How to Bring An End to the War Over Sex Ed

(3 of 3)

The comprehensive sex-education model used in District 3 is sometimes referred to as "abstinence first" or "abstinence plus" because it combines factual information about birth control and STIs with a strong message that kids should wait to have sex. From what Jordan and her colleagues have seen, it best fits the reality of most teenagers' lives. Most students won't wait until they get married to have sex, so they need to be told more than "Just say no." But with 66% of teenagers nationally saying they wish they had waited longer before having sex, they're also looking for more than just medically accurate information about birth control.

Related

Photos

Teens in America: Class Pictures

Stories

• Behind the Boom in Adult Single Motherhood

• Behind the Family-Planning Flap

Jordan's approach seems to be working. During her first three years, teen birthrates in the district stayed steady, with 19 births to girls ages 10 to 19 in 2006. But in 2007 that number dropped to four and then last year dropped again, to two. School officials have been so pleased that they've talked about adding a sex-education requirement in 11th grade (most students take health during their freshman year). Other school districts in Anderson County that initially balked at the comprehensive approach now want Impact to go into their schools and replicate the program. The only thing stopping them is money. "For $2 million," says United Way's Burdette, "we could put a Kristen in every school in our county for five years. But we don't have $2 million."

Doing What Works
There is growing evidence that comprehensive sexuality programs like the ones Jordan teaches can be more effective than abstinence-only curriculums at persuading teens to behave more responsibly. Douglas Kirby, a neutral analyst who has studied sex-education programs for more than three decades, says most evaluations of abstinence-only programs have found "no impact on sexual behavior." However, nearly half the comprehensive programs that have been studied reduced sexual risk in three areas: delaying the age at which teens first have sex, reducing the number of sexual partners they have and increasing their use of condoms.

The crucial difference between comprehensive programs that work and older curriculums that focused exclusively on promoting safe sex (remember learning how to put a condom on a banana?) is the new emphasis on behavior. "The older programs were less likely to deliver a clear message about behavior," Kirby says. "It was, 'Here are the facts, here are the pros and cons. You decide what's right for you.'" By contrast, he explains, the effective programs these days "have a very clear message that not having sex is the safest choice. They put emphasis on skill-building and role-playing, they teach how to use condoms, and they encourage young people not to have sex."

Parents and schools are increasingly putting their support behind the comprehensive approach. In a 2004 Kaiser Family Foundation survey, 95% of parents of middle-school students said contraceptive methods were "appropriate topics" for school health classes. The Pittsburgh, Pa., school board voted 8 to 1 in February to replace the district's abstinence-only curriculum with a comprehensive program after parents raised concerns about rising teen-pregnancy rates.

Yet even if every community in America woke up tomorrow and decided to put an end to the sex-education wars--laying aside the chastity belts and condom bananas and embracing comprehensive, abstinence-first education--it's not clear that much would change. That's because for all the battles over funding and policies, no one really knows how sex education is taught inside most classrooms. While most states and local school districts have policies regarding sex education, very few set standards on how to give students factual information about sex or teach them to develop healthy relationships. Even fewer attempt to evaluate what is covered in the classroom, and 17 states don't even require sex education to be taught in public schools.

Taking sex education seriously isn't easy. "There are so many ways young people get messages about sex--parents, friends, media," says Sarah Brown, CEO of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Un ed Pregnancy. "It's hard for people to get a grip on those factors, so instead they spend their time arguing about what's on page 128." But we can't afford to keep failing our children. This month the National Center for Health Statistics reported that teen birthrates rose in 2007 for the second year, after a 15-year drop.

Jewels Morris-Davis is the embodiment of why it's so important to get it right. Thanks to her work with Kristen Jordan over the past few years, Jewels is a girl transformed. Sitting in a school office in a hoodie, with a gray-and-white-striped scarf around her neck, she projects a fierce confidence. "I don't need anyone to tell me I'm beautiful," she says, eyes flashing. "I know I'm beautiful." Jewels runs the 400 m on the track team and is on the cheerleading squad. And she's broken out of her family's cycle with a whole new set of goals. "I'm going to be the first one in my family to graduate from high school," vows Jewels. "I'm going to college. And then I'll get a job. And then I want to be married"--she pauses for emphasis--"with no kids."

See TIME's special report on paying for college.

See pictures of college mascots.