Objective: The aim of the current study was to examine adolescents’ perceptions of the quality of a Sex and Relationship Education (SRE) intervention, their preferences for sources of SRE and how these vary as a function of gender, school’s faith and school type.
Design: A non-experimental design was used.
Setting: The participants (N = 759 adolescent girls [n = 448] and boys [n = 326]), who had attended an SRE intervention and had previously been given formal SRE within the school they attended, completed a survey questionnaire.
Method: A questionnaire was designed to assess perceptions and preference of the intervention. The data were analysed using logistic regression.
Results: Adolescents judged the sex education intervention to be of high quality and enjoyed being taught by sexual-health workers. Preferred sources of SRE included sexual-health workers, parents and peers as well as the media. Gender, school’s faith (Church of England or Catholic) and school type (mainstream, special needs) were predictors of preference for various aspects of SRE.
Conclusion: The results highlight the crucial role of experienced qualified SRE educators, but also the supplementary role of parents and peers as well as the auxiliary role of Internet sites, magazines, phone lines and schools. Stereotypical preferences of boys and girls outside SRE seem to be perpetuated in SRE, and special needs and mainstream adolescents’ preferences are consistent with their communication and education outside SRE.
Department of Education and Employment (DfEE).Sex and relationship education guidance (1006/2000). London : HMSO, 2000.
2.
Blake S., Katrak Z.Faith, values and sex & relationship education. London : National Children’s Bureau, 2002.
3.
Lynch J., Blake S.Sex, alcohol and other drugs. London: National Children’s Bureau, 2004 (p. 35).
4.
Novilla LB, Barnes MD, De La Cruz NG, Williams PN, Rogers J.Public health perspectives on the family: An ecological approach to promoting health in the family and community. Family & Community Health, 2006: 29(1): 28-42.
5.
Pike A.Family relationships in middle childhood. London : National Children’s Bureau, 2006.
6.
Weaver AD, Byers SA, Sears HA, Cohen JN, Randall HES.Sexual health education at school and at home: Attitudes and experiences of new Brunswick parents. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality , 2002: 11(1): 19-31.
7.
Anonymous.Abstinence-only education policies and programs: A position paper of the society for adolescent medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 2006 : 38: 83-7.
8.
Bleakley A., Hennessay M., Fishbein M.Public opinion on sex education in sex education. Archive of Paediatric Medicine, 2006: 160: 1151-6.
9.
Thomas R.Religion, ethnicity & sex education: Exploring the issues. London: National Children’s Bureau , 1993 (pp. 73-9).
10.
Klein M.America’s war on sex: The attack on law, lust and liberty. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Publishers / Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006 (p. 212).
11.
Rose S.Going too far? Sex, sin and social policy. Social Forces, 2005: 84(2): 1207-32.
12.
Qualification and Curriculum Authority/Department of Education and Employment.National curriculum handbook for secondary school teachers. London: QCA/DfEE, 1999.
13.
Rautopuro J. , Atjonen P., Puurtinen S., Pyykkonen P.Students’ selection between virtual and traditional exam: factors explaining the preferences to choose the study mode. Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University College Dublin, 7-10 September 2005 (p. 8). Online. Available: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/143172.htm (accesses 20 November 2007)
14.
Wolitski RJ , Fishbein M., Johnson WD, Schnell DJ, Esacove A.Sources of HIV information among injecting drug users: Association with gender, ethnicity, and risk behaviour. AIDS Care, 1996: 8(5): 541-55.
15.
Haggstrom-Nordin E., Sandberg J., Hanson U., Tyden T.‘It’s everywhere!!’ Young Swedish peoples thoughts and reflections about pornography . Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 2006: 20(4): 386-93.
16.
Jochen P., Valkenberg PMAdolescents’ exposure to a sexualized media and their notions of women as sex objects. Sex Roles, 2007: 5(5-6): 381-395.
17.
Subrahmanyam K., Smahel D., Greenfield P.Connecting developmental constructions to the Internet: Identity presentation and sexual exploration in online teen chat rooms. Developmental Psychology, 2006 : 42(3): 395-406.
18.
Nonoyama M. , Tsurugi Y., Shirai C., Ishikawa Y., Horiguchi M.Influences of sex-related information for STD prevention. Journal of Adolescent Health, 2005: 36(5): 442-5.
19.
Taylor LDAll for him: Articles about sex in American lad magazines. Sex Roles, 2005: 52(3-4): 153-63.
20.
Willemson TMWidening the gender gap: Teenage magazines for girls and boys. Sex Roles, 1998: 38(9-10): 851-61.
21.
Kim JL, Ward M.Pleasure reading: Associations between young women’s sexual attitudes and their reading of contemporary women’s magazines. Psychology of Women’s Quarterly, 2004: 28: 48-56.
22.
Baker CNImages of women’s sexuality in advertisements: A content analysis of black and white-orientated women’s and men’s magazines. Sex Roles, 2005: 52(1-2): 13-2.
23.
Peter J., Valkenburg PMAdolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit material on the Internet . Communication Research, 2006: 33(2): 178-204.
24.
Robinson AJ , Rogstad K.Adolescence: a time of risk taking. Sexually Transmitted Infections , 2002: 78: 314-15.
25.
Gomez R., Santolaya J.Being mothers too early. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2005: 192(2): 340-1.
26.
Buston K., Wight D.The salience and utility of school sex education to young women. Sex Education, 2002: 2(3): 233-50.
27.
Walsh-Childers K., Gotthoffer A., Lepre CRFrom ‘just the facts’ to ‘downright salacious’: Teens’ and women’s magazine coverage of sex and sexual health . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum , 2002 (p. 308).
