BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Gloria Romero, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 1300
AUTHOR: Correa
INTRODUCED: February 19, 2010
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: April 21, 2010
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Lynn Lorber
SUBJECT : Teen Dating Violence Prevention
KEY POLICY ISSUES
Should the State Board of Education be required to
incorporate teen dating violence and sexual violence
curriculum into the health framework?
Should schools be statutorily authorized to provide teen
dating violence prevention education when they are already
allowed to do so (permissive Education Code)?
Should parents be able to opt-out of this instruction?
Are existing references to dating relationships and violence
in the health standards and framework insufficient?
Is this bill premature considering the process of updating
frameworks has been suspended until the 2013-14 school year?
SUMMARY:
This bill authorizes schools to provide teen dating violence
prevention education and requires the State Board of
Education (SBE) to incorporate teen dating violence and
sexual violence curriculum into the health curriculum
framework.
BACKGROUND
Current law:
1) Authorizes schools to offer health education. Current
law defines "comprehensive health education programs" to
include activities designed to ensure that, among other
things, pupils will receive instruction to aid them in
SB 1300
Page 2
making decisions and school districts may voluntarily
provide pupils with instruction on preventative health
care. (Education Code 51890)
2) Authorizes schools to offer comprehensive sexual health
education. Current law provides that one of the
purposes of the California Comprehensive
Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention Education Act is
to encourage a pupil to develop healthy attitudes
concerning dating, among other things. (EC 51930 and
51933)
3) Authorizes schools to use School Safety Block Grant
funds to, among other things, provide age-appropriate
instruction in domestic violence prevention, dating
violence prevention, and interpersonal violence
prevention. This funding is included in the categorical
flexibility pursuant to SB 4 of the Third Extraordinary
Session (Chapter 12, 2009), whereby schools are
authorized to use funding from 43 categorical programs
for any educational purpose. (EC 32228)
SB 4 of the Third Extraordinary Session (Chapter 12, February
2009), for the 2008-09 and 2009-10 fiscal years, suspended
the requirement that schools provide pupils with
instructional materials within 24 months of adoption by the
SBE. SB 4 also provided categorical flexibility for many
programs, including the Instructional Materials Fund.
(60422.1 and 42605)
The processes for reviewing frameworks and adopting
instructional materials has been suspended since July 2009,
pursuant to AB 2 of the Fourth Extraordinary Session (Chapter
2, July 2009), which among other things, prohibited the SBE
from reviewing frameworks and adopting instructional
materials until the 2013-14 school year. AB 2 also extended
to the 2012-13 fiscal year the suspension of the requirement
to purchase instructional materials within any specific
period of time following adoption of those materials by the
SBE. (EC 60200.7 and 60422.1)
February 2010 is "National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and
Prevention Month (ACR 100, Res. Ch. 3, 2010).
ANALYSIS
SB 1300
Page 3
This bill authorizes schools to provide teen dating violence
prevention education and requires the SBE to incorporate teen
dating violence and sexual violence curriculum into the
health curriculum framework. Specifically, this bill:
1) Authorizes a school district to provide teen dating
violence prevention education consisting of
age-appropriate instruction, as developed by the SBE, as
part of the sexual health and health education program
it provides to pupils in grades 7-12.
2) Requires the SBE to incorporate teen dating violence and
sexual violence curriculum into the health curriculum
framework at its next revision. This bill requires the
SBE to consult with the Department of Public Health, the
Attorney General, and domestic violence and sexual
assault prevention advocates for advice on the
development of grade-level concepts and content
guidelines to be incorporated into the sexual health and
health education program currently taught in grades
7-12.
3) Requires a school district that elects to offer teen
dating violence prevention education to include
instruction and materials regarding teen dating violence
and sexual violence that include methods for doing all
of the following:
a) Recognizing what constitutes a healthy
relationship.
b) Identifying teen dating violence, verbal
abuse, nonverbal abuse, physical intimidation,
stalking, physical abuse, inappropriate sexual
behavior, sexual harassment, sexual violence,
sexual assault, and Internet abuse and cyber
bullying.
c) Locating sources for legal, medical, mental
health, and other supportive services regarding
teen dating violence.
4) Requires a school district that elects to offer teen
dating violence prevention education to satisfy criteria
that is consistent with current law regarding sex
education, including the information must be medically
accurate and objective, age appropriate, available to
English learners, encourage communication with parents,
SB 1300
Page 4
and teach respect for marriage and committed
relationships.
5) Requires each school district that provides teen dating
violence prevention education to notify the parent or
guardian of each pupil about instruction planned for the
coming year, and research on pupil health behaviors and
risks. The notice must include all of the following,
which is consistent with current law regarding sex
education and HIV/AIDS prevention education:
a) Educational materials are available for
inspection.
b) Whether the prevention education will be
taught by school personnel or by outside
consultants (if by consultants, the date of
instruction, name of organization of each speaker,
and statement of the right of parents to request a
copy of this section of law).
c) Explanation of the right to request a copy of
this section of law.
d) The parent may request in writing that his or
her child not receive teen dating violence
prevention education.
e) Upon written request to the school principal,
a parent shall be allowed to examine the
instruction materials at the school in which the
child is enrolled.
6) Authorizes anonymous, voluntary and confidential
research and evaluation tools to measure pupils' health
behaviors and risks, including questionnaires and
surveys containing age-appropriate questions about the
pupil's attitudes concerning teen dating violence to be
administered to any pupil in grades 7-12. The
questionnaire or survey may be given only if the parent
is first notified in writing that it is going to be
administered and the pupil's parent is given the
opportunity to review the questionnaire or survey and to
request in writing that his or her child not
participate. This is consistent with current law
regarding sex education.
7) Prohibits a pupil from attending any class in teen
dating violence prevention education, or participating
in any questionnaire or survey, if the school has
received a written request from the pupil's parent
SB 1300
Page 5
excusing the pupil from participation. This bill also
prohibits a pupil from being subject to disciplinary
action, academic penalty or other sanction if the
pupil's parent declines to permit the pupil to receive
teen dating violence prevention education or to
participate in a questionnaire or survey. This bill
requires schools to provide an alternative educational
activity for pupils who are not participating in teen
dating violence prevention education or the
questionnaire or survey. All are consistent with
current law regarding sex education and HIV/AIDS
prevention education.
8) Authorizes schools to use school district personnel or
outside consultants who are trained in the appropriate
courses, which is consistent with current law regarding
sexual education and HIV/AIDS prevention education.
9) Defines the following terms:
a) Abuse of property.
b) Dating partner.
c) Healthy relationship.
d) Inappropriate sexual behavior.
e) Internet abuse or cyber bullying.
f) Nonverbal abuse.
g) Obscene materials.
h) Physical abuse.
i) Physical intimidation.
j) Reproductive control.
aa) Sexual assault.
bb) Sexual harassment.
cc) Sexual violence.
dd) Stalking.
ee) Teen dating violence.
ff) Use of weapons.
gg) Written materials.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill : According to the author, "public
schools currently do not have to educate employees and
pupils about dating violence, nor do they have to have a
response policy and protocol for complaints of teen
dating violence. SB 1300 would provide guidelines for
dating and sexual violence prevention on campus and aid
in preventing dating violence by spreading awareness."
SB 1300
Page 6
2) Permissive Education Code . This bill authorizes an
action that can already be undertaken under existing
law. Given this, the Committee may wish to consider
whether the bill is necessary.
3) Parental opt-out . This bill requires schools that
choose to provide teen dating violence prevention
education to notify parents prior to this instruction,
and allows parents to request that their child not
receive teen dating violence prevention education, which
is consistent with current law relative to sex education
and HIV/AIDS prevention education. Some have raised
concerns that the notification requirement will be too
burdensome for schools and that this instruction is a
personal safety issue that is too important to allow
parents to opt-out. Should parents be given this
choice?
4) Already in health framework and standards ? The SBE
adopted the health education framework in 2002, and
adopted the health content standards in March 2008. The
content standards and framework currently include some
references to dating violence, characteristics of
healthy relationships, and recognizing harmful or
abusive dating relationships. However, neither the
standards nor the framework include the level of detail
about teen dating violence prevention that would be
incorporated into the curriculum pursuant to this bill.
5) Schedule for revising frameworks . The health framework
was scheduled for review in 2011 but the entire schedule
to revise the frameworks and adopt instructional
materials has been suspended pursuant to AB 2 of the
Fourth Extraordinary Session (Chapter 2, July 2009),
which prohibited the SBE from reviewing frameworks and
adopting instructional materials until the 2013-14
school year. Considering this suspension, is this bill
premature?
6) Prior and related legislation .
SB 1290 (Kehoe, 2010) requires the State
Board of Education to include self-defense
instruction and safety instruction in the physical
education content standards for grades 7-12. SB
1290 is pending in this Committee.
SB 1300
Page 7
SB 1278 (Wyland, 2010) essentially removes
the process of instructional material adoptions
from categorical flexibility, and establishes a new
timeline for the adoption of materials for specific
subjects (e.g. Health in 2015). SB 1278 is
scheduled to be heard in this Committee on April
21, 2010.
AB 589 (Levine, 2007) would have required
school districts to develop policies, procedures,
and training for school employees regarding the
prevention of teen dating violence and sexual
violence. AB 589 was held in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
AB 506 (Monta?ez, 2005) would have required
each school district to establish a policy and
protocol, as specified, for dealing with incidents
of teen dating violence involving middle school and
high school students. AB 506 was held in the
Assembly Appropriations Committee.
AB 558 (Jackson, 2000) would have
authorized age-appropriate instruction in domestic
violence prevention in grades 1-12 and required the
Department of Education to identify and distribute
information and a model curriculum to school
districts and county offices of education. AB 558
was vetoed by Governor Davis, whose veto message
read:
While I am supportive of efforts to reduce domestic
violence, I cannot support this bill for the
following reasons. Existing law already requires
instruction in the principles and practices of
individual, family, and community health. In
addition, if districts chose to provide such
instruction this bill could result in redirections
of up to $7 million away from core academic
programs. Any such issues should be addressed
through the annual Budget Act. Finally, this bill
contains no provision for parents to exempt their
children from this instruction if they so choose.
AB 578 (Honda, 2000) would have required
the Superintendent of Public Instruction to develop
SB 1300
Page 8
training standards for teachers on domestic
violence and sexual assault recognition and
appropriate prevention responses. This bill
stipulated the use of these standards as optional
for school districts. AB 578 was held in the
Senate Appropriations Committee.
SUPPORT
American congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
California Association of School Psychologists
California Medical Association
California State PTA
California State Sheriffs' Association
Junior Leagues of California, State Public Affairs Committee
OPPOSITION
None received.