Study finds student shyness as major barrier to sexual health education
Despite the rollout of Competency Based Education, learners remain vulnerable to teenage pregnancies, early marriages, and sexually transmitted infections due to gaps in how sensitive topics are handled in the classroom.
What you need to know:
- While most schools affirm that the curriculum recognises local beliefs, practical challenges including student shyness, limited materials, and a lack of detailed guidance continue to limit effective delivery of SRH content.
A new report has identified student shyness as the primary barrier preventing the effective delivery of Sexual and Reproductive Health (SRH) and life-skills education in public primary schools, challenging the common assumption that religion and culture are the main obstacles.
Despite the rollout of Competency Based Education (CBE), learners remain vulnerable to teenage pregnancies, early marriages, and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) due to gaps in how sensitive topics are handled in the classroom.
The report by the National Gender and Equality Commission (NGEC) engaged 19 public primary schools from Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (Asal), Nairobi's informal settlements, and other hard-to-access areas.
The study specifically highlighted the proportion of schools identifying key strengths and challenges within CBE in relation to SRH and life skills content. Local beliefs recognition (88.9 per cent), suggesting efforts to align curriculum delivery with community values, and student shyness (74.41 per cent) emerged as the two most frequently cited obstacles.
The analysis reveals a stark contrast to the widespread assumption that religion and cultural resistance are the primary barriers to SRH integration. Instead, practical and structural challenges within the education system itself emerged as the dominant hurdles.
Among the schools assessed, 45.7 per cent cited a lack of teaching materials, 21.8 per cent reported limited curriculum guidance, while 19.6 per cent noted the curriculum content was too general.
Notably, direct community resistance to topics was a secondary concern, cited by only 13.7 per cent of schools, with a similar proportion (13.6 per cent) observing that the CBE curriculum itself avoided sensitive topics. Merely eight per cent felt it ignored pastoralist lifestyles.
The report directly addresses this disconnect, stating: “While most schools affirm that the curriculum recognises local beliefs, practical challenges including student shyness, limited materials, and a lack of detailed guidance continue to limit effective delivery of SRH content.”
Researchers explain that these systemic factors, alongside occasional community resistance, underscore the necessity for localised and context-sensitive curriculum approaches.
Issued this month, the report raises a fundamental concern, concluding that the CBE curriculum “remains largely conservative and only partially aligned with comprehensive sexuality education principles.”
The findings indicate that while most schools include general topics such as pregnancy, HIV, and hygiene, critical subjects like contraceptive use and Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) prevention are rarely addressed directly.
Furthermore, SRH education across schools consistently omits in-depth coverage of gender-based protection. The approach tends to prioritise basic awareness over empowerment, often focusing on abstinence and hygiene rather than equipping learners with comprehensive knowledge and skills for informed decision-making.
The analysis further revealed that only a minority of schools—a mere 10 per cent—provided students with information on contraception.
This stark gap in coverage reflects a conservative implementation of the Ministry of Health’s Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health (ASRH) policy (2022–2032), highlighting a significant disconnect between national policy goals and practical delivery in schools.
The policy is philosophically anchored on the principle of leaving no Kenyan behind in matters of reproductive health, emphasising responsible reproductive rights and personal liberty as priorities for resource allocation.
However, this stands in stark contrast to the reported implementation. While the majority of schools (70 per cent) covered general topics like pregnancy, HIV, hygiene, puberty, and STIs, the critical subject of contraception was addressed by only 10 per cent of schools.
The data further reveals a curriculum marked by selective implementation. While abstinence-focused content was included in 40 per cent of schools, only 30 per cent incorporated education against FGM.
Teachers and education officers engaged in the study as key informants disclosed that SRH topics are fragmented across subjects, primarily delivered through Life Skills, Science, and Religious Studies, rather than as a coherent, standalone programme.
They added that many teachers expressed hesitation in discussing FGM, citing fear of community backlash or conflict with religious and cultural values.
Despite classroom sensitisation, the findings showed that FGM and early marriage persist in Asalcounties, a clear indication that school messaging alone is insufficient without community-level engagement.
The study, titled ‘Evidence on School-Level Factors Affecting Girls’ Access to Quality Education in Marginalized Communities in Kenya’, advocates for the systematic integration of SRH, hygiene, and life-skills modules within the CBE, explicitly guided by the comprehensive ASRH Policy (2022–2032).
Furthermore, it advises the introduction of periodic school-health audits to monitor compliance with the National School Health Policy, with reporting channels established through the NGEC to ensure oversight and accountability.
It also recommends strengthened collaboration between schools and local health departments to improve the accuracy and impact of SRH education.
