Search

As part of a project funded by the Wellcome Trust, we held a one-day symposium, bringing together researchers, practitioners, and policymakers, to discuss priorities for research on relationships and sex education (RSE) in a world where young people increasingly live, experience, and augment their relationships (whether sexual or not) within digital spaces. The introduction of statutory RSE in schools in England highlights the need to focus on improving understandings of young people and digital intimacies for its own sake, and to inform the development of learning resources. We call for more research that puts young people at its centre; foregrounds inclusivity; and allows a nuanced discussion of pleasures, harms, risks, and rewards, which can be used by those working with young people and those developing policy. Generating such research is likely to be facilitated by participation, collaboration, and communication with beneficiaries, between disciplines and across sectors. Taking such an approach, academic researchers, practitioners, and policymakers agree that we need a better understanding of RSE's place in lifelong learning, which seeks to understand the needs of particular groups, is concerned with non-sexual relationships, and does not see digital intimacies as disconnected from offline everyday 'reality'.

This article draws on a recent U.K. research project about lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT+) perspectives on university to examine the implications for pastoral care and other service provision on campus. In a departure from previous scholarship that has tended to understand LGBT+ students as "vulnerable" and/or needing "support," it argues that university spaces should be (re)framed in a way that moves beyond (only) personal or individual "care." The article outlines some of the issues that LGBT+ students may face under the following headings: Curriculum and course content; Discrimination, prejudice and bullying; Facilities and service provision on campus; A continuum of experiences. Following these, a final section draws some conclusions and implications for practice in higher education.

This paper presents new empirical data that highlight how a focus on "bullying" is too limited and narrow when thinking about homophobia, biphobia and transphobia that young people may experience. The paper draws on two recent studies with young lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans participants, which each identified issues and experiences not readily captured within dominant bullying discourses and understandings. Findings are examined within three sections: beyond "bullying", questioning inevitability, and (in)appropriate responses. In conclusion, I set out some implications and suggestions for the development of practice and future research concerning homophobia, biphobia and transphobia in youth settings.

This article discusses some key findings about secondary schools from a mapping study of Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education in England. The secondary school elements of the study combined a nationally representative survey of 617 secondary schools with follow-up in-depth case studies in five of these schools. These case studies involved interviews and discussion groups with pupils, parents and key school staff members, as well as governors and school improvement partners, and local authority support staff. Results reported here relate to the models and methods of delivery; frequency and curriculum coverage; the purpose and value of schooling, and PSHE education, and issues about staffing, expertise and credibility. Where appropriate, comparisons are made with primary schools. In doing so, the article raises issues about the diminished status and priority of PSHE education in secondary as compared with primary schools, and how this may stem from the ways in which schools do/do not value the subject, and its relationship to broader attainment and education policy contexts. (Contains 3 notes and 4 tables.)

This article reports on recent findings from a mapping study of Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education in schools in England, focusing on the data derived from primary school participants. It is based on a nationally representative survey of 923 primary school PSHE education leads, and follow-up in-depth interviews and discussion groups with 171 participants. This included local authority support staff, and from participating primary schools: senior management representatives, PSHE education leads, teaching staff, governors, school improvement partners, parents, and pupils. Results included here primarily relate to two areas: delivery models and curriculum coverage, and pupil views on their experiences and the (potential) value of PSHE education. In examining these areas, the article raises issues about blurred boundaries between PSHE education and Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning and/or pastoral care within school more widely, and particular staff sensitivities about the teaching of certain elements of PSHE education, particularly sex and relationships education and drugs, alcohol and tobacco education. These subject areas were less likely to be included or prioritised within PSHE education than, for example, emotional health and well-being, but were often the areas highlighted as most important by pupils. In conclusion, the article raises questions about the potential links between PSHE education and attainment, and the use of different teaching approaches across the curriculum more broadly. (Contains 3 tables and 5 notes.)

This article draws on three small-scale studies with young people in two cities in the United Kingdom, which sought to gather views on sex and relationships education (SRE) and sexual health, and included those who self-identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB). Participants were involved in detailed self-completion surveys and/or in-depth interviews/focus groups. Each project elicited data about respondents' views on SRE (at school) and how this included and excluded LGB young people. The article also looks at influences on sexual activity, conceptualizations/understandings of sexual health and "safe sex", and expectations in relation to safer sex. This aids understanding about the existence of dominant "sexual cultures" and their influence on young people's attitudes towards sexual health, including views on/experiences of "risk behaviours", and (unequal) access to services. The article concludes with recommendations for good practice, and future research, highlighting the importance of an equalities and human rights foundation for learning about sex and relationships, for both young and old, and people of all sexual identities/experience. (Contains 1 note.)

In this article we discuss the findings from a recent study of UK policy and practice in relation to sexual health services for young people, based in--or closely linked with--schools. This study formed part of a larger project, completed in 2009, which also included a systematic review of international research. The findings discussed in this paper are based on analyses of interviews with 51 service managers and questionnaire returns from 205 school nurses. Four themes are discussed. First, we found three main service permutations, in a context of very diverse and uneven implementation. Second, we identified factors within the school context that shaped and often constrained service provision; some of these also have implications for sex and relationships education (SRE). Third, we found contrasting approaches to the relationship between SRE input and sexual health provision. Fourth, we identified some specific barriers that need to be addressed in order to develop "young people friendly" services in the school context. The relative autonomy available to school head teachers and governors can represent an obstacle to service provision--and inter-professional collaboration--in a climate where, in many schools, there is still considerable ambivalence about discussing "sex" openly. In conclusion, we identify areas worthy of further research and development, in order to address some obstacles to sexual health service and SRE provision in schools. (Contains 1 table.)

This article draws on UK research with over 600 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans (LGBT+) people, funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (grant AH/J011894/1), which explored understandings and experiences of LGBT 'community'. I examine the ways in which intimacy is regulated and shaped by and within social interaction, which was apparent in three main ways. First, the research identified how for some people the very concept of 'LGBT community' was linked to intimacy. Second, there was strong evidence to suggest that some LGBT+ people self-regulate their practices of intimacy (such as holding hands or kissing in public) so as not to be recognised as enacting a same-gender relationship. This was understood as a form of self-protection or hate crime prevention, though degrees of habit and professed concern for other people's feelings were also contributing factors. Third, experiences of intimate relations were shaped by intersectional dynamics, particularly relating to various forms of discrimination, including ageism, biphobia, classism, (dis)ableism, racism, and transphobia from and among LGBT+ people. Whilst LGBT 'communities' were thought to enable opportunities to seek sexual and/or intimate encounters, this is not without its complexities. Although there have been improvements in relation to legislation and wider social attitudes, there is, for some, persistent apprehension and self-regulation which, whether necessary or not, are significant. LGBT+ people's experiences thus suggest that intimacy can be shaped by multiple inequalities both within and without LGBT 'communities'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]