1. family and parenting
2. motherhood
3. pregnancy

TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION THROUGH EDUCATION
Vandana Kohli
Assistant Professor
Sociology/Anthropology
Research Scientist, Applied Research Center
Kenneth L. Nyberg
Chair, Sociology/Anthropology
Director, Applied Research Center
California State University, Bakersfield
Faculty Fellows Program
Center for California Studies
California State University
June, 1995
CONTENTS
Executive Summary .................................................................................. ii
Introduction................................................................................................1
Literature Review ......................................................................................1
Factors that Influence Teen Pregnancy................................................1
Age of Entry Into Sexual Union ..........................................................2
Contraceptive Use................................................................................4
Psychological Factors ..........................................................................5
Familial Factors ...................................................................................6
Social and Demographic Factors .......................................................10
Prevention Programs ..........................................................................12
Data Analysis............................................................................................15
Sample Description ............................................................................15
Sample Description and FLE .............................................................22
FLE Evaluation ..................................................................................31
FLE Curriculum .................................................................................34
Respondents' Comments ....................................................................41
Policy Suggestions ....................................................................................46
Conclusion .........................................................................................49
Bibliography .............................................................................................50
Appendix: Survey Questionnaire
i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is the final report on the evaluation of family life education (FLE) in the public
schools of California. Data and findings reported herein are based on a 50 percent
systematic random sample of all public school districts in California, and a 100 sample of
all 58 County Superintendent of Schools offices. The response rate for school districts
was 52 percent, and 48 percent for county offices.
Major Findings
1.
87 percent of all school districts (including unified and combined) offer FLE
instruction to their students, though only 77 percent are required to do so.
2.
Hardly any districts maintain data on student pregnancy rates (19 %), sexually
transmitted disease (STD) occurrence (3 %), or AIDS (4 %).
3.
There exists little standard practice and no standardization, regarding gradeappropriate FLE curriculum or the number of contact hours required to deliver that
curriculum.
4.
The vast majority of school districts (86 %) have not been pressured to stop offering
FLE courses, but a sizeable minority (34 %) have been pressured to modify the
curriculum. Outside pressure most often comes from religious organizations.
5.
There exists a consistent discrepancy between what respondents feel should be
taught in FLE courses and what is in fact offered, though this is mostly a matter of
emphasis. The overwhelming majority view current instruction as "average".
Policy Suggestions
1.
Schools need to maintain data on the incidence of AIDS and other sexually
transmitted diseases, and pregnancy among students.
2.
FLE programs should be evaluated by professional evaluators on a regular, and
ongoing basis.
3.
Standardization of FLE curriculum should be coupled with guidelines on which
grades and for how many hours the FLE program is implemented.
4.
Teachers need to be specifically trained to teach sex education.
INTRODUCTION
ii
The following report presents the findings of a survey on the state of Family Life Education
in California schools. The report begins with a literature review of the factors that influence teen
pregnancy. This section is followed by an analysis of the data and a summary of the various
comments received from respondents. The last section presents some suggestions for policy
consideration.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Factors That Influence Teen Pregnancy
The issue of how to prevent teenage pregnancy revolves around what factors are identified
as the causative influences. Some researchers regard prevention programs, regardless of how
well thought out and implemented, as doomed, because the issue of teenage pregnancy involves
the social whole. Males (1993), for example, thinks that current programs of all sorts, will not
succeed because of a discrepancy between reality and strategies for prevention. In a similar
vein, Davis (1989), argues that since teenage pregnancy is covered under a broad social blanket,
it needs to be handled at that level. Further, as Furstenberg (1991:136) notes, the epidemic of
teenage pregnancy will not go away unless we are willing to "resolve conflicting cultural and
political tendencies toward sexuality." He makes a good point by arguing that the factors which
stigmatized early childbearing, or out of wedlock childbirth, have virtually vanished and it is this
lack of stigmatization which has resulted in an increase in teenage sexuality and pregnancies.
However, since holistic solutions are less likely to be implemented we can only hope to deal
with the symptoms of teenage pregnancy, i.e. births to teenagers. These symptoms can be
prevented by intervention at any of the four following intervening variables (Flick 1986):
- age of entry to sexual unions
- use/nonuse of contraception
- abortion/non-abortion
- adoption/non-adoption.
Only two of these factors, however, are true preventive variables: delayed age of
entry to sexual unions; and use of contraceptives. Each of these factors, however, is, in
turn, influenced by a variety of different social indicators. For example, peer pressure,
adoption of prosocial values, better parent-child communication, and increased self2
esteem are only a few of the many variables that influence a child's decision to delay first
intercourse or use contraceptives. This report will begin with a discussion of age at entry
to sexual unions and contraceptive use or non-use. These are prime candidates for
prevention strategies since the relative importance attributed to these factors has formed
the framework undergirding programs that either encourage abstinence or effective
dissemination of contraception technology to teens.
Age of Entry Into Sexual Unions
During the last two decades sexual activity among unwed, young women has
increased dramatically. According to a study conducted by Campbell (1986: 46),
About 1 in 10 women aged 32-44 in 1982, who turned 20 between
1958 and 1970, reported that they had first intercourse before age 16,
and one-third said they had done so before age 18. About 1 in 5 of
those aged 22-26 who turned age 20 between 1976 and 1980, had had
intercourse before age 16, and nearly half had had coitus before age
18............................................................................................................
Many factors are associated with early intercourse. For example, early dating and
an absence of rules in a teen's home governing dating behavior are highly correlated with
early intercourse (Miller and Moore 1990; Thornton 1990). The peer group is also noted
as a factor influencing a teen's decision to engage in sexual activity, although the results
indicate that this influence is secondary to that of the teen's family. In Davis' (1974)
study of 81 males and 97 females at a venereal disease clinic, peer influence appeared
negligible while family environment had a decisive and strong influence on attitudes
toward sexuality. In particular, teens who had been exposed to frank and open
discussions about sexuality within the family, also had a positive attitude towards
sexuality or what Davis refers to as "sexual efficacy".
Sexual efficacy is greatly facilitated by a young teen's attitude toward their own
gender role, particularly for adolescent girls. In order to test this hypothesis, Cvetkovich,
Grote, Lieberman, and Miller (1978) analyzed a sample of 369 female and 325 male
adolescents collected by the American Public Health Association in 1975. For males the
study revealed that 16 and 17 year old boys had sex unless they were opposed to it on the
3
basis of family teachings, morality or had not been able to find a willing partner. These
authors also measured sexual liberalism, sex role attitude and sex role integration for four
groups of teen girls: virgins who believed they would engage in sex in the near future;
virgins who did not think they would engage in sex anytime soon; non-virgins who began
engaging in sex relatively recently; and non-virgins who had their first sexual experience
at a very early age. The results indicated that 75 percent of the non-virgins displayed
more sexually liberal attitudes whereas only 25 percent of the virgins displayed the same
amount of sexual liberalism. However, the authors also found that when sexual
liberalism was statistically controlled, virgins scored higher on their sex role integration
than non-virgins; while those virgins who did plan on having premarital sex had the most
conservative attitudes towards female gender roles. This study implies that for some
adolescents sex is a way of defining their own gender roles. Those adolescents who have
a developed sense of their sex roles tend to not engage in premarital sex during their
adolescent years.
Increase in sexual activity is often, though not always, associated with an increase in
the incidence of teen pregnancy (Jones 1986). Indeed, some studies have found that an
increase in sexual activity does not necessarily result in a proportionate increase in births
to teen mothers. For example, Mecklenberg and Thompson (1983), reported a two-thirds
increase in premarital sexual intercourse among young girls aged 15-19 between 1971
and 1979. This increase, ranging from 30 percent for young women in 1971 to 50
percent for young women in 1979 resulted largely from an increase in premarital sexual
activity for young white girls. They also found an increase in contraceptive use among
sexually active teens from 50 percent users in 1971 to 70 percent users in 1979. This
increase in contraceptive use was not enough to offset the increase in premarital sexual
activity which resulted in more pregnancies to teenage girls. But, as Campbell, a
demographer cited in Mecklenberg and Thompson's article indicates, there has been a
decrease in actual teenage births as a result of an increasing amount of pregnancies being
terminated through abortions.
Contraceptive Use
4
Campbell and Mecklenberg and Thompson's studies point to the important role of
contraceptive use in preventing teen pregnancies even in the face of increased sexual
activity. According to a 1992 study by Santelli and Beilenson, teenagers in the United
States had the same level of sexual activity as teens in western European countries and
Canada. But the United States has nearly twice the rate of teenage pregnancy than these
other countries (Stark 1986). The reason attributed for this differential teen pregnancy
rate is the effective and frequent use of contraceptives by teens in western European
countries and Canada (Jones 1986, Stark 1986, Santelli and Beilenson 1992).
The decision to use contraceptives is not an easy one to make for a teen, yet, not
using contraception is cited as one of the main factors contributing to teenage or even
adult pregnancy (Stark 1986, Shapiro 1994, Jones 1986). There are many reasons
forwarded for why teens are not good contraceptive users, some of which include: not
admitting to being sexually active (Kandell 1979, and Furstenberg 1971); encountering
difficulties in making long range plans; youthfulness and the concomitant immaturity and
irresponsibility (Zabin, Wong, Weinick, and Emerson 1992); and fear of side effects such
as weight gain and upset stomach.
The most pervasive explanation, however, is that teens do not use contraceptives
because of ignorance both about contraceptive technology and about how to gain access
to this technology. As Jones (1986:52), puts it:
The reasons many adolescent women do not always practice
contraception include their ignorance about their pregnancy risk and their
attitudes and lack of knowledge about the methods they could use, as
well as problems in access to the medical care system.
The literature does indicate, however, that those teens who are involved in a longterm relationship and are older tend to use contraceptives effectively (Furstenberg, Moore
and Peterson 1985, Luker 1984). But, in a short-term relationship, young girls fear a boy
friend's rejection or the loss of spontaneity (Kandell 1979). This effect is mitigated by
how strongly teenage girls are willing to exercise their own role in a relationship; the
more a young girl believes that females are accountable for birth control the more likely
5
she is to be an effective contraceptive user.
Thus, exposure to sexuality and contraceptive use or non-use are intermediate to
pregnancy. But, as stated earlier, the decision to engage in sex or use contraception is, in
turn, conditioned by factors that are related to an individual's psychological, familial, and
social and demographic characteristics. Some studies have indicated the importance of
the family environment by revealing that some school-age mothers have significantly
fewer fathers or step-fathers living at home than non-pregnant teens (Zongker 1977).
Psychological Factors
Psychological factors influencing teen pregnancy range from maladjustment to the
desire to have a child, although many studies indicate that most teenage girls do not
intentionally attempt to become pregnant (Furstenberg 1992). But there are some
teenagers, who, lacking a close mother-child relationship during their own growing up
years, compensate by having a child in the hopes of developing a close bond with the
infant. Further, girls often feel they can win the affection of their boyfriends by having a
child since a pregnancy confirms the young man's manhood. Other psychological factors
include: becoming independent; trying to be equal to their mother; to be like other
pregnant friends; and to signal for help, among others (Kandell 1979, and Musick 1993).
Low self-esteem is one of the most important psychological factors associated with
teenage pregnancy. Studies such as the one by Abernethy (1974), found that pregnant
adolescents had low self-esteem which highly correlated with their engagement in sex
and the risk of pregnancy. Not only does it correlate with a higher incidence of sexual
activity but it also correlates with poor performance in school which, in turn, leads to a
higher incidence of sexual activity (Dryfoos 1988), and the continuation of a vicious
cycle. In fact, according to a study by Stark (1986), poor school performance is
associated with a three times higher risk of early exposure to sexual intercourse,
compared to teenage girls who perform relatively well in school. Another study by the
Institute for Juvenile Research (1974), found that "males and females, regardless of age,
are about twice as likely to have experienced coitus if they expect to stop education
6
before college (Institute for Juvenile Research 1974:62). Conversely, those who aspire to
a higher education, have a fair amount of intelligence, and have a good academic record,
do not have sexual experiences at a young age (Furstenberg 1991, Mott 1986, Jessor and
Jessor 1977).
Familial Factors
Other reasons which contribute to teen pregnancy include poor family
communication. If communication is poor between mother and daughter, then an
increased likelihood of sexual activity results (Fox, et al 1988), as do the chances for
incorrect and inconsistent use of contraception (Hofferth 1987; Furstenberg, HercegBaron, Shea and Webb 1984). Poor communication between father and son and likewise
between father and daughter (Miller and Moore 1990), had the same result. Inazu and
Fox (1980) believe that if parents and children communicate well about sex-related issues
then adolescents will be less promiscuous and will be more likely to correctly use
contraception. Juhasz and Sonnenshein-Schneider (1987) reported that communication
between adolescents and parents is necessary for adolescents to make competent
decisions concerning sex.
On the other hand, many studies have discovered no relationship between parentteen communication and sexual activities or regular use of contraceptives (Fisher 1986;
Furstenberg, Herceg-Baron, Shea and Webb 1984; Moore, Peterson, and Furstenberg
1986; Newcomer and Udry 1987; Jessor and Jessor 1977). There are others who find
that family communication does not influence whether or not a teen will engage in sex,
but it does influence teen use of contraception and access to an abortion (Eisen and
Zellman 1987).
Fisher (1986) conducted a study in which families were put into high and low
communication groups according to scores reported by parents and children. The sexual
attitudes of the parents in the two groups did not differ, yet were consistently less
permissive than their children. It was found that among older, middle and younger
adolescents, the middle adolescent had a more permissive attitude than the other two
combined, regardless of communication level. All the others tended to follow the
7
attitudes of their parents, save the older adolescent in a low communication family.
Finally, when daughters and sons were analyzed separately, the sons' attitudes were not
significantly correlated with their parents'. In fact, Kahn, Kalsbeek, and Hofferth (1988),
found that there seems to be a different effect on sons than daughters in this area, since
communication with the father increases, and communication with the mother decreases,
sexual activity in sons.
A study by Mueller and Powers (1990) compared teens' perceptions of their parents
communication style with the sexual activity of the teens. Parents who were deemed
friendly and attentive had children who were less sexually active, while parents who were
labelled "contentious, expressive, dramatic, open and/or dominant" (477) had children
who were much more sexually active. Similar results were reported for contraception
use. The communication style of parents was a much more important factor in the
behavior of junior high and college students than for high school students. Younger
adolescents also seem to be more affected by closeness to their parents (Fox and Inazu
1980).
Darling and Hicks (1982) discovered that parents still influenced their children's
attitudes about sex even when there were no verbal messages. In other words, if sexually
active females perceive that their parents approve of the use of birth control they would
use it effectively on a regular basis. Religious beliefs and practices can inhibit sexual
activity, (Thorton and Camburn 1989), although they also inhibit use of contraception
(Miller and Moore 1990).
When Newcomer and Udry (1987) divided mothers into groups depending on their
reported early sexual behavior, it was found that the earlier the experience of the mother,
the earlier the experience of their teenager. Moore, Peterson and Furstenberg (1986)
found that parents with traditional values in a broader sense had daughters who
experiment less with sexual activity, but this pattern did not hold for males of such
families. Similarly, the mother's profession seemed to affect the sexual activity of
teenagers; professional mothers had teens who were more likely to participate in sex
than were mothers in a traditionally feminine profession, or who were homemakers. The
factor which seemed to affect the teens' behavior in this study was their parents' sex role
8
attitudes, which also reflected the mother's professional goals, rather than the reverse.
Additionally, girls from female-headed homes were more likely to engage in sexual
activity than those from two-parent homes (Zelnick et al 1981; Newcomer and Udry
1983; Moore et al 1985).
Males were more likely to report coital experience regardless of parental
involvement if they also reported a high degree of peer involvement (Miller and Simon
1974). This pattern was neither consistent nor significant in females. Many studies have
also shown that when parents are the primary source of sexual information for teens,
teens tend to use contraception regularly, engage in sex less frequently, and have longer
lasting relationships with members of the opposite sex (Fox 1980; Spanier 1977).
Because the self reporting of teens and parents disagrees so much in this area there
are limits to these types of studies; parents, for instance, believed themselves to be the
primary source of information in many studies, but few teens agree. Nonetheless, since
teens find discussing sex with their parents more difficult than any other topic, they use
their peers as the main source of sexual information (Dickinson 1978; Dickinson and
Bennett 1980). Rozema (1986) found that the communication climate between same-sex
friends was significantly more supportive than opposite sex friends, that more
information about sex was gained from friends than parents, and from mothers than
fathers. This latter result is also repeated elsewhere (Spanier 1977).
The effect that same sex friends (Smith, Udry and Morris 1985) and opposite sex
friends (Mittelmark, Murray and Luepker 1987) have on behavior, in the sense of teens'
efforts to match their behavior with that of their peers, is also reported. Girls are more
strongly influenced by their best male friends and their sexual partners than by their
female friends (Miller and Simon 1974; Cvetkovich et al 1978).
Pleck, Sonenstein and Ku (1993) report that:
a male with a more traditional conception of manhood reported more
sexual partners in the last year, reported a less intimate relationship at
last intercourse with his most recent partner, viewed relationships
between women and men as more adversarial, used condoms less
consistently with his current partner, viewed condoms more negatively
9
as reducing male sexual pleasure, was less concerned with whether a
partner wanted him to use a condom, believed less in male
responsibility for contraception, and believed more that making
someone pregnant would validate his masculinity.
Hofferth, (1987), however, finds problems with research on the influence of peer
groups, as the teen respondent is reporting both his/her attitudes and behavior as well as
their own, "without independent validation" with the additional weakness that "data have
been gathered at only one point in time, thus preventing researchers from detecting
delayed effects." Nonetheless, Cvetkovich et al (1978) report that whatever teens believe
to be true of the behavior of their peers is a powerful predictor of their own behavior.
Interestingly, black teens seem not to be so influenced, nor to pick their friends based on
these beliefs.
Despite the unequal time in supplying information, parents were still found to have
the most influence in forming teens' opinions about sex (Sanders and Miller 1988).
Sanders and Miller, also found that when male friends and readings were used as their
primary source of information, females were more inclined to engage in sexual
behaviors. Younger siblings were also more likely to engage in sex if their older siblings
had already done so (Rogers and Rowe 1990), and this is especially true in large families
(Hogan and Kitagawa 1983).
It was suggested by Newcomer and Udry (1987) that both males and females who
were extremely sexually active might be reacting to losing a father. Some studies
suggest that many teen mothers come from fatherless homes, although these usually cite
white middle class or upper-middle class homes (Hayes 1987). Thus, the 'loss of a
father' referred to is usually caused by a divorce witnessed by the teen as opposed to an
ended relationship occurring before the teen was born, or in which the father rarely, if
ever, visits, which is more common in the lower class. This latter study also suggests
that the fatherless home is riskier for females because they become vulnerable to other
men, which starts a cycle of low self-esteem in female teens and predation upon them.
Musick (1993) also ties lower class girls' decisions to become mothers, even in the
10
presence of alternatives, to their diminished self-view. Girls with poor academic skills
from a poor household have a much greater chance of becoming pregnant than girls with
solid academic skills coming from a household with an above-average income.
The connection between active sexuality in teens, and family neglect and abuse has
been repeatedly demonstrated (Butler and Burton 1990). Moreover, the frequency and
variety of sexual encounters for females is strongly tied to previous sexual abuse. The
Burton and Butler (1990) study found that victims had a lower self-regard, were more
likely to engage in sex when they didn't want to, were twice as likely to want a baby,
were the only respondents who said that they "didn't know" why they had gotten
pregnant, and of their already-pregnant respondents, half were victims of past abuse.
Sex among teens is used to satisfy needs such as isolation, a lack of compassion or
warmth, a feeling of low self-worth, relief from monotony, or to release rage. Elliot and
Morse (1989) found that adolescents whose past included criminal activity had a greater
chance of being sexually active. There is also a strong relationship between the use of
drugs and early involvement in sexual activities (Zabin, Hardy, Smith and Hirsch 1986;
Zabin 1984; Mott and Haurin 1988; Ensminger 1987; Jessor and Jessor 1977).
Social and Demographic Factors
Race is no longer a significant predictor of sexual activity for older teens (Forrest
and Singh 1990; Santelli and Beilenson 1992) but it is still a predictor of contraception
use and abortion. The greatest difference between the sexual activity level of blacks and
whites occurs for teens under 16 years of age (Santelli and Beilenson 1992) even though
birth rates for white teens are increasing while they are decreasing for black teens.
Parental supervision decreases sexual activities among inner city blacks but there does
not seem to be much of an effect for anyone else (Newcomer and Udry 1983). Two
theories have been promoted as explanations of the difference in pregnancy rates by race:
first, that socioeconomic differences explained them, and second, the relatively more
permissive black community.
The relative poverty of black teens as a group seems to be a big factor in their
pregnancy rates. According to Hogan and Kitagawa (1985), "Black teens living in
11
impoverished neighborhoods are more likely to initiate sexual intercourse than black
teens not living in impoverished areas." Jones (1986) explains that these adolescents see
a financially bleak future, so the costs of having children do not outweigh the rewards of
not having them.
Research conducted before the present decade often focused on the differences
between white and black attitudes about teen sex and pregnancy, sex and childbearing
outside of marriage, and sexual attitudes generally, with the black population always
listed as more permissive (Furstenberg 1971; Moore et al 1986). Hofferth (1987) also
questioned these reports on the grounds that attitudes were tested after sexual activity,
which could easily bias the results, and the failure to control for the length of time that
the individual or his/her family has lived in poverty.
There seem to be distinct cultural differences for Hispanics which impact their teen
pregnancy rates. Daughters who have been less acculturated into the majority culture,
follow their parents' un-permissive values, (Montanez, Riera and Kohn 1978), and might
not benefit as much from discussing sexual material at school due to cultural inhibitions.
Hispanic teens with children are not encouraged to return to school (Salguero 1984;
Auerbach, Nathan and O'Hare 1985). The two explanatory devices used for Black teen
pregnancy and early sexual activity rates, values and poverty, are also present in studies
of Hispanics, though the values explanation is posited in the negative direction.
Forrest and Singh (1990) report that "among never-married females, aged 15-29,
49% of Hispanics reported they had experienced sexual intercourse as compared to 61%
among Black females, and 52% among Whites..." Mexican-American adolescents
receive less sex education and have less parent-child communication on sexual topics
(Durant, Pendergrast and Seymore 1990). There are numerous other factors that may
impact Hispanics in this area, including "...language; lack of knowledge regarding what
services are available in the community; high costs of care; lack of insurance;
undocumented status...; concern about confidentiality; and transportation," (Brindis
1992). Hispanics engage in sex later and are more inclined to keep their babies when
they become pregnant (Aneshensel, Fiedler and Becerra 1989).
12
Prevention Programs
There are two strongly held, and often opposing beliefs, regarding pregnancy
prevention: contraceptive dissemination; and sexual abstinence. The first prevention
strategy aims to reduce the risks of conception by propagating the wide spread use of
contraception. This group of prevention programs is guided by the belief that children
today are likely to engage in sexual activity at young ages regardless of what social
pressures schools and parents may bring to bear. Therefore, proponents of this view
argue, by making contraceptives available to teens we can at least hope to reduce the
incidence of unwanted pregnancies. Indeed many of these programs have had a
significant degree of success.
The other group of prevention programs is guided by the belief that teens can be
taught to delay initiating sexual intercourse until adulthood. This strategy is clearly
indicative of the broader "just say no" approach to solving adolescent problems.
Summed in the words of the (ex) secretary of education, William J. Bennett (cited in
Olsen et. al 1992: 371):
We currently know very little about how to effectively discourage
unmarried teenagers from initiating intercourse ... We do know how to
develop character and reinforce good values ... The contraceptive
approach is acting with an extravagantly single-minded blindness when it
simply, in the name of science, ignores such experience, and offers
instead a highly mechanical and bureaucratic solution - more widely
available contraceptives in the schools.
Programs such as Values and Choices and Teen Aid, both funded under Title XX,
provide successful examples of abstinence-based sex education programs. What is even
more interesting about these programs is that they received favorable student responses
even though junior high students reported a more positive assessment of the programs
than did high school students (Olsen, Weed, Nielsen and Jensen 1992).
Even though parents do not typically provide their children with accurate sexual
information (or any sexual information), many feel that they should be the ones
responsible for educating their children on sexuality (Gordon and Dockman 1977;
Koblinsky and Atkinson 1982). Adolescents too feel that their parents need to have sex
13
education so that they can answer their children's questions pertaining to sex. However,
sex education at home is usually ineffective (Fisher 1986; Fox and Inazu 1980;
Newcomer and Udry 1985; Warren and Johnson 1989; Fox 1980).
School-based pregnancy prevention program have consequently appeared as a
source for sexual information. According to Dryfoos (1988:215), "interest in school
based programs has been spurred by the growing recognition of the link between low
basic skills and school dropout, poverty and childbearing." Further, the pragmatics of
school based prevention programs have been outlined by Allen et al. (506) who recognize
that schools serve as places where adolescents congregate and spend nearly 15,000 hours
of formal schooling by the end of the high school period.
Parents might, and often do, object to having sex education offered in the schools.
However, this is usually because parents want to feel that they have been involved in
their child's sex education training. One way to overcome parents' resistance is to
incorporate them in the school based programs. There is plenty of evidence indicating
that parent-child communication is critical in developing a child's orientation toward
contraceptive use, exposure to intercourse, and pregnancy resolution (Flick 1986; Males
1993). Other reasons for involving parents have been outlined by Kirby et al (1982:1056) as follows: parents indicate a desire to upgrade their own sexual knowledge;
eliminates fears that sexual programs will subvert parental values; increases program
support; improves parent-child communication; and diminishes the 'values in the
classroom' dilemma.
According to Fox (1981:124-125), cited in Mecklenberg and Thompson:
Policies that ignore familial support, and undermine rather than
supplement, the efforts and effectiveness of parents are likely to yield
programs that are wasteful, inefficient, and ineffective.
Not every prevention program chooses between contraceptive use and abstinence.
Indeed, one very successful program is focused quite apart from these issues. Allen,
Philiber and Hoggson (1990) evaluate the success of a school-based program, "The Teen
14
Outreach Program," which encourages students to "perform volunteer service in their
communities." They argue that volunteer service helps teens become help-givers,
thereby increasing students' sense of self-empowerment. Further, volunteer service in a
community fortifies social values held by members of the larger community. Both an
increase in personal growth and the internalization of prosocial values have been
associated with a reduced rate of adolescent problem behavior including teen pregnancy.
As a result of the combination of classroom-based instruction and discussion combined
with community outreach the program has a significant success rate. "Four consecutive
years of data on the program have indicated that it reduces teen-age pregnancy and
school failure and drop out rates by approximately 30 to 50% relative to matched
comparison groups of students" (Allen, Philiber, and Hoggson 1990:506).
15
DATA ANALYSIS
"Thank you for collecting this data. Parents are concerned about values,
context and "dangers" for their children. Information like this will help
them understand how schools are supporting proper decision making on
the part of students."
Assistant Superintendent, large
Elementary school district
Our intent was to construct a large, representative sample of school districts in
California to insure both a cross-section of types of school districts and a large enough
response rate to warrant meaningful statistical and qualitative analysis. As such, we
devised a systematic, random, fifty percent sample of all school districts listed in The
California Public School Directory (1994) which yielded a sample target of 508 school
districts. As well, we surveyed all 58 County Superintendent of Schools offices in
California.
For each target population we sent an initial questionnaire, and followed that with a
postcard reminder some ten days later. For non-respondents, we again mailed the
questionnaire, and again followed that with a postcard reminder. Moreover, quite a few
potential respondents contacted us by telephone, and for those requesting it we sent a
third questionnaire. These efforts resulted in a 52 % response rate (n=236) for school
districts and a 48 % response rate (n=28) for County Schools offices. Our total "N" is
291 respondents.
Sample Description
Several important demographic variables describe our respondents. One such
variable is the percentage of students receiving free lunch in a district. Table 1 shows
this information broken down by percentage ranges. The table shows that the category
with the largest number of school districts in our sample was 0-10 percent of students
receiving free lunches. The category with the fewest number of school districts in our
sample was 91-100 percent receiving free lunches. As Table 1 indicates, roughly eighty
16
percent of all the school districts in our sample provided free lunches to sixty percent or
fewer of the students enrolled in their schools.
The drop out rate for the responding districts in the sample is provided in Table 2.
Eighty-eight percent of the districts in the sample had a drop out rate of less than 11
percent, while nearly 10 percent of the districts had a drop out rate ranging from 11 to 20
percent. Only two percent districts had a drop out rate higher than 21 percent with no
school district reporting a rate that exceeded 40 percent.
The high percentage of districts with a low drop out rate reflects the composition of
school districts in the sample. The greatest number of districts, for example, contain
elementary, middle, or junior high schools, with children that cannot elect to drop out.
Table 3 reflects the breakdown of the districts in our sample by their school components
and total enrollments. The largest number of schools contained in the districts in our
sample were elementary schools, which also accounted for the highest enrollment figures.
The second largest category was middle schools but middle school enrollment was much
less than the enrollment for high school and the K-6 unified schools.
The districts were further differentiated by the race and ethnic backgrounds of the
students. As Figure 1 depicts, 61 percent of all the students are white, while nearly 25
percent belong to the Hispanic group. Asian and African Americans represent the next
largest group with nearly 6 percent and 5 percent students, respectively. Finally, the
smallest racial/ethnic group is native Americans followed by other races which are not
presented in the pie chart, Figure 1, below.
17
18
19
Most districts in the sample represented a fair diversity of racial/ethnic groups,
although there were concentrations of certain groups in some districts. For example,
some districts had a very high concentration of African American and native American
students. With this exception, however, the distribution of students was as expected.
Whites tended to be represented in all districts: nearly 33 percent of the districts had less
than 50 percent white students; while 50 percent of all districts had more than 70 percent
white students. This pattern, as is evident from Table 4, was the reverse of that witnessed
for Hispanics: nearly 83 percent of all districts had less than 50 percent Hispanic
students; while only 10 percent of all districts had more than 71 percent Hispanic
students. The different distribution of white and Hispanic students is presented in the
following area graph, Figure 2.
20
21
As Table 5 indicates, an overwhelming majority of California districts require their
teachers hold a proper teaching credential. In our study, nearly 84 percent of all districts
had credentialed teachers in 90 to 100 percent of the schools in their district while only
14.4 percent had credentialed teachers in 10 percent or fewer of all schools in their
district.
22
Sample Description and FLE
The survey results also indicate that many schools in the sampled districts do not
reserve special selection criteria or even space for the implementation of the Family Life
Education curriculum. Nearly 84 percent, or 205 school districts, include the state
required AIDS prevention curriculum. The remaining 16 percent of the districts do not
combine FLE and AIDS prevention education. These figures, however, must be
interpreted with caution since they could imply that these districts do not offer FLE (this
discussion is continued later on in this report). Further, even though FLE teaching
requires particular skills, very few districts mandate a policy regulating specific
requirements for FLE teachers. Among all 236 districts for which data are available,
only 31 percent required that FLE teachers have specific qualifications whereas nearly 70
percent of all these districts did not have such a policy. Reflecting this lack of credential
regulation, FLE teachers in 75 percent of the surveyed districts are not required to have
particular subject matter competency. These results are presented in Table 6.
Of the remaining 25 percent of the districts (n=57) that do require particular subject
matter competence for FLE teachers, the majority (or nearly 68 percent), require FLE
teachers to be trained in health or health science (see Table 7). The second subject area
required for FLE teachers is science, but only 11 percent of these districts require this
competency. Other districts elect to have their FLE teachers trained in the areas of social
science (8.9 %), or home economics (7.1 %). Finally, a few districts, roughly 5 percent,
require the school nurse to teach the FLE curriculum.
Nurses, in addition to teaching FLE, are also the providers of important health
information to students on campus. But in our sample, only 39 percent of all the districts
had a nurse on 90 to 100 percent of their school campuses. A large plurality of districts,
(nearly 47 percent) had nurses on fewer than 10 percent of the schools on their campus.
Further, many respondents volunteered that although they had a nurse available on
campus, it was only for two hours, or three times a week, or for half a day for three days
or for other part-time arrangements. Table 8 displays this information.
23
24
25
The data we collected indicate that districts and schools are unable to develop
specific target programs based on the needs of their student constituents because they
lack necessary information to make such decisions. Nearly 94 percent of all districts do
not maintain data on AIDS; nearly 81 percent do not maintain data on student pregnancy
rate; and nearly 97 percent do not maintain data on the incidence of venereal diseases
among students. This information is clearly presented in the following figure, Figure 3.
26
In our sample, 226 or roughly 87 percent of all districts offered FLE in their schools.
Further, 172 districts or nearly 77 percent required the schools in their district to offer
FLE. These data are summarized in Table 9. However, as is evident from Table 10, all
those districts that do not offer FLE do so because their district does not require that FLE
classes be offered. The same table also indicates that nearly 22 percent of the districts in
our sample offer FLE even though they are not required to offer FLE.
27
The data on the grades at which FLE classes are taught is not telling, nor of a
discernible pattern. The only definitive statement that can be made based on the
information presented in Table 11, is that, in the districts in our sample, there is no
consistency in the grade or grades at which FLE is offered. With the exception of the
'other' category for example, the largest percentage (a mere 9.82 percent of all districts)
offer FLE in grades 5-8 inclusive. The remaining districts vary considerably. Regardless
of the manner in which we code the data, conclusions about the grades in which FLE is
offered in California schools are impossible to make given the nature of the diversity of
the implementation of the FLE curriculum. This phenomenon has immediate policy
implication which will be discussed at a later point in this report.
Similar problems exist with trying to identify the approximate number of hours that
are devoted to teaching the FLE curriculum. In Table 12, for example, 91 percent of the
districts report teaching the FLE curriculum anywhere from 0-5 hours per week.
However, our survey results do not allow us to pinpoint the number of years over which
this rate of instruction spans. From a qualitative overview of the survey instruments,
however, the respondents usually identified a total number of hours. In other words, 0-5
hours per week usually means that a student in that particular school district will receive
a total number of hours of FLE ranging from 0 to 5 hours during the entire time they
spend in that school. This is particularly true for those districts that are not unified.
28
29
Further, most districts in our sample report a fair degree of cooperation from parents
in the teaching of the FLE curriculum. Among the districts surveyed nearly 84 percent
reported that less than 5 percent of the parents in their districts withdrew their children
from FLE classes. In less than 1 percent of the districts in our sample, 2 districts, parent
withdrawal rate exceeded 15 percent. These results are summarized in Table 13.
The results in Table 14, however, point to the fact that some district officials have
been pressured to either stop offering FLE or modify the FLE curriculum. The
overwhelming majority of districts do not report such problems but nearly 14 percent of
the district officials who answered our survey reported that they had been pressured to
stop offering FLE while another 34.1 percent had been pressured to modify the FLE
curriculum. Our data analysis further revealed that among those who wished to have
district officials stop offering FLE, 55.8 percent were church groups; 25.6 percent were
parent groups; and 18.6 percent are 'other' groups, not including political or community
groups. Similarly, among those who pressured district officials to modify the FLE
curriculum, 57.6 percent were church groups; 22.4 percent were parent groups; and 20
percent were 'other' groups not including community or political groups.
30
31
FLE Evaluation
Another concern of this study was to investigate whether districts or schools in the
district evaluate the effectiveness of their FLE offerings and what measure they consider
as an appropriate indicator of a successful program. Our results indicated that 160
districts, or 72 percent of the valid cases, evaluated their programs while the remaining
28 percent did not evaluate their FLE classes. Table 15 shows that 31 percent of all FLE
class evaluations are conducted by the teachers themselves, another 29.6 percent by
teachers, school officials - such as a principal or vice-principal - and district officials
combined. And another 14.8 percent by the teacher and the school official without the
district official. But, even though a successful FLE program is critical, only 2 percent of
all the surveyed districts had an outside evaluator assess the success of their FLE classes.
32
Regardless of who evaluates the FLE program, district officials who responded to
our survey rated student feedback as the highest measure of FLE class effectiveness. The
second and third highest ranked measures of effectiveness were an increase in a student's
self esteem and better parent-child communication, respectively. The respondents rated
reduction in pregnancy rate, venereal disease rate, and an increase in responsible
parenting among student parents as more or less equally important measures. According
to the respondents, subject matter competency and better academic performance,
respectively, were rated as the two least important criteria for a successful FLE program.
33
The survey instrument also contained an item that allowed district officials to make
an evaluation of their FLE classes in terms of their effectiveness in reducing the
incidence of teenage pregnancy. The results of this question are presented in Figure 4.
The line graph indicates that most district officials thought their FLE classes were
average. Quite a few respondents also indicated that they had better than average
programs and only a very few self-reported poor, below average, or excellent FLE classes
or programs.
34
FLE Curriculum
The final, and probably most important, concern of this study was to investigate how
much time was actually spent on teaching various topics in FLE classes and to compare
this to practitioners' judgments of the ideal amount of time that should be spent on
teaching these same topics. The topics that we included in our survey emerged from a
review of the literature on the FLE curriculum and its implementation. The literature
identified the following topics: AIDS prevention; VD prevention; responsible sexual
behavior; values concerning sexuality; improving family interactions; strengthening the
individual; improving self-esteem; improving academic performance; physical
development; human reproduction; using contraceptives; consequences of early
sexuality; consequences of pregnancy; dating; peer pressure; awareness of the opposite
sex; enhance decision making; and alternative life styles.
We asked respondents to rank on a scale of 1 to 3 the actual and ideal amount of
time they thought is, and should be, spent on teaching these topics for four different
grade levels: K-3; 4-6; 7-8; and 9-12. Table 17 summarizes the results of this line of
inquiry, and reveals that average scores for ideal amount of time that should be spent on
teaching particular topics always exceeded average amount of time that is actually spent
on teaching the same topics. The only exception was teaching children in grades K-3
about dating.
Regardless of grade levels, respondents ranked improving self-esteem as the most
time-absorbing topic closely followed by peer pressure but only in the two higher grade
levels. Very little time was actually devoted to the teaching of contraceptive use except
in the 9-12 grades and, in all grades, teachers spent very little time addressing alternative
life styles.
35
36
Importantly, there was a consistent difference in the actual and ideal amount of time
respondents identified as being devoted to teaching elements of the FLE curriculum for
different grade levels. We have presented the information for different grade levels in
Figures 5-8. Figure 5 shows that for the K-3 grades the greatest discrepancy between
actual and ideal amount of time exists in teaching students how to enhance decision
making, cope with peer pressure, and improve family interactions. Again, as we
summarized in the preceding discussion, the greatest amount of actual time was spent on
improving young people's self-esteem.
The results for grades 4-6 are presented in Figure 6. As in grades K-3, respondents
would like to spend more time teaching enhanced decision making, coping with peer
pressure, improving family interactions but, in addition, in these grades respondents
report a significant discrepancy between the actual amount of time that is spent teaching
students about dating, and the consequences of pregnancy and early sexuality. As in all
other grades the greatest amount of actual time is spent on improving student's selfesteem.
Figure 7 presents the results for grade 7-8. Here, in addition to the topics we have
previously mentioned, respondents identify the greatest discrepancy between actual and
ideal amount of time devoted to teaching students about contraceptive use, sexual values
and responsible sexual behavior, and VD and AIDS prevention. Again the greatest
amount of actual time is shared in teaching about self-esteem and coping with peer
pressure, but in grades 7-8 respondents spend more time also teaching about
strengthening the individual.
In grades 9-12 there is a differential in the actual and ideal amount of time spent on
teaching about alternative life styles, sexual values and responsible sexual behavior.
These results, presented in Figure 8, also reveal that for the most part more or less equal
time is spent on all the topics of the FLE curriculum included in our list. Interestingly
enough, the least amount of time is actually spent on such topics as improving academic
performance, contraceptive use, physical development, and awareness of the opposite
sex. Respondents would ideally like to spend the greatest amount of time teaching 9-12
graders how to enhance decision making, combined with such topics as AIDS prevention,
37
responsible sexual behavior, strengthening the individual, and consequences of early
sexuality and pregnancy.
38
Figure 6
39
Figure 7
40
Figure 8
41
Respondents' Comments
In addition to the quantitative data analyzed above, we received and analyzed a
substantial amount of qualitative data. We were gratified and impressed by both the
number of written comments we received and their deliberate quality. Approximately
half of those responding included thoughtful and occasionally lengthy comments. Three
of the questions on the instrument elicited the most responses:
Question 16 - "In your opinion what are some factors that may help
reduce the incidence of teenage pregnancy?" (this also prompted the
lengthiest responses);
Question 42 - "Is there any information you would like to share with us
regarding the causes of teenage pregnancy"; and
Question 43 - "Is there any other information you would like to share
with us regarding school-based teenage pregnancy prevention
programs?".
The qualitative data evidenced in the written comments of respondents was utterly
consistent in one regard: the need for early and continuous pregnancy prevention
programs. Beyond this there were several "themes" which were often invoked. The first
of these themes centered on two differing views of teenage girls, one view holding that
pregnancy was a manifest effect, the intentional act of a young woman who wanted to get
pregnant, often either to find some expression of love, or to gain independence through
welfare support. The other view found it a latent effect, the unintentional result of
seduction (purportedly by "older", non-school males) or poor sex education. A second
theme decried the media for portraying both too much sex, as well as presenting it
without consequences. And, finally, a third theme, often entwined with the former, was
that children receive "mixed messages" regarding sex, or in some cases a clutter of
messages, which confuse young people. Beyond these general observations, we can note
some very specific issues that received considerable commentary by our respondents:
Effective Programs
42
You can't put out a forest fire with a bucket of water
Director of Counseling, small high school
While some viewed the problem of teenage pregnancy as insurmountable, especially
given current resources, many commented on specific programs which were viewed as
very promising or already successful. In this regard, the ENABL (Education Now and
Babies Later) Program was singled out repeatedly for favorable comment. Indeed, only a
handful of other programs (e.g. Planned Parenthood's "Postponing Sexual Involvement")
were even mentioned. A few respondents echoed one superintendent's plea, "Do you
know of any programs that work? Please let me know."
Rural-Urban Differences
Being a small rural school we have had no pregnancies in ten years. We
had one case after graduating, though she got pregnant near the end of
her first year in high school
Superintendent-Principal, rural high school
There is little question that teenage pregnancy is viewed as both a greater problem,
and accompanied with greater stridency, by urban educators than by their rural
counterparts. However, rural educators often decried the absence of compelling
distractions in their communities, suggesting that sexual activity occurred out of a lack of
alternative forms of entertainment. They also were more likely to comment on
insufficiency of funding for prevention programs. Urban and suburban educators, on the
other hand, occasionally described teenage pregnancy in epidemic terms, and focused
causes on social mores, dysfunctional families and the media.
43
Parents and Families
Most teenagers in our area become pregnant in their own homes and in
their own beds. Our students need more after school and evening
supervision. They need vigilant and vested parents.
School Nurse, suburban elementary
................................ and middle school, combined
A consistent theme, variously expressed, was that families were not exercising
enough supervision over their children, or providing enough love and affection. In some
cases, particularly in urban districts, parents were characterized as poor modelers of
appropriate behavior, but most characterizations were of parents "too busy" to provide
sufficient care or supervision. Almost all educators noted that "dysfunctional families"
played a very large role in tacitly encouraging teenage sexual activity either by their
distance or discomfort in talking about sex and sexuality with their children. Many
educators noted the relative absence of "family activities" in the lives of children.
Mixed Messages
Don't give teenagers so many confusing ideas, such as be careful about
AIDS, but safe sex is fine.
Mentor teacher, 97% Hispanic combined
elementary and middle school
Focus on pregnancy prevention instead of sexual abstinence.
Health Services Administrator, large
urban unified school district
Many educators, indeed the vast majority, complained that students received "mixed
messages" on sexual activity; however, there was no consensus concerning how those
messages should be pared. Some argued for "abstinence only" programs, others for "safe
sex" programs, and still others for pregnancy prevention efforts through contraceptives.
One educator even admitted disbursing contraceptive information on an individual basis
because district policy forbids the discussion of contraceptives in class. The cacophony
surrounding sex education clearly is seen as debilitating by educators, but it is no less
true that school districts substantially disagree on just how to reduce the competing
44
messages to a single theme.
Somebody to Love
Pregnant children or unwed mothers who have been interviewed say they
just want to have somebody to love. That says it all.
Upper grade teacher, very small
Elementary district
The reason students become pregnant has nothing to do with knowledge.
The majority of teen pregnancy is intentional. Students want someone to
love them, they want to escape.
Health services coordinator, medium
size Unified district
Many respondents argued that teen girls elect pregnancy, principally to create a
loving relationship that they believe will be stable, but also as a means of escaping a life
that holds few reinforcing or empowering relationships. Quite a few respondents argued
that existing social and welfare programs provide incentives for girls to become pregnant,
often more than once. Most who believed girls made conscious decisions to get
pregnant, however, thought it less the result of economic incentives than inadequacies in
the teen's own family and home life. Others noted that a lack of an apparent future of
consequence led young women to construct a consequential life out of independent
motherhood. As one school nurse noted, "some students plan a pregnancy because they
have no plan or hope for the future."
45
Academic Standards and Self Esteem
First, higher academic standards in elementary schools, more
demanding curriculum emphasizing traditional classic
literature...second, the same as above in secondary schools with
commensurately demanding academic curriculum. Third, success based
on the reality of academic achievement results in expectations for adult
life that mirror traditional society. In a word, academics!
Superintendent-Principal-Teacher
small elementary district
Some respondents argued, forcefully, that a stronger and more sustained focus on
academic achievement would go a long way in reducing instances of teen pregnancy.
While not many expressed this view, those that did so offered lengthy presentations.
More often, a stronger academic program was mentioned as one key ingredient in
substantially improving student self-esteem. The lack thereof was one of the most
frequently mentioned "causes" of teen pregnancy.
More Information
More information about human reproduction, anatomy and physiology is
needed. Better information given to students about contraception and
where to obtain these services should be provided.
Health Services Coordinator, medium sized
combined school district
Competing with those who believed pregnancy an intentional action were an equal
number of respondents who believed pregnancy occurred out of ignorance, either about
reproduction or birth control. Many also mentioned the need for developing "refusal"
skills in young girls. This pregnancy-as-latent-effect theme disavowed any rational
calculus on the part of teen girls, and instead attributed teen pregnancy to a lack of
information or prevention strategies. Curiously, however, many of these respondents
also mentioned low self-esteem as a prime contributor, even though this would seem
more consistent with a "planned" pregnancy than an accidental one.
POLICY SUGGESTIONS
46
The data analysis presented in this report coupled with the comments we received
from the respondents suggest a few policy directions that might be followed. First, in
order to improve the effectiveness of the FLE curriculum, data on the incidence of
teenage pregnancy and the like must be maintained at the school level. As Adler, Bates
and Medringer (1985:187) point out, teenage pregnancy may be in danger of being
regarded as a hidden problem unless schools and school districts start to maintain data on
the number of total pregnancies among their students or the drop out rate of students as a
result of pregnancy. In our study, as collaborative evidence, the data presented in Figure
3 indicates the paucity of data on the incidence of AIDS, pregnancy, and venereal disease
among students maintained by California schools.
Clearly then, there needs to be some policy for collecting information on these
important variables. Serious efforts to prevent pregnancies or sexually transmitted
diseases cannot be measured for their success rate unless 'before-after' statistics are
available for comparison purposes. Further, schools and school districts might also
benefit by more research on methods that can be used to aggregate data on teen
pregnancy that have particular value for schools - for example teen births by school
districts - from already available data sources such as vital statistics registers (Gould,
Ostrem and Davey 1989).
Second, the schools, districts, and FLE effectiveness would greatly benefit from a
policy that regulates or governs teachers' preparedness for teaching the Family Life
Education curriculum. In our sample, FLE teachers in only 25 percent of all districts
were required to be trained in a particular subject area with the remaining 75 percent of
districts not requiring FLE teacher training in any particular subject area. Even among
those districts whose teachers held 'particular' qualifications (n=56), 68 % required a
teaching credential in health or health science. The next concentration of subject matter
area was science but only approximately 11 percent of districts required training in this
area. The problem is not that there is a dearth of trained teachers in California schools
but rather that there is a complete absence of teachers who are trained in the area of sex
education. This is not unique to the present time or to the state of California. In an
47
article by Forrest and Silverman (1989:206), for example, the authors comment, in the
following manner, about the qualifications of sex education teachers in the nation:
The majority of the 50,000 teachers providing sex education are
experienced educators who have training and experience in teaching the
subject. Their primary identity is as a teacher of another subject,
however, not as a sex educator, and for most of them, sex education
represents a small proportion of their teaching load.
Considering the breadth of the FLE curriculum and the absence of appropriate texts
or course materials for FLE, it behooves us to consider implementing policies that help
prepare teachers to specifically teach the subject content of FLE.
Third, policies should be developed to guide the evaluation of pregnancy prevention
programs. In our sample, FLE classes were not evaluated in nearly 28 of 100 cases.
Even in the approximately 71 percent of the districts that did evaluate their FLE classes,
only a mere 2 percent had an official evaluation conducted by an outside evaluator.
Again, in this regard, California schools and school districts are demonstrative of a
broader trend characterizing teenage pregnancy prevention and assistance efforts
throughout the nation over the last two decades: they are not evaluated! As Miller and
Dyk (1991:386) point out:
Literally hundreds of programs were developed during the 1980s to ameliorate the
problems associated with adolescent parenthood. Unfortunately, many of these
adolescent pregnancy programs were conducted with little or no evaluation of their
effects.
Thorough evaluations can help a community of educators identify those programs
that have worked and that might be adopted by other educators as well. But, Allen,
Philiber and Hoggson (1990:506) go a step further to say:
As preventive programs are developed, however, there is a need for
research that focuses not only upon program outcomes but also upon the
processes by which programs produce change in participants .... Such
research is needed to move beyond a simple catalog of programs which
did and did not work and to provide a base for developing new
48
programmatic interventions.
Thus, prevention programs need to be evaluated for their outcomes and for the
particular elements within the program that produce change and the conditions under
which these elements optimize programmatic success. To conduct such an evaluation,
however, would require the expertise of trained impact analysts who may already exist at
the level of the district office. Schools need to be encouraged by way of regulatory
policy to have their FLE programs evaluated on a regular basis.
Finally, the data in our sample also point to a need to develop some governing
policy that standardizes the FLE curriculum: the grades in which it is offered; the
content; and the number of hours it should be taught. For example, the current analysis
indicates that it is impossible to make a statement about the grade levels in which FLE is
offered in California schools. Further, although the total number of hours of FLE
instruction a student receives is currently very small, there is, even within these narrow
limits, considerable variation. Finally, of course, this report also indicates the need to
develop a standardized course syllabus that narrows the gap between what teachers think
should be taught under the FLE rubric and how much time should ideally be spent on
teaching particular topics, on one hand, and what is actually taught and for how long, on
the other hand. As is clear from the data presented in Table 17, teachers indicate that
they would ideally like to spend more time teaching every element of the items included
in our survey than they currently do.
A policy that standardizes these three dimensions of teenage pregnancy programs in
California schools would go a long way in improving FLE effectiveness. And such a
policy would do more than provide a blueprint for a successful FLE program. It would
shelter the teachers from negative community reaction in case there was any. Teachers
would be able to teach what they have negotiated as being important, at the grade levels
that have been identified as being important, and for as much time as is mutually
determined. In other words, standardized curriculum would, indirectly, provide support
for our teachers. In the words of Forrest and Silverman (1989:206):
49
Perhaps the most important step toward improved sex education would
be increased, clear support of the teachers. One form such support
should take is the development of curricula that provide teachers with
constructive, planned ways to raise and deal with topics on their students'
minds .... Greater support should also help increase the availability of
high-quality instructional materials and on going education and
information for teachers. Adequate teaching materials and support for
teaching in earlier grades the topics students want to know about might
help solve the problem of student inattention and negative reactions, to
say nothing of helping with the problems of teenage pregnancy and the
spread of AIDS and other STDs.
Conclusion ....................................................................................................
This report has summarized the findings of a survey on Family Life Education in
California school districts. The data reveal some interesting policy directions which
might help improve the effectiveness of the FLE curriculum and reduce the incidence of
teen pregnancies.
As a final point, the rather lengthy literature review presented in the beginning of
this report should be interpreted as reflective of the diverse intellectual approaches that
characterize the literature on teenage pregnancy. This report, nevertheless, concludes by
a suggestion for continued research in this area with the intent of developing some
theoretical rigor that will facilitate the development of effective prevention programs.
50
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abernethy, Virginia. 1974. "Illegitimate Conception Among Teenagers". American
Journal of Public Health 64: 662-664.
Allen, J.P.; Philliber, S.; and Hoggson, N. 1990. "School-Based Prevention of Teen-Age
Pregnancy and School Dropout: Process Evaluation of the National Replication of
the Teen Outreach Program. American Journal of Community Psychology.
18:505-524.
Abramson, P.R.; Moriuchi, K. D.; Waite, M. S.; and Perry, L. B. 1983. "Parental attitudes
about sex education: Cross cultural differences and covariate controls". Archives
of Sexual Behavior. 12: 381-396.
Adler, Emily Stier, Mildred Bates and Joan M. Merdinger. 1985. "Educational Policies
and Programs for Teenage Parents and Pregnant Teenagers". Family Relations.
34: 183-187.
Allen, Joseph P., Susan Philliber and Nancy Hoggson. 1990. "School-Based Prevention
of Teen-Age Pregnancy and School Dropout: Process Evaluation of the National
Replication of the Teen Outreach Program". American Journal of Community
Psychology. 18: 505-524.
Aneshensel, Carol S., Eve P. Fielder, and Rosina M. Becerra. 1989. "Fertility and
Fertility-Related Behavior Among Mexican-American and Non-Hispanic White
Female Adolescents". Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 30: 56-76.
Auerbach, S.; Nathan, B.; O'Hare, D.; and Benedicto, M. 1985. "Impact of ethnicity".
Society 1985 (Nov/Dec): 38-40.
Baldwin, S. E.; and Baranoski, M. V. 1990. "Family interactions and sex education in the
home." Adolescence. 99: 573-582.
Bennett, S. M.; and Dickinson, W. B. 1980. "Student-parent rapport and parental
involvement in sex, birth control, and venereal disease education". Journal of Sex
Research. 16:114-130.
Billy, J. O. G.; and Udry, J. R. 1985. "The influence of male and female best friends on
adolescent sexual behavior. Adolescence. 20:21-32.
Brindis, Claire. 1992. "Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention for Hispanic Youth: The Role
of Schools, Families, and Communities." Journal of School Health. 62: 345-351.
Butler, Janice R. and Linda M Burton. 1990. "Rethinking Teenage Childbearing: Is
51
Sexual Abuse A Missing Link". Family Relations. 39: 73-80.
Campbell, A. A. 1986. "Trends in teenage childbearing in the United States". In
Adolescent pregnancy and Childbearing: Findings from Research, edited by C. S.
Chilman. NIH Publication No. 81-2077. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C.
Current Population Reports. Population Characteristics "Fertility of American Women":
June 1992 U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics .
Administration. Bureau of the Census.
Cvetkovich, George, Barbara Grote, E. James Lieberman and Warren Miller. 1978. "Sex
role Development and Teenage Fertility-Related Behavior". Adolescence. 13:
231-236.
Darling, C. A.; and Hicks, M. W. 1982. "Parental influence on adolescent sexuality:
Implications for parents as educators". Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 11:
231-245.
Davis, Peter. 1974. "Contextual Sex-Saliency and Sexual Activity: The Relative Effects
of Family and Peer Group in the Sexual Socialization Process". Journal of
Marriage and the Family. 36: 196-202.
Davis, Richard A. 1989. "Teenage Pregnancy: A Theoretical Analysis Of A Social
Problem". Adolescence. 24: 19-29.
Dickinson, G. E. 1978. "Adolescent sex information sources: 1964-1974". Adolescence.
13: 653-658.
Dryfoos, Joy G. 1988. "School-Based Health Clinics: Three Years of Experience".
Family Planning Perspectives. 20:215-222.
Durant, R.; Pendergrast, R.; Seymore, C. 1990. "Sexual behavior among Hispanic female
adolescents in the U.S.". Pediatrics. 85: 1051-1058.
Eisen, Marvin and Gail L. Zellman. 1987. "Changes in Incidence of Sexual Intercourse
of Unmarried Teenagers Following A Community Based Sex Education
Program". The Journal of Sex Research. 23: 527-533.
Elliott, D. S.; and Morse, B. J. 1989. "Delinquency and drug use as risk factors in teenage
sexual activity". Youth and Society. 21: 32-60.
Ensminger, M. E. 1987. "Adolescent sexual behavior as it relates to other transition
behaviors in youth". In S. Hofferth and C. Hayes (Eds.), Risking the future:
52
Adolescent sexuality, pregnancy, and childbearing: Working papers and
statistical appendices. Washington, D.C.: national Academy Press.
Fisher, Terri D. 1986. "An Exploratory Study of Parent-Child Communication About
Sex and the Sexual Attitudes of Early, Middle, and Late Adolescents". The
Journal of Genetic Psychology. 147: 543-557.
Flick, Louise H. 1986. "Paths to Adolescent Parenthood: Implications for Prevention".
Public Health Reports. 101: 132-147.
Forrest, Jacqueline, D. and Silverman, Jane. 1989. "What Public School Teachers Teach
about Preventing Pregnancy, AIDS and Sexually Transmitted Diseases". Family
Planning Perspectives. 21:199-207.
Forrest, J. D.; and Singh, S. 1990. "The sexual and reproductive behavior of American
women, 1982-1988". Family Planning Perspective. 22: 206-214.
Fox, G. L. 1980. "The family' role in adolescent sexual behavior". In T. Ooms (Ed.),
Teenage pregnancy in a family context. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Fox, G.L.; and Inazu, J. K. 1980. "Mother-daughter communication about sex". Family
Relations. 29:347-352.
Fox, Greer, Litton, Marie Colombo, William F. Clevenger, and Celia Ferguson. 1988.
"Parental Division of Labor in Adolescent Sexual Socialization". Journal of
Contemporary Ethnography. 17:349-371.
Furstenberg, Frank Jr. 1971. "Birth Control Experience Among Pregnant Adolescents:
The Process of Unplanned Parenthood". Social Problems. 19: 192-203.
Furstenberg, Frank F. Jr. 1991. "As the Pendulum Swings Teenage Childbearing and
Social Concern". Family Relations. 40:127-138.
Furstenberg, Frank F. Jr. 1987. "Race Differences in Teenage Sexuality, Pregnancy, and
Adolescent Childbearing". The Milbank Quarterly. 65: 381-403.
Furstenberg, Frank F. Jr. 1992. "Teenage Childbearing and Cultural Rationality: A
Thesis in Search of Evidence". Family Relations. 41: 239-243.
Furstenberg, Frank F. Jr. 1976. Unplanned Parenthood: The Social Consequences of
Teenage Childbearing. New York: The Free Press.
Furstenberg, Frank F. Jr, Leon Gordis, and Milton Markowitz. 1969. "Birth Control
Knowledge and Attitudes Among Unmarried Pregnant Adolescents: A
Preliminary Report". Journal of Marriage and the Family. 31: 34-42.
53
Furstsenberg, Frank F.Jr., Jeanne Brools-Gunn, and Lindsay Chase-Lansdale. 1989.
"Teenaged Pregnancy and Childbearing". American Psychologist. 44: 313-320.
Furstenberg, Frank F. Jr; Moore, K. A.; and Peterson, James A. 1985. "Sex Education
and Sexual Experience Among Adolescents". American Journal of Public Health.
75:1331-1332.
Furstenberg, F. F. Jr.; Herceg-Baron, R.; Shea, J.; and Webb, D. 1986. "Family
communication and contraceptive use among sexually active adolescents. In J. B.
Lancaster and B. D. Hamburg (Eds.), School-age pregnancy and parenthood:
Biosocial dimension (pp.251-261). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Gould, Jeffrey B., Mary Ostrem and Becky Davey. 1989. "Analyzing Teenage Births By
School District". Family Planning Perspectives. 21:131-133.
Hayes, Cheryl D. ed., Risking the Future: Adolescent Sexuality Pregnancy and
Childbearing. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 1987.
Hofferth, Sandra L., Joan R. Kahn, and Wendy Baldwin. 1987. "Premarital Sexual
Activity Among U.S. Teenage Women Over the Past Three Decades". Family
Planning Perspectives. 19:46-53.
Hofferth, S. L. 1987. "Factors affecting initiation of sexual intercourse". In S. L.
Hofferth & C. D. Hayes (Eds.), Risking the future: Adolescent sexuality,
pregnancy, and childbearing. Vol. 2, (pp. 7-35). Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press.
Hogan, D.; and Kitagawa, E. 1985. "The impact of social status, family structure, and
neighborhood on the fertility of black adolescents". American Journal of
Sociology. 90:825-855.
Institute For Juvenile Research, and William Simon. 1974. "Adolescent Sexual
Behavior: Context and Change". Social Problems. 22: 58-76.
Jessor, R.; and Jessor, R. 1977. Problem behavior and psychosocial development. New
York: Academic Press.
Jones, Elise F. 1986. Teenage Pregnancy In Industrialized Countries. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
Juhasz, Anne McCreary; and Mary Sonnenshein-Schneider. 1987. "Adolescent
Sexuality: Values, Morality and Decision Making". Adolescence. 22: 579-590.
Kandell, Netta. 1979. "The Unwed Adolescent Pregnancy: An Accident?". American
54
Journal of Nursing. 79: 2112-2114.
Kahn, J. R.; Kalsbeek, W. D.; and Hofferth, S. L. 1988. "National estimates of teenage
sexual activity: Evaluating the comparability of three national surveys".
Demography. 25: 198-204.
Kirby, Douglas, Lynn Peterson, and Jean G. Brown. 1982. "A Joint Parent-Child Sex
Education Program". Child Welfare. 61 (LXI): 105-114.
Luker, K. 1984. Abortion and the politics of motherhood. Los Angeles, CA: Regents of
the University of California.
Males, Mike. 1993. "School-age Pregnancy: Why Hasn't Prevention Worked?". Journal
of School Health. 63:429-432.
McAnarney, E. R. 1982. "Report on adolescent pregnancy to the William T. Grant
Foundation". New York: William T. Grant Foundation.
Mecklenburg, Marjory E. and Patricia G. Thompson. 1983. "The Adolescent Family
Life Program As A Prevention Measure". Public Health Reports. 98: 21-29.
Miller, Brent C. and Kristin A. Moore. 1990. "Adolescent Sexual Behavior, Pregnancy,
and Parenting: Research through the 1980s". Journal of Marriage and the
Family. 52: 1025-1044.
Miller, Brent C.; and Dyk, Patricia, H. 1991. "Community of caring effects on
adolescent mothers: A program evaluation case study. Family Relations. 40:386-395.
Miller, P.; and Simon, W. 1980. "The development of sexuality in adolescence". In J.
Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of Adolescent Psychology. New York: Wiley.
Miller, B. C.; McKoy, J. K.; Olson, T. C.; and Wallace, C. M. 1986. "Parental discipline
and control attempts in relation to adolescent sexual attitudes and behavior".
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48: 503-512.
Moore, Kirstin A. ; Simms, Margaret C.; and Betsey, Charles L. 1986. Choice and
Circumstance: Racial Differences in Adolescent Sexuality and Fertility. New
Brunswick: Transaction Books.
Moore, K.; Peterson, J.; and Furstenberg F. 1986. "Parental attitudes and the occurrence
of sexual activity". Journal of Marriage and the Family. 48: 777-782.
Mott, F. 1986. The pace of repeated childbearing among young American mothers".
Family Planning Perspectives. 18:5-12.
55
Mott, F. L.; Haurin, R. J. 1988. "Linkages between sexual activity and alcohol and drug
use among American adolescents". Family Planning Perspectives. 20: 128-136.
Mueller, Kay E. and William G. Powers. 1990. "Parent-Child Sexual Discussion:
Perceived Communication Style and Subsequent Behavior". Adolescence. 25:
469-482.
Musick, Judith S. 1993. Young, Poor, and Pregnant: The Psychology of Teenage
Motherhood. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Newcomer, S.; and Udry, J. R. 1987. "Parental marital status effects on adolescent
sexual .............. behavior". Journal of Marriage and Family. 49: 235-240.
Olsen, Joseph, Stan Weed, Anita Nielsen, and Larry Jensen. 1992. "Student Evaluation
Of Sex Education Programs Advocation Abstinence". Adolescence. 27: 369-380.
Pleck, Joseph H., Freya L. Sonenstein, and Leighton C. Ku. 1990. "Contraceptive
Attitudes and Intention to Use Condoms in Sexually Experienced and
Inexperienced Adolescent Males". Journal of Family Issues. 11: 294-312.
Rodgers, Joseph Lee and David C. Rowe. 1990. "Adolescent Sexual Activity and
Mildly Deviant Behavior: Sibling and Friendship Effects ". Journal of Family Issues.
11:274-293.
Rozema, Hazel J. 1986. "Defensive Communication Climate as A Barrier to Sex
Education in the Home". Family Relations. 35: 531-537.
Salguero, C. 1984. "The role of ethnic factors in adolescent pregnancy". In M. Sugar
(ed.), Adolescent Pregnancy. New York, NY: Spectrum Publications.
Sanders, G. F.; and Mullis, R. L. 1988. "Family influences on sexual attitudes and
knowledge as reported by college students". Adolescence. 13:838-846.
Santelli, John S. and Peter Beilenson. 1992. "Risk Factors for Adolescent Sexual
Behavior, Fertility, and Sexually Transmitted Diseases". Journal of School Health.
62: 271-279.
Shapiro, Constance Hoenk. 1994. "Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention: Sexual Learning
and Self-Esteem". Human Ecology Forum. 10: 21-24.
Spanier, G. 1976. "Perceived sex knowledge, exposure to eroticism, and premarital
sexual behavior: The impact of dating". Sociological Quarterly 17: 247-261.
56
Spanier, G. 1977. "Sources of sex information and premarital sexual behavior". Journal
of Sex Research. 13:73-88.
Stark, Elizabeth. 1986. "Young, Innocent and Pregnant". Psychology Today. 20: 2835.
Thornton, Arland. 1990. "The Courtship Process and Adolescent Sexuality". Journal of
Family Issues. 11: 239-273.
Thornton, A.; and Camburn, D. 1989. "The influence of the family on premarital sexual
attitudes and behavior". Demography. 24:323-340.
Warren, Keith C. and Ray W. Johnson. 1989. "Family Environment, Affect,
Ambivalence and Decisions About Unplanned Adolescent Pregnancy".
Adolescence. 24: 505-522.
Zabin, L. S.; Wong, Rebecca; Weinick, R. M.; and Mark R. Emerson. 1992. Journal of
Marriage and the Family. 54: 496-507.
Zabin, L. S.; Hardy, J.B.; Smith, E. A.; and Hirsh, M. B. 1986. "Substance use and its
relation to sexual activity among inner city adolescents". Journal of Adolescent
Health Care. 7: 320-331.
Zelnik, M.; and Shah, F. 1983. "First intercourse among young Americans". Family
Planning Perspectives. 15: 64-70.
Zongker, Calvin E. 1977. "The Self-Concept of Pregnant Adolescent Girls".
Adolescence. 12: 477-488.
57
58
Table 1
Number and percentage of school districts
by percentage of students receiving free lunch
______________________________________________________
Percentage of students ................................................... Number of districts
Percentage of
receiving free lunch .......................................................................................
................................................................................................................
districts
______________________________________________________
00-10 %........................................................................................................
34..........................................................................................................
15.6
11-20 %........................................................................................................
29..........................................................................................................
13.3
21-30 %........................................................................................................
28..........................................................................................................
12.8
31-40 %........................................................................................................
32..........................................................................................................
14.7
41-50 %........................................................................................................
33..........................................................................................................
15.1
51-60 %........................................................................................................
19..........................................................................................................
8.7
61-70 %........................................................................................................
16..........................................................................................................
7.3
71-80 %........................................................................................................
14..........................................................................................................
6.4
81-90 %........................................................................................................
9..........................................................................................................
4.1
91-100 %........................................................................................................
4..........................................................................................................
1.8
no response ....................................................................................................
45 ................................................................................................................
missing
59
Total ...............................................................................................................
263..........................................................................................................
100.0
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
218
______________________________________________________
Table 2
Number and percentage of school districts
by percentage of students who drop out
______________________________________________________
Percentage of students ................................................... Number of districts
Percentage of
who drop out ..................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
districts
______________________________________________________
00-10 %........................................................................................................
147..........................................................................................................
88.0
11-20 %........................................................................................................
17..........................................................................................................
10.2
21-30 %........................................................................................................
2..........................................................................................................
1.2
31-40 %........................................................................................................
1..........................................................................................................
0.6
no response ....................................................................................................
96 ................................................................................................................
Total ...............................................................................................................
263..........................................................................................................
100.0
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
167..........................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
60
Table 3
Type of school by number of schools by total enrollment
______________________________________________________
Type of school................................................................................................
No. of .....................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................... schools
enrollment ..............................................................................................
______________________________________________________
Elementary .....................................................................................................
1266........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
Middle ............................................................................................................
938........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
Junior High ....................................................................................................
598 .................................................................................................... 70007
High................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................... 336
196011....................................................................................................
K-6 ................................................................................................................
770........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
K-8 ................................................................................................................
60........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
K-12 ...............................................................................................................
.................................................................................................... 56
82859.............................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
Figure 1
Distribution of sample by race of students
______________________________________________________
Table 4
Percentage of school districts by racial/ethnic composition
______________________________________________________
Percentage of .................................................................................................
Percentage of districts
students ................_____________________________________________
......................................................................................................White
Hispanic .................................................................................... African
61
Total
866499
151782
225990
47383
Asian
Native
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................American
American
______________________________________________________
00-10 %...................................................................................................7.1
38.4.........................................................................................................
83.3.........................................................................................................
11-20 %...................................................................................................4.5
15.7.........................................................................................................
10.3.........................................................................................................
21-30 %...................................................................................................6.7
9.7 ......................................................................................................... 4.9
2.6 .............................................................................................................. 31-40 %...................................................................................................7.1
12.5.........................................................................................................
3.2.........................................................................................................
41-50 %...................................................................................................7.1
6.5 ......................................................................................................... 0.6
0.6 .............................................................................................................. 51-60 %...................................................................................................8.9
5.1 .............................................................................................................. - ..............................................................................................................
61-70 %...................................................................................................9.4
1.9 .............................................................................................................. - ..............................................................................................................
71-80 %.................................................................................................15.6
5.1 .............................................................................................................. - ..............................................................................................................
81-90 %.................................................................................................17.9
3.2 .............................................................................................................. - ..............................................................................................................
91-100 %.................................................................................................15.6
1.9 ......................................................................................................... 0.6
- ..............................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
Figure 2
Total Percentage of white and Hispanic students
______________________________________________________
Table 5
Percentage of districts that have teachers who hold
62
84.8
93.7
8.5
4.7
0.6
-
-
0.8
-
-
0.8
a teaching credential
______________________________________________________
Percent holding ..............................................................................................
districts...........................................................................................................
Percent of districts
credential
______________________________________________________
00-10 %........................................................................................................
30..........................................................................................................
14.4
11-20 %........................................................................................................
1..........................................................................................................
0.5
21-30 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
31-40 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
- ................................................................................................................
41-50 %........................................................................................................
2..........................................................................................................
1.0
51-60 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
61-70 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
71-80 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
81-90 %........................................................................................................
1..........................................................................................................
0.5
90-100 %........................................................................................................
175..........................................................................................................
83.7
no response ....................................................................................................
54 ................................................................................................................
missing
Total ...............................................................................................................
263..........................................................................................................
100.0
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
63
No. of
209
______________________________________________________
Table 6
Descriptives on school districts and FLE
______________________________________________________Question item
yes ..........................................................................................................
no............................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
Is FLE offered with
AIDS prevention
education?
(number)........................................................................................................
205..........................................................................................................
39..........................................................................................................
(percent) ........................................................................................................
84..........................................................................................................
16..........................................................................................................
------------------------------------------------------------Is there any special
policy regulating the
qualifications of FLE
teachers?.........................................................................................................
(number)........................................................................................................
72.........................................................................................................
164..........................................................................................................
(percent) ........................................................................................................
30.5.........................................................................................................
69.5.........................................................................................................
------------------------------------------------------------Are FLE teachers
trained in any
particular subject?
(number)........................................................................................................
57..........................................................................................................
171..........................................................................................................
(percent) ........................................................................................................
25..........................................................................................................
75..........................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
64
total
244
100
236
100
228
100
Table 7
Subject area training of FLE teachers
____________________________________________________________
Subject area....................................................................................................
Number of ..............................................................................................
Percent
................................................................................................................
Districts ..............................................................................................
Districts
____________________________________________________________
Home economics............................................................................................
4............................................................................................................
7.1
Science ...........................................................................................................
............................................................................................................ 6
10.7
Social Science ................................................................................................
5............................................................................................................
8.9
Health/Health science ....................................................................................
38............................................................................................................
67.9
School nurse...................................................................................................
3.................................................................................................
5.4
Total ...............................................................................................................
...............................................................................................56
100.0
____________________________________________________________
65
Table 8
Percentage of districts that have a nurse on campus
______________________________________________________
Percent of schools in
district that have.............................................................................................
districts...........................................................................................................
Percent of a nurse on campus
______________________________________________________
00-10 %........................................................................................................
87..........................................................................................................
46.5
11-20 %........................................................................................................
7..........................................................................................................
3.7
21-30 %........................................................................................................
5..........................................................................................................
2.7
31-40 %........................................................................................................
5..........................................................................................................
2.7.......................................................................................................
41-50 %........................................................................................................
9..........................................................................................................
4.8
51-60 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
61-70 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
71-80 %........................................................................................................
2..........................................................................................................
1.1
81-90 %........................................................................................................
- ..........................................................................................................
90-100 %........................................................................................................
72..........................................................................................................
38.5
no response ....................................................................................................
76 ................................................................................................................
missing
Total ...............................................................................................................
263..........................................................................................................
66
No. of
100.0
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
187
______________________________________________________
Figure 3
Percentage of districts that maintain data on AIDS, venereal disease
and incidence of pregnancy among students.
______________________________________________________
Table 9
Districts requiring and offering FLE
______________________________________________________
Item ................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
Do the schools in your
district offer FLE classes?
(number)........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
(percent) ........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
Are the schools in your
district required to offer
FLE classes?
(number)........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
(percent) ........................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
Table 10
Percent of districts offering FLE by percent
of districts requiring FLE
______________________________________________________
................................................................................................................
% of districts ..........................................................................................
% of districts
................................................................................................................
67
Yes
No
226
33
87.3
12.7
172
51
77.1
22.9
requiring FLE.........................................................................................
not requiring FLE
................................................................................................................
____________________________________
% of districts .................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
21.8
offering FLE
% of districts
not offering FLE .................................................................................... 0.0
................................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
Table 11
Grades in which FLE is taught
______________________________________________________
Grades ............................................................................................................
Number of districts ................................................. Percent of districts
______________________________________________________
4-6 ................................................................................................................
11 ................................................................................................................
4.91
7-8 ................................................................................................................
16 ................................................................................................................
7.14
9-12 ................................................................................................................
6 ................................................................................................................
2.68
K-12 ...............................................................................................................
11..........................................................................................................
....................................................................................................... 4.91
4-12 ................................................................................................................
3 ................................................................................................................
1.34
K-8 ................................................................................................................
3 ................................................................................................................
1.34
4-8 ................................................................................................................
18 ................................................................................................................
8.04
5,6,7,8 only ....................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
9.82
68
78.2
100.0
22
6,7,8 only .......................................................................................................
18 ................................................................................................................
8.04
6 only .............................................................................................................
4 ................................................................................................................
1.79
other ...............................................................................................................
112..........................................................................................................
....................................................................................................... 50.0
no response ...................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
missing
Total ...............................................................................................................
263..........................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................100.0
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
______________________________________________________
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
Table 12
Number of hours per week FLE classes offered
______________________________________________________
Hours per week ..............................................................................................
Number of districts ................................................. Percent of districts
______________________________________________________
0-5 ..............................................................................................................
115..........................................................................................................
91.27
6-10 ..............................................................................................................
6..........................................................................................................
4.76
11-15 ..............................................................................................................
1..........................................................................................................
0.79
16-20 ..............................................................................................................
1..........................................................................................................
0.79
more than 20 ..................................................................................................
3 ................................................................................................................
2.38
no response ....................................................................................................
137..........................................................................................................
missing
Total ...............................................................................................................
69
39
224
263..........................................................................................................
100.0
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
126
______________________________________________________
Table 13
Number and percent of parents who withdraw
students from FLE classes
______________________________________________________
Percent parents who .......................................................................................
Number of ..............................................................................................
Percent of
withdraw students ..........................................................................................
districts...................................................................................................
districts
from FLE
______________________________________________________
no parents withdraw.......................................................................................
................................................................................................................
0-1 %..............................................................................................................
108..........................................................................................................
48.6
1.1-4.9 %.......................................................................................................
65............................................................................................................
29.3
5-10 %............................................................................................................
30............................................................................................................
13.5
11-15 %..........................................................................................................
4..............................................................................................................
1.8
more than 15 % ..............................................................................................
2..............................................................................................................
0.9
no response ....................................................................................................
41............................................................................................................
missing
Total ...............................................................................................................
263..........................................................................................................
100..........................................................................................................
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
222
______________________________________________________
Table 14
70
13
5.9
Pressure to stop or modify FLE
______________________________________________________
Item ................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................... Yes
No
______________________________________________________
Have you been pressured
to stop offering FLE?
(number)........................................................................................................
......................................................................................................... 32
190
(percent .........................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................14.4
85.6
Have you been pressured
to modify FLE curriculum? ...........................................................................
(number)........................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................... 76
147
(percent) ........................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................34.1
65.9
______________________________________________________
Table 15
Who evaluates FLE
______________________________________________________
Evaluators ......................................................................................................
Number of districts ................................................. Percent of districts
______________________________________________________1. teacher
......................................................................................................... 61
.........................................................................................................31.0
2. school official ...........................................................................................
................................................................................................................
3. district official...........................................................................................
................................................................................................................
4. outside evaluators .....................................................................................
................................................................................................................
5. 1,2, and 3 only...........................................................................................
................................................................................................................
6. 2, and 3 only..............................................................................................
2 ................................................................................................................
1.0
71
11
5.6
5
2.6
4
2.0
58
29.6
7. 1, and 2 only..............................................................................................
29 ................................................................................................................
14.8
8. 1, and 3 only..............................................................................................
13 ................................................................................................................
6.6
9. 1, 2, 3, and 4 only......................................................................................
................................................................................................................
no response ....................................................................................................
67 ................................................................................................................
missing
Total ...............................................................................................................
263..........................................................................................................
100.0
Valid Cases ....................................................................................................
196
______________________________________________________
Table 16
Mean score of importance of certain variables
in evaluating FLE effectiveness
______________________________________________________
Variable..................................................................................................
.......................................................................Mean score (range = 1-3)
______________________________________________________
Student feedback............................................................................................
................................................................................................................
Subject matter competency ............................................................................
.........................................................................................................2.20
Reduction in pregnancy rate ..........................................................................
.........................................................................................................2.32
Reduction in VD rate .....................................................................................
................................................................................................................
Increase in student's self esteem ....................................................................
2.59
Increase in responsible parenting (students)..................................................
Better parent-child communication ...............................................................
2.53
Better academic performance ........................................................................
2.07
______________________________________________________
Figure 4
Self ratings of FLE program
72
13
6.6
2.77
2.36
2.36
_____________________________________________________________
Table 17
Mean actual and ideal importance scores for
FLE curriculum items
______________________________________________________
ITEM..............................................................................................................
K-3 .......................................................................................... 4-6
7-8
9-12
................................................................................................................
___________________________________..........................................
................................................................................................................
actual .............................................................................................ideal
actual
ideal ............................................................................................. actual
ideal
actual .............................................................................................ideal
________________________________________________________________________
AIDS PREVENTION .............................................................................1.32
1.48
1.77..................................................................................................2.09
2.24
2.61..................................................................................................2.43
2.75
VD PREVENTION........................................................................................
1.08
1.13..................................................................................................1.49
1.8
2.11..................................................................................................2.50
2.39
2.68
SEXUAL BEHAVIOR ...........................................................................1.13
1.24
1.63..................................................................................................1.97
2.33
2.66..................................................................................................2.48
2.78
SEXUAL VALUES .......................................................................................
1.19
1.38..................................................................................................1.73
2.06
2.13..................................................................................................2.53
2.22
2.63
FAMILY INTERACTIONS ...................................................................1.88
2.32
2.10..................................................................................................2.45
2.19
2.56..................................................................................................2.20
2.63
STRENGTHENING THE
INDIVIDUAL................................................................................................
2.30
2.57..................................................................................................2.41
2.64
2.42..................................................................................................2.66
2.39
2.72
IMPROVING SELF
ESTEEM ........................................................................................................
2.45..................................................................................................2.69
2.49
2.73..................................................................................................2.47
2.70
2.48..................................................................................................2.69
IMPROVING ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE ..........................................................................................
2.28
73
2.50..................................................................................................2.19
2.14..................................................................................................2.44
2.51
PHYSICAL
DEVELOPMENT ..........................................................................................
2.13..................................................................................................2.31
2.39..................................................................................................2.54
2.38
HUMAN REPRODUCTION..................................................................1.16
2.00..................................................................................................2.17
2.47..................................................................................................2.28
CONTRACEPTIVE USE .......................................................................1.04
1.23..................................................................................................1.47
2.21..................................................................................................2.12
CONSEQUENCES OF
EARLY SEXUALITY............................................................................1.07
1.56..................................................................................................1.94
2.60..................................................................................................2.60
CONSEQUENCES OF
PREGNANCY ...............................................................................................
1.08..................................................................................................1.51
2.24..................................................................................................2.62
2.76
DATING ........................................................................................................
1.09..................................................................................................1.05
1.82..................................................................................................2.08
2.25..................................................................................................2.62
PEER PRESSURE .........................................................................................
2.07..................................................................................................2.31
2.47..................................................................................................2.72
2.67
OPPOSITE SEX
AWARENESS ...............................................................................................
1.40..................................................................................................1.85
2.13..................................................................................................2.35
2.45
ENHANCE DECISION
MAKING .......................................................................................................
2.02..................................................................................................2.39
2.67..................................................................................................2.47
2.45..................................................................................................2.80
ALTERNATIVE LIFE
STYLES.........................................................................................................
1.09..................................................................................................1.16
74
2.45
2.06
1.94
2.47
2.14
1.31
2.30
2.47
1.05
1.77
2.49
1.08
2.24
2.75
1.07
1.89
2.42
1.47
2.44
1.79
2.57
2.48
1.26
2.06
2.15
2.34
2.78
1.17
1.47..................................................................................................1.42
1.49..................................................................................................1.94
______________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
Figure 5
Actual and ideal amount of time devoted to various FLE
curriculum items in grades K-3.
____________________________________________________________
Figure 6
Actual and ideal amount of time devoted to various FLE
curriculum items in grades 4-6.
____________________________________________________________
Figure 7
Actual and ideal amount of time devoted to various FLE
curriculum items in grades 7-8.
____________________________________________________________
Figure 8
Actual and ideal amount of time devoted to various FLE
curriculum items in grades 9-12.
____________________________________________________________
_
75
1.74