Minnesota Abstinence Program Maligned in Minneapolis Star Tribune     1/16/2004
By Michael Schwartz

However, independent study shows taxpayers got more abstinence.

A news story in the Minneapolis Star Tribune announced recently that, according to an independent study, Minnesota’s abstinence education program isn’t working. However, an analysis of the study itself reveals that counties that implemented the program had significantly lower levels of teenage sexual activity, and that no other known factor was associated with this result.

“The state’s $5 million abstinence-only sex education program isn’t working … ,” declared the January 4 article by Josephine Marcotty. “The study found that sexual activity among junior high kids at three schools where the program was taught doubled between 2001 and 2002.”

The factual basis for Ms. Marcotty’s dismal (or gleeful, depending on your viewpoint) report was the table showing student responses to the question, “At any time in your life have you ever had sex (intercourse)?” In 2001, 14 of 243 seventh- and eighth-grade students (5.8%) answered “yes.” In 2002, of the 170 members of that same group of students not lost to follow-up, now in eighth or ninth grade, 21 (12.4%) answered “yes.” Hence the claim that sexual activity “doubled.”

The authors of the evaluation had this to say in their commentary on that particular finding: “It is commonly understood that sexual activity increases with age. … Because we have no control group, we cannot say whether these one-year increases … (while significant) were better or worse than they would have been without the PSI [Postponing Sexual Involvement], or some other curriculum.”

The State of Minnesota commissioned its own evaluation of the program it had started in 1996, when the welfare reform law initiated federal funding for abstinence education. Run through the state’s Department of Health, this program consisted of community awareness activities, a media component, and classroom instruction for 7th and 8th grade students, based on the “Postponing Sexual Involvement (PSI)” curriculum.

The authors also provided some context for reading the statistics they had gathered. “At the statewide level, 19% of all 9th graders said they had experienced sexual intercourse at least once. In the three MN ENABL [the acronym used for the abstinence program] counties, the percentage of students who reported having sex at least once were 15% (Freeborn), 19% (Mille Lacs), and 22% (Crow Wing). Direct comparison … is problematic, however, because of the potential bias in our sample due to consent procedures and attrition. ... [I]t is impossible to say whether the MN ENABL groups’ rate of increase was comparable to, or less than the one-year rates of increase for the same counties or the state.”

In other words, the evaluation actually says that the study lacks enough or sufficiently reliable data to judge the short-term impact of the program on student sexual behavior. (It is worth noting, however, that the percentage of 9th-grade students in the survey who reported ever having intercourse is significantly lower than the statewide percentage.)

The evaluation, however, does not conclude on this inconclusive note. The researchers gathered statistics on the percentage of 9th-grade and 12th-grade students across the state who reported ever having sexual intercourse, and they correlated these findings with the level of implementation of the ENABL program. As Table 1 shows, there was no appreciable difference in the levels of sexual activity among 9th-grade students.

Table 1

Percent of Ninth Grade Students Who Ever Had Sexual Intercourse By Strength of Program Implementation in County

[Appendix G, Table 2, Page 92]

Frequency of Intercourse		Male Students			Female Students
	None	Weak	Strong	None	Weak	Strong
Never	78.6	78.2	78.1	83.6	83.1	83.7
1-2 times	10.8	10.1	10.3	7.3	7.7	7.2
3+ times	10.6	11.7	11.6	9.1	9.2	9.2

But when the responses of 12th grade students were placed on the same matrix, an entirely different pattern emerged.

[Appendix G, Table 1, Page 91]

Never	49.8	53.5	54.3	46.7	50.4	53.7
1-2 times	11.3	11.6	11.2	6.5	7.5	7.4
3+ times	38.9	34.9	34.5	46.8	42.2	38.9

Researchers found a statistically significant difference in the sexual behavior of 12th-grade students between those counties in which the abstinence education program was implemented and those in which it was not, and this difference was stronger in counties that implemented the program most aggressively.

Next, the investigators aimed to determine whether this difference was actually related to the abstinence education program. Using a statistical model called Hierarchical Linear Modeling, the investigators were able to adjust their findings both for 10 individual student risk characteristics (e.g., race, computer use, alcohol/drug problem)and for nine county social indicators (e.g., median family income, employment rates, home ownership).

Two social indicator variables were significantly related to the percentage of 9th-grade students reporting sexual intercourse. When a community had more child poverty and a greater proportion of people of color, a greater percentage of 9th -grade students reporting ever having sexual intercourse. The level of MN ENABL programming was not a significant factor in predicting the levels of sexual activity among 9th graders.

Using the same methodology to isolate the significant predictive factors for sexual activity among 12th graders, the authors concluded, “[O]nly MN ENABL programming was significantly related to students reporting sexual intercourse. None of the social indicator variables [was] significantly related to sexual intercourse after controlling for the student variables. Counties without an MN ENABL program have on average 4.5% more 12th-grade students reporting having had sexual intercourse. County adjusted averages … are 53.0% vs. 48.5%. These are predicted county-averaged means adjusted for student differences.” [Emphasis in original.]

After cautioning about the need to differentiate between correlation and causation, the authors of the study ask, “[H]ow does one account for a significant program finding for 12th graders and not for 9th graders? One explanation is that the MN ENABL program is too weak to affect kids who, by 9th grade, are at greatest risk for teen sex, but has greater influence over the ‘average’ teen. MN ENABL may help support these less risk-prone kids into delaying their initiation of sex. Another explanation is that 12th graders would have spent more years in an environment that had had up to six years of community organizing and media campaigns promoting abstinence. Perhaps this accumulation of community organizing and publicity helped delay onset for teens.”

Note that in this concluding paragraph of their report, the authors are not speculating about whether the program is working, but rather why it is working. It is absolutely clear that counties that implemented the abstinence program aggressively had significantly lower levels of teenage sexual activity and that no other known factor was associated with this result.

That means the people of Minnesota paid for more abstinence and actually got what they paid for. How often can that be said of any government program?

Josephine Marcotty might find it useful to go back to school for remedial reading.

Michael Schwartz, CWA’s vice president for government relations, is a member of the executive committee for the National Federation for Abstinence Education.

For more information on abstinence education, read CWA's paper and Family Voice article.

Printer Friendly Version

Recent Articles

Lynchburg Conference Offers Encouragement

Kevin Jennings: Disturbing Background, Disturbing Agenda

Kevin Jennings Connected to ACT-UP and NAMBLA Sympathizers

Kevin Jennings: Too Radical to Oversee Education Programs

Two New Area Directors Join CWA of California

Obama's National Address to School Children

New Hampshire Homeschooler Ordered into Public School

Progress Report on Home Schooling