Sex Education Curriculum Reform: Promoting the Well-Being of Children
Introduction
The institutionalized education system has arguably focused only on a singular dimension of the well-being of its students, which is the intellectual development through academic instruction (Miller, 2015). In a world where standardized tests and academic preparation are the keyholders to advancement within education and social mobility, there are certain aspects of development that are neglected. One of the areas that the institutionalized education system struggles to adequately address among young people is sex education.
Sex education in public schools traces its roots back to the 1800s. During this time, many called for the need to regulate sexuality and introduce practices and preventative measures to reduce risk in response to outbreaks of syphilis and gonorrhea, as these diseases were considered to be threats to national security and American families. The household had always been the place where conversations about sex and health took place. However, during the Progressive Era within the United States from 1880 to 1920, movements began to promote sex education within schools instead. Introducing the topic of sex to young people in a formal manner was controversial at first, and it was centered on abstinence before and faithfulness after marriage between a man and a woman (Huber and Firmin, 2014).
Society has evolved significantly since then, and the norms of today are certainly more progressive than the Progressive Era of the early 20th century. Along with these changes comes a need to restructure sex education curriculum within schools and to shift it towards a comprehensive and holistic consideration of the student, taking into account existing nuances and intersectionalities of social identity.
Youth Development Approach Theory
This need to review and reform sex education curriculum is rooted in the youth development approach theory of child well-being. In the mid-1970s, Orville Brim and Nick Zill at the Foundation for Child Development called for a comprehensive set of social indicators on the state of the child across domains and across ecological contexts (Lippman, 2007). This resulted in a formal list of indicators of children’s well-being, which included child health, education, economic security, social environment, and social development (Brown, 1997). The two indicators most closely related to sex education are child health and social development.
Comprehensive Sex Education
Comprehensive sex education (CSE) distills science-based, medically accurate and complete, age-, developmentally, and culturally appropriate sexual health information to young people to address their physical, mental, social, and emotional dimensions as they relate to their sexuality. CSE includes information and development of skills concerning a range of topics that address human development, personal skills, relationships, and sexual behavior. These include topics like abstinence, sexual health, society, and culture. The CSE curriculum is taught by trained educators in a sequence throughout a child’s schooling from K-12. In fact, less than half of all high schools and a mere 20 percent of middle schools in the United States have been teaching all of the 16 topics that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention deems “critical sexual health education topics” (SIECUS, 2017). Some of these topics include: how to create and sustain healthy and respectful relationships; communication and negotiation skills; goal-setting and decision-making skills; how to access valid and reliable information, products, and services related to HIV, STDs, and pregnancy (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). In other words, CSE goes beyond the standard education about sex that is grounded in anatomy and sexuality, and challenges students to learn about sex through the lens of healthy emotional relationships and choices based on context.
Concerns Being Addressed
CSE leads to an improvement in academic success; prevention of child sexual abuse, dating violence, and bullying; development of healthier relationships; a delay in sexual activity; reduction in unintended pregnancy, HIV, and other sexually-transmitted infections (STIs); as well as a reduction of sexual health disparities among LGBTQ young people (SIECUS, 2017). Here are two examples of how sexual activity can impact individuals’ educational, physical, emotional, and social well-being. When a teenage girl unintentionally becomes pregnant and does not have the social or economic capital to continue pursuing an education in spite of the pregnancy, she faces the threat of being undereducated and unable to secure a lucrative well-paying job to financially support her family. When a teenage boy’s sexual advances are met with resistance, and he is unable to properly identify and interpret these signals, he puts his partner at risk of being sexually assaulted while also putting himself at risk of being incarcerated for rape charges, thus interrupting the course of the lives of both him and his partner. The awareness and knowledge around sexual activity that CSE provides is a strategy that could be used to help address the micro causes of economic and educational disparity and inequity in communities.
State of the Environment
To further explore recommendations to curriculum, it is crucial to review the current state of the environment of sex education in schools, as well as of reported sexual activity among young people. As of March 2016, all states are somehow involved in providing sex education to children in public schools. There are also several states that either require parents to consent to their children receiving sex education or allow parents to opt-out of instruction on behalf of their children (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2016). Half of the approximately 20 million estimated STIs in the United States each year continue to occur among people ages 15 through 24. This age group also accounts for more than 20 percent of new HIV infections in 2014, with HIV infection rates particularly increasing among Black and Latino young men who have sex with men (SIECUS, 2017). Moreover, young people who receive comprehensive sex education as opposed to abstinence-only programs are more likely to delay their sexual activity and are also more likely to use contraception (Manlove et al., 2004).
There is also a large number of literature about the impact of sex education from the perspective of the students themselves. Analyzing this feedback can help to inform recommendations to sex education curriculum. Because the most salient desires for teenagers are emotional, relational, and interpersonal, there is a need for sex education that considers young people as sexual beings that have sexual desires and sexual inclinations. Abstinence-only programs inadvertently shame or dismiss this reality by promoting sex education that is rooted in avoidance of all types of sexual activity (Adams and Williams, 2011). Students also want to be seen as agents of self-choice or, in other words, as people who have the right to make their own decisions about sexual activity and who need support in navigating these choices. They have expressed a desire to receive more sex education content pertaining to emotions in relationships, teenage parenthood, abortion, and how to make sexual activity more pleasurable (Allen, 2008). Students also want to receive information according to a theory-based curriculum that is relatable to them in terms of attitudes, expectations, and culture. The simple and standard delivery of information about STIs and safe sex is no longer enough. Educators and practitioners must be able to teach this content from the lens of the students, anticipating certain barriers like negative attitudes towards contraception and low self-efficacy in combating risky sexual behavior (Walcott et al, 2011). From this feedback directly from young people, abstinence-only programs fail to properly educate students about access to preventative measures to avoid pregnancies and STIs, as well as helpful resources if young people do find themselves in sexual predicaments.
Additionally, cultural context matters in this discussion. Overly-simplistic and generalized sex education programming may not be effective across cultures, demographics, and even neighborhoods. For example, Latina youth may find more value in discussions that validate family-oriented values and capitalize on relationships with a dating partner and other important friends and family members. Prevention of pregnancy among young Latinas may perhaps be more effective if teens, partners, and parents are supported in planning for the future, for instance, by providing information and aid in college preparation (Adams and Williams, 2011).
In its current form, sex education is centered around an implied context of sexual activity as one that is engaged in between a male and a female (McNeill, 2013). This heteronormative philosophy is quite detrimental to the proper growth and development of all students, particularly LGBTQ youth who may or may not be engaging in sexual activity with same-sex partners. Moreover, heteronormative tendencies woven into sex education consequently promotes homophobia in schools and sends a message that non-heterosexual activity is abnormal and not worthy of inclusion in sex education pedagogy (McNeill, 2013). As a result, LGBTQ youth are not receiving proper education and resources around safe sex practices, and have to resort to community centers or, even worse, not receive assistance at all, which may lead to contraction of HIV and STIs.
Recommendations
In an effort to help address the micro causes of economic and educational disparity and inequity in communities, below are several recommendations that aim to improve the curriculum and delivery of comprehensive sex education to young people.
Ensure that sex education programs teach all of the CDC’s 16 critical sexual education topics. The comprehensive list provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) outline an all-encompassing curriculum that positions sexual activity within the same context as emotions, relationships, contraception, smart decision-making and goal-setting, and communication. Schools must meet these minimum topic requirements and adhere to guidelines and best practices provided by the CDC and the Department of Education. This approach acknowledges young people as sexual beings with sexual desires who require adequate guidance around their sexual choices.
Suspend parental ability to consent to or opt-out of sex education instruction for their children. Teens across ethnicity and gender have expressed a desire to gain more information and support from adults about their romantic and sexual relationships (Adams and Williams, 2011). When parents deny their children this type of education, they expose their children to a lack of awareness and preparedness around sexual health.
Hire sex education teachers who display knowledge of cultural competencies. The “one size fits all” approach to sex education is not a sustainable and effective model. Cultural context matters, with family dynamics and societal norms playing key influencers in sexual behavior of young people. Practitioners should be able to deliver content, while taking into account the nuances and intersectionalities that exist based on students’ social identities.
Eliminate heteronormative pedagogy within sex education. With the reported presence of rising HIV infection rates among Black and Latino young men who have sex with men, sex education needs to acknowledge homosexual activity to effectively educate all students about all types of sexual activities. Doing so will also aid in the dismantling of homophobia in schools.
Conclusion
When sex education fails to seriously consider the content suggestions and perceptions of young people about their own sexuality, it risks their disengagement from its messages (Allen, 2008). Comprehensive sex education has shown evidence of improving academic success, preventing sexual abuse and dating violence, and reducing unintended pregnancies and STIs (SIECUS, 2017). Effective sex education curriculum will contribute to ensuring the overall well-being of children. Sex education should indeed start to be viewed as intervention and prevention programs that not only address sexual health, but also address the micro causes of economic and educational disparity and inequity in communities.
References:
Adams, H. L., & Williams, L. R. (2011). What they wish they would have known: Support for comprehensive sexual education from Mexican American and White adolescents' dating and sexual desires. Children And Youth Services Review, 33 1875-1885.
Allen, L. (2008). 'They Think You Shouldn't be Having Sex Anyway': Young People's Suggestions for Improving Sexuality Education Content. Sexualities, 11(5), 573-594.
Brown, B. V. (1997). Indicators of children’s well-being: A review of current indicators based on data from the federal statistical system. Indicators of Children’s Well-Being (Russell Sage Foundation, New York).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). 16 Critical Sexual Education Topics. School Health Profiles.
Huber, V. i., and Firmin, M. f. (2014). A History of Sex Education in the United States Since 1900. International Journal Of Educational Reform, 23(1), 25-51.
Lippman, L. (2007). Indicators and Indices of Child Well-being: A brief American History. Social Indicators Research, vol.83, 1, 39-53
Manlove, J., Ryan, S., & Franzetta, K. (2004). Contraceptive use and consistency in US teenagers' most recent sexual relationships. Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health, 36(6), 265-275.
McNeill, T. (2013). Sex education and the promotion of heteronormativity. Sexualities, 16(7), 826-846.
Miller, Jennifer. (2015). 5 Holistic Educational Philosophies to Inspire Your Child. Noodle.com. https://www.noodle.com/articles/the-philosophies-behind-a-holistic-approach-to-education
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2016). State Policies on Sex Education in Schools. https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-policies-on-sex-education-in-schools.aspx
SIECUS. (2017). Promote Adolescent Sexual Health by Advancing Sexuality Education Fact Sheet. http://www.siecus.com
Walcott, C. M., Chenneville, T., & Tarquini, S. (2011). Relationship between recall of sex education and college students' sexual attitudes and behavior. Psychology In The Schools, 48(8), 828-842.