Satisfaction with previous sexual health education as a predictor of intentions to pursue further sexual health education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the nature of the relationship between satisfaction with high school sexual health education and the pursuit of a post-secondary human sexuality course. In an initial study, first-year university students who received high school sexual health education in Ontario completed a questionnaire which assessed their satisfaction with sexual health education and asked whether students were pursuing or intended to pursue a human sexuality course in university. Students who were less satisfied with high school sexual health education and, in particular, those who did not rate sexual health education as contributing to their understanding of themselves as sexual beings, were more likely to pursue a university-level course. A second qualitative study investigated potential reasons underlying this correlation. Eleven first-year students enrolled in a human sexuality course were interviewed about (a) their satisfaction with their high school sexual health education and (b) their reasons for taking the course. The findings suggest that dissatisfaction with sexual health education may be a result of students perceiving they had not learned enough personally relevant information and/or received a biased education in high school. These factors, which seem to determine dissatisfaction, may motivate students to pursue additional education in university.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".