The evaluation framework and pre-evaluation questionnaire were developed in consultation with the inter-government agency sexuality education reference group and subject specialists.
ERO evaluated the quality of sexuality education in 100 schools during Terms 2 and 3 of the 2006 school year. Information for this evaluation was collected in the course of the schools’ regular reviews.
The schools represent 18 percent of New Zealand secondary schools, and 12 percent of intermediate schools. This percentage is sufficiently large to support useful conclusions.
The sample is representative of the school education sector in terms of the decile[1] range and status (state or integrated). It slightly over-represents urban schools as there was preferential sampling of secondary schools that are largely urban. It does not include private schools.
Further detail about the schools can be found in Appendix 2.
ERO gathered information from schools about the following evaluation questions.
See Evaluation questions and indicators (Appendix 1).
Review officers made evaluative judgements on the responses to each of these evaluation questions. They identified whether the teaching of sexuality education was highly effective, effective, partially effective or not effective for each area of investigation. Table 1 gives a definition of each of the terms in the context of this evaluation.
Table 1: Definition of ratings for evaluation questions
| Level of effectiveness | Definition |
| Highly effective | Clear, consistent and convincing evidence of teaching practice that reflects indicators of high quality teaching. |
| Effective (with minor weaknesses) | Clear evidence of teaching practice that reflects indicators of high quality teaching (practice reflects indicators but may not be as consistent or convincing across all sources of evidence). |
| Partially effective (with substantial weaknesses) | Limited evidence of teaching practice that reflects indicators of high quality teaching. |
| Not effective | No evidence of teaching practice that reflects indicators of high quality teaching. |
ERO also asked schools about:
Review officers gathered data for this evaluation using ERO’s Evaluation Indicators.[2]
Schools were given a self-evaluation questionnaire before the ERO on‑site review. Although all schools completed this self-evaluation, the varied quality and completeness of responses meant that the data set for each question ranged between 70 and 100 schools.
During the review ERO collected data from various school and classroom documentation including: strategic plans; annual reports and self-review information; documents that support teaching and learning such as assessment policies and procedures, curriculum guidelines, and planning guidelines; classroom records such as teachers’ work plans and assessment documents; samples of students’ work; and information provided to parents and the school community.
ERO also had discussions and interviews with the principal and school leaders, teachers and school staff and students.
Review officers discussed their findings with board members and school managers in each school. Schools had the opportunity to provide further information in response to the findings if they wished.
The methodology and evaluation framework were reviewed and agreed on by an external working group that included subject experts.
A small group of specially trained review officers conducted this evaluation.
Completed evaluation worksheets were moderated nationally to check the consistency of the judgements made by review officers. Two moderation meetings were held with review officers – early in the data collection phase and about half way through the data collection phase. These meetings provided assurance that all review officers were making consistent judgements for each evaluation question.
[1] A school’s decile indicates the extent to which a school draws its students from low socio-economic communities. Decile 1 schools are the 10 percent of schools with the highest proportion of students from low socio-economic communities, whereas decile 10 schools are the 10 percent of schools with the lowest proportion of these students.
[2] Education Review Office (2003) Evaluation Indicators for Education Reviews in Schools. ERO, Wellington.