Talk:Sex education: Difference between revisions

Line 9: Line 9:

__TOC__

==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==

[[File:Sciences humaines.svg|40px]] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 20 December 2019. Further details are available [[Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Hunter_College,_CUNY/Critical_and_feminist_methodologies_-_Editing_Wikipedia_(Fall_2019)|on the course page]]. Student editor(s): [[User:Kimiesha|Kimiesha]].

{{small|Above undated message substituted from [[Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment]] by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) 09:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)}}

==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==

[[File:Sciences humaines.svg|40px]] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2020 and 7 December 2020. Further details are available [[Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/New_York_University/Research_Process_and_Methodology_-_RPM_FA_2020_-_MASY1-GC_1260_101_Tue_(Fall_2020)|on the course page]]. Student editor(s): [[User:Soymilkp20|Soymilkp20]].

{{small|Above undated message substituted from [[Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment]] by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) 09:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)}}

==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==

[[File:Sciences humaines.svg|40px]] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2021 and 15 December 2021. Further details are available [[Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Boston_University/Public_Writing_(Fall_2021)|on the course page]]. Student editor(s): [[User:Mollyybakerr|Mollyybakerr]].

{{small|Above undated message substituted from [[Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment]] by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) 09:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)}}

== Evidence ? ==

https://www.theguardian.com/healthcare-network/2015/mar/24/sex-education-uk-teenagers-pregnancy-sexually-transmitted-infections [[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 12:02, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

==Some more Suggestions==

1) Relevance: there seems to be a little relevance for the definition of “sex education.” “Definition” can be changed to comprehensive sex education. Plus the citations used are at least 10 years old in some areas.

2) There seems to be a high representation of a view point in this article with worlds that suggest an opinion. Under evidence there are big block quotes without citations. It also uses language that pushes an opinion, even if it is the language of the author/article the editor is citing.

3) The lead seems to be missing what I would consider a key point of relevance relating to formal and informal education. It states the main ways in which sex education is passed on, but fails to mention informal methods such as peers, media, and common types of media. This is only mentioned later on as it states how in the mid-20th century it was obtained informally, but this method of education isn’t solely limited to only the 20th century…?

4) I think there could be a section for abstinence only education, such as where it is represented and by whom. Giving it a whole section with time would allow for a more balanced article.

5) There are plenty citations missing. It is missing citations regarding the increase in teen pregnancies of the 1960s and later under the heading “sources” the author writes how parents should be involved (needs a citation). This is just one of many places missing a citation as a lot of this article is direct quotes.

6) structure: it is odd to have who supports what type of education in the lead of this wikipedia article. Public opinion and some countries under “by area” seem un-necessary due to the lack of citation and information. For example Thailand has no citations at all, so why do we have it?

7) some information is a bit outdated reaching as far back as 2002. ([[User:Rbuell|Rbuell]] ([[User talk:Rbuell|talk]]) 15:40, 15 February 2018 (UTC))

==Sex education in Thailand, Netherlands, and Germany==

1) In the article “Smart boys” and “Sweet Girls,” the authors argues how Thailand’s sex education is considerably ineffective in that it lacks cultural context. This article makes note on what the sex education lacks, while also supporting 5 major changes to it, most of which have to do with doing away with western sex-education material. I would suggest adding ideas such as informal education being the preferred method in Thailand. I will add to the Thailand section describing how cultural context is important to consider, for example, in Thailand teenagers prefer the story based vignette approach. [4]

2) In the article “the evolution o sex education” the author argues that the sex education in Finland has been very comprehensive in the 2000s. I will add from this article the history of sex education for Finland. Some of the material will describe how Finland has curriculum called “Health Education” in which incorporates sex education. Finland also begins sexuality education at grade one. I will also incorporate how they have sexual health campaigns and fertility festivals.[5]

3) in the article “analysis of Public Policies for Sexuality education in Germany and the Netherlands” the author argues that the differences in how the US, Germany, and the Netherlands regards sexuality education accounts for the differences in STI and teen pregnancies between countries. I will be adding some information regarding how Germany requires sexuality education three times between primary and secondary school, while the Netherlands has secondary school programs such as “Long Live Love” and the “week of butterflies.” these programs support talking about sexuality, self-esteem, the difference between boys and girls. I will elaborate this in the Wikipedia article. [6]

comment if you have any concerns please.

[[User:Rbuell|Rbuell]] ([[User talk:Rbuell|talk]]) 05:16, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

== Splitting off the “By area” section ==

[[User:Iniquity]] has tagged [[:Sex education#By area]] for splitting into a new [[:Sex education by area]] article. I agree this section is becoming overwhelming for the article here. We also have [[:Sex education curriculum]] that is identified as the main article for this section. Sounds like here we should have a summary-style and there we should have the full details. [[:Sex education curriculum#By area]] already exists with extensive detail. The article here has ”more” detail than the curriculum article–seems backwards of the WP parent-vs-subtopic article relationship.

That article’s content focuses on different areas, and has some contradictions where the areas are the same, so I think merging those two by-area sections ”somewhere” is appropriate. And there is already identified a pre-existing target for off-loading the content that has accumulated here rather than a new third article on this topic. But if the by-area content is really extensive enough to split off its own article–and I think it overwhelms the curriculum article as well, I think that should absorb the by-area from both the main and curriculum articles. [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] ([[User talk:DMacks|talk]]) 05:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

== Crazy layout ==

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project’s importance scale.

	This article is part of WikiProject AIDS, an attempt to build a comprehensive, detailed, and accessible guide to AIDS, HIV, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.AIDSWikipedia:WikiProject AIDSTemplate:WikiProject AIDSAIDS
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project’s importance scale.

I’m going to try to edit a couple of the sections for repetitiveness and clarity, but really this whole article is in need of a massive edit. There are so many repeats and strange formatting decisions, like North America, USA, Canada, and Texas all having the same-sized header and some repeated information, and United Kingdom being linked to another page but also having a load of information for England and Wales, and a separate Scottish section. Lots needs doing here. Emmybris (talk) 18:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Emmybris: I encourage you in your ambition.

Can you please briefly (1-2 sentences) give your reasoning for reorganizing whatever you reorganize? Also I see you are new as an editor. Advice: make more smaller edits rather than fewer big edits, when you are planning a big revision as you are proposing. Thanks and please proceed. Bluerasberry (talk) 19:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Bluerasberry ! Yes, I am a new editor- I was brought here as I am currently conducting research on sex education and its history.

Looking at the United States section- should this information be removed (provided it is detailed on the United States-specific sex education article)? I find it unusual that Africa, as a continent, is given one paragraph, but the United States has a glut of information on various state-specific policy. Since there is already Sex Education in the USA, would it be appropriate to ensure the information here is represented on that article, and simply have a link to that here?

Please let me know if this is acceptable 🙂 Emmybris (talk) 15:10, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Emmybris: Yes what you are describing is Wikipedia:Splitting. The content is already split – sex ed in the US as you linked – so the norm would be to have about one summary paragraph here with the {{main}} at the top of the section heading to direct readers to the main article.

Africa gets a paragraph probably because that is all anyone wrote, and other places are omitted entirely. This top-level article is a catch-all for anything which does not have enough content to split.

So move the content here to the other article. It is okay if it is messy – your redesign plan is spot on and you do not have to fix everything. What you describe is an improvement and part of the usual development process. Thanks. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NeonHD7: Regarding the NeonHD7 edit of 20 August 2024, I would describe this as “not an improvement”.

Here are my points:

There is no need to state that “abstinence-only sex education … focuses on sexual abstinence”; in case this isn’t sufficiently self-explanatory, a wikilink to abstinence-only sex education is provided.
The observation that these two approaches are in opposition, that’s just fluff.
I would avoid “comprehensive sexuality education” avoiding the extra syllables by cutting it to “comprehensive sex education”. Perhaps adding the extra syllables is some kind of regional preference, but the only effect seems to be just to make it more awkward.

Fabrickator (talk) 06:44, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fabrickator: While I do agree with some of your points, I am curious if you actually think the previous wording was better, it just sounded plain awkward from my perspective. The whole structuring of the sentence was ungraceful. It was bordering on becoming a run-on sentence. The main point of my edit was cutting the sentence and introducing more contrast. And if I could take it a step further, I’d argue that mentioning the US was unnecessary and very nation-centric.

I agree that “in opposition” is a bit fluff, but this was meant to be analogous to “is often opposed to abstinence-only sex education” from the previous edit. Nonetheless I will take that part out.

You and anyone else are free to improve upon my edit and its surrounding text, but I would advise against going back to the previous wording.

NeonHD7 (talk) 03:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2025 and 9 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SamhitaM26, Gracelohr, Gryffindorgirl206 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Gryffindorgirl206 (talk) 15:22, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please add a section with the name “criticism”, and that text, I may make it more comprehensive in the future:

Young people, as recipients of sex education, have voiced significant criticism regarding both the pedagogical approaches and the content delivered. A study conducted among Irish adolescents revealed that 70% were dissatisfied with the sex education they received in school. Key concerns included the omission of crucial topics such as consent, LGBTQ+ issues, and pornography. Notably, dissatisfaction was especially pronounced among homosexual and bisexual youth.

It was highlighted that school-based sex education often fails to meet the psychological and practical needs of adolescents. It tends to focus disproportionately on the risks associated with sexual intimacy, begins too late, is overly technical, and places little emphasis on pleasure and emotional aspects of sexuality. The dominant framework is typically biomedical, emphasizing “appropriate” behaviours while reinforcing gendered stereotypes—for instance, suggesting that young women possess less sexual desire than young men. Same-sex sex is made invisible by the focus on heterosexual practices. Some young men report feeling uneasy or embarrassed during sex education sessions, fearing that asking questions might expose their lack of knowledge and undermine socially constructed notions of masculinity. Similarly, young women often feel inhibited in mixed-gender settings, concerned that expressing their understanding of sexual topics could provoke belittling or judgmental remarks from peers.^[1] Also researchers call for a broadening of the scope of sexual education, better addressing the needs of young people, specifically ‘to lean away from only teaching about pregnancy prevention and male erections’, ‘to improve knowledge about different aspects of sex’, ’Schools should develop strategies to teach students effective search methods for finding reliable information about sexual health on the internet,’ and ‘More policy level strategies are needed that insure federal funding is allocated to comprehensive sexual health education programs that provide [same-sex attracted] young men with
the skills and information needed to make an informed, responsible, and healthy decisions prior to first same-sex’.^[2]

The Other Karma (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The changes are not supported by neutral, independent, reliable sources. Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 14:39, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply