Sexuality Education Agreements

States may accept PREP, TPPI or V funds. Many states accept funding for both abstinence programmes and evidence-based interventions. In 2013, 19 SEA and 17 LEAs obtained five-year cooperation agreements from CDC/DASH to implement ESHE in their school systems. [22] Concerns about the CSE`s incompatibility with religious and cultural norms have been reported to undermine acceptance [18]. In Zambia, this is often expressed as a conflict between the CSE and a tradition of grandparents offering sex education, as well as cultural norms that condemn discussions about sexuality between the sexes, except in grandparent-grandchildren relationships. It is also a widely held approach that sexual information should be avoided to young adolescents, as this triggers sexual promiscuity. [19]. Similar difficulties in teaching sex education have been reported in other countries [20, 21]. Conflicting intergenerational discourses on sexuality between teachers and community members, as well as taboos related to the sexuality debate [22, 23] and gender challenges [23,24,25] have been reported to influence the acceptance of sex education in studies conducted in South Africa and Botswana. Mhlauli MB, Muchado YES.

Hearing Voices in Schools: Sexuality Issues in the Upper Class in Primary Schools in Botswana. J Educ Hum Dev. 2015;4 (2):130-41. Zambia has had reproductive health education since the 1990s, but its initial content was limited. Central CSR themes, such as gender relations, sexual behaviours, information on contraceptive methods, values, attitudes and life skills for self-realization, which are now included in the new CSE framework, have not been addressed [4]. One of the essential features of the revised framework is that it should not be proposed as a separate subject, but should be integrated into subjects such as the natural sciences and social sciences [4]. In summary, all sex education programs advertised in the state[3] This study also showed that the use of discretion to change what to teach was justified by teachers as the best way to protect children from sexual harm. Teachers were concerned that certain information would motivate learners to have sex because they no longer had to worry about pregnancy. They argued that the situation has the potential to turn learners into “sex experts” who put them at risk of pregnancy in cases where contraception is not available or appropriates an STI if condoms are not available.

This process of discretionary exercise among district teachers was motivated by guardianship, as they considered or defined learners as “vulnerable children and not as young people entitled to relevant information about their own bodies and sexuality” [43], p. 36). As described above, teachers justified the adoption of paternalistic values, as they perceived themselves as the “parents” of all the children in the class. It is important to note that paternalism continued to be expressed through resistance to CSE teaching. Teachers objected to the teaching of the CSE because they considered it to be something that, from the outside, was irrelevant to local needs and incompatible with cultural norms and values. Helleve A, Flisher AJ, Onya H, M┼ękoma W, Klepp K-I. Teachers teach sexuality and HIV/AIDS? South African teachers` perspectives on life orientation. . . .

By Tim