Violating the Rights of the Child through Inadequate Sexual Health Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The focus of this research was to examine the impact of traditional sexual health education, an approach that infringes upon children's rights to information, on 15 year-olds' knowledge of birth control, sexually transmitted infections, pregnancy, attitudes toward gays and lesbians. One hundred and twenty grade ten students completed a survey comprising measures of sex education received, sexual activity, sexual health knowledge, attitudes toward gays, lesbians, and the teaching of homosexuality, and school-based experiences with homophobia. Our findings reinforce the inadequacy of traditional sexual health education to meet rights consistent standards. Although many of the respondents were sexually active, their knowledge of sexual health issues, and especially of homosexuality, was poor. Homophobic expression was reported to be very common in schools, and teacher interventions were few. Prejudicial attitudes toward gays and lesbians were related to experience with homophobia and to a lack of knowledge about homosexuality. In essence current practices are violating the rights of all children but particularly those of sexual minority status. Consistency with children's rights requires shifts in sex education practices and teacher attitudes and behaviors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".