just highlight. 160 DR. MURRAY! I'll try to speed it up then. We are in a partnership in Altoona with the Ecumenical Council. We have asked them to review our sex education materials and to approve or disapprove what they are reviewing. Moving on, the protection of Pupil Rights. I simply say again there's a great redundancy and in fact we're very confused as to how this relates to sex education directly. We're wondering if students now must also approve, if the student is emancipated, if the student is 18 years of age. The present Chapter 341, Section 341.12 requires parent consent prior to any psychological testing, and so you move on through that section and we're simply saying that sections A and B would be that students who need the services of psychologists would be denied these services and many legal interpretations would also have to be made, according to the way this bill is presently written. j Going on, the next section, 2507, Prohibited Health Services, again, legal interpretation • seems to be a problem in terms of the way this is written and it says, what does a nurse, teacher or counselor say » to an adolescent who says she is pregnant and needs help. j I say to you that teenage pregnancy is not a mythical problem. The Secretary of Ed has said 13,000 females 161 under the age of 18 will become pregnant in Pennsylvania this year, and that 43-percent of our school aged students are presently actively participating in sexual I behavior. And I guess, moving on through the additional mandates, again, I say that this is not a mandated piece of legislation, which tells me that is an encouragement that if you don't want to jump through all of the hoops, don't offer it to students. i j And in summary, we go on to say that, on the next to the last page, that House Bill 2277 it j appears to us to promote a particular religious or moral point of view. And as I read the bill, I keep noticing similarities with the doctrines published by certain L fundamentalist organizations who make the accusation that public schools' sex education courses teach deviant sexual behavior, homosexuality, bisexuality, incest, group sex, abortion, and sodomy, which is not true. This I J same group states that students are being brainwashed by j the new term "moral relativism," that values clarification teaches no values, and that it is systematically designed to destroy Christian or home values, all under the broad, general label of secular humanism. While we respect the view of people of 162 this persuasion, we must pluralistically represent all of our society, and to take 2277 and mandate that with all of the obstructionist hurdles I think would be a mistake because I think many school districts would opt-out of presenting sex education to students. I'm rushing, after your comment, Representative Cowell, but we are opposed— CHAIRMAN COWELL: I appreciate it. As I said, that's the only way we're able to accommodate most of the people who have tried to participate in these three days of hearings. Are there any questions? Representative Kosinski. BY REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: (Of Dr. Murray) Q. Dr. Murray, your mentioning that there seems to be a Fundamentalist problem here with certain things mentioned within the curriculum. Did you actually see the curriculum they're complaining about? A. The curriculum, no, but I have copies of | I the pamphlets and things that they have distributed. | Q. Then how can you comment that those things weren't in there? A. Were in the 2277? Q. No. You're saying that there seems to be a Fundamentalist, for want of a better word, plot that 163 states certain things are covered within the curriculum, and they are because I've seen the curriculum and I saw j the study materials and they obviously were there, such as necrophilia as an alternative lifestyle. ( A. Well, I can assure you that they are not ' in our curriculum. I t Q. Right, but you— } A. And our board has approved our curriculum, i' and since the board approves the curriculum, and we are a i government through representation of the people, the •' elected board members, I would think that the elected board would have a responsibility, as would the I administration of the school district. | Q. But I think where you may have gone off JI the track here is that the Fundamentalists, and I hate to use that term because they're citizens of this country just like you and I— A. I am not saying— Q. —and they have valid complaints, but the material that they're talking about, they're referring to, was some of the State material that we have seen and which prompted our action on this whole matter. And until people have actually seen that material, I don't like any comments to be directed towards one group that they're either wrong or they're not right until you have 164 seen that State material, which was absolutely unbelievable. And that comes from a Philadelphia Democrat, too. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? Representative Fremd. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Dr. Murray) Q. I appreciate your testimony. I do think you make one mistake, and I told a representative of the American Association of University Women just a couple of weeks ago, I don't think it does anybody any good whatsoever to look to possible motivations, all right? I j think what you do is you look at the bill.

Now, I'm the prime sponsor of the bill, | and let me tell you something: This bill is not a Catholic bill or a Fundamentalist bill or a Jewish bill or an atheist bill. I don't think the goals that it's trying to achieve, and you can disagree with the way we're trying to achieve those goals, I think we all agree on the goals, and you have a right to disagree with the means we're using, but things such as parental input, things such as stressing that the only completely reliable way to refrain from obtaining AIDS, unwanted pregnancy, venereal disease, is through abstinence. I don't think that focuses on any particular religion. And so I think, in all fairness to you, I 165 don't think it does your case any good at all to look into motivations. Feel free to disagree with how we're doing things. I think our goals overall are the same. Now, let me ask you a specific question. You seem to have a problem with that section in the bill which does just that, it emphasizes abstinence is the only completely reliable way to refrain from unwanted pregnancy, venereal disease, or AIDS. I hope you're aware that that is not limiting in any way whatsoever. Any sex education course can go on and offer anything else it wants, it only has to stress that, the same way that the AIDS regulations, which has the force and effect of law and which all the school districts apparently have supported, stress that the only completely reliable way you can avoid AIDS sexual transmission is through abstinence, and through drugs is through abstinence from drugs.

So we're not tying your hands there at all. You're aware of that, aren't you? A. i think you are tying our hands, particularly on the AIDS part of the provision where presently we're permitted to talk about abstinence and refraining from using drugs through intravenous needles and things of that nature. But with the State Board reg, we are permitted to also — we have the flexibility to 166 teach other kinds of things. I believe that's being removed. Q. Not at all. A. Well, that was my opinion, or interpretation. Q. We can disagree on opinions. Let me make it clear, we're not changing the AIDS at all. The only point that the chairman made, the only difference would be, under this bill, AIDS would also be an opt-m instead of an opt-out. But this bill still provides you 100- percent flexibility on how you want to attack that problem. You have to do, under this bill, exactly what you have to do under your regs. You have to stress abstinence and then do whatever else you think appropriate.

REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thanks for your testimony. \ CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Kosmski. | REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: All I just want to say is I'm always surprised by the amount of academic ' arrogance that's shown to us when we come into an area in that the educators know best, and in certain cases I think the parents know best, and this is one of them. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Representative Davies. BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Dr. Murray) 167 Q. We heard a concern in Philadelphia, and again it was from somebody this morning that was from your area that said they had problems with getting the information on the curriculum. Could there be a possible glitch there or can you explain how you do that in the school district? A. Sure. I'll let Dr. Smeigh address that because he was the person who did address it. DR. SMEIGH: Materials are available. We do not send them out or send them home with parents. Parents have to make arrangements to come in and review those materials. I am not aware, and I do not believe that any parent has ever been denied the right to come in and review materials. I have been present or have spoken to principals after a parent has been in to review materials. There may be times when it's not mutually convenient for a parent to come in and review materials. I'm not aware that any parent was ever denied that right. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Okay, I can't quote the information directly, so I'll see that you do get that one testimony. DR. SMEIGH: I would appreciate it. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: The other was not in writing, it was part of the question-and-answer period, and when we get the transcript of that, I'll make 168 that available to you as well. DR. SMEIGH: Thank you. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? Greg White. MR. WHITE: One quick question. BY MR. WHITE: (Of Dr. Smeigh) Q. Are you saying that the only time that the materials are available to parents is during regular school hours? A. Yes. Q. It would be hard for two parents who work to get to school without either having to take a sick day or schedule vacation time to look at curriculum material. The district won't let them go home at all? A. We do not send curriculum materials home other than the basic textbooks that are sent home. We do make arrangements for parents to come in. Materials, when they are adopted, are left out on review for 30 days, the basic text and supplemental materials, for parents to review if they wish to do so, and we have, when it has been terribly inconvenient for a parent, we've tried to make other arrangements for other times. Parents do make arrangements to come in during school hours when there's a problem with their child. They do 169 1 make arrangements to do so, they do make arrangements to come in during school hours for parent-teacher conferences. It is possible to do so and they do so all the time. j ii DR. MURRAY: Also, the materials could be t made available in the board room. When the textbooks are ! I being adopted they are in the board room for public j review, for board review. Sex education materials could \ be placed there and they would be available in the \ j evening. So when you say just during school days, I meant— < MR. WHITE: But only on an evening when I the school board is in session? DR. MURRAY: Well, they're in session I \ quite a bit with committee meetings and regular meetings. \ MR. WHITE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Just a question on the implementation of the AIDS regulation. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Dr. Smeigh) Q. There are certain principles reflected in 2277 which are also reflected in the AIDS regulation, not all the principles in 2277 but some, and I'm curious about the implementation of the regs. How has that gone in your district, particularly those provisions that provide for the opt-out opportunity? Has anybody opted 170 out of the AIDS instruction? Answer that first, if you would, please. A. Yes. We've had each year approximately 4 or 5 students out of about 2,000 students who go through a sex education unit opt-out. The trend for the last five years has been less than one-half of 1 percent of the students who go through the unit. Q. We did provide in that AIDS regulation a requirement that materials be made available for home use, upon parental request, if in fact parents decide to opt their son or daughter out of the program. Has anybody been exercising that provision? A. To the best of my knowledge, the parents who have opted out, there have been four requests in the last year since the AIDS regulation went in for parents to come in and review sex education material. I'm not aware of any requests by parents to review AIDS material specifically. CHAIRMAN COWELL: You noted that there was mention of the Altoona School District in prior testimony. I don't know if you were in the room or not at that point, but I specifically asked the gentleman who was making that testimony if there were any specific questions that I should direct to you, since you were going to be present, and he had no particular 171 suggestions. I was left with the impression that the issue of the access to material was an issue that was about two years old, apparently has been resolved— DR. MURRAY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COWELL: —and that as best as he could tell me this morning, there was no particular issue that we should raise with you pertaining to the policies and procedures and content in your district this moment. Thank you very much for being here. j Representative Freind. j REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thank you. Anne Zelnosky, the co-chairman of the Pennsylvania Parents' Commission who has already testified before the committee in Harrisburg, is here I today and requested in a note if she could testify j afterwards, after the two gentlemen from Altoona, about specific problems in Altoona. I know, Mr. Chairman, before I even ask, your schedule is carved in granite, and I'm not criticizing you. What I would suggest, and I'm sure you agree with this, if there are specific problems with Altoona, if she could put them in writing and send them to the committee and they'll be disseminated to the members of the committee. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Yes, I would agree with that. We, again, have tried to accommodate a maximum 17 2

number of people, which meant that this could not be an audience participation show and that we do not have much flexibility of the program, although we allowed some this morning where Mrs. Winter asked that another person be allowed to testify in her place. But we do not have flexibility to start to accept additional witnesses, particularly those who have previously testified. But we would welcome any written material from anybody, including those who have previously testified, and upon request, we will make it a part of the formal record, and in all cases we will copy it and have it shared with all members of the committee. I REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. { MR. KIMMEL: Representative Cowell, if the testimony that Representative Freind asked for is submitted to you, will we be able to get copies for the Altoona District then? CHAIRMAN COWELL: The formal transcript of this and all hearings is a matter of public record. MR. KIMMEL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: At this point, we will recess the hearing until our next scheduled witness, who is Mary Anne Pekar, and that time is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. 173 Thank you. (Whereupon, a recess was taken at 12:50 p.m. The hearing was resumed at 2:05 p.m.) ! CHAIRMAN COWELL: I call the hearing back to order. For those who may just be joining us for the first time today, let me note that this is a public hearing being conducted by the House Education Committee. The subject of today's hearing is House Bill 2277, the proposed parent and Pupil Protection Act. This is the ] I third in a series of three public hearings which the committee is conducting on this subject, the first two j hearings having been held previously in Harrisburg and in

i Philadelphia. Again, I would request that everybody who is testifying please attempt to stay within the time limits that were established. In most cases, we have asked individuals to limit their remarks to no more than five minutes to allow adequate time for questions from members and staff. It was also necessary for us to make that request in order to accommodate the large number of people who did ask for an opportunity to participate in these three hearings. We've had different members come and go during the course of the day. At this point there are three other members with me. I'm Representative Ron 174 Cowell. With me is Representative Steve Freind; Representative John Davies, who was seated here just a moment ago, I'm sure he's going to return; and Representative Gerry Kosmski at the end of the table. Our first scheduled witness for the afternoon session is Mary Anne pekar. Mary Anne. MS. PEKAR: To my Representative, Ron Cowell, and to the members of the panel, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to testify and to testify in favor of House Bill 2277. It grieves me to know that our Department of Education feels that our kids cannot discipline themselves. It is realistic to believe that our kids can keep their emotions under control. It is an invasion of their privacy and also to we, as parents, to think that they, as educators, must step in and bombard our kids with predetermined information about their sexuality.

Our kids do not need explicit instruction in human sexuality. Statistics have proven that this kind of instruction does not cut down on teenage pregnancy but only promotes promiscuity. Today society is telling our kids to do what "feels good". Sensuality and enticing media are all around them. Must the schools put the icing on the cake? Our Department of Education not only feel they must teach our kids how to fornicate, 175 but they also feel they must protect their sin by establishing health clinics in the schools to protect our | young women from unwanted pregnancy by issuing birth control pills behind their parents' backs, or worse yet, making abortion referral services available. Morality was once upheld in the public schools and chastity was encouraged. I'm sure our kids have to feel both embarrassed at times and disgusted, or at least let down. Can we not believe in them? If these same kids can discipline their bodies to swim, jog, play football and basketball, et cetera, can we not believe J they can practice abstinence? With the threat of AIDS and the epidemic forecasted, do we have any other choice than to teach abstinence? We are really a doomed nation if we don't.

I am not so naive as to think everyone would become virtuous overnight, but I believe even those who are being promiscuous would like to be told it's wrong and you better stop or you will pay the consequences. We are really a doomed nation if we don't. j We can have sex education in the schools, but values must again be taught and abstinence stressed, and parents hopefully will have the right, through House Bill 2277, to protect their kids and themselves from these liberal-minded people who think they know best what 176 is good for all of us. A woman by the name of Anna Marie Grubbs gave me permission to use this as part of my testimony, and so I quote, "I would like to relate to you our experience and why we encourage you to support House Bill 2277. "Our daughter is presently enrolled in the tenth grade at Moon Area High School. After careful review of the health curriculum we decided to withdraw her from these particular classes. We had notified the school of our intent and shortly thereafter the assistant principal called my daughter into his office. He explained the difficulty with our decision and placed upon her undue pressure, whether intended or not. Can you imagine how a 15-year-old would feel knowing that she would have to walk out of a classroom or not be present at one time or another? We believe that this approach of opting out places an undue burden on a teenager, teacher, administrator, and parent. "When i first approached the principal about keeping her out, he was somewhat defensive, it appeared I was questioning his judgment and that of his staff as to what was educationally sound for our child. We strongly believe you cannot teach sexuality without teaching values and we want our values taught. The best 177 way to do this is to have sex education classes reviewed by the parents and their permission. This is opting in rather than opting out, and House Bill 2277 would do just that." And this is by Mr. and Mrs. Howard Grubbs, Coraopolis, PA. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thanks, Mary Anne. Are there questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Mary Anne, let me just ask a couple of questions with respect to your comments about the Department of Education.

i MS. PEKAR: Yes, sir. ! BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Pekar) Q. You state in your first sentence that the Department of Education feels that kids do not discipline themselves. What are you referring to? A. In the course of just reading over the last few years. There was a particular health curriculum guide that was just thrown out. I'm sure that was in the papers and most people know about that. And I had a copy of that and I read some of the materials that were going to be presented to these high school kids in the classroom and I could not believe the content of those 178 materials, which were very presumptuous believing that they had all been promiscuous, sexually active. You know, there are a segment in our schools, the children who are, you know, engaging in sexual activity and being promiscuous, but to present this kind of material in the classroom, I just don't want to see it happen and I'm, you know, here to stop it before it does.

Q. I think the members of the committee, those who are here and those who are not here, with much j uniformity agreed that that curriculum guide, and not only the guide itself but especially some of the material referred to therein, documents that were not prepared by the Department of Education but were referred to, were outrageous or distasteful, depending on how extreme one I wants to feel. Those materials, the guidelines were, of i course, prepared under the Thornburgh Administration. . Nobody has suggested, however, that there was anybody in I I the Department of Education who really embraced that { stuff. j I think all of us recognize that it was a major lapse in the processes and procedures of the department. But, you know, it would be easy for me as a Democrat to sit here and charge Governor Thornburgh with all of those things that you just said, but I really wouldn't believe that. There was a lapse in the process 179 where they allowed some of that material, those guidelines, to get the approval of the department. Once the issue was raised within the last 18 months, the Department of Education has been quick to disavow those materials and specifically to ask that they be recalled or destroyed. So your later comments about the Department of Education feeling that they must teach kids to fornicate and must establish health clinics, are you referring to the same episode? i i A. Well, I know that there have been incidents where they have brought condoms into a classroom— Q. The Department of Education, or are you talking about particular school districts? A. I'm not sure. Q. Or particular teachers? A. Nevertheless, this is teaching kids how to fornicate. This is an example. Q. Okay. I don't mean to badger you. There's a big difference between what an individual teacher might do, even in violation of a law or school district policy, and a statewide policy embraced by the Department of Education and/or the legislature, and I'm not aware of any Department of Education policies that 180 reflect any of these things that you've suggested, although i would not be surprised if one could demonstrate that an individual teacher got into some of these issues, or even perhaps a school district. And that's one of the reasons we're doing these hearings, to look for just that kind of evidence. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thanks very much for being here. MS. PEKAR: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And please thank Mr. and j il Mrs. Grubbs for their comments as well. j MS. PEKAR: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Chris Niebrzydowski, President of Pennsylvania NOW. MS. NIEBRZYDOWSKI: I'm Chris Niebrzydowski. I'm here to speak in opposition to House Bill 2277. In the spring of this year. Representative Stephen Fremd made national news for his erroneous statement that it was practically impossible for a woman to become pregnant as a result of rape because in the trauma she "secretes a certain secretion which has a 181 tendency to kill sperm." A June 29th letter to columnist Ann Landers from an El Paso writer quoted Freind's rape secretion statement and asked, "How's this for an argument to teach sex education in the schools, and perhaps in the legislature as well?" The United States leads developed nations in teenage pregnancies with 96 pregnancies per 1,000 teens, compared to 14 in the Netherlands. Teen pregnancy is an epidemic whose impact on the lives of adolescents is devastating. Sex education can make a difference, while ignorance promotes unwanted pregnancy, venereal disease, and AIDS.

It is, therefore, incomprehensible tome as to how Freind, this man whose rape secretion statement exposed his ignorance of sexual reproduction, could acquire 112 cosponsors to a bill that would in effect take sex education out of the schools by making it a costly, burdensome subject for school districts to include in their curricula. According to a November 1986 Time poll, 86-percent of all Americans favor comprehensive sex education. As the mother of three children, two of whom are teenagers, and as the former foster parent to three infants born to three 15-year-olds, I can strongly support sex education in the schools, since parents, as 182 Freind's rape secretion statement shows, are often ill- equipped or unknowledgeable about scientific facts concerning reproduction. I remember how uncomfortable it was for me to candidly answer my young child when he asked, "Mommy, I know all about that sperm and that egg, but tell me, exactly how does that sperm get to that egg?" Statistics show that most parents don't discuss sex with their children. Less than 15-percent of mothers and 8-percent of fathers discuss premarital sex or intercourse with their children, and an even lower percentage discuss venereal disease. It's a little too late for a 15-year- old teen to learn the facts of life discovering that she's pregnant.

While I am opposed to unmarried teenagers engaging in sexual intercourse, my opinion means nothing to most teens. Teens come from a variety of homes with j diverse views on morality. However, even among parents who practiced what they preach and who have taught their children to respect their opinions, religion, and to not engage in premarital sex, they have teens who succumb to peer and media pressure, parents and communities must start to acknowledge that they have not been able to regulate teen sexual activity and must realistically deal with the fact that most teens are sexually active.

I [ 183 The New York Times reported that about 1 million students became pregnant each year, and that pregnant teens have an 80-percent school dropout rate. Teen pregnancy often results in unemployment, dependency on welfare, and a life of poverty.

The National Organization for Women is aware of the great success that the St. Paul, Minnesota high school clinics had in reducing teen pregnancy. A few years ago, a similar clinic opened in Chicago's DuSable High School, in response to the fact that one- third of its 1,000 female students were pregnant.

The existence of such school clinics not only drastically cut down teen pregnancy but also detected teens with heart murmurs, diabetes, and a variety of venereal diseases. Considering the success of such clinics, there are at least 71 in the nation, it's unreasonable that the legislature even consider a bill that would prohibit school clinics from operating in a school district. Those who don't want their children to take part in sex education classes already have the right to opt-out. Considering the support that sex education has, it's absurd to have school districts absorb the expensive cost of mailing parents a consent form that would authorize their children to take a sex education 184 class. It's also absurd to mandate that school boards waste their valuable time having to conduct hearings on sex education curricula so that irrational people will have an opportunity to act out at school board meetings. Section 2506 of HB 2277 does not include definitions of psychiatric or psychological examination, testing, or treatment, which leaves the legislation open to broad interpretation and could include a multitude of topics considered offensive by a minority of parents. Taken literally, a student could not be questioned, without prior parental consent, about suspected child abuse since it may be embarrassing to the family or I critical of the parent. Nor could a student's drug or alcohol habits be questioned since such habits could also be embarrassing to the student's family. Today, 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 7 boys will be sexually molested before the age of 18. Approximately J 80 percent of these children will be molested by a family member. However, in the last few years in western Pennsylvania it wasn't a relative but four priests who I were charged with child molestation, which shows the \ I great need for children to be educated and truly protected. Children of all ages must learn that they have a right to say no to sexual advances, and if such advances occur, they must have someone to talk to and to 185 confide in. House Bill 2277 makes this impossible by j prohibiting teachers, school psychologists, and other | school personnel from helping a child in need. j

ii The State Education Department estimates \ I that between 80 and 90 percent of the State's 501 school j districts offer some sort of sex education. This j education should be broadened, not narrowed. House Bill 2277, the Pupil ignorance Act, an act that would protect I child abusers, deserves to be soundly defeated. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. j Are there questions? i Representative Freind. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. Niebrzydowski) I Q. I want to thank you very much for your J i testimony. When I hear testimony like this, I want you > to know that, albeit unwittingly, you do more for my cause and the cause of parents and the cause of life than I can do in an entire lifetime, and I thank you very much. | i Now, I know that these attacks aren't directed at me because I know you like me because if it weren't for Steve Freind, what would be put in Pennsylvania NOWs fundraiser? Now, you can play that game about the secretion remark all you want, but if we want to discuss 186 the fact on how that was overblown and misquoted by the news media, we can. But does it surprise you and are you questioning the wisdom of 112 members, elected members of this Commonwealth, that are cosponsors of this legislation, including 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 women, which I believe is more than 50 percent of the entire female membership of the legislature? J

A. If I understand it, some of them have withdrawn their cosponsorship, including one of the women. Q. including one of the women? A. Lois Hagarty. At this point. Q. That's seven then. It's still— A. Right. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I would ask that we keep to the format of questions. You get to ask the questions, the witness gets to answer them, at this point. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Okay, fine. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Ms. Niebrzydowski) Q. Now, it's one thing if you take your shot at me. Let me read this sentence again, "it's also absurd to mandate that school boards waste their valuable time having to conduct hearings on sex education curricula so that irrational people will have an

i 187 opportunity to act out at school board meetings." Do you consider parents who have a concern about the sex education of their children irrational people? A. Parents have a right to opt-out. They have that right right now. Those who are uncomfortable with the sex education that a school is teaching, they already have access to the materials the school offers and have the right to opt-out. I have already been through this fight in the Catholic school my children attended where someone objected to the fact that a diagram of a uterus and ovaries would be shown, and that was offensive because if you show a young girl a diagram of what ovaries and a uterus is, she'll want to use it.

Q. The issue here— A. So they pulled the course. Q. Excuse me. The issue here is, who are these irrational people? is it irrational— A. The ones that applauded. Q. Pardon me? A. The ones that applauded your statement. Q. Oh, I see. Nothing like the good old ad hominem attack. A. Right. Q. And, you know, what I've found with 188 organizations such as yours, when you can't go on the issues, then attack the person. But is it irrational for parents, so they can make a knowledgeable choice as to whether or not they want their children— A. As I pointed out, parents have the right to opt-out. Q. Excuse me. When I'm done, then I'll ask you to answer. Now, the question is, is it irrational, before a parent even chooses to opt-in or out, to want to ! have a public hearing so that questions can be asked of the individuals and so that they can have an open forum to determine what the curriculum is going to be so that they can make a knowledgeable decision? Is that

i irrational? A. I am certain that any parent who wanted to do that would have the school make themselves available i to them. The school my children go to have done that for 1 ! me, and I'm sure that's already in place. I i Q. No, the question is, is it irrational for I parents to want to have a public hearing, such as we're it having a public hearing today, I might add, to have a public hearing on the curriculum on sex education? A. it has been my experience, both through i i I t | 189 the school my children attended at parochial school when they were young and even in this own school district, Gateway School District, when such hearings were held it was sort of a freak show where someone got up and cried because the word "penis" was used. I mean, that's what it's opening up school boards to, that's why that's in there, because I've had that experience. Q. So all of these people who have a concern and want input, they're irrational. Okay, now that takes on Steve Freind and parents. Now you got your last shot in, didn't you? j It's not enough to go after Steve Freind and the parents, you also want to go after the Roman Catholic church. Why is it necessary for you to put in the fact that of the thousands of cases of child molestation, four happen to be priests? is there any particular reason why that had to be done? A. Why it's done is because the diocese have 1 covered up the issue. If you pick up the Post-Gazette— Q. If you have a problem with the archdiocese or the diocese, take it to them. if you have a problem with the Catholic church, don't spew in your anti- Catholicism here at this hearing. A. Part of why that is in there is because sometimes children don't address their parents and they 190 can tell a school teacher or a counselor at school about their problem, about the fact that they've been molested. That's why it's included in there. yesterday's post-Gazette and Press speak to this issue. Q. Then why didn't you put in about the facts of cases where teachers molest students and other people in public trust molest students? The only shot you got in were four priests. Now, if that makes you feel very good, so be it. I don't have any further questions for you. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. >, MS. NIEBRZYDOWSKI: Thank you. | CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next scheduled f witness is Mr. Lee Ruffner, Jr., from Ford City.

MR. RUFFNER: I am glad to be here to you today and I am glad that I came. I am glad that I followed the last speaker. This is not in my testimony, but I am very disturbed when somebody comes up here, as I 191 am a school board member — I do not represent the school board, nor do I say so. I am a school board member and a ' 1 citizen, but I am very disturbed when a speaker comes up ' here and tells me, as a school board member, that I am i; going to waste my valuable time listening to parents. I object to that. J As a school board member and a citizen, I j Ji am strongly in support of House Bill 2277. The school j I system was set up to educate our children in the basic j I subjects so that they could be more able to understand ( ii and participate in our democratic form of government. J in any government-mandated activity there must , always be checks and balances to assure that that j I 1 activity is carried out in a productive manner. It must j also assure and protect its citizens from abuses by those i who administer the system. Such are the duties of the school board. The school board is given the task of J selecting the employees, the course of study, the books, and the educational materials to be used, it is an awesome duty, and it is a duty that we as school board j members — and we'd better start recognizing that fact — more often than not have failed. The simple truth is that school administrators and the teachers and the personnel in 192 today's schools rule the board. Today's school boards too often are rubber stamps and standby participants instead of a governing body making the major decisions. In this day when the school system is beset by many conflicting and various self-interest groups pushing their ideas on social, economic, political, and moral issues, the public-at-large, the taxpayers, the parents and the children, need to be protected from and have more right to review that which is being taught and in many instances is corrupting their children and corrupting our society.

You must remember, our children in our schools are a captive audience. They cannot walk away nor can they run. They just have to sit there and listen to that which may be contrary to their ideals and their teachings. The parents are likewise captive participants. They must send their children to school under penalty of the law. House Bill 2277 guarantees those parents and those students their constitutional rights to have more say in what is being taught and what must be listened to. I urge you to pass this bill, and I thank you. j CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, sir. Are there questions? 1,3 (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, thank you for being here. Let me also acknowledge receipt of written i testimony from a gentleman who was not able to be fitted into today's schedule for oral testimony. We received j written remarks of Mr. Chuck Pascal, who is a school j director with the Leechburg Area School District. (See index for submitted testimony of Mr. pascal.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next scheduled witness is Mr. John Soboslay, Director of Governmental Liaison with the Pittsburgh Public School District. MR. SOBOSLAY: Thank you for the opportunity to be here today and exchange some thoughts with the committee. j Reasonable people agree that parents need to be involved in the education of their children. In fact, parents are the first teachers of their children. The interest and attitude of the parents shape the character of the child who comes to us for formal education. Parents continue to help shape the child after he or she arrives at the door of the public school. The State has the right, even the duty, to see that school districts involve parents in the formal 19 4 education of their children. On the other hand, the State should not create unreasonable burdens on locally elected school board members who are answerable to their constituents at the ballot box. i The members of the Pittsburgh School Board long have recognized their duty to involve parents and I have done something about it. j In addition to the traditional parent- Teacher Association, since 1969 the Pittsburgh School District has had the parent Representative Organization. Each of our schools, through ballots carried home to parents by the students, elects parent representatives to I meet with the principal of their school on a regular basis to discuss school matters. Each of the high school feeder areas then elects a cluster chairperson, and these chairpersons meet with the superintendent of schools at a monthly evening meeting during the school year to discuss school matters they wish to present. They also listen to reports and requests for parent help from the superintendent. > In addition to this type of parental involvement in Pittsburgh, all textbooks and curriculum materials, prior to adoption by the board, are available for inspection at eight public libraries throughout the city and at that district's Professional Library. 195 Parents, along with teachers, serve on our textbook selection committees, parents are welcome to visit classrooms throughout the school year. And I would add that each month our board holds an evening public hearing 10 days prior to the board's legislative meeting. And at this monthly hearing persons can testify either on agenda items that the board will consider 10 days later or on any other school matter, except private personnel matters.

So you can see that we have no quarrel with parental involvement. We recognize its necessity and reach out to encourage it. In our school district's sex education program, the emphasis is on abstinence. Communications explaining the program are sent to parents informing them of the aspects of the program taught at the particular grade level of their child. They have the unchallenged right to withhold their child from such instruction if they choose to do so and inform us of their decision. So what's all the fuss about House Bill 2277? Its 11 pages provide numerous opportunities for discussion, but when you sift through it all, there is one section that really could cripple the instructional capacity of the schools. Section 2505-A would require prior written consent of a parent or guardian in order to 196 permit sex education for their children. For numerous reasons of day-to-day human behavior, this is impractical. I would venture to say if you applied such a requirement to academic subjects, we would have a sizable percentage of students in all school districts not being permitted to be instructed in history, science, or English. Procedurally, the school just would not receive permission slips back from the parents. in most instances, there would not be a parental objection to the subject. it would be because of the pace and problems of modern family life that the slips just would not come back. 1 If you require us to have parents opt-in for sex education, many students who clearly need such instruction and guidance would be barred from it. Opting out is an obvious right of parents. Requiring opting in is an undue restraint on the work of the schools. In theory, opting in has its attraction. In practice, it is not realistic or workable. We ask you to trust us to carry out our mission. We seek to do what is proper. We do not plot to do what is improper. If you want to help us in the area of sex education, for instance, help us to find a way to expeditiously certify those sensitive and interested 197 academic teachers not now certified in health education so that they might become eligible to teach sex education. I am told we have numerous excellent role models who could help us improve our sex education program if they carried the proper paper credentials. In this brief statement, I hope I have made clear the role of the parents in the Pittsburgh Public Schools. I have tried to tell you what we do and what we believe it is not practical for us to do. And again, I thank you for the opportunity to share these ideas. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, John. Are there questions? Representative Freind. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Mr. Soboslay) Q. John, thank you very much for your testimony. It's always a pleasure to see you. It appears that our goals are the same, that we're in disagreement particularly in one specific, that's the opting out or the opting in. And if I'm reading your testimony right, the biggest problem you have with it is the mechanical problem which you think would wreak havoc.

A. That's right, and slips not returned not based on objection but on human oversight. 198 Q. Okay. I understand that. As you know, we're having these public hearings. As you also know, we're going to sit down after the hearings and sift through all the testimony and review the bill prior to its introduction next term. I have a tremendous regard for the Pittsburgh School District in general, and you in particular, and you know the door is always open. And I, again, appreciate you coming forth and testifying today. A. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? Representative Davies.

BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: (Of Mr. Soboslay) Q. In your suggestion, would you accept an endorsement sort of thing that they used to have on certification to get those other people into the field? A. I'm told by people who are knowledgeable in this field, and I must say, I'm here today because of a tragedy in the school district. A young person who is responsible for curriculum became ill over the last month and within the last 10 days passed away. So I don't want to pose as an authority on curriculum. But I'm told by various people - teachers, supervisors - that we have teachers, some history teachers, some English teachers, what have you, who are sensitive who could present the right tone, and that's so important in dealing in this 199 area, that could be helpful to us to improve our sex education program if they were permitted to do it and the children could receive the health credit that they need for this period of time. So we're seeking any ideas, endorsements along that line that might help not only us but I would suspect districts across the Commonwealth. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: John, thank you very much for being here. Our next witness is Frances Reily, from Pittsburgh. Let me also note that Representative Terry Mcverry has a representative from his office in the audience. We welcome her today. Go ahead. MS. REILY: It is obvious something is very wrong in our schools. Sex education is a profound failure resulting in teen promiscuity, teen pregnancy, teen suicide, and VD being at an all-time high. According to recent newspaper reports, test scores have declined consistently; children cannot find the united States on a map. Our country's future is in jeopardy 200 because we are not graduating students competent in science and math. Scholastically, our schools rank 15th or so among other nations of the world, and I understand 300,000 Christian schools have been established in recent years due to parent dissatisfaction with public education. Children have become patients instead of students with drugs, self-esteem, child safety, sex, and AIDS education all taking up valuable classroom time. What does all this mean? It means that along with the above health problems we now have 27 million illiterates nationwide. Correcting this deplorable situation should be top priority for the education establishment but instead they have busied themselves distributing a pornographic, privacy-invading, psychologically manipulative sex curriculum to all 501 school districts in Pennsylvania. I It is more than clear that parents cannot leave the educating of their children in the hands of people who are not concerned about their best interests. House Bill 2277 will assist parents as well as concerned educators to correct some of these abuses through a better check and balance procedure, with the option of not permitting the child to participate, in certain cases, and this is as it should be. I feel, however, the bill has not gone far 201 enough. Regarding Section 8, I would strongly urge that chastity not just be emphasized but taught as the only ; safe, healthy way. Regarding Section 9, AIDS education, j with its hidden agenda, should be dropped. The programs K through 12 that I have reviewed are nothing more than j values clarification being used in a daily, ongoing, systematic manner, the goal being to change the values and behavior of the child, and, yes, to desensitize them j i to the homosexual lifestyle. It A better plan, I feel, would be to set f aside an hour or so during health class at the junior or ! high school level and explain that AIDS is a deadly virus and the only way to avoid contacting it is to avoid sex j outside marriage and set as their goal a lifelong monogamous relationship within marriage. If we do

i anything less, we are playing Russian roulette with the lives of our children. j We hear news reports on a daily basis jj addressing the worrisome state of affairs in our nation's schools pointing to money problems, society, or parents as the cause. Sooner or later, the media will find its way inside the structure and the blame will fall where it rightly belongs - on a flawed school system that has moved away from its intended responsibility of imparting academic knowledge to the child to the manipulation and 202 socialization of the child. Let's start to turn things around now. please vote in favor of HB 2277. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, Mrs. Reily. Are there questions? Frank Christopher. BY MR. CHRISTOPHER: (Of Ms. Reily) Q. At one point in your testimony, Mrs. Reily, you indicate that parents should not leave the education of their children to the schools? A. Well, of course I'm talking about completely. I think that the parents have a very large role to play, and especially in this day and age when we see evidence of some of the things that are going on, I such as this curriculum that's found its way into the I schools that nobody seems to know who was responsible for it. Q. You're not advocating, though, that the i public schools shut down? I A. Oh, absolutely not. No. I would just like to see them turn around and get back to the business of teaching the children history, science, math, et cetera; things that they need to really survive in this world, to get a job and to produce and so forth. MR. CHRISTOPHER: Thank you. 203 MS. REILY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? Jan Bissett. MS. BISSETT: Just one. BY MS. BISSETT: (Of Ms. Reily) Q. How would you envision a school, what I 1 would a school do to get parents to be more active in j their children's lives both at school and at home? And ] \ out of that, what can be done can you envision the State j I doing? j A. Would you repeat that, please? How would I envision— Q. How could the school district, or at the State level here, make parents or get them involved more in their child's life? A. Well, I don't see that as a problem. I see probably as a bigger problem when some of the parents j who haven't realized what's going on in the classroom, when they see it, then they really will be— Q. All right, now, we're looking at the State level, the entire State of Pennsylvania. What about the children whose parents are not involved in their lives, are not involved in school activities with them, who really don't really care about the child? What can a school do to help that child and to help those parents? 204 A. Well, I can see where they might need special assistance, however, if one child is sick in a classroom, you don't give the whole classroom medicine J because of the one child. There's a certain percentage— Q. So in other words, you just take them out and let them go? A. Well, I don't know. That would certainly be up to the decisionmaking process after it's been completely examined. But I don't think you gear the whole school system to just a certain number of children. Q. In other words, you should gear it towards the majority? A. Well, why does it have to be that? Why can't it be that both are taken into consideration? MS. BISSETT: Okay. No further questions. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Reily) Q. Mrs. Reily, I'm reminded by your comments in favor of this bill of Representative Freind's very recent observation — I'm paraphrasing, but he effectively said sometimes the arguments of those who disagree with him in turn become some of his most potent tools to enhance his own position, but I'm thinking that just in reverse. 205 Do I understand from your remarks that you are against the drug education programs that are occurring in schools? A. More or less, yes. I mean, how much school time, how much class time, can be taken up with this type of thing? This just goes on and on and on and on. And why does a child have to have 12 years of drug education, 12 years of AIDS education? This is preposterous. There's just not that much information that has to be given to a child on these topics. This is taking away valuable classroom time that should be used i on really important topics, really important subjects.

Q. Do I understand correctly from your comments then, about 60-percent of the way down the page, that you are also against the AIDS instruction requirements which were recently approved by the State Board of Education and by this committee? A. I am, yes. I mean, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. What in the world can be told to a student from kindergarten through 12th grade about AIDS? You can tell a child in an hour all there is to know about AIDS. You know, there's just more involved in this. There's the same old question routine, the same old trying to change their values, the same old values clarification. it blows your mind, as far as I'm 206 concerned. I mean, I can't understand why in the world that amount of time would have to be given to AIDS education. Q. Are you familiar with the actual requirements for AIDS instruction that are found in the regulation currently enforced? A. Coming from the State that are mandated by ! the State? Q. Um-hum. A. Well, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Q. The one that you said you're against. Do you know what's in it? J A. I believe that — I have heard — I'll have to think about that for a while. I believe they — i it's supposed to be up to the individual school district, j as I understand, but then it's a mandate coming from the State. So, I don't know, is this what you're asking me? Q. I think you've answered my question. Finally, the language that you use in your testimony that the education establishment has busied themselves, itself, "distributing pornographic, privacy invading, psychologically manipulative sex curriculum to all 501 school districts in Pennsylvania." Are you suggesting that that curriculum that you say was distributed, are you suggesting that in fact it is being i 207 used in all or most of the school districts of the Commonwealth? A. No, and I don't think I said that. I said it was distributed. As I understand it, there was a check put on it and the use of the curriculum was to be stopped. However, I don't know where that stands now. The last I heard, it was still a big "if". So I'm not really sure. Maybe it is being used in some of the j! school districts. J j Q. Do you know if it's being used in any school district? A. I don't know. No. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Are there any | other questions? ! (No response.) jI CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MS. REILY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Dr. 1 j George Dull, Guidance Counselor in the Fox Chapel School I District. MR. DULL: Good afternoon. My name is George Dull, and I am employed as a school counselor in the Fox Chapel Area School District. I am pleased to have the opportunity to participate in the formal hearings related to House Bill 2277. 208 My specific areas of concern with the proposed legislation are: 1. An overall concern that this bill would severely restrict school counselors from performing duties for which we have professionally been trained as well as specific responsibilities that our school districts have hired us to perform. Pupils with serious problems will be restricted when seeking help, and school personnel may be violating law by providing assistance to pupils suffering from a multitude of problems which include, but are not limited to, drug and alcohol abuse, child abuse, teenage suicide, neglect, and teenage pregnancy. School counselors may even be hindered in verifying physical evidence of suspected child abuse, which is required by law to be reported. House Bill 2277 is capable of being other than a mutual and equal parent and pupil Protection Act. This bill has the potential to protect the parent while leaving the pupil at risk. For example, how does one provide school service to the pupil who, while at home, is exposed and subjected to drug and alcohol abuse, child abuse, or who through incest is pregnant, since counseling and examination may only occur subsequent to the written consent of the parent? This is in Section 2506-A. 209 2. The definition of sex education in Section 2501-A is much too brbad. Self-esteem is part of our school district's counseling curriculum and does not necessarily include a discussion of sexual behavior. But if questions would arise on this topic, a school counselor must not be put in the position of curtailing discussion on this subject. Students feel and must continue to feel that their school counselor is a significant adult in their lives and one to whom they feel free to discuss aspects of their lives, including sexual questions. 3. in Section 2503-A(d), the bill would permit any person to review the curricular material to be used for sex education, permitting any person to review materials could bring out witch hunters who only wish to stop any sort of meaningful sex education program. 4. Section 2505-A deals with prior written consent of parents for sex education courses. This section must have been written by someone not involved with schools in the last few years. Getting this consent would prove to be burdensome for the schools in administering this part of the bill. It would be a full-time job for some employee to collect, tabulate, and chase down all the consent forms. Mass mailings for many districts is not a minor expense and it is another 210 negative aspect of this bill. 5. Section 2506-A deals with psychiatric examinations. This section would restrict the ability of the school counselors and other school personnel to identify and place students in appropriate classroom settings suited to their individual, emotional, and educational needs. Public Law 94-142, Education of the Handicapped Children Act, requires local education j agencies to provide testing for student placement not limited to intelligence testing. Without a psychiatric examination, there can be no meaningful services or placement for the socially and emotionally disturbed j child. To restrict a psychiatric exam from revealing I certain information would go against the professional rights and responsibilities of the psychologist or the ] psychiatrist. 6. Section 2507-A, Prohibited Health Services, goes against the very heart of my profession and training. To restrict me from discussing abortion or contraceptives with a student client opposes everything my profession and I stand for. It is ridiculous to muzzle school counselors from being able to have an open and caring counseling session with their clients. I have dedicated my professional life to being a student advocate, and to say that I cannot discuss certain 211 i aspects of my students' life is frightening and borders > on censorship. While I would agree that students should get sex education information at home, the fact is that many parents are not informed themselves, have their own I problems, or worse, are not caring enough to take time to j discuss these issues. You cannot have school counselors JI refusing to assist students when they need us to discuss |i issues of sexuality. What is the school counselor to do i when a student approaches them overwhelmed by a sex- U related problem and is receiving no guidance from home? < Turning them away surely cannot be the answer. 7. Many, if not most, of the proposed bill's sections are addressed in the State Board of Education's Chapter 5, Curriculum Requirements. As an example, Section 5.13(a)(1) of Chapter 5 speaks to the issue of who should participate in the development of the | curriculum. f 8. I understand that organizations of J administrators and the Pennsylvania School Boards I Association are opposed to this bill. Their opposition could be at least partially based on the fact that Chapter 5 is in place and addresses any curriculum concerns. 9. Finally, and most importantly to me as 212 a school counselor, House Bill 2277 would not alleviate the sexual problems facing young people in today's society, but it would restrict school boards and educators who are trying to prepare pupils to deal with them.

We must recognize and acknowledge the dilemmas facing young people today in environments rife with sexual innuendo and fantasy but very little factual information. Rather than ignoring the problem, we must educate them so that they are ultimately able to make mature, informed decisions about issues of sexuality and sexual behavior. I want to thank the members of the House Education Committee for providing an opportunity for | interested individuals to present their viewpoints \ relative to House Bill 2277. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you.

H Questions, Representative Kosinski? ! REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: Yes. j BY REPRESENTATIVE KOSINSKI: (Of Dr. Dull) ' Q. Currently, Dr. Dull, who is able to review curriculum material in the Fox Chapel School District? A. I believe just about anybody that wants to. My understanding is that once the curriculum is developed through various committees composed of parents, 213 teachers, that those curriculums are available for public viewing. Q. Now, what's the difference between that and Section 2503-A? |

A. (No response.) Q. There is none, Dr. Dull. There is none. Let's put it that way. j Number two, how much does it cost Fox I ' Chapel to make a mass mailing and how many of them do $ they put out a year? A. I have no idea. Q. Then how can you say mass mailings is not a minor expense and a negative aspect? A. Well, for some districts. I know it's not a major concern for possibly my district, but for some it may be. j Q. I would imagine that when they mail out I opening of school information they could put it in. , \ One thing that I object to today, just a ', general comment, is that I see an attack on a bill by educators, by the academic community, and it runs in a certain pattern. At least you could vary your pattern. You're educated people. And I hear from the parents on the other end who are not involved in the academic train of thought, the academic clique, and they come up with I 214 very good ideas for this bill. And there's nothing within the bill that is unreasonable. Do you see I anything unreasonable in the bill? Have you read the bill? A. Yes, I have. Q. Okay. Then how come, again, getting back to Section 2503-A, you said that anybody could review the curriculum materials in your school district. Where is that different than in 2503-A? A. Well, I think when it deals with sex education you may get, as I said, some of the witch hunters, some of the people out for a particular interest. Q. Who is a witch hunter? A taxpayer in the f ! district who pays for your salary in the school? A i parent in the district whose child may be in the school? A legislator who's concerned about our funneling State money to your district? Who is a witch hunter? A. it may be just a person that has a certain agenda that they want to get covered in protesting that bill. Q. Such as? A. Their own agenda. I don't know specifically what their— Q. Well, you see, what I can't understand is 215 you told me a few minutes ago that everybody now could come and review a curriculum. Why should sex education be different than any other curriculum? A. Well, I don't think it would be. Q. Okay, fine. That's all I need to know.

A. And my point is that Chapter 5r I believe, addresses that. J Q. Not sufficiently. A. Well, that's your opinion. J j Q. That's correct. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? j Steve Freind. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Just very briefly. BY REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: (Of Dr. Dull) Q. Paragraph 6 of your statement, and I appreciate your statement, mcidently, relates to Section I 2507-A. Now, keep in mind, I think it's obvious on its face and it's clear it's our intention that we're not trying to prohibit any type of education. What we're j saying is, it's not the place of the school to provide abortion services, abortion counseling services, abortion referral services, family planning services, pregnancy testing, pregnancy testing referral services, contraception counseling services, contraception referral services, or prescribing or dispensing of contraceptives. 216

We've heard testimony today, gruesome

testimony, where the school districts were involved in assisting a minor female to obtain an abortion without the parents even being notified. Now, we both agree and we know the law, and the law says that a parent's responsible, under stiff criminal penalties, for the health and welfare of his or her minor children. When we get into — forget the morality of it for a minute — abortions, contraceptives, we're into areas that can have a severe impact on the health and the welfare of that minor child. How can the school, knowing that the parent has the legal responsibility, move into that area, at least without the parents being notified? Do you really think you have a right to do that?

A. yes. Q. Do you want to explain why? A. Well, as I said in my statement, as a counselor, if I had a student coming to me with a sexual question or if the student was pregnant and was completely — what can I say — had no idea what was going on, you know, had no one to talk to, parents didn't care or in some cases the parents may not even be in the situation, I feel it would be my right and my responsibility to that student to counsel them and tell them the options that are available to them. That's the

I 217 only thing I'm saying. And the way I read the bill is that if this bill were passed, I'm restricted from doing that, from offering recommendations. Q. Do you think you have the right to recommend to Mary, "You should have the baby, Mary," or "Mary, you should have an abortion."? isn't the best thing to say to Mary when she comes to you and she's pregnant is, "Mary, you ought to do two things. You ought to see a doctor, and you ought to talk to your j parents."? A. Yes, sure, that would be certainly part of the recommendation. But I think in some cases the child must also know the other options that are open. Q. Such as? A. Abortion, having the child. These are the things that you can, you know, that you have to decide upon. Q. Let me make you a promise, and I don't make many guarantees, this bill is not carved in granite, and we're willing to take into consideration all the viewpoints, and there undoubtedly will be some changes made. We are never, ever going to permit a tax-funded public school to be able to counsel those females, who are also victims of abortion when they have an abortion themselves, that one of the options is to kill an unborn 218 child. I draw the line there. I think you're dead wrong. And I'll guarantee you one thing that will still be in that bill, and that will be a prohibition against abortion counseling and contraceptive counseling. Not just for the morality. By God, you've got to draw the line, and sure the school has a place, but when we start pushing the family out of it completely, our civilization as we know it is on the road to ruin.

REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. DR. DULL: I made no statement that we would eliminate the parents' involvement. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: Why don't you just tell them, "Talk to your parents and talk to a doctor."? DR. DULL: Well, we always do that. Those are some options, but there are some students that would not, would not choose to do that, would not have anyone to talk to. That's the only point I'm saying, and I'm not going to turn that student away. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: And then wherefore we, as public officials, we intersperse our own values— DR. DULL: No. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: —and give them recommendations of what they should be doing. DR. DULL: No. If I'm not permitted to

I 219 tell them that abortion is an option, then, yes, I am putting values, not mine. REPRESENTATIVE FREIND: You're certainly allowed to tell them the law. This legislation doesn't say you can't tell them the law. Everybody knows it's the law that you're allowed to have an abortion, unfortunately for now. Okay? We're talking about abortion counseling. We're talking about doing what one of those school districts did where they helped and they covered up and they gave her an excused absence so she could have an abortion. We're talking about dispensing contraceptives or recommending that they have contraceptives when the parents, who have responsibility for their health — you know as well as I do, the IUD can have a significant health impact, so can the Pill. And yet we're going to cut the parents out even though they're legally responsible for the health and welfare of those children? Somehow, that doesn't seem logical to me.

CHAIRMAN COWELL: Other questions? (No response.) BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Dr. Dull) Q. Sir, just to refer you to that same section about the prohibited health services and the counseling that might be prohibited, have you read that 220 section? A. Yes. Q. Is it your interpretation of that section that if that same young lady that you referred to earlier would come to you with her mother, or with her mother and father, the prohibitions would still apply? A. Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Any other questions? | (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: That's all. Thank you very much. j Our next scheduled witness is Fred Dean, Supervisor of Health, physical Education and Health Services here in the Gateway School District.

i I'm sorry, I have skipped somebody. Mr. ' Dean, I would ask you to bear with me for a second. I skipped over Mr. J. Kevin Scanlon. MR. SCANLON: Yes, and I'm here and I would like to get Stephen Freind. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Then in that case we're going to recognize Mr. Fred Dean, and then we'll come j back to Mr. Scanlon. MR. DEAN: Mr. Cowe11, members of the legislative committee, I thank you for the opportunity to 221 address you. I will be reserving my comments to certain portions of the bill. I would also like to state that I think it's important as an educator, I'm sure this bill is drafted out of an interest in providing the best educational situation that we can for our children in the schools of Pennsylvania, and I would hope that all of the comments that are made are made with this concept in mind and that we not get in adversarial relationships, because \ \ I think that really limits what we're going to end up ; » with at the end. Recognizing that attitudes toward sex education are varied and create strong concerns when infringed upon, one perceives the necessity to have safeguards to protect the rights of all individuals - parents and students - to receive an education based on their needs and levels of understanding. These programs should be under the primary control of the parents through their local elected officials - the school board. • And I think this is important that we not forget we do have elected officials that are there to represent the local attitudes. House Bill 2277 seems to address this concern, but in its current form can create situations where the local school board's ability to review and manage its own education programs is compromised. Some 222 of the requirements are burdensome and require the use of local funds and resources that could better serve the students in other ways. in its current form, it could discourage any program in the sex-related areas, including AIDS instruction, which is mandated, or at least sterilize that instruction to the point that it will be ineffective. In a sequential review, some of the areas that should be addressed include: Section 2503-A. Most school districts conduct study sessions open to the public prior to meetings where curricular adoption is considered. This should constitute a public hearing. School board meeting schedules are pre-arranged and the hearing should conform J to that schedule. I believe it calls for 10 days. I know some districts have their study sessions which are open to the public six days, seven days, depending upon the schedule they have set. I would think that, you know, if there is a requirement there that it be a little more flexible to meet the needs of certain boards. The adoption of a curriculum and textbooks must be accomplished in a timeframe that facilitates implementation, i.e. ordering textbooks, teacher in- service, planning, et cetera. Setting timeframes in excess of current requirements can be burdensome to local

I 223 boards of school districts in their planning. Section 2509-A. By requiring an annual outline curriculum guide and materials to be provided to parents and guardians, you have created a costly and burdensome process that will adversely affect the educational program. The waste would be significant while the monetary and human resource cost is high. Having them available to people and making them available is one thing, but mailing them out to everyone where maybe 50 or 60 percent of them could end up in the trash can I think would be a waste of taxpayers' money and wouldn't necessarily further the concepts that we wish to further. Sending a written notice by mail will again increase costs and not insure communications. Better success is achieved through a signed parent response carried home by the student and returned to their teacher. The required loan of audio/visual or curricular materials to be taken from the school setting can provide a logistical nightmare. I recognize it doesn't require that they be loaned out, it seeks to make them available. Availability for preview or announced reviews should provide parents an opportunity to evaluate their content. This should be scheduled by the school. 224 in other words, the school should make an opportunity for this availability, but because we would desire to have professional staff, sometimes it's an evening meeting when parents are working, the school should be able to select some of those times. Subsection (d), line 13, specifying, "any person" be permitted to review should be changed to "local school district resident". This could be a watchdog provision that would permit nonresidents to disrupt the educational program that parents may wish to have in place. | I submit as an example, if I were a parent j living in School District A and I had a very strong feeling about certain aspects, the way it's written, and I interpret it, I could go to School District B, C, E, and P and demand to review their materials when I'm not even a taxpayer, a parent, or a resident of that particular district. Requiring a signed consent for attendance is an opt-in program. Local school boards should have the latitude to decide on an opt-in or opt-out process as long as parents are notified by a process which the local elected school board endorses. I would submit as an example for that, in our process here, in our educational programs, we first 225 started with an opt-out process where we sent letters home, and we really didn't get any response. And then I had a parent call me that said they didn't see the letter. Now, it's been our experience that sometimes j particularly older youngsters don't take mail home, or if the mail is sent to them in the U.S. Mail and the parents are working, they intercept the mail. We find this with \ our other notifications on grade problems and so forth. I We have gone to an opt-in process where it's like a homework assignment. The youngster takes the letter home, the parents must see it and sign it and return it, and we also have a phone number and a time when they can call if they have questions. But I believe this process is important to look at. Experience indicates that standard i mailings do not insure parent notification since many students precede working parents home and get the mail. School communications are often discarded. I feel it is important to have a process for parent involvement in the education of their children and to guarantee the autonomy of local boards to reflect the attitudes and mores of their local residents in determining their programs. To mandate a process that is burdensome, costly, and provides for groups other than parents to 226 control their local schools is perilous and will result in a reduction of educational opportunity for our students. I respectfully suggest that any legislation developed should meet the following criteria: 1. Provides school district's parents with a process to work positively with the schools in the development of effective programs to meet local needs. j And I would like to include in there, j which i deleted, "students." "Parents and students." J And strangely enough, we're talking about students. I very rarely heard their name mentioned in any of the testimony today. 2. The process should not be punitive and cumbersome and a deterrent to program development. 3. Allows school districts options in the notification process. Some school districts may find that it is easier to mail letters home, which we have done for certain programs, and in other type programs where it's been one grade level we have sent them home with the youngsters. 4. Legislation should not provide a process where special interest groups or agencies have a means to disrupt and control the total education process 227 that is a function of the residents and their elected representatives - the school board. j 5. Any process developed should provide for student representations and concerns in the ! development process. ! In our recently completed health education curriculum, we had four students on our committee, on our | community committee, that served with parents, and I j S believe some of their input has had a marked impression I on me and my attitudes towards these programs. 6. The emphasis should be on curricular development and improvement rather than evaluation. The j bill, in many cases to me in reading it, seemed as though it kind of looked at what was in place and mandated processes to put things in place. I would think if a bill is developed, that it should include something that would help develop a process where the other portions of the bill that are valuative in nature we wouldn't have to be concerned about. I would just like to emphasize that I think it's important, as I said at the onset, that parents, legislators, school boards, and students and educators need to work together to try to develop something that is important for our most important resource, which is our children. 228 Thank you very much for your time and your attention. CHAIRMAN COWELL; Thank you very much. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Dean) Q. Mr. Dean, what is the Pennsylvania Association for Health, physical Education, Recreation and Dance? A. Well, there's one word left off there. It's Pennsylvania State Association for Health, physical Education, Recreation and Dance. It is a group, it is an organization that professionals belong to throughout the State of Pennsylvania. Most of them are educators at both the public school, private school, and collegiate level. It is an organization that supports the j development and improvement of professionalism within those ranks. And I guess I should bring up, because one of the individuals here mentioned to me something about some of the materials that were out were tied to our association, some of the materials that were looked upon j with disfavor. And when they said that to me, I had to correct them because we were not involved either in the development or the distribution of those materials. There were some materials that were developed under a contract to the PDE, but it was under another group. It 229 was not our group. a Q. This is not that organization? j A. No, sir, it's not. j Q. I just wanted to clarify that. Credibility has been restored. A. Now, we have done some things with the State association and the PDE in the development of, for I instance, the PE Life Project, which is going on around ] the State in many of the schools. We've done some things of that nature. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? Greg White. BY MR. WHITE: (Of Mr. Dean) | I Q. On the first paragraph, the second page of your testimony, you stated that the required loan of i audio/visual or curricular materials would create a logistical nightmare, you suggested some kind of prescheduled reviews for parents to review the curriculum. How is this going to be beneficial to j someone who has a sales position or travels frequently and can't attend on a night when a school district schedules one of these pre-review periods? A. Well, first of all, I think we often tend to rely upon our own experience in making our statements, so I can only refer to what we have done. I have loaned 230 out audio/visual aids to parents and they were going to be back in two days and I didn't get them back for a week. Had I needed those things to use or to send back, because I had them out on loan, it created a problem. We have never denied any parent the access to any of the materials, and I believe they should have access to them. I just think that by putting in a law requiring it you again create a burdensome situation where, for instance, person A comes in to me, and I know from past experience working with that parent that maybe they tend to be a little slow in returning things, and then they come in and ask to borrow a videotape and I say no. Then I'm in a position where the law says I have to give it to them or, you know, make it available to them.

I do believe, and I think I made it clear there, the school districts do have a responsibility to communicate with the parents. Communication is a two-way street. And if I need to meet with them in the evening, then I need to be able to set that up. And if I need my health teacher there, then I need to have some control over when that meeting is set because, again, if I give them enough lead time. We've mailed out, on two different occasions, mailed out letters to parents to review materials over the past five years. One of the meetings, out of 300 families, I had 6 parents show up. 231 And another group that we just had this last year on AIDS, we had one of the foremost AIDS people in the State, in fact in the country, in to speak to the parents and to review the curriculum, because we felt it was important to get information out to the community, out of something like 1,100 families, I had 65 people come to the meeting, and we sent these out through the U.S. Mail. Q. As you answered the question, you noted that you tend to base your answers on your own personal experience. The problems don't appear to be with school districts like yours which do this. The problems have j been cited in a number of individual cases in testimony where school districts simply refused it, and the only way people can get it is if the State tells them they have to make it available. Otherwise, the school districts have said, we refuse. And unfortunately, some of your colleagues may be responsible for making your life a little bit more difficult somewhere down the road r because of that fact. j A. Well, this is where I believe, you know, that every school district has different problems. For instance, we've talked about birth control clinics, let's say, that were mentioned. My personal feeling is I'm against those and don't feel they have a place in school. But who's to say that School District C doesn't have the 232 need to have some type of thing available to them? I just think sometimes blanket rules can sometimes be a very delimiting factor and preclude things. Q. I don't think the bill would preclude you from putting some restrictions on how the information and materials are dispensed and that they be back within a certain period of time. Let me ask one other quick question. I don't want to take up too much of the committee's time here. I'm a little perplexed by a statement which you said that, "To mandate a process that is burdensome, costly, and provides groups other than parents to control their local schools is perilous...." Are you suggesting that the taxpayers who paid for the schools but who may I not have kids in school should not be permitted to review these materials and make statements to the board and the school district administration about whether they're appropriate or not? A. No, sir, and if I gave that implication to you, I'm afraid I miscommunicated with you. Q. Well, the you probably did. A. i would like to call to your attention the wording, and I'm not a legislator and I didn't study this bill as many of you, I'm sure, have, but there was, and maybe somebody can correct me— 233 Q. The bill says that members of the public can review the materials. A. Section (d), line 13, I believe, is the one. Section (d), line 13, on page 5. "Upon request, any person—" 5 Q. Um-hunt. 1 1 A. "Any person." I'm not a lawyer either, f but to me, "any person" means any person. It doesn't j mean a taxpayer, it doesn't mean a parent, it means someone— S Q. It's true that it could be someone from outside of the school district. A. That's right, and the problem that we have I in this process, sir, is the fact that people feel a responsibility to sometimes, because they feel their precepts are correct, to impose their precepts on other people. Q. I understand your point. [ A. And that negates the— CHAIRMAN COWELL: I think you folks are discussing back and forth whether residents who are not parents have a right to review it. MR. WHITE: Yes. MR. DEAN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Is that the issue? 234

MR. DEAN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COWELL: And I think that on number 4 you speak about, "...process that is a function of residents and their elected representatives...." Is that your response, that you would expand your comment about parents to include other residents in the district? MR. DEAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. MR. WHITE: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? Frank Christopher. BY MR. CHRISTOPHER: (Of Mr. Dean) Q. You had talked about, not in your written testimony but as an aside you said you had initiated an opt-in program here at Gateway? A. That's the way we did it this past year and we've tried with both. Q. With what particular program was that? A. This was for our AIDS education program and our sexually transmitted disease program at the junior and senior high school level. Q. I see. MR. CHRISTOPHER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) 235 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Mr. Dean, thank you very much for being here. MR. DEAN: Thank you very much, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN COWELL: We'll return on the agenda to the preceding witness, Mr. j. Kevin Scanlon, from Pittsburgh. »' B i MR. SCANLON: Thank you, and I apologize J I for running out of here before. ! i I

Good afternoon. My name is J. Kevin f Scanlon. I live at 203 Emerson Avenue, Pittsburgh, J 15215. I was a member of my school district's Task Force I 1 on Exceptional Discipline problems a few years back. I I was a member of my school district's AIDS Curriculum II Review Committee this year. I was a volunteer at a ' 'i school district Generations Together program last year, I spent one day a week at the junior high school as an assistant to four different teachers of children with learning disabilities. My wife and I were the \ chaircouple of Parents Who Care three years ago, have j been actively associated with it for over four years. I am the treasurer of the football boosters organization this year. I give you some of my background to let you know that I am a person who has given extensively to my community and to my school district. Most of my 236 volunteer activity has been accepted with open arms. However, in one area of involvement, as a reviewer of the 10th grade health curriculum, I have been treated more as an adversary than as one who is interested in the best for the children of my school district. Here is what happened.

My wife, Mary Catherine, is a member of the Pennsylvania parents Commission. When it was discovered that the Department of Education had produced the now famous curriculum guide, Mary Catherine and other parents went to Harrisburg to announce the formation of the ppc. Coincidentally, it was reported after the November school board meeting of our school district that the 10th grade health curriculum had been proposed and would be available for perusal for 30 days before it would be approved at the December school board meeting. We decided to review it.

Mary Catherine and two other parents, mothers of students, went first on November 12, 1987 to review the materials. They did not have adequate time to complete the job. Mary Catherine and I went back to the school on November 23rd and spent approximately six hours reviewing materials that were provided to us. As some of the material that was proposed for use was not available for our review, I wrote a letter to Administrator A — I 237 have not used any names in any of my testimony or any of the documents I have provided you with — I wrote a letter to Administrator A expressing the opinion that we did object to some of the material that we reviewed and that we would like to review other materials that were listed in the curriculum document. The letter was dated November 30, 1987. In it, we asked if we should plan to be at the December school board meeting to voice our objections. in a subsequent phone call to Administrator A, I was assured that school board action would be deferred at least beyond the December meeting.

I would like to make a point here about just one of the objections that was listed in our letter. You have a copy of the complete letter with titles substituted for names of individuals. We objected to the inclusion of student information sheets on the subjects of birth control, abortion, rape, and homosexuality. These appeared in the activities resource book that is meant to accompany the textbook for the course. They were designed to be duplicated and used as pass-outs. We objected for two reasons. First, they were biased against values that we hold dearly and contained information which was not factually correct or complete. Second, the textbook, which goes home with 238 the student, does not have anything to say about birth control, abortion, rape, and homosexuality. The index to the text does not even contain those words. in other ! I words, a parent would not know that these subjects were being taught unless they went to the extent that we have gone. As it finally turned out, the health teacher who offered the curriculum told us that she did not use the student information sheets. However, her substitute, when she was on sabbatical, did use them. When we had not been contacted by the first of the year, after the November 30th letter, I called Administrator A to ask why we had not been ] ! provided with any of the materials we asked to see in our letter of November 30th. I was given what I considered to be an evasive answer. The next event was a meeting of Parents Who Care, on January 6, 1988, at which Administrator B went on record as disagreeing with us about our objections, even though he later admitted that he had not seen our letter and was made to realize that he agreed with us on more of what we said than he disagreed with us. It was then, on January 8, 1988, that I delivered the note asking Administrator A when we would be allowed to begin reviewing curriculum materials. You have a copy of that note with titles substituted for names of

I 239 individuals. Administrator A was cooperative at this point, began by providing immediately some of the materials for our review. The health teacher, who was the author of the health curriculum, was on sabbatical for the first term of the school year, was expected back on January 22nd. in fact, that was the day Dr. Bruce Dixon from the Allegheny County Health Department talked with the faculty about AIDS. Administrator A invited me to come to that meeting, and I attended. The health teacher was there. We expected then to hear from the school district with the arrangements for our long-awaited meeting with her. By this time, we had reviewed at least half of the materials we requested in the November 30th letter and had prepared an extensive critique of the curriculum materials. Chairman Cowell has a copy of the critique. We waited for over a month with no word. I decided that I would bring my concerns to a school board meeting , made a request to our superintendent to be placed on the agenda. As if in reaction to my request to appear before the school board, a meeting was scheduled. Mary Catherine and I met with the health teacher, our high school principal, and Administrator A. I think we 240 had a cordial meeting during which our concerns were aired. The high school principal agreed that we had made some valid points. We walked away from that meeting thinking that our concerns would be addressed fairly and that we would be informed of the outcome. I believe this meeting occurred in early March. We didn't hear anything from the school district with respect to this subject until we saw that the school board had approved the 10th grade health curriculum at its August meeting. We called Administrator A's office to find out what had been approved. He referred our request to Administrator C's office. When a woman in Administrator C's office told us that the curriculum had not been approved in August but the previous December, at which time it was bound and distributed, we asked for a copy of what had been approved. When we received it, it was dated August 1987 and was not recognizable as the document we had reviewed in November. At this point, I called the superintendent to ask him to get involved. He said he would arrange a meeting for us with our high school principal, Administrator A, Administrator C, and himself to clear things up. He said he would do this on Thursday, September 22nd. in fact, he transferred me to his 241 secretary so that she could find out when we would be available. She told me that the superintendent would be away the following week and that the meeting would be ! arranged for sometime during the first week in October. When I didn't hear by Thursday, October 6th, a week ago yesterday, I called. We finally had the meeting on Friday, October 7th. The high school principal, though he was asked to attend the meeting, did not attend. Other than to ask for clarification about certain points that were covered by the curriculum guide | and our critique of the original curriculum guide, and to point out one glaring omission in the new curriculum guide, we had little to say. However, we were offered this time the opportunity to review texts which will be purchased for the 1989-90 school year. This time the superintendent asked Administrator A to check on matters that were discussed and report his findings to us. This was done on October 12, 1988, a full 11 months after the process of review was begun. It was then that we found out that the student information sheets were used last year. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Excuse me, sir, I have to ask you to stop. You've used your five minutes and the five minutes that was allotted for members of the committee to ask questions. 242 I would ask only one question. MR. SCANLON: Yes. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Which school district are you in? MR. SCANLONs Do I have to make that public? CHAIRMAN COWELL: It would be helpful, otherwise we have no idea what you're talking about. MR. SCANLON: Okay. I am from the Fox Chapel Area School District. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MR. SCANLON: you're welcome. (See index for exhibits of Mr. Scanlon.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Eunice Evans, from Johnstown. I would once again ask those who are going to testify to please extend us the courtesy of limiting your remarks to the five minutes that has been allotted. That is the only way that we have been able to attempt to accommodate all the parents and others who have asked for the opportunity to testify.

MS. EVANS: I am Eunice Evans. I am giving my time to Mary Moses, from Norwin. MS. MOSES: My name is Mary Moses, and I am president of people Concerned for Quality Education in 243 the Norwin School District in North Huntingdon, I I Pennsylvania. I am speaking today in support of the i proposed parent and Pupil protection Act. In March of 1987, People Concerned for \ ! Quality Education, along with 31 plaintiffs, filed a i j lawsuit in Federal district court against the Norwin : ! School District. This lawsuit concerned a very offensive j textbook titled, "Adolescents Today", which is used in a j mandatory 10th grade health course. "Adolescents Today" is a college psychology book which presents homosexuality ii as a favorable and natural lifestyle, recommended gang ! I masturbation for 13- to 15-year-old males, and premarital \ sex for teens. The course also contained a presentation j l; of methods of birth control, which included three forms I of abortion, infanticide, and sterilization. The course I i in which "Adolescents Today" is used is mandatory for graduation. We approached our school board on five occasions between January 1985 and August of 1986. We requested that the school board permit our children to opt-out of the controversial course and to provide an alternative health course. Our requests were denied. In addition, we were not permitted to view film strips and other aids used in the curriculum. We had to obtain a court order to view the aids. I, and other concerned 244 parents, were informed in a letter from the school solicitor that if we did not put our children into this course, they would not receive a diploma. Despite this, we withdrew our children. Only after exhausting local, State, and Federal complaint procedures without success did we file our suit, it was a last resort, in June of 1988, after j months of negotiations, we reached an out-of-court settlement. Under the settlement, the students were given an alternative health course. In addition, the parent plaintiffs and their attorney had the opportunity to review and to revise some of the alternative curriculum. It will not include abortion or infanticide as means of birth control, values clarification, or invasion of personal or family privacy. Both sides compromised to reach this settlement. The suit was very expensive for the plaintiffs as well as for the school district. This would have never happened if parents had had input into this curriculum.

i Since then, our district has adopted an AIDS curriculum which parents were invited to review and which is working out very well, parents were encouraged to share their views and were also told that if they found any part of the curriculum offensive, they could I t 245 opt their children out of the course. Cooperation does i wor k. In conclusion, I believe that no school board or teacher or administrator has the right to usurp the authority of parents, who are the primary educators of their children. Unfortunately, this is happening in school districts throughout Pennsylvania and the nation. That is why I think Bill 2277 will only serve to clean up ! the current wave of liberal and value-free sex ed j curricula in our public schools today. It will also provide a base for parents, teachers, and administrators to begin working together instead of against one another. Thank you. ! CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, ma'am. f BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Moses) Q. We spoke at the breakfast a couple weeks ago, is that correct? j A. No. Q. Or did somebody mention you to me? A. They may have mentioned me. Q. Okay. They had indicated that you had some testimony about a particular incident and that they would try, whoever I was speaking with indicated they would try, to arrange to have somebody share their time with you, so I'm glad they were able to work that out. 246 There are a couple of questions. You've

indicated that there's been some resolution to this issue now. A. Yes. Q. And you indicate that the AIDS program, the AIDS instruction program, has been put into place. Aside from the AIDS instruction, looking to other kinds of sex ed curricula, is there still no opt-out provision, or was that question part of the settlement? A. There is an opt-out policy now. As far as I know, the Norwin School District was the only school district in our area around here that didn't provide for an opt-out. We were stonewalled. I mean, you see, we've been working on this since January of '85. It took us till '88 to solve it. We tried to convince them that i this is the policy of other districts. We asked them to just give us back the old health course of CPR, first aid, personal hygiene that they had prior to adopting this book so that it wouldn't cost the school district any additional money to order j new textbooks. And at one point in February of '85 they told us they were taking that into consideration, and at that time I had no children personally involved at that grade level and we thought that indeed they had done that, until upon going to open house, when my son was a 247 senior, I found out in talking to his anatomy teacher, who happened to be the health teacher also, that there indeed was no alternative curriculum and they did not go back to using the old health course for the people that felt that the material in it was offensive. Q. Okay. in your view, has the issue or have the issues been satisfactorily resolved at this point or are there still outstanding problems that remain to be J resolved? A. No. Right now, as far as this particular course goes, it's been resolved. The alternative course is in place and will be in place, and in fact, when this curriculum was adopted or brought into the school district, this particular textbook, nobody, except the teachers, had ever seen this book. When the first parents commented and complained and called the superintendent, he didn't know what they were talking about. Nobody had ever reviewed this book, although Norwin would tell you they have two curriculum review boards. Nobody had reviewed it. And also, we asked if we could be put on the curriculum review board, and we were told that only professionals were permitted on that committee.

Q. Okay. In your testimony you note that you filed your suit as a last resort. 248 A. um-hum. Q. And you said after exhausting local, State, and Federal complaint procedures. Could you briefly share with us the State and Federal complaint procedures that you pursued before filing the suit? A. We called the Pennsylvania Department of Education and I talked to Joseph Carr, and I asked him if such a sex education or psychology were mandatory in the State of Pennsylvania, could it be a mandated course, and he said, no. And so I told him, well, our school district is doing this. This is sex ed and actually a psychology book, and he told me I would have to file a complaint. So several parents filed complaints at the State level, and we all received a letter saying that indeed psychology and sex ed couldn't be mandated but it was up to the local school boards to decide whether they wanted that or not. In other words, it didn't matter what the State said, our school boards said and were in j agreement that this was a mandatory course and— Q. So they told you that it wasn't mandated ' by the State but the local districts had the right to mandate it? A. Yeah, the local districts, yes. Q. And were there other procedures at the State, and you mentioned the Federal level, that you

I I 249 pursued? A. I received a letter from Gary Bower, at that time I think he was Under Secretary of Education at the Federal level. He told me to get in touch with my State Representative. So I got in touch with my State Representative. I took all the information that I had over to him. His secretary ran off photocopies, and to this day I've never heard from him. Q. Okay. So there really wasn't a Federal j k procedure, it was a referral. t A. And we did file with the Federal. We were ; working with a Mr. Re illy with the Federal Department of Education also, and we didn't really get anywhere there either. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Any other questions? Frank. BY MR. CHRISTOPHER: (Of Ms. Moses) Q. The compromise agreement, is that what dismissed the suit in Federal court? AT Yeah. Q. Okay. A. Because that's all we had asked for to begin with, is just an alternative. We didn't ask them to get rid of that book, we just asked for an alternative 250 for our children, and that's what we finally got three years later. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much to both of you for being here. Our next witness is Elda Billings, from portage. Go ahead, Ma'am. MS. BILLINGS: My name is Elda Billings, and I am the mother of six children, three of them are school teachers. I have three grandchildren who attend the portage Area School. I have tried very hard to instill high moral values in my children, and they in turn are teaching these principles to their children also. When my six children were students in the public school, I had complete trust in our school and in the leadership of it. The teachers in our schools do not

i need permission to teach our children reading, English, mathematics, science, the social studies, or computer science - the five new basics identified by the National Commission. The big problem is changes that have been taking place in the classroom. Changes can be very constructive, but there are very many controversial and 251 experimental programs being implemented in our schools today. Many of these programs are diametrically opposed to traditional moral and ethical values. This is one of 1 the many reasons I feel that the parent and Pupil Protection Act should become a vital part of our school program. Why shouldn't the teaching materials be available for parental inspection? Why should parents be : denied the opportunity to inspect the materials being t used with their own children? The parental consent form in itself is not sufficient unless the full scope and content of the course or workshop is given on the form. Otherwise, the parent may be deceived. The Parent and Pupil Protection Act will protect the pupil, parent, teacher, and the school. Parents and pupils are not always protected from deception, conscious or otherwise. I can say this from personal experience. On December 10, 1986, I attended a workshop at the Holiday inn at Johnstown. The workshop was advertised on the program that I was given as discussing the subject "Kids and TV - How Does TV Influence Children?" The sophomore class of the Portage Area School was also in attendance. The morning session was a panel discussion on television. it was very informative. After lunch 252 there was a performance by the Washington Area Improvisational Teen Troupe, WAITT. This title was the only information about this group printed on the program. The subject material to be covered was not specified. There were three skits performed. The pupils from the Portage Area School did not learn how to be critical television viewers but rather learned how to have so- called safe sex. Upon arriving home, still shocked by what our approximately 90 students from our local school had been exposed to, I contacted several of the school board members to find out how our pupils happened to be at this particular workshop. After explaining what took place that afternoon, they were surprised as much as I. I was told what was on the permission slip. It said, "Mrs. Conlon wishes to take the Sophomore Class to Holiday inn, Johnstown, to a TV and Teenage Workshop on Wednesday, j December 10." Several days later, I went before the entire school board with this matter. They felt that ' r they, too, were deceived. Parents, pastors and priests ' | were all up-m-arms about this. All of the newspapers carried the story. The headlines in the Tribune-Democrat read, "portage Residents Outraged Over Sex Tips For Students." The main point that was stressed throughout 253 this whole ordeal was the fact that the permission slip did not contain the proper amount of information in order i for the parents to make a sensible decision in regards to j this particular workshop. j 1 Two other mothers and I have been j instrumental in having pornography removed from three different places of business in our town. Some of the parts of the skits that were performed that day could be classified as being pornographic, by word and action. Why would we as parents work so hard to keep pornography I out of our stores and then allow it to come into our , children's education? i j Parents want to know what their children J are doing during classroom hours. This bill, the Parent jj and Pupil Protection Act, does not censor any program, it j merely requires parental consent before objectionable programs are used. How could anyone object to that? Thank you. You do have the two things I « included in my statement, the program and the permission slip that was given to the school board in Portage, and you'll notice that part down there in regards to this, and they said this is what was included on the permission slip and nothing more. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Billings.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay. Thank you 254 very much. Questions? (No response.) BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Billings) Q. Before the students could be taken on what I would characterize as a field trip, parents had to give prior permission, is that correct? A. Right. Urn-hum. j Q. And so really, this was in the form of an opt-in. A. Yes, it was. j Q. And even though it was an opt-in process, that in itself didn't guarantee anything because the real test was the accuracy or inaccuracy of information that was provided to the parents. j A. Right. Um-hum. Q. You've indicated that the school board itself was outraged. A. Yes. Yes. Q. What subsequently was the position of the superintendent and the — Mrs. Conlon, was she a teacher? A. Yes, she was. Q. And Mrs. Conlon, the teacher? A. Well, at the school board meeting a lady stood up and told that it was advertised in the paper — i 255 now I got a personal invitation. I'm a member of Concerned Women for America, and another friend who is an j Eagle Forum lady got an invitation, so we attended innocently. When I got there and I looked around and the only school students were from the Portage area, which is 16, 17 miles away, I was really alarmed. J Q. What I'm asking though is that after it j i was all over and the school board said that they were 1 'i outraged, what was the attitude of the superintendent and the teacher? Did they acknowledge that what occurred was in fact what they had expected or were they in a position where they said this wasn't the kind of program they thought they were taking the kids to? How did they explain it? A. Well, they apologized, first of all. They told me that it would never happen again, and that they were in the dark just as much as I was, the superintendent and everyone. And after it was over, Mrs. Conlon ridiculed me to her pupils, and I was really Public Enemy No. l — because my niece was in her room and several other students told me — that she was right that the children had a right to go to this, whether they had their parents' permission or not. And many parents approached me and they said they signed the slip because they didn't realize this and they were very sorry. Two 256 of the school board members' sons were in attendance and they were in objection to this very much so. Q. so apparently what happened was in conflict with at least informal school board policy or school board attitudes, and it was not something that was condoned by the polices of the administration? A. No, it wasn't. in fact, they felt that I they were deceived too, and I imagine the teacher was j reprimanded, from what I understand, and then she objected to what I had to do because she was very hurt. Q. Are there any other problems in the Portage Area School District that you're aware of relating to sex education? A. No, because I have been there, I've seen the curriculum, I've been invited, I had a town meeting in the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown with my school board members and my principals and the teachers that are teaching the sex education class came, and I've been invited. If I ever want anything to be brought up, I'm invited personally to bring in some of my ideas, and they're very easy to work with, you know, and so I feel very good about it, but it can happen, to be deceived. Q. So as far as you know, the one incident where there was objection on the part of you and other parents and grandparents was an isolated incident—

i I ! 257 A. As far as I know. Q. —that apparently was inconsistent with the policies of the school district? : A. Right. Right. JI Q. And the school district has said they're not going to allow it again? j I A. Yes. As far as I know, it has never i happened again, to my knowledge. As far as the permission slips, can I say « this? My son, who has taught school for 18 years in the Portage Area Schools — not Portage Area, Forest Hills — j has over 100 students in his band. He has slips that he I issues to his students every week, over 100, that they j have to bring in a report of practicing, and I have j copies of them. The parents respond beautifully. And « he's been doing this for 18 years and he doesn't find it extra work, and it's worked fine with their practicing habits. And he doesn't mind that at all. it's a lot of work, but he feels it's part of his job, and he does a beautiful job. He has a wonderful band. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? Mr. Christopher. BY MR. CHRISTOPHER: (Of Ms. Billings) Q. Ma'am, in that program that you gave out, 258 it was just the one segment of that seminar that was objectionable? A. Yes. The other was fine. Q. Some religious people sponsoring the other segments. A. No, no. It was a public. You'll notice there's psychologists there from the hospital, and it was from Planned Parenthood, from television stations. It was a very good panel, it was very informative, as I I said. Q. Just the one segment? A. The one segment that came in the afternoon, the whole afternoon. MR. CHRISTOPHER: Thank you. MS. BILLINGS: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much, Ma'am. Thank you for being here. Our next witness is Cecile Hecker, from j Bethel Park. MS. HECKER: In support of the Parent and Pupil Protection Act, House Bill 2277. My name is Cecile Hecker, and as spokesperson for the Coalition For Parents' Rights, I represent approximately 16,000 concerned citizens of Pennsylvania. My husband and I have lived in the Pittsburgh area for 31 years and we 259 have three grown children and two grandsons. I am a former fourth grade teacher. I have 160 hours of course work and years of hands-on experience working for and training counselors and volunteers for Crisis Intervention services and telephone hotlines that address teen drug, suicide, and pregnancy problems. Currently, I am a part-time senior sociology major at the University of Pittsburgh, where I hold a certificate in women's studies. in the past 10 years I have not only worked almost daily with teens, but I have done extensive research on the teen scene at both the national and local levels. My research shows me that there have been amazing changes in our schools in the past 10 years. Powerful forces such as planned Parenthood and Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S., SIECUS, have promoted value-free sex education and dangerous sex clinics all over America, and they have failed miserably to stem the tide of teen pregnancies. These groups are developing the programs, guiding the philosophy, and training the teachers. These people are at work in the schools seeking to control and condition our children to accept attitudes and conduct that are contrary to what most parents want. Concerned parent Maria Zaccaria recently 260 said, "The schools are not only teaching the ABCs of reading, writing, and arithmetic, but are teaching the new ABCs: Abortion, Birth Control and Contraception." H.B. 2277 addresses important questions that parents need to have answered and under the protection of this bill parents can reclaim their children and regain control over their children's sex education. The questions are: Who is going to teach sex education? What is going to be taught? How is sex education going to be taught, and where is it going to be [ taught? This bill does not ban sex education, rather it gives parents a chance to have input into the process. So even though scientific studies show that planned Parenthood's value-free brand of sex >| education and their sex clinics don't work because they j i promote promiscuity, teen pregnancy, abortion, venereal j diseases, destroy family relationships and waste j taxpayers money, they continue to push these programs, ' with proven failure records, in our nation's schools. j A tragic example of what I have just said j is taking place right here in Pittsburgh, PA, where Planned Parenthood supporters, fueled by a five-year $25 million grant, $12.5 million to come from the Annie E. Casey Foundation and $12.5 million to come from PA taxpayers, set up the dangerous, experimental New Futures 261 School program on September 1, 1988 and took control of the city's schools. An abortionist is now co-chairman of the committee, making the major decisions concerning the minds and bodies of thousands of Pittsburgh's children. The "Strategic planning Guide" provided by the Casey Foundation and used as a model for Pittsburgh's New Futures and for New Futures in other U.S. cities is filled with Planned parenthood and SIECUS rhetoric and programs.

I urge every legislator to support the parent and Pupil protection Act, House Bill 2277, for we must protect children's rights, parents' rights and citizens' rights from those who are destroying and exploiting the minds and bodies of America's precious children. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, Ma'am. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Hecker) Q. What is an abortionist, as you use it in your testimony? A. Dr. Kenneth Goodrich, the abortionist, he is Associate Medical Director of Women's Health Services, is the co-chairman of the Mayor's Commission on Families, which is the organization that is calling the shots in the New Futures program in Pittsburgh. This man is making major decisions, his committee is making major 262 decisions, that concern the minds and bodies of Pittsburgh's children. Q. I have heard today and in testimony at our hearing in Philadelphia two weeks ago several people who are not residents of Pittsburgh complain about the New Futures program in the Pittsburgh School District. A. Yes. Q. I have not heard any parent or other resident of Pittsburgh make such complaints. Are you aware of any individuals among the 400,000 residents of Pittsburgh who might share that view? A. Yes, I am aware of several who have the information. Any resident of Pittsburgh may go to the Pittsburgh School Board building in Oakland and get a copy of the New Futures proposal and read it for themselves to see what's included in this dangerous proposal. The people who talked about it in Philadelphia, l don't know to whom exactly you're referring, but there's also a program that will be started in Reading, PA. They did not receive the Annie E. Casey Foundation grant, but the people who networked and prepared their proposal are going ahead anyway with a New Futures Program. These people may have information from that area also.

Q. Okay. If any of those 400,000 people who 263 live in Pittsburgh share your concerns and you know them, I would you ask them to share their views with me and with I I other legislators who represent all or portions of j Pittsburgh? > A. I certainly do. Q. Because I have checked with a number of other legislators who represent the city of Pittsburgh, I and there are a number of legislative districts in that j area, and those concerns to date have not been expressed j by any residents, parents or otherwise, of the Pittsburgh School District. A. Well, the reason for that is — well, one reason is I have not been able to address the Pittsburgh School Board. They have limited the people who speak in open meetings to only those who are residents of the city of Pittsburgh, so it's pretty difficult to make information known when you're not allowed to speak. Q. Well, I really have trouble believing that there are 400,000 ignorant people living in the city of Pittsburgh. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? MS. HECKER: May I ask you a question, sir? CHAIRMAN COWELL: No. 264

MS. HECKER: No. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much for your testimony. MS. HECKER: Yes. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Alan Carson, Health and Physical Education Department Coordinator in the Quaker valley School District.

Sir. MR. CARSON: My main complaint with House Bill 2277 is really Section 2505-A. As a health educator concerned with my students' growth and development in all aspects of their lives, I am opposed to House Bill 2277. By adopting this bill, I feel we are giving our students the unspoken message that sex, sexual feelings, and sexual drives are bad, unhealthy, and should be repressed. I believe this neo-puritan philosophy leads

t to guilt and shame about one's body, feelings, and drives. These, in turn, can be major contributing factors in inappropriate expressions of sexuality - child | molestation, rape, and incest. Sexuality is God-given, or nature-given, and repression of sexuality will lead to future adjustment problems for many people. Teachers should have the training and freedom to promote sexual health, defined here as the integration of bodily, mental, and spiritual aspects of

I

I

I 265 sexuality in ways that are positively enriching and that enhance personality, communication, and love. This certainly is not how sexuality is being presented to our youth by way of movies, television, music, and advertising. These media are promoting "if it feels good - do it," lust, and irresponsibility. While I agree with House Bill 2277 with regard to promoting abstinence, I do so from a developmental position, not from a moralistic one. Early sexual experiences bring with them the risk of reduced feelings of self-esteem, risk of being used or exploited, risk of pregnancy, and risk of acquiring a sexually transmitted disease.

In addition, various research studies on the impact of sex education on teenagers have found that sex education delays the onset of sexual activity, decreases sexual experimentation, decreases pregnancy, and increases the likelihood of practicing safe sex for those who are sexually active. it has also been found that one's attitudes about sex become less permissive, while becoming more tolerant of the sexual behavior of others. Other public survey polls indicate that the vast majority of Americans^ 89 percent, favor sex education in the schools, and that 69 percent of parents 266 feel that they do not do as much as they should in teaching sexuality to their children. I also feel that the heart of sex education takes place in the home and for those parents who do talk to their children about sexuality, their children are much more likely to adopt the values and attitudes of the parents. j In conclusion, it is the considered opinion of myself, my teaching colleagues, my administrative colleagues, and my board of school directors that passage of this bill is unnecessary and potentially destructive. In an era in which teens are more unsupervised than ever, it would lead to more problems. The solution lies in educating teachers in how J to promote sexual health. If I could add one piece of oral | testimony, I feel for our school district the way the AIDS bill was set up and operated worked well, and I ! i would like to see, if this bill is going to exist, to amend it to appear similar to the AIDS bill where there is public hearings, parents can look at information, but I am opposed to the opt-in. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, sir. Let me pursue your last point, because as Steve Freind indicated earlier to another witness, 267 members of this committee did work very hard to help craft the language of that AIDS regulation, and I'm of the view that we considerably improved what was originally proposed by the State Board. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. Carson) Q. There are certain principles that are in 2277 that are reflected in the AIDS process, the AIDS instruction process, one of which was the requirement that the materials be made available for review by parents and other citizens who might have an interest. In your district, have you had any problem with that at all? A. No. We did follow guidelines and I believe we had six parents showed up for the community informational meeting to let them know what we would be teaching, which isn't very many parents if you have like over 1,000 students, and we did make materials available. I'm not sure any parents took advantage of it. Q. The other principle that we tried to have reflected was the principle that parents have the right to opt their children out of such programs. In the case of the AIDS instruction, have any parents opted their children out of the program? A. None. Q. Does your school district have sex 268 education programs other than or any instruction with respect to sex education other than the AIDS instruction? A. Yes. I've been teaching sex education for 17 years as part of a health education course. Q. And again, do parents, currently under the policies of your district, have a right to opt their sons and daughters out? A. Yes, and no one has done so. And in 17 years of having open house where parents come in and I tell them what the curriculum is and I give them a handout on the curriculum, I have not had one negative comment on the sex education unit that we have. Q. So I take it that some of the things that we've heard discussed today and at other hearings don't reflect any type of a major issue in your own school district? A. yes. I met Tuesday night with the school board and that's why we added the last paragraph, that the school board is in opposition as well because we have not had this problem. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thanks for being here. MR. CARSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is 269 Clarence McMillian, from the American Family Association. I indicated to the previous lady that I j was not going to at this time engage in an audience i participation or question-and-answer session with witnesses, but those who might have some desire to chat after this meeting, it's going to probably be close to 6:00 o'clock, but I'm going to be here and I'm certainly willing to chat with those who choose to remain with us j for the duration of the program. Sir, go ahead . J MR. McMlLLIAN: I'm Clarence McMillian, J President of the Pittsburgh Chapter of the American | Family Association. The association is a 12-year-old national nonprofit, nondenominational organization. We are working to reinstate traditional American family j values. Our group primarily is concerned with the | S pornography in the marketplace. Our group also monitors the prime time television programing. We do this by writing letters, visiting stores, and discussing the problems in the marketplace. The 110 Pennsylvania legislators cosponsoring House Bill 2277, Parent and Pupil Protection Act, are to be commended for their efforts in providing important guidelines for public school curriculums, guidelines which will better insure the safety and good 270 health of our children and grandchildren, Incidently, I'm a parent of four and a grandparent of six. H.B. 2277 should be passed without delay, but I am unmindful that it will meet strong opposition from those with a different agenda and supported by well- funded organizations as the planned parenthood liberals. The subjects of this bill as abortion, family planning, pregnancy, contraceptives, and sexual diseases as AIDS have been the very target of these liberal planners responsible for trashing the American family. This well-defined bill represents a j genuine family rescue mission of major proportions. It is a future protective armor for family values against the misguided and conspiratorial ravages of the past. Why is passage of H.B. 2277 so critical? Because it represents a complete departure from unwholesome and unwarranted school sex education curriculums. It will help correct immoral teachings promoting sexual violence against families. With an overdue accommodation to parents or guardians, it will bring out the best in students, not the worst. Children are the heritage of any great nation. Public school administrators and teachers have been on a collision course with family values for more than 25 years. Our historical pathways are littered 271 with the disasters of premarital sex, extra-marital sex, promotion of contraceptives, rape of women and children, acceptance of family incest, drug and alcohol abuse, abortion, divorce, crime and violence, communal living, homosexuality, and sexual disease. And the list could go on. What is the evidence and consequences of these massive charges? First, let me talk about academic excellence. The Department of Education reported in 1983 that we are, quote, "A Nation At Risk," unquote, and proposed national reforms to improve educational standards. But Federal regulations are of little value unless reflecting healthy community standards.

Children of concerned parents have fled public schools in favor of church/parochial/private schools with better educational standards. Three thousand or more Pennsylvania parents teach their own children. Eighty percent cite family and moral reasons. Our Christian schools have grown from 1,000 in 1965 to some 32,000 in 1985, a 3,100-percent increase in 20 years. 1986 Department of Education figures show a total enrollment of 45,113,000 students in grades 1 through 12; 87 percent attending public schools and 12.4 percent private schools. Private school growth will 27 2

continue so long as public educational standards are

compromised. A study of 4,519 student semi-finalists in the 1988 National Merit Scholarship program by Specialty Research Associates of Aledo, Texas, showed that 60.8 percent of public school students and 39.2 percent were 1 private school students. Yet, SAT scores of the private I school students were more than three times higher than the public school students, attesting to the merits of quality teaching. Now, I have a laundry list here of things that's wrong. We're not labeling schools as the sole originator. We feel that the things that I'm mentioning here are both the joint responsibility of the parents and the school. Going quickly to them now. Sexual promiscuity, pregnancy and abortion: — 13 million unmarried teens will be I I sexually active. — 1.2 million teens will become pregnant. — 350,000 will give birth to illegitimate | babies. — 400,000 under age 19 will have an abortion. — 1.5 million babies aborted each year, 273 25 million, or thereabouts, thus far. Crime and sexual violence: — 1 violent crime committed every 24 seconds. — 1 million children sexually molested every year. Drugs and Alcohol: — 12 million young people will take some form of narcotics. j J — 300,000 youths will have a serious [ drinking problem. What about families? — 500,000 young people will attempt suicide. — 1 million children will run away from home; 10 percent never return. — 5 million children will become victims of broken homes. According to the Center for Disease J Control in Atlanta, 1 in 4 Americans between 15 and 55 eventually will acquire 1 of 7 sexually transmitted diseases. AIDS may infect 20 to 25 million persons in the 1990's. I strongly urge passage of House Bill 2277 since it provides a practical way for parents and 274 guardians to participate with teachers in the education process. There should no longer be a question about whose values are being taught. Federal Law 20 US Code 1232h, Protection of Pupil Rights, gives parents every right to,know what is being taught. H.B. 2277 reinforces these rights. The bill can start the family healing process so badly needed. The very survival of American families and the future freedoms and growth of our great nation are at stake. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, sir. A couple of questions. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Mr. McMillan) Q. in what school district do you reside? A. Moon Township, Robinson Township. Q. Have your children or grandchildren gone through that school district? A. No, they live in out-of-state areas, but I've been given, through our work, many educational materials people bring to us at our meetings and mail them to us, and I have looked at some materials that would turn your stomach that are supposed to be in some schools involving sexual orientation, rape, and abortion, all the other miserable subjects that we're talking 275 I about. Q. With respect to the materials that you characterize that would turn your stomach, in which Pennsylvania school districts have you found that material to be in use? A. Well, I didn't follow up on the actual source other than the fact that it was in a public textbook by a well-known publisher. And as I understand it, publishers provide material for all school districts across the country. Q. Well, there are many different publishers and there are people who publish books and can't sell them, it's been my experience too. Do you know of any I school districts in Pennsylvania that are using the materials that you have found objectionable? A. Well, otherwise the material wouldn't have been given to me by the people that gave it to me. 1 Q. Well, I've seen material at these hearings that a lady brought in from Virginia, for instance, and somebody spoke about objectional material from New Hampshire, and it probably was pretty objectional. My concern, as a Pennsylvania legislator, is whether or not it's being used in Pennsylvania schools. A. Really, it's a little bit like the dial-a- porn problem. You can get all kinds of material to read 276 about that the kids know about it. They know what's going on. And what happens outside the school is just as important as what happens inside. Q. That is not in dispute. What is in question and what my question pertains to is what Pennsylvania schools are using and what Pennsylvania schools are distributing, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, but my question is, do you know of any school district in Pennsylvania that's using the materials you have found objectionable? A. At the moment I don't, but I'll certainly trace the source of the material that I have and see that you get it. ] Q. For purposes of these hearings and in consideration of the legislation, that would be very helpful to us. A. Absolutely. Q. Just one other question — two other questions. On page 2 of your testimony you say, "Yet SAT scores of the private school students were more than three times higher than the public school students...." A. For the sample that was taken. Q. That seems to be a phenomenal statistic. A. 4,519, I think it was. That came out of a 277 recent book, and I'll be glad to give you the source for that. Q. So you're saying the raw scores were three times higher?

A. No, I'm just saying all it indicates is that private schools have something going for them. ' Q. Well, we're aware of that in Pennsylvania because private schools are able to pick and choose those students who attend and the public schools take everybody j who can't choose to or afford to go somewhere else, so there's no disputing the fact that on most sets of scores private schools will tend to appear to be better. A. Right. Q. What I'm wondering about is the assertion ,] that the SAT scores were three times higher in private schools than in public schools. A. For the sample of 4,519 that was taken. That's all. | Q. If you could provide that documentation to us. j A. I'd be glad to. Q. Because everything that I have seen in terms of national and Pennsylvania statistics suggest that private schools may be a little higher, but you can only go so high on the SAT score. 1,600 is perfect, and 278 you're suggesting that private school students are getting close to 1,600; public school students are only down around 500 or 550. That would be a challenging statistic. A. It's in the book. Q. If you could share that with us, I would appreciate it. The final question that I have, I think we share some strong feelings about fundamental principles such as parents being able to have information and have access to materials, and I think we would share a minimum of opinion that parents ought to have a right to opt their children out of a program. These are very j fundamental principles. A. I agree. Q. This legislation would apply those principles only to the public schools. Do you think that they ought to be applied in nonpublic schools as well and provide equal protection to parents and children going to nonpublic schools? A. i think as a matter of fact if they don't, they should. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. We appreciate you being here. Our next witness is Kathy Stokes, from the 279 North Pittsburgh Crisis Pregnancy Center. Kathy Stokes, if you're somewhere back there, wave. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay, we'll move on to our next witness then, who is Ruth Burig, a school nurse from the Shaler Area School District. MS. BORIG: Good afternoon, Representative Cowell and the remainder of the board. I am Ruth Bung. I've been a school nurse in the Shaler Area School District for 16 years. I would like to thank your committee for the opportunity to present testimony on House Bill 2277, the parent and Pupil Protection Act. My position is one of strong opposition. I oppose many sections but will concentrate on just one, Section 2507-A. Allow me to relate a true personal experience. Although most of my time is spent in an elementary school, I also work in a small Catholic high school. While reading House Bill 2277 a few weeks ago, I kept flashing back to Connie. About five years ago, on the first day of school, Connie came to my office. I had gotten to know her better than most of the other kids at her school because of her occasional special needs. Connie had had polio as a child in Vietnam and her legs were of little 280 use. She relied on braces and used crutches all the J time. Nevertheless, Connie seemed to be happy-go-lucky, had a lot of friends and fit well into the student body. J Although she said that her summer had been okay, I noticed that some of her joie de vivre seemed to be missing. Unable to give her my undivided attention on this day as the office was busy and the paperwork had really piled up, I promised Connie that I would spend time with her early the next Monday morning. Monday came and Connie was in my office before I was, crying. Although the interview was difficult and sensitive and really more than I expected, we really finally reached the conclusion that Connie was probably pregnant, likely about eight weeks.

Call me naive, but this was the last thing on my mental list of things that might be bothering Connie, A very petite, physically immature, however charming, 16-year-old, Connie was very upset and frightened. She said that if in fact she were pregnant, she could not have the baby. Her adoptive parents were very affluent professionals, visible and respected in the community and very staunch, conservative Catholics. We worked out a plan. Although I did not | I take her for the test, I guided her to a facility near her home where she could get a pregnancy test as the

I i I I 1 281 ! t first step. I made sure Connie had my phone number at home in case she needed someone to talk to - something I had never done before. Several days later she called me with the expected results. I Given the facts of her young age and physical problems, Connie's pregnancy was high risk. Getting her to a source of prenatal care quickly was imperative. Because Connie was extremely afraid to J i confront her parents. I agreed to call home and set the stage, which I did. j Connie's parents were very upset. They jj chose to take her out of school for the remainder of the pregnancy, during which time she was tutored. She had a { i I healthy son the next spring and put him up for adoption. j The next year she graduated with her class. i There are a lot of Connies out there. Not all pregnancies end this way, as you know. For every I; f live birth to a teenage mother there is an abortion. j i What I did is being done by school nurses and counselors ! every day, in your school district as well as in mine. Often a school nurse or a counselor is the only adult from whom a student can get help. Section 2507-A raises serious personal and professional concerns relative to school personnel responding to the needs of students. We would find ourselves having to refuse to 282

assist students when they may really need us the most. We need to be able to answer students' questions about sex and sex-related issues factually, whether they are in a formal classroom setting or one-to- one in a private conversation. Let's abort House Bill 2277. It does not deserve to go to term. , CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. just a couple clarifications, if you will. MS. BURIG: Sure. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Burig) Q. During the course of some of the testimony that we've heard, particularly testimony in Harrisburg that I'm thinking of, some members of this committee or I! I others listening might have been led to believe that school nurses in Catholic high schools might not be confronted with the situations where a young lady or a young man comes to a school nurse or a counselor and that in fact there would be a school nurse or a counselor or other professional there who might do things such as you did. i i A. Well, I would say that could very well be j true. As I pointed out about Connie, I probably knew her I better than any other kid in the school and we were more or less friends. The counselors who are at the 283 particular school of which I speak probably would not be approached with this question or with this matter. i Q. But you are the school nurse there? A. I am the school nurse there; I have been for many years. Generally, these kinds of problems do not get to my office. They seem to be — these girls seem to mysteriously withdraw from school, and I find out from their classmates what the problem is. ! Q. Okay. Again, I don't want to prejudge \ anybody, but I'm convinced that some proponents of this « legislation would like to believe that every school nurse [ in the situation that you found yourself in would end up making recommendations that would lead to an abortion. You clearly did not do that. i A. Right. Q. And as I listened to and read your testimony, I got the impression that the prompt advice that you were able to provide helped the young lady have a determination made which led to a couple of things: One, a rather prompt meeting with her parents; and two, perhaps just as important, prompt prenatal care that allowed, I assume, a healthy baby to be born and ultimately adopted. A. I'd like to think that also. Thank you. But when I approached the parents, I did 284 not say, "Mr. and Mrs. —, Connie's pregnant." I allowed, as indeed I told them what we had discussed and exactly what I had ascertained, that she hadn't had periods, et cetera, and discussed several possible other causes of this situation. It was the parents who took her for the test following and made the final determination and sought the care. And this all took about, I would say, two to three weeks from my first meeting with Connie. Q. If that young lady who you've indicated I you know pretty well did not have you to turn to, and i i this is conjecture, I understand that, and none of us can really know what she might ultimately have done, but is it reasonable to assume that whatever she would have done would have occurred substantially later as a result of procrastination, worrying? A. very possibly. Very often, as you probably are aware, kids if they can't talk to their parents, and Connie absolutely could not, felt that she couldn't anyway, her father is a physician, for one thing, and she was just terrified. But most of their advice comes from their peers, and in fact it was a friend who took her for her original pregnancy test. But you're right, they do procrastinate and who knows where they could have ended up. I don't i 285 ; know. j

Q. Just one other thing. As a professional J school nurse, I ask you to interpret some things for me. s The language in the bill that deals with the prohibited i health services. j A. Yes. | Q. I have interpreted that language to mean j that even if Connie would have come to you as a i| professional school nurse with her mother, under the i language of that proposed legislation in that section, you would have been prohibited from providing assistance. A. I heard you ask someone else that question and I went back through it hurriedly and I wasn't able to ( make that determination one way or another. Q. It doesn't speak to "except with parental consent," or anything like that. It seems to be absolute prohibition. A. Which is really, you know, I think that's wrong. But personally, I would inform a parent if she came with a child to talk with me about something like that. I wouldn't have a problem. But if this passes, my hands would be tied. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Um-hum. Any other questions? (No response.) 286 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much for being here. MS. BURIG: Thank you. I CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Dr. | C. Paul Banks II, School psychologist with the penn Hills School District. While Dr. Banks is coming forward, let me acknowledge receipt of written testimony from Mrs. Dorothy W. Gillan, and the text of her written testimony will be submitted for the record. (See index for prepared written testimony of Mrs. Dorothy W. Gillan.) Sir, go ahead. DR. BANKS: Good afternoon. My name is Paul Banks, and I'm employed as a school psychologist in j the Penn Hills School District. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to participate in the formal public hearings today. My specific areas of concern with this proposed legislation that I will comment on today are with Section 2506 - Protection of Pupil Rights. In my opinion, Section 2506 could seriously hinder school psychologists from providing I quality service both to the students and to their parents. Rather than protecting student rights, House Bill 2277 could actually interfere with the student's 287 right to an appropriate education by severely restricting the information available to school psychologists, which could necessitate placement decisions based upon an inadequate fund of relevant information. It is neither my job nor my intent to embarrass students or their parents, but I would not be doing my job as a professional school psychologist if I ignored potentially embarrassing problems or pretended they have little effect on the lives of students. Alcoholism, drug abuse, neglect, physical abuse, psychological abuse and sexual abuse are but a few of the potentially embarrassing problems which school psychologists cannot ignore because of the devastating impact these problems have on students and their families. It would be, in my experience, extremely unlikely to find a parent engaged in illegal, antisocial, demeaning or embarrassing behavior willing to give the school prior written consent to investigate these activities, in spite of the negative consequences these behaviors may be having on their child. Seventeen years as a practicing school psychologist has convinced me that the overwhelming majority of parents are doing a commendable job of raising children, and these same parents are most appreciative of and cooperative with school personnel. I 288 believe Section 2506 of House Bill 2277 would have little impact on these parents but would offer protection not of pupil rights, but to the relatively small but growing number of parents who are either unable or unwilling to provide a healthy atmosphere for their children. In order to do my best as a psychologist in the schools, I need to have access to information concerning all relevant aspects of the student's life. Appropriate counseling and remediation is based upon appropriate diagnosis, and appropriate diagnosis is based upon a systematic, comprehensive look at all aspects of a problem. in my opinion, this would not always be possible under provisions of House Bill 2277. I want to thank the members of the House Education Committee for providing an opportunity for interested individuals to present their viewpoints relative to this bill. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much, sir.

Do we have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Sir, your testimony is consistent with what we have heard from other school psychologists, so we appreciate your remarks. Thanks 289 very much. DR. BANKS: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Helen Cindrich, representing People Concerned for the Unborn Child.

MS. CINDRICH: Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Helen Cindrich. I am Executive j Director of People Concerned for the Unborn Child, a I nonsectarian, nonpartisan, interracial, nonprofit jj organization of pro-life, pro-family parents, students, concerned citizens and professional people. We are primarily an educational organization and our primary audience is the population of students in classrooms from kindergarten through graduate school. !• ) PCUC supports the parent and Pupil I Protection Act and we urge you to move it from your committee to the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote. We have waited a long time for a comprehensive bill such as this one. The children deserve our best in our efforts to educate and at the same time protect them. This bill will give us some of the help we need. People Concerned for the Unborn Child passed a sex education resolution in 1980. We are pleased that H.B. 2277 will put into law many of the 290 points we made in our resolution which said in part, "...parents have the God-given right and responsibility to teach sex education to their children within the natural environment of home and family life." We believe that when parents designate the local school district to supplement facts and values taught in the home, both parents and school administrators have a mutual responsibility to know what is being taught in the classroom.

For instance, PCUC presents programs that focus on life before birth, respect for life, family values, chastity, and, when the audience is mature enough, abortion and related issues. We always confer with the teacher before presenting a program and often with administrators, parents are always invited to be present, and in many cases they have had a preview of the program before it is presented. All this, we feel, is necessary because the topics discussed by our speakers are a useful addition to, but never a substitute for, classroom courses in science, biology, health, and/or sex education.

As a mother of three children, two of them still teenagers, I've done my best to provide appropriate information on the topic of sexual development when I felt my children were ready for it. I was a little 291 surprised when my son, who was about 12 at the time, told me he knew he had to learn more about sex sometime, but would I please hold off for a little while? Of course, I I did. I don't remember what the topic might have been at that time and it doesn't matter now, but I wondered at i that time, and I wonder today, how many other young men and women experience the same aversion to being fed more | * on the subject than they feel they're ready to hear. I ( wonder what my son's and other children's reactions are when sex education comes to the classroom where they can do nothing to hold off, since the class is a captive audience. My personal experience, brief as it was, makes me glad there will be opportunity for parental review of materials to be used in sex education programs. The need for parental permission for children to participate in sex ed programs becomes very important when we realize that parents are natural buffers for their children's needs and anxieties on this subject. And not even the most sensitive, caring teacher is close I enough to every one of his or her students to discern their needs in this intimate, delicate area of personal education. The need for parental knowledge and review of materials to be presented to students was brought home 292 sharply to me a few years ago when a fremd, a mother of six children in the East Allegheny school District, told me that the home economics teacher of one of her daughters, when shown pictures of aborted babies in the home economics class, responded by pointing to a jar containing a baby preserved in formaldehyde and said, "Now look at this one. He's in perfect condition, not burned or cut up. Those pictures are just to scare you." The teacher neglected to have the children note that the baby was dead and pickled in formaldehyde.

This prejudiced, inaccurate, and misleading information would be a lot less likely to be presented in a class mislabeled "Home Economics" if the topic of life before birth were part of a course correctly titled "Sex Education," with a curriculum made available for preview and approval by the local school board prior to the beginning of each school year, and as in Section 2502-A(6), it were part of a planned course. PCUC's resolution objects to the "...sex education...which invades the private conscience of the J child, subjects him/her to peer pressure and conflicts with traditional Christian-judaic values." We are painfully aware that we cannot completely protect our children from all the effects of the rapidly changing society in which we live, but we 293 demand the right to have our values presented and we want the opportunity to cooperate with our local school systems in preserving family values for this and future generations. In his book on teenagers, "All Grown Up And No Place To Go," David Elkind, Professor of Child Study at Tufts University, says, "For us adults this is a time to give serious thought to our values and

4 it principles, just as it is a time to struggle for greater J tolerance. ironically, our responses may only make matters worse for teenagers. Caught between two value systems, parents become ambivalent, and teenagers perceive their ambivalence as license. Failing to act, we force our teenagers to do so before they are ready. j Because we are reluctant to take a firm stand we deny teenagers the benefit of our parental concern and we impel them into premature adulthood. We say, honestly, *I don't know,' but teenagers hear, * They don't care.'" Sections 2505-A, 2508 and 2509, which refers to AIDS instruction, are protective of traditional parental values and rights. You are parents and you may be grandparents someday. You want your children to feel physically, mentally, morally and spiritually competent to meet the challenges that are inevitable in today's 294 world. The Parent and pupil protection Act is another useful tool for our job as formers and shapers of this and future generations. There have been some comments in the media that this bill is being promoted by right-to-life groups, such as ours. This is true, and we do so proudly. The largest number of our members are parents who are concerned enough about the smallest, most vulnerable member of the human family to sacrifice time, talent, and resources to work for his/her rights with no expectation of recognition of compensation. How much more will we then care for the needs of our own children? Supporting this bill is a natural outgrowth of our concern for preborn children and their vulnerable mothers. Sections 2504-A, 2507, and 2508 will alleviate the fears of many parents. Some critics of the bill say that those who promote it believe sex education is a dangerous topic that should be handled cautiously and without openness. That's a half-truth. No adult, particularly no parent, i would want sex education handled with less than caution. As Attorney William Ball said recently, "Sex is an engine, vitalizing, but at the same time, possible destructive." He also said, and we agree, "Sex is not bad but potentially explosive." 295 We do want sex education handled with openness, so much so that we want public hearings at our local level and we want parents to be able to review curriculum materials before they are presented in the classroom. Sections 2503 and 2504 make openness possible.

i PCUC has been studying the topics |j discussed here today since 1969. We are pleased that the <

it lawmakers of Pennsylvania are showing true concern for j the welfare of children and of parental and family values to this bill. We urge you to work for its passage and signing into law by the Governor. Thank you for your attention, and God bless you. i CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you for your testimony and thank you for reading it rapidly to keep us i i moving along in the schedule. A couple of questions. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Cindrich) Q. On page 1 of your testimony you referred to the program presentations that PCUC provides. A. Yes. Q. And the next sentence suggests that that does occur in schools because you say you always confer with teachers and sometimes administrators. 296 A. Yes. Q. Do you have an opportunity to provide your program in any public school districts? A. Yes. Q. How prevalent is that? A. Not as prevalent as it is in parochial schools, but there are several districts in the Pittsburgh area and in the suburbs where we present our programs. We also go to the universities, you know, the State universities, and wherever we're invited. Q. You indicated that you do it in the public schools too. Would that be elementary and the secondary school — I'm sorry, the private. Public and— A. public schools? More junior high and high schools. Q. And of the private schools, elementary at all? A. I go to kindergarten through, you know, all the way up. Sometimes I go to the same school for two days in a row to make sure I get to talk to all of the classes. Sometimes we'll set up a program that will go over several weeks so that you know how classes change in numbers. Q. Do you get into what you would characterize at all as anything relating to sex 297 education? And again, there's a pretty broad definition of that in the legislation. A. We don't specifically get into things like plumbing and biology, unless they come in questions. Q. Uh-huh. A. Our approach to what could be labeled sex education is that we teach chastity. Q. Uh-huh. j i! 'i A. We don't get into — our organization j doesn't have a position on birth control, and so we don't talk about that. | Q. Okay. You do indicate that when the audience is mature enough, though, you will get into abortion-related issues. A. We talk about our views — the areas we address are abortion, euthanasia, government population control, and infanticide. Q. You indicate that parents are always invited to be present. A. Yes. Q. is that in the public and in the nonpublic schools? A. As far as we're concerned, parents are welcome to any and all of our programs. Q. Well, there's a difference between being 298 I

welcome and being invited. A. It's up to the teacher to invite them and they are — they're not always there. Older children are maybe less likely to have their parents there than young children. When we're going to children down at the lower grades, often there are almost as many parents there as there are students. Q. You're testifying in favor of 2277— A. Yes. Q. —and again, as I indicated to a previous witness about an hour ago now, there are certain fundamental things about which I don't think there's a whole lot of disagreement, the notion of parents having a right to review materials, parents being notified, parents having a right to opt-out— A. Opt-in. Q. Opt-out. I don't think there's a lot of disagreement about opting out. There is debate back and forth about the opt-in provisions, but let's just stick with the opt-out. A. Okay. I understand that what the bill says is that parents have to put their children into the programs. Q. Right. That is correct. That's what it says. I'm saying there's quarreling about that, but 299 there's little quarreling about opting out, as we find in the AIDS instruction. As a matter of principle, since you are testifying in favor of this legislation and in favor of principles that even go beyond what I just said, for instance go beyond opting out and instead would provide opt-in requirements— A. Yes. i Q. —as a matter of principle, when you take \ your programs into public and nonpublic schools, why do you not insist that parents be formally invited and have J an opportunity to review the materials in advance and at least have an opportunity to opt their children out of the program before you present that program in the public j t or nonpublic school? I A. They do. Before we present a program, we don't insist. it's up to the teacher. The teacher decides if there's going to be a letter sent home, and there often is. The teacher decides if that letter is going to include permission for the children to be in or out, and the teacher — if the children don't come to the program, the teacher provides another occupation for the children at that time. And that's, you know, that's up to the teacher. We go there to present our material. We're not part of the formal program of any school. 300

We're there as a supplement to what is being done. Q. Kind of like that group of kids from Johnstown that were taken out of the school on a field trip to the TV program which was a supplement. Again, I personally believe in principles of and intend to support it if presented with a piece of legislation that otherwise is acceptable, support principles relating to parental notification and parental review and parental right to opt-out. I believe in those principles and I'm asking why, as a matter of principle, if you feel so strongly about all the provisions of this J legislation, why don't you insist that those principles J be adhered to, even on a voluntary basis? What you told me is that you leave it to the teacher, which is what we do in the public schools right now, something of which you're critical.

A. The programs that we present are not, as I said, they're not part of the program. We are not part of the school system, except that we are parents and we go with what the teacher or the administrators or the school board decides to do. We often have to be reviewed, previewed by the school board also before we go into a school. Q. I would think that you could do a lot to contribute to the acceptance of, the implementation of, 301 the principles in this legislation if you would insist on some of the things that I've suggested. Frankly, I think there's a little inconsistency to your logic and your position. A. Explain that, please. Q. Well, when you advocate legislation such as we have before us— A. Yes. Q. —and you express support for some « principles that we really agree about— A. Um-hum. Q. —but you provide programs in public and nonpublic schools without adhering to or insisting that those principles be adhered to. | A. Our programs are informal programs. What we're talking about here is the law— Q. I understand, that's the— j A. —what we're talking about here is the law j of the Commonwealth. You're putting together something that will go across the Commonwealth and be a blanket means of getting education to the children. What we are doing is providing in southwestern Pennsylvania informal programs to classrooms. We don't insist, when we're talking to the Rotary Club or the Knights of Columbus, that they have permission. When we're talking to a 302 Christian mothers' group or to, say, Witness for Fitness, we don't insist that they opt-in or opt-out. Q. We're only talking about what happens in the schools. We're talking about my right as a parent. A. Yes. Q. And we're talking about certain principles that apply to the schools, and although the State doesn't require them to do certain kinds of things, we've heard testimony from a number of school districts that have put into practice procedures and policies that are quite laudable and quite consistent with some of these fundamental principles that we agree about, again. A, yes. Q. And again, I don't mean to badger you about it. You might just give some thought to it. I personally think you could go a long way to being, one, more consistent with your position; and two, fostering more adherence to the principles you advocate if you would insist that before you take a program into a public school or a nonpublic school, that certain basic things around which there is little dispute - parental notification, parental review, and opting out - in fact be put into practice. A. That's what we prefer. Q. Well, I understand you prefer that, but 303 you don't do that. A. We don't, but that is what happens in most cases, and for you to infer that it doesn't happen is not correct either. Q. Well, what we're dealing with though is a problem that is not a real problem in most cases among the 501 districts. We have heard a number of witnesses say that even if there are only 3 or 4 or 10 exceptions among the 501 districts, it's important enough that we address it and apply these principles across the board as a matter of law. A. Well, isn't what this bill saying — is not what this bill saying is that each district will have the right to decide what materials are used, how they are presented— Q. What this bill says, though, is that these basic principles— A. Yes. Q. —of parental notification, parental review, and parental right to opt-out shall be applied equally in all school districts, and we've had some witnesses suggest that they ought to be applied in all nonpublic schools as well. A. i heard that. Q. I think you understand — I respect you a

r 304 great deal. I think you understand the point I've made, so I'm not going to pursue it any further. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MS. CINDRICH: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, from Pittsburgh. DR. DUNEGAN: My name is Lawrence Dunegan. I'm a pediatrician. I've been in practice for 20 years now. I want to thank you, Mr. Cowell, and all the members of the House Education Committee for holding these hearings on House Bill 2277, and I hope that you will support enactment of the bill, which, as we all by now know, relates to sex instructions in public schools and sex-related personal services to students attending those schools. We should recognize that parents in Pennsylvania differ as to how they believe their children | should be instructed in sexual matters. We should acknowledge that parents are entitled to hold these differing beliefs, and they are entitled to have their children instructed in ways that do not conflict with their beliefs. Also, children themselves differ as to 305 the kinds of information they need and the time when they are ready to handle such information, judgments as to the kinds of sexual information, and the time and manner I of presenting information to children, are usually best made by the parents of those children. Now, at this point I would like to observe | that State agencies dealing with our children are created ( ! by the people, through our Representatives, for the ] I purpose of serving the people. But because of the power j inherent in some agencies, there is risk that some agency personnel may come to believe the reverse, that is, that j the people are to be subservient to the agencies. Just as our Representatives help the people by creating governmental service agencies, so must they also help us [ I to maintain control over these agencies. The Department i of Education and the government schools are examples of such agencies. House Bill 2277 will be an important ) element in helping our people and our Representatives to j maintain proper controls on public school instructions Ii and services. j Now, I feel that needs to be stated explicitly because children in public schools are, in reality, a captive audience. This creates a situation where children can be indoctrinated with whatever sexual values are held by those persons who are in a position to 306 determine the content of sex instructions. To claim that sex instructions can be given value-free I see is misleading. You can no more discuss sexual behavior in a way which is free of values than you can go on vacation to a place that is free of climate. The issue can be only which values or which climate is chosen. To the extent that government school sex instruction conflicts with what a parent would wish to have taught to his child, the teaching becomes a usurpation of parental rights and is therefore unjust. The same holds true for any clinical services in which schools might participate. State government and its agencies have an obligation to guarantee that the rights of parents and their children are protected. 1 House Bill 2277 offers this much needed protection. it promotes an opportunity for parents to discover what sex instructions are intended to be given to their children. it fixes authority for the content of sex instruction with the local school boards, who are the representatives closest to the people to be served. it j protects pupils from being asked personal questions which have no place in the educational curriculum. It would protect vulnerable children from being led, secretly, into using sex-related clinical services to which their parents might object. 307 I would like to see the protection offered by House Bill 2277 strengthened by a provision that no penalties, budgetary or otherwise, could be imposed on a school district for rejecting the use of any curricular material, and also prohibiting any budgetary or other incentives or rewards offered from public or private sources for agreeing to the use of any curricular material. In summary, I believe House Bill 2277 is a bill which provides needed protection, and so I hope that you will enact it into law. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, Doctor. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Dr. Dunegan) Q. The next to last paragraph in your testimony, Doctor, where you speak about penalties and incentives or rewards with respect to accepting or rejecting certain curricular material. A. Yes. Q. Could you elaborate on that, put that into some context for us? is that happening somewhere where someone is being penalized financially for not using certain curricular material or where they have been enticed by incentives or rewards to use some other curriculum material? 308 A. it's my understanding that — I'm sure you're familiar with the EQA or Education Quality Assessment examination given in Pennsylvania. Q. um-hum. A. And it's my understanding from people in our school district that when that test was first prepared, school districts were given financial incentives to use it. And then that was followed by a time when they were penalized if they refused to use it. I don't know the current status of that, but I— Q. We fought that battle about 10 years ago. A. Yeah, I know. Q. And the fact is that the test is now optional for school districts as well as it is optional for parents within a school district that does choose to use it. A. Well, I know it has been optional right along. It was never mandatory. The only thing school people were told is if you refuse it, then you have the ' J right to refuse it. You simply get less financial help. ? I Q. Well, I think that's wrong. A. Well, I can only go by what I was told. But in any event, if the potential is there, let's — you know, I think there should be protection against that. i If that has never happened, so much the better. 309 Q. Okay. I would also note that — again, it's a matter of semantics and we don't need to argue > that back and forth, that most of us probably do not view the EQA test or that test instrument as curricular

i material. I thought you were referring to certain books I or slide shows or things of that sort. A. Oh, okay. As far as sex education and that sort of thing? Q. Or really the principle could apply to any discipline - math, science, or sex ed or whatever. Are you aware of any situations where if a school district — because we don't have a statewide curriculum, that's why I asked. And we don't have a State approved book list, or such thing. i A. I think I understand where you're going. Q. I'm not aware of anyplace where State government ties any State financial incentives or disincentives to the use or lack of use of any curricular materials. Are you aware of any? A. Other than the EQA, no, I'm not aware of that having happened yet. Q. So you were referring to EQA? A. Well, EQA was what alerts me to this as a potential danger for other things, but I'm not aware of it having happened as regards sex instruction or any 310 j other— Q. Or anything else. Okay. The final question I have— A. Yes, sir. Q. Two questions. You may have said it, but what school district do you live in? A. Mt. Lebanon. Q. Mt. Lebanon. Are there any particular policies or practices or materials in use in your school district that you object to? A. No, there are not. Our school district, at least most of us feel, is a very good school district. We have a lot of participation from the people and we feel that, I think it's fair to say, that overall our school board and our administration are responsive to the people, but I do know that's not true everywhere. A. Okay. I don't expect you to know 501 i different districts in this State, most of us don't, but \ among the districts with which you are familiar, which j districts are using policies, practices and materials 1 related to sex education that you feel are objectionable and which would be corrected by the provisions of 2277? A. Okay. You're aware of the Pennsylvania parents Commission— j Q. Yes. 311 A. —which is the organization from which I began to learn about this problem. And I'm sure you're aware of what was called the Pennsylvania Health J Curriculum Guide/Family Health, which the Department of Education put out in 1984. I think you know the curriculum guide I'm referring to. Q. Yes. A. It's my understanding that in Downing town, Pennsylvania, there were 1,600 parents who objected to that being in the school, petitioned to have it removed, and their petition was ignored. I shouldn't say it was ignored. They were not able to get— Q. We heard extensively about the Downingtown j School District at our Philadelphia hearing two weeks ago and it's a complicated situation and we're just learning , more about it. I do know that the statewide curriculum guide that was found to be objectionable, that members of this committee objected to as well, in fact was withdrawn by the new Secretary of Education and he also issued an order that any other copies of the guide be returned or destroyed. A. Yes. Q. So that issue is behind us. One of the districts with which you are personally familiar— A. May I say— 312 Q. Sure. A. —that that issue is not really behind us. The reason it got withdrawn and destroyed was some parents were fortunate enough to learn about it and bring

it to light. That particular issue may be behind usf but the reason I support the bill is there's no telling how long that curriculum guide might have been in use and I don't think anybody now really knows how widely it's used. Q. Actually, we've had trouble finding anybody that's using it. A. Well, I'm pleased to hear that. But with the provisions of this bill, I think that guarantees or at least promotes the opportunity for parents to know what is being used. in other words, things cannot be used about which they might object. If people would see a curriculum guide and say, well, I like that, then, you know, they have that right. Q. Right. Let me return to my question, though.

A. Yes. Q. In terms of districts, you've already said that you have no quarrel with the Mt. Lebanon district where you reside. In terms of any other districts, wherever they might be in Pennsylvania where you have 313 personal knowledge, can you identify any districts for us that have policies, procedures, or are using curriculum materials related to sex education where you find objection, where parents do not have access to the information, where parents have been denied the right to opt-out of programs, where students have, unbeknownst to I their parents, had very offensive materials placed upon them?

i A. Yes. Yes.

Q. Would you identify those districts? ( A. Cambria County. Now, I don't know who, ! you know, who's responsible for — whether it was the j f local school or the school board. I'm not sure of the j 1 responsibility, but I have a relative who lives in i ij Cambria County who at that time was 14 years old. Her < mother, we were talking — well, anyhow, in a conversation and it came up about sex instruction in schools and her mother said, "Well, you'd never believe what my daughter told me about what they'd done in school." So I asked the girl to tell me, she is 14, and she had very much difficulty in relating the two movies that they were shown. So I asked her mother, I said, you know, this is obviously difficult for her to talk. Can you help her? what happened? There were two movies in full color, one 314 with close-up shots and all kinds of different angle shots of various heterosexual activities going on. The second movie was homosexual activity. I don't want to get into the details of what was shown, but I think that's enough.

Q. Approximately when did that occur? Do you have any idea? A year? One year, two years, five years ago? A. No, this was further back. This would be like the late '70's, early *80's. Q. So we're talking about 7, 8, maybe 10 years ago? A. in that neighborhood, yes. Q. Other than that incident 7, 8, or 10 years ago in some school district in Cambria County, are you aware of any other cases where the policies, procedures, or materials are in place— A. Materials. A mother came into my office one day after I examined the child and the child was already in the waiting room. She said something like, "What do you think about this incident?" and then related an incident. This was in one of her elementary schools in Mt. Lebanon where they had some sort of sex instruction class scheduled. The kids were all in the room with the lights out for a movie and the movie 315 started out — well, very soon it was recognized that this was a pornographic movie. The teacher had started the film and then stepped out of the room. The movie ran j 1 — this is third-hand information now because the child 1 i told the mother and then the mother told me, but the movie ran maybe five or six minutes and some of the kids were crying, some of them were laughing, they were getting pretty rowdy in the room so the teacher came back in, seeing the chaos, and then apparently quite surprised by what was on the screen turned it off. That's all I know about it, what one mother says one child told her, and at that time I thought it was just a bizarre incident, maybe a mislabeled movie and was, you know, glad that it got turned off. But subsequent to that time, I think there's a need for us to be much more alert as to what's offered to the children. Q. The incident in Mt. Lebanon, how long ago was that? A. That would have been in the early '80*s, maybe '81, '82, along in there. Q. I really am searching, quite honestly, to determine how pervasive this problem is, and as I listen, finding that people are having great difficulty citing very many instances among the 501 districts. Certainly there have been some incidents cited. 316 A. I'm pleased to hear that. Q. But I'm getting the impression that the problem that we're addressing is more prospective than current. That doesn't make it any less important, but some people who would listen to testimony are left with the impression that there are filthy books and filthy pictures and improperly motivated teachers and administrators in all of our school buildings in this State, and I'm quickly — I'm getting the impression that that would be a wrong conclusion to reach, based on the testimony that we're hearing. A. I, too, think it's a wrong conclusion. I know a lot of teachers who are my patients, their children are my patients, and fortunately, most of the people at the local level have better sense than to use that curriculum guide which was alluded to earlier, and I don't know whether they got rid of the supplementary material that was recommended for use along with the curriculum guide. One of the pieces in that material, this is for kids at 10th through 12th grade, is a book called, "i Deserve Love." Are you familiar with that? Q. Well, I think the consensus was that the material referred to — some of the materials referred to were among the most objectionable parts of that whole program. 317 A. I have a copy and I'd be happy to give it to you, if you'd care to read what some of the things they want our kids to do. I'd be happy, because I think j this is important for our hearing. Q. Well, we had a meeting and a hearing and a lot of discussion around that. if you care to submit it, I can't stop you from doing that, but to be honest with you, I'm not going to read it. A. Okay. Well, I knew you wouldn't. I expected you wouldn't because I was asking you to read it out loud. The instruction to the children is, write and say again and again the same positive statements to make changes of yourself. And can I have just a minute [ j to get it? j \ Q. Sure. Go ahead. A. There's a whole book full of affirmations where the student is instructed to write and say again and again the same things. I don't want to read these out loud but I don't know if there's any volunteer here I who would. Q. Well, we've got the impression that J they're not very nice. A. That's a gentle understatement, yes. Q. A question I would have though, to the best of your knowledge, is that book being used in any 318

school building in Pennsylvania? A. it's my understanding it is in Downingtown. You know more about the Downingtown situation than I do. It was my understanding that — Downingtown is the only one. There are some other school districts that I hear about just rumor. But it's my understanding Downingtown is one. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much, sir. DR. DUNEGAN: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Kathleen Greenawalt, from Indiana. Let me also acknowledge the submission of written testimony from Mamsy Stable, who is the Pennsylvania State Director for Citizens for Excellence in Education, and that has been submitted into the record. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Stable.) 1 MS. GREENAWALT: I have seen and worked with too many girls that have needlessly been through too much, too soon. i am here because of those girls, their families, and my children. Along with many others, I will continue to work against school-based clinics and

I 319 for H.B. 2277 until they no longer have to be subjected to lies, hurt, and misinformation. Social health officials who have pushed our children through school clinics, AIDS prevention programs and wellness centers, or whatever they may be called, cannot truly have the best interest of our children at heart. They refuse to acknowledge the data that tells the truth, and that being that where there is parental involvement, there is less problem pregnancy; truth that it is a biological fact that there is a human being in the womb; and that the majority of our teenagers are not having sexual intercourse, and for those that do, there are mental and physical aftereffects.

If these were not true, some of us would not be here today, communities would not be voting down school-based clinics, when they are aware of them, and there would be post-abortion groups springing up all over the country. People who refuse to acknowledge these truths are people who are concerned with keeping their jobs and/or are people who are intent on manipulating our children to their own warped agenda. In order for them to gain control, they must desensitize, belittle, and devalue the child and the family. These are also the same people who constantly play the semantic game regarding the 320 importance of parent-teacher relations. While they smile and patronize the parent, they are voting in laws that exclude any parental knowledge and consent. If they were truly concerned and cared, they would let parents be parents and let schools be once again centers for learning. Those who enter the schools under the guise of social do-gooders are not always connected with the schools nor with academics. With polls showing more than half the American people would put their children in private schools if they could afford it, with businesses begging to at the very least teach basic education, and with American high schools placing last in world competitions, one would think schools would be bending over backwards to concentrate on an academic curriculum and the support of parents.

If the argument is that clinics are needed for those whose parents are not involved, or for minorities, whoever they are this week, then the argument is saying that, one, we can't or will not get the parents involved; and, two, minorities are so dumb that they are unable to adhere to what the rest of the people are saying and doing. With the understanding that life was not nor will ever be a pollyanna paradise, families 321 nevertheless did quite well. That is before a callous and detrimental philosophy invaded their lives and deliberately made parents feel inadequate, intimidated and made zombies of our children. There is, of course, one fact that both sides of this issue are fully aware of, and that's money, and lots of it. The whole school clinic/pro- abortion/condom/AIDS mentality has to be and is self- perpetuating. For if abstinence is once again encouraged and accepted, that means no pregnancies, no abortions, no revenue, and therefore no reason to exist.

What kind of arrogance and audacity is it that perpetuates a failed policy, particularly when that policy involves the lives of our children? With all the money available to the social do-gooders and with extremely favorable media coverage, one would think that every school would have a clinic, parents would be in ecstasy, and most of all our kids would be disease and pregnant free. After all, we've had over 20 years of them cramming their sexual tirade down our throats.

We are not here today in order to preserve a 30b or to pimp for a new generation without values or to destroy the family unit. We are involved parents solely because we know, we understand, we protect and deeply love our children. We have seen the destruction, 322 the chaos and the heartbreak, and we want it stopped. Get out of our schools, get out of our lives. You have no right to our children, least of all mine. I am fully in support of H.B. 2277. It's the only common sense approach to protect our children. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, Ma'am. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Greenawalt) Q. Are you in the Indiana School District? A. Yes, I am. Q. Do you have children in that school district? A. Yes, I do, two teenage children. 0. you make mention of the health clinics. I'm really unfamiliar with the districts in Indiana County. A. Indiana, so far, has not had a health clinic per se, but some of the information that was given to our children is on the same basis of a health clinic. This morning I had — my son had to put pictures on a paper bag through his life, snapshots, and inside he had to put most personal and private information, and including sexual information, in this bag. Now, he's 16, he's a sophomore. When I asked, I said, why? He said, well, we're supposed to get to know ourselves. 323 Now, in the first place, they have no jI right to his personal and private information. Secondly, ii he was told that it would not be released throughout the school or the class, so then there would be no point in ! taking them. Due to my husband's employment, I have lived in four different States since my children have been born. The gentleman that was sitting on the right end of your left— Q. Gerry Kosinski from Philadelphia. A. I have had this in every single State, and J he made reference to it, too, the academic arrogance. I I have had it from time and time again. Every school year I tell my children, you do not fill out diaries, you do not tell them what goes on in our family. It is none of their business. In regard to the doctor that was talking about the EQA, this was the reason I got into this because when you said it was not a curriculum subject j when it first came out, they would put it under biology, they would put it under math, they would put it under < everything, and as soon as we did find out and petitioned to get it out of the schools, they did mandate it. I understand some of the questions have changed. But we objected to it, as parents, in the very beginning. And 324 as soon as they found out that we knew about it, we went to the school board, we were told that we didn't have as much education as they did, that we didn't have the degrees and we didn't know what it was about. Well, we had researched it and we knew it went all the way back to some juvie program in Wisconsin, many of the questions.

Q. I'm sorry, it went back to what? A. A juvie program in Wisconsin, if you do not have a thought process where you do not think, then you are having less problems, then you do not have as many problems as an academic, intelligent area. Where if you have a program set up of kids just to be quieted, then you don't teach them to think and progress. And a lot of the programs and a lot of the questions were stemmed from that program. Not a lot, but it was on the basis of the thinking of the same thing. And when we went and found out and went to the school board, they brought in people from Harrisburg, they brought in people from IUP and everything, and it was mandated then.

So that's how more or less we got into it. And then the same progress of values clarification, et cetera, et cetera, all came from — what did you say, 10 years, 12 years ago maybe? And everything has stemmed from that. And I think this H.B. 2277 only makes good, common sense. Why shouldn't we have the right to know 325 what they are being taught? CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Our next witness is Bethann Detwiler, State Director of Concerned Women for America. • MS. DETWILER: Good afternoon. My name is I Bethann Detwiler, and I am the Pennsylvania State Director for Concerned Women for America. I would like i I to note also that I am a former high school educator J myself. Our address is listed here. ! Concerned Women for America is a growing organization representing over a half a million women | nationwide. These women have joined together in prayer and action to protect the rights of families in America. j CWA has become the largest women's legislative organization in the United States, and has a growing membership in Pennsylvania which currently numbers over 20,000. We thank the committee for the opportunity to express our support for this proposed legislation to protect parents and their children embodied in House Bill 2277. Since sex education is most definitely a family issue, Concerned Women for America must take a stand on it. We are diametrically opposed to the implications 326 made by planned parenthood and others that providing abortion services and prescribing or dispensing contraceptives will reduce teenage pregnancy and teenage abortion. For the past 15 years, this prescribed cure has consisted of progressive sex education programs, the establishment of confidentiality between adolescents and various public and private agencies with total disregard for parental rights, and the easy access to contraceptives. Despite years of concentrated effort and more than $500 million in expenditures, teenage pregnancies have nearly doubled since 1971. Abortions in I the 15-19 year age group increased from 232,000 to I 445,000 between 1973 and 1980. Valueless or value neutral sex education is at the very root of these escalations. Many do not understand that information in and of itself is useless if not supported by certain values. Whether or not contraceptives are widely available, teen pregnancy will increase if sexual license does. Some pretend that they can objectively present our youth with only the facts. Either they are deceiving us or deluding themselves. The family planning solution of the past decade has been tested and has failed miserably. Valueless sex and contraceptive education and the 327 breakdown of parental authority have yielded more abortions and more teen pregnancies. On the other hand, when parental involvement is encouraged, abortion and birth rates plummet. A case in point is Minnesota where a 1981 law requiring parental notification for abortion was enacted. According to a 1985 Select House Committee Report, abortions to Minnesota teens age 15 to 19 decreased by 40 percent, births declined 23.4 percent, and pregnancies dropped 32 percent.

Parental awareness and involvement is a vital factor in seeing teen abortion and pregnancy rates I decline. This parental factor is what makes House Bill 2277 such an excellent piece of legislation. When parents are actively involved with inspection and review of sex education course materials and are an integral part of the educational process with their children, positive results will begin to accumulate. Unfortunately, when current programs are evaluated and found to be ineffective, often the proposed solutions are an expansion and modification of the existing concepts rather than a change in direction. The recent emergence of the school-based health clinic epitomizes such a phenomenon. School-based health clinics violate even the most basic parental rights. To realize that our schools can dole out prescription drugs 328 and even counsel and transport our children to abortion clinics, all without parental knowledge, is a national atrocity. How can we expect adolescents today to obey the law and those in authority over them when the schools have undermined and weakened the first and most basic authority figure in their lives - the parent in the home? Because our children are our nation's greatest resource and because their behavior will determine the type of world that will exist in future generations, we must not abandon our children to sexual promiscuity. We must renew our efforts to mold their character in such a way that they reflect virtue, self- control and self-sacrifice in service to others. This is why Concerned Women for America stands strongly in support of House Bill 2277 and urges the House Education Committee to swiftly bring it to the floor for a vote. The strength of our nation and our State is no greater than the strength of our families.

Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Are there any questions? Frank Christopher. BY MR. CHRISTOPHER: (Of Ms. Detwiler) Q. You had alluded in your testimony to the school-based clinics. 329 A. Yes. Q. We've heard that mentioned among the last several witnesses. Quite frankly, I'm not totally familiar with that concept. If you could— A. Elaborate on it? Q. Yes, please. A. Okay. School-based health clinics basically are an extension of the sexual education programs that we've had since we've realized that we have not been curbing pregnancies and abortions and births by the programs we've had. They've expanded it by setting up m-house clinics in the schools—

Q. is this the district that does it? A. Well, it depends on the various States. In Pennsylvania, I think they have been doing it by the district, yes, and I don't know all the, you know, legalities of how a school-based clinic comes into being. I know there are people here that do. But what they do is basically give a blanket check to the schools to provide all sorts of services without parental knowledge. Q. Who is "they"? A. I don't follow you. Q. That writes a check to the schools. A. Well, the school-based clinics are enacted, you know, are voted by the town council or 330 whoever gets them accepted into the school, however they are, you know, legislated or whatever. Once they are in place, the school has an opportunity to dispense prescription drugs, counsel for abortion, refer for abortion, transport children to abortion clinics, and the list goes on and on, all without parental knowledge. in many States what's happened is parents do give a blanket consent form and they think, oh, my child is getting — they'll bill it as this is like a little health clinic and if you sign this, then your children will get free school physicals. You know, if there's a sports injury, we'll take care of it, this kind of thing.

Q. We don't appropriate State money to the school districts for this purpose. A. Well— MS. BISSETT: Are there any in Pennsylvania? I MS. DETWILER: Are there any in Pennsylvania? MS. BISSETT: Yeah. MS. DETWILER: I believe they're coming into Pittsburgh. Does anybody know here about that? WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: Pittsburgh. MS. BISSETT: Pittsburgh School District? WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: It's the New Futures 331 program.

MS. DETWILER: is that what it's called? MS. BISSETT: Is that the one out of California? Sacramento? WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: No, Greenwich, Connecticut. MS. DETWILER: There's many, many different programs all over the place. I'm mainly familiar with ones that are already running. MS. BISSETT: There's no information currently in Pennsylvania that you know of in operation now, today? MS. DETWILER: I don't know of any off­ hand, except that I know that they are coming in Pittsburgh schools. They've already been voted on. WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: January 1st. MS. DETWILER: January 1st they will be in the Pittsburgh city schools. So that's pretty current. MR. CHRISTOPHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I had noted to another witness who spoke about the New Futures Program in Pittsburgh, who if I remember correctly was a resident of Bethel Park or some suburban community, that if she is aware of any of the citizens, any citizens among the 400,000 residents of Pittsburgh who care to object to 332 that program, we would be interested in hearing from them. To date, we have heard nothing from residents of Pittsburgh. MS. DETWILER: I've already gotten several calls from people in the city asking what they can do, You know, what can I tell them? And, you know, you'd ask other people of things happening in the State and that kind of thing. I probably received two, three, four phone calls a week from parents that are disgusted with the educational system from curriculum materials, from tests that were administered asking personal questions. just the other day I had some woman call me from Penn Hills School District that said they had some little questionnaire in a class where they wanted to know what color underwear the children were wearing and all kinds of other personal things, if they had had sex, and this kind of thing.

You know, it's happening and we may not always — a lot of parents don't ever even find out this stuff happens, and what's great about H.B. 2277 is that it can keep these things from happening. And I hate to wait and wait for more of these things to have to happen before we do something positive about it, and that's why I think we really have a great opportunity here. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any other questions? 333 (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thanks very much for being here. MS. DETWILER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Especially to those who are testifying late in the afternoon I want to express our thanks for your patience as you stuck with us. Our next witness is Anita Hoge, from West Alexander. MS. HOGE: Good afternoon. I would like to cut into the heart of the bill, the parent and Pupil Protection Act, covering the area of psychological testing and treatment. My name is Anita B. Hoge. I am a parent who cares. Professionally, I am an educational research consultant and lecturer. My testimony will cover two areas. The first is related to testing and treatment in the classroom, which I was denied access, in violation of Federal law, the protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, in which there is a pending Federal investigation against the Pennsylvania Department of Education in regard to psychological testing and treatment. The second area relates to the extreme importance of the Parent and Pupil Protection Act that parents urgently need for protection of their children in the compulsory government schools. 334 My story does unfold with my son taking the EQA, the Pennsylvania Educational Quality Assessment, without my knowledge or my consent. I was denied access to the test and the valuative materials from both my local school district and the Pennsylvania Department of Education. After securing the materials from computer sources, I had found several illegalities not only in the administration of the testing procedures but the test content and the scoring as well.

There is currently a Federal investigation into the operations of the Pennsylvania Department of Education in violation of the protection of Pupil Rights Amendment. The "Hoge Case," or Pennsylvania Case, as it is sometimes called, includes all three testing areas - the EQA, the TELLS testing, and the programs that result from the scoring of these tests for particular behavior change. The investigation has been for over two years, and the Pennsylvania Department of Education has refused to cooperate with the Family Educational Rights in Testing and privacy and the Deputy General Counsel's Office on the Federal level, which is investigating the complaint. Attached is a letter from that office to the Pennsylvania Chief Counsel, Mary Rogers, to substantiate my claim. The State was given until June 335 15# 1988 to turn over all State budgets and plans for the EQA, TELLS, and programs that are related. Federal funding must be substantiated for the Federal law to be valid in this complaint. Mr. Rooker, of that I investigating office, has agreed that the testing is psychological and may be in violation of one or more of the seven protected areas of personal, private, and sensitive information on children and their families. f The PDE has refused to cooperate. Letters are enclosed j i of the Pennsylvania Department of Education's refusals to jl cooperate and proof of Federal funding involved. i Through tapping into the Department of | i Education computer banks, I have documented official F, J information of how the Pennsylvania Department of | Education scores attitude and value tests passed off as academic testing. The Pennsylvania Assessment Department has used this attitudmal information for research and experimentation on Pennsylvania children, unaware to most legislators and parents. The scored attitudes to government correct values and attitudes have been collected by the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the NAEP, and scored in NCES national data bank. The data is used by researchers and curriculum developers to promote particular behavior change usually in opposition to parental teachings at home. 336 What we are talking about, ladies and gentlemen, are psychological techniques called intervention strategies used to change the values and attitudes of our children without the knowledge or consent of parents. This is not only dangerous in a compulsory setting , it is a grave concern of the escalating numbers of child suicide in our State and nation today. The international EQA and TELLS is cause for this concern.

The State of Pennsylvania has been the pilot State for the NAEP since the EQA inception, except most legislators have known it as a State initiative and not a Federal initiative. The high tech TELLS format was created from the EQA objectives identifying the individual child from microrecording data systems in the national data bank. Because of the Federal J investigation, the Pennsylvania Department of Education is currently trying to manipulate all of the testing objectives of the EQA and TELLS into one test called the Pennsylvania Assessment System, which will not escape the Federal investigation no matter what name is attached to the national data collecting vehicle. The Pennsylvania Department of Education will be held responsible for all violations of Federal and constitutional law. It is quite clear that most parents would 337 not have been able to research these technical areas and spend unbelievable amounts of time on such a project. Under ordinary conditions, most parents would have given up the battle against the experts of the Pennsylvania j Department of Education's manipulation. It is truly the biggest case of fraud, waste, and abuse in the history of y I the United States against our most valuable possession - I our children. j I am requesting that quick legislation be j passed for the protection of our children that is found !j •i in the P.A.P.P.A. bill. I am also requesting that all j funding be stopped immediately to the Pennsylvania j I Assessment Center until further investigation by our ; State legislators and the Federal investigation is | satisfactorily resolved on the Federal level. (See index for exhibits of Ms. Hoge.) I could read you the following letter, if there was time, from the Federal investigating committee to the Chief Counsel, if there is still time. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I just read it and I'm the only legislator here, so I understand what's in the letter. MS. HOGE: I'm sorry, but I do not know your name. CHAIRMAN COWELL: I'm Representative 338 Cowe 11. MS. HOGE: You are Representative Cowell. Are there any questions? The Federal investigation — I have researched this particular problem for four years. I was passed to the Federal level by William Logan, who was at that time Director of Basic Education in the Pennsylvania Department of

i Education. It is a grave concern that, first of all, this is even happening in the State of Pennsylvania. It is also a grave concern that we cannot get recognized for the information we have against the State that this is actually happening and that there are Federal ties to the Pennsylvania EQA. | And I also have the Federal funding, just which was one sheet, of different programs that were j involved. At this time I am being passed from one department to the other on the Federal level because of the documentation is so extensive and of course it is very complex. When you say that the State is scoring i attitudes and values, we are talking about threshold j levels of children, locus of control. It's an unbelievable situation, but it is happening. If it were not happening, I would not have been passed to the Federal level. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any questions? 339 J Frank Christopher. j t BY MR. CHRISTOPHER: (Of Ms. Hoge) ) i Q. Is it kosher for you to tap into the | Department's computer bank? | A. I paid for everything I got. Q. Oh, okay. A. It was legitimately gotten. I will say that it was very difficult— CHAIRMAN COWELL: While we just passed that wiretap law, we take that word "tap" real cautiously. MS. HOGE: Right. It was — let me tell you this. I was denied access to materials and I have known different people who have gotten to see the different testing, but being a research consultant, I did not only ask for testing materials, I asked for evaluations. I wanted to know how they were scoring an attitude and value test, and then what they were doing with the information. BY MR. CHRISTOPHER: (Of Ms. Hoge) Q. I didn't understand that they did grade— A. Oh, they most certainly do. And there is a grading sheet that you have— Q. There's not a pass or fail on it. A. Oh, yes, you do. You get one point— 340 Q. You don't even have to take it. It's been optional for the last five years. A. No, it is not — well, the parents have a right if they know what the testing is. Q. Are you talking about TELLS or EQA? A. I'm sorry, it is a mandatory test. I'm sorry, but I do have from the Attorney General's office that it is a mandatory not voluntary system. It is definitely a mandatory system. I have it from Dr. Caldron's office, 1981, directly from the General Counsel's office in the Department of justice, from Attorney General Zimmerman. It is a mandatory not voluntary. The problem is because of financial entrapment, everything is attached to EQA - the curriculum, the development of the curriculum, the 10 — well, it used to be the 10 quality goals but now it's 12 quality goals, you have to arrange your 5-year long- i range plan, which is mandated, according to the 12 quality goals which are based on EQA. The whole entire « process is based on the attitudinal and value testing of J EQA, and curriculum is developed directly from EQA. I Q. you're telling me that you have to take the EQA test? j A. I'm saying that if parents know about it j 341 they have an option to opt-out. Q. You're telling me that a district must test? A. I'm telling you that they have an option to opt-out, and I am telling you that that is against Federal law. Federal law states that if you are doing psychological testing and treatment, you must have written parental permission from every parent taking the test. That means a sheet goes home to the parent, the parent must sign it. If they do not have a sheet that says their children are allowed to take this attitude and value test, then that child does not take the test. The Pennsylvania Department of Education is in violation of Federal law. Q. All right, you talked about the high tech TELLS. A. High tech TELLS. Q. In my opinion, there's nothing really highly technical about the TELLS test. A. TELLS testing is high tech, it is part of the NAEP expansion of inferential comprehension, which is testing value judgments of children. it is value testing also. it is called cognitive testing of a belief system which is not academic learning. They are testing value judgments in the inferential comprehension. 342 Q. The tests of essential learning skills? A. TELLS, right. TELLS is part of my complaint that is on the Federal level. The TELLS testing objectives was pulled right out of the EQA. My son took the pilot research portion of TELLS. They are exactly the same objectives, you can give any name to a test, but if they're testing the same objectives and you give a new name to the test, it's the same test. They need both areas, okay? What I am talking about, the TELLS is being used to identify every child in the State of Pennsylvania who is going through the third grade. At this time, the Pennsylvania Department of Education is combining the test with the attitude testing and the ! belief system, which they need both in order to gain a psychological profile on every child that will be in the national data bank. And this is what is happening. The information that is being collected from Pennsylvania is not just used in Pennsylvania. It is passed on. It is used for research. I have correlated one particular project that started in the Allegheny Intermediate Unit and it has been passed around the country. And this particular project is the basis of my entire complaint, which used Federal fund Title 4C funds, and was used in the Thomas Jefferson— 343 Q. Do you realize the Department right now is prosecuting people for circulating those tests? I A. For circulating which tests? J I Q. The TELLS tests. A. For circulating TELLS tests? What do you mean?

1 Q. There are four people in this State right i | now under prosecution by the Department of Education for jj circulating TELLS tests— - A. What do you mean circulating TELLS tests? j Q. Among their students. I A. You mean — I guess I don't know. Do you mean where the test got out from the school district or the State and it's being passed around and it's like teaching to the test? Q. That's the idea. A. Well, I did not know of that but I do know that not only the — the test itself is an invasion of privacy. it's what is happening with the test results that's in violation of constitutional and Federal law. The test itself is just hitched on the way that it is administered. Okay? Because actually, every parent should be signing — and it is a psychological test down to the main core. Now, this test was began back in 1969- 70 was the first time, and it was much more extensive at 344 that time. Q. I think we're talking about different tests. A. No, I'm sure we're not talking about different tests. The TELLS, the Testing for Essential Literacy and Learning Skills is definitely the test that is under Federal investigation, along with EQA. If you would look at the letters, they are right in front of you, where the State has refused to cooperate. In fact, the Deputy General Counsel, there is a letter there from Diane Wemstein, said they don't know why Pennsylvania is not cooperating with the information that was requested of them. And then there are several other letters where they were given to March 31st of last year to comply. And then they were given until June 15th to comply, and then my complaint was passed over to the Federal Inspector General, where it is sitting now, because they really don't know what to do with it.

There is so much documentation against the Federal Department of Education and in collusion with the Pennsylvania Department of Education that it is overwhelming. Most legislators haven't any idea— Q. Is there any action being brought against the Federal Department of Education? A. I am hoping. I'm taking it one step at a 345 time. I am starting at this level where the State is committing illegal acts, and then moving on to where the information is being stored and who is using it. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Hoge) Q. I have just one request. You clearly in your testimony mention EQA and TELLS. You just said in response to Frank's question though that the TELLS is being investigated as well, and you mentioned in the various letters. I searched those letters and I can't find any mention of TELLS, although I searched them very quickly. I see clear mention of the EQA repeatedly. A. Okay. The Federal investigation is also taking this one step at a time. They are taking— Q. So are you saying there is not mention of TELLS in the letters? A. Oh, yes. The particular letters here, my letters always say TELLS. Okay? Q. It must be a trick of the copy machine. Q. Pardon me? Q. It must be a trick of the copy machine because mine only say EQA. A. I said my particular letters that I write. Q. Oh, the ones you sent. Okay. A. My complaint is covering three areas - the EQA, the TELLS, and the resultant programs. TELLS is 346 definitely a part of the NAEP and part of the inferential comprehension that is being tested within the EQA which has the same objectives. Again, I will repeat, no matter what name you put to a test, if they're testing the same objectives, it's testing the same test. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. Our next witness is Kathryn Forsyth, from Pittsburgh. MS. FORSYTH: Mr. Cowell, my written remarks are longer than my five minutes, so I need to have them put as part of the formal— CHAIRMAN COWELL: Okay, fine. MS. FORSYTH: I have an extra copy if you need one for the record. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Is this the same thing you just gave us? MS. FORSYTH: Yes. ! CHAIRMAN COWELL: You might give it to the young lady there. MS. FORSYTH: Okay. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you. Go ahead. MS. FORSYTH: Mr. Cowell and members of the Education Committee, as a parent and a registered nurse, I believe that House Bill 2277 is a sound piece of legislation that will greatly improve the health and 347 well-being of our children. The education and health care of each child is ultimately the parents' responsibility. This bill supports parents in raising their children by providing them the opportunity to be involved in their school's sex education curriculum and by giving them the choice to provide their child's sex education at home if they believe this is the most appropriate approach for their child. I The emphasis on abstinence and the | prohibition of health services related to contraceptives |

>i i and abortions is necessary. Our current method of sex education presents the facts regarding the physical I process and supports easy access to contraceptives. This has not decreased the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy among children. if anything, the j rate of teenage pregnancies has been increasing and sexually transmitted diseases are now occurring in epidemic proportions in adolescents. The most responsible approach is for us to j change our method of sex education. Abstinence will prevent sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. Since this bill requires that sex education emphasize abstinence and that it must stress that abstinence is the only completely reliable means of preventing the transmission of AIDS and other sexually transmitted 348 diseases and of preventing pregnancy, it proposes a sound approach to children's sex education. According to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling this past summer. Bowen V. Kendrick, it is permissible for the government to promote abstinence in sex education without violating the separation of church and State doctrine. We cannot tell our children to "just say no" to sexual activity and then provide them with contraceptives and abortions. Our children need to learn that their behavior has consequences and that they need to be responsible for their behavior and its consequences. If we provide contraceptives and abortions i without parental knowledge and consent, we remove a very important motivator for our children in heeding our instruction because we remove the child's accountability for his or her behavior. Not only that, but we are asking children to be able to make adult decisions regarding complex health issues - issues that will have long-reaching effects on their lives. We are also sending our children a double message by telling them not to engage in sexual activity, but then saying in effect that they will not be able to control themselves anyway so they better use contraceptives, and if need be, abortion to keep their sexual activity, quote, unquote, "safe." 349 There are a host of risks involved with early sexual activity. Children need to be taught about these risks so that they know why it is important for them to abstain from sexual activity. There are seven major health risk areas. The first is sexually transmitted diseases. These, as we all know, can result in death from AIDS; incurable, painful conditions like herpes; death from untreated syphilis; or infertility due to scar tissue formation. A second risk of sexual activity is the side effects from contraceptives. Of the available methods, birth control pills have the largest number of serious side effects. Third, if a pregnant child has an abortion, she faces the very real risks of infection, hemorrhage, allergic reactions to medications, and there's also the risk of death. Fourth, any person who aborts a baby has to deal emotionally with what she has done. Fifth is the risk of pregnancy. Sixth is the increased risk of cancer of the cervix in girls who start sexual activity early in life and with many partners. Seventh is the detrimental effect of early 350 sexual activity on our children's self-esteem. With all of these recent consequences of early sexual activity, it is imperative that we teach our children to "Just Say No" and act like we mean it by not handing out contraceptives and abortions. For these reasons, I believe this proposed bill is an excellent piece of legislation that truly does protect parents and children. Yes, there are some children who will not listen to our instruction on this matter, just as there are some children who will use drugs and alcohol. Do we stop the "Just Say No" to drugs program because some children will not listen? That would be irresponsible on our part.

This bill presents a valid approach to the rising rates of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases among children, please "just Say Yes" to this legislation. Thank you for your time and consideration. (See index for prepared submitted statement of Ms. Forsyth.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you, Ma'am. BY CHAIRMAN COWELL: (Of Ms. Forsyth) Q. In what school district do you reside? A. Mt. Lebanon. Q. We had a gentleman here just a few moments 351 ago from Mt. Lebanon and,I think I know the answer to the question, but for the record I'll ask, the health clinics to which you object, is there one in your school district? A. Not that I know of in Mt. Lebanon, no. Q. Can you share with us information that you have about health clinics that exist in other school districts in Pennsylvania? A. I'm not familiar of any other ones that currently exist in Pennsylvania. I know that in the Pittsburgh School District there has been a move in, I believe it started last year, to get school-based clinics in the Pittsburgh School District itself. They've had some public hearings on it and there's been quite a bit of parental opposition, from what I know. I do have some friends that reside in the Pittsburgh School District who have gone to the hearings themselves, but at this point I don't know at what stage they are in getting that into the schools or whether it's been knocked down. Q. Aside from the debate in Pittsburgh, you're not aware of any of these objectionable clinics existing in any other school districts in Pennsylvania? A. Not in Pennsylvania. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Any questions? (No response.) 352 CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you very much. MS. FORSYTH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Our next witness is Nancy Orban, from Somerset. MS. ORBAN: Good afternoon. One of the reasons that I feel blessed in being a United States citizen is that our representative form of government employs a system of checks and balances which protects the rights of the individual as well as those of the masses. I believe that passing the parent and pupil Protection Act, House Bill 2277, into law would do the same for our educational system as our Constitution does for its citizens. Because of the influx of values-laden courses into the public school system, there is more of a need than ever for parents to be involved in the educational system, if only to be sure that their values are being implemented. As a parent, I want to be assured that our traditional family values are not undermined by those that we pay to teach our child. j t As to the sex education courses, if they j are implemented, it may be wise to have the students be required to opt-in rather than out of these courses, much as one would sign up for a college course. This would insure that there would be no harassment directed toward j 353 those students who choose not to take the course. One of the reasons that I feel so strongly about this is that my husband and I personally discovered that not all educators can be counted on to protect the rights of our child. When we moved to our present school district four years ago, our daughter Cherie was in the fifth grade. She had been attending only a few weeks when a boy who was two years older, larger than she and who had been mamstreamed into her class started harassing her, making terroristic threats, and finally, with the help of another boy, physically assaulted her on the way to the school bus. This was witnessed by several students in front of the school doors.

The next year was an education for the three of us into the politics of education, juvenile probation, and the court system. During this time, the boy persisted with witnessed threats of rape, intimidating gestures, and unwanted physical closeness. This was all reported by us to the school authorities to no avail. This was puzzling to us, as rules are on the books to prevent such behavior on school property. Also puzzling were some comments a teacher took upon herself to make to our daughter, in a harassing manner, about her required court appearances. Our daughter was, and is, an honor student and these necessary appearances did not 354 affect her school work. The judge ruled in our favor, stating that the situation should never have gone on so long. A restraining order went into effect and the activity only then ceased. In this situation obviously we needed and were fortunate to have the strength of the law to fall back upon. Because of this personal experience and also because of what I have read in a number of publications, one of them the Education Reporter, and the j article on the cancellation of the controversial sex education guide, I believe that the parent and Pupil protection Act needs to become law. parental involvement has long been called for by the educators of our children. My question is, to what degree is this parental involvement really wanted? Research shows that those parents who consider education a top priority have children whose grades and behavior reflect that attitude. Also of interest are the findings of University of Chicago researcher James Coleman. He discovered that Roman Catholic schools do a better job of helping low-income minority students to get to college not because they offer a better education but because they have a much closer relationship with the families 355 \ t they serve, and that I feel is the crux of it. The i schools are there to serve the needs of the students and the parents. The Parent and Pupil Protection Act, passed into law, would assure the local control of value-laden matters right where that control belongs. And as to the EQA, our daughter opted out of taking EQA one year and they singled out, and these are teenagers and they don't want to be singled out, and j they singled out, they called over the intercom their 'j | names and said they weren't taking the test, herded them \ 1 to the library, and my daughter said very emphatically j that they were treated in a very nasty manner by the people who were proctoring them. CHAIRMAN COWELL: In what school district do you live in? MS. ORBAN: Somerset. CHAIRMAN COWELL: Are there any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COWELL: Thank you for being here. Again, I want to thank our hosts here at the Gateway School District for their generous hospitality in allowing us to use their facilities today and it has contributed to what I think has been a very informative hearing. And most of all, we want to thank 356 all of those who testified, as well as those who came to listen along with us. We appreciate your attention. Again, finally, I would note that anyone who has additional information to submit is welcome to do so. We would find it useful, particularly with respect to some of the requests that we have made of various witnesses, and a few of them are still in the room. if we had asked you to submit something in writing or suggested that it might be helpful to us, I want to encourage you to follow up and provide any additional materials that you're able to provide to us. There being no further witnesses at this point, we will adjourn the hearing. Thank you very much. (Whereupon, the proceedings were concluded at 6:07 p.m.) 357

I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me during the hearing of the within cause, and that this is a true and correct transcript of the same.

ANN-MARIE P. SWEENEY

The foregoing certification does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.

Ann-Marie p. Sweeney 536 Orrs Bridge Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 358

EXHIBITS DR. PAUL JOHNSON PA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS Testimony Presented to

House Education Committee

on

House Bill 2277

By

Paul A. Johnson

Superintendent of Franklin Regional

October 14, 1988 EDUCATION COMMITTEE - HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HOUSE BILL Ho. 2277. SESSION OF 1988 OCTOBER 14, 1988

rman, and Members of the House Education Committee, my Paul A. Johnson, Superintendent of the Franklin Regional )istrict in Westmoreland County. Thank you for the Lty to offer testimony on House Bill 2277. I am offering timony on the basis of my experience as Superintendent of Lklin Regional School District and as the Pennsylvania Lon of School Administrators Legislative Committee tative for the Westmoreland County Intermediate Unit.

\11 is a perplexing piece of legislation which seems to to blend together several elements which impact on local istrict operations, both in the short run and potentially a the future. lexing feature of the bill to me is the rationale for the additional state involvement in local school district a as it regards sex education, defined in the bill as "... xuction that is given as part of any planned course, dm or other instructional program and that is intended to Information or promote discussion or understanding in :o human sexual behavior, sexual feelings and sexual human sexuality and reproduction, pregnancy avoidance or Lon, or sexually transmitted diseases, regardless of such instruction is described as or incorporated into a on of sex education, family life education, family health ., health education, family living, health, self esteem or arse, curriculum, program or goal of education." It o me that this definition is too broad. Local districts the responsibility to develop and implement programs for within the constraints of the existing school code. tool districts should continue to operate responsibly in opment, implementation and evaluation of all curriculum, t stresses sex education or any other subject.

100I districts can and should develop local policies on selection, dealing with complaints from residents about and materials. In the Franklin Regional School District ided to complaints voiced by residents about a component elementary guidance program which dealt with decision id increasing self esteem. In February 1986, using the ied forum of a public school board meeting, and under the is of the local school board which conformed to the Sunshine Law, residents expressed concern about the :s of the elementary guidance program. The school board L an ad hoc committee consisting of members of the staff dents, including some of the concerned parents, and the committee to review the concerns and make Lations to the board regarding these concerns. In my that was the proper way to have proceeded in such a ibsequently, the board adopted policies on the selection

2 Doks and other materials, and adopted a policy on the ration of programs and materials (enclosed). Since the of those policies, no problems have arisen from the sgarding the appropriateness of the issues of decision d self esteem. illy, each school district in the Commonwealth n a timeline recently for the implementation of AIDS L within each local school district. At the Franklin School District we developed a curriculum at the state id grade levels with residents serving on the teacher/ ator curriculum committees developing those courses. The im was then presented in meetings for public reaction Lopted by the local board of school directors. This was example of a locally developed program with public snt in the development of the program, and with the .ty for parents to have children opt out at their in. H.B. 2277 provides a much more cumbersome approach in 2505-A. Why not approach the issue of sex education r to the way we approach them locally?

.cations of this bill go beyond sex education in terms of king additional state controls and promoting a potential ; environment for special interest groups, which can n the diminution of local curriculum, intrusion into academic freedom, not to mention opening the way to .p by special interest groups (see attached article: "AASA,

3 s urge policies on censorship"). the motive for incorporating a portion of the federal mendment (attachment from the Federal Register toer 6, 1984)? This section of H.B. 2277 (Section 2506-A) be re-examined in light of the national consequences tch Amendment as well as the lack of clear definition 2277 of "psychiatric and psychological examination, or treatment" (Section 2506-A),

Lons of the legislation which provide additional checks aces between the legislative and executive branches of eminent, specifically the Department of Education, may be ite, but the involvement of the state in the local control zulum practices is questionable. It appears that the H.B. 2277 is much broader than sex education curriculum iced by the inclusion of Hatch Amendment language in the

mia has had and should continue to foster respect . control of educational programs. It also has protected freedom while permitting recently with the AIDS re opting out of courses not required for graduation. I rge the committee to be cautious deliberating the .ons of the various components of H. B. 2277 before any or all of the various sections of the Bill. Respect igthen local school districts in this Commonwealth, do not

4 sgislation that undermines responsible local school decision making and action.

5 FRANKLIN REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 3210 School Road Mtavysville, Pennsylvania 15668

RECONSIDERATION POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR

PROGRAM AND INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

Adopted:

March 10, 1986 POLICY

RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM/INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

The Franklin Regional School District has an educational philosophy that encourages parental communication and interaction with the school community. This philosophy provides opportunities for parents to visit the schoolst review curriculum materials and observe classes simply by arranging an appointment with the appropriate building administrator.

It is with this philosophy in mind that the following procedures have been implemented. These procedures will assist parents by providing ample opportunity to communicate their feelings or concerns in relation to our program of instruction. PROCEDURES

RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM/INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

1) Upon receipt of a request for reconsideration concerning program or instructional program materials the building principal shall provide the individual with a standard form (Request for Recon­ sideration of Program and Instructional Materials). This form is to be completed in full and returned to the building principal. 2) Within ten (10) calendar days following the receipt of the completed form the building principal shall meet with the individual and appropriate school staff to discuss the concern and attempt to resolve it through an explanation of the philosophy^ goals3 and methodology of the instructional program.

A copy of the completed reconsideration form and the Administrative Investigation Form must be forwarded to the appropriate Supervisor immediately following the conference. 3) If the concern remains unresolved the appropriate Supervisor will meet with the parent and building principal within ten (10) calendar day8 of the receipt of the form from the building principal in an attempt to resolve the issue.

4) If the concern remains unresolved the Superintendent will meet with the parent and the xppropriate Supervisor in an attempt to resolve the issue.

5) If this meeting does not resolve the concern^ then the issue shall be taken by the Superintendent to the Board of School Directors who may assign the issue to a Reconsideration of Program and Materials Review Committee for further study. The board or committee will study the issue and provide a recommendation for its resolution at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of School Directors.

Suggested Committee Membership for the Reconsideration of Program and Materials Review:

A. Superintendent of Schools B. Appropriate Supervisor C. Building Principal/Department Chairman/Teacher D. Board Member(s) E. P.A.C. Committee Members(s) F. Student Advisory Committee Member(s) 6) Access to challenged material shall not be restricted during the reconsideration process.

x FRANKLIN REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 3210 School Road Murrysville3 Pennsylvania 15668

WEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM AND/OR INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

SUBJECT AREA

\ck area for reconsideration: 'ogram ( ) Textbook ( ) Workbook ( ) Film •her vitiated by:

Telephone Zip Code

', represents:

Himse If

Student

Other (Please identify)

it program or materials do you object? Please be specific. (Attach additional t if necessary.)

xnd with whom have you reviewed the planned course and materials?

io you feel might be the results of the use of this program ov materials? RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM AND/OR INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS Page 2 hat age group would you recommend this program or materials?

is your interpretation of the teacher's purpose(s) in using this program terials?

is your reason for objecting to this program or materials?

jht of your objections to this program or materials3 please list your positive mendations or suggestions for this program or materials.

Signature

Date

i Received By The Principal i Received By The Supervisor FRANKLIN REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 3210 School Road Murrysville, Pennsylvania 15668

ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION FORM

INITIAL REPORT IT FILED BY

OF COMPLAINT

JIT INVESTIGATION

NT ANALYSIS:

TAKEN: arent Conference

(date) eacher Conference raoEe? ' arent/Teacher Conference

TaaHe) orreapondence (Please attach copies)

ION .

NFORMATION . TEXTBOOK SELECTION

I. Determine Need A. Staff surveys B. Materials outdated II. Select Committee A. Department Head B. Administration C. Teacher representatives from various grade levels and schools. III. Survey Publishing Companies A. Committee reviews available textbooks to match curriculum. B. Field is narrowed to two to five textbooks. C. Various instruments may be used to narrow in the selection process i.e. EPIE, checklists, etc. IV. Presentations by Selected Publishers A. Presentations may be made to the committee by selected publishers representatives. B. Committee is given opportunity to question.

V. School Discussions A. Committee members discuss strengths and weaknesses of each textbook with colleagues.

VI. Decision A. A consensus of the committee is reached to determine the best textbook for our present needs. VII. Board Approval A. Representatives of the committee will present the text to the Curriculum Committee for their review and recommendation to the Board of School Directors. B, The Board of School Directors must approve all textbooks before they can be purchased. INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS SELECTION POLICY

Adopted: 12/04/86 INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS SELECTION POLICY

Q9 POLICY he Board of Director* of the Franklin Regional School District declares it Zicy of thm District to provide a widm and diverse rangm of instructional on all lavmla of difficulty. Thm Board will provide for the review of

inappropriate instructional materials. he Board subscribes in principle to the statements of policy on library

/ as expressed in the American Library Association (LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS), which is appended to and made a part of this policy.

VS

Bxtbooks ound materials provided in multiple copies for use by a total class or major segment of such a class. istructional Materials ipport materials including printed, usually not bound and non-printed tterials which supplement the planned course. ibrary/tledia Materials cint and non-print materials, including audio-visual materials (not juipment) to typically be housed in a school library/media center. mal Materials Selection Policy 2

PHILOSOPHY , le right to a from choicm among alternatives ia baalc to a democratic society. mgh the exercise of the freedoms set forth in the Bill of Rights that an in- dee can taice piece. Our educational syetem mist, therefore, allow a free a full range of instructional materials to insure the realization of these

RESPONSIBILITY m legal responsibility for the selection of instructional materials rests oard of Education, The purpose of this selection policy is to define the , criteria, and procedures to be followed by those groups that /unction as the Board of Education for acquiring print and audio-visual materials for nal programs.

LECTION CRITERIA

Relation to Curriculum Materials shall support and be consistent with the general educational he district and the written objectives of specific courses.

Relation to gristing Collection

The materials should make a contribution to the balance of the individual lection of materials for which they are selected.

Appropriateness

Materials should be appropriate for the subject area, the age level, nal development, the ability level, and the social development of the students he materials are selected.

Accuracy and Authenticity

The content of materials should be valid, reliable, complete and current. Authority Consideration should be given to the qualifications, reputation, and onal Materials Selection Policy 3 nee of those responsible tor creating the material (the author, producer, ) and to the recoamandatlon of the profeaaional staff.

Permanence and Tlmlineaa

The material should be of lasting value and/or should be of wide- rrent interest or concern.

Cultural Pluralism Consideration should be given to the contribution the material makes eadth of representative viewpoints on controversial issues and to the depiction uralistlc nature of society. Whole vs. Part

Each item should be approached from a broad perspective, looking at the

; whole and judging controversial elements in context rather than as isolated eriodicals, for example, should be selected and purchased for their over-all n, and should not be rejected because of an occasional article which may be

9' Quality of tfritinc/Production

Materials should have aesthetic, literary, or social value. 0. Technical and Physical Qualities

Print material should be attractively presented with suitable tlons and graphics. The size and style of type should be appropriate to nded age level. Audio materials should use sound creatively and be clear

of distortion. The narrator should have a pleasant voice and speak with on. Visual materials should have good picture quality and be authentic d to detail, color, depth, dimension, and size proportions. Original art aid be reproduced faithfully. There should be sufficient durability to demands of the intended user. lonal Materials Selection Policy 4

11. Cost Value should be commensurate with cost and/or need.

>.ES FOR SELECTION OF TEXTBOOKS AND CLASSROOM INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS ^

The Department Head determines need based upon the following: staff survey,

condition of text, curriculum change, outdated materials, and educational hange.

The Department Head forms a Textbook Study Committee consisting of the nt Head, administration, and teacher representatives. Responsibilities

'extbook Study Committee are as follows: contact appropriate publishers, nd survey texts and professional text guidelines, narrow the field to

s, and arrange for publisher presentations.

Presentations of selected publishers are to be made to faculty and depart- ds above and below the area of need with the faculty given an opportunity ion publishers.

The Textbook Study Committee will discuss and survey the faculty on strengths nesses of presented texts before reaching decisions on texts. The Textbook mmittee will notify the selected publishers of any weaknesses they feel shoulz c- d in their textbooks. Representatives of the Committee present recommended

Board Curriculum Committee approval. Board Curriculum Committee will seek f„;_ proval. Copies of selected textbooks will be available for public inspection dmimstrative offices before adoption by the Board.

Classroom instructional materials selected by the teacher will be appropriate istent with the content in the approved course of study, and will be chosen dance with the selection criteria.

>ES FOR THE SELECTION OF LIBRARY/MEDIA MATERIALS

Materials for media centers are selected by the library staff with due regard istions from the faculty, parents, and students. Final selection is made fay

'ary of the school in which the center is housed.

Selection is an ongoing process which will include the removal of materials tr appropriate and the replacement of lost and worn materials still of education ional Materials Selection Policy 5 henever possible, both printed and non-printed madia arm to ba physically bafora purchase. If posaible, materials should be bought "on approval" judged unsuitable, returned to vendor tor credit.

1ft materials shall be judged by the criteria outlined and shall be accepted ted by those criteria. aviews of proposed acquisitions will be sought in the literature of s professional organisations and other reviewing sources recognised tor jectlvity and wide experience. The following recommended lists of materials consulted, but selection is not limited to this listings

American Historical Fiction Basic Book Collection for Elementary Grades Basic Book Collection for Junior High Schools

The Best in Children's Books

Children and Books Children's Catalog

Elementary School Library Collection

European Historical Fiction and Biography

Guide to Sources in Educational Media Junior High School Catalog Reference Books for School Libraries Subject Guide to Children's Books in Print

Subject Index to Books tor Intermediate Grades

Subject Index to Books tor Primary Grades

Westinghouse Learning Directory part of the vertical file index, other special bibliographies, many of re been prepared by education organizations for particular subject matter donal Materials Selection Policy 6

AAAS Science Books and Films Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books Horn Book Kirkus Reviews Previews

School Library Journal Wilson Library Bulletin Learning resources Einrarg Sill of flights

The American Library Association affirms that all libraries an forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services.

1. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation. 2. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be pro­ scribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. 3. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their re­ sponsibility to provide information and enlightenment.

4. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas. 3. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age. background, or views.

6. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups request- mg their use.

Adopted June 18.1948. Amended February 2.1961. June 27.1987. and January 23.1980. by the ALA Council. •——•—^—p——^——p—— ——— ——

SWBIM Lain fMfi tfnwl FustaaktoalStaciioBS New Jersey revises principal 1909 appropriations, with Caneducators teach about training, licensing program cuts, a gUmpse of free expression without requirements; studies values things to come allowing a free press? curriculum * * Da 84 . ?*£•! p*»08 *•** M

, Mmt M r •JWaWfljJ9aj^^'"^ s ^^^f^^S^^^^^^^^^[\^f^^P^^ff^r^SI^^K^^F^^^^^^^^^^^^P^^^^^^T * " ""*" "*•" •*"* *•*** ^B^l^l%Bv nHfe^LnlHa^Htr iHfcTal

^^W^^^^^^MM^^^^MW^^^^g-a^^^MJP^^^MUltl.w-^ niiniiiiniiiuiiwuniwwm.iiiit. • tw» «»^(«*w» *«» *» <»>»«•«• u IMIINK-MIIH^HK MNN.M VI

INFORMATION AND OPINION FROM THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS

To help school adminis- dith Krug, director of ALA'S EZ3 trators buttress themselves Office of Intellectual Free- ^BB against those who would ban dom, said her office now is ^^9 educational materials to suit fielding 1,000 complaints of ^Hfl narrow purposes, the Ameri- censorship attempts annually, ^^H can Library Association and compared with about S00 in ^^H A AS A'recently published a 1979-80. \W^ guide, Censorship and Selec- "Under this administra- H&fl Aon.* Issues and Answers far tion, it has become acceptable •K^C Schools. and even appropriate to air Eyjfc£ Complaints from schools perspectives that might be Judith and libraries being pressured viewed as .. conservative, or MnM to censor books ana other ma- traditional, or promoting the thraafl terials have increased dra- old-line values, Krug said. "I u-reei matically during the 1980s, am not in any way to oe inter- absolu according to ALA. Speaking preted as saying this is wrong creas< at a press conference at which I think that it is very healthy tempts the report was released, Ju- But I think it also led to an See A1 . . . . • ^-j-j^fci-^/h&

t-J Thursday g^B^^g September 6, 1984 ss5| ^B

p^^ Part IV .pserf Department of |jp3 Education t^gg 34 CFR Parts 75, 76, and 98 S ^BP* Student Rights Hi Research, Experimental ff f Activities, and Testing; Final Rules With |P^few| Invitation To Comment GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT

PROTECTION OF PUPIL RIGHTS SRC. 439 (a). All instructional material, including teacher's man­ uals, films, tapes, or other supplementary instructional material which will be used in connection with any research or experimen­ tation program or project shall be available for inspection by the parents or guardians of the children engaged in such program or project. For the purpose of this section "research or experimenta­ tion program or project" means any program or project in any ap­ plicable program designed to explore or develop new or unproven teaching methods or techniques. (b) No student shall be required, as part of any applicable pro­ gram, to submit to psychiatric examination, testing, or treatment, or psychological examination, testing, or treatment, in which the primary purpose is to reveal information concerning: (1) political affiliations; (2) mental and psychological problems potentially embarrass­ ing to the student or his family; (3) sex behavior and attitudes; (4) illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating and demeaning be­ havior, (5) critical appraisals of other individuals with whom re­ spondents have close family relationships; (6) legally recognized privileged and analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers; or (7) income (other than that required by law to determine eli­ gibility for participation in a program or for receiving financial assistance under such program), without the prior consent of the student (if the student is an adult or emancipated minor), or in the case of unemancipated minor, without the prior writ­ ten consent of the parent. (20 U.SC 1232h) Enacted August 21. 1974. P L. 93-380, sec 514(a). 88 Stat. 574 amended Nov 1.1978. P L. 95-561. see. 1250. 92 Stat. 2355, 2356. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON REGULATIONS \s' ieral Register / Vol. 49. No. 174 / Thursday. September 6. 1984 / Rules and Regulations

F EDUCATION /• or project. For the purpose of this favor of these regulations. f section "research or experimentation approximately 270 persons wrote 76, and 98 I program or project" means any program against them, and approximately 25 \ or project in any applicable program persons provided general comments i Research, \ designed to explore or develop new or Comments were received from residents HvrtJes, and Tasting unproven teaching methods or 0f each State and the District of ent of Education. techniques. Columbia. Nations with invitation Under subsection (b) of section 438 no . The major provisions of these student shall be required as part of any ftgutadoni are substantially the **me ——: — applicable program to submit to as those contained in the NPRM. ' icretaryissuesfinal psychiatric examination, testing, or However, after consideration of the )lement a procedure for treatment, or psychological „„M«, mn.m»nt. ».. tk. nMnn«^ implaints under section examination, testing or treatment in ^SZlI^KSd. the General Education which the primary purpose is to reveal regulations, the Secretary has made IEPA). Section 439(a) of / information concerning one or more of 80me cnan8e«- at under most / the following: , Several commenters expressed iteredbythe J (1) Political affiliations; concern that the NPRM did not require a iucation. an award < (2) Mental and psychological complainant to attempt initial resolution actor make all \ problems potentially embarrassing to at the local and State levels before filing srial used in \ the student or his family: a complaint with the Department. In my research or I (3) Sex behavior and attitudes; response to this public comment gram or project \ (4) Illegal. anti-sociaL self- paragraph (b)(2) has been added to its of children involved incriminating and demeaning behavior , ga.7. Paragraph (b)(2) requires project Section 439(b) (S) Critical appraisals of other evidence of an initial attempt at a recipient of funds I individuals with whom respondents resolution with local and State officials ams to obtain have closei family relationships: (where there is a State processj'and t requiring a child to (8) Legally recognrad pnvUeged and requires the complainant to provide the kinds of psychiatric or analogous relationships such aeti^ of name of local and/or State officals tssszsLimination. testing, or saaassssa^^^^^r^ ^szzssss^"S^S^SSSSi^" *SSvS£^ receivu^fiiumcWaasistanca under jwrsons other than parenU or guardians ,,rnml„,.",ngre,s such program), without the prior consent °* student. could file « complaint under a^wTr.ff.etiv.d.1. of the student (if the student is an adult the procedure established in the NPRM. fnd&SSZr oremandpatedniinor).orintiiecaaeof To clarify that the complaint procedure 'urj^VUnZ-t an unemandpatad minor, without the applies only to parents or guardians of wra V prior written consent of the parent students directly affected and directly . ildhe.nhmiHM«nnnr The Department currentiy has affected students who an adults or ?1984. regulations that essentially restate emancipated minors. 198.7(a) has been ~.__~_»_. w t section 439 of GEPA. These regulations rewritten. .°SSL} Mimka are codified at 34 CFR 75.741 and 34 Commenters requested that . <;ww«h^n TV CFR nnL However, these rules do not definitions of statutory terms be B an, wasmngion. m. establish procedures for the handling of induded in the final regulations to ««..•«». Mun.iM. complaint. that ansa under section 439. ensure that complaints are limited to IHaZui To estabUsh such procedures, the applicable programs and activities iDut^Under^retarv Sewtary issues these final regulations. requiring pnor consent To respond to UnitedStates Significant Differences Betwe« the these comments, the final regulations Iucation. Rm. 3021 NP*M «nd These Final Regulations provide clarifying interpretations of the and Avenue SW. On Febnmry 22.1984. the Secretary SSSSSSSSfS*^ ^Telephon.,^, j^^g^vm SffttZSSEUX v™"*™" mte».%(^^e^nta^^v1Sft• Z2SS££2ttJE2 S^StiSttiZSK* definition. Please read die Invitation to issues final regulations 98). Following the publication of the Comment,a,t ine end of »» Preamble for ent section 439 of the NPRM. the Department of Education additional information on the m Provisions Act conducted hearings in seven tides to opportunity to comment . 1232h). Under accept testimony on the procedures Finally, commenters requested that section 439. all proposed in the NPRM. A total of 183 programs funded by the National enaL inducting persons testified at those hearingsiall Institute of Education (NIE) and the B. films, tapes, or other but 2 persons urged speedy publication National Center for Education Statistics structional material of final regulations. Persons testifying (NCES) be included as applicable id in connection with were from 29 States. In addition, the programs under these regulations. After xperimentation Department has received more than 1900 careful consideration of these comments :t shall be available for comments in response to die NPRM. Of and review of section 439 and its history parents or guardians the total number of comments received. and intent, the Secretary has determined igeged in such program approximately 1825 persons wrote in that these programs should be covered Federal Register / Vol. 49. No 174 / Thursday, September 6, 1884 / Rules and Regulations 35319 s and Responses Secretary has no authority to extend informed of the activities conducted in lowing is a summary of the these re8u'atlons t0 activities funded by their children's classroom, while at the nments received on the otner federal agencies or from State or same time not intruding on school regulations published in the local sources. district's authority to select curricula eoster on February 22.1984 ' Comment Two commenters requested which enhance academic achievement. 16) and the Secretary's that the regulationsclanf y the The definitions included in the final i to those comments The relationship of section 439 to Part B of regulations at 198.4(e) are intended to I. responses, and changes are the Education of the Handicapped Act clarify the types of activities which I in the same order as thp Response. No change has been made. require prior consent These definitions lf further dJStaZiZ ?hes" final *"»«*» bacomet J wrtl clanfy (he intent of the final ,. necessary, the Secretary would consider regulations to establish a procedure for the possibility of addressing this matter the handling of complaints which relate 1.2 Applicability of Part in a separate notice of proposed to the probing of individual students' applicable to NTE and NCES their children, no change has been Section 9&3 Information and r education programs, and the made. With regard to die burden this Investigation Office ad ruIe iakin f!*^ J J! ? places on local school officials, the —. ___,. ^,^atlmm „,J» •_. •„,.„ TSfSS?*}*"?*" Secretary beUevea that each school rJ^&^i^^t^Z^ •of GEPA and under section districtwill devise methods of £2^£ZE^ft£*]£^ * «Depar?l!r^U0!Fd^caacS . inspection of materials which are ?£S32XE£S^e22Z^ ion Act (DEOA). These final appropriate for the local community the ^SSSSSKS^ s therefore apply section 439 schools serve tadependenuy initiate trams tint were administered investigations. i former Education Division of Section OM Protection of Students' s tf ReaaHM and Records tment of Health. Education. Privacy in Examination. Testing, or Section 9M Reports ana Records ire and to new programs Treatment Paragraphs (a) and (b) of tiiis section fter die effective date of the Comment Many commenters have been removed as unnecessary. d administered by the requested mat mis section include GEPA requires a recipient or contractor of Education. definitions of "psychological or under an applicable program to nt A number of commenters psychiatric examination, testing, and maintain records and topermi t access to that the provisions of these treatment." Commenters suggested that *« Secretary and die Comptroller is apply to all expenmental without these definitions, parents would General. These requirements are regardless of their funding not be able to determine under which already implemented in the Education iey asked mat locally. State or circumstances the requirements of Department General Administrative funded programs be treated in section 439(b) of GEPA would apply. Regulations (EDGAR) § S 75.730-75.734 way under the proposed Other commenters indicated tiwt the and 78.730-78.734. In addition. Part 74. of procedure. absence of definitions would place an EDGAR provides general rules sbout te. No change has been made. undue burden on school officials maintenance of records. 9 applies only to activities because parents or students would file Paragraph (c) has been revised to in of an' applicable program." complaints against classroom activities remove its paragraph designation and to y interpreted in these for which no pnor consent is required. indicate *at. under these regulations. s. applicable program" Response. A change has been made. the Secretary only requires reports ?mpm°fgFvtmS admin,s,er<'d by The Secretary intends to provide the necessary to resolve complaints. The imeni ot ^duration Thr maximum opportunity for parents to be Secretary wants to ensure that any xteral Register / Vol. 49. No. 174 / Thursday. September 6. 1984 / Rules and Regulations epanng reports is kept to a regulations specify that a Invitation to Continent reasonable penod of time, given all of ?„.„„,.•„ J „„„,„... ,.„ .„„.»„^ »„ Some commenters the circumstances of the • • - » ,i '?^ at the final regulations available to the recipient or contractor ^^^^S.^^^T r e 8 h ol districts to notify parents for voluntary compliance Consideration . f"t" n * deflniUon-contained in he provisions of section 439. - f the circumstances" will include ' "^"'JJle,e Hn* ^T™ °"L,n„, of aU 0 a t d No change has been made. the mterests of the complainant as well ™™E'™™% ™ a vZ^l y defer, to local practice in as ^ naQUIC„ of me recipient or majMbe sent to 1Mom^"«J rents of these Federal „.,_,,„, Hamson. Room 3021.400 Maryland, i. However, section 439(b) conira«°r. Avenue SW., Washington. DC 20202. All uires that students or Section 98.10 Enforcement of the comments should be submitted on or ide consent prior to Findings before November 5,1984 to be assured >r psychological _ ., consideration by the Secretary If an *. tests or treatment whose . Comment Some commenters asked fa definitions is tthat fi al aniendment t0 >ose is to ask the student to *• " regulations include a necessary. the Secretary will publish the nation hated in J 98.4. Piston to make individuals workuig mendl^nt in me fj^ R^ter. „ for a reapient or contractor, against "™7^ " f"~ ,. *^ A U Filing a Complaint whlch ^re „ a findmg, personally L comment* submitted in response Many of the commenters liable for any psychological damages to t0 this request for comments will be (provisions of the NPRM the affected student available for public inspection, during st the NPRM allowed any Response. No change has been made. and after *• J^j^^f- m the »file a complaint School Section 439 does not include such a room sPeJ=fed.m *e preceding ressed concern that this provision, and the Secretary has no paragraph between the hours of 8.30 :o frivolous complaints that authority to impose such a requirement. am; *«"* -WW o.nt. Monday through >cal resources to resolve as Fnday of each week except Federal iding a way for interest Other Changes holidays. ject curricula selected by Paragraph (a)(2) has been revised as a List of Subject. Y^rf"" i... v_ i^ technical matter to make die remedies „ ___ _ _ , _ A change has been made. contractors consistent with the 34 CFR Parts 75 and 76 has been rewritten to make »««""« M»™"" , ""m *""* ~™. ese regulations limit the remedies against grantees, as permitted Grant programs-Education. Education. .compounder section togFggA*^ ^^^^ 3< CFR Part 96 nts—or parents or guardians « WK «-3 ana «.i. -who allege violations Executive Order 12291 Educational research. Privacy. n 439. Standing to bring a Students, Notice of complaint limited to students—or These regulations have been reviewed Complaints. Consent examination. aardians of students—who i° accordance with Executive Order Experimental programs. Family. Notice irectly affected by such 12291. They are not classified as major 0f findings. Inspection. Instructional because they do not meet the criteria for material. Political affiliations, A number of State and major regulations estaWtshed-in-rhe Psychiatric. Psychological. Reporting Is commented that die Order. anj recordkeeping requirements. it the Federal toveL The Secretary certifies that these Treatment A change has been made. It regulations will not have a significant . ... cretar/s intent to economic impact on a substantial Citation of Legal Authority f'Md^ta^ffiSZS10 number of small entities. These A citation of statutory or legal s^comSSn^lnLS regulations will affect small entities that authority is placed in parentheses on the M2?n2bSn^ddSTto "• ««*" •"«»«• «*« aPP»cable ^ following each substantive SconSaiSamsto program, of the Department of provision of ihese regulations. u™/S,™2!i Education. However, the regulations will K • Meditate not have a sig^c»t gnomic impact ^^^^ i,^i«T-«»l*Js--.k-J.-. on these entities because the regulations T.RBen. ignificant dates in die recordkeeping requirements or impose (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance solution process. other regulatory burdens m excess of Number doe. not apply) at rnwtion*,™ „nj fi-^.w «* «tory requirements. TbB ^^^^ ameada Part, 7S and 78 Investigation and Findings AummmA6tEduct&a^bnpacX and adds a new Part 98 to Subtitle A of , A number of commenters Tide 34 of the Code of Federal tat die final regulations Based on the comments received in Regulations as follows: lit on me time available to a response to the Notice of Proposed contractor to correct a Rulemaking and his own review, the PART 75—DIRECT GRANT Section 439. Secretary has determined mat these PROGRAMS . No change has been made. regulations do not require die xity of a complaint, the transmission of any information that is J 75.741 [Removed] esources. and the remedy already gathered by or is available from i. Section 75.741 is removed. dl affect the length of time it any other agency or authority of the resolve a complaint The United States. Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 174 / Thursday. September 6. 1984 / Rules and Regulations 35321

-STATE-ADMINISTERED mm*m^\*0*m,mm\ »££E?~ (2) MenUl and psychological MS ; ' **— problems potentially embarrassing to fBM«-i IPHW itmmmmmmm P«I»MIO*. the student or Wis or her family. iHtmovM] imnimdeir °* studenta* privacy m address of the office designated under 1 1— examination, teettog, or treatment paragraph (a) of this section: Family •""" """""^ bXtSmSl? (a) No student shall be required, as Educational Righto and Privacy Act j part of any program specified ins 98.1 Office. U.S. Department of Education, * uSH^mm ""* (a) or (b). to submit without prior 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.. " EduenonAeiM consent to psychiatric examination, Washington. D.C 20202. ; '£££,*,,*. testing, or treatment, or psychological (20 u S.C. I23ie-3(a)m. i232h) *"" ' !2ff2" examination, testing, or treatment in fjjfjy^* which the primary purpose is to reveal §•*•• Reports. ••-3741 jo ; information concerning one or more of The Secretary may require the osc iorod-2i the following— recipient to submit reports containing (1) Political affiliations: information necessary to resolve deral Register / Vol. 49. No. 174 / Thursday. September 8, 1984 / Rules and Regulations ider section 439 of the Act has been alleged that the complaint has under { 98.9(c). the Secretary may ations in this part. been received. either— The nonce •-3(a)(1). i232h) (°) to the recipient or ^j por a recipient, take an action ,__ contractor under paragraph (a) of this authonzed under 34 CFR Part 78. i complaint. section must— including itudent or a parent or (1) Include the substance of the ... Ua*T7a . _„,.' -._. nt tn student direcdy affected alleged violation: and " J^S^A^fSmi2V i under Section 439 of the (2) Inform the recipient or contractor terminate funds under 34 CFR 78.21. i complaint under this part that the Office will investigate the (u) tosuing a notice to withhold funds it must be submitted in complaint and that the recipient or under 34 CFR 78\21,20054(b). or» i Office. contractor may submit a written 298.45(b). depending upon the applicable nplaint filed under response to the complaint program under which the notice is I of this section must-{l) izou.S.C.izzie-3(A)(i).i232h) issued: or ific allegations of fact (iii) Issuing a notice to cease and able cause to believe that a §•"•• «"veaMqation and WndTnga. desist under 34 CFR 7&31,20094(c) or ither i 98J or 198.4 exists: (a) The Office may permit the parties 298.45(c). depending upon the program to submit further written or oral under which the notice is issued: or evidence of attempted arguments or information. (2) For a contractor, direct the £!Kte?t|*f,h2^U?!l,1 W Following its tavestigations. the contacting officer to take an 5l22f!J5li,f* I*,* 0B!ce P™vlde*^the cofflPtam«n, "t appropriate action authorized under the S£«JnSTJS fi,. TTT °f "?5!T ^^J"55i£ **»** Acquisition Regulations. names oflocal and State its findings and the basis for its findings. m-i„Ji-_ rjv_-_ acted and significant dates (c) If the Office finds that the recipient l°«uaing enner— ted resolution process. or contractor has not complied with (I) Issuing a notice tosuspend ice investigates each section 439 of the Act the Office operations under 48 CFR UA or rich the Office receives that includes in its notice under paragraph (») Issuing a notice to terminate for uirements of this section to (b) of this section default either in whole or in part under lether the recipient or (1) A statement of the specific steps 48 CFR 49.102. led to comply with the that the Secretary recommends the (b) If. after an investigation under section 439 of the Act recipient or contractor take to comply; § 98.9. the Secretary finds that a •-3(a)(1). U32h) *nd recipient or contractor has complied erOMB control number 1880- (2) Provides a reasonable period of -voluntarily with section 439 of the Act time, given all of the circumstances of the Secretary provides the complainant m» •*. ~_^t_ "• CM6'durmg wWc,! *• redP,ent or and the recipient or contractor written etaweompwnt contractor may comply voluntarily. iu>tice of the decision and the baaia for VSSSSiSiS^li I""6"""** thedecteion. ten notification to the ' fM.10 Eiiforoeimntoftheflndlnga. (20 US.G l2zle-3(aKl). I232h) ind the recipient or (a) If the recipient or contractor does mioie.»Kap»riiis« i n—a ainst which the violation not comply during the period of time set KUMO COM 40oo-o*« 388

EXHIBITS AL FONDY | PA FEDERATION OF TEACHERS f VLVANIA FEDERATION OF TEACHERS v, September 27.1988 The Pittsburgh Press ~"OPINION Le Pittsburgh

PRES mmm m m m S •" ^"" ^ ^ j mm rmiw MADELYN ROSS l Scripps Howard Newspaper J^^ETOUANN , Wished June 23, 1884 — Published Daily and Sunday " Autm AA„^r>,g Editor/Gnpbics McEACHRAN JIMMY E. MANIS SSSifi^Sr/Spom Editor General Manager BARBARA J. GRIFFIN Assc. Managing. Editor/Feature* Kt, 34 Boulevard of the Attics. Pittsburgh, Pa. 1$230 ROM ROYHAB P.O. Box S66-Tetephone (412) 263-1100 7ZL~* Maoagmg Edxtor/New, ————-—-————-—--——— ISADORE SHRENSKY Jght and the People WW Find Their Own Way Edueaal Page Edtor* lging up on sex ed it legislation being promoted by sun, these forces are vociferous and politi- ephen Freind, the House's resident caUy active, as the Education Committee eceived a public hearing in Harris- hearing demonstrated. And in Rep. Frond, day. For many Pennsylvanians, it R-Delaware, they have a ready ally for the ; glimpse of a new assault on the most extreme of their views. ** an?^g.-e??i0Br^..a?ti' R«P- Freind nas been a principal spokes- ces, with which Rep. Frond has nm for and spoiisor of aira-abortion legislation assoaatea- for years. But he often gets carried away on ctive of the bill, according to Rep. rhetorical flights of fancy on the issue — the o give parents more say in the most blatant occurring last March. sex-education courses. Thafs a At the time, Rep. Freind asserted that a ing idea, which has attracted con- true rape victim was unlikely to bfconw tpport among House members. pregnant bpwwsft she "secretes a cwr*8^ reality is that the bill goes far secretion which tends to kill the sperm." He ag more adults involved in educa- later pulled back on that one, but only slightly. s. It seeks to give considerable Such an overstatement exemplifies the tall numbers of parents to discour- tendency of Rep. Freind and other proponents :k sex-education classes, as well as of anti-sex education measures to embrace attempts to provide information or often bizarre theories or beliefs to support their ibout abortion or birth-control to arguments. idents. That's not the kind of enlightened direction, •sex education forces may be much on any subject, that legislators should want to a imagined: An as-yet unreleased impose on the schools. The misnamed Parent sored by Planned Parenthood re- and Pupil Protection Act, which will have i found that 88 percent of adults in another hearing Oct 14 at Gateway High a support teaching about sex in the School in Monroevilte, represents a big step backward for education in Pennsylvania. 390

EXHIBITS JAMES STEVENS PA STATE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 390

EXHIBITS JAMES STEVENS PA STATE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION TESTIMONY BEFORE THE HOUSE EDUCATION COMMITTEE

CONCERNING HOUSE BILL 2277 THE PARENT AND PUPIL PROTECTION ACT

PRESENTED BY: , s\kni

OCTOBER 11, 1988 GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JOHN YARNOVIC. I AM PRESI- THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION. I WOULD THANK THE HOUSE EDUCATION COMMITTEE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY NT OUR TESTIMONY ON HOUSE BLLL NO. 2277. THE PURPOSE OF THIS TESTIMONY IS TO SUMMARIZE THE REA- \ PSEA'S OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL, FLRST/ THE THRUST OF . IS SQUARELY INCONSISTENT WITH PENNSYLVANIA'S CURRICULUM ONS. CHAPTER 5 CURRICULUM REGULATIONS OF THE [STATE] = EDUCATION (SECTION 5.4) PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, :3T IS THE POLICY OF THE BOARD THAT BOARDS OF SCHOOL DI- HAVE THE GREATEST POSSIBLE FLEXIBILITY IN CURRICULUM ;. . . ." H.B. 2277 MOVES IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION BY I THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOCALLY DESIGNED SEX EDUCATION CUR-

SECOND/ THE DEFINITION OF "SEX EDUCATION" IN SEC- 12-A is so VAGUE AND ENCOMPASSING THAT LITIGATION OVE« ITS IS INEVITABLE. IT IS NOT EVEN CLEAR WHO HAS THE AUTHORI- HE RESPONSIBILITY TO DEFINE THAT MEANING ON A PRAGMATIC/ JAY BASIS IN THE SCHOOLS. THE RESULT OF THE AMBIGUITY IN READY CONTROVERSIAL AREA WILL NECESSARILY BE TO STIFLE [ON# DISCOURAGE THE OPEN INTERCHANGE OF IDEAS/ AND TO ALL DIALOGUE INTO A NARROW AND PAROCHIAL FUNNEL OF NON" ERSIAL/ CONFORMIST IDEAS. THE LATE U.S, SUPREME COURT LEARNED HAND STATED A CENTURY AGO: "THE CLASSROOM IS PECULIARLY THE 'MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS.' THE NATION'S FUTURE DEPENDS UPON LEADERS TRAINED THROUGH WIDE EXPOSURE TO THAT

-1- ROBUST EXCHANGE OF IDEAS WHICH DISCOVERS TRUTH OUT OF A MULTITUDE OF TONGUES (RATHER) THAN THROUGH ANY KIND OF AUTHORITATIVE SELEC­ TION." THE DESIGN OF H.B. 2277 IGNORES THIS CONCEPT. AS STARTERS THEN/ THE BLLL WILL PROMOTE LITIGATION/ IN­ STITUTIONAL TIMIDITY/ STIFLE FREE DISCUSSION/ AND REMOVE JNTROL OVER THE CONTENT OF THE SEX EDUCATION CURRICULUM. THIRD/ THE BILL WILL SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE SEX EDUCATION .UM OFFERINGS. THE MANDATED PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE THEM- SO CUMBERSOME AND BURDENSOME THAT SCHOOL DISTRICTS WILL :LY EITHER ELIMINATE THE COURSES OR NOT PROVIDE THEM. IN 4/ THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE BURDENED BY THOSE WHOSE GOAL IS TO PREVENT SCHOOLS FROM PROVIDING ANY MEANINGFUL :ATION PROGRAMS. A 1987 SURVEY OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF )N INDICATED 90 PERCENT OF THOSE RESPONDING PROVIDED SOME LOCALLY DESIGNED SEX EDUCATION. THAT NUMBER WOULD DROP ROUSLY IF THIS BILL WERE ENACTED. NOT ONLY ARE THE HEARINGS BURDENSOME BY THEIR MANDATE* RE DESIGNED TO DISCOURAGE SEX EDUCATION OFFERINGS. 7 REQUIRES SCHOOL BOARDS TO ACT AFFIRMATIVELY IN A PUBLIC IN ORDER TO ADD SEX EDUCATION INTO THE CURRICULUM. THE _L EXEMPTS THE ELIMINATION OR CURTAILMENT OF SEX EDUCATION 3 FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. IN OTHER WORDS/ IT IS SIER TO ELIMINATE A SEX EDUCATION PROGRAM THAN IT IS TO

i

-2- THERE IS NO LOGICAL BASIS FOR THIS PROPOSED PROCESS AN DETERRENCE/ SINCE SCHOOL BOARDS CURRENTLY ARE REQUIRED : REGULATION TO INVOLVE PARENTS OF SCHOOL"AGE CHILDREN IN ESS OF DEVELOPING THEIR SEX EDUCATION CURRICULUM, SECTION 2504-A SUBSECTION (A) FURTHER REQUIRES ALL PAR- > GUARDIANS TO "RECEIVE ANNUALLY" A MASS OF INFORMATION. RHE RESULT WILL BE TO DISCOURAGE BOARDS FROM PROVIDING TRUCTION. IF YOU IMAGINE WHAT IT WILL COST FOR PAPER/ PRINTING/ 1/ COLLATING/ AND POSTAGE TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT IN THE FIRST CLASS OR MAJOR URBAN AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT/ YOU BE" EE THE BUILT-IN DETERRENT. THE REQUIREMENT THAT MAIL NOTIFICATION OCCUR 60 DAYS ) THE BEGINNING OF ANY SUCH INSTRUCTION IS ALSO UNREASON-

FlNALLY/ THERE IS THE PROVISION THAT "CAINY PERSON : PERMITTED TO REVIEW" CURRICULUM MATERIAL. THERE IS AB" ' NO VALID REASON FOR THIS PROVISION; ONLY PARENTS OR IS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REMOVE THEIR CHILD FROM THE THIS OPEN INVITATION HAS THE POTENTIAL OF THE WITCHHUNT/ BROILING DISTRICTS IN LENGTHY BATTLES WITH PEOPLE OR OR" [ONS THAT HAVE NO LEGITIMATE INTEREST IN THE CURRICULUM. RHE DETERRENT EFFORT IS OBVIOUS. FIFTH/ REQUIRING PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT FOR PUPIL PAR- ION (SECTION 2505-A) MAY RESULT IN PUPILS WITH THE LEAST \ND SUPPORTIVE HOME SITUATIONS BEING PREVENTED FROM LEARN" r THEY NEED TO KNOW.

-3- THE BILL IMPLICITLY ASSUMES THAT STUDENTS WILL GET THE ION THEY NEED AT HOME. WHAT HAPPENS TO STUDENTS WHO ARE OR UNWILLING TO DISCUSS ISSUES OF SEXUALITY WITH THEIR

NO PUBLIC EDUCATION CURRICULUM/ INCLUDING AIDS/ RE~ 'PRIOR WRITTEN PARENTAL CONSENT" FOR PUPIL PARTICIPATION. » A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ALLOWING PARENTS TO EX~ :IR CHILD FROM A CLASS ("OPT OUT")/ AND REQUIRING EVERY TO PROVIDE WRITTEN PERMISSION ("OPT IN") TO AUTHORIZE IILD TO PARTICIPATE IN A CLASS. THIS MAY SET A PRECEDENT :R CHOICES OF STUDENTS. IN 1974/ SIECUS ESTABLISHED A POLICY WHICH STATED/ :CESS TO FULL AND ACCURATE INFORMATION ON ALL ASPECTS OF FY IS A BASIC RIGHT FOR EVERYONE/ CHILDREN AS WELL AS IT IS APPARENT THAT FACTUAL INFORMATION AND ACCURATE SE ABOUT SEXUALITY ARE ESSENTIAL TO ALL INDIVIDUALS. IT JE UNDERSTANDABLE ALSO THAT "EVERYONE" REFERS TO ALL INDI" INCLUDING THOSE WITH EXCEPTIONALITY."* TEACHERS WANT STUDENTS TO BECOME RESPONSIBLE/ MATURE WHO EXERCISE INFORMED CHOICE. ENACTMENT OF H.B. 2277 IOT ALLEVIATE THE SEXUAL PROBLEMS FACING STUDENTS IN SOCIETY. IT WOULD INSTEAD MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR BOARDS AND EDUCATORS TO PREPARE YOUNG PEOPLE TO DEAL WITH

INFORMATION AND EDUCATION COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES iAb; JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY/ iy/H/ VOL. liL

-4- ft

SIXTH, THE RESTRICTIONS PLACED ON PSYCHIATRIC AND PSY- \L EXAMINATION/ TESTING/ OR TREATMENT (SECTION 2506"A) *ES THE NEED TO DEFINE THESE BROAD TERMS, FOR EXAMPLE/ INCLUDE A STUDENT'S CONFERENCE WITH A GUIDANCE COUNSELOR? COUNSELORS AND OTHER SCHOOL PERSONNEL WILL HAVE TO BE WHEN TALKING WITH STUDENTS ABOUT DRUG ABUSE/ ALCOHOL HILD ABUSE/ OR THE LIKE IN ORDER TO AVOID SURFACING "MEN- PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEMS POTENTIALLY EMBARRASSING TO THE 3R HIS FAMILY." A LITERAL READING OF THIS SECTION MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE ENTS TO GO TO SCHOOL PERSONNEL OF THEIR CHOICE FOR HELP THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF THEIR PARENT. THIS IS ES~ TRUE IN SITUATIONS WHERE THE PARENT IS ABUSING THE IN TURN/ THE TEACHER OR GUIDANCE COUNSELOR WOULD BE N THE POSITION OF HAVING TO CHOOSE BETWEEN HELPING THE OR VIOLATING THE LAW. IN ADDITION/ THIS PARTICULAR SECTION CONFLICTS WITH LAW BY RESTRICTING SCHOOL PERSONNEL IN IDENTIFYING AND STUDENTS IN APPROPRIATE CLASSROOM SETTINGS SUITED TO DIVIDUAL EMOTIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL NEEDS. FOR EXAMPLE/ 142 REQUIRES LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES TO PROVIDE TESTING )ENT PLACEMENT NOT LIMITED TO INTELLIGENCE TESTING. A MUST BE ASKED/ "WHAT IMPACT DOES P.L. 94~M2 HAVE IN RE~ 0 THIS BILL?" PSEA SUPPORTS P.L. 94-142 AND THE EXISTING CHAPTER 12 GHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES REGULATIONS OF THE STATE BOARD \TION. THE IMPOSITION OF H.B. 2277 WOULD DILUTE THOSE

-5- SEVENTH/ SECTION 2507-A IS A PARTICULARLY TROUBLING OF THIS BILL IN THAT IT CAUSES PERSONAL, PROFESSIONAL, :AL CONCERNS FOR SCHOOL EMPLOYEES. SEX EDUCATION IS A BASIC AND PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY OF UNFORTUNATELY, THIS RESPONSIBILITY IS OFTEN INADE- 1ANDLED, NEGLECTED, AND/OR IGNORED. o Louis HARRIS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. CONDUCTED A 1986 NA- POLL OF TEENAGERS, AGE 12 THROUGH 17, AND FOUND THAT: (1) MORE THAN HALF OF AMERICA'S TEENAGERS REPORT HAV- SEXUAL INTERCOURSE BY THEIR 17TH YEAR. (2) SEXUAL ACTIVITY BEGINS EARLIER AMONG THOSE TEENAG- HAVE THE FEWEST RESOURCES, AND WHO ARE THUS THE MOST VUL~

(3) ONLY ONE-THIRD (33 PERCENT) OF THOSE TEENAGERS WHO I INTERCOURSE SAY THAT THEY USE CONTRACEPTIVES ALL THE

CO A MAJOR PRIORITY FOR SOCIETY IN DEALING WITH THE OF TEENAGE PREGNANCY IS TO FIND WAYS OF INCREASING THE ION THAT TEENAGERS HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSAL. (5) IT IS IMPORTANT THAT BOTH PARENTS AND SCHOOLS PLAY R ROLE. PSEA ACKNOWLEDGES THE PRIMARY VALUE-DRIVEN ROLE OF THE [N ADDRESSING TEENAGE PREGNANCY. HOWEVER, THERE ARE SKILLED, AND EXPERIENCED SCHOOL PERSONNEL, INCLUDING URSES, AND PHYSICIANS, WHO KNOW THE MEDICAL SIGNIFICANCE

HARRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC., AMERICAN TEENS SPEAK; SEX, , TV, AND BIRTH CONTROL, 1986, pp. b-a.

-6- IVING EARLY PRENATAL CARE. ADULT/ PROFESSIONAL COUNSELING -ABLE AND IMPORTANT. SECTIONS 2508-A THROUGH 2511-A CALL FOR ONLY ABBREVIAT- ENT. No SCHOOL PROGRAM SHOULD ASSUME THE PARENTS* RESPON" Y TO DISCUSS THE MORAL AND RELIGIOUS ASPECTS OF SEXUALITY CHILD. HOWEVER/ SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN SCHOOLS CAN ENT AND COMPLEMENT THE PARENTS* KOLE. PSEA IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION 5 CURRICULUM REGULATIONS REQUIRING INSTRUCTION IN AIDS TO THAT ABSTINENCE FROM SEXUAL ACTIVITY IS THE ONLY COM" RELIABLE MEANS OF PREVENTING THE SEXUAL TRANSMISSION OF

THE RESTRICTIONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 2509~A ARE UNNEC" THERE ARE SUFFICIENT CHECKS AND BALANCES WITHIN THE LEG" E AND THE VARIOUS COMMONWEALTH AGENCIES/ INCLUDING THE IN~ HT REGULATORY REVIEW COMMISSION. SECTION 2510-A. ENFORCEMENT WOULD PLACE A HEAVY BURDEN E DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STAFF. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT HAS BEEN AN APPROXIMATE 50 PERCENT DECREASE IN STAFF TO 500+) WITHIN THE PAST DECADE. THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER CTION ARE FOR PURPOSES THAT ARE PARTICULARLY LIMITED IN

THE SECTION ALSO REQUIRES THE DEPARTMENT TO "CONDUCT IPLETE AN IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION" UPON RECEIPT OF A COM~ AGAIN TIME/ MONEY/ PERSONNEL WOULD BE NECESSARY TO FUL~ 1IS REQUIREMENT/ THUS IMPACTING ON AN ALREADY DEPLETED

-7- TO PERMIT "ANY PERSON" TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITHOUT ING GEOGRAPHIC RESIDENCE APPEARS UNREASONABLE. As NOTED/ tDING WOULD EXTEND BEYOND THE LIMITS OF THE SCHOOL DIS" OMMUNITY/ OR BOUNDARIES OF THE STATE.

ON I BELIEVE IT IS OBVIOUS TO ALL HERE THAT OUR ORGANIZA" S NOT SUPPORT THIS BILL, PSEA RECOGNIZES THE CHANGING STUDENT POPULATION/ THE FAMILY STRUCTURE/ AND THE ABSOLUTE NEED FOR THE PUBLIC TO MEET NEEDS AS THEY ARISE WITHOUT IMPOSITION OF LAWS OR ONS THAT WOULD PREVENT THAT NEED AND AT THE SAME TIME THE SANCTITY OF PERSONAL AND RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. IN CLOSING/ PSEA SUPPORTS THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

TATEMENT ON "SEX EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF PENN" " AS ADOPTED IN 1969 AND AMENDED IN 1976 (COPY AT" 3

RF I >

JNWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION/ SEX kTiQN IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF PENNSYLVANIA/ 1976,

-8- Commonwealth of Pennsylvania STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION BASIC EDUCATION

Policy Statement on SEX EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF PENNSYLVANIA e

There are few programs in the educational milieu today which invite as erse opinion as the area of sex education* School officials are being ed on this topic by parents, clergy, physicians and citizens at large; anding, others encouraging; some knowledgeable, others misinformed; stioning, others criticizing. The many media of communication have o educate, publicize, condemn and at times misinterpret the role of in sex education.

Parents and educators vave become acutely aware of the place which assumed in the entertainment media, advertising, fashion, books and s. It is a fact that few segments of our society have escaped some involvement with the symbol of sex.

Therefore, it would appear that today's youth are finding themselves . in emotional and physiological sexual confrontations, not unique ily to their generation, but perhaps engaging them in a more open and scope than immediate past generations have experienced.

There is an obvious national concern over increasing venereal disease bortion, the new morality, pre-marital promiscuity, contraception, and e. While these problems need and deserve the careful attention of e and mature deliberation, they have all too frequently been the subject ;ical and irrational attacks upon sex education in the schools.

There seems to be little question that sex education is a responsi- rhich should be shared by the home, church, school and community* Yet it clear that the school has a fundamental role to perform. In a concerned -o assist young people confront the physiological, psychological, social .cal implications of sexuality, the schools must share a definite .bility for assuring that opportunities prevail through which accurate -ion and trained leadership are available. Central to such responsibility irtunities to make responsible choices based on facts relative to compet- is of conduct, the implications of one's sex role, and the standards, ss, and ideals which combine to form one's self -concept and personal a. Therefore, sex education is implicit in the school's commitment to slopment of the whole personality. tion -2 BEP-2 ri

Sex education is more than biological information concerning the re- e systems of man and woman. It is an interdisciplinary! sequential and sive program planned to generate socially and ethically desirable , practices and personal behaviors. It is but a single phase, however , of a total educational program.

Sex education cannot be confined to the mechanistic dimensions of ion, physiology, anatomy, or a classification of modes of sexual but must include the biological, psychological, social and ethical f sex and sexuality as well. Thus, sex education is concerned with s and values. It must be expected to contribute to the process by ldren and youth develop standards of acceptable behavior, self- and a realization of the role of sex in one's adult life.

While the State Board of Education recognizes that the home is and the foundation and continuing source of information and counsel in f a child's growth and development, it has become cognizant that requently seek and welcome assistance in carrying out this responsi- The intent, therefore, of the State Board of Education through the t of Education, in cooperation with local school districts is to t not supplant the parent in matters concerning sex education and lationships. is

The long-range, over-all objective of sex education should be the .on by students of personal maturity. The development of constructive ' sexuality in human living, familial roles, and the acceptance of .s vital. The focus should not be solely involved with the examination sgative outcomes of sex misused.

Sexuality finds expression in behavior from infancy throughout life. education begins the day the child is born, the learning of one's r proceeds apace. For this reason sex education should begin in the jrades and continue as a sequentially planned subject matter in the un which increases in complexity as individual levels of maturity •ehension increase. Objectives for programs of sex education should !*ied by developmental levels. These objectives should be flexible, :, and coordinated in a manner designed to encourage children to i normal progression of interest in and an increasing body of knowledge nan beings and their relationships, with the underlying goal of :hildren and youth to form acceptable values and make wise decisions iir behavior. Sex education can and should be presented from many Ives; it should grow as the child grows and widen as his experiences [here should be no attempt to teach it as an isolated course of study. is for Program Development

The State Board of Education approves the following guidelines to ;e program implementation: _ BEP_2

:ation -3

local board of school directors is charged with the authority responsibility for administering the school program, including education, within its district. sol officials should make every effort to inform and involve ants, clergy, physicians and all interested community people advance of proposed programs in sex education. ulty shall be carefully selected and adequately prepared in ordance with standards approved by the Secretary of Education. arallel sex education program for parents and adults should be Liable. ti school's program should be adapted to its own needs and the acity, interests, and training of its faculty; program length depth should be determined by the needs of the pupils and the ources of the community. ual techniques should not be included in sex education.

consequences of the sex act in terms of pregnancy and the sibility of venereal disease must be explained.

education should not be an isolated or fragmented facet of cation, but integrated into any appropriate area of the total ool program where it can be taught by an adequately prepared ulty member. natters of varying moral, ethical, and religious beliefs the ool and teacher should be especially mindful of individual ferences. Such matters should be referred to parent, family sician or clergyman.

evaluation of program and faculty should be on a continuing is and the effectiveness of programs should be periodically raised by local school administrators.

- 7-11-69 med - 1-18-74 mended - 7-16-76 402

EXHIBITS SUSAN GREENBERG FRANKLIN REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 PAULA JOHNSON Franklin Regional School District Ska?-*—

19-m C^K««l Q«-H KENNETH A RIGBY f OZIO OCnOOl nOau Supvr EtemMttry Educatior M Murrysville, Pennsylvania 15668 &?£ SP^PUP»IS«VIC.S Phone (412,327-5456 EKEiS? MARY VIRGINIA OIEHL Super Food Service

Testimony Presented to

House Education Comsittee

on

House Bill 2277

By

Susan I. Greenberg

President, Franklin Regional School Board

October 14, 1986 Mr. Chaixaan and mentors of the House Education Committee, I aa uaan Greenberg, President of the Franklin Regional School Board. I ould like to thank you for providing this opportunity to comment on louse Bill 2277, as veil as to provide you with some insight inte'the roomdures local school districts use to develop and implement curri- ulum*

have been authorised to speak against this bill, which we consider o be unnecessary, burdensome to the local school district, and poten­ tially damaging in the long run to the concept of local development nd adoption of ourriculum.

We are aware that this bill is an outgrowth of concern regarding the nauthorized sex education guidelines which were distributed by the lepartment of Education several years ago. That publication actually ad little impact on local districts, because it is widely understood hat few, if any, really used it, and the remainder, inoluding our local istriot, rejected it as inappropriate and unsuitable for implementation*

House Bill 2277 goes far beyond this concern, however, and contains (revisions that appear to be addressing a potential problem or problems bat haven't, in faot, been identified as needing remediation through toe process of legislation.

The bill makes several assumptions about parental involvement in ooal district proceduresihlch are net accurate.*. Parents presently dp. isve the right to inspect ourriculum materials. They have the right to ittend public hearings on curriculum development and adoption, and to ixpresa their views. Students currently have the right to "opt out" of tourses of study which may conflict with their religious or moral beliefs.

"Opting in", a dramatic departure from present procedure, would not »nly create an enormous burden for the local district, but would surely Leprive some students of participation because parents failed to follow through in returning their forms, or because some parents are not as in­ volved in their children's education as they should be.

-1- Using my own school district as an example, oyer the sirs* rears ive been a member of the Board I hare seen an increasing willingness not just receive input from the public, but to actively solicit it. revisions of the Sunshine Law have opened up all our committee meetings the public which would deal with courses of study and policy making,

The most graphic example of how we deal with the publio in developing adopting oourses of study could be seen in the process we used to •ulate our "AIBS" curriculum*

In October. 1966, our school board adopted a revised policy an dealing h AIDS, a copy of which I have attached to my presentation. In March. 7, our school doctor was our guest speaker at the Parents Advisory noil meeting, discussing the disease of AIM, and its impact on the ool system, both in terms of future educational goals, as well as how deal with the disease within the school setting.

The school doctor, along with several administrators, our Health and sioal Education faculty, and school nurses, spent several months ex- ring the information available from all reliable sources, screening ropriate video tapes, looking at a wide variety of printed material, developing an outline of a proposed curriculum which meets the Depart- t of Education's mandate of all students receiving instruction about S at least three times over the course of their publio school attend­ ee.

Three publio meetings were held, one for each mandated grade level, the age-appropriate material, including course outline and video tape, e shown to the parents for their review. A question and answer period lowed each presentation, and the issue of "opting out" was included at e point in the discussion, each night.

Following these meetings, a final draft of the course of study was sented to the school board in a regular meeting before the publio, it was officially adopted.

-a- I would be surprised to learn that other districts around the state rfer significantly from us in these procedures. The PSBA data suggest it in the estimated 80 to 90# of school districts now offering sex edu- tion classes, there has been no major disagreement with the procedures Llowed to develop and implement these programs. The reasonable assump- m is that local school officials are acting responsibly, in including jut from parents and other concerned groups, and that the programs are »rating successfully. It certainly has been the ease in our district. iitionally, our district has developed a "selection policy of classroom L library materials", as well as a "reconsideration of program/inatruo- >nal materials" policy, which I have also attached. These policies re enable! our school district to deal with parental concerns in. an or- rly, business-like manner, and were, in fact, an outgrowth of community icern about curriculum and materials.

Ultimately, our goal, as is the goal of every other school board rand the atate^. is to provide an appropriate, thorough, up-to-date >gram of education for the students we are entrusted with to educate. It- our opinion that House Bill 2277 is not a piece of legislation which LI enhanoe this process, and in fact, may seriously undermine it. I p you to reject it.

Thank you.

- 3 - FRANKLIN REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

SK FORCE COMPOSITION FOR DEALING WITH AIDS/ARC IN THE SCHOOL SETTING

MEDICAL CONSULTING STAFF

1. School Physician

2. Pediatric Infectious Disease Specialist

SCHOOL STAFF

1. School Superintendent

2. Special Pupil Services Coordinator

3. Certified School Nurses

The above body will implement the policy guidelines for dealing with

DS/ARC in the school setting. If such a case is detected, individual case

'tivities would be decided by above body AND

1. School Principal of involved school.

2. Parent of Child/Representative of Staff Member.

3. Physician of Child or Staff Member.

4. Selected members of the teaching staff involved with the child.

/a* AIDS POLICY

AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) has been identified as a jable disease in limited circumstances and because patients with 1 are susceptible to infection with other diseases, the Franklin I School District deems it appropriate to develop, approve and adopt policy to address these issues.

POLICY PROCEDURES Task Force will utilize as a resource the Center for Disease Control lelines on Education of Children for those infected with AIDS-causing ises. The Task Force will make a recommendation to the Superintendent irding the attendance of the student or employee. The Franklin lonal School Board will make the final decision on attendance or trnate placement of the student or employee. irmation on AIDS/ARC will constantly be updated as per the Center for tase Control. NO OTHER research body will be used for a reference it. This information will be available to the general public for lew. Task Force will review the situation on case-by-case basis. The Task TO's decision about the type of educational setting for the AIDS child I be based on the child's behavior, neurological development, physical iition and the expected type of interaction with others in that setting. loyees also will be considered on a case-by-case basis using appropriate teria.

Task Force's decision recognizes that the benefits of the unrestricted ilar school setting outweigh the risks of the AIDS patient's acquiring intially harmful infections and the apparent non-existent risk of ismission of AIDS to other persons. trict personnel involved in the education and care of AIDS-infected Idren will respect the patient's right to privacy. This includes the itaining of CONFIDEBTIAL RECORDS. The number of persons made aware the condition will be kept to a minimum. Only personnel involved in proper care of the patient and in the detection of situations where potential for transmission of AIDS/ARC is increased (e.g. a bleeding ury) will be informed. The same right to privacy will be maintained employees.

Task Force will provide education about AIDS/ARC to the general public disseminate information in a timely manner. POLICY 4 RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM/'INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

The Franklin Regional School District has an educational philosophy that encourages parental communication and interaction with the school community. This philosophy provides opportunities for parents to visit the schools, review curriculum materials and observe classes simply by arranging an appointment with the appropriate building administrator.

It is with this philosophy in mind that the following procedures have been implemented. These procedures will assist parents by providing ample opportunity to communicate their feelings or concerns in relation to our program of instruction.

-10- PROCEDURES

RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM/INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

1) Upon receipt of a request for reconsideration concerning program or instructional program materials the building principal shall provide the individual with a standard form (Request for Recon­ sideration of Program and Instructional Materials). This form is to be completed in full and returned to the building principal. 2) Within ten (10) calendar days following the receipt of the completed form the building principal shall meet with the individual and appropriate school staff to discuss the concern and attempt to resolve it through an explanation of the philosophy, goals, and methodology of the instructional program. A copy of the completed reconsideration form and the Administrative Investigation Form must be forwarded to the appropriate Supervisor immediately following the conference. 3) If the concern remains unresolved the appropriate Supervisor will meet with the vent and building principal within ten (10) calendar days of the receipt of the form from the building principal in an attempt to resolve the issue. 4) If the concern remains unresolved the Superintendent will meet with the parent and the appropriate Supervisor in an attempt to resolve the issue.

5) If this meeting does not resolve the concern3-then the issue shall be taken by the Superintendent to the Board of School Directors who may assign the issue to a Reconsideration of Program and Materials Review Committee for further study. The board or committee will study the issue and provide a recommendation for its resolution at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of School Directors. Suggested Committee Membership for the Reconsideration of Program and Materials Review:

A. Superintendent of Schools B. Appropriate Supervisor C. Building Principal /Department Chairman/Teacher D. Board Member(s) E. P.A.C. Committee Members(s) F. Student Advisory Committee Member(s) 6) Access to challenged material shall not be restricted during the reconsideration process.

Amended: 12/04/86 -11- >aa FRANKLIN REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 3210 School Road Murrysville, Pennsylvania 15668

REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM AND/OR INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

______SUBJECT AREA __ iheck area for reconsideration: Program ( ) Textbook ( ) Workbook ( ) Film Other

Initiated by:_

Telephone Zip Code

Himse If

Student

Other (Please identify)

that program or materials do you object? Please be specific. (Attach additional its if necessary.)

i and with whom have you reviewed the planned course and materials?

t do you feel might be the results of the use of this program or materials?

-12- ? RECONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM AND/OR INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS • Page'2 that age group would you recommend this program or materials?

is your interpretation of the teacher'a purpose(a) in using this program iterials?

is your reason for obj'eating to thia program or materiala?

ght of your objections to thia program or materiala, please Hat your positive mendationa or suggestions for this program or materials.

Signature

Date n Received By The Principal

7i Received By The Supervisor FRANKLIN REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 2210 School Road Murrysville, Pennsylvania 15668

ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION FORM

? INITIAL REPORT INT FILED BY OF COMPLAINT

______,______^^__ •

TBT INVESTIGATION

TNT ANALYSIS:

•

TAKEN:

Parent Conference ______^__^_^^^_^___ • (date) Teacher Conference

TaaSe) ' Parent/Teacher Conference

^ • (date) Correspondence (Please attach copies) ^ ^^ •

TION .

INFORMATION . INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS SELECTION POLICY

' Of POLICY *» Board of Directors of the Franklin Regional School District declares it >llcg of thm District to provide a wide and diverse rangm of instructional t en all levels of difficulty. The Board will provide for the review of r inappropriate instructional materials,

9w Board subscribes in principle to the statements of policy on library ly as expressed in the American Library Association (LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS),

' which is appended to and made a part of this policy.

)NS textbooks

Sound materials provided in multiple copies for use by a total class or i major segment of such a class* :nstructional Materials Support materials including printed, usually not bound and non-printed materials which supplement the planned course. Ubrary/Media Materials ?rint and non-print materials, including audio-visual materials (not squipment) to typically be housed in a school library/media center. mal Materials Selection Policy 2

PHILOSOPHY ja. M Tight to a from choicm among altarnatlvaa la baaic to a democratic society. wgh thm exercise of torn freedoms sat forth in tha Bill of Righta that an in- tiea can tako placa. Our educational system moat, therefore, allow a ftaa a full ranga of instructional matariala to inaura tha raalixation of thaaa

RESPONSIBILITY w lagal responsibility for tha aalaction of inatructional matariala rests toard of Education. Tha purpoaa of thia aalaction policy la to daflna tha t, critaria, and procaduraa to t>a followed by thoaa groupa that function aa tha Board of Education for acquiring print and audio-visual materials for mal program*.

ELECTION CRITERIA

Relation to Curriculum Matariala shall support and ba consistent with tha ganaral adueational 'ha district and tha written objectives of specific courses.

Relation to Exiating Collection

The materials should make a contribution to the balance of the individual lection of materials for which they are selected.

Appropriateness

Matariala should ba appropriate for the subject area, the age level, mal development, the ability level, and tha social development of tha students the matariala are selected.

Accuracy and Authenticity

The content of materials should be valid, reliable, complete and current.

Authority Consideration should ba given to tha qualifications, reputation, and nal Materials Selection policy 3 em of those responsible for creating the material (thm author, producer, and to the recommendation of the professional staff. permanence and Timeliness

the material should be of lasting value and/or should be of wide- rent interest or concern. cultural Pluralism Consideration should be given to the contribution the material makes mdth of representative viewpoints on controversial issues and to the depiction iralistic nature of society. Whole vs. Part Bach item should be approached from a broad perspective, looking at the whole and judging controversial elements in context rather than as isolated triodicals, for example, should be selected and purchased for their over-all %, and should not be rejected because of an occasional article which may be

ft

9. Quality of Writing/Production Materials should have aesthetic, literary, or social value. 3. Technical and Physical Qualities Print material should be attractively presented with suitable tions and graphics. The size and style of type should be appropriate to nded age level. Audio materials should use sound creatively and be clear of distortion. The narrator should have a pleasant voice and speak with on. Visual materials should have good picture quality and be authentic d to detail, color, depth, dimension, and size proportions. Original art uld be reproduced faithfully. There should be sufficient durability to demands of the intended user. onal Materials Selection Policy • • 4 •

1. Cost Value should be commensurate with cost and/'or need.

S FOR SELECTION OF TEXTBOOKS AND CLASSROOM INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS ^

'he Department Head determines need based upon the following: staff survey, ondition of text, curriculum change, outdated materials, and educational ange.

'he Department Head forms a Textbook Study Committee consisting of the

t Head, administration, and teacher representatives. Responsibilities xtbook Study Committee are as follows: contact appropriate publishers, d survey texts and professional text guidelines, narrow the field to

', and arrange for publisher presentations. resentations of selected publishers are to be made to faculty and depart- s above and below the area of need with the faculty given an opportunity on publishers. he Textbook Study Committee will discuss and survey the faculty on strengths esses of presented texts before reaching decisions on texts. The Textbook mittee will notify the selected publishers of any weaknesses they feel should b>

in their textbooks. Representatives of the Committee present recommended

Board Curriculum Committee approval. Board Curriculum Committee will seek full

roval. Copies of selected textbooks will be available for public inspection mimstrative offices before adoption by the Board.

lassroom instructional materials selected by the teacher will be appropriate

stent with the content in the approved course of study, and will be chosen lance with the selection criteria.

:S FOR THE SELECTION OF LIBRARY/MEDIA MATERIALS laterials for media centers are selected by the library staff with due regard

tions from the faculty, parents, and students. Final selection is made by

ry of the school m which the center is housed.

'election is an ongoing process which will include the removal of materials

' appropriate and the replacement of lost and worn materials still of educationa. ional materials Selection Policy 5 henever poamJM; both print** and non-printed madia arm to be physically baton purchase. If poaalbla, materials should b* bought "on approval" judged unsuitable, returned to vendor tor credit. itt matmxiala shall be judgmd by the criteria outlined and shall be accepted ted by those criteria. avion* ot proposed acquisitions will be sought in the literature ot a professional organisations and other reviewing sources recognised for jectivity and wide experience. The following recommended lists of materials consulted, but selection is not limited to this listingt American Historical Fiction Basic Book collection tor Elementary Grades Basic Book Collection for Junior High Schools The Best in Children's Books Children and Books Children's Catalog

Elementary School Library Collection European Historical Fiction and Biography Guide to Sources in Educational Media Junior High School Catalog Reference Books for School Libraries Subject Guide to Children's Books in Print Subject Index to Books tor Intermediate Grades Subject Index to Books for Primary Grades Westinghouse Learning Directory part of the vertical file index, other special bibliographies, many of ve been prepared by education organizations for particular subject matter ional Materials Selection Policy 6

AAAS Science Books and Films Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books Horn Book Kirkua Reviews Previews

School Library Journal Wilson Library Bulletin Learning resources 420

I

EXHIBITS PAMELA COOK AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN

H

I t

J I ^^ American Association of University Women

W W M 2401 Virginia Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037 \JL^m (202) 785-7700

Testimony Presented to House Education Committee on House Bill 2277 By Pamel3 Cook Promoting Individual Liberties Task Force mmerican ussociation o-f University Women

October 14, 1988 well and members of the Education Committee, thank -'ou -for pportunity to testi-fv before you this morning. My name is Pam nd I am speaking on behalf of the American association of si ty Women. As a mother of two, a school director, and member iW's national task force on "Promoting Indcidual Liberties", I tifying today in opposition to H.B. 2277.

with its 8,000 members in Pennsylvania, has demonstrated its ical commitment to academic freedom, equity, and excellence b/ ting a strong s/stem of public education which offers the m to teach, to learn, and to express ideas.

has the need for se»" education been greater than today. AIDS, cent pregnancy, child se .ual abuse, pornography, and ship are sexual health issues that affect all of us - en, parents, and professionals.

suit of concern about these issues has been national 1* trated efforts to control, limit, and eventually eliminate school famil/ life and =e\ education programs through ation. This effort has emerged in many states across the i in the form of parent-pupil protection acts - state "ersions federal Hatch Amendment Regulations of 1984 which attempt to ct and alter public school curriculum. H.B. 2277 (Section \) is ^et another attempt to imbed fede a1 Hatch Amendment ige in state legislation. ling to a Lou Harris poll of Pennsylvania adults last Ju 1 > , burgh Press. 9/24/38^ &QY. of those polled support the school's :s to assume a role in helping students make responsible, ied decisions regarding their sexuality - a role too often ited b> parents. A 1987 stud' re"ealed that less than IV. of s refuse permission for their teenage children to participate : education programs (Center for Population Options, "Se ual i t. ion", 1'87> . Vet this legislation requires public hearings 1 the initiation of se/ education programs while at the same ermits districts to discontinue sex education programs without : input from the majority of citizens who support such ims. [Section 2503-A ]. Those who support this legislation •11 aware that public hearings on sex education curriculums be dominated b, a vocal minor it/ who oppose comprehensive ims.

egislation sets up obstacles in the form of expensive mailings on 2504-A' and a prior written consent requirement 'Section O - provisions which are unnecesary in »iew of the fact that := currently have the right to inspect curriculum materials and >tion to remove their children from sex education programs to the/ have moral or religious objections. The/ knoi-i too that :hildren will miss out on a = e* education program because their :s misplaced or forgot to return the prior consent form. HOM ie doubt that the ultmate aim of this legislation is to dilute Thaps eliminate se* education in the public schools0 f ten American teenage girls become pregnant, giving the U.S. the highest teen birth rates in the developed world. buroh Post-Gazette. 3/18/86') The correlation in Britain, and Sweden between earl/ comprehensive sex education and low ncy rates is a strong indication that sex education in the s a prime example of "too little too late" (Children's Defense "Why Is Teenage Pregnancy a Problem0", 1/86). this legislation as a vehicle, a vocal minority is attempting trol curriculum by demanding that school administrators e burdensome public hearings, annual distribution o-f ulum outlines and prior written consent for participation in ucation programs. This year it's sex education. Can we these same constraints next year in science classes with the surrounding evolution versus creationism or in social studies s regarding discussions o-f religion^ st school officals shoulder the entire weight o-f insuring that s ape in-formed about the curriculum' When it comes to their en's education, parents must be just as accountable as rs and administrators. This means attending parent meetings; ns reading school newsletters, programs o-f studr, and i ty newspapers to become in-formed about the total educational m. It also means participating in curriculum development and into district o-f-fices to inspect courses o-f study and talk chool officials. Last, but not least, parental responsibi1itv speaking up at monthly school board meetings which are open to blic but all too seldom attended by the public. s who are dissatisfied with their children's educational m have a responsibility to attempt an initial resolution of concerns at the local level, rather than first filing a int with the State Department of Education or court of common as required by this legislation. Likewise school districts develop reconsideration policies to resol"e parental ions in a democratic manner and in concert with local ity values. grees that the state se\ education guidelines which prompted egislation were both inappropriate and objectionable. r, no one person, not even the Secretary of Education, should he authority to unilaterally and arbitrarily censor such ulum guidelines. It is AAUW's position that the legislature direct the Pennsylvania Department of Education to develop a based review process which would enable state officials to e future challenges to state level curriculum guides in an v and democratic manner. ideal world, all parents talk with their children about their ity, about mutual respect, responsibility and accountability. n the real world, man/ parents avoid such discussions. In antime, our children are at risk in a world where sex ion is no longer only a matter of moral it/. Theirs is a world AIDS has made sex a matter o-f life and death, a world where ng teen pregnancy rates mean diminished life opportunities, y, and children abused bv parents who themselves are children. or 1d where many parents have abdicated their sibilities, where even well-intentioned parents are not ed, schools must provide our children with the information ary to protect themselves and society.

the controversy, no one ever seems to ask "What do the kids what do the/ need and -feel0" One young girl spoke out in a New York Times Magazine feature story (11/9/87). She said, think the/ re protecting you, but the/'re hurting you. That's A education is so important. We've been leaving it up to the s and they haven't been doing the job." s must realize the> cannot protect children bv keeping them nt; they must understand that explaining does not mean ing. Our children are at risk and what they don't know can hem. The American Association of Uni^eristy Women tfully urges the Committee to reject this damaging and ssary legislation. 425

EXHIBITS

DR. DENNIS E. MURRAY ALTOONA AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT ALTOONA AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT TESTIMONY House Education Committee Pittsburgh, Pa 10/14/88 Dennis E. Murray Superintendent of Schools Representative Cowell, Members of the House Education :ommittee, good afternoon. I am Dennis E. Murray, Superintendent of the Altoona Area School District, and I am lere to testify on House Bill 2277. I would begin my testimony by stating that House Bill 2277, in the opinion of this respondent, is redundant as Section 11.3 of the State Board of Eduction's Chapter 11 Attendance Regulations; Section 1317 of the Pennsylvania Administrative Code, 1929, adopted by the State Board on torch 17, 1969 and amended in 1976; and the Pennsylvania School Code of 1949, gives authority to the Department of Education to prescribe minimum courses of study for public schools, and Sections 501-526 of said Code state that it is the School Board's duty to shape the policy of the School District for sound educational programs. There are, as just cited, numerous measures in place already dealing with curricular offerings, and in particular with sex education curriculum. In addition, the Bill appears to be burdensome, confusing and in all probability would lend itself to a great deal of legal interpretation. After reading the Bill, this Administrator gets the impression that someone in either government or society feels that when it comes to sex education the school districts are the problem not the solution. I frankly find this difficult to comprehend, as I am keenly aware of the decline of the family in America and Pennsylvania, and as a practicing administrator I observe the fact that there obviously has been a decline in the moral values and fibre of our Nation, State and Community. The increase in school age pregnancies is just one indicator of that decline. I would be the first to admit that the primary responsibility for teaching sex education rests with the family, in particular the parents, and would suggest that that is where it should be placed. However, when one considers that single parent families now comprise close to 50% of households, and that other social problems such as drugs, tobacco, alcohol, character building, AIDS, Child Molestation, special education, at-risk-students, school nutritional programs, just to list a few, have been placed in the schools, it becomes clear that society is not depending upon the home to impart certain social standards and values. The school has become the preferred provider. I will respond to the various sections of the Bill in their order of prsentation, beginning with: SECTION 2503-A BOARD APPROVAL FOR SEX EDUCATION INSTRUCTION. This section states that the Board shall approve Sex Iducation instruction. This is one of those redundancies to ixisting policies and practices, as the Board presently must ipprove any Sex Education Curriculum. The non-redundancy is eguiring a public hearing prior to the adoption of the loard Resolution. This would make it impossible to present ip to date information. Since a hearing would not be Lecessary to curtail or eliminate instruction on sex tducation, one gets the impression we are being encouraged :o drop it from the instructional program. SECTION 2504-A PARENTAL NOTICE OF COURSE MATERIALS Parental notice of course materials is a cumbersome requirement for school districts and one that obviously is Lesigned to consume a great deal of administrative time, requiring school districts to provide an outline of the relevant curriculum, supply any guidelines and supplemental laterials, permit parents to take the material home for a seven day period, notify parents in writing of their right :o review the materials, and provide parents with a 60 day lotice prior to the commencement of any such instruction. Jhis section is totally unrealistic. There are enough hoops :hat we have to jump through now, in terms of complying with standards, regulations and Law. To take a particular course md apply all of these requirements at the front end of the sourse serves no instructional purpose. I want to make it emphatically clear that I am not apposed to parents having the right and the opportunity to :ome into a school and review any material, any curriculum, relating to sex education. We have always permitted and sncouraged parents to do just that. In addition to parents reviewing the materials, the Altoona Area School District las established a working partnership with the Ecumenical Council and we have asked the Council to review all of our 3ex education materials and to respond where they deem it appropriate. SECTION 2505-A A PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF PARENT OR GUARDIAN FOR SEX EDUCATION COURSES I am not objecting at all to written cQifocnt u£-parents prior to a student participating in a sex education course. [ feel that the Altoona Area School District is already complying with this type of a procedure in that we state in the student handbook, which goes home to parents, that >arents may have their child/children withdrawn without anbarrassment at any time if they feel that the material >resented in a sex education or a science education course .s in contradiction to their values or beliefs. By putting it in the student handbook we place the .ocus of responsibility for withdrawal on the parent. additional action, however, has been taken in that we realize that parents might not read the student handbook. therefore, we ask the instructors to send home written lotification, prior to any material being presented, that light be in contradiction to parental values. I think the important issue of this section is to landle this in an expeditious manner so that it doesn't secome a cumbersome task. SECTION 2506-A PROTECTION OF PUPIL RIGHTS This section would drastically alter the evaluation :omponent of existing Special Education laws and practices Ln that: 1. Student consent would be required prior to the jvaluation, and 2. psychologists would assume additional Liability when evaluating students. Title 22, Pennsylvania School Code, Chapter 341, Section 341.12 requires written parent consent prior to completing a psychological evaluation. H. B. 2277 would now require, in addition to parental consent, the prior consent of the student. This lew requirement has the potential of denying services to nany at-risk students, especially adolescents, who are lenying that they are having a problem and resist help from adults. Psychologists would also assume additional Liability because they may find information about the child :hat could be construed to be a violation of H. B. 2277, L.e. mental or psychological problems that are potentially embarrassing to the student and his family. The overall result of H. B. 2277, Sections A & B would ae that students who need the services of psychologists itould be denied these services, and in many instances legal Interpretation would be needed prior to rendering said services. House Bill 2277, as contrasted to Special Education Standards and Professional Practices, would be mostly, time consuming and unnecessary. Subsection b. addresses the fact that this would not nodify existing laws that provide for special education or Individual counseling. Current special education regulations require that before a school psychologist can evaluate a child, the school district is required to inform :he parent of the reason for the referral, the evaluation >rocedures or instruments to be used, the proposed date of :he evaluation, and the fact that the parent has the right :o review school records and to meet with the psychologist srior to the evaluation. The parent must consent to this evaluation in writing, and may request an educational learing if they disagree. A psychiatric evaluation is used Ln a public school setting only for diagnostic purposes, and LS required before a child can be placed in a program for socially/emotionally disturbed students. SECTION 2507-A PROHIBITED HEALTH SERVICES This section lends itself to legal interpretation in :hat it states that no school district "may provide, fund, :ooperate in or authorize the provision of the following services to childrn of school age" 1. abortion services 2. abortion counseling 3. abortion referral services 4. family planning services 5. pregnancy testing 6. pregnancy testing referral services 7. contraceptive counseling services 8. contraceptive referral services 9. prescribing or dispensing abortifacients or contraceptives. Legal issues could be brought up such as "What does a aurse, teacher, or counselor say to an adolescent who says she is pregnant and needs help?" It would appear that anything said by the professional could be construed as a violation of H. B. 2277. Since school districts deal with real people and real human issues, they must have the Ereedom to openly discuss and to provide alternative solutions for students to examine when they are faced with Life's problems. Clearly teen-age pregnancy, AIDS, etc. extract a high cost in terms of mortality, constricted lives and medical attention in today's "real" world. To prohibit ar discourage counseling by school officials is incompatible tilth the mission of public education.

SECTION 2508-A SEX EDUCTION EMPHASIS ON ABSTINENCE FROM SEXUAL ACTIVITY. This respondent has no objection to the concept of abstinence being required as primary in sex education regarding pre-marital sex, the transmission of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, and the avoiding of iregnancy. However, in order to curb or reduce school age itudents from participating in sexual activities other oncepts need to be presented. Assuming that schools who each abstinence will curb the sexual problems of teen age itudents is being extremely naive. There are a lot of other issues that need to be iddressed in addition to abstinance. Remember the glands, ientlemen. There are biological pressures as well as peer >ressures and social pressures at work here. SECTION 2509-A RESTRICTIONS UPON STATE SEX EDUCATION MANDATES AND GUIDELINES. It is the perception of this respondent that this section is intended to remove sex education from the schools, except for the required section on AIDS, and return .t to the alleys and street corners. If all of the hoops lave to be jumped through that are identified in Sections 1504A, 2505A and 2506A, it seems as though this might be the >ut for the school districts just to drop the teaching of ;ex education from the curriculum, which I happen to lisagree with totally. Subsection d. - Current State guidelines emphasize that ibstinence from sex and not using intravenous drugs are the mly reliable methods of preventing and transmitting AIDS. Chis subsection would prevent the reference to other means )f minimizing the spread of AIDS, i.e. the use of condoms. fith the current medical evidence that is available about MDS in terms of prevention, this would present a moral lilemma for educators. SUMMARY In summary, it is the feeling of this respondent that :here are enough mechanisms currently in place to monitor :he teaching of sex education in the public schools. This piece of Legislation, though perhaps well intentioned, serves no healthy purpose and in fact could be a vehicle for removing sex education from the schools, which would be a terrible mistake. There are additions, obviously, that could be made to current sex education curriculum that would involve parents nore in the process, such as proper notification of when the content is going to be presented, opportunities to come into the school and review the curriculum, participation by Ecumenical Councils, etc. but these practices should be forthcoming from the State Board or the local Board. They should not be legislated. I would hope that House Bill 2277 was not introduced to promote a particular religious or moral point of view. As I read the Bill, I kept noticing similarities with doctrines >ublished by certain Fundamentalist organizations who make :he accusation that the public schools' sex education :ourses teach deviant sexual behavior, homosexuality, sisexuality, incest, group sex, abortion and sodomy, which .s not true. This same group states that students are being brainwashed by moral relativism, that values clarification :eaches no values and is systematically designed to destroy :hristian and home values, all under the broad general label )f secular humanism. While we respect the views of people )f this persuasion, we must pluralistically represent mr total society. This Bill, obviously, is meant for the white, middle ind upper classes, and not for the urban poor. I strongly urge you not to pass H. B. 2277. ENCLOSURES I am submitting data that you might find interesting. attached are copies of: 20th Annual Gallup Poll Results of various polls 1970 - 1985 Louis Harris and Associates Poll 1985 Purdue University Poll 17th Annual Gallup Poll Analysis of School Sex Education Program Studies Effects of Sex Education Summarization of Studies and Polls A copy of the AASD Sex Education Curriculum OBJECTIVES

VT BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON SEX EDUCATION NATIONALLY

IBE ALTOONA'S SEX EDUCATION PROGRAM

R QUESTIONS ABOUT ALTOONA'S PROGRAM THE COURTS

WELL v. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION A 1969 MARYLAND CASE THE COURT HELD ATION IS A PUBLIC HEALTH MEASURE THAT NEITHER ESTABLISHES ANY PARTICI DENIES RELIGIOUS FREEDOM — AS LONG AS PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQl R CHILDREN BE EXCUSED.

H v. Ricci (1982) U. S. SUPREME COURT DISMISSED AN APPEAL BY A GROUP CHALLENGED A NEW JERSEY STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION RULE THAT REQUIRED F EDUCATION) BE PROVIDED IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

EENS FOR PARENTAL RIGHTS V. SAN MATEO COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION (1975 JAMS THAT COVER BIRTH CONTROL INFORMATION ARE "NEUTRAL" IN TERMS OF R AS THEY 6IVE EQUAL TIME TO ALL METHODS OF CONTRACEPTION. SUMMARIZATION OF STUDIES AND POLLS

A BROAD BASE OF SUPPORT FOR SEX EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS EXISTS ACROSS THE NATION.

SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS APPEAR TO INCREASE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE OTHER* MYSTERIOUS AND CONFUSING TOPIC OF HUMAN SEXUALITY. (KNOWLEDGE IS AL PREFERABLE TO IGNORANCE.)

SEX EDUCATION DOES NOT INFLUENCE A TEENAGER'S DECISION TO ENGAGE OR ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY.

STRONG PUBLIC SUPPORT EXISTS FOR INCLUDING INFORMATION ON CONTRACEPT IN THE SEX EDUCATION CURRICULUM.

STRONG PUBLIC SUPPORT EXISTS FOR INCLUDING INFORMATION ON VENEREAL D IN THE SEX EDUCATION CURRICULUM.

THE LARGE MAJORITY OF SCHOOL PROGRAMS DEAL WITH: VENEREAL DISEASE CONTRACEPTION VALUES ANALYSIS OF SCHOOL SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS STUDIES

ALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE/ ML INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION (1978) URBAN INSTITUT FREQUENCY OF INCLUSION % TOPIC PHYSIOLOGY 90 PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES D CHILDBIRTH 95 PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH EASE 97 SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES E METHODS 78 CONSEQUENCES OF TEEN PREGNANC ANTED SEX 65 CONTRACEPTIVES 70 SOURCES OF FAMILY PLANNING IOUES 6 MOST LIKELY TIME FOR PREGNANC 53 RESISTANCE TO PEER PRESSURE FI f 52 PERSONAL VALUES MASTURBATION HOMOSEXUALITY

ss

ISES ARE 5 TO 20 HOURS PER SEMESTER

[GH SCHOOL COURSES ARE COEDUCATIONAL 17TH ANNUAL GALLUP POLL

CS THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN HIGH SCHOOL SEX EDUCATION

1985 1981 JDED TOTALS X TOTALS I i CONTROL 85 79

IEAL DISEASE 84 84

)6Y OF REPRODUCTION 82 77

\RITAL SEX 62 60

?E OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE 61 53

HON 60 54 PURDUE UNIVERSITY POLL

1000 TEENAGERS POLLED SURVEY REVEALED

DW THEY ACQUIRED KNOWLEDGE

52Z OF GIRLS INFORMED BY PARENTS 15% OF BOYS INFORMED BY PARENTS 6% LEARNED FROM COURSES IN SCHOOL 53Z OF BOYS LEARNED FROM PEERS 42Z OF GIRLS LEARNED FROM PEERS 15Z FROM OTHER SOURCES

IHEN THEY ACQUIRED KNOWLEDGE

56% LEARNED BETWEEN SlXTH (6TH) GRADE AND NlNTH (9TH) GRADE 18Z LEARNED BETWEEN FlRST (1ST) GRADE AND FlFTH (5TH) GRADE

882 WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION

SEPORTED IN HEALTH EDUCATION APRIL/MAY 1985 p. 2*4-27 POLLS

Louis HARRIS & ASSOCIATES POLL

"AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF AMERICANS BELIEVE THAT TEEN-AGE PREGNANCY IS A SEIOUS PROBLEM, BUT MOST PARENTS DO NOT DISCUSS BIRTH CONTROL WITH THEIR CHILDREN AND WOULD LIKE SCHOOLS AND TELEVISION TO DO THE JOB...." (PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER NOV. 5, 1985 P. 9A)

WHERE DID RESPONDENTS LEARN ABOUT HUMAN SEXUALITY? 21% FROM THEiH MOTHER 05% FROM THEIR FATHER 40% FROM FRIENDS 10% FROM SEX PARTNERS 08% FROM SEX EDUCATION COURSES (NEW YORK TIMES. NOV. 5, 1985, p, A12)

33% OF PARENTS DISCUSS BIRTH CONTROL WITH THEIR CHILDREN (PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER)

"RESPONDENTS ALSO OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED SEX EDUCATION IN THE SCHOOLS." (PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER) POLLS

GALLUP POLL - 65Z OF RESPONDENTS APPROVE OF SEX EDUCATION IN THE SCHOOLS

NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER - 79% OF RESPONDENTS ARE FOR SEX EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

GALLUP POLL - 771 OF RESPONDENTS APPROVE OF SEX EDUCATION IN THE SCHOOLS

NBC/AP POLL - 75% OF RESPONDENTS APPROVED OF SEX EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

GALLUP POLL - 70% OF RESPONDENTS APPROVED OF SEX EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOLS

NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER - 82% OF RESPONDENTS SUPPORTED SEX EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

GALLUP POLL - 75% OF RESPONDENTS SUPPORT SEX EDUCATION IN PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOLS 52% SUPPORT SEX EDUCATION IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 20th Annual Gallup Poll ublic attitudes concerning AIDS education in public schools

90% believe that AIDS education programs should be developed in the public schools. 5% believe that they should not be developed. 5% don't know

At what age should such programs start? 6% under 5 years old 40% between 5 and 9 years old 40% between 10 and 12 years old 11% 13 or older 1% don't know

Teaching "safe sex" (Use of condoms) 78% in favor 16% opposed 6% don't know EFFECTS OF SEX EDUCATION

[X EDUCATION PROGRAMS FACE AN AWESOME TASK: ATTEMPTING TO MODIFY/ IN CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION, THE MESSAGES THAT YOUNG PEOPLE RECEIVE EVERY ENDS, THE MASS MEDIA/ AND OTHER SOURCES. FURTHERMORE/ THE LINK BETW ) BEHAVIOR IS TENUOUS AND DIFFICULT TO PROVE/ PARTICULARLY SINCE PARE UCTANT TO ASK STUDENTS ABOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF SEX RELATED TOPICS/ ) THEIR VALUES."

IOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDY IN 1982 FOUND THAT THERE IS OVERWHELMIN : CLAIM THAT THE DECISION TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY IS NOT INFLUEN NOT TEENAGERS HAVE HAD SEX EDUCATION IN SCHOOL. ALSO SUPPORTED BY A 9.

SAME JOHN HOPKINS STUDY FOUND THAT IF TEENAGER FEMALES ARE SEXUALLY I HAVE HAD SEX EDUCATION SEEM LESS LIKELY TO BECOME PREGNANT THAN THO HAD SEX EDUCATION.

980 STUDY IN CALIFORNIA FOUND THAT SEX EDUCATION COULD HAVE A POSITI IDENT'S SELF-ESTEEM AND DECISION-MAKING SKILLS. IN THE SAME STUDY 70 ORTED THAT THE PROGRAM HAD IMPROVED COMMUNICATION WITH THEIR CHILDRE

IER STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT SEX EDUCATION INCREASES KNOWLEDGE/ AS MEA I POST-TESTS. (ZELNIK & KANTER, 1977) Pennsylvania At-Risk Youth Fact Sheet

Each year in Pennsylvania, about 23,000 students drop out of high school.

Each year in Pennsylvania 13,000 girls under the age of 18 will become pregnant. Half of these girls will carry their babies to term and almost all of them will keep their babies.

43% of high school students are sexually active and only 10% of these students use contraceptives.

25.2% of all youth under age 18 live at or below the poverty level.

20% of all youth under age 18 live in single parent homes and the youth are more likely to live in poverty.

20% of all school age youth drink beer weekly.

One in seven of all school age youth drink hard liquor weekly.

10% of all school age youth use marijuana weekly.

One in six school age youth use cocaine at least weekly.

More than 13,000 students come from families where English is a second language.

Youth under age 18 account for 27% of all arrests and 35% of serious crime arrests. More specifically, youth account for 53% of the vandalism arrests, 34% of the serious property crime arrests and 32% of the violent crime arrests.

Suicide accounts for 10% percent of all deaths for youth age 15-24. Suicide is the second leading cause of death in this age group after accidents. 444

EXHIBITS CHUCK PASCAL TESTIMONY OF: Chuck Pascal School Director Leechburg Area School District before the State House Education Committee October 14, 1988 Gateway High School Monroeville, PA Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee the subject of House Bill 2277 today. As the chairperson of the Legislative Committee of the chburg Area School Board, I recommended that our board take official position against HB. 2277. That recommendation adopted by our board without opposition. I would like to share with the Committee the reasons that sked my colleagues on the school board to join with in opposition to HB 2277, and discuss what I feel are impending dangers to our children and school boards and tricts should this legislation be adopted. The "Parent and Pupil Protection Act," as this proposal dubbed by its sponsors, actually strips away the protection inst intellectual dishonesty and political demagoguery which Id no doubt occur around the sex education issue should this islation become law. Various components of this bill throw each and every ision made in the arena of sex education—from the level curriculum and material choice by our 501 school boards the level of curriculum guides issued by the Department of cation—headlong into an often volatile and vocal political na, and remove it from those most equipped, through education training, as teachers and other educational professionals, make such decisions and recommendations. 2.

In addition, this legislation places an added and undue ien on school boards themselves, and requires school districts spend money without providing funding. While we have no problem with showing any parent the ricular material used in our classes, or providing anyone h a synopsis of the class itself, several other requirements osed by this legislation are simply not reasonable. Requiring this material to be mailed to each parent whose dent is eligible for enrollment in such a class provides a rical and added financial burden, albeit minimal in the case our district, which is unnecessary. It must be said that have never had any serious complaints about our curriculum materials, and this provision would serve only one purpose— one sought by some of this bill's sponsors—to create problems opposition where none before existed. The requirement to conduct a public hearing on this ject is absurd. Any member of the community may at any e come to meetings of the school board and address any ject they wish. The nine members of the school board e the obligation to provide leadership on issues they ieve to be important to the educational well-being of the dents. Again, this requirement is one which seeks to do thing—dig up opposition, awaken whatever sleeping dogs be lying in the community, and, ultimately, dismantle education programs in as many districts as possible through itical pressure from a no doubt vocal minority. 3.

It should be noted, as well, that while this bill requires ublic hearing to be held when a board is considering ablishing, altering, or expanding a sex education program, such hearing would be necessary when considering the tailment or elimination of such a program. Surely, the ority of the public, which believes that sex education plays important role in the educational process,should be equally ltled to air their views in such a forum should their district sider abandoning their commitment to sex education. Apparently, the sponsors of this bill would like to e it as difficult as possible for school districts to ablish or improve sex education programs, requiring them jump through a series of hoops in this pursuit; but as y as possible to abandon the program all together. The proposed requirement that curricular material be ilable for public inspection at the meeting where approval curricular material is to be considered is one which will ve to harass school boards, year after year, as curricular erial is updated. The public, having had the right to mine these materials prior to the hearing, would then be e to insist on viewing movies, film strips, etc., at the ay, prolongation, and trivilization of the meeting. It the hope, no doubt, of some of this bill's sponsors, that .ool directors frustrated by this annual burlesque of the ernmental process will opt to drop sex education rather ,n be tortured by those who will seek to use this law as iisruptive tactic. 4.

But by far the most damaging part of this bill would be require prior written consent from parents for their children be enrolled in sex education classes. As I said, in the chburg Area School District, we have had no serious complaints ut our curriculum. Annually, not more than two or three ents request that their children not be enrolled in our gram. This legislation would require the proactive action parents to place their children in the program—an attempt doubt to deny more students of this type of education, an- cation which I believe to be vital and beneficial to all dents living in this society. Another provision of this bill which I find troubling, is t which would prohibit any school employee, including ool nurses or doctors, from performing various activities, luding one labeled "pregnancy testing referral services." While our district has no such service, nor do we have plans to begin to offer one, this clause would seem to vent a school nurse or physician from recommending that a dent be tested for pregnancy or informing her of an titution in the area where she might go to have the test formed, even if she asked for this information. I believe that there is no positive purpose, and possible m—both physiologically and psychologically—to be> done by ocating ignorance on the part of the possibly pregnant student abdication of professional responsibility on the part of school employee,through this legislation. 5.

Allowing each school board to totally decide the content tenor of its curriculum regarding sex education flies in face of what this bill's chief sponsor, Representative phen Freind, claims is its motivation, namely "truth in education." We do not allow each board: to decide the "truth" about mmar. That would be absurd. We do not allow each board decide the "truth" about evolution. That was decided by courts long ago. Why do we feel that there are so many ential "truths" about sex education that boards should be e to pick and choose the ones with which they agree to be ght in the classroom? And while this bill's sponsors recognize the need to date AIDS education, they would put school boards in the ie political position in determining the curricular content the subject of this deadly disease, one not without its re of sensationalism, misinformation, and prejudice attached it. This bill would have 501 school districts teaching 501 ferent "truths" to our Commonwealth's students. How does s "protect" our pupils from those students who were taught lacies, lies, and myths by a school district whose curriculum i written in an exercise in political compromise, capitulation, frustration? ~ 6.

God help the young woman who encounters a man who was ght, in his high school sex education course, the "truth" as ered by Representative Freind on the floor of the House Representatives: that a woman can't get pregnant from being raped. The only way to provide "truth in sex education" is not allow "truths" to be debated, but rather for the real"truths" be taught by professionals, without political pressure. I ask you, as members of this committee, to act in the erests of "truth" and the "protection" of our pupils, and defeat this bill.

Thank you.

-#- Chuck Pascal is a school director in the Leechburg Area School District. He chairs the Legislative and Community Service Committees, and sits on the High School Advisory, Student Affairs and Community Relations, Special Education, and Support Services Committees. He resides in Gilpin Township, Armstrong County, at RD 1, Box 93, Leechburg, 15656. 453

EXHIBITS J. KEVIN SCANLON PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING HOUSE BILL 227? Friday, October 14, 1988 - 2:30 p.m. - Monroeville afternoon. Tie is J. Kevin Scan Ion. e at 203 Emerson Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15215. a member o-f my school district's Task Force on Exceptional pline Problems a -few years back. a member o-f my school district's AIDS Curriculum Review Committee year. a volunteer in a school district-Generations Together program last spent one day a week at the junior high school as an assistant to different teachers of children with learning disabilities. fe and I were the Chaircouple of Parents Who Care three years ago, been actively associated with it for over four years. the Treasurer of the football boosters organization this year. e you some of my background to let you know that I am a person who liven extensively to my community and to my school district. Most ' volunteer activity has been accepted with open arms. However, in trea of my involvement, as a reviewer of the tenth grade health culum, I have been treated more as an adversary"^thari as one'who is •ested in the best for the children of my school district. Here is happened. fe, Mary Catherine, is a Member of the Pennsylvania Parents ission (PPC). When it was discovered that the Department of ition had produced the now-famous curriculum guide, Mary Catherine jther parents went to Harrisburg to announce the formation of the Coincidentally, it was reported after the November school board ing of our school district that the tenth grade health curriculum >een proposed and would be available for perusal for thirty days *e it would be approved at the December school board meeting. We led to review it. "*"' ~*~*~ Catherine and two other parents (mothers of students) went first on liber 12, 1987 to review the materials. They did not have adequate to complete the job. Mary Catherine and I went back to the school ovember 23rd and spent approximately six hours reviewing materials were provided to us. As some of the material that was proposed for mas not available for our review, I wrote a letter to Administrator pressing the opinion that we did object to some of the material that eviewed, and that we would like to review other materials that were sd in the curriculum document. The letter was dated November 30, . In it we asked if we should plan to be at the December school d meeting to voice our objections. In a subsequent phone call to nistrator A, I was assured that school board action would be rred, at least beyond the December meeting. - 2 -

Id like to make a point here about just one o-f the objections that isted in our letter. of individuals.) Administrator A was cooperative at this point, i by providing immediately some of the materials for our review. lealth teacher who was the author of the health curriculum was on ttical for the first term of the school year, was expected back on try 22nd. In fact, that was the day Dr. Bruce Dixon from the ACHD •d with the faculty about AIDS. Administrator A invited me to come tat meeting, and I attended. The health teacher was there. Ue :ted then to hear from the SD with the arrangements for our -awaited meeting with .her. By this time we had reviewed at least of the materials we requested in the November 30th letter, and had ired an extensive critique of the curriculum materials. (Chairman II has a copy of the critique.) tited for over a month with no word. I decided that I would bring sneer ns to a school board meeting, made a request to our . rintendent to be placed on the agenda. As if in reaction to my »st to appear before the school board, a meeting was scheduled. Catherine and I met with the health teacher, our high school :ipal and Administrator A. I think we had a cordial meeting during h our concerns were aired. The high school principal agreed that we nade some valid points. Ue walked away from that meeting thinking our concerns would be addressed fairly and that we would be rmed of the outcome. I believe this meeting occurred in early h. - 3 -

Jn't hear anything -from the SO with respect to this subject until i that the school board had approved the tenth grade health :ulum at its August meeting. Ue called Administrator A's office to >ut what had been approved. He referred our request to istrator C's office. When a woman in Administrator C's office told nt the curriculum had not been approved in August, but the previous jer, at which time it was bound and distributed, we asked for a if what had been approved. Uhen we received it, it was dated t, 1987, and was not recognizable as the document we had reviewed /ember. At this point I called the superintendent to ask him to nvolved. He said he would arrange a meeting for us with our high I principal, Administrator A, Administrator C and himself to clear 5 up. He said he would do this on Thursday, September 22nd. In he transferred me to his secretary so that she could find out when uld be available. She told me that the superintendent would be the following week and that the meeting would be arranged for some during the first week in October.

1 didn't hear by Thursday, October 6th, 1 called. Ue finally had eeting on Friday, October 7th. The high school principal, though s asked to attend the meeting, did not attend. Other than to ask larification about certain points that were covered by the culum guide and our critique of the "original" curriculum guide, o point out one glaring omission in the new curriculum guide, we ittle to say. However, we were offered this-time the opportunity view texts which will be purchased for the 1989-70 school year. time the superintendent asked Administrator A to check on matters were discussed and report his findings to us. This was done on «r 12, 1988, a full eleven months after the process of review was i. It was then that we found out that the "Student Information s" were used last year; we were assured that they would not be used this point on. Also, other information about videos and movies was ed to us and we were told that the glaring omission had been added le curriculum. its shouldn't have to go through what we went through to be heard. ibjections were not outlandish. Ue were not insisting that the >1 district stop teaching sex education, as The Pittsburgh Press J have people believe. Ue did ask that false information not be it, and that biased presentations not be made.

>assage of the proposed law would force teachers and administrators t more responsive to the concerns of parents, would give parents a ?r opportunity to understand what is being taught to their children. ill lead to better instruction in sex education and better jnicat ions among students, parents, teachers, administrators and DI board members. Please pass House Bill 2277. tie way, I consider what has happened over the last eleven months a BSS story for the school district and myself. I hope that the rs who were involved agree.

K you for your attention. November 30, 1987

[Administrator A): Mewed the text and syllabus for the 10th grade health class. mng are some observations and requests: te book teaches sexuality from a completely amoral viewpoint. It gative about too many subjects to make it acceptable for use. In a complete report later, we will cite examples. hese are the materials that we would like to see: a. Teacher's Guide for Understanding Health. b. Separate Sexuality Supplement <18pp) for Understanding Health. c. American Cancer Society breast model. d. Video: Testicular Cancer (Excellent 1/9/88) e. Videos: AIDS f. Film: Herpes: 400,000 New Cases Each Year g. Pamphlet: AIDS (Surgeon General's Report) h. Film: Death and Dying: A Teenage Class i. Film: Suicide: The Warning Signs

he Activities Resource Book that is meant to accompany standing Health contains "Student Information Sheets" on birth ol, abortion, rape and homosexuality that contain material which is :eptab1e. Also, the textbook, which goes home with the student, not have anything to say about birth control, abortion, rape and sexuality. The index to the text does not contain those words. In words, a parent would not know that these subjects were being it unless they went to the extent that we have gone. Finally, we a question: Why no SIS on Chastity so that something positive can lid about teenage sexuality?

It is difficult, if not impossible, for a parent to review what an ted speaker says without being present in the classroom. We would to know what is said by speakers from the Allegheny County Health rtment on STD's (because what a representative said in a reply to a >r was unsatisfactory), from March of Dimes (because it is unclear s what the representative would say about prenatal testing), from rtJCA (because the YUCA has published a strongly-worded pro-abortion cy statement), and from a private gynecological practice (because we d like to have the doctor of our choice do this). ou suggested, after we review the materials, we will get together (the health teacher) to discuss our concerns. less to say, we do object to what is being taught in the 10th grade th class. Should we come to the December 7th Board meeting to voice objections? ks for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

J. Kevin & Mary Catherine Scanlon note I delivered to Administrator A on January 8, 1988: on Wednesday. I told the group that MC & 1 had approached you about the culum, and reported to the Board what you said about getting a broader brought the matter up -for two reasons: 1) to let the Board know that we as parents and as a result o-f MC's participation on the Penn Parents not as PUC members; and 2) to recommend that PUC not get involved. (The aid he thought PUC should be involved. Someone else felt that parents ivolved even if PUC as an organization decided not to be involved. When nt) asked for Administrator B's opinion, Administrator B said he would see PUC get involved because it would factionate the organization. Then statement that he disagrees with us about our objections.

the chance to talk with Administrator B after the meeting he told us not seen our letter (of November 30 to Administrator A). Uhen I brought our concerns - teaching chastity/abstinence up -front, up-to-date on NFP, among others - and my letter to the ACHD, he agreed with me. If ?en our letter and he agrees with me on the points I raised, why does he js strong enough to make him declare publicly that he disagrees with us? ints in our discussion that we definitely did disagree about were i the educational purpose of 10th grade boys doing a breast examination nodel. Uhen I mentioned that the SIS on Abortion was the type of thing come directly from NARL or Planned Parenthood, Administrator B said he i-abortion. Uhen he said that husbands frequently detected breast cancer ues, I challenged the statement. purpose of this meeting. Uhen will we be able to begin reviewing the terials? Add the movie on breast examination that was announced at the Ue wish to review the materials be-fore we meet with (the health s you recommended at the start.

mothers who was with Mary Catherine on November 12th) called MC last told MC that you have not responded to her repeated attempts to get in you. I guess this knowledge and what happened at the PUC meeting with Administrator B's comments, and the fact that MC and I had about four e way back from Penn State yesterday, are what make me feel uneasy about at ion of the other day. i me now that we are being put off. Ue are all for getting other opinions do not at all think that our concerns are outlandish or would not be ither parents. But we do not wish to wait to review the materials until i teacher) returns. How can we discuss our concerns about things we have d? Also, it is possible that we do not have objections about any of the f we can be assured that they are being used properly.

>n I have is: Should we feel uneasy about your reaction to our concerns to have them fairly heard?

ng information was obtained from the ACS after the meeting on January 8th istrator A:

P breast cancer is detected by the woman herself or by her husband (sexual By far the majority not by partner, but by the woman herself. Some are f the husband. By the time they are detected by the husband they are "too iny per cent of men get breast cancer. Different.

the articles on breast-examination that we are aware of does the ACS that husbands examine their wives' breasts. The recommendation is always Kami nation. The ACS does have a pamphlet on the subject - breast n - which is labeled "for men only", which I have requested and will share no matter what it says. 459

EXHIBITS ELDA BILLINGS PORTAGE, PENNSYLVANIA •v

TESTIMONY OP

ELLA BILLINGS — CONCERNED PARENT

FOR THE PARENT AND PUPIL PROTECTION ACT

My name is Elda Billings and I am the mother of six children. Three of them are school teachers. I have three grandchildren who attend the Portage Area School. I have tried very hard to instill high moral values in my children and they in turn are teaching these principles to their children, also. When my six children were students in the public school I had complete trust in our school and in the leadership of it. The teachers in our schools do not need permission to teach our children Reading, English, Mathmatics, science, the Social Studies, or Com­ puter Science - the five new basics identified by the National Comm­ ission. The big problem is changes that have been taking place in the classroom. Changes can be very constructive but there are very many controversial and experimental programs being implemented in our schools today. Many of these programs are diametrically opposed to traditional moral and ethical values. This is one of the many reasons I feel that the Parent and Pupil Protection Act should be­ come a vital part of our school program. Why shouldn't the teaching materials be available for parental inspection? Why should parents be denied the opportunity to inspect the materials being used with their own children? The parental consent form in itself is not sufficient unless the full scope and content of the course or workshop is given on the form. Otherwise the parent may be deceived. The Parent and Pupil Protection Act will protect the pupil, parent, teacher, and the school. Parents and pupils are not always protected from deception, conscious or otherwise. I can say this from personal experience. On December 10, 1986 I attended a workshop at the Holiday Inn at Johnstown. The workshop was advertised, on the program that I was given, 2. ,s discussing the subject "Kids and TV - How Does TV Influence Children?". !he Sophomore Class of the Portage Area School was also in attendance. The morning session was a panel discussion on television. It was rery informative. After lunch there was a performance by the Washington .rea Improvisational Teen Troupe - WAITT. This title was the only infor- ation about this group printed on the program. The subject material to >e covered was not specified. There were three skits performed. The rapils from the Portage Area School did not learn how to be critical tele­ vision viewers, but rather learned how to have so-called "safe sex". Upon arriving home, still shocked by what our approximately 90 itudents from our local school had been exposed to, I contacted several if the school board members to find out how our pupils happened to be at ;his particular workshop. After explaining what took place that afternoon, ;hey were surprised as much as I. I was told what was on the permission ilip. It said, "Mrs. Conlon wishes to take the Sophomore Class to Holi- Lay Inn, Johnstown to a TV and Teenage Workshop on Wednesday, December 10." Several days later I went before the entire school board with this latter. They felt that they too were deceived. Parents, Pastors, and 'riests were all up-in-arms about this. All of the newspapers carried the itory. The headlines in the Tribune-Democrat read "Portage Residents hitraged Over Sex Tips Por Students". The main point that was stressed throughout this whole ordeal was the fact that the permission slip did lot contain the proper amount of information in order for the parents to lake a sensible decision in regards to this particular workshop. Two other mothers and I have been instrumental in having pomnography removed from three different places of business in our town. Some of the (arts of the skits that were performed that day could be classified as leing pornographic, by word and action. Why would we as parents work so lard to keep pornography out of our stores and then allow it to come In to »ur children's education? Parents want to know what their children are doing during classroom tours. This bill, the Parent and Pupil Protection Act does not censor any jrogram - it merely requires parental consent before objectionable programs ire used. How could anyone object to that? Thank you. SCHOOL DISTRICT OL DIRECTORS DA REGULAR MEETING 986 - 7:30 P.M. ITEA MICROCOMPUTER HARDWARE/COURSEWARE GRANT APPLICATION 26. Copies of the Grant application are included with this agenda and approval to apply should be made by the board.

Requests 27 . A. Mr. Conlon wishes to hold annual Elementary-Jr. Hi. wrestling tournament on Saturday, January 10 in High School gym. Cost to district = use of facilities B. Mr. Mignogna, Secretary and Portage Area Sewer Auth. wish to store pipe and supplies on Stadium Parking Lot for Johnson Avenue and Caldwell Avenue projects. Copy of certificate of Insurance to be provided. Cost to district = us of storage area C. Mr. Branas and Wrestling Boosters wish to hold a mud wrestling fund raiser in the High School gym on Monday, December 15, 1986 from 6-10:15 P.M. Cost to district = us of facilities

D. Mr. Black wishes Patrice Nezneski and Natalie Novotny to participate in District Chorus at Chestnut Ridge February 4-7, 1987. Cost to district = $130.00 approximately E. Mr. Nezneski and Colorguard Squad requests permission to have a sub and pizza sale December 20th and January 24th. (To be purchased from Mustang Corral) Cost to district = none

F. Mrs. Conlon wishes to take the Sophomore Class to the Holiday Inn, Johnstown to a VT and Teenagers workshop on Wednesday, December 10. Cost is $2. per student plus transportation. Cost to district = $252. + $130. for busses (2 busses)

(Continued on Supplemental agenda) KIDS &TV tt does TV influence children? KIDS ( PRDQ

Sponsored By S:30 - 9:30 Rc3i*tMUo> ithood of Cantoria/Somerset, INC. 9:30 ' 10:0° Opening R^ >et

[ 15goi 10:00 - 11:45 Panel VUCLU PanzZ Membe/ Planning Comnittee Gnarvt ^fioyU Pk.d, Execotu Chici Pi Aloy-iia. Halt ol MeAc vtoxz, UPJ itudcnt inttfin „ r n . ^ _, vthood oi CambUa/SomaJuU Vonna V/llJ*-> CommunUy Bduca Vici a>, Patient _ _,_ „ „, . , . IZzy School Vi&tAict Vave- HuAAt> *"*•**" CUil, ft i PTO mcmbzA Padton. Robot Kaltcnbaugh, Uzy School Vi&&Uct _. . _. _ CIvuA Tayloti, PhoghamlPnoim t Kalttnbaugh ft 7 7:45 - 72:45 Lunch Community Education CoonxLinatoti /' ~~~~ ~ ~~. vthood ol Cambnixi/Somvuu ( ^:45 - 2:00 PvL&oxmance. V knea lmpiova> ^~ nthood oi Cambnia/Somen* ct * The GnAifan Book Stone uu \u to Bob and Von KalXenbaugh today. A 10% discount vxl I aA&i&tance. pivtcha^ed OK ofidcKed toda 464

EXHIBITS ANITA HOGE WEST ALEXANDER, PENNSYLVANIA L'NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Vib-.NoTON DC :0202

MAY I 3 '9S3

:ers. Esc. tunsei salth of Pennsylvania mt of Education :st Street: irg, Pennsylvania 17126-0333

Rogers: enow, this Department is investigating a complaint, by .ta Hoge alleging tnat Pennsylvania's Educational Quality snt (EQA) was administered to her son witnout her prior consent by the McGuffev School District in violation of taction of Pupil Rignts Amendment (PPRA), Section 439 of sral Education Provisions Act. 20 U.S.C. 1232h. sr to you dated March 9. 1988, the Department requested information from Pennsylvania to support the assertions Federal funds from we U.S. Department of Education (ED) so. in connection witn l.ie EQA. The Commonwealth was sd to provide specific documentation snowing wnether 181, which funded tne test, contains ED funds. You were i that the deadline for such documentation was Marcn 31, ["has documentation was not received until May 10. 1988. face, this documentation is not conclusive; thus, it will ssary for the Department to analyze it further. To avoid delay should the information not prove to be dispositive romplamt, we request tnat you address tne following tfith documentation by June 15. 1988. from EQA literature submitted to this Office, it does not that written parental consent was obtained by the scnool 3tudents were required to take the EQA test. This Office aived EGA literature which requested that teacners give 3 an information booklet to take home to parents informing at by making a written request of the scnool principal, nildren could be exempt from tne test. From our Lion of this literature, it is not evident tnat tne ealth followed the PPRA stipulations with regard to 1 consent. In fact, the essence of Mrs. Hoge'3 complaint sne was not afforded aer rights under PPRA to provide or written consent Defore her son was required to taKe the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ^ib-.NuTON DC :u2U2

MAY 1 3 '9c3

ers. Esc lunsei salth of Pennsylvania mt of Education :et Street trg, Pennsylvania 17126-0333

Rogers: enow, this Department is investigating a complaint by .ta Hoge alleging tnat Pennsylvania's Educational Quality mt (EQA) was administered to her son witnout her prior consent by the McGuffev School District in violation of section of Pupil Rignts Amendment . Section 439 of »ral Education Provisions Act. 20 U.S.C. 1232h. sr to you dated March 9, 1988, the Department requested information from Pennsylvania to support the assertions Federal funds from the U.S. Department of Education

ers, Esq. unsel i alth of Pennsylvania nt of Education et Street rg, PA 17126-0333 Rogerst .s office baa previously coaaunicaced with you regarding ce with the Protection of Pupil Rights Anendaent in on with the Coaaonvealth's SQA tests. On January 19, is office received certain docuaentation froa you g the source of funding for taose testa. That documen- ndlcates that the coats associated with the development lbotion of the EQA were charged to Commonwealth account at material, however, in no aay identifies the source of Is for account 181. ( cover letter dated January 13, 1988 which accompanied re materials indicated that further docuaentation iq the source of funds for account 181 would be provided office by the Co=a»onvealth's Coaptroller'3 Office. Such :ation auet be in a fora which will readily demonstrate account 181 contains federal funds from any appiicaole lost two months have now elapsed and the Comptroller's tas not provided to us any of the promised documentation. i are not able to further delay our inquiry into this we must insist that such docucientation be provided to Eice by March 31, 1988. After that date, we will draw a : inference that the documentation, if provided, would in that funds under an applicable program were used by the >alth to pay for the development and/or distribution of tests. Thereafter we would expect to take such action ppropriate. Sincerely.

r.'^r.i. rw_ Attorney n't ni'iir1, I>I s'; 11 ;, i) i.Min is m'l '<\n u M THI ., , i'i '.i :".i i k"i 111Ai I'l'.n «. 1)

1. "ri'ii'i t liih' - U'urld TiilLuri's ( urr itn 1 un Oi-vi-lnprient for secondary S< hiu

III'M rii<( nm or filijfi I .vo - iV\r lopnrnl of ,i set of tcioli- .pi, ->iU" iil<., un Iiiihn:'. ti u hi r iiiimils, studi-tit manuals, •.li'lt1.. r ipcs, t i msp ironc i L*s, .nut rosoiirco Kuidos, to he 'is, J in s,\nirn in 1 tiiith iT..tlf wo rhl i mil nt s. " *..ir!>, r nl 1.1', 'njilou'i s- - ? pirr-timt* ut ._IJI i< nt s DI '.iiviti- - 1U sil.nol ilistiiits incluiiinft i,'pi •** ir* it i iv imi i I'.II liors liul M.SIMI siiiiU-iits. :\t i .u«.l_ J'.«.,,U':,rLi.'LJ vl,u,_Ll,lJi- " s','i*'t,,l SIIJII i" M ''iii.Miiij - sirvni' u .t rs

2. Project Tit K- - itt'sponsiblo Citizenship I'rojei t

"i'.''.'.' 'i'1 "'" or fiyifi t i vi' - "I'v providing n.itori.il .ind pro- I'Miin; ti i< MITS (.• I ,u i I i Lit v i l.is-.i i.nn il i S,MISS ions of -iiril ISMU'S; ind t>\ inl lectin*, ind i onn.innn dit.i cnncprnin|> stiuU'iit. ror.il )ii>lt'«.nv.'iiL - . .iiul... si 11-npdi i si .ind inj',, .ill l — ln'ii' l ii .Hi1, sitiool, mil cili t'lisiiip, llu" ,'roji.ct will: jj (.i) "'i-.i Turi' ,mv diffetomo Inlwern tin.* lujtli tiiid low I ••oi ui-i-i .'iii-nii iri'is. B III* ".* I .liro 'P' l! I f f iTl'lli"!' DlUS'i'lMl tl 11 llOr (rliniii; j, • < "'• :..! ••• •„ v, ,'i,-p \s. te.n IUT ir.iimi'u bv tr.iri- 9 in.' -• ii'.i il ." | Also, tin- piM|urr vill .ittonpt to validate the H/A (l.'din.a- B tion.il Oinlitv Asse .'.nenl ) inst riinu'iit used bv the I'lif. ' Nn, tin. (iiii|i'rr irtonds lo issi", , I In* influence t>f "one pirtirnlir leu'lunr process" on I In l't.\ tost<;. ' •!, in r -f I •". ' *i' - ! • i.l 1-t iini", 1'• ,'irt-tipii' ! • ii-11 "I ,i* '.-••.,• - 2 '• tli .i ocn l I'.ir'in <-. in 11 ij i f forme s. I>.mi i!i irurs .m I 1 , J -.* * 'ini'ilif.. L'L'J1 •iiiL.'".' ,'!Jl:Ln '•^.j'jjisl iiuri - ''iS.lil

S-iiirre of fiir.ijin,', - rodfr.nl (ovcrnront

3. Project Iitle - I HA - Inv>lviM»otit On out nil I'roj'r i-.i

i'i si i i,ii i,i i 'r •• fl'\ (Pi.tnrt Honcm.il ers o' v tin ij in irio. ill put o| tin- ioi.il lli'.-v I ( ono'iu (. s ) 1'rurr.in _". lUvflop .in n 1 )'• i I \-or n nt oil 1 I'A prnjtcl '. ii i • 11 \. i I ! . iiimrn I mli nt in,i l"i-i. nt in disi rn I I t'liptci .. 1 I'.n i 1,1 .i fun f .nitiil.it ion of inn rosl .mil p.iitd ip it 'on in KM", in t lit" rid.llr silimils .ind in |nnior 1 111. t • srliwl-. '•. ''rf,ini/f .i < ••••nl , 'MA.... ">. Develop .1 j MTII'S o' .'ulo stiii nl l ipos u'lirli i in lie used ,ns .1 part •'. of tho Hon ' onimi'•. l'rni.r.i—." i] j 87 7.; 'I i

i H.I*H*U»*»»I.»»I*»JV I.W JIIHJ un ii i a JIU'P *»>)»•»>*< m* mmm*9^t.mm im,,u*jj ui

^*^*TM$rr T> MI,' ^ ^ ' SSL" V.'~ - /** ^^W

I Citizenship ^~7 //>**»» - 3 ^*U*AN^^ tcation should help every child acquire the habits and attitudes associated with citizenship. nONALE

*

>:hjols should encourage pupils to assume responsibility for their actions as well as r>f the group Opportunities should be provided for pupils to cooperate and work up goals and to demonstrate integrity in dealing wjth. others Pupils shuuld se £»en to lake the initiative and assume leadership for group action as well as lend support fforts as followers.

.MENT RATIONALE rhe mores, codes, laws and social expectations of society provide the reference p:\nts ; which behaviors reflect responsible citizenship and which inJicate poor ».cizer.>-jp if literature revealed that the National Assessment of Educational Progress developed il citizenship objectives. The en tenon "tor inclusion of any one objective was its relative i to society as agreed upon by a committee of scholars and lay people. rhese national objectives, wete used to provide the frame of reference for what was sured. Objectives in the factual domain such as (a) knowing structure of government iderstanding problems of international relations were not considered in developing the

Arming at a sa Us factory definition of citizenship was much less complicated than he definition to the assessment of students' attitudes and bchuviors The display of c citizenship behaviors like honesty or integrity are ino»t often situational

A person'* dispUy of good citizenship behavior under one set of motivating .ondiuon* tie ibout the way he or she can be expected to awt if those wondmons are altered xt in which the behavior is elicited therefore becomes at least as important in determining me 41 the predisposition of the individual involved. To assess ciuzcnship, a behavior-referenced model incorporating elements related la tychological notion of ihreskot^ s used. In reference to ciuzcnship. threshold refers ta dui F conditions necessary rcHmng about the desirable responses Thus by varying the situaocc niroducing conaiuoos p| reward and puntsnmem vW Arc able to determine the cutoff levev uch the student will display positive behavior in this way it is possible to assess not ac.) students' predisposition to behave in a manner consistent with responsible citizenship 6-1 to provide some measure of the intensity of that predisposition across a wide spectrum z; ions.

ERAL SCALE DESCRIPTION* Fifty-seven items measure willingness to exhibit good citizenship in many social situation r a variety of motivating conditions. Social contexts are given by 19 situations, each po - Mem and suggesting an actioai predefined as good or poor citizenship. Each story has th.M which list positive or negative consequences resulting from- the action. Student are asks tcide whether to take the action tor eacri consequence. " >le stuaDon (grade H): ^JL There is a secret club at school called the Midnight >••* " . ./** Artist*. They go out late at night and paint funny C if *J? \ & sayings and pictures on buildings. A student is asked * • *f!-\ #*** 10 i°tn *• ciuD- 'n this situation, I would JOIN TIIF , " ,tf* CLUB when I knew.... ? b v W Yes Maybe No y >le item set: 1. My best friend asked me // to join. Y M N 2. Most of the popular students / . _^ were in the club. Y M N ^ jt£? *" „-N 3. My parents would ground V,\^ me if they found out 1 -_^ joined, Y M N

The items within the scale are grouped to yield three subscale scores in addition t al score. ~ cale I: Concern for the welfare and dignity of others contains 18 items (item sets fro- five situations) designed to measure concern for the feelings of others, wilhnzn? to protest unjust treatment of others, and the tendency to accept new p*o:> into a group. Also measured u the degree of restraint from teasing or degradu- others. cale 2: Respect for law and authority has 21 items measuring the willingness to repo law-breaking of others, obey authorities during emergencies and prevent clissroc disruptions. Also assessed is the degree of restraint from violent actions that co- harm others or damage property. icalc 3: Personal responsihiBty and integrity has 18 items which tap the willingness to hor ^ self-made commitments to individual* »r grow* and the willingness ro u< * responsibility for one's own mistakes and to report mistakes made in one's fa».

bn F. Russell from the Division of Educational Quality Assessment b the author of the icnship scale. -ERENCED SCORING tie following item weighting Kheme • used for oorm-feferenced iconng

Response Options rectum Yes Maybe So izenihip 2 1 0 itizenship 0 12

^REFERENCED SCORING esponscs are considered favorable when diey reflect a willingness to display proper behaviors or an unwillingness to use poor citizenship behaviors. A student's score on le (total or subscale) "is" the percentage of Items to wfucR a favorable response was the citizenship scale the scoring scheme applied to the items is:

Response Options

Section Cr^soO ' .V \, **«* Maybe No

Qzenship ., v~N ^ ^ " \ 0 0 iuzenship 0 0 1 <^T

_> •— — 472

EXHIBITS KATHRYN FORSYTH PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA Mr. Cowell and members of the Education Committee, as a rent and a registered nurse I believe that House Bill 2277, the oposed "Parent and Pupil Protection Act", is a sound piece of gislation that will greatly improve the health and well-being our children. The education and health care of each child is timately the parents' responsibility. This bill supports rents in raising their children by providing them the portunity to be involved in their school's sex education rriculum and by giving them the choice to provide their child's x education at home if they believe this is the most propriate approach for their child.

The emphasis on abstinence and the prohibition of health rvices related to contraceptives and abortions is necessary! r current method of sex education presents the facts regarding e physical process and supports easy access to contraceptives. is has not decreased the incidence of sexually transmitted seases and pregnancy among children. If anything the rate of enage pregnancies has been increasing and sexually transmitted seases are now occurring in epidemic proportions in — olescents. Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) is also ginning to show up in teenagers. The most responsible approach for us to change our method of sex education. Abstinence will event sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy! Since this 11 requires that sex education emphasize abstinence from remarital sexual relations" and that it must "stress that stinence from sexual activity is the only completely reliable ans of preventing the transmission of AIDS and other sexually ansmitted diseases and of avoiding pregnancy", it proposes a >und approach to children's sex education. According to a U.S. preme Court ruling this past summer (Bowen vs. Kendrick) it is rmissible for the government to promote abstinence in sex lucation without violating the separation of church and state ctrine.

We cannot tell our children to "just say No" to sexual

:tivity and then provide them with contraceptives and abortions. ir children need to learn that their behavior has consequences td that they need to be responsible for their behavior and its msequences. If we provide contraceptives and abortions without irental knowledge and consent we remove a very important >tivator for our children in heeding our instruction, because we tmove the child's accountability for their behavior. Not only tat, but we are asking children to be able to make adult icisions regarding complex health issues; isssues that will have >ng reaching effects on their lives. We are also sending our lildren a double message by telling them not to engage in sexual :tivity, but then saying in effect that they will not be able to ntrol themselves anyway so they better use contraceptives, and : need be, abortion to keep their sexual activity "safe".

You may say that parents do sign a consent form for these rvices provided by a school based health clinic, however, I lieve it is unethical and possibly illegal to request parents > sign a blanket consent form for health care for their children a school based health clinic. Consent is legally valid only en it is informed consent and when it occurs between a person

legal age (or in the case of a minor his or her parents or gal guardian) and the healthcare provider. Since this bill lis for parental consent it will protect the school districts d the state from liability suits. These suits could nceivably come as a result of side effects or complications of ntraceptives or abortions prescribed or performed without rental knowledge and consent. Contraceptives have also been own to fail at preventing pregnancy. Could the school district

state be liable when unwanted pregnancy occurs despite ntraceptive use if these contraceptives are dispensed through hool based health clinics without specific parental knowledge d consent?

There are a host of risks involved with early sexual tivity. Children need to be taught about these risks so that ey learn why it is very important for them to abstain from xual activity. The proposed legislation's promotion of stinence will be beneficial in the following seven major health sk areas.

First, sexually transmitted diseases are a major risk of rly sexual activity. These can result in incurable, painful nditions like herpes, death from AIDS, death from untreated philis, or infertility due to scar tissue formation.

A second risk associated with sexual activity is potential de effects from contraceptives. Birth control pills have a ng list of side effects which includes depression, nausea and raiting, weight gain, fluid retention, vaginal yeast infections, |h blood sugar, headaches, and blood clots. They increase i's risk of high blood pressure, stroke or heart attack >ecially if the person also smokes cigarettes. There is a [her risk of liver tumors and gallbladder disease among birth itrol pill users. IUDs can cause infections, heavy bleeding, 1 they can perforate the uterus. Contraceptive sponges can :rease one's risk of toxic shock syndrome and cause allergic ictions. Diaphragms can increase one's risk of bladder Sections and the spermicidal creams used with cervical caps, iphragms, and condoms can cause allergic reactions. None of ise contraceptives are 100% effective at preventing pregnancy 1 idoms and diaphragms may reduce one's risk of contracting rtain sexually transmitted diseases, but they are NOT 100% Liable!

Third, if a pregnant child deals with the pregnancy by zing an abortion she faces other very real risks. Infection i hemorrhage can occur. The uterus can be perforated. If • esthetics, antibiotics, or pain medications are used allergic actions can occur with the most serious reaction being iphylactic shock which may result in death. If the child is in : second trimester of pregnancy she will have to go through >or in order to abort her baby. Not only can second trimester >rtion be emotionally traumatic to a child, because she has to through labor, but it exposes her to more medications and rasive procedures, all of which carry their own side effects 1 complications.

Fourth, any person who aborts a baby has to deal emotionally :h what she has done. This "quick fix solution" may haunt her >r the rest of her life and it may have a harmful effect on a tture pregnancy even if this new baby is wanted. Dr. Lewis Mehl : Stanford University School of Medicine has found that (resolved conflicts from a past abortion can adversely effect a lild's relationship with her future child or children.

Fifth is the serious risk of pregnancy. This is a serious :oblem from many aspects, because it so drastically alters the lild's life both now and in the future. No matter what the lild does with her baby (whether putting it up for adoption, sorting it, or raising the baby herself) her life is forever langed. Finishing school or going to college may never happen ssulting in under-employment or being on welfare. A pregnant lild is a high risk for complications due to the fact that she 3 still growing herself. These complications can have >ng-lasting effects on both the child and her baby. Our )untry's high rate of premature and low birth weight babies and lr high rate of babies dying at birth is partly a reflection of lildren bearing children.

The sixth risk of early sexual activity is that the younger girl is when she starts having sex and the more partners she is the higher is her risk of developing cancer of the cervix. And finally, a little-acknowledged risk, but an extremely uportant one, is the effect of early sexual activity on our lildren's self-esteem. According to a study funded by the apartment of Health and Human Services under the Adolescent imily Life Act, children who become sexually active experience a >wering of their self-esteem. This study also found that girls id boys who become sexually active lose interest in going on for er education and that their grades frequently drop. With all of these risks and consequences of early sexual vity, it is imperative that we teach our children to "Just No" and act like we mean it by not handing out contraceptives abortions!

In summary, this legislation is excellent because:

1) Parents have a say in what will be taught. 2) Parents must give specific consent in order for their child to participate in a sex education course.

3) Parents must give their consent for their child to undergo psychological testing and treatment.

4) Since our present sex education programs do not work, abstinence is the only safe alternative to teach our children. This is because "Safe Sex" is not safe: There is a high risk of contagious diseases, cervical cancer and other physical and emotional side effects that are far from "safe".

5) The bill promotes a consistent message: NO means NO, not No here are some contraceptives, go to it. 6) The bill addresses the legal/liability/insurance issues of contraceptives and abortion services being provided without specific parental knowledge and consent by prohibiting these services in our schools. For these reasons I believe this proposed bill is an llent piece of legislation that truly does protect parents children. Yes, there are some children who will not listen

>ur instruction on this matter; just as there are some dren who will use drugs and alcohol. Do we stop the "Just

No" to drugs program, because some children will not listen?

: would be irresponsible. This bill presents a valid approach

.he rising rates of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted sases among children. Please "Just Say YES" to this

.slationl Thank you for your time and consideration.

Respectfully submitted,

(Mrs.) Kathryn A. Forsyth, R.N.

75 Iroquois Drive

Pittsburgh, PA 15228

] I

REFERENCES Baker, C. E.: Physicians' Desk Reference. Oradell, NJ: Medical Economics Company, 1979.

Hamilton, H. K.: Nursing 86 Drug Handbook. Springhouse, PA: Springhouse Corporation, 1986.

Jensen, M. D.,Benson, R. C, and Bobak, I. M.: Maternity Care: The Nurse and Family. Saint Lewis: C.V. Mosby Company, 1977.

Peterson, G.: Birthing Normally: A Personal Growth Approach To Childbirth. Berkeley, CA: Mindbody Press, 1981.