618216

research-article2015
PHPXXX10.1177/2373379915618216Pedagogy in Health PromotionFisher and Cummings

Original Research
Pedagogy in Health Promotion: The

Assessing Teacher Confidence and Proficiency Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

2016, Vol. 2(2) 101­–107
© 2015 Society for Public
With Sexuality Education Standards: Health Education
Reprints and permissions:

Implication for Professional Development sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/2373379915618216
php.sagepub.com

Christine M. Fisher, PhD, MPH, CHES1,

and Carol A. Cummings, PhD, MPH, CHES1

Abstract
The timely emergence of the National Teacher Preparation Standards for Sexuality Education in the United States
will transform preparation of future educators and provide guidance for professional development training of current
sexuality educators. This article focuses on identifying factors that affect sexuality education by examining perceptions and
experiences held by certified Rhode Island public school health educators. Study participants were asked to respond to
questions addressing their confidence in teaching sexuality education topics, ability to plan and implement sexuality lessons
with the National Health Education Standards, and ability/proficiency in the National Teacher Preparation Standards for
Sexuality Education. The topic of identity (36%), which addresses people’s understanding of who they are, was the only
topic identified by the National Sexuality Education Standards that teachers were uncomfortable teaching. The majority of
the educators felt very confident in their abilities to teach lessons integrated with four of the six National Health Education
Standards. Less than half of the educators felt very confident with integrating communication and advocacy skills. The
educators surveyed also believed to be very confident in meeting all seven National Teacher Preparation Standards for
Sexuality Education. This article concludes that gauging current teacher’s confidence and proficiency with these standards
can isolate factors that either impede or enhance quality sexuality education for youth. Expanding the understanding of
these factors can influence professional development and provide meaning as to what confident and proficient sexuality
educators look like in practice.

Keywords
health education, school health, sexuality education, teacher education

In the United States, the development of the National
Sexuality Education Standards (NSES) provided a com-
prehensive view of essential content and skills students
should be receiving in sexuality education lessons
nationwide for K-12th grades (Future of Sex Education
Initiative, 2012). Planning and aligning lessons with
these standards and teaching effective lessons might be
difficult if teachers do not possess the necessary skills
and training. Following the development of the NSES,
the National Teacher Preparation Standards for Sexuality
Education (NTPSSE) were created to provide more trans-
parency into what effective sexuality education teachers
should know and do. While these new standards provide
a useful tool for teacher preparation programs, they can
also be used to support current sexuality education
teachers’ growth and professional development.
This article presents the results from an online survey
administered to certified health and physical educators
(HPEs) and school nurse teachers (SNTs) in the state of
Rhode Island (RI). Certified HPEs plan and deliver sexu-
ality education in most middle and high schools in this
state. The school nurse teacher, who is also certified to
teach, is often responsible for teaching health education
at the elementary level. RI requires sexuality education
to be taught as part of a comprehensive health education
program for K-12th grades (Rhode Island Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education & Rhode Island
Department of Health, 2009). Sexuality education,
which includes age- and developmentally appropriate
standards for K–12th grades, is one of seven health con-
tent areas the Rhode Island Department of Education
1
Rhode Island College, Providence, RI, USA
Corresponding Author:
Christine M. Fisher, Assistant Professor of Health Education, Rhode
Island College, 130 The Murray Center, 600 Mt. Pleasant Avenue,
Providence, RI 02908, USA.
Email: cfisher1@ric.edu

Downloaded from php.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2016
102 Pedagogy in Health Promotion 2(2)
(RIDE) included as part of the comprehensive health
instructional outcomes. These outcomes are used by
school districts to influence curriculum development
and lessons in elementary, middle, and high school
(RIDE, 2012). According to the Youth Risk Behavior
Survey, sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, 27% of RI high school students reported
having had sex, and of those sexually active, 10% have
had unprotected sex (Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, n.d.). While these statistics are similar to
national data, it shows that RI youth can benefit from and
need sexuality education. In RI, the state requires sexual-
ity education; however, local school boards decide
which topics should be covered and at what grade level.
Background
Preparing and supporting effective, committed, and suc-
cessful teachers are directly linked to experiences pro-
vided during professional preparation programs and
professional development (Marzano, 2007). Regardless
of the core subject, all students should expect to receive
well-planned lessons taught by highly qualified teachers.
This will yield a better profit in students learning and ulti-
mately in their success. Darling-Hammond (2006) out-
lines, in “Constructing 21st Century Teacher Education,”
what successful teachers should know and do: (1) under-
stand how all students learn; (2) comprehend national,
state, and district curriculum content, standards, and
goals; and (3) implement teaching skills using best prac-
tices based on instructional theories and content. The
emergence of the NTPSSE was the direct result of a need
to form a structure that depicts what competent and effec-
tive sexuality education strategies teachers need to know
and do (Future of Sex Education Initiative, n.d.). These
standards, framed to address specific features exclusive to
teaching sexuality education, align with the framework
for 21st-century teachers (Darling-Hammond, 2006).
These new standards render the discipline of sexuality
education more transparent and help guide preparation
of teacher-candidates as well as professional develop-
ment efforts to support mastery of skills and instructional
practices of effective sexuality education teachers.
Teacher preparedness and demonstration of knowl-
edge and skills essential for effective sexuality education
contribute to the positive outcomes programs have on
learners. More important, the NTPSSE provide the impe-
tus for identifying key elements necessary for training
preservice health educators and SNTs. Research efforts
have identified many gaps in the delivery of sexuality
education. When comparing professionals who teach
sexuality education, Borawski et al. (2015) found a sig-
nificant difference between the professional skills of
health education teachers and SNTs. Health education
teachers had more background knowledge and comfort
with material and provided opportunities for critical
Downloaded from php.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2016
thinking; while SNTs demonstrated a greater impact on
students’ attitude, beliefs, and efficacy. Health educa-
tion teachers’ perspective on the importance of sexuality
education topics does not always mean that these topics
are covered in class. Eisenberg, Madsen, Oliphant, and
Sieving (2013) found that 80% of health education
teachers’ sanctioned 10 of 14 key sexuality education
topics including abortion and sexual orientation; how-
ever, they reported a lower percentage of teaching these
topics. Obstacles that hindered coverage of topics
included lack of time, resources, and inadequate materi-
als, and concern for reactions from parents, students,
and administration officials. Data from the 2006-2010
National Survey of Family Growth revealed sexually
experienced teens receiving varied or, in some cases, no
sexuality information from their teachers, parents, and
health care providers (Donaldson, Lindberg, Ellen, &
Marcell, 2013). Additional variations or gaps in sexual-
ity education include teachers omitting or minimizing
time spent on developing essential skills that support
personal responsibility (i.e., birth control use and com-
munication skills), lack of teaching about sexual orienta-
tion, and variations in teaching approaches (Landry,
Darroch, Singh, & Higgins, 2003; Lindeau, Tetteh,
Kasza, & Gilliam, 2008).
Purpose of Study
Few studies have explored how confident teachers feel
about their ability to create and implement lessons based
on the NSES along with aligning lessons with state com-
prehensive health instructional outcomes that mirror the
NHES. In addition, very little research has emerged, thus
far, about teachers’ perceptions about their proficiency
with the NTPSSE. The purpose of this study is to examine
the perceptions, beliefs, and experiences held by certi-
fied HPE and SNT regarding teaching sexuality educa-
tion in public schools.
Method
A cross-sectional study design was used to collect teach-
ers’ feedback regarding confidence, proficiency, training,
and professional development in teaching sexuality edu-
cation. Public schools listed on the RIDE website were
individually researched to identify all certified SNTs and
HPEs (RIDE, 2015). Each teacher’s name, teaching posi-
tion, grade level taught, and work e-mail were collected.
A 23-item electronic questionnaire was designed to
gather teacher feedback about sexuality education in
their schools. After receiving approval from the RI College
Institutional Review Board, an online survey was admin-
istered via SurveyMonkey and sent to all identified
school work e-mail addresses of SNTs and HPEs in the RI
public schools. The responses from the survey were
exported from SurveyMonkey and analyzed using SPSS
Fisher and Cummings 103
Table 1.  Teachers’ Confidence in Their Ability to Teach Sexuality Education Topics Effectively With Their Students.
Very confident,
Topics N (%)
Personal safety 107 (73)
Healthy relationships 103 (70)
Puberty and development 99 (67)
Anatomy and physiology 97 (66)
Pregnancy and reproduction 90 (61)
Sexual transmitted infections and HIV 85 (58)
Identity 53 (36)
Note. HIV = human immunodeficiency virus. Percentages may not equal up to 100% due to rounding up the percentages.
*p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01.
21.0. The analysis included both descriptive statistics
and chi-square analyses.
Results
Response Rate and Demographic Characteristics
The electronic questionnaire was sent to 736 RI public
school HPEs and SNTs. First, an introductory e-mail was
sent informing participants about the study and to make
them aware that the survey would be sent to them. Three
waves of e-mails were sent to maximize the response
rate; 190 out of the 736 surveys were returned for a
response rate of 26%. Of the collected responses, 55
were from SNTs and 135 were from HPEs. The majority
of the teachers were female (72%) and identified them-
selves as White (97%), and their highest level of educa-
tion was having a bachelor’s degree (50%), a master’s
degree (49%), or a doctoral degree (1%).
Teaching and Planning Sexuality Education
The majority of the teachers reported that seven topics
identified in the NSES were currently being taught at
their school: (1) personal safety (84%), (2) healthy rela-
tionships (81%), (3) anatomy and physiology (73%), (4)
puberty and development (78%), (5) sexually transmitted
diseases and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV;
62%), (6) pregnancy and reproduction (60%), and (7)
identity (41%). When asked who should be involved in
making the final decision on what sexuality education
topics should be taught in schools, the following
responses were collected: HPEs (73%), SNTs (62%),
school administrators (48%), the state department of
education (46%), and parents (45%).
Teacher Confidence and Proficiency
Teachers were asked to identify their level of confidence
in their ability to teach seven sexuality education topics
(Table 1). Descriptive statistics indicated that the major-
ity of the teachers felt very confident in their abilities to
Downloaded from php.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2016
Confident, Somewhat Not confident,
N (%) confident, N (%) N (%) Chi-square
35 (24) 3 (2) 1 (1) 0.880
39 (27) 2 (1) 3 (2) 1.16
43 (29) 5 (3) 1 (1) 3.39
37 (25) 11 (7) 3 (2) 4.40*
43 (29) 7 (5) 7 (5) 9.28**
39 (27) 17 (12) 6 (4) 6.18*
51 (35) 27 (19) 15 (10) 1.47
teach most of the topics identified by the NSES, with the
exception of identity, which only 36% of teachers
reported feeling very confident. A series of chi-square
analyses were performed to examine if educators trained
through a college course believed themselves to be more
confident in their abilities to teach selected sexuality top-
ics effectively compared to those who did not take a col-
lege course. There were three statistically significantly
differences associated with having taken a college course
and reporting being very confident in teaching the fol-
lowing topics: Anatomy and Physiology (58% vs. 42%),
Pregnancy and Reproduction (61% vs. 40%), and
Sexually Transmitted Infections and HIV (56% vs. 44%).
Teachers were also asked how confident they are in
their abilities to plan and implement skills-based sexu-
ality education that results in students working toward
the RI comprehensive health instructional outcomes,
which are based on the NHES (Table 2). Descriptive
statistics indicated that the majority of the teachers
identified themselves as being very confident in four of
the six skills-based standards. The two standards that
teachers fell below the majority included having stu-
dents demonstrate their ability to use interpersonal
communication skills (49%) and their ability to advo-
cate for personal, family, and community health (48%).
A series of chi-square analyses were performed to
examine if educators who have received training
through a college course believed themselves to be
more confident in their abilities to plan and implement
skills-based sexual health education compared to those
who did not take a college course. There were four sta-
tistically significantly differences associated with those
having taken a college course versus those who did not
regarding the confidence level in their ability to plan
and implement skills-based sexual health education:
Students analyze the influence of culture, media, tech-
nology, and other factors on health (60% vs. 40%); stu-
dents demonstrate the ability to access valid health
information and health-promoting products and ser-
vices (59% vs. 41%); students demonstrate the ability
to use interpersonal communication skills to enhance
104 Pedagogy in Health Promotion 2(2)

Table 2.  Teachers’ Confidence in Their Ability to Plan and Implement Developmentally Appropriate Skills-Based Sexuality Education
That Results in Working Toward the Following Rhode Island Health Education Standards.

Very confident Confident Somewhat Not confident

Standards N (%) N (%) confident N (%) N (%) Chi-square
Students demonstrate the ability to use 83 (57) 49 (33) 14 (10) 1 (1) 3.20
goal-setting and decision-making skills
to enhance health.
Students demonstrate the ability to 80 (54) 53 (36) 13 (9) 2 (1) 3.01
practice health-enhancing behaviors and
to reduce health risks.
Students demonstrate the ability to access 76 (51) 50 (34) 20 (14) 2 (1) 5.87*
valid health information and health-
promoting products and services.
Students analyze the influence of culture, 75 (51) 52 (35) 19 (13) 2 (1) 9.44*
media, technology, and other factors on
health.
Students demonstrate the ability to use 72 (49) 57 (39) 17 (12) 2 (1) 7.10*
interpersonal communication skills to
enhance health.
Students demonstrate the ability 71 (48) 53 (36) 22 (15) 2 (1) 7.56*
to advocate for personal, family,
community, and environmental health.

Note. Percentages may not equal up to 100% due to rounding up the percentages.
*p ≤ .01.

health (59% vs. 41%); and students demonstrate the
ability to advocate for personal, family, community,
and environmental health (60% vs. 40%).
Teachers were also asked about their ability/profi-
ciency with the NTPSSE (Table 3). Descriptive statistics
indicated that the majority of the teachers believed
that they were proficient in meeting all seven of the
standards. A series of chi-square analyses were per-
formed to examine educators who have received train-
ing through a college course believed themselves to
be more proficient in the NTPSSE compared to those
who did not take a college course. There were statisti-
cally significantly differences associated with having
taken a college course regarding proficiency level for
each of the standards: Demonstrate comfort with,
commitment to, and self-efficacy in teaching sexuality
education (68% vs. 32%); show respect for individual,
family, and cultural characteristics and experiences
that may influence student learning about sexuality
(67% vs. 33%); possess accurate knowledge of the
biological, emotional, and social aspects of human
sexuality and the laws relating to sexuality and youth
(67% vs. 33%); make decisions based on applicable
federal, state, and local laws; regulations and policies;
as well as professional ethics (70% vs. 30%); plan age-
and developmentally appropriate sexuality education
that is aligned with standards, policies, and laws and
reflects the diversity of the community (66% vs. 34%);
use a variety of effective strategies to teach sexuality
education (64% vs. 36%); and implement effective
strategies to assess student knowledge, attitudes, and
skills in order to improve sexuality education instruc-
tion (66% vs. 34%).
Professional Development
Sixty-four percent of the participants responded that they
have sought out training opportunities to expand their
knowledge and skills for teaching sexuality education.
When asked where they received their training, the
responses were divided. A plurality (39%) selected hav-
ing received sexuality education training by attending a
college course that focused on content knowledge fol-
lowed by 35% who selected having attended profes-
sional development opportunities that focused on
sexuality education topics (Table 4).
Nine out of 10 teachers (90%) responded that they
would be interested in attending professional develop-
ment opportunities. When asked what type of informa-
tion they would like to receive, the majority selected
professional development that focuses on teaching
strategies and how to engage learners (61%), followed
by specific sexuality education topics and content
knowledge (45.8%).
Discussion
Examining teachers’ perspectives about sexuality educa-
tion will provide a more in-depth idea of what effective
and highly qualified teachers should know and do. Little
is known about how teachers’ perceive their ability with
the NTPSSE. The emergence of these teaching standards,

Downloaded from php.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2016
Fisher and Cummings 105

Table 3.  Teacher Ability/Proficiency in the National Teacher Preparation Standards for Sexuality Education.

Proficient, Fair, Poor, Not sure,

Standards N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) Chi-square
Show respect for individual, family, and cultural 110 (77) 22 (15) 3 (2) 8 (6) 21.92**
characteristics and experiences that may
influence student learning about sexuality
Use a variety of effective strategies to teach 94 (66) 31 (22) 9 (6) 8 (6) 6.35*
sexuality education
Demonstrate comfort in, commitment to, and 93 (65) 35 (25) 5 (4) 10 (7) 13.34**
self-efficacy in teaching sexuality education
Implement effective strategies to assess student 90 (63) 38 (27) 8 (6) 7 (5) 7.85*
knowledge, attitudes, and skills in order to
improve sexuality education instruction
Plan age- and developmentally appropriate 87 (61) 41 (29) 7 (5) 7 (5) 6.58*
sexuality education that is aligned with
standards, policies, and laws and reflects the
diversity of the community
Possess accurate knowledge of the biological, 85 (60) 40 (28) 9 (6) 8 (6) 9.89*
emotional, and social aspects of human sexuality
and the laws relating to sexuality and youth
Make decisions based on applicable federal, state, 71 (50) 56 (39) 7 (5) 8 (6) 10.38**
and local laws; regulations and policies; as well
as professional ethics

Note. Percentages may not equal up to 100% due to rounding up the percentages.
*p ≤ .01. **p ≤ .001.

Table 4.  Where Teachers Have Received Training Regarding
Sexuality Education.
Items
College course(s) focusing on sexuality education
content knowledge
Professional development (workshops, conferences,
etc.) focused on sexuality education topics
College course(s) focusing on sexuality education
teaching methods
Not received any training
Professional development (workshops, conferences,
etc.) focused on teaching sexuality education
Other: independent research (N = 3), sought out
assistance from other faculty (N = 4)
Note. Percentages may not equal up to 100% due to this question being
“Check all that apply.”
along with the NSES, provides a solid framework for
increasing the number of highly qualified sexuality edu-
cation teachers in the United States. Research studies
have concluded that sexuality education does improve
behaviors, reduce risks, and improve health outcomes
(Kirby, Laris, & Rolleri, 2007). Studies examining vari-
ables that influence sexuality educators’ teaching prac-
tices have provided key elements that affect quality
teaching (Barr et al., 2014; Borawski et al., 2015; Clark,
Clark, & Brey, 2014; Darling-Hammond & Bransford,
2005; Lindeau et al., 2008). The results of this study can
add to the current body of literature and in conjunction
with the new NTPSSE more effective ways to prepare and
train sexuality educators for the 21st century.
N (%) Results from this study revealed that when asked
about teaching sexuality education topics identified in
74 (39) the NSES, more than 50% reported teaching six of the
seven topics; however, only 41% reported teaching
66 (35) about identity. With regard to teacher confidence in
teaching identity, only 36% of educators reporting being
37 (20)
very confident. The low confidence level perceived by
34 (18) educators for effectively teaching this topic could be one
31 (16) reason why so few teachers reported teaching it in class.
Respondents who were not addressing a topic were not
7 (4) given an opportunity to elaborate on reasons why the
topic(s) were omitted from being taught. Previous
research studies have documented that even though
teachers approve teaching sexuality education topics,
they omit topics because of lack of resources and time
along with concern for student, family, and administra-
tion (Eisenberg et al., 2013).
Significant differences revealed that teachers who com-
pleted a college sexuality education course reported
higher confidence levels than those who did not for teach-
ing anatomy and physiology, sexually transmitted infec-
tions and HIV, and pregnancy and reproduction. Similar
results were revealed for teacher confidence aligning sex-
uality education lessons with the NHES outlined in the RI
comprehensive health instructional outcomes. Most
respondents reporting being very confident with four of
the six standards, but less than 50% reported being very
confident with teaching lessons where students master

Downloaded from php.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2016
106 Pedagogy in Health Promotion 2(2)
communication and advocacy skills. Communication and
advocacy skills are both key performance indicators for
many of the seven topics for essential content and skills for
school-based sexuality education (Future of Sex Education
Initiative, 2012). Teacher confidence in teaching sexuality
education topics should reflect not only a thorough under-
standing of the material but also the ability to be comfort-
able with the content and to align lessons with health
education skills-based standards (Bruess & Schroeder,
2014).
Descriptive statistics indicated that the majority of the
teachers believed that they were proficient in all seven of
the NTPSSE. Proficient percentages ranged from 50% to
77%. While the majority reported being proficient with
these standards, it is important to report that 15% to 39%
of educators reported being fair/poor in their abilities.
Significant differences were reported for participants
who took a college course versus those who did not
regarding proficiency level for each of the NTPSSE. With
the inclusion of these new standards in health teacher
preparation programs, it is to be hoped that more sexual-
ity educators will feel more proficient in their teaching
abilities for this content area.
Only 64% of sexuality educators reported receiving
professional training for teaching sexuality education. Of
those who received training, either by attending a college
course (39%) or by attending a professional development
opportunity (35%), the majority of the information received
was regarding content knowledge. When asked what type
of information they would like to receive, the majority
selected professional development that focuses on teach-
ing strategies and on how to engage learners (61%), fol-
lowed by specific sexuality education topics and content
knowledge (45.8%). This shows a need for not just basic
content knowledge but also strategies on how to teach the
material effectively to the target population. Providing
teachers with sexuality education professional develop-
ment that addresses both content knowledge and peda-
gogical skills, along with opportunities for practice, will
increase comfort levels and self-efficacy (Clark et al., 2014;
Wilson, Wiley, Housman, McNeill, & Rosen, 2015).
Limitations
This study includes several potential limitations. First,
this study relied on participants to voluntarily complete
the survey. With a response rate of 26% and the majority
of the respondents being female (72%), we might have
missed valuable feedback from participants who choose
not to complete the survey. Second, this study relied on
self-report responses, where teachers might not have
reported truthfully but instead might have reported how
they believe they should be doing. Third, this study
focused on sexuality educators in one state, and there-
fore the results cannot be generalized to sexuality educa-
tors across the United States.
Downloaded from php.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2016
Conclusion
The results from this study disclose that teacher confidence
and perception of proficiency in teaching sexuality educa-
tion are greater for teachers who have taken an academic
course. There were repeated significant differences
between these two groups for many of the survey items.
This difference held true for confidence in teaching sexual-
ity education topics, confidence in planning lessons
aligned with health education standards, and proficiency
with the NTPSSE. A greater percentage of teachers who
completed a college course reported significant difference
for three of the seven topics identified in the NSES. Teacher
confidence was high for aligning sexual health lessons
with four of the six NHES outlined in the RI health instruc-
tion outcomes skills; however, once again there was a sig-
nificant difference between those who completed a college
course and those who did not. Teachers who completed a
college course reported confidence in planning and imple-
menting sexuality education lessons aligned with three of
the standards. Finally, teacher proficiency with the NTPSSE
revealed that even though the majority of the respondents
reported being proficient, significant differences occurred
between those who completed a college course and those
who did not for all seven standards.
The results of the current study indicate that complet-
ing an academic course will affect teacher beliefs regard-
ing confidence and proficiency in teaching sexuality
education. Academic courses have the venue to address
many aspects of sexuality education where learners can
develop deep content knowledge and apply and practice
pedagogical skills, which will serve to build teacher con-
fidence and self-efficacy. Only 64% of the respondents
reported receiving professional training in sexuality edu-
cation. Future of Sex Education Initiative (n.d.) reports
that only 61% of preservice teacher preparation pro-
grams include sexuality education course in their pro-
gram of study and one third of practicing sexuality
education teachers have participated in professional
development in sexuality education. Addressing teacher
confidence through professional development opportu-
nities that mirror academic courses will greatly influence
practice. Professional development should be multitiered
and give teachers experience in building content knowl-
edge and pedagogical skills, along with building skills
necessary to address the barriers to implementing com-
prehensive sexuality education. Further research should
examine what confidence actually looks like for teachers
in practice. Sexuality education teachers for K-12th
grades very often have varied professional backgrounds
and therefore might have different perspectives regarding
confidence and proficiency (Wilson et al., 2015). Is con-
fidence based on command and comfort with functional
knowledge but not necessarily planning and implement-
ing critical thinking lessons that use classroom discourse
for learning? Are learners provided with opportunities to
Fisher and Cummings 107
assimilate content into their schema, develop skills that
can be applied to their lives, and build self-efficacy nec-
essary to support sexual health (Future of Sex Education
Initiative, 2012)?
The percentage of teachers reporting that they would
like professional development addressing teaching strat-
egies (61%) and sexual health topics (45.8%) further
reinforces that high confidence levels reported might not
truly reflect highly qualified teaching practice. Further
research needs to be conducted to gain a better under-
standing of what teachers mean when they report their
confidence in teaching sexuality education topics or
pedagogical strategies. How do they know that they are
proficient? What does this look like in practice? This will
provide a better understanding of what effective sexual-
ity educators should know and do and how to apply this
to professional development.
These results support the need for examining the dif-
ferences between academic courses focusing on sexual-
ity education content knowledge and different teaching
methods. In addition, when planning professional devel-
opment experiences, examining the teachers’ confidence
and proficiency will result in training experiences that
address specific teacher needs. Researchers, with the
support of schools and administrators, need to provide
teachers with a highly motivated venue for professional
development that assist them in developing competency
with the new NTPSSE. Professional development allows
teachers to continue to develop skills and proficiency so
they become better able to plan authentic lessons with
relevant standards and to implement best practices
(Darling-Hammond, 2006; Marzano, 2007). Finally, the
data provide researchers, teachers, administrators, cur-
riculum coordinators, and undergraduate programs with
valuable information that can drive lesson planning, pro-
fessional development, and preservice education.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Barr, E. M., Goldfarb, E. S., Russell, S., Seabert, D., Wallen, M.,
& Wilson, K. L. (2014). Improving sexuality education: The
development of teacher-preparation standards. Journal of
School Health, 84, 396-409.
Borawski, E. A., Adams, K., Trapl, E. S., Hayman, L. L., Yoder,
L. D., & Lovegreen, L. D. (2015). Effectiveness of health
education teachers and school nurses teaching sexually
transmitted infections/human immunodeficiency virus
prevention knowledge and skills in high school. Journal of
School Health, 85, 189-196.
Downloaded from php.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2016
Bruess, C. E., & Schroeder, E. (2014). Sexuality education:
Theory and practice. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). 1991-2013
High school youth risk behavior survey data. Retrieved
from http://nccd.cdc.gov/youthonline/
Clark, J., Clark, S., & Brey, R. (2014). Improving pre-service
elementary teachers’ self-reported efficacy for using the
professional teacher standards in health education. Journal
of School Health, 84, 459-465.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 1-15.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teach-
ers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and
be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Donaldson, A. A., Lindberg, L. D., Ellen, J. M., & Marcell, A. V.
(2013). Receipt of sexual health information from parents,
teachers, and healthcare providers by sexually experienced
U.S. adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53, 235-240.
Eisenberg, M. A., Madsen, N., Oliphant, J. A., & Sieving, R. E.
(2013). Barriers to providing the sexuality education that
teachers believe students need. Journal of School Health,
83, 335-342.
Future of Sex Education Initiative. (2012). National Sexuality
Education Standards: Core content and skills, K-12 [a spe-
cial publication of the Journal of School Health]. Retrieved
from http://www.futureofsexed.org/documents/josh-fose-
standards-web.pdf
Future of Sex Education Initiative. (n.d.). National Teacher
Preparation Standards for Sexuality Education. Retrieved
from http://www.futureofsexed.org/documents/teacher-
standards.pdf
Kirby, D. B., Laris, B. A., & Rolleri, L. A. (2007). Sex and HIV
education programs: Their impact on sexual behaviors of
young people throughout the world. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 40, 206-217.
Landry, D. J., Darroch, J. E., Singh, S., & Higgins, J. (2003).
Factors associated with the content of sex education in
U.S. public secondary schools. Perspectives on Sexual and
Reproductive Health, 35, 261-269.
Lindeau, S. T., Tetteh, A. S., Kasza, K., & Gilliam, M. (2008).
What schools teach our patients about sex? Obstetrics &
Gynecology, 111, 256-266.
Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teach-
ing. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Rhode Island Department of Education. (2012). Rhode Island
Department of Education comprehensive health instruc-
tional outcomes. Providence, RI: Author.
Rhode Island Department of Education. (2015). RI school
districts. Retrieved from http://www.ride.ri.gov/
StudentsFamilies/RIPublicSchools/SchoolDistricts.
aspx#1204605regular—regional-districts
Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education & Rhode Island Department of Health. (2009).
Rules and regulations for school health programs.
Providence, RI: U.S. Department of Education.
Wilson, K. L., Wiley, D. C., Housman, J., McNeill, E. B., & Rosen,
B. L. (2015). Conceptualizing and implementing a profes-
sional development pilot program for public school teachers to
strengthen sexuality education. Pedagogy in Health Promotion.
Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2373379915583676