Sexuality Education: Policy in Neoliberal Times

• In Event: Health and Sexuality Education: Considering Intersections of Policy, Politics, and Practice

Abstract

Background
Global moves to legalize gay marriage, along with changes in youth culture and ever-increasing access to sexual content online, are resulting in cultural shifts around sexuality, and arguably, a more liberal approach to school-based sexuality education in some countries. Recent policy changes in Ontario, and in New Zealand provide a case in point (Ministry of Education, 2015; Ontario Ministry of Education, 2015). The ministries of education in both places released new sexuality education curriculum documents in 2015, resulting in social debate that included everything from outrage to applause. Media commentary surrounding the release of these policy documents suggests that communities remain polarised about approaches to learning in this area. Nevertheless, the actual policy documents at the center of these debates maintain a firm place for sexuality programs and represent a socially liberal and politically critical view of the subject. Sexuality education is aligned with broader health education and is thus entangled in questions of youth health and the role of schools in ameliorating health issues. In this, schools are caught in a bind between educating for the health of students and educating about health as a discipline of study (Fitzpatrick & Tinning, 2014).

Theoretical framework and arguments
In this theoretical paper, we draw on post-structuralist notions of governmentality (Foucault, 1991; Rose, 1999a, 1999b, 2000) and assemblage (Deleuze & Guattari, 1980) to consider what might be driving social and political discourses of sexuality education, and how such discourses are impacting policy moves. We consider how debates about abstinence versus comprehensive sexuality education (Kirby, 2008; Rasmussen, 2012) continue to underscore perceptions of what sexuality education is and who should deliver it. In this, there is a curious intersection with the neoliberalizing of schools (Apple, 2006). Neoliberal moves in education have seen an increase in the outsourcing of health work, including in sexuality education (Gard & Pluime, 2014). As a form of privatisation in public education, outsourcing mimics the ‘efficient’ and ‘effective’ practices of the private sector. As a privatisation of education, outsourcing shifts the development of sexuality education curricula, the use of pedagogies, and the teaching of students to private sector (and private sector-funded) providers, including those that appear to have little, if any, educational expertise. The outsourcing of sexuality education is a neoliberal reform of education that has crept into schools across the globe and now involves, not only for-profit companies, but also a wide range of community groups, ‘not-for-profits’, charities, and faith-based organisations (Apple, 2006). With a mish-mash of organisations attempting to shape sexuality education in schools, it is becoming increasingly unclear who is teaching young people about sexuality, what discourses underpin externally produced and provided programmes and resources, and to what ‘effect’. In this paper, we aim to render visible how neoliberalism, government policies, corporate activities, students’ identities and the interests of ‘other’ organisations may shape how teachers (and ultimately children and young people) engage with sexuality education; the notion that the neoliberalization in and of sexuality education is normal, natural and harmless may be successfully challenged.

Authors

• Katie Fitzpatrick, University of Auckland

• Darren Powell, University of Auckland