Well, it's been about 9 months, so naturally the next fetus of sex education controversy is on its way out of the oven. After all, teen pregnancy is on the rise.
The latest study, however, takes us on a somewhat different genetic path than the previous siblings in this family. Just as Obama reduced/eliminated funding for abstinence-focused education, research is now suggesting that abstinence education actually worked to curb sexual activity in a group of middle schoolers in Philly.
No, that's not a typo. I said abstinence education was effective.
In the past, I've been pretty clear that I take major issue with a lot of these "just say no" approaches to sex ed. A product of this attitude myself, I especially take issue with many of the religious groups and guilt-laden misinformation that gets infused into many of these programs.
But there's a key difference with these new findings. As pointed out by a New York Times article, and again by their staff editorial today, the program urged students to delay sexual activity until the student felt more mature. This is quite the departure from many program's "if you pop the balloon the angels will cry" approach. As Quinn clearly demonstrates on "Glee", this is not the way to go.
I've always believed that sex ed HAS to be more than either of the two extremes, neither "jesus is watching" nor "take a handful of condoms and here's some pictures of clamydia." As a newcomer to the education scene, I'm constantly told to not just spoonfeed my students the answers, but to teach them how to think. It's not always about the right answer; it's how you get to that answer that really has any consequence.
I'm still not ready to throw all my tax dollars back into the abstinence bucket (although it might be a better choice than spending them on a Superbowl commercial. Grrr.). But I think the conversation is finally headed in the right direction.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment