Noise drowning out analysis of sex-ed course
Published:Saturday | June 21, 2014 | 12:00 AM
THE EDITOR, Sir:
The presentation of arguments and counterarguments surrounding the delivery of age-inappropriate sex education materials to Jamaica's most vulnerable group of children is skewed and unfortunate.
Spurious conclusions are being drawn. The stark reality is that journalists are expressing disgust at the justification of the materials, while citizens continue to be led down the pathways of darkness and confusion.
In deciding whether the materials ought to have been be delivered, due care and scrutiny should have been given to the development of vulnerable children, and the content of the curriculum, respectively. Being the final arbiter, agents of the State, whose responsibilities are grounded in public law, should have facilitated this process. What is now happening is a colourful party that is grounded in showmanship and a menu of red herring.
But, how does one get the truth? Are the sex-education materials for vulnerable children age-inappropriate? A rigorous way to make the determination is to identify correlations. And, it is recommended that one can start by asking the following questions:
Scenario 1 - What is the correlation between 'independent coalition sex-education curriculum' (independent variable) and 'the child's level of sexual development' (dependent variable)?
Scenario 2 - What is the correlation between 'agent(s) of the state sex-education curriculum' (IVs), and 'the child's level of sexual development (DV)?
There are indeed various statistical tests that will determine the level of confidence in the findings of both scenarios. As such, this approach will present an opportunity for journalists and citizens alike, to analyse the responses of the child separately (and independently) from those administering the curricula.
It is at this point one can objectively determine whether or not the party of showmanship and red herring is a continuing thereof, or the end of.
ANTHONY WOODBURN