Teachers' perception of sexualities education: a study of secondary school teachers in Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently in Quebec no sexuality education program is formally mandated by the Ministry of Education.Since the Reform of 2005 teachers are expected to integrate sexuality related topics in their respective fields, for example, ethics and religious culture, English literature, or even mathematics.This study examines the perceptions of teachers on the teaching of sexualities education in this particular context.Data was collected through interviews and aimed to answer three questions: 1) how do secondary school teachers in Montreal English schools perceive the current state of the sexualities education program at their school?; 2) how do the teachers view/describe their role in developing students' sexual knowledge?and 3) how do the teachers believe sexualities education should be taught and why?Three conceptual themes are discussed.Theme 1, need for program structure, explores teachers' view on the structure of sexualities education.Data shows that they are very critical of the current situation.Due to lack of organization and specific training, the participants feel confused about what they should teach, fearing they will be viewed in a negative light for integrating a "program" that is not mandated by the formal curriculum.Theme 2, valuing students, addresses how and why teachers address difficult topics in spite of this fear.The teachers interviewed want to make sure that their students receive appropriate information regarding their sexuality.They see their role as being emotionally open and accessible to their students.The findings of the study clearly indicate that these teachers are strongly animated by a personal sense of responsibility for the well-being of their students.Lastly theme 3, moving beyond the classroom, covers teachers' program preferences and what they hope to accomplish by teaching a comprehensive program.Not only do they hope to reach students on a personal level, they also hope students will develop into considerate and respectful citizens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".