Girls between the ages of 15 and 19 account for 11% of pregnancies worldwide, according to the World Health Organisation’s 2018 report.

Of this 11%, 95% of these pregnancies are in low to middle-income countries, including South Africa.

South Africa has a high rate of teen pregnancies, with some girls as young as 13 engaging in sexual activity.

These are facts that cannot be ignored, and have contributed to the decision to change the sex education curriculum in South African schools.

Parts of the new curriculum were leaked to the media last week, reports City Press, and they weren’t that well-received:

Chris Klopper, president of the SA Teacher Union (SAOU), said they were shocked and that the material was “grossly insensitive”.

They are advising teachers who do not agree with the content to boycott it.

Here’s some of the contested material:

City Press

It looks to me like the new curriculum is taking the realities of the world today into account. It’s also aligning with the Constitution, which recognises people of all sexual orientations and gender identifications.

In addition to what is outlined above, students will also encounter case studies in which adults assault children. In grade five, they will be given an example of “Max”, who is sexually assaulted by other boys at their school, and then reports it to a teacher.

Given what we’ve seen in the news of late, that’s a lesson worth learning:

Angie Motshekga, minister of basic education, writes in a preface guideline that government had begun to revise the curriculum as early as 2011 because the previous focus on HIV and pregnancy did not have the desired outcome.

The department strongly promotes abstinence from sex until a suitable age is attained, she writes. Pupils will still be encouraged to put off having sex.

But the curriculum had to be aligned with international standard guidelines drawn up by the UN’s education body, Unesco, in cooperation with leading experts in the field.

As things stand, some Christian groups are upset by the inclusivity of the curriculum, especially the parts that speak to diverse sexualities and gender orientations.

The Christian lobby group, For SA, shared examples of the material and expressed its outrage.

In particular, they are opposed to the “normalisation” of homosexuality in the curriculum and “ideological preconceptions” with which they don’t agree.

Other things that people are taking umbrage with include the “normalisation of single-parent households” and “sexual consent”, according to IOL.

South Africa Teachers Union‘s operational director Johan Kruger says that teachers would find the content difficult to teach.

“It is important that teachers get training in order to be able to handle this topic and present to learners.

“I was a school principal myself, and it is not every teacher that can actually provide sexual orientation education to learners. You have to have training to do it because it is a difficult topic.”

That sounds like a productive solution. More training is never a bad thing when it comes to educating children.

Overall, most children have access to the internet and more information about sex than ever before, but they aren’t mature enough to handle it. A teacher friend of mine told me about the tablets and smartphones that her six-year-old students bring to class.

If they’re getting their information from a responsible adult in school, they may be less likely to stumble across something that could harm them.

I think the methods of relaying the information should be a discussion point, and the best way of teaching the subject should be established.

The unfortunate reality is that a curriculum like this is necessary.

[source:citypress&iol]