Raleigh, North Carolina — The State Board of Education has approved new healthy living standards for schools to implement within two years. The healthy living standards include education on hygiene, nutrition, physical activity, anatomy and reproductive health.
The revised standards haven’t sparked much debate at the State Board of Education meeting, but some conservative groups have voiced opposition to the new standards, calling them “too vague” and arguing they leave too much room for interpretation by educators and could lead to inappropriate lesson plans on reproductive health that don’t emphasize abstinence enough, said Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the North Carolina Values Coalition.
“They don’t teach abstinence [sexual] “Sex education activities should be the expected standard of behavior for all school-age children,” Fitzgerald said. That’s not what the current standards are, she said, and her group is frustrated that the new standards don’t fix what they see as shortcomings in the current standards.
The future standards, like the current standards, would require teaching students that abstinence is the surest way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, which is required by law. They would also require students to evaluate the benefits of abstaining from sex before marriage and the risks of making other decisions and using FDA-approved contraception, which is also required by law. Fitzgerald wants the standards to explicitly state the “expected standard” of abstinence and not teach other decisions as options.
But state board members and the North Carolina Department of Education disagree with Fitzgerald, arguing that the standards’ other implementation documents are far more specific and ensure schools comply with the law.
“The standards don’t have to be exhaustive of the actual statute because that would be duplicative,” board Chairman Eric Davis said after the board voted. “Our standards are set to help teachers make sure their students know what’s required no matter what the situation is.” [content] “In this region, the standards passed today are in line with the law.”
The board approved the standards in a 7-1 vote, with board member Olivia Oxendine voting against. Oxendine said the standards don’t fully incorporate state law. Board members Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, Treasurer Dale Folwell and Donna Tipton Rogers did not attend the meeting.
State law requires schools to promote premarital abstinence and monogamous heterosexual marriage as the only sure way to avoid pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Davis said the new standards don’t change the law. Schools still have to follow that law, and the new standards’ implementation document (which has yet to be written) always addresses legal requirements, he said.
Course standards are a framework of requirements that teachers must ensure students learn: For example, second-graders must learn about proper personal hygiene, including not sharing combs or toothbrushes.
The course standards are a gateway to more specific guidance on what educators should actually teach. In the coming months, the Public Education Department will issue “explanatory documents” for the standards, essentially detailing how educators should use them. These documents will list examples of lessons that might comply with the new standards, such as having students list ways to prevent the spread of germs at school and at home.
The current document outlining the standards argues that abstinence is a “positive choice” for young people and lists a variety of skills, including communication skills, that teens need to master in order to make that choice. The high school document suggests that students role-play saying “no,” for example. It also teaches students that abstinence is the surest way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases, but makes no mention of marriage or sexual orientation.
These unboxing documents will not be updated to reflect the new standards for the next few months.
Course standards are updated every five to 10 years to reflect new research, policies and teaching methods that lead to improvements, and while this year’s revisions have been planned for years, the health standards hadn’t been updated since 2011.
The changes approved Thursday were not a major overhaul of the current standards, but they did add clarity in a number of areas.
Criticism of the revised health standards reflects a larger debate over new social studies standards in 2021. At the time, conservative groups opposed the changes, saying the standards were vague.
After the social studies standards are revised, conservative groups said they will be keeping an eye on upcoming revisions to health standards.
