Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Csincsak, M.
Right arrow Articles by Van Oost, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Csincsak, M.
Right arrow Articles by Van Oost, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Education Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, 473-483, 1994
© 1994 Oxford University Press

other

School-based sex education in Flanders: problems, barriers and perceived needs for future practice

M. Csincsak, I. De Bourdeaudhuij and P. Van Oost

Ghent University Department of Psychology, Research Group Health and Behaviour H.Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium

This study aims at exploring the difficulties experienced by teachers currently involved in sex education and the major barriers for teachers who are not or no longer involved. It is part of the first systematic large-scale survey of the practice of school-based sex education in Flanders. A representative sample of 400 secondary schools was drawn out of a total of 1050. A response rate of 33% was obtained. The majority of the teachers were currently involved in sex education. A list of 25 items based on former research was formulated to assess perceived problems and possible barriers. Factor analyses resulted in a seven-factor structure with the group of teachers involved in sex education and an eight-factor structure for the group of teachers not involved in sex education, accounting for 59 and 71% of the total variance, respectively. Four factors appeared in the two groups, e.g. relationship variables, support, teacher and student variables. The results further suggest that the potential difficulties included in the list do not represent important problems for the teachers currently engaged in sex education. Taking this into account, structural and support related problems score relatively highly. For teachers not currently involved in school-based sex education, the barriers seem to be harder to surmount. Course related variables seem to be most prominent.


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
 Scand J Public HealthHome page
A. Helleve, A. J. Flisher, H. Onya, S. Kaaya, W. Mukoma, C. Swai, and K.-I. Klepp
Teachers' confidence in teaching HIV/AIDS and sexuality in South African and Tanzanian schools
Scand J Public Health, June 1, 2009; 37(2_suppl): 55 - 64.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
K. Buston, D. Wight, G. Hart, and S. Scott
Implementation of a teacher-delivered sex education programme: obstacles and facilitating factors
Health Educ. Res., February 1, 2002; 17(1): 59 - 72.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChildhoodHome page
S. T. RUSSELL
Sex Education Content and Teenage Motherhood
Childhood, August 1, 1998; 5(3): 283 - 301.
[Abstract]


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.