Objective: To assess an intervention to familiarise parents with children’s books for use in primary (5 11years) sex and relationship education (SRE) classes.Method: Case study of a 7 week programme in one London primary school, using ethnographic observation, semi structured interviews and focus groups with parents (n=7) and key stakeholders (n=4), and pre and post programme self completion questionnaires (n=9).Results: Parents reported increased understanding of the SRE curriculum and awareness of relevant children’s books, enhanced interactions with their children on SRE topics and some positive effects on partners and attitudes towards the school. There was increased confidence in addressing issues in the SRE curriculum for parents of 8 to 10 year olds, although reduced confidence for one mother.Conclusions: Familiarising parents with materials has the potential to enhance SRE, by improving coherence between educators’ and parents’ messages to children about sex and relationships, increased discussion of SRE topics in parent child conversations and reduced parental anxiety about topics such as sexual orientation. Future challenges of involving fathers, scalability and sustainability highlight the dilemma of how best to enable parental choice or make equalities interventions..

These exciting pieces provide us with a glimpse into that stage in her development when the painterly techniques of her earlier work ran headlong into the more freewheeling design concerns that drove her work forward in the 1990s.” Robert AyresARTnews, Summer 2005″Moving away from the dense packed compositions full of bright color juxtaposed with dark, hovering, ominous shapes, Sochynsky is finding a new voice in small whimsical floating objects. Individual shapes, often ambiguous and imbued with a personal twist, rendering them momentarily reminiscent of recognizable forms. And yet they simultaneously obscure any particular association, as they hover hauntingly reminding of us of the often surreal juxtaposition of images found in her monumental works.

He is charged with “incitement of insurrection.”Senators, many of whom fled for safety the day of the attack, watched Tuesday’s graphic videos of the Trump supporters who battled past police to storm the halls, Trump flags waving. More video is expected Wednesday, including some that hasn’t been seen before.The prosecutors are arguing that Trump’s words weren just free speech but part of “the big lie” his relentless efforts to sow doubts about the election results. Those began long before the votes were tabulated, revving up his followers to “stop the steal though there was no evidence of substantial fraud.Trump knew very well what would happen when he took to the microphone at the outdoor White House rally that day, almost to the hour that Congress gaveled in to certify Biden’s win, said Rep.