How does sexual health education vary in quality of its delivery from the perspective of teachers?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teachers are key to the quality of school-based sexual health education (SHE) that students receive. The authors sought to determine teachers’ perceptions of the quality of the SHE they provide. In addition, they examined factors associated with these perceptions, topics about which little is known. Participants were 343 teachers aged 23 to 62 ( M = 41.55 years; 80.5% women) teaching at the elementary (K–5, n = 123), middle school (Grades 6–8, n = 160), and high school (Grades 9–12, n = 60) levels. Teachers typically reported partial coverage of assigned outcomes, rated their teaching quality as being moderate in quality on average (i.e., neither high nor low in quality), and indicated that they seldom or only occasionally used a range of teaching methods. Elementary school teachers rated their SHE teaching quality as significantly poorer than did middle school and high school teachers. Canonical correlation analysis indicated that higher quality ratings of one’s SHE teaching were associated with extensive in-service training and self-directed learning, greater experience teaching SHE, and more comfort and willingness to provide SHE. A second profile emerged of teachers who had more years teaching generally, more SHE teaching experience, more in-service training, and yet less willingness to provide SHE. This work underscores the need to study the teaching context more closely, as well as the willingness of teachers for self-directed learning in efforts to improve SHE delivery.
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 | 0.006 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".