bassman2546
12-03-2010, 07:35 PM
A teacher in Montreal administered a sexually explicit quiz to her Grade 8 students, was suspended and is under investigation. Would this have happened if sex ed was still part of their curriculum?
A teacher in Quebec is under investigation and has been suspended after administering a sexually explicit quiz to her Grade 8 students (http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/12/01/16389716.html).
The teacher wrote it herself and gave the multiple-choice test as part of a religion and ethics course. When confronted about its controversial content she claimed her quiz was meant to fight societal prejudices about sexuality. Some of the questions addressed sperm, anal sex, lesbian sex and went as far as to ask whether or not "blacks have bigger penises" or if it was agreed that "all sexual positions are comfortable."
Without having seen the actual quiz, I have to say it seems completely ludicrous that those types of questions or topics would have anything to do with a religion and ethics course. I'm sure there are other ways to teach about sexual prejudice, without being so explicit.
That said, the teacher was likely well-intentioned but just didn't realize how far she'd gone in her questioning. If we think 13 year-olds have no idea what anal sex is or are unfamiliar with the other sex topics in her quiz then we're probably being a little too naive. A good chunk of my Grade 8 friends lost their virginity at that age. So in that respect it's good to expose students to ideas, ask questions and to talk about topics that most would deem taboo. When it comes to sexual education, open communications is the key.
The problem here is that there is no sex education. At least not in Quebec, where in 2008 the province under went massive education reforms and sex-ed was cut out of the classroom and taken off the curriculum. (http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/BritishColumbiaHome/20080309/sex_education_080309/) The idea was that teachers would now integrate sexual education into a variety of classes. So for instance your math teacher could decide to include a lesson on sex randomly, or alternatively never talk about it once.
While touted as a more "holistic" educational approach it is also optional and some Quebec teachers opt never to mention sex. It's the reason women's groups and health professionals including Quebec Women's Federation and Quebec's Planned Pregnancy Federation l have been advocating for more sex education (http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/09/01/quebec-coalition-sex-ed-inadequate.htm) in the province.
It's more than likely that the teacher in this particular case was taking matters into her own hands in a well intentioned but misguided attempt at injecting some sex ed into her classroom. The question is, did she go too far?
Some of the comments made about the article were actually quite appauling. Some blaming the parents for the fact that this is how kids must learn about sex these days. Are you fucking serious? Since when does a student have to know if black have larger penises? How does that contribute to their sexual education. I honestly think that they caught a predator before she had a chance to take further illegal steps.
A teacher in Quebec is under investigation and has been suspended after administering a sexually explicit quiz to her Grade 8 students (http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/12/01/16389716.html).
The teacher wrote it herself and gave the multiple-choice test as part of a religion and ethics course. When confronted about its controversial content she claimed her quiz was meant to fight societal prejudices about sexuality. Some of the questions addressed sperm, anal sex, lesbian sex and went as far as to ask whether or not "blacks have bigger penises" or if it was agreed that "all sexual positions are comfortable."
Without having seen the actual quiz, I have to say it seems completely ludicrous that those types of questions or topics would have anything to do with a religion and ethics course. I'm sure there are other ways to teach about sexual prejudice, without being so explicit.
That said, the teacher was likely well-intentioned but just didn't realize how far she'd gone in her questioning. If we think 13 year-olds have no idea what anal sex is or are unfamiliar with the other sex topics in her quiz then we're probably being a little too naive. A good chunk of my Grade 8 friends lost their virginity at that age. So in that respect it's good to expose students to ideas, ask questions and to talk about topics that most would deem taboo. When it comes to sexual education, open communications is the key.
The problem here is that there is no sex education. At least not in Quebec, where in 2008 the province under went massive education reforms and sex-ed was cut out of the classroom and taken off the curriculum. (http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/BritishColumbiaHome/20080309/sex_education_080309/) The idea was that teachers would now integrate sexual education into a variety of classes. So for instance your math teacher could decide to include a lesson on sex randomly, or alternatively never talk about it once.
While touted as a more "holistic" educational approach it is also optional and some Quebec teachers opt never to mention sex. It's the reason women's groups and health professionals including Quebec Women's Federation and Quebec's Planned Pregnancy Federation l have been advocating for more sex education (http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/09/01/quebec-coalition-sex-ed-inadequate.htm) in the province.
It's more than likely that the teacher in this particular case was taking matters into her own hands in a well intentioned but misguided attempt at injecting some sex ed into her classroom. The question is, did she go too far?
Some of the comments made about the article were actually quite appauling. Some blaming the parents for the fact that this is how kids must learn about sex these days. Are you fucking serious? Since when does a student have to know if black have larger penises? How does that contribute to their sexual education. I honestly think that they caught a predator before she had a chance to take further illegal steps.