|
4. After reading the following selection, write an argumentative passage drawing one of these conclusions: (1) Sex education classes of the type recommended by Ms DeCarlo should be commenced in elementary school. (2) Ms DeCarlo's model for sex education classes should be modified in such-and-such a way. (3) Sex education classes should never be taught. Educating for Sexual Responsibility by Pamela DeCarlo School is starting soon, and the topic on many minds will be sex. Sex education, that is. Over 93 percent of all public high schools currently offer courses on sexuality or HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. More than 510 junior or senior high schools have school-linked health clinics, and more than 300 schools make condoms available on campus. Most schools are doing something, but the question is, are they doing the right thing? Across America, controversy continues over what message sex education programs in schools should offer. Too often, statements of values ("My children should not have sex outside of marriage") come wrapped up in misstatements of fact that deny the lessons of science ("sex education doesn't work anyway"). Should we do everything possible to suppress teen-age sexual behavior? Should we leave education up to the family? Or should we acknowledge that many teens are sexually active and prepare them against the negative consequences? The statistics speak for themselves. Young people need help protecting themselves from disease and unwanted pregnancy. In the United States, HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) is increasing most rapidly among young people; one in four new infections occurs in people younger than 22. We have more than double the teen-age pregnancy rate of any Western industrialized country, with more than a million teen-agers becoming pregnant each year. And teen-agers have the highest rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) of any age group, with one in four young people contracting one such disease by the age of 21. In light of these alarming rates of HIV, STD and pregnancy among adolescents, it is obvious that efforts in schools, families, churches or communities have not been as effective as we hoped. We can no longer ignore the need for education that helps young people protect themselves. Simply having a sex education program in a school is not the answer; we need to ask if the current programs are effective, and if not, how can we make them better? Social and behavioral scientists have made huge steps in understanding how young people learn to change behaviors. We now know what works to help youths delay sexual activity and protect themselves from disease and unwanted pregnancy if they do initiate sex. But knowledge alone is not enough to change behaviors. Programs that rely mainly on conveying information about sex — Plumbing 101, or how the body's sexual system functions — have failed. Likewise, education that focuses solely on moral precepts, warning teens about the dangers of promiscuity and premarital sex, have also failed. Many school districts have opted for abstinence-only programs, the "just say no" approach to sexuality. Yet no sexual abstinence programs that have been scientifically evaluated have been proven effective at delaying the onset of intercourse. And the emphasis on waiting until marriage excludes gay and lesbian teens, those at highest risk for HIV. However, programs that focus on helping teen-agers to change their behavior — using role-playing, games and exercises that strengthen communication and social skills — have shown signs of success. These programs encourage youths to discover and then practice behaviors that will prevent unwanted sex, pregnancy and disease. A common argument against sex education programs is that exposing teens to information about sex will encourage them to engage in sexual activity. But a comprehensive review of effective school-based programs found quite the opposite: That teens who received specific HIV/STD education were less likely to engage in sex than their peers who did not receive sex education. Older students in the programs who did engage in sexual activity were likely to have sex less often and have safer sex. Characteristics of effective sex education include: practice in communication, negotiation and refusal skills; activities that address social and media influences on sexual behavior; reinforcing clear and appropriate values to strengthen individual values and group norms against unprotected sex; and experimental activities to personalize the risk of unprotected intercourse and practice avoiding it. Many of these programs have been proven effective. Postponing Sexual Involvement, a program for African-American eighth-graders in Atlanta, used 11th- and 12th-graders to help youths understand social and peer pressures to have sex and to develop and apply resistance skills, as well as learn about human sexuality, decision-making, and contraceptives. Healthy Oakland Teens targets seventh-graders attending one junior high school there. Health educators teach basic sex and drug education, and ninth-grade peer educators lead interactive exercises on values, decision-making, communication and condom-use skills. One exercise involves peer educators reading statements like "It is OK not to use condoms if you're having sex for the first time" or "I would date someone my parent don't like." Students then walk to either the agree or disagree side of the class. Peer educators lead discussions about the statements and why students agree or disagree. Too often, sex education begins in high school, after many students have already begun experimenting sexually. Studies have shown that sex education begun before youths are sexually active helps young people stay abstinent and use protection when they do become sexually active. Almost 40 percent of U.S. ninth-graders have had intercourse; by the time they graduate, 70 percent of all high schoolers have had sex. The sooner that effective, behavior-based sex education begins, the better. Teen-agers are the future of our society, and they deserve the best education they can get. |