Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Strange, V.
Right arrow Articles by Oakley, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Strange, V.
Right arrow Articles by Oakley, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Education Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, 327-337, June 2002
© 2002 Oxford University Press

Peer-led sex education—characteristics of peer educators and their perceptions of the impact on them of participation in a peer education programme

Vicki Strange, Simon Forrest1 and Ann Oakley The RIPPLE Study Team

Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, London WC1H 0NR and 1 Department of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, University College London Medical School, London WC1E 6AU, UK

The RIPPLE study is a randomized controlled trial of peer-led sex education in English secondary schools. In 1997, 27 schools were recruited and randomly allocated to a programme of peer-led sex education or to act as control schools. In experimental schools peer educators in Year 12 (aged 16/17 years) were recruited in two successive cohorts and, having received a standardized training programme, delivered classroom-based sex education sessions to Year 9 students (aged 13/14 years). This paper is the first of two focusing on data gathered from these peer educators. Through analysis of pre- (n = 505) and post- (n = 331) programme questionnaire data, the paper describes the profile of peer educators and examines the impact on them of their involvement. Compared to the students receiving the peer-led sex education, more peer educators were female, white, high academic achievers and less socially disadvantaged. Peer educators reported positive changes in sexual knowledge and changes towards more liberal attitudes, and believed the programme would have a positive impact on their confidence in relationships and on their sexual behaviour. There was an increase in confidence about communication and interaction in groups. The paper discusses the methodological difficulties of assessing how involvement in such a programme impacts on peer educators.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
F. Starkey, S. Audrey, J. Holliday, L. Moore, and R. Campbell
Identifying influential young people to undertake effective peer-led health promotion: the example of A Stop Smoking In Schools Trial (ASSIST)
Health Educ. Res., December 1, 2009; 24(6): 977 - 988.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EvaluationHome page
V. Strange, E. Allen, A. Oakley, C. Bonell, A. Johnson, J. Stephenson, and The Ripple Study Team
Integrating Process with Outcome Data in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Sex Education
Evaluation, July 1, 2006; 12(3): 330 - 352.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 EvaluationHome page
A. Oakley, V. Strange, J. Stephenson, S. Forrest, and H. Monteiro
Evaluating Processes: A Case Study of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Sex Education
Evaluation, October 1, 2004; 10(4): 440 - 462.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social ScienceHome page
A. Oakley, V. Strange, T. Toroyan, M. Wiggins, I. Roberts, and J. Stephenson
Using Random Allocation to Evaluate Social Interventions: Three Recent U.K. Examples
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, September 1, 2003; 589(1): 170 - 189.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.