back to activity report

My initial intention for employing Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), as an exploratory qualitative investigation, was to provide young people with an opportunity to discuss an educational program on sexuality and gender equality in relation to their own needs and concerns. However, during the course of research, I decided to reformulate the conception of FGDs, and to include, besides pupils, also teachers, as another key users and beneficiaries of schools' educational programs. Moreover, I decided to redirect discussions' guidelines towards the issue of school-based SE in Croatia in general, and to address the gender equality perspective as one of the cross-curricular components of efficient schoolwork on sexuality and health. My decision was made in the view of the early stage of the development of school-based SE in Croatia, as well as to adjust to the activity plan of the broader processes of drafting curriculum reform at the national level, in which this (IPF) project is involved. Additional conceptual suggestions were provided at expert consultations. The FGDs' topic guide and related questions were developed to reflect major critical points from the literature (*** 1997c; ***, 1997d; ***, 2002k; Carrera & Ingham, 1997; Csincsak et al, 1994; Lawrence, Kanabus & Regis, 2000; Oost van et al, 1994), and to include the specificities of the Croatian context.

Participants were recruited from four secondary schools in Zagreb, utilizing established networks of pupils and teachers who have participated in CESI's educational programs. There were eight teacher participants (all female), two of them working as school pedagogues, and the other six as subject teachers (biology, teaching methods, pediatrics, ethics, Croatian language and literature, English language) in three secondary schools (Administrative, Civil Airforces, Midwives). Seven pupils participated (six girls and one boy), aged between 14 and 18 years, and attending two different secondary schools (Civil Airforces and Nursing). Separate sessions were organized for the teachers (November 12th 2002) and for the students (November 15th 2002), both at the CESI premises in Zagreb. The FGDs lasted between an hour and 15 minutes (teachers) and an hour and a half (adolescents), and were facilitated by Nataša Bijelic (CESI) and myself. The discussions were tape-recorded and then transcribed. The analysis of textual material was directed by the interaction of questions serving as guidelines for the discussions, and the particular issues raised by the participants themselves. The following part, based on the major themes identified, summarizes findings from the FGDs with both teachers and students.

All of the participants, students and teachers alike, agreed that there is a strong need for SE programs in Croatian schools, and that school-based SE should be mandatory and regulated at the national level. The teachers were uniform in their opinion that SE contents should be implemented across the curriculum, integrated in teaching subjects such as biology and student community class, and additionally organized in the form of 'projects and seminars'. Moreover, many teachers highlighted a need for applying interactive teaching methods ('workshops') within SE lessons, as well as a need for a closer co-operation between school personnel (e.g. a school psychologist/pedagogue and class-teachers). Students, on the other hand, differed in their opinions on the issue of SE implementation. Whereas some of them tended to see SE in school as a separately time-tabled subject ('but without marks'), the others suggested that sexuality issues should be addressed within various school-subjects such as biology, psychology, and Croatian language and literature, but a problem is that some of secondary schools' curricula (some vocational and art-schools) do not include many of these subjects. The adolescent participants did not support the idea of student community class as the proper timetable niche for SE, adding that these classes are often used for other purposes, mostly as a substitute for the lessons missed. However, the students, same as the teachers, additionally emphasized a need for interactive learning methods ('It should be more like a conversation, with everyone participating'). The both groups of participants also agreed that SE should be implemented already in the primary schools' curriculum, and adjusted accordingly to major developmental stages of pupils. One suggestion was that in lower grades the educational focus should be more on relationships, and then to gradually introduce sexuality issues in order to achieve a comprehensive and systematic coverage of all SE contents.

With reference to the objectives of SE, teachers deliberations offer a wide-ranging account: to improve young people's self-esteem and personal integrity; to develop respect and tolerance for different sexual identities; to provide basic knowledge of reproductive system; to strengthen communication skills; to address the issues of sexual and gender roles and identities; and to support positive attitudes to sexuality. On the other hand, the students in their answers to the same question often referred to the contents rather than to the goals of SE. Nevertheless, their inputs paint the vivid picture of adolescents' concerns and needs when it comes to sexuality: STI's (occurrence, symptoms, avoidance, testing); contraception; the first experience of sexual intercourse; pressures ('everybody is doing it'); fears; unwanted pregnancy; going to gynecologist; masturbation; 'about sexual intercourse as something natural and normal'; sexual orientation; sexual violence; love relations; communication; and emotions. With regards to this last issue, young women added that it is necessary that SE classes also address emotions, as 'girls often don't know the difference between physical attraction and being in love' and 'young men are often 'closed' and don't discuss their own emotions'. While all of the teachers and all of the young women agreed that there is no need for single-sex groups, the only male participant pointed that, concerning the issue of masturbation, it could be better to have discussion first in single-sex groups, and then in a joint girls-and-boys session.

In discussions about who should be teaching SE, the teacher participants suggested that these educators, primarily, should be motivated and trustworthy individuals who are comfortable with discussing sexuality issues with young people. However, they also indicated that sexuality educators should also have sufficient expert knowledge and developed facilitation skills, indicating a need for additional teachers' education in the knowledge area of sexuality and personal relationships, as well as a need for training programs focusing on interactive teaching methods. The teachers also indicated that well prepared and compiled educational materials (manuals, references, handbooks) could additionally motivate the potential practitioners of school-based SE. On the same issue, the adolescents proposed that various experts from the outside of school environment (medical doctors, gynecologists, psychologists) should be invited to conduct SE classes. Young people argued that it is easier for them to confide in someone from the outside, someone whom they do not encounter every day. In that way they feel more comfortable to ask about things that they would be embarrassed to ask their class-teacher, or a school pedagogue/psychologists. Their accounts emphasize youth's need for confident, reliable, and pragmatic support and advice on sexual matters.

The participants, depending on their age, differently perceived parents' role in the implementation of school-based SE. The adolescents indicated that SE classes should not be conditioned by parents' consent, as 'there are some very conservative parents who don't discuss that subject with their children', and 'probably would not allow that their children discuss it in school'. They also stressed that 'parents don't realize that sexuality is a really important issue for young people'. On the other hand, the teachers suggested that 'SE program should be accompanied with workshops and support groups for parents', and that 'if SE would be regulated at the national level, then parents' consent is not necessary'. Likewise, generational differences were notable in the discussions on the role of religious institutions in the development and implementation of SE in Croatian schools. Young participants pointed out that 'sexuality isn't a matter of church' and argued that 'these /sexuality issues/ are our problems, and we have to talk about them', and that 'we know that religion tells us one thing, but real life is something else'. On the other side, teachers remarked that it is necessary to involve the representatives of church in the process of drafting SE school-programs, as 'every confrontation with the church in a country where 95% of its population self-identify as Catholics is not effective'. Their recommendations include 'seeking liberal people within the Catholic church', and 'starting to create a dialogue with them first'. They also suggested that it is needed to 'think politically' and to keep in mind that 'some religious (Catholic) interest groups could have a certain influence on the Ministry of Education' and that 'entering into conflict with the Church could significantly reduce the odds of SE implementation in schools'.

The teacher participants indicated two possible directions for future actions in the area of school-based SE: to intensify lobbying for a consensus at the national level and then to develop SE projects in a co-operation with the MoES; and/or to continue former work of spreading and coordinating the network of motivated individuals. One of the teachers stressed that any future initiative should also involve organizations and institution from other sectors, for example public health (Children's Hospital Zagreb) and NGOs (CESI), as well as various experts. The adolescents, from their perspective, added that there is a need for peer-education programs, and that young people should have an opportunity to suggest the themes for particular SE classes.

While it is evident that no general conclusions can be stated on the basis of such a small sample, both the students' and the teachers' contributions, each from their perspective, additionally stress some of the major points and considerations that need to be addressed in any future policy development and/or curriculum experimentation (small-scale programs with evaluation) in the area of school-based SE.