Are We Really Serious?

Going Beyond Reconceptualization of Population Education

Are We Really Serious?

Going Beyond Reconceptualization of Population Education

Introduction

In his article, "Reconceptualization of Population Education" (Population Education Newsletter and Forum, No. 38, 1993, UNESCO PROAP), O. J. Sikes makes a strong case for reconceptualizing population education, providing guidelines for the future direction for population education development. The recommendations Sikes made in his article were further strengthened in the International Conference on Population a re Development held in September 1994, which listed among the objectives for IEC: To encourage attitudes in favour of responsible behaviour in population and development, especially in such areas as environment, family, sexuality, reproduction, gender and racial sensitivity. Furthermore, among the priority issues identified for IEC action were safe motherhood, reproductive health and rights, maternal and child health and family planing, male responsibility, teenage pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases , including HIV/AIDS, responsible sexual behaviour and gender equality. The ICPD also stressed a "people-centred" approach.

Population education enhances life skills for these young people

The broad aims and direction for future population education development are clear. However, from past experience, we know that there are many obstacles, especially in setting priorities in school education, in making time for population education, i n introducing culturally sensitive topics, in curriculum and instructional materials development, in teacher training, etc.

How do we go about taking that first step?

We need, first of all, to convince policy/decision makers, especially in education, that the reconceptualized population education that Sikes recommends is urgently needed. This paper attempts to look at some major issues which policy makers need to consider and suggests broad steps which might be taken to operationalize a reconceptualized population education focussed on emerging issues and problems.

It is hoped that others will suggest other alternatives and share their experiences.

Population Education and the Goals of Education

I would guess that all education systems in every country will have in their plans, goal statements such as "personal development", "to develop the understandings, skills, habits and attitudes necessary to success in the real world of work and com munity life", "to develop productive workers, contributing citizens and caring family members", etc. Some may even have more specific goals - e.g., "to assist young people to acquire the knowledge, skills and values which will prepare them for the respon sibilities of adult life, marriage, parenthood and for participation in community life with the view to contributing to healthy and satisfying lives". They attempt to accomplish these lofty life goals through a blueprint called the curriculum", which prescribes what is to be taught and when. Unfortunately, in reality, the goal statements are only a wish list and may bear little relevance to what is actually taught and how it is taught. At best, the relationship between the goals of education for life and the curriculum is tenuous. Instead, if one did not know better, just by observing schooling in most countries, one would surmise that the raison d'etre for "education" is to pass examinations to go on to further education. In other words, most of education is very academic, and has little of direct "real life" in it. For example, one Pacific Island country typically requires the following in order for a student to graduate from high school:

1. Social Studies 3 units/credits*
2. National Language 1 unit/credit
3. Mathematics 3 units/credits
4. Science 3 units/credits
5. English 4 units/credits
6. Physical Education 1 unit/credit
7. Vocational Course 1 unit/credit
8. General Business 1 unit/credit
9. Electives

Most of these traditional academic courses are, of course, important in general education. For example, the social studies can be used to help students understand history, to help create a socially active citizenry, or help students recognize the connection between culture and ideas. Science can be used to help students learn to think like scientists, to understand the balance of nature, to appreciate the limits of science in establishing social policy, or to gain an appreciation of life and the physical universe. The language arts can be used to learn to appreciate great works of literary art, and to acquire the mechanics of written and spoken language. Mathematics can be taught to help students learn to compute, to understand the structure of mathematics, to solve mathematical problems, and to help students appreciate the beauty of structures in space.

While some of those courses, I am sure, would contribute to preparing a student for work and life in general, as all education should, there is little there, even in the curriculum, which directly focuses on, for example, "developing caring family members", or in general preparing students to cope with changes from traditional culture to modern society, especially in relation to attitudes and values. Nowhere is this failure more visible than in the area of young people's sexual and reproductive health, a vital part of "real life". For example, how much emphasis and time have schools devoted to exploring the profound negative consequences of teen pregnancy on individuals and families? How much time has been spent developing responsible attitudes and decision-making skills related to teen pregnancy - e.g. preparing students to resist peer pressure to have sex? Like elsewhere in the world, many adolescents in the Pacific are not prepared to deal with sex in a responsible manner, leading to unplanned pregnancy, STD/HIV, and high infant and maternal mortality rates. Ketting (1) states, "Adolescent sexual and reproductive health is in a state of global crisis", and cites Global Facts on Youth:

If these are global and national concerns, what have the schools done about them?

The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), over the past two decades, has supported school population education programmes and projects throughout the world. It is generally agreed that population education is the process of helping people under stand the nature, causes and implications of population processes as they affect, and are affected by, individuals, families, communities, and nations. It focuses on family and individual decisions influencing population change at the micro level, as wel l as on broad demographic changes. Historically, most early population education programmes were driven by rapid population growth in developing countries and emphasized the consequences of that growth, which also provided a rationale for family planning. From the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in 1994, however, UNFPA has set as a priority, reproductive health, and a "people-centred" approach. This translates into population education emphasizing a more personal, reproductive health/sexuality orientation for adolescents, especially in view of increasing teen pregnancy, STD/AIDS, substance abuse etc. worldwide. Addressing these issues will also have a direct effect on rapid population growth.

I believe it is now time, as O.J.Sikes (2) recommends, to "reconceptualize population education" to include the development of life skills in general. Now, more than ever, with changes in family life relationships, influences of television and ci nema, unemployment, movement of young people, for example, teaching about relationships, sex, responsibility, family planning, parenting, communicating, life planning, etc. becomes important if we are serious about achieving the goals of education, which most countries have only paid lip service to up to now. We need a more direct, focussed population education, which prepares students for a changing world.

Reconceptualization of Population Education And Its Delivery: A Case for a Separate School Subject

O.J. Sikes presents a strong rationale for reconceptualizing population education in his article. He stresses the need for clear objectives, inclusion of emerging concerns, prioritization of contents, the involvement of parents, approaches to tea ching, teacher training, evaluation, and institutionalization. In relation to content, Sikes observes that when attempts have been made to include too much in curricula, the results have been counter productive and that the effect is to water down more important population content. Furthermore, Sikes recommends:

A basic goal of population education should be to convince learners that they can control many of the events in their lives, including those related to reproductive behaviour (e.g., when to marry, when to have the first child, how many children to have, etc.). They can take decisions, follow up with action and obtain results. Many children begin to believe early that they have no control over their fate. Schools should help them modify this attitude, and teach them that what they become in life will depend in large part on their own decisions and actions. Participatory learning is important to the accomplishment of this goal.

In view of the "global crisis" in adolescent reproductive health, it is clear that attempts in the reconceptualization of population education should emphasize this content. However, redesigning the curriculum based on relevant real-life issues is only a part of the actions needed to reconceptualize population education. In order to accommodate population education into the school curriculum, most projects and programmes have, in the past, adopted the integration approach - i.e., population-related content (individual lessons or units) has been slotted into the existing traditional school subjec ts, especially in social science, science, health, agriculture, home economics, mathematics, and language. In view of the priority of addressing real-life issues, this practice should be abandoned, and the reconceptualized population education should be given the importance it deserves - a high priority stand-alone subject in the school curriculum. While the topics and subject matter of population education are inter-disciplinary, the approach in schools must be singular and focussed, a nd directed to the issues to be addressed, like teen pregnancy. Hence, the population education curriculum must be redesigned, with the focus on priority issues (some of the emerging concerns Sikes enumerates), and the development of attitudes, values, d ecision making and communication skills as objectives. A properly structured population education course should present positive opportunities to address these issues.

The integration approach was adopted and perpetuated, largely by the belief of educators that the school curriculum was full (the so-called "overloaded curriculum") and that it was not possible to introduce another subject called "population education". The integration approach however, has resulted in the dilution of important messages and ideas because these were interspersed in larger, mo re general subject content, and hence, "lost in the shuffle". Perhaps the more general, global issues did not require the focus that personal issues require. A focussed approach, - as exemplified in out of school family planning or anti-nuclear campaigns, can have a greater impact on knowledge and attitudes of learners, and the personal issues like pregnancy, marriag e, sex, further study, number and spacing of children, STD, relationships, abortion, family planning, etc, are matters too important to be diluted or treated at the macro level, by integration into other subjects. Students should be given opportunities to engage in serious discussion and exploration about the conduct of their own lives, present and future. These issues should be

Participatory and more innovative methodologies are less likely to be used

In addition to content, integration of population education into existing subjects probably results in teaching approaches more likely used in teaching of the parent subject, in most cases, probably didactically. In other words, participatory and more innovative methodologies, especially designed to influence attitudes, values, decision-making and communication skills, are less l ikely to be used, as teachers may not think about "shifting gears" or are reluctant to do so, or those methods for teaching for objectives other than the cognitive, are not in their repertoire. This is understandable, as the examination system that supports a linear curriculum focussed on discrete bits of information and basic academic skills may not be conducive to teaching for personal relevance and life. It is easier and more efficient to teach facts didactically-lecturing, reading, etc.

Several countries in the Pacific are undertaking "curriculum reform", which usually means compiling a new "curriculum framework" in the respective subjects offered in the schools. Again, while the lofty life education goals are still maintained, an examination of the revised curriculum frameworks reveals that as in the past, scant attention is paid to the "life issues" (One of the first things that should have been done is to ask the students what they want/need to learn). Curriculum development, admittedly, is not a simple task, especially if it is based on changing societal needs, and teachers and curriculum officers need help. But the reforms have generally ignored priority family, personal and societal issues and have fallen back to more cosmetic changes to existing curricula, and familiar programmes, in some cas es with assistance from outside consultants. In short, new content might be added and approaches recommended, but all in all, the status quo is maintained, promising a failure to teaching for life preparation in their own countries.

The Myth of The "Overloaded Curriculum"

Even if population education is "reconceptualized" as advocated by Sikes, there is still the major problem of how it should be taught in the schools. Historically, the reason for integration of population education into existing subjects was the "overloaded curriculum". A general perusal of the curriculum of the subjects taught in school would give one the impression that indeed, there is much that the school is required to teach, and that there is hardly any time to "cover" all that is there over the school year. In addition, other than the national history/culture/language, the curricula display a general sameness- for example, most Pacific Island social science curricula mandates the teaching of "The Family" in Form 1 (Class 7), and the "Community" in Form 2 (Class 8). While all the countries mi ght agree that the "family" should be taught, the sameness might indicate that the social science curriculum was simply shared, perhaps through a transplanted curriculum from foreign sources, and the curriculum may not reflect true national/public consensus on what students in that country should learn.

On closer examination and analysis, using relevance in individual cultural contexts as a guide, one might discover that the "overloaded curriculum" is a myth, because there is much in the school curriculum that can be shortened, combined, or dropped altogether. There is much trivia now being disseminated ("taught") which have very little relevance to the students' lives, which contributes little to understanding/knowledge, or which can be done more easily elsewhere. I recall seeing a lesson in home economics on cleaning a refrigerator, in a country where many of the outer islands have no electricity, much less refrigerators. How important is it to spend a period learning to clean a refrigerator? In short, I am sure there is, in each subject, much that can be dropped without any adverse effect on learning, even on passing national examinations. Curriculum developers seem to have overlooked the basic question: What knowledge/experiences are of most worth within the national context? As Beane (3) observes: "In too many places, students are still taught how to diagram complex sentences as if that were the key to the writing process, still made to memorize the names and routes of European explorers, still taught the same arithmetic year after year, page after page, with no particular connection to their lives".

The problem here is that each subject specialist/curriculum officer (in the Pacific, teachers, also) responsible for developing the curriculum has his/her own vested interest in the subject area and defends it, unwilling to give anything up, or even restructuring it. The curriculum developer perpetuates the practice of building blocks for the particular discipline, from primary to secondary, usually based on the existing curriculum, not on an examination and evaluation of what is needed to be taught in the national context or educational goals; hence the focus on content and repetition of content block or units, grade after grade, often referred to as the "spiral curriculum". Even in the examination-driven system, the questions asked are not necessarily based on the prioritization of the knowledge of most worth (as it should be), but on what is in the curriculum, some of which, as mentioned earlier, may be trivia. Hence, the school curricula should look less overcrowded if each curriculum specialist eliminated some of the knowledge which are not high in priority in that discipline.

Connected with the content in school subjects is how these subjects are taught in trying to make education more efficient and the school day less crowded. Observation of classrooms might reveal that there is much time wasted. There is much "busy work" - e.g. copying material from the backboard. Even silent reading, when that could be done outside of school. While much of these activities are not necessarily the responsibility of the curriculum developer, but problems of classroom management, efficiency can be taught in teacher training or through teacher's guides which suggest alternative approaches by the curriculum developer.

Again, I believe that the "overloaded curriculum" is a myth. If the excuse for not giving population education (life education) the importance it deserves is the "overloaded curriculum", then the entire school curriculum should be examined critically, restructuring content and eliminating topics which are unimportant and/or frivolous and which waste time. It is a question of priorities. If through this process, in a 15-week school term, time for even six lessons in five existing subjects is given to a separate population education course, a total of 30 periods (lessons) can be made available, which translates into an average of two periods per week for population education. In a two-term school year, 60 periods become available for population education. Is this unreasonable? If we are serious, it should not be: The "overloaded curriculum" or real-life education that serves the young people for whom the curriculum is intended?

Sexuality Education in School Population Education

In addition to the implications for all school curriculum and teaching in introducing a separate population education course, the most contentious issue is the teaching of sexuality. But, if school education is to have any effect on teen pregnancy, STD, abortion, family planning, and the other problems related to sex, it must address these issues directly - and that means sexuality education. The costs of not providing it are great. For example, the health and social consequences of teenage pregnancy are profound, not only to the mother but also to the baby. For example, having a child when too young is a serious threat to the life and health of a young woman. Children born to adolescents are at high risk of sickness, death, or life long physical and mental handicaps. Pregnancy outside of marriage often leads to dangerous illegal abortion, or abandonment of the child, or even to suicide. In addition, most teenage women who bear children face limited educational and job opportunities. Early childbearing almost always means an end to formal schooling for the young woman and hence restricts her career options. This is also true for the young male who fathers the child if he leaves school with limited skills and educational credentials, preventing a good start in the job market. Unlike even 20 years ago, in most countries, including in the Pacific, the economy and skills required in the workforce have changed dramatically. In short, early childbearing restricts career options for those involved, is an obstacle to human resource development and contributes to maintaining low socio-economic status. With limited prospects for the future and a high degree of dependency, it is too easy for teenage mothers to fall into a cruel cycle of more pregnancies, thus, reducing the generational gap and contributing to rapid population growth. Education and employment can break this cycle.

Early childbearing almost means an end to formal schooling for the young woman and hence restricts her career options

In addressing gender issues, especially in raising the status of women, family life/sexuality education can influence attitudes of students regarding sex roles and reproductive responsibilities. Education is fundamental to the process of raising the status of women in general and of limiting fertility and bringing down growth rates in particular. Sexuality education more directly offers young women the possibility of improving their knowledge and skills in the areas of boy-girl relationships, self esteem,family planning, health, child spacing, etc. It will hopefully also help women develop leadership potential.

One of the major obstacles to the introduction of sexuality education in schools is the simple fact that policy-makers, opinion leaders, and parents are either not aware of the benefits, and/or believe that family sexuality education will lead to more sexual activity by students, or are oblivious to the problems of teen pregnancy, STD, etc. Sensitizing these groups must be given more priority.

While few may disagree with the need for the young to be better prepared for life through relevant education, there are formidable barriers to the introduction of "sex education" into the schools. No school subject is more likely to elicit opposition and condemnation from some parents and cultural and religious leaders. And for some reason, even a minority of parents and/or leaders can influence decisions to introduce sexuality education into schools, usually negatively. Hence, ignorance and misconceptions and unplanned activities related to sex are guaranteed. Sexuality and its physical, psychological, and social dimensions, experiences to clarify attitudes and values regarding sexuality, skills in responsible decision-making and communication, and planning for the future, are ignored in school teaching.

The main reason for the opposition to the teaching of sexuality education in schools is attributed to culture/religion and the belief that learning about sex will promote experimentation and promiscuity among the students. Those who believe this ignore the fact that there is already much sexual activity by the youth, as evidenced by teen pregnancy, STD, etc. And that this is happening without formal "sex education" in schools. The misconception that sexuality education encourages sexual activity/experimentation or teaches students how to have sex is common. However, there is no evidence that sexuality education increases sexual activity. In fact, in a study of the effects of sex education in several countrie s conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) (4), there was no evidence that sex education encourages sexual experimentation or increased sexual activity. However, if any effect is observed, it is in the direction of postponed initiation of sexual intercourse and/or effective use of contraceptives and the consequent reduction of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STD).

Another reason given for the opposition is that it is the parents' responsibility. However, in surveys of students, it is usually found that very few, if any, have been given any kind of instruction on sex. Generally speaking, parents do not even talk about it with their children. On the other hand, television and videos are watched all the time. A recent survey of American-made TV programs showed that more than 75 percent of the sex on TV happened between people who are not married, or at least not married to each other. What kind of message does this convey to young people? When seen often enough, the sexual behaviour portrayed on television may be perceived by the viewer as acceptable, normal, or even desirable. Sexuality education should address these issues.

The general goal of population/sexuality education is to improve family life and quality of life in general by developing more responsible attitudes and behaviours related to family life and sex, especially in view of the rapidly growing population and its consequences, teen pregnancy, illegitimacy, STD, divorce, etc. To do this, the population education program should provide the students with accurate and adequate knowledge of human sexuality and its physical, psychological, and social dimensions; experiences to help clarify their own values and attitudes pertaining to sexuality and other family life issues; and skills in decision making, communication, and planning for their future. Responsibility is one of the key messages that should be stressed throughout the program.

While the purpose of population/sexuality education is not to impose values on the students but to assist in clarifying their own values, this does not mean that the program should not have values. On the contrary, the sexuality education should be initiated because it is felt that some basic values need to be reinforced. Hence, values such as the examples in the box may be implicit in any program.

If we truly believe in these values, population education must be redirected to focus on individual behaviour if the educational system is to contribute in any significant degree towards solving the myriad problems, especially high fertility, teen pregnancy, and STD. Without a change in the education strategy, there will not be much of an improvement over the present situation. In fact, over time, the problems will be compounded. If we are serious about reducing the fertility rate, and reducing teen pregnancy, if we are serious about reducing STD, then we must take measures to introduce population education in the schools, which will directly address these issues, not as an academic subject, but as a personal, meaningful, life education. While some of the relevant topics may be found in the present school curriculum, these must be reshaped and consolidated into a separate course, and new approaches, including student participatory activities, must be employed, so that the issues will be viewed by each student to be personal ones, and which can be controlled by personal action for the benefit of his/her personal quality of life.

What Needs to be Done?

In view of the social, health and economic problems faced by youth today, it is clear that the schools need to do more. While the relationship between education goals and schooling is very complex and it is unreasonable to expect paradigm shifts in the system, there are important changes which can be started. As one interested in school population education to address some of these issues, I have raised some ideas for discussion. I believe that a separate population education course can be at least one school subject designed to address problems, issues and concerns posed by life itself. These are the problems of the youth themselves and hence, meaningful and relevant to them, and, which also affect society in general.

In contrast to the traditional academic school subjects in which academicians determine the curriculum, a reconceptualized population education should start with youth problems in society and the views of youth themselves. Hence, students must be involved to suggest what they need and want to learn and be taught about life. Also, parents and citizens should express their views on issues and how schools can address them, aside from their own wishes of their children passing their examinations. This approach is in contrast to the top-down approach employed in academic subjects.

While prevention of teen pregnancy may not guarantee a bright future, when it does occur, it severely restricts life options for those directly involved, especially the teen mother. In most cases, if teenagers want to achieve career goals, they must delay childbearing. To me, the most logical approach to address the issues related to youth including teen pregnancy, is directly through the schools, with a structure, set curriculum, and a captive audience who will be interested in what is being taught. Even editorials in newspapers often recommend "sex education" in schools after alarming stories about teen pregnancy, STD, etc. appear in the news, but usually no action is taken by the education system. Hence, I believe the time is ripe, and some bold thinking and action is required, for example,

• Public education campaigns on the relationship between teen pregnancy and quality of life, and possible school interventions to address the issue should be targeted to school systems and policy makers.
• Communities need to be organised and empowered to demand that schools be reorganised to more effectively educate their children. If advocacy is successful, parents may indeed prefer family life/sexuality education in a proper/safe setting than students learning from pornography, television, etc.
• Strong collaborative efforts among school personnel, parents, churches, and community organisations can help bring the necessary resources and leadership to bear on youth problems, including teen pregnancy.
• Family life/sexuality education, including the community values which need to be reinforced, can be mandated.
• Innovative approaches, not only in teaching methodologies but also in commitment from the community, including families, churches, NGOs, care providers and adolescents themselves can be explored - e.g., to place out reach social workers in schools to provide counselling and support for students where there are no school counsellors.

Furthermore, a reconceptualized population education should be made compulsory for all schools for maximum effectiveness. The secondary schools in Fiji have the option of teaching a family life/sexuality education course, but at last count, less than half of the secondary schools were offering the course to the students, I would guess, because the school administrators are focussed more on academics, believe in the "overcrowded curriculum", are too conservative and afraid of the possible controversy surrounding the content, or are not aware of the potential benefits of family life education. Obviously, more advocacy is required.

Even if a decision is made to introduce a reconceptualized, revitalized separate population education (including family life/sexuality education) into schools, it is only the beginning. The relevant issues/themes need to be identified. Objectives, for both cognitive and affective development specified. Content selected. Other subject areas restructured. Materials developed. Teachers trained. School schedules revised. Advocacy strategy for parents, religious/cultural leaders, policy makers implemented to gain their support. There is much to do.

Do we do it? Or continue the status quo? It is easy to do nothing. But doing nothing is doing something - allowing the global and national crisis in adolescent sexual and reproductive health to continue unabated. I believe that apathy, rather than bureaucratic obstruction, to be the main stumbling block to needed changes and a clear direction. While what is suggested here is no panacea, we should do the best for our youth.

References

1. Ketting, Evert, "Meeting Young People's Sexual and Reproductive Health Needs Worldwide" Planned Parenthood Challenges, 1995/1

2. Sikes, O.J., "Reconceptualization of Population Education", Population Education Newsletter and Forum No. 38, UNESCO, PROAP, 1993

3. Beane, James A., "Curriculum Integration and the Disciplines of Knowledge", Phi Delta Kappan, April 1995

4. Baldo, Mariella; Aggleton, Peter; Slutkin, Gary; "Sex Education Does Not Lead to Earlier or Increased Sexual Activity in Youth", WHO paper, undated.

5. UNFPA, "Report of the International Conference on Population and Development", 1994.

Photo credits: Pacific Islands Monthly