Three Decades of Research: The Case for Comprehensive Sex Education

Abstract

School-based sex education plays a vital role in the sexual health and well-being of young people. Little is known, however, about the effectiveness of efforts beyond pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease prevention. The authors conducted a systematic literature review of three decades of research on school-based programs to find evidence for the effectiveness of comprehensive sex education. Methods: Researchers searched the ERIC, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE. The research team identified papers meeting the systematic literature review criteria. Of 8,058 relevant articles, 218 met specific review criteria. More than 80% focused solely on pregnancy and disease prevention and were excluded, leaving 39. In the next phase, researchers expanded criteria to studies outside the U.S. to identify evidence reflecting the full range of topic areas. Eighty articles constituted the final review. Results: Outcomes include appreciation of sexual diversity, dating and intimate partner violence prevention, development of healthy relationships, prevention of child sex abuse, improved social/ emotional learning, and increased media literacy. Substantial evidence supports sex education beginning in elementary school, that is scaffolded and of longer duration, as well as LGBTQeinclusive education across the school curriculum and a social justice approach to healthy sexuality. Conclusions: Review of the literature of the past three decades provides strong support for comprehensive sex education across a range of topics and grade levels. Results provide evidence for the effectiveness of approaches that address a broad definition of sexual health and take positive, affirming, inclusive approaches to human sexuality. Findings strengthen justification for the widespread adoption of the National Sex Education Standards.

Viewing Sexual Health Education through the Lens of Critical Pedagogy: A Case Study in Chicago Public Schools

“…The use of a critical pedagogical framework may be an avenue to address this gap while also bridging existing bodies of research, including previous SHE calls for inclusion of pleasure [40,41] and a broader range of sexual health topics that extend beyond a focus on reducing risk [42]. While the potential value of critical pedagogy in SHE has not been widely discussed, it has been mentioned by some [4,43] and this study further supports this call. Furthermore, the handful of SHE studies that have incorporated student experiences, align with findings reported here, including the need for content that is more relevant to students' own lives, the elimination of the stigmatization of LGBTQ+ identities, and the use of strategies that welcome questions and promote dialogue [44].…”

“…Many such programs are also intended to be LGBTQ+ inclusive [1][2][3]. Comprehensive SHE programs are being adopted in response to strong evidence of their effectiveness [2] as well as in light of persistent health inequities, particularly in communities of color, and particularly among students identifying as LGBTQ+ [4][5][6]. Chicago Public Schools' (CPS) 2013 policy and accompanying curriculum is one such example [7].…”

Sex Education in the Spotlight: What Is Working? Systematic Review

“…Ten studies (50%) dealt with school-based interventions [ 45 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 ], 9 (45%) referred to online interventions [ 46 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 ] and 1 (5%) was a review of blended learning programs [ 64 ]. In total 491 studies were included in the 20 reviews covered by the present RoR.…”

“…All studies were conducted in high-income economies following the World Bank classification [ 65 ], including US samples in 16 of the 20 studies, although there are two studies in which the country of the sample is not identified [ 51 , 52 ]. Most of the studies evaluating interventions in school settings also include developing countries (low- and middle-income economies) [ 45 , 47 , 50 , 52 , 53 , 55 ], as is also the case in three reviews of online interventions [ 46 , 61 , 62 ] (see Table A2 ).…”

“…The targeted age for reviews in school settings, as shown in Table A2 , is the period of adolescence, from 10 to 19 years of age, though one of the studies covers ages from 7 to 19 years [ 53 ]. All the online studies also include young adults (20–24 years old), alongside the adolescent sample [ 46 , 56 , 57 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 ], whilst the review by DeSmet et al [ 58 ] extends the upper limit to 29 years of age.…”