MAedDissertationSL SRE03_01_13

MA Education Dissertation
2012
A Secondary School Case Study: What are the Main Issues and Challenges for
Teachers Delivering Sex and Relationships Education?
by
Sarah Lyles
This dissertation is submitted in part fulfilment of the degree of MA Education, University of
Roehampton.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 2
Abstract
This qualitative secondary school case study explored the issues and challenges for
teachers delivering Sex and Relationships Education (SRE). It investigated several
themes identified through guidance documents, research and related literature
from the perspective of the teachers and the PSHE Lead. An interpretivist
methodology was applied to the study. Purposive sampling was used to select the
participants and data was collected via semi-structured interviews, e-
questionnaires and documentary analysis. Data highlighted a high level of regard
for the subject and a mutually supportive school ethos. The importance of high
quality training for PSHE practitioners along with Local Authority commitment for
PSHE was found to be at the heart of effective SRE pedagogy; however it was
realised that the issues facing teachers delivering SRE were of a highly complex
nature. A lack of clarity surrounding terms included within the PSHE curriculum
(QCA, 2007) was emphasised along with further challenges compounded by the
involved and personal nature of the subject. The findings align with
recommendations made by OfSTED (2002, 2005, 2007, 2010) and Macdonald
(2009). The study concludes that in order to overcome the issues facing teachers
delivering SRE it is essential that these recommendations are accepted by the
current Government, SRE terms are defined, a commonly understood aim for SRE is
agreed and up-to-date, comprehensive guidance material is provided for
practitioners.
Keywords: Sex and Relationships Education, PSHE, faith, values, culture, attitudes,
sexuality, sexual orientation, sexual identity, safeguarding

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 3
Acknowledgements
My thanks are dedicated to a few, yet highly significant people.
My wonderful husband, my family, a very special friend; and Peter (Basil, Boris,
Dougal, Chewbacca) – our rabbit. Thanks must also go to my tutor, Dr Richard
Race; who I am sure can attribute at least one of his grey hairs to me and my
relentlessness.
I also wish to acknowledge my appreciation of the staff involved in the study who
gave of their time, experience and expertise.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 4
Contents
Abstract 3
Acknowledgements 4
Contents 5
Chapter One – Introduction 7
 My Background and Rationale for this Research 7
 PSHE and Sex and Relationships Education 8
 My Professional Experience and how this led me to the Research Focus 9
School Examples 9
 Emerging Themes 11
Chapter Two – Literature Review 13
 Introduction 13
 The Context of SRE 13
 Defining SRE – the SRE Policy 16
 Sexuality, Sexual Identity and Sexual Orientation 20
 What to Teach and When to Teach it 22
 Faith, Culture, Values and Attitudes 23
 Summary 24
Chapter Three – Research Methods and Methodology 26
 Introduction 26
Methods 27
 Case Study 27
 Semi-structured Interview 30
 Questionnaires 32
 Documentary Analysis 32
Methodology 33
 Initial Semi-structured Interview 35

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 5
 E-questionnaire 37
 Documentary Analysis 38
 Follow-up Semi-structured Interview 39
 Ethical Considerations 39
Chapter Four – Data Analysis 41
 Introduction 41
 What to Teach and When to Teach it 41
 Sexuality, Sexual Identity and Sexual Orientation 45
 Faith, Culture, Values and Attitudes 48
 Safeguarding 53
 Information – Training and Resources 57
 An Evaluation of how the Findings Impact upon my Professional Practice 63
Chapter Five – Conclusion 66
 Strengths and Limitations of the Research 67
 Further Research 69
Bibliography 71
Appendices 82
 Appendix A – Compilation of Questions 82
 Appendix B – PSHE Programme of Study 84
 Appendix C – Headteacher Consent Form 85
 Appendix D – Initial Semi-structured Interview Schedule - PSHE Lead 86
 Appendix E – Teacher Consent Form 87
 Appendix F – Follow-up Semi- structured Interview Schedule - PSHE Lead 89
 Appendix G – Transcript PSHE Lead Initial Semi-structured Interview 91
 Appendix H – Transcript PSHE Lead Follow-up Semi-structured Interview 104
 Appendix I – Blank E-questionnaire 110

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 6
A Secondary School Case Study: What are the Main Issues and Challenges for
Teachers Delivering Sex and Relationships Education?
Chapter One - Introduction
My Background and Rationale for this Research
As a Personal, Social, Health and Economics Education (PSHE) Consultant, I support
both primary and secondary teachers with the planning, delivery and assessment of
PSHE. To be effective I require expertise in a variety of the ‘staple’ areas of school
improvement (Hargreaves, 2011; Schmoker, 1999) which include: teaching, learning
and pedagogy - where active, needs-based learning is central (Inman, Buck and
Tandy, 2003), and leadership and management (Fullan, 2006). I also need a solid
knowledge and in-depth understanding of the OfSTED Framework for Inspections
(OfSTED, 2012a) and the additional guidance specific to PSHE (OfSTED, 2012b).
Further to the core skills and knowledge of education consultancy I consider it
necessary to be emotionally intelligent (Salovey and Mayer, 1990). It is my belief
that greater success is enjoyed when one is self-aware, empathetic and possesses
refined social skills (Goleman, 2006). I consider that part of my role is to model
these desired and appropriate behaviours for school staff, parents1
and young
people. In many schools the profile of PSHE needs to be raised (Macdonald, 2009),
therefore it is important for me to build positive and valuable relationships with
schools. If relationships are not successful and the impact of school improvement is
not apparent then PSHE developments made may be short lived. In my experience,
a successful PSHE Consultant needs to be highly proficient in these emotional and
social skills, possibly more so than consultants supporting core areas such as Maths
or English due to the high profile of their subject (Alldred and David, 2007; OfSTED,
2012a).
Working primarily within one Local Authority (LA), I often support other LAs and am
involved in national and local initiatives and training events. I have been able to
apply a partnership approach (Gilles, 1998) to many of the resources I have written,
1
In all cases the term parent(s) also includes carers.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 7
working closely with other education consultants, schools, Smokefree Alliances,
DAATs (drug and alcohol action team) and health professionals to develop
resources such as the ‘PSHE – Tobacco Education and Stopping Smoking Support
Toolkit for Secondary Schools’ (Babcock 4S, 2011a), the ‘PSHE – Drug and Alcohol
Education Toolkit for Key Stage 4’ (Babcock 4S, 2012a) and the ‘PSHE - Partnership
Approach for Key Stage 3’, lessons to be delivered by the Police (Babcock 4S,
2012b). The same approach was successfully applied to the recent development of
the training materials for the National PSHE CPD Programme (Babcock 4S, 2012c).
PSHE and Sex and Relationships Education
PSHE is “the planned provision in schools for promoting the emotional, social and
health development of children and young people” (Babcock 4S, 2012c). It is a
National Curriculum subject (QCA and DfEE, 1999) which contains several specialist
areas. The main areas of specialism, as denoted by the National PSHE Continued
Professional Development (CPD) Programme (Babcock 4S, 2012c) are: Drug
Education, Economic Well-being and Financial Capability, Emotional Health and
Well-being, Staying Safe and Sex and Relationships Education (SRE) - SRE is a subject
within PSHE.
Although a subject in its own right, PSHE’s links with safeguarding, behaviour
management and well-being (Blake, 2006; OfSTED, 2005) requires me not only to
have an in-depth knowledge of curriculum matters, but also to have an equally solid
understanding of wider issues such as anti-bullying (DfE, 2012a; OfSTED 2012b),
behaviour and discipline, (DfE, 2012b) use of reasonable force (DfE, 2012c) and a
variety of other areas associated with agencies such as the police, the fire service,
the Drug and Alcohol Action Team (DAAT), family support groups, domestic violence
support, and Young Carers. This is an added dimension to the role of curriculum
consultant, but one I view as being imperative if my help and advice to schools is
going to be as up-to-date and informed as possible. I view myself as a strategic and
vocal PSHE champion who has an in-depth knowledge of both the curriculum and
wider PSHE agenda, helping to bridge the gap between schools, health services and
local and national support agencies. This can prove a demanding task as the PSHE

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 8
schema is wide (Blake, 2008) and I have limited capacity and influence, therefore
prioritising and being able to recognise the difference between ‘urgent’ and
‘important’ is a key feature of my role (Everard, Morris, and Wilson, 2004: 123).
My role requires me to be able to support teachers with all of the aforementioned
elements associated with PSHE. Applying the concept of ‘reflective practice’
(Bolton, 2010) to the communications I share with teachers and other members of
school staff, the two areas which appear to cause the most anxiety are Drug
Education (Powney and Lowden, 2001) and SRE (OfSTED, 2005). These areas are
also highlighted in the OfSTED report, ‘Personal, Social, Health and Economic
Education in Schools’ (2010: 6). In this, OfSTED concluded that due to a lack of
discrete curriculum time and incomplete coverage of the subject “[t]he areas that
suffered included aspects of sex and relationships education; education about
drugs, including alcohol; and mental health issues…”
My Professional Experience and how this led me to the Research Focus
Several recent experiences in the field led me to research this area in more detail. I
find that teachers are often concerned or even afraid of PSHE; and frequently when
I probe further, the major stumbling block is SRE. Whether in the infant, junior or
secondary phase, teachers’ apprehension is generally focused upon this one
specialist area of PSHE.
School Examples: A Higher Level Teaching Assistant (HLTA) participating in the
National PSHE CPD Programme (DCSF and VT 4S, 2009) tried to order the children’s
story book ‘And Tango Makes Three’ (Richardson and Parnell, 2005). The book was
highlighted by the ‘No Outsiders’ project, research which focused upon addressing
equality in the primary classroom (Lee, 2010). The book tells the story of two male
penguins that successfully hatch an egg. Morals underpinning the story are ones of
kindness, love and family units which do not conform to stereotype. The school
would not allow her to order a copy of the book, stating that they considered it
unsuitable for infant-aged pupils. This contradicted the school’s values statement
along with the 2010 Equality Act (HMSO) and made the HLTA question the values
demonstrated by school staff, including the senior leadership team.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 9
Part of my role is to deliver parent SRE evenings, often to showcase materials which
will be used by the school. In one school the documentation stated that the
materials were for Year 4, though they were being used with Year 5 pupils. When
challenged, the PSHE Lead replied, “[t]he then Year 4 teachers were reticent to
teach it. The Year 5 teacher and I had experience of teaching it in Year 4 and were
happy to take it on” (PSHE Lead, 2012). I was informed not to expect any particular
parental concerns. On meeting the parents I placed SRE in the context of
supporting their children’s emotional development and self-worth; helping young
people to make sense of what was happening both to them and around them, and
how the work in which they would soon be taking part bridged the gap between
biology and personal development (Bernstein, 1994). The evening passed positively
and the parents left informed. The teachers were relieved and explained that there
had been parental concern prior to the event and they had been dreading it. But
because I had placed the learning into a tangible context it had dispelled anxiety
and focused upon the importance of SRE. The teachers also added that another
reason that this area of the curriculum moved year groups was because of parental
concerns. Therefore the Year 4/5 SRE curriculum was based upon whether the
parents were ready for SRE, and not necessarily when the pupils required input,
demonstrating the complex issue of when elements of the SRE curriculum are
taught (Sex Education Forum, 2011b; Mason, 2010).
I have encountered many issues when working with secondary teachers that reflect
OfSTED (2007) findings: from schools claiming that they deliver no SRE at all, even
though it is a statutory part of the Science curriculum, to secondary schools
repeating the puberty work already covered by primary schools. However, there
are further significant matters which have arisen when teachers have attended
training events. One concern is around sensitivity in relation to culture. This was
raised when I spoke about a school’s ethos being one of security and safety for all
pupils. I questioned whether staff felt confident in challenging inappropriate or
unacceptable behaviour and language. One teacher stated that they were unable
to challenge unacceptable language and behaviour in relation to homosexuality, as
they worked in an international school which included pupils from countries where

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 10
homosexuality is illegal, for example, from China. However, by working in this
manner the school was acting against the law as stated in the 2010 Equality Act
(HMSO) and OfSTED Anti-Bullying guidance (2012c). I was able to correct the
teacher’s misconception regarding Chinese law, as homosexuality was legalised in
1997 (Mountford, 2009).
A further issue is one of sensitivity around religion. In a particular faith-based
school SRE was being delivered in strict accordance with certain values. Pupils were
specifically being taught that abortion, sex before marriage and homosexuality were
wrong. The pupils were not given other perspectives, informed of the laws and
their rights surrounding such matters, or even provided with information regarding
support services where pupils could discuss issues or other personal concerns (SEF,
2004).
Emerging Themes
The above examples illustrate only a sample of the issues I have been made aware
of through my role as PSHE Consultant. Over many years I have worked with
teachers and other staff delivering and supporting PSHE; this professional dialogue
has revealed common themes. These conversations have enabled me to draw
together questions to inform the direction of this research (see Appendix A).
I strive to become increasingly effective in my role as PSHE Consultant. Greater
understanding of the complexities associated with SRE will impact positively upon
my training events, resource writing, one-to-one consultancy, parent SRE evenings
and wider SRE strategies (SEF, 2004). Issues highlighted through this introduction
and Appendix A, in conjunction with certain significant SRE documents and
research, at this stage have enabled me to generate three overarching themes
which I have found are the greatest concerns for schools in relation to SRE. These
themes are:
 What to Teach and When to Teach it (after deliberation I decided this
is a statement and not a question),
 Sexuality, Sexual Identity and Sexual Orientation, and

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 11
 Faith, Culture, Values and Attitudes.
The above themes have been apparent through both my professional experience
and related literature, nonetheless I wished to consider that additional issues may
become apparent through this research. The following intentionally-open research
question was developed:
What are the main issues and challenges for teachers delivering Sex and
Relationships Education?
What now follows is a description of the structure for my dissertation. The
Literature Review in Chapter Two analyses some of the main SRE texts and
considers ways in which they impact upon current practice; it aims to add further
clarity to my focal research question. Chapter Three considers the methods
selected and looks at the methodological justifications for the interpretivist
approach taken; ethical safeguards applied to the research are also considered.
The Data Analysis in Chapter Four presents the findings obtained through the
research and analyses the data in light of related literature. It also reflects upon
how the findings impact upon my professional practice. Chapter Five concludes the
study by considering answers to the focal research question. It highlights the
strengths and limitations of the research process and considers the implications for
further inquiry.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 12
Chapter Two – Literature Review
Introduction
Chapter Two provides a holistic view of SRE and uses related literature to establish
areas of current understanding. The chapter uses sub-headings in order to clearly
develop focal issues. ‘The Context of SRE’ offers an account of SRE since the SRE
Guidance (DfEE, 2000). It highlights a number of contradictions between assertions
made in the document and findings from OfSTED, along with subject reviews and
related research. A background to the principles and aims of SRE, as set out in the
SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000), is provided and compared to related literature; insight
into the possible reasons for discrepancies is offered. ‘Defining SRE – the SRE
Policy’ considers some of the complex issues associated with the definition of SRE.
It highlights inconsistency within the SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000), and provides
evidence which conflicts with assertions made by the document. Literature findings
are applied in order to consider possible reasons for the discrepancies. The chapter
then considers the identified three themes of: What to Teach and When to Teach it,
Sexuality, Sexual Identity and Sexual Orientation, and Faith, Culture, Values and
Attitudes. Each theme selected has been reported, through both my professional
practice and related research and guidance, to cause challenge for teachers
delivering SRE. These themes informed the main research question: What are the
main issues and challenges for teachers delivering Sex and Relationships Education?
The Context of SRE
“In most schools, the content of SRE programmes is appropriate, although it is not
always taught when it would most effectively meet all individual pupils’ needs”
(OfSTED, 2002: 15).
Young people “feel that parents and teachers often leave it too late and do not talk
about such issues until they have reached puberty or have started feeling sexual
desire. In the case of SRE, young people do not want just the biological facts but
want to talk about feelings and relationships” (Ofsted, 2007: 11).

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 13
Pupils “said that their sex and relationships education was taught too late and there
was not enough of it to be useful. Discussion was sometimes limited because of
their teacher’s embarrassment or lack of knowledge” (OfSTED, 2010: 14).
The above quotes, ranging from the first OfSTED review of SRE in 2002 up until the
most recent PSHE subject report in 2010, portray a rather bleak picture of SRE in
English schools. Although schools were provided with SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000),
OfSTED evidence would suggest that this has had little impact upon SRE provision.
The SRE Guidance (ibid) underpins current policy along with teaching and learning
in SRE throughout many English primary and secondary schools. It takes account of
both the Social Exclusion Unit report on teenage pregnancy (1999) and the revised
National Curriculum framework (QCA and DfEE, 1999) which, for the first time,
incorporated Personal Social Health Education. The guidance states that “there are
many excellent examples where schools have established clear sex education
policies in consultation with parents, governors and the wider community, and
where they are delivering effective programmes” (DfEE, 2000: 3). The DfEE asserts
a positive view of SRE practice; however, the above OfSTED evidence would indicate
that this is not the case.
Fundamental principles in the guidance affirm that effective SRE seeks to equip
children and young people with the knowledge and skills necessary to be able to
make informed and responsible decisions about their lives. It stresses that SRE
should be delivered, not in isolation, but through the PSHE framework, supported
by elements of the Science curriculum and other cross curricular themes; it clarifies
the main objective of SRE as being to support children and young people in their
physical, moral and emotional development, whilst helping them to respect
themselves and others (DFEE, 2000). This may appear relatively straightforward,
and SRE taught discretely through PSHE and strengthened through cross-curricular
and Science links could seem like an effective approach; however, as highlighted by
the preceding OfSTED findings, it would seem that effective SRE provision is a more
complex issue.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 14
The non-statutory PSHE curriculum covers many social elements of SRE, including:
the development of confidence, the exploration of positive relationships, feelings
and sexuality, and the knowledge of confidential support services. Conversely, the
Science curriculum is a statutory entitlement for children and young people and sets
out the biological aspects of SRE. From this, one may assume that the biological
elements of SRE are delivered throughout all maintained schools in England.
In the 2000 NATSAL (National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles) study, 39%
of 16–19 year-old men and 30% of 16-19 year-old women reported school as being
their main source of sexual information. This was more than any other source
contained within the study, including parents and friends (Macdowall et al, 2006).
Additionally 21% of 16–29 year-old men and 18% of 16–29 year-old women
believed that they lacked knowledge of biological sexual matters when they felt
ready to have some sexual experience. However, it should be noted that the survey
was carried out with respondents who had gone through the school system prior to
the 1999 National Curriculum (QCA and DfEE). Nevertheless, Science had been a
statutory core subject since the 1989 introduction of the National Curriculum (DfES)
and the participants should have studied the topics ‘Processes of Life’ and ‘Genetics
and Evolution’ which covered areas such as reproduction, the human life cycle, the
names of body parts, conception and genetics. This research suggests that the
Science element of SRE was not being delivered in line with its statutory status.
More recently, a survey carried out by Brook (2011) demonstrated that 26% of
young people received no SRE at all; 26% of those who did receive SRE stated that
teachers were not able to teach it well. Science is a statutory subject, therefore all
pupils in maintained schools should receive at least the biological elements of SRE;
however these findings suggest otherwise, and are echoed by Blake (2007).
Support for this reasoning is strengthened by the Sex Education Forum (SEF)
findings (2008). The teaching of HIV and AIDs is also a compulsory part of the
Science curriculum (SEF, 2011b); however the SEF reported that one in four young
people admit that they have not learned about it in school. Discrepancies may be
explained by Alldred and David (2007), whose study with LA PSHE co-ordinators

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 15
provides helpful insight. They state that the low status of PSHE, in comparison to
the statutory National Curriculum (QCA, 2007), is significant in limiting SRE. They
found that a framework for delivery is often in place, yet the timetable is frequently
cramped, PSHE is not a school priority, the subject matter is ‘controversial’ in nature
and some teachers asked to deliver it are anxious about the lessons. This may
explain why so many pupils report a lack of SRE in schools.
Defining SRE – the SRE Policy
The outset of the SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000) places importance upon the
requirement for all schools to have an up-to-date SRE Policy where SRE is defined.
There are two points of note here. Firstly, when the guidance was initially
introduced in 2000 the relationship aspect was referred to in the singular thus, as
suggested by Alldred and David (2007: 35), privileging “monogamous partnerships
or marriage, rather than all relationships including non-sexual ones”. By 2002 the
OfSTED SRE subject review had already altered the focus from the singular to the
plural, re-naming the subject Sex and Relationships Education, thus strengthening
its focus on cohesiveness and emotions. Secondly, when the DfEE (2000: 3) stated
that “[t]here are many excellent examples where schools have established clear sex
education policies… and where they are delivering effective programmes”, the title
of the documentation was contradicted by reverting back to the language of sex
education, as in the Circular 5/94 (DfE, 1994). This seems to add confusion for
schools already attempting to come to terms with a shift from the language of
morality to the more holistic notion of personal development (Thomson, 1994). If
the DfEE lacks a consistency of approach, the legitimacy of its claims come under
question; and whilst OfSTED (2002) supported the view that many schools did in
fact have a policy in place they were not as enthusiastic about sharing the DfEE’s
assertions regarding the effective delivery of SRE programmes, and noted that
“[t]oo many schools persist in involving all form tutors in the teaching of SRE when
there are clear indications that doing so leads to unacceptable inconsistency in
quality” (OfSTED, 2002: 22).

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 16
A clarity of understanding surrounding the purpose and nature of effective SRE is
vital to its effectiveness and “it would seem logical that SRE should be underpinned
by a clear conceptual framework that has evolved through consultation with young
people on what SRE is trying to achieve” (Hirst, 2008: 399). Nonetheless, many
schools fail to base their SRE curriculums and frameworks upon the needs of their
students (OfSTED, 2007). This lack of consistency regarding the subject’s name,
along with the absence of a framework or shared sense what the subject is trying to
achieve (Hirst, 2008), appears to perpetuate the apparent lack of clarity over its
purpose. This continues a dysfunctional relationship between the content of
school-based input and the reported experiences of young people (Macdowall et al,
2006; Brook, 2011; Mullinar, 2007). One has to question the credibility of
documentation which uses the terms sex education and Sex and Relationships
Education interchangeably, as the two terms suggest quite different approaches to
the culture and fundamental underpinnings of the subject, simply adding further
confusion to an already sensitive area of the curriculum (Jackson, 1982).
Up to this point the literature has demonstrated the importance of the word
relationships within SRE. If the ‘R’ stands for relationship - the singular, it is
suggested that SRE concentrates upon monogamous relationships or marriage
(Alldred and David, 2007) rather than friendships and non-sexual interactions. If the
word ‘relationships’ is omitted, and the subject is referred to as sex education, the
scientific focus prevails. It would appear that a subtle difference to the subject’s
name results in a difference in tone applied to the curriculum area. However, there
seems to be a paucity of evidence around whether schools that consistently refer to
‘Sex and Relationships Education’ tend to have a more in-depth understanding of
the subject area and communicate its function to parents, pupils and the wider
community, and whether, in contrast, schools that refer to ‘sex education’ place a
lower priority on the subject, a greater biological focus; taking more of a ‘damage
limitation’ approach (Corteen, 2006). The title ‘sex education’ may be more likely to
provoke an increasingly negative reaction; schools working in this manner may
therefore be less likely to view it as a subject which supports their ethos and values

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 17
and the “physical, moral and emotional development” of young people as required
of schools by the SRE guidance (DfEE, 2000).
Parental understanding of SRE has been found to be significant in the way in which
they are able to communicate with their children, and the more open and positive
the discussions between parent and child the greater the child’s confidence and
aptitude (Stone and Ingham, 2002). It is not necessarily communication about sex
and safer sex itself which has been found conclusively to produce these positive
outcomes, the key factors have been identified as an inclusive approach focusing
upon “openness, closeness, support and warmth” (Rosenthal and Feldman, 1999).
Thus strengthening the concept that effective SRE requires a backdrop of a wide
range of skills (Vincent, 2007) underpinned by a school culture of inclusion, social
value, social justice and innovation, and a belief in the importance of educating the
‘whole child’ – in other words, a culture of well-being (West-Burnham, 2010).
According to the literature, inconsistencies in SRE are rife. One example (Mason,
2010), explored the provision of SRE in two Primary Schools. Although the two
schools referred to the subject as Sex and Relationships Education, there were clear
differences between the nature of the subject’s ethos and pedagogy. Mason noted
that School A had a particularly ‘isolated’ SRE programme delivered through a one
off ‘Growing up Talk’ which included an element of single sex grouping where girls
were spoken to about menstruation and boys about wet dreams. School B’s
programme was delivered to all pupils via a series of sessions disseminated over a
six week period. Findings demonstrated that, in particular for pupils from School B,
pupil knowledge and understanding had increased and there was a greater
awareness of the opposite gender’s body changes. Mason attributed this to the
‘bravery’ of the teacher; however, this may also be linked to the concept of
‘leadership for well-being’ (West-Burnham, 2010), where issues are fundamentally
considered from a ‘humanistic’ view-point and a holistic approach taken towards
the subject matter. The teacher at School B applied a creative culture that was
relevant to the pupils, and the six week time-scale enabled the curriculum to more
accurately reflect the needs of the pupils. This example highlights the importance

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 18
of the holistic nature required for effective SRE (DfEE, 2000). However, it was noted
that the teacher had to be ‘brave’ in order to take this approach.
These issues may appear insignificant in isolation, but when held against the
backdrop of OfSTED reports, pupil findings and other literature, it can be argued
that they prove to be some of the major stumbling blocks unwittingly implanted
when the current foundations of SRE were laid. If the guidance on which the
subject is built is riddled with inconsistencies, the question of how schools can hope
to develop coherent practice remains.
The SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000: 5) states that SRE is “… lifelong learning about
physical, moral and emotional development. It is about the understanding of the
importance of marriage for family life, stable and loving relationships, respect, love
and care. It is also about the teaching of sex, sexuality, and sexual health. It is not
about the promotion of sexual orientation or sexual activity – this would be
inappropriate teaching”. If this is the accepted definition of SRE there are
numerous questions for schools to consider. Schools may decide whether to adopt
or amend this definition; they may choose to create or select one of their own, to
suit the needs and requirements of the school community. The DfEE definition is
clearly a reference to which schools must turn; however, the way in which the
definition was assembled expresses further discourse. The guidance takes its lead
from the 2000 Learning and Skills Act (HMSO: 74) which made amendments to the
1996 Education and Skills Act (HMSO), to ensure that pupils “learn the nature of
marriage and its importance for family life and the bringing up of children”.
Interestingly, recognition is also given to the consultation document Supporting
Families (Home Office, 1998) which highlights the many strong and supportive
relationships that exist without marriage. The DfEE (2000) definition of SRE clearly
acknowledges both of these principles and could again be considered a cause of
confusion for the direction of SRE. Nevertheless, whilst the 2000 Learning and Skills
Act (HMSO) maintains the importance of marriage as the basis of family life, the SRE
guidance urges teachers to exercise care that children are not stigmatized by non-
conformity to this concept, seemingly conflicting with the emphasis placed upon

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 19
marriage in the above definition. This issue, to which Alldred and David (2007: 40)
allude by referring to the tacit “validity of childbearing outside of marriage”, is
considered refreshing, even though they also note that this is compromised through
other areas of the guidance.
Nationally-recognised bodies suggest alternative definitions of SRE. The Sex
Education Forum (2005a: 1), provide the definition, “lifelong learning about sex,
sexuality and emotions”. The Family Planning Association (2011: 1) offer “[s]ex and
relationships education is learning about sex, sexuality, emotions, relationships,
sexual health and ourselves”. Both may be considered to provide a more holistic
view of SRE. It follows that prior to the selection of a definition for SRE the
alternatives are considered in order for a definition to be developed which supports
the SRE curriculum for the pupils and the local community. It could be suggested
that confusion is demonstrated within the SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000)
documentation itself. As demonstrated, the definition provided can be viewed as
contradictory, furthermore the views of teachers, pupils and parents must also be
reflected through the policy (ibid) and additional complications may arise if
community beliefs do not correspond with guidance documentation.
Sexuality, Sexual Identity and Sexual Orientation
Once a definition of SRE has been agreed, schools may find that additional issues
arise. The terms sexuality, sexual identity and sexual orientation (a theme
identified by this research) are not explained by the SRE Guidance (ibid) although
they are expected to form a part of both the SRE definition and curriculum. In
relation to sexuality, OfSTED (2002: 9 - 34) reported that “many teachers remain
nervous about approaching the matter and deal with it only superficially”. They
recommended that “teachers should be given further guidance about content and
methods in teaching about sexuality”. The External Steering Group (2008)
strengthened previous findings and reported that teaching around sexuality was
weak and that further guidance was required. Recent OfSTED (2010: 14) evidence
would suggest that the prolonged absence of definitions, along with a lack of
understanding about sexuality, sexual identity and sexual orientation, compounds

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 20
weaknesses in the delivery of these areas, resulting in some secondary-aged pupils
being unsure as to what was meant by ‘homophobic’ and “why the word ‘gay’ as a
term of abuse was unacceptable” (ibid).
The Primary National Curriculum (QCA and DfEE, 1999) addresses the issues of
sexuality, sexual identity and sexual orientation implicitly by requiring pupils to be
able to name the external parts of the body, recognising and identifying differences
and similarities between people, developing empathy and recognising that actions
have consequences. However, the Secondary National Curriculum (QCA, 2007)
requires pupils to explicitly consider similarities and differences among people of
different gender and sexual orientation examining the impact of prejudice on the
individual and society. The evidence further highlights a need for information which
will enable teachers and schools to prepare for this area of study confidently and
effectively.
According to the SEF (2005b) a significant minority of young people identify
themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB) or have feelings for people of the same
sex. These young people may feel excluded from SRE as they believe that the
lesson content has little relevance for them. Not only does this prove unhelpful for
LGB pupils it can also perpetuate the invisibility of LGB identities throughout the
school community, thus inhibiting understanding and respect for LGB issues,
impeding empathy and respect for inclusion and diversity (Oliver and Candappa,
2003). Research suggests that bullying affects a large number of young people
(OfSTED, 2012c), thus anti-bullying behaviour is a high priority for schools. The
2010 Equality Act (HMSO) and duty for schools to have published their first ‘Single
Equality Scheme’ by April 2012 (Babcock 4S, 2011b), place further pressure on
schools and it follows that the reported lack of clarity around the issues of sexuality,
sexual identity and sexual orientation hinders the development of these important
areas.
Twelve years after the introduction of the SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000) there has
been no subsidiary update and the resulting omission of, for example, civil
partnerships, in the current documentation indicates that the definition of SRE is

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 21
not inclusive of all pupils and families. The External Steering Group (2008: 7)
recommended that SRE should be “inclusive and relevant to all young people,
including young people with disabilities, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender
(LGBT)”. This strengthens previous endorsement for up-to-date, well-researched
and inclusive SRE Guidance.
What to Teach and When to Teach it
The National Curriculum (QCA, 2007) established the secondary curriculum
requirements for each subject, identifying the concepts and processes to be
addressed along with the range, content and suggested curriculum opportunities.
This provided schools with the overarching PSHE knowledge to be taught, skills to
be developed and areas to be studied. As stated by Blake (2007: 34) “SRE is an
intrinsic part of the broader curriculum subject PSHE, which includes the range of
public health and personal development topics”. He continues to assert that “[t]he
compartmentalisation of different aspects of PSHE into different topic areas… has
continued to hamper its holistic development”. This may help to explain why
OfSTED (2010a: 11) reported that in schools where achievement is not good or
outstanding PSHE was “fragmented… there was a lack of specialist teaching” and
“student’s knowledge and understanding were superficial and their development of
relevant skills was limited”. Blake (2006: 8) defines PSHE as “planned provision for
emotional and social development”. He continues to stress that it should be
relevant to a pupil’s “age, maturity and understanding”. This may further clarify
OfSTED evidence and provide reasons as to why SRE “often does not meet the
needs of children and young people” (Macdonald, 2009: 5).
The lack of assessment in PSHE may provide additional insight as to why SRE
frequently does not meet pupil need. OfSTED (2010: 5) highlighted the assessment
of PSHE, along with the tracking of pupil progress, to be the “weakest aspects of
provision”. Macdonald (2009: 33 - 34) also emphasised assessment as being an
area of difficulty within PSHE; he drew a parallel between ‘traditional’ subjects
where he concluded that there was common understanding of the discipline and an

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 22
“established body of knowledge”, and PSHE, where “there is a commonly held view
that PSHE is somehow unique” and “that you cannot test the personal”.
The evidence suggests that, collectively, a plethora of components present
complications for teachers who often struggle to know ‘What to Teach and When to
Teach it’. Although the National Curriculum (QCA, 2007) sets out PSHE content and
skills, the previously explored difficulties surrounding the subject’s name and the
absence of definitions for terms necessary for the effective exploration of SRE,
along with the complications of ensuring that PSHE is appropriate to a student’s
age, maturity and previous knowledge and skills appears to result in teachers being
anxious about what to teach and deciding when it should be taught. PSHE’s non-
statutory status adds further pressure to teachers already struggling with “a level of
disconnectedness between children and young people’s needs and their learning”
(Crow, 2008: 43), as its status does not require it to be delivered through initial
teacher training (ITT). Macdonald (2009) highlighted this in his recommendation to
promote PSHE through ITT and provide further routes for teachers to enable them
to become PSHE specialists. These issues combine to demonstrate the importance
of many of the recommendations made by the External Steering Group (2008)
which included: the development of skills and confidence of practitioners delivering
PSHE, the development of PSHE assessment tools and the provision of updated SRE
guidance.
Faith, Culture, Values and Attitudes
There are people who believe that that faith and culture do not have a place in the
delivery of SRE and that it is delivered in a value free manner (Blake and Katrak,
2010; Government Office for London, 2009: 11; External Steering Group, 2008).
However, the DfE (2011) states that “the curriculum should reflect values in our
society that promote personal development, equality of opportunity, economic
wellbeing, a healthy and just democracy, and a sustainable future” and that “[t]hese
values should relate to… our relationships, as fundamental to the development and
fulfilment of happy and healthy lives…”. In this sense values are central to the SRE
curriculum. An arising issue is whether the values on which the SRE curriculum is

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 23
built are a set of shared values. Values can be described as one’s “ethical DNA”
(Gilbert, 2009, cited in Duckworth, 2010). They are formed through early
experiences and influenced by our carers and parents. Schools also impact upon
the values we internalise and apply to the way in which we lead our lives (ibid).
These factors support the concept that one’s faith and/or culture impact upon the
formation of values. By applying Katrack’s ‘values bell’ (2003, cited in Babcock 4S,
2012c) it can be demonstrated how values impact upon our beliefs, attitudes and
opinions - ultimately our behaviours. This means that if we are brought up with a
particular culture or are predisposed to a faith, this is validated by the values we
apply to guide our actions and choices.
Culture and faith are separate issues with distinct definitions. Culture can be
considered to be the reflection of a set of collective “common verbal and overt
behaviors that are learned and maintained by a set of similar social and
environmental contingences (i.e., learning history)…” (Sugai, O’Keeffe and Fallon,
2012: 210). And faith, when considered in a religious context can be defined as a
“strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than
proof” (Oxford Dictionary On-line, 2012). Frequently, however, they “become
confused and are considered interchangeable” (Blake and Katrak, 2010: 13). The
close relationship between faith, culture, attitudes and values can cause difficulty in
differentiating between the terms and the deeply personal notion of values. As
values may be social, moral, cultural or faith based, these immensely personal
issues are shown to cause dilemmas for teachers (Roberts, 2000, cited in Best,
2000). The evidence suggests there is a lack of understanding of the links, yet
subtle differences between faith, culture, attitudes and values. This again implies a
failure on the part of guidance literature available for teachers, in particular the SRE
Guidance (DfEE, 2000), to clarify these important concepts.
Summary
The Literature Review has increased my understanding of the effects a lack of
clarity, in relation to the aim and definition of SRE, can have upon teachers, parents
and pupils; and this chapter demonstrates that there are many complex matters

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 24
involved with the delivery of SRE. This analysis of evidence suggests that many of
the issues included in the themes are inter-related and that a lack of guidance and
clarity in one theme impacts upon an absence of transparency in another. This
appears to compound the challenges and issues facing teachers and suggests that
documentation available for teachers is not yet adequate, which, in turn, adds
weight to Alldred and David’s (2007) assertion that PSHE has become ‘a poisoned
chalice’.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 25
Chapter Three – Research Methods and Methodology
Introduction
This chapter examines the research methods applied in the study. Methods, as
described by Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2010: 47), are a range of approaches
used to collect data. The data may then be used to explain, infer, interpret or
predict. I comment upon the reasons for the method selection and reflect upon the
associated advantages and disadvantages. The research was set within an
interpretivist framework and provides an illuminative secondary school case study
where the imposition of external forms and structures was limited (Cohen et al,
2010: 21). It also sought to understand the behaviour and cognitive processes of
the teachers involved. Research planned and undertaken within an interpretive
paradigm often involves a wide range of approaches and methods, and its direction
is, in part, governed by the participants, learning about their circumstances,
perspectives and background (Denzin and Lincoln, 1998). Samples are frequently
small scale and purposively selected - discussed later - and data collection
commonly involves close contact between the researcher and the participants
(Ritchie and Lewis, 2003). Each of the aforementioned elements is demonstrated
throughout this research.
The study uses predominantly qualitative research methods including semi-
structured interviews and e-questionnaires. An analysis of school documentation
aimed to support the triangulation of findings, thus increasing confidence in the
conclusions drawn (Cohen et al, 2010). The three main themes identified during the
introduction along with the questions which form Appendix A helped to guide the
research tools. I sought to provide a deeper understanding of not only the issues as
identified by guidance and subject documentation, but also the personal issues and
thinking which may contribute to some of the issues and challenges surrounding
SRE (Denzin and Lincoln, 2003).
The chapter continues to discuss the selected methods, giving consideration to the
underpinning approach to the inquiry (Punch, 2011: 15). As Kaplan (1973) asserts,
the methodology aims to explain the process, not the products, of the research. I

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 26
explore the suitability of the methods and consider validity and reliability. The
ethical implications of the approach taken and tools selected are considered
throughout. Through my review of related literature and the issues which have
arisen as part of my professional role, I have (as mentioned in Chapter One)
identified three themes which I feel are significant for teachers delivering SRE; these
underpinned the development of the methods employed:
 What to teach and when to teach it,
Methods
Case Study
Arsenault and Anderson (1998, cited in Anderson and Arsenault, 2002) highlight
case studies as one of the main types of naturalistic study. Stake (1995: 43)
positions the case study as research whose function “is not necessarily to map and
conquer the world, but to sophisticate the beholding of it”; a sentiment which
describes exactly the aspirations for this study. It places the research within the
realm of ethnography, capturing people in their ‘natural setting’, requiring the
researcher to also work within that field without external meaning being placed
upon the participants (Brewer, 2000: 10) and, as Newby (2010) suggested it is one
of the many benefits of using this ‘postmodern’ approach to research. A case study
is an investigation into a specific question or focus in a ‘real-life’ context (Cohen, et
al, 2010: 170). The aim is not to necessarily reach a consensus, but to work
together in order to illuminate a more general notion, demonstrating how ideas fit
together (Nisbet and Watt, 1984, cited in Bell et al, 1984).
With regard to reliability and validity, a singular case study examines one setting
only; however, obtaining the experiences, feelings and thoughts in a distinct
circumstance can provide a deep and rich understanding. In this research my
intention was to increase both reliability and validity. Newby, (ibid) states that a
single case study is “representative of something”; Bryman (2008) called this the

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 27
‘exemplifying’ case as the intention is to capture the everyday situation. In this case
study the selected school represents OfSTED’s criteria for ‘Outstanding’ in PSHE
(OfSTED, 2009). Findings may well be characteristic of other schools in similar
circumstances, and the results are potentially applicable to other case studies
(Punch: 2011). As Bryman (2008) suggests, generalisability is a vital component in
establishing the degree of external validity. Notwithstanding this, I am also
interested in considering other similar case studies in order to gain a more
extensive appreciation of issues surrounding SRE; this is because case study
research techniques and methods may very well produce the finer detail required
to complement other larger scale research and literature (Cohen et al, 2010).
Reliability is concerned with whether the findings are repeatable, and validity is
associated with the level of faith which can be placed in the associated theoretical
reasoning; to summarise, according to Cohen et al (2010), the greater the
corroboration between data from the different methods, the greater the
confidence levels, therefore the more reliable the data. In future the research may
be replicated in order to test findings, examine particular features or generate
further conclusions.
Several researchers have categorised case studies, (Yin, 1984; Merriam, 1988).
However, the research aims referenced here best complement Sturman’s (1999,
cited in Keeve and Lakomski, 1999: 107) definition of an ethnographic case study: “a
single in-depth study”. Yet case studies may act as catalysts, enabling the fusion of
both theory and practice (Ball, 1990) providing a decision point for modification
(Newby, 2010).
A limitation of an interpretivist approach is that it can become overly interpreted,
and there are dangers that it may become so subjective that it becomes mis-
leading, or journalistic (Bernstein, 1974 cited in Rex, 1974). Nisbet and Watt (1984,
cited in Bell et al, 1984: 91) are mindful of this and advise researchers using a case
study methodology to be conscious of: “picking out more striking features of the
case, therefore distorting the full account… selecting only evidence which will
support a particular conclusion, thereby misrepresenting the whole case… striving

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 28
to generate profound theories from low-level data… and only including those
aspects of the case study on which people agree rather than areas on which they
may disagree”. Further to the aforementioned issues concerning over-
interpretation and bias (Bernstein, 1974) other possible weaknesses include a lack
of generilisability and an inability to easily cross check findings (Nisbet and Watt,
1984, cited in Bell et al, 1984). However, validity and reliability are an inextricable
part of research, and questions relating to reliable evidence and triangulation must
be addressed. In light of this, when planning the case study research, consideration
was given to several issues, which included: the selection of participants and any
impact, ownership and release of data, the use of primary and secondary sources,
cross-checking of data, the consequences (or perceived consequence) of the
research, ethics and anonymisation (Adelman et al, 1980, cited in Simons, 1980).
Purposive sampling (Bryman, 2008), rather than random sampling, was used to
select both the school and the teachers involved in the case study. There were
several reasons for this. A school that was interested in the research would be
more likely to effectively use the findings as part of their self-evaluation (OfSTED,
2006). Ideally, the teachers involved would be willing participants – indeed,
partners in the research. A large secondary school within the Local Authority in
which I predominantly work was selected. The school had a pro-active PSHE Head
of Department who held the National PSHE CPD Accreditation (DCSF and VT 4S,
2009) and who had the support of the senior management. The school was
situated in an area where childhood poverty was approximately 20% and had been
identified by the Primary Care Trust as a high teenage pregnancy ward (County
Council, 2011). The school already used local data in order to ensure their
curriculum met the needs and requirements of their young people (Black and
Wiliam, 1998; Gardner, Harlen, Hayward and Stobart, 2008).
Purposive sampling helped to ensure that participants were available and felt
comfortable with the research focus, process and methods, including the sharing of
findings (highlighting the significance of the ethical issues surrounding informed
consent). Checking mechanisms (triangulation) were built in to the research.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 29
Research methods were selected to support a robust yet sensitive approach (McNiff
and Whitehead, 2010: 60) as previous research indicated uncertainty and sensitivity
around research and SRE (Corteen, 2006, Mason, 2010, Formby, Hirst, Owen,
Hayter, Stapleton, 2010). Finally, consideration was given to the possible
consequences of sharing and disseminating research data and findings; therefore,
all participants remained anonymous throughout. Although Adelman et al (1980)
considers that anonymity may be necessary he also suggests that anonymisation, in
order to ethically ‘go public’ with the findings, may make case studies
unrecognisable. Anonymity remains vital to both this research and the participating
school.
Semi-structured Interview
“An interview is literally an inter view, an interchange of views between two
persons conversing about a theme of general interest” (Kvale, 1996: 14). Semi-
structured interviews (Bogdan and Biklen, 1992) combine the flexibility of the
unstructured interview with the focus of a structured interview. This enables the
researcher to guide the process at the same time permitting the interviewee some
ability to guide and steer the conversation, thus allowing them to expand upon
areas or themes which are of concern or importance to them. It is for these reasons
that when speaking to the PSHE Head of Department semi-structured interviews
were selected as a “construction site for knowledge” (ibid). The semi-structured
nature enabled the research question to be used as a starting point to be developed
by my personal experiences as a PSHE Consultant, the questions contained within
Appendix A, and the evidence ascertained through the Literature Review.
Interviews are a tool for generating data (Laing, 1967) and therefore enable both
interviewer and participant to discuss knowledge and interpretations from their
own perspectives. The interview enabled the discussion of a broad range of issues,
whilst the semi-structured nature allowed me to probe further, when necessary, in
order to seek clarification.
As interviews are “expensive in time” (Cohen et al, 2010: 349) this method was
specifically selected for use with the Head of PSHE due to his expertise in the

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 30
subject, PSHE qualification, level of subject management and leadership
responsibility, pro-active nature, interest in the research area and willingness to
take part. There are several ethical concerns common to the application of
interview techniques, one of which can be the level of perceived threat or
sensitivity of the questions being asked, others include a possible power imbalance
where the researcher may be viewed “as ‘the one who knows’” and the practitioner
is positioned as an aspirant” (McNiff and Whitehead, 2010: 18). The semi-
structured nature of the interview was intended to empower the practitioner,
enabling him to exert greater ownership and control of the situation. To help
ensure that this was the case the purpose of the interview along with what would
happen to the data was explicitly shared with the Head of PSHE prior to the
interview. However, in order to retain the validity of this method and obtain a
‘true’ picture, the interview schedule was not shared prior to the interview so that
the participant provided as honest a response as possible (Tuckman, 1972).
The interview, for the purpose of research, has been described as, “a two-person
conversation initiated by the interviewer for the specific purpose of obtaining
research-relevant information and focused by him on content specified by research
objectives of systematic description, prediction or explanation” (Cannell and Kahn,
1968, cited in Lindzey and Aronson, 1968). It is often compared to the
questionnaire, with the questionnaire viewed as more reliable, due to its
anonymous nature (Cohen et al, 2010). However, interviews provide an excellent
opportunity for both personalising and probing, maybe due to the increased
motivation of the selected participant. Interviews also yield a higher response rate
(Oppenheim, 1992); and as interviews are both personal and subjective they are an
indication of how participants make sense of their social world (Barker and Johnson
1998). Therefore, this method was selected as being the most appropriate for this
sensitive subject matter. In preparation for the unexpected (Kerlinger, 1970) any
‘issues arising’ were to be addressed in a follow-up, informal, semi-structured
interview (Appendix F).

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 31
Questionnaires
According to Bryman (2008) questionnaires completed by the research participants,
sometimes referred to as ‘self-completion questionnaires’, are one of the main
methods used by researchers to gather data. They are similar in nature to the
interview, but less ‘time-intensive’ as there is no necessity for the participant and
researcher to meet face to face (Faulkner et al, 1991). Once designed, the
questionnaire is relatively quick to administer and if required, can be sent out in
large numbers, obtaining data from a significant range of respondents (Newby,
2010) as opposed to the more involved interview.
Questionnaires are designed by the researcher, and participants, unlike the
previously considered semi-structured interview, are unable to steer their direction.
This makes questionnaire design an important feature. Questionnaires are
associated with both positivist and interpretivist paradigms and as a general rule,
the larger the sample the more closed and numerical the questionnaire design, and
the smaller the sample, the less structured and open-ended the questionnaire
(Cohen et al, 2010). Therefore, as the number of participants was relatively small
(12) several questions required ‘free responses’ in order to access in-depth data.
Time and logistics were demanding factors which were necessary to negotiate
effectively throughout the research project; these issues had to be considered
during the research design. E-questionnaires were the most suitable tool to obtain
feedback from a range of teachers delivering PSHE, not just the Head of
Department. E-questionnaires are similar to postal questionnaires; however, they
do not have the expense of postage (Newby, 2010). As the school had
enthusiastically agreed to take part in the research I believed that completion rates
would be high, especially if the e-questionnaire was relatively short and contained
both closed and open ended questions. Thorough piloting (Oppenheim, 1992)
enabled consideration to be given to e-questionnaire design.
Documentary Analysis
“Documents are a rich source of data for education and social research… yet much
of this is neglected by researchers” (Punch, 2011: 158 - 159). As the focus of the

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 32
research related to the challenges and issues faced by teachers delivering SRE the
aim was threefold: to discover whether certain school documents, such as the PSHE
Programme of Study (Appendix B), SRE Policy2
, PSHE Policy and Anti-Bullying Policy
were in place; to ascertain whether the documentation provided teachers with
support or guidance; and thirdly, to explore whether findings from the documentary
analysis echoed the conclusions drawn from other research methods.
Mason (2002) suggested that using a variety of methods enables the different
elements underpinning the research focus to be explored, highlighting any
interrelated areas or issues – possibly providing the researcher with even greater
depth and richness of understanding. Mason (ibid) also proposed that the use of a
variety of interrogation methods may help to understand findings from a different
perspective. Importantly for me, it was the notion that the analysis of the related
documentation supported the triangulation of the other findings (Denzin, 1989). I
was interested to find out whether the ‘official’ school line (assuming there was
one) supported other findings, since previous research has found great
inconsistency between SRE documentation and SRE delivery (National Foundation
for Educational Research, 1994; Haydon and Corteen, 1998; Corteen, 2006).
Campbell and Fiske (1959) suggest that triangulation is an effective way to
demonstrate validity, especially in qualitative research, and the extent of
triangulation impacts, along with the honesty, depth and richness and scope of the
data gathered, upon the level of validity (Winter, 2000). As a qualitative case study
it was expected that the findings would contain an innate degree of standard error,
mainly due to the subjective nature of the supporting interpretivist paradigm
(Cohen et al, 2010).
Methodology
In this section I explore the methodological suitability, including reliability, validity
and ethical considerations, in the context of this illuminative, interpretivist case
study.
2
School policies were not included in the appendices as to support anonymity.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 33
Mindful of Morrison’s (1995) notion of perpetuating the ‘status quo’ of power
(knowledge), I strongly believed that carrying out research as part of my daily role
would be both unethical, therefore I ensured that all research participants knew
that the research was being carried out as a piece of personal study, and that the
school and participant names would not be reported to the LA. Having an LA role
could be seen to impose an inequality of power where teachers may consider that I
had my own agenda (Bernstein, 1974). These concepts were explained through
initial meetings with both the Headteacher and PSHE Head of Department, and
reinforced through formalised ‘informed consent’ forms (Appendices C and E).
Carrying out research into the issues and challenges facing teachers delivering SRE
was an ideal opportunity that provided further clarification and a deeper
understanding of the concerns confronting teachers dealing with a highly sensitive
and relatively new area of the curriculum (Thomson, 1994) - an area which purports
to be one of the most difficult areas of PSHE for teachers (OfSTED, 2010a).
Owing to its focus upon relationships, emotional health, well-being and values, an
interpretivist approach was taken as it “is characterised by a concern for the
individual” (Cohen et al, 2010: 21). Not only was there an interest in obtaining a
greater understanding of the concerns and issues faced by teachers in relation to
the delivery of SRE, there was also a desire to understand the teachers themselves.
This implied that to fully appreciate the answers to the research question, the
subjective world of the participant must also be understood. As Cohen et al (2010:
21) assert, an interpretive approach can “be thought of as behaviour with
meaning”, and is aligned to future action. This research paradigm is in direct
contrast to a normative or positivist approach which considers human behaviour to
be ‘rule governed’ (Douglas, 1973) where the root of the behaviour lies somewhere
in the past, most likely as a response to external motives. It could be argued that
this approach was not appropriate for this case study and would restrict the
insightful understanding of teachers’ knowledge and conceptions. Hopkins (2008)
prompted the focus of the selected research methods to ensure clarity of
investigation. However, he also affirms that classroom- and practitioner-based

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 34
research is more concerned with cases, rather than with samples, and highlights
that the necessary methodology to be applied in this research situation is one which
is “more applicable to understanding a problematic situation than one based upon
predicting outcomes within the parameters of an existing and tacitly accepted social
system” (ibid: 130). With this in mind it was clear that the interpretive approach
taken was the most appropriate; however, clarity and effective planning were also
key factors in ensuring the research and its findings were both reliable and valid.
Decisions upon research methods were carefully considered with the aid of a
planning matrix (Cohen et al, 2010) and the research question took much
deliberation. The focus needed to be open, without bias, and without pre-
supposition of the issues and challenges associated with delivering SRE (Corteen
2006; DfEE 2000; OfSTED 2002 OfSTED 2007; OfSTED 2010). McNiff and Whitehead
(2010) pointed out that qualitative research often produces large amounts of data,
hence, questions focused upon the research themes and data collection was limited
to the members of staff with a primary role in SRE.
Initial Semi-structured Interview
The initial semi-structured interview with the PSHE Lead was based upon the
questions identified in Appendix A. These, alongside the review of literature had
helped to identify the three themes of:
 What to teach and when to teach it,
Evidence would suggest that the pre-supposition of issues and challenges faced
teachers delivering PSHE was justified, and previous research (Alldred and David,
2007) indicated that finding adequate time and space to carry out staff interviews
proved problematic due to the busy nature of teaching. These two factors indicated
that careful consideration had to be given to the number of questions selected for
the interview schedule and effective and timely communication with the PSHE Lead
was required in order to establish the appropriate date, time, location and duration
for the initial semi-structured interview.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 35
Questions from Appendix A were considered, altered and then reduced in number.
The three identified themes were the focus for this process. Further to this,
questions were included which would open up the interview in order for the PSHE
Lead to provide insight into any additional issues or challenges he considered were
associated with the delivery of SRE.
Bryman (2008) advises that interview questions should be piloted, not only to
ensure that the questions are clear, but also to verify whether the entirety of the
method is suitable for the purpose for which it is intended. Therefore, as suggested
by Costa and Kallick (1993), the semi-structured interview questions were piloted by
several ‘critical friends’ from both education and non-education backgrounds. Each
‘critical friend’ from education had a level of understanding of research
methodology as they had all engaged in post-graduate study. The questions were
considered flexible, precise and easy to understand. They were also judged to be
suitable and related to the focus question of the qualitative research (see Appendix
D for the initial interview schedule).
Punch (2011) suggests that the greater the flexibility of the interview, the smaller
the amount of piloting required; however, conclusive piloting provided greater
confidence in the questions so they were less likely to be misconstrued by the PSHE
Lead, therefore increasing the reliability of the findings. The semi-structured
interview was arranged and as it was not taking place ‘in the field’ audio recording
of the interview had been selected. Equipment chosen for this purpose was a tie
microphone, audio software and a back-up MP3 recorder. This information was
shared with the PSHE Lead prior to the interview and approval was granted.
To help enable the setting of a calm and conversational atmosphere the semi-
structured interview began with several general questions specifically focusing upon
the PSHE Lead and his teaching background. When the atmosphere felt relaxed the
interview schedule was introduced. This appeared to begin well and the interview
flowed. The design of the schedule was intentionally flexible and driven by the
participant responses (Cohen et al, 2010), initially there appeared a power balance
to the process, thus continuing the comfortable atmosphere. The PSHE Lead did

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 36
not mention the SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000) when discussing documentation that
informed SRE. The omission of this vital text was in line with findings by Alldred and
David (2007). To find out whether this was an oversight or whether the guidance
was not considered by the Lead as the ‘cornerstone’ of SRE I asked: “Right, okay; so
have you used the National DfEE SRE guidance too?” At this point, the previously
confident and qualified PSHE practitioner appeared uneasy and constrained by the
recording and the formality of the discussion. Owing to the change in the PSHE
Lead’s composure, questions continued and the remainder of the interview
continued without incident; equilibrium of power had resumed.
Overall careful planning and consideration enabled a positive and respectful climate
to ensue through the majority of the semi-structured interview, and flexibility
enabled the PSHE Lead to speak at length regarding several areas which had not
formed part of the initial schedule.
E-questionnaire
Previous research on SRE indicated that schools and teachers consider this a
sensitive area of the curriculum and highlighted that there can be a reluctance to
engage in research addressing this area (Corteen, 2006). This is why anonymous e-
questionnaires were selected for use with the teachers delivering SRE. These were
used in order to increase reliability and validity of the other the research methods
applied and support triangulation. Consideration was given to the following:
 the focal research question
 the questions formulated in Appendix A
 the three identified themes
 teacher availability
 sensitivity around SRE
 ease of access to the research tool
 teacher understanding of the nature of the research, the reasons it
was being carried out and by whom.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 37
The e-questionnaire began with closed, familiar questions designed to encourage
the teachers to participate (Oppenheim, 1992). After the initial closed questions,
the questions became increasingly open, focusing upon the research question and
themes. The majority of questions required a simple, dichotomous ‘yes/no’ answer
as an initial response, followed by space for clarification and explanation. The final
question was open-ended and enabled participants to state whether they
considered any issues and challenges faced teachers delivering SRE; as suggested by
Sudman and Bradburn (1982), open questions are generally considered more
effective in eliciting information about sensitive issues.
Attention was accorded to the e-settings of the questionnaire. My aim was to
maximise the response rate. Although the e-questionnaire settings selected did not
permit respondents to omit questions completely, it allowed them to move to the
next question without providing an explanation. The research method was piloted
by ‘critical friends’ from both educational and non-educational backgrounds who
found the questions comprehensive and clear.
In order to maximise the return rate and enable the teachers to understand the
research focus and process, the PSHE Lead provided the team with background
information and informed them of the e-questionnaire. The teachers signed a
‘written consent’ form (Appendix E). Additionally, the introduction to the e-
questionnaire provided information regarding the research and again confirmed
confidentiality. Thorough planning resulted in the completion of nine out of a
possible 12 e-questionnaires.
Documentary Analysis
According to Silverman (1993) too little attention is often given to the data that can
be gathered from documents. Taking this into consideration the PSHE overview of
planning, PSHE Policy, Sex and Relationships Policy and Anti-Bullying Policy were
requested from the school. Previous studies by Corteen (2006) and Mason (2010)
had demonstrated inconsistency regarding policy intent and practice. Therefore,
these ‘official’ documents assisted in the understanding of whether the school’s
vision for these elements of provision validated data gathered through the other

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 38
research methods. Documentary analysis was carried out after the initial semi-
structured interview and the return of the e-questionnaires. This was so that any
discrepancies between the documentation analysis and the other research methods
would assist in the development of the follow-up questionnaire.
Follow-up Semi-structured Interview
The planning stage for this study highlighted that a follow-up questionnaire with the
PSHE Lead may be necessary and that this would be dependent upon findings from
the other research tools. This would take a similar format to the original semi-
structured interview with its purpose being to clarify and explore any discrepancies
or further ‘issues’ which may have arisen through the data. However, the initial
semi-structured interview highlighted the emergence of two additional themes:
safeguarding; and information, training and resources. The e-questionnaires had
identified a discrepancy in relation to the notion that all teachers at the school
volunteered to teach SRE; they also identified that a number of teachers considered
they did not require any further continued professional development (CDP) to
support their delivery of SRE. For these reasons a follow-up interview was planned,
scheduled and carried out following the same preparation procedures as the initial
semi-structured interview (Appendix F).
Ethical Considerations
Owing to the highly sensitive nature of the research, ethical considerations were
required throughout. Frequently, teachers delivering PSHE lack confidence in this
area (OfSTED 2007, OfSTED 2010) therefore occupying teachers’ time to discuss SRE
would have to be carefully managed, especially if the school and its staff were to
engage positively. As confidence is often low in this area of the curriculum, any
situation which could involve the participants in a ‘failure’ situation may further
lower self-esteem in this important subject, resulting in an additional reduction in
confidence, possibly “affecting trust in rational authority” (Cohen et al, 2010: 62).
Further to the aforementioned ethical considerations, the decision was made to
obtain the majority of the data through the PSHE Lead as he had been a teacher of
PSHE prior to being the Head of Department and brought both dimensions to the

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 39
research, he was prepared to devote time to take part in the research and had an
interest in the research focus.
Evidence suggested that anonymity would be central to the participants (Corteen,
2006). Consequently, a universalist stance was adopted. Bryman (2008: 116)
described the universalist stance as being one where the “ethical precepts should
never be broken… [i]nfractions of ethical principles are wrong in a moral sense and
damaging to social research”.
Punch (2011) made the observation that research of any nature intrudes, in some
way, into peoples’ lives, and noted that qualitative research is likely to intrude the
most, due to its personal nature. He highlighted four areas which should be given
particular consideration; these were at the heart of this study:
 harm
 consent
 deception, and
 privacy.
Bell (1991) suggested that approval should be sought early on, and when
participants are aware of potential benefits. Consequently, the PSHE Lead, teachers
and the Headteacher were made aware of the research considerations and gave
consent to participate.
The four areas above highlighted by Punch (2011) along with the BERA (British
Educational Research Association) Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research
(2011) and Roehampton University Ethics Guidance (2011) supported the
development of the informed consent form. The form explained the purpose of the
research, along with the timescale and the teachers’ entitlement to confidentiality.
Although it may be considered that simply addressing procedural ethics is not
adequate (Cohen et al, 2010) the document informed participants of their right to
withdraw from the research at any point (O’Leary, 2004), and stressed that
complete anonymity was automatically established.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 40
Chapter Four - Data Analysis
Introduction
This chapter presents the findings and data gathered and considers other sources of
literature and research in order to critique conclusions drawn. All research
methods applied attempted to uncover the challenges and issues facing teachers
delivering SRE. Reflections on the main themes of this study have been explored.
As mentioned in Chapter Three, I was careful to heed the warnings of Bernstein,
(1974, cited in Rex, 1974) and Nisbet and Watt (1984, cited in Bell et al, 1984) and
did not intend findings to become overly subjective or distorted. In an attempt to
avoid this happening, as soon as the transcripts and e-questionnaires were
returned, I highlighted feasibly significant elements and examined any relationships
with the above three themes whilst looking for further emerging ideas. Considering
Glaser and Strauss’s (1967) concept of saturation, research issues and further
derived matters appeared and analysis was refined until the final five themes were
decided upon. Due to the complex nature of the subject matter definitive themes
were difficult to construct, and so included within each theme are related issues
and findings.
Due to the amount of data gathered through documentary analysis and the e-
questionnaire they do not form part of the appendices, however full transcripts of
the semi-structured interviews along with a blank e-questionnaire and a copy of the
PSHE Programme of Study are included for information (see Appendices B, H, I and
J).
What to Teach and When to Teach it
This was an issue that arose out of professional experience and from evidence
established in the Literature Review (External Steering Group, 2008; OfSTED, 2010;
Martinez and de Meza, 2008). When asked how the PSHE Lead decided what to
teach and when to teach it, he replied:
“Well, what we teach is based on, well, meets, the end of Key Stage statements 3
and 4. What we did was, we took those Key Stage statements and placed them

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 41
in front of young people, parents and staff and said where do you think they
belong? When would you like them to be taught? And we went with the best fit
approach to years 7, 8 and 9 - and then years 10 and 11 for Key Stage 4
statements.”
This decisive response suggested that the subject Lead had the confidence to bring
issues out in the open, the ability to involve all stakeholders in the designing of a
curriculum based on the specific needs of the pupils in the local community and the
knowledge of how to appropriately apply the National Curriculum (QCA, 2007) as
set out in ‘best practice’ SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000; OfSTED, 2002; SEF, 2011a;
Babcock 4S, 2012c). This consultative method of working indicated that the lead
had support from the senior leadership team and had gained the professional
respect from all parties necessary to develop the PSHE curriculum in an organised
and collective fashion. This is not representative of the majority of SRE curriculums
delivered in many secondary schools (Alldred and David, 2007; Martinez and de
Meza, 2008).
The Lead also reported that the staff that helped developed the curriculum:
“…had expressed an interest in teaching PSHE as part of their timetable…”
This again suggested a high level of support for the subject and that the teachers
delivering it were confident with the subject matter as they had chosen to teach the
subject, rather than it being allocated to them (OfSTED, 2010). The staff e-
questionnaires re-enforced this conclusion as only one of the nine respondents
indicated feeling unconfident delivering the subject. This teacher along with
another member of staff reported that they only delivered PSHE as they were ‘light
on their timetable’. This conflicted with the aims and selection process for teachers
delivering PSHE previously stated by the PSHE Lead, supporting the concept that
even schools with a strong focus upon PSHE still find it difficult to give the area time
when the curriculum is cramped and the subject is non-statutory (Alldred and
David, 2007; External Steering Group, 2008). Nevertheless, both of the teachers
believed that SRE had a positive impact upon pupils and the SRE curriculum met

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 42
their needs, thus demonstrating a belief in the importance of the subject area
(Alldred and David, 2007; Mullinar, 2007).
Overwhelmingly the staff confirmed their conviction to the subject and the school’s
approach and reported that SRE:
“Provides them [the pupils] with an outlet to voice concerns, gain info and ask
questions.”
“Gives students the opportunities to discuss issues.”
“Promotes the school's ethos, gives students skills to manage and communicate
with their peers, parents and teachers and I feel it boosts self-esteem and gives
students the tools to be confident about themselves and their futures.”
One member of staff considered the personal nature of PSHE to be a positive aspect
of the subject. This contradicts other evidence which noted PSHE as ‘intensely
personal’ (Roberts, 2000, cited in Best, 2000) standing as though in a ‘no man’s
land’ embroiled in a political, moral and public health debate somewhere between
the individual and the state (Thomson, 1994). This demonstrated a high level of
teacher confidence.
Feedback from the e-questionnaire again stressed the importance of strengthening
the school’s values and ethos by drawing attention to the importance of challenging
stereotypes and prejudice (Rogers, 1975; Kozeki and Berghammer, 1992).
“Pupils in secondary schools are naturally inquisitive about sex and relationships
at their stage of physical and emotional development - this gives the subject a
huge advantage over many others. Starting from a neutral standpoint of
assuming that all students need information gives pupils the opportunity to even
out their knowledge - incorporating things they may have discussed with their
parents, older siblings or peer group. It also gives us as educators the opportunity
to challenge sexual prejudice and stereotypes.”
The PSHE Lead reported that parents demonstrated confidence and trust in the school’s
professional ability to develop an appropriate SRE curriculum.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 43
“…[parents] were happy with the order of things and they agreed the format. We
asked them to place things in order and it was pretty much err… best fit. We
went with best fit, but ultimately they went with what we were happy with when
we presented our findings to them. That was something that they okayed. Our
ideas, as in where we thought things should go.”
The PSHE Lead reported that parents supported the curriculum and terminology
suggested by the school.
“…sexual activity, as like in touch - personal boundaries – they [the parents] were
keen for that to be in Year 7, which I – looking at the map of our curriculum
effectively, that was something which was pleasantly surprising really. I was
under the impression that parents would be a lot more, certainly those within our
working party; I thought they would be potentially more conservative than that. I
was quite pleased by the fact that seemed to be the opposite of the case.”
Although the parents were supportive of what the school was doing, the PSHE Lead
implied that he had expected there to be certain members of the parent working
group who would not support the school’s SRE Programme. According to Sherbert
(2009) and the External Steering Group (2008), the majority of parents recognise
the importance of children and young people being educated about the concept of
SRE, and see it as being a significant part of their development. Many parents
recognise school as an effective supplement to SRE at home. Some parents rely
upon schools to provide SRE for their children, as they feel uneasy and possibly
unable to do it themselves (NFER, 1994; Walker, 2001). Many teachers, however,
underestimate parental support and fail to involve them in SRE developments (SEF,
2011a).
Documentary analysis demonstrated consistency across the areas of PSHE: the PSHE
Policy viewed PSHE as a subject in its own right whilst linking it to school
organisation and specialist college status. Amongst other methods the policy
highlighted the ‘classroom code of conduct’ (including ‘one voice’ to promote the
right to be heard), tutoring to support reflection, and house events, along with anti-
bullying weeks and advice to support options and careers decisions, as some of the

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 44
overarching ways in which PSHE skills and knowledge were transferred into ‘real-
life’ situations. The policy also examined ways in which leadership monitored and
evaluated the impact of the subject. Methods included lesson observations,
learning walks, student discussions and questionnaires; approaches cited as being
‘best practice’ (OfSTED, 2012a).
The SRE Policy clearly outlined what the school constituted as SRE and placed a
strong emphasis upon emotional and physical change, sexual activity and
contraception, the importance of making links with other subject areas, links to
form tutor time, addressing sensitive issues, inclusivity, safeguarding, equal
opportunities and anti-bullying. This mirrored the way in which the school
developed the SRE curriculum.
Sexuality, Sexual Identity and Sexual Orientation
According to the SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000) sexuality, sexual identity and sexual
orientation form part of the foundation of SRE, although locating definitive
definitions of these terms or supportive documentation has proved difficult (Hirst,
2008). Again, this theme had been identified through my professional role. When
asked to confirm how these terms are defined, the PSHE Lead replied:
“Sexuality, is – by sexuality it obviously – it’s not obvious.”
Despite these terms underpinning the nature of the subject definition is complex.
Having discussed this issue with students, the PSHE Lead admitted that everyone’s
comprehension of these terms was ‘quite ropey’. Indeed, further comment
revealed more:
“There’s a likelihood that all three terms are the same thing. They could be…
Somebody talking about their sexual identity could easily be talking about their
sexuality; being homosexual/heterosexual could be their identity.”
Recognising that he could not answer the question fully the PSHE Lead drew upon
the school policies which are there to underpin the curriculum and its ethos.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 45
“No, okay, well I feel as though I am doing myself a disservice here by not being
able to give you a concrete definition. Hopefully, that may be the point, but what
I would say is this; as far as the school is concerned our policy and our approach
to the teaching of sexuality, we - our party line, is that everyone has got the right
to their own sexuality and that’s something that they shouldn’t feel victimised or
alienated as a result of; and we defend and protect the right for people to have
their sexual identity you know, their sexuality. That is something which is the
right of the individual; that’s not something that should be challenged or…
somebody shouldn’t be made to feel challenged or victimised. That is what we
wish to promote here.”
Drawing upon his knowledge of school policies the PSHE Lead demonstrated a ‘real
and living’ set of school values which clearly underpinned teaching and learning,
along with the wider school curriculum (Ofsted, 2012a). The PSHE Lead took a more
definite stance when asked how he kept informed about these issues:
“I don’t think I am, I don’t think - I think it’s a very, very grey area for schools. I
do believe that we are ahead of the bell curve in regards to our approach to it
and the fact that we discuss it openly with our young people and that our young
people discuss that with each other… I would say that as far as the issue is
concerned, defining sexuality, putting your finger on it is a difficulty because it’s
something that is very difficult to put your finger on, or place, or box; and I think
it is part of the challenge. I think challenging homophobic bullying is the key to
being able to teach positive relationships. We talk about partners, rather than
boyfriend/girlfriend as much as we can do, which is best practice. That sort of
approach tends to be the way we are inclusive in our teaching of SRE."
The PSHE Lead was able to circumvent the elusive definitions by referring the
school’s values and policies and applying identified best practice as acknowledged
in the National Curriculum (QCA, 2007).
The follow-up semi-structured interview began by enquiring as to whether there
was anything he wished to clarify after the initial interview; there was only one
issue.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 46
“The thing that, the main thing that was interesting was the fact that the
terminology, sexuality, sexual orientation… sexual identity that were mentioned
in guidance that weren’t well defined – that was quite interesting ‘cos I thought
in our interview, I thought that I might have missed a meeting [training session] -
it turns out there isn’t any [clear definitions]. And that’s quite interesting. That
was the thing that I certainly found interesting from our last conversation.”
The PSHE Lead had considered this issue over a number of weeks and still had not
been able to find a conclusive answer, indicating the complex nature of this area of
the curriculum (Hirst, 2008).
Overall, the majority of teachers delivering SRE believed that the school SRE Policy
supported teaching around the areas of sexuality, sexual identity and sexual
orientation. Six out of the nine respondents stated that the SRE Policy did indeed
support the teaching of these issues, with the three remaining teachers claiming
that they were not sure what the policy said. The comments below highlight the
level of consideration given:
“Our policy describes fully how we teach in the above areas [sexuality, sexual
identity and sexual orientation] - it is the most complex area of our work and one
which we are developing an understanding of in terms of putting policy into
practice.”
“It provides the students with the forum, in small groups, to discuss these topics.
The policy is explicit and comprehensive - but it could be braver in its treatment of
sexuality.”
“The policy supports none discrimination and the promotion of understanding
others' points of view on these areas.”
The quotes demonstrate the commitment of the staff towards supporting an
inclusive curriculum. There was recognition that these areas were sensitive, where
conclusive answers and definitions were difficult to achieve. However, several
members of staff recognised that this was an area requiring constant development
and refinement due to its involved and delicate nature.

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 47
Faith, Culture, Values and Attitudes
This is the third theme identified through my professional role and related
literature. There appear to be links between faith, culture, values and attitudes;
and values associated with faith are also apparent within a secular context (Blake
and Katrak, 2010). As with sexuality, sexual identity and sexual orientation, it was
found that these terms were also challenging. When asked about the role played by
faith, culture, attitudes and values in SRE the PSHE Lead was initially hesitant to
answer.
“The role of... I think is… Really I am reluctant to say anything that’s going to be
incriminating really. It’s very difficult.”
This demonstrated the level of sensitivity surrounding many issues related to SRE
and may signify “misunderstandings about faith groups’ perspectives on sexuality
and misplaced assumptions about their opposition to SRE” (Blake and Katrak, 2002).
It also drew attention to the pressure placed upon teachers to be knowledgeable
and ‘expert’ in this most challenging area. It took a reminder that the research was
anonymous to obtain a response.
“We have working parties and stakeholders in our policies which affect the way
we teach PSHE here. Ultimately I am steering the ship here as far as our SRE and
PSHE is concerned for the large part of the community which the school belongs
to, so is a big responsibility, and I try to bear that in mind and try to be as
impartial as I can be. The issue that I – and I don’t know if it’s right or wrong, but
as far as faith being able to dictate what we can and can’t teach to children –
that is something I find challenging.”
This indicated the responsibility placed upon a PSHE Lead to ‘get it right’ in areas of
great complexity. It also demonstrated the level of recognition that the PSHE Lead
assigned to the importance of his role. The PSHE ‘ship’ he was steering reaches
further than simply a curriculum subject: it impacts upon the whole culture of the
school. It did, however, show that by devoting time and effort to PSHE and
developing the subject and ethos through working parties – taking a ‘whole school
approach’ (Healthy Schools, 2009) - the views of a greater proportion of the whole

LYL10299675 EDU0607020 48
school community could be represented. This would ideally incorporate a
representative picture of the values, attitudes, cultures and religions supporting the
school population; a concept heralded by the SRE Guidance (DfEE, 2000), the
National PSHE CPD Programme (Babcock 4S, 2012c) and Blake and Katrak (2010).
Although as emphasised by Blakey et al, (2006) when consulting communities or
stakeholders, cultural norms often prevail and inequalities can be re-enforced. This,
in turn, can frequently impact upon the rights of young people, and in particular
females, LBGTQ (lesbian, bi-sexual, gay, transgender and questioning) groups and
people with, or who have suffered from, mental health problems. Again, this
stresses the difficulties faced by all leaders of PSHE.
Further to the issues of faith, culture, values and attitudes, the issue of a parent’s
right to withdraw their child from SRE, as per the 1996 Education Act, arose:
“As far as faith being able to dictate what we can and can’t teach to children –
that is something I find challenging. Obviously the parents have got the right to
withdraw their children from SRE lessons etc., I just don’t think that’s something
that keeps young people safe. I know that’s not a popular opinion; that’s not
necessarily considered to be correct in education, but that is something that I find
deeply challenging that some young people are denied relationship education on
the grounds of faith and I think largely, if parents were aware of what it was we
were wishing to deliver to their children, you know… positive relationships, not
being in an abusive relationship - how to approach that if you are in that
situation, etc. being able to give advice and guidance to friends based on their
relationships. I think that can only be a positive thing for young people, and it
seems to be that young people aren’t necessarily having those conversations at
home.”
The PSHE Lead made a link between young people being withdrawn from SRE and a
family’s religion, an assumption shared by Thomson (1994: 53) and clearly
illustrated by her statement that the parental right to withdraw a child from SRE “is
expected to be exercised primarily by religious minorities”. This view is diluted by
other research which demonstrated that parental support for SRE is overwhelming

MAedDissertationSL SRE03_01_13

MAedDissertationSL SRE03_01_13

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to MAedDissertationSL SRE03_01_13

Similar to MAedDissertationSL SRE03_01_13 (20)

MAedDissertationSL SRE03_01_13