Educational PsychologyPsychometricsPublic HealthSexology

Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II

The Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II (FLSE-GQ-II) is a comprehensive psychometric needs assessment scale designed to evaluate educator and community priorities regarding adolescent sex education in public schools.

memjavad
PUBLISHED
Scientifically Reviewed · Dr. Marwa Abd-Alazim · October 1, 2026
Medically & Scientifically Reviewed Verified: October 1, 2026
Dr. Marwa Abd-Alazim Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology • University of Kerbala
Review Criteria & Clinical Standards

This content undergoes rigorous scientific peer-review and medical editorial standards at Arab Psychology Network to ensure clinical accuracy, validity, and compliance with evidence-based guidelines from leading psychological and healthcare authorities (APA / WHO).

Abstract

The Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II (FLSE-GQ-II) is a comprehensive psychometric needs assessment instrument developed by Steven Godin and Kimberly Razzano to evaluate stakeholder attitudes toward the curriculum goals of family life and sex education in public school systems. Originating from the early 1980s Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire (FLSE-GQ) and updated to capture contemporary challenges in adolescent health, the FLSE-GQ-II operationalizes educational priorities across two structural variations: a 60-item Long Form and an empirically distilled 20-item Short Form. Responses are gathered using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Very Unimportant) to 5 (Very Important). Psychometric investigations across multi-regional samples of educators and parents (comprising cohorts from the American Midwest and Northeast) reveal five primary dimensions: (a) Sexual Decision-Making and Life Skills, (b) Teaching about Male and Female Physical Development, (c) Encouraging Respect for Diversity, (d) Providing Secondary Prevention, and (e) Teaching about the Family and Integrating Sexuality in Personal Growth.

Internal consistency metrics establish solid psychometric stability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the Long Form ranging from .60 to .79 among teachers and .65 to .85 among parents. The 20-item Short Form demonstrates enhanced internal consistency, yielding alphas between .73 and .83 for teachers and .79 and .87 for parents. Exploratory factor analyses designate Sexual Decision-Making and Life Skills as the principal factor, accounting for roughly 31% to 32% of total variance across diverse parent and regional cohorts. Demographic and sociocultural analyses substantiate criterion and construct validity, indicating that religiosity and race significantly predict variations in stakeholder priorities. As an empirical diagnostic tool, the FLSE-GQ-II bridges community preferences with school board policymaking, mitigating sociopolitical controversy by substituting ideological assumptions with quantifiable consensus data.

Keywords

Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II, FLSE-GQ-II, sex education curriculum, needs assessment, sexual health education, adolescent health, psychometrics, parental attitudes, teacher attitudes, factor analysis, public school health policy

Authors

The FLSE-GQ-II was developed and validated by:

  • Steven Godin, Ph.D., MPH — Department of Health Studies, East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, East Stroudsburg, PA. (Correspondence: [email protected]).
  • Kimberly Razzano, Ph.D., MPH, CHES — Department of Health Studies, East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, East Stroudsburg, PA.

The original iteration of the instrument (FLSE-GQ) was conceptualized in the early 1980s through collaborative research involving Steven Godin, Susan Frank, Sandra Jacobson, and J. Sugrue.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II is to provide an empirical, psychometrically validated needs assessment framework for identifying, clarifying, and operationalizing community and educational priorities surrounding comprehensive sexuality education. School boards, curriculum developers, district administrators, and public health officials frequently confront complex sociopolitical tensions when designing adolescent sexuality curricula. Historically, educational leadership has exhibited hesitancy in integrating comprehensive sexuality topics—such as contraception, abortion, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission, and sexual orientation—due to perceived community resistance or anticipated backlash from vocal minority factions (Scales, 1983).

The FLSE-GQ-II addresses this governance vulnerability by replacing anecdotal assumptions with systematic data collection. By administering the scale to parents, classroom teachers, school counselors, and administrators, school districts can quantify the degree of support or reservation concerning distinct curricular modules. The instrument clarifies where consensus exists (e.g., broad endorsement of physical development and family communication) and pinpoints content areas where disagreement is localized (e.g., condom demonstration, abortion education, or sexual decision autonomy).

Beyond municipal curriculum design, the FLSE-GQ-II serves valuable clinical and academic research purposes. In health psychology, public health evaluation, and educational sociology, it functions as a diagnostic mechanism to examine how parental and educator attitudes correlate with socio-demographic indicators, such as religiosity, educational attainment, ethnicity, and geographic locality. Furthermore, the instrument assists public health researchers in evaluating the congruence between state-mandated educational policies (such as abstinence-only versus comprehensive sexuality models) and authentic grassroots community expectations, thereby facilitating evidence-informed educational reform.

Psychological Construct

The FLSE-GQ-II measures subjective valuations of educational objectives across family life and sexual health education. Rather than evaluating factual knowledge or personal behavioral tendencies, the underlying construct represents normative educational prioritization: the cognitive endorsement of specific concepts, skills, and preventive interventions as vital components of public school socialization. Through extensive psychometric derivation, this construct is partitioned into five distinct dimensions:

1. Sexual Decision-Making and Life Skills

This subscale evaluates the degree to which stakeholders prioritize adolescent autonomy, communication efficacy, critical thinking, and pregnancy/disease risk-reduction strategies. Rather than treating sexuality solely as a biological process, this construct captures the valuation of self-regulation and pragmatic health behaviors. Key instructional targets subsumed under this dimension include counseling adolescents to make independent decisions regarding sexual involvement, equipping youth to identify and resist peer pressures, and familiarizing students with community reproductive health resources, contraception mechanics, and pregnancy resolution options (e.g., Items 8, 10, 17, 18, 21, and 43).

2. Teaching about Male and Female Physical Development

This dimension quantifies the perceived necessity of foundational biological, physiological, and anatomical instruction. It assesses attitudes toward normalizing physical changes during puberty, demystifying bodily processes, correcting physiological myths, and fostering positive body image. The construct focuses on promoting holistic somatic comfort and delivering medically accurate anatomical information regarding male and female reproductive systems (e.g., Items 32, 33, and 44).

3. Encouraging Respect for Diversity

This factor examines the importance placed on cultural humility, ethical pluralism, tolerance of non-heteronormative sexualities, and the deconstruction of rigid societal gender roles. It captures stakeholder support for teaching how cultural, ethnic, and familial backgrounds shape sexual values, as well as the necessity of addressing structural stereotypes and alternative sexual lifestyles in classroom settings (e.g., Items 47, 48, and 49).

4. Providing Secondary Prevention

Secondary prevention encompasses targeted, supportive interventions aimed at mitigating the academic, psychosocial, and health consequences experienced by vulnerable, pregnant, or parenting adolescents. This dimension gauges community support for retaining pregnant students in public schools, providing specialized prenatal guidance within educational settings, and supplying school-based crisis counseling for expectant adolescent mothers and fathers (e.g., Items 39, 45, and 57).

5. Teaching about the Family and Integrating Sexuality in Personal Growth

This construct evaluates the priority assigned to contextualizing human sexuality within interpersonal relationships, family dynamics, and broader developmental milestones. It reflects traditional and relational paradigms of sex education, emphasizing open intergenerational dialogue between adolescents and parents, constructive intra-familial conflict resolution, moral accountability, and the synthesis of sexual identity within general emotional maturation (e.g., Items 16, 20, 22, 23, and 54).

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the FLSE-GQ-II integrates principles from Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986), Ecological Systems Theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), and contemporary paradigms of public health curriculum design. Rather than conceptualizing health education as a mechanical transmission of biological facts, the instrument assumes that sexuality education is fundamentally an ecological and reciprocal social enterprise.

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory provides the macro-level justification for the scale. Adolescent sexual health outcomes are shaped not only by individual attributes (the ontogenic level) but through dynamic interactions with microsystems (family, peer networks, school classrooms), the mesosystem (interconnections between parents and educators), and the macrosystem (cultural norms, religious ideologies, and legal frameworks). The FLSE-GQ-II explicitly measures the mesosystemic congruence between the school and the home. When discordant attitudes exist between educators and parents regarding curriculum content, implementation fidelity drops, institutional resistance escalates, and adolescent health messaging becomes fragmented.

Concurrently, Social Cognitive Theory underpins the operationalization of the ‘Sexual Decision-Making and Life Skills’ subscale. Bandura emphasizes that behavior change requires more than knowledge acquisition; it necessitates the development of self-efficacy, observational modeling, anticipatory outcome expectations, and self-regulatory skills. The FLSE-GQ-II captures whether stakeholders value pedagogical methods that build behavioral competencies—such as condom application demonstrations, role-playing refusal techniques against peer pressure, and deliberate boundary-setting—or whether they endorse purely descriptive, knowledge-oriented curricular paradigms.

Finally, the scale’s historical development reflects the evolving paradigm shift within American adolescent health: the empirical movement from restrictive abstinence-only-until-marriage models toward comprehensive sexuality education (CSE). Large-scale meta-analyses and policy reports (Alford, 2003, 2008; Kirby, 2001; Kirby et al., 2005; Waxman Report, 2004; GAO, 2006) established that comprehensive curricula delay coital debut, reduce high-risk sexual practices, and decrease sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and adolescent pregnancies without hastening sexual activity. The FLSE-GQ-II is theoretically constructed to measure the degree to which local stakeholders embrace this public health paradigm versus moral-philosophical restraint models.

Validity

Empirical validation of the FLSE-GQ-II rests on robust content, construct, and criterion-related validity assessments conducted across diverse geographic, cultural, and professional cohorts.

Content and Face Validity

Content validity was established through systematic reviews of public school sexuality curricula, adolescent development guidelines, and consultation with health education experts, teachers, school administrators, and community leaders. Iterative revisions from the 1980s FLSE-GQ to the 2006 FLSE-GQ-II ensured the integration of contemporary public health challenges, including modern HIV/AIDS transmission modes, safer sex negotiations, and emergent adolescent social dynamics.

Construct Validity: Factorial Invariance

Construct validity was confirmed via exploratory and principal component analyses on diverse stakeholder cohorts. A benchmark study evaluated 337 elementary and secondary teachers and 248 parents in the Midwest, followed by replication studies involving 175 high school teachers and 157 parents in the rural and suburban Northeast (Razzano & Godin, 2006). These factor analyses consistently reproduced the same five-factor structural architecture across disparate educational contexts, confirming that the underlying conceptual dimensions of the FLSE-GQ-II possess cross-sample stability.

Criterion and Group-Difference Validity

Construct and criterion validity are further substantiated by the scale’s sensitivity to demographic and sociocultural predictors of curriculum attitudes (Frank et al., 1982; Godin et al., 1984). Multiple regression analyses revealed that:

  • Religiosity emerged as the strongest and most consistent negative predictor of endorsement for controversial sexual decision-making and contraceptive skills among both teachers and parents.
  • Race and Ethnicity accounted for significant variance in parental ratings, particularly regarding Respect for Diversity and Secondary Prevention goals, reflecting diverse cultural priorities regarding family role structures.
  • Regional and Cohort Convergence: While Midwestern baseline studies indicated that parents and teachers viewed sexual decision-making as significantly more contentious than basic physical development, Northeast cohort analyses (Razzano & Godin, 2006) demonstrated strong cross-stakeholder consensus regarding the critical importance of sexual decision-making and life skills, demonstrating the instrument’s capacity to reflect longitudinal and regional cultural shifts.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the FLSE-GQ-II has been documented across multiple validation studies using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, demonstrating acceptable to excellent psychometric reliability across both the 60-item Long Form and the 20-item Short Form.

Long Form (60 Items) Internal Consistency

Across the five extracted goal dimensions on the full-length questionnaire, alpha coefficients demonstrate solid internal consistency:

  • Teacher Cohorts: Cronbach’s alphas range from .60 to .79 across the five subscales.
  • Parent Cohorts: Cronbach’s alphas demonstrate slightly higher coherence, ranging from .65 to .85 across subscales.

Short Form (20 Items) Internal Consistency

By retaining only items exhibiting robust factor loadings (λ ≥ .50) across both parent and educator samples, the 20-item Short Form demonstrates superior internal consistency compared to the full instrument:

  • Teacher Cohorts: Cronbach’s alphas range from .73 to .83.
  • Parent Cohorts: Cronbach’s alphas range from .79 to .87.

The absence of unstable or cross-loading items in the Short Form enhances latent construct measurement, making it an efficient option for community surveys where respondent fatigue or varying literacy levels could compromise data quality.

Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the FLSE-GQ-II was established through Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with orthogonal and oblique rotations, administered separately to parent and educator data sets to prevent cross-sample contamination.

Variance Distribution and Latent Architecture

Factorial extraction consistently revealed a dominant primary factor accompanied by four distinct secondary factors:

  • Midwest Parent Sample (N = 248): The Sexual Decision-Making and Life Skills factor accounted for 31% of the total explained variance, representing the core axis of parental evaluation. The remaining four dimensions (Physical Development, Diversity, Secondary Prevention, Family Life) functioned as minor dimensions, each explaining between 4% and 9% of the variance.
  • Midwest Teacher Sample (N = 337): In contrast to parents, teachers prioritized relational integration; the Family Life and Personal Growth dimension accounted for 30% of total variance, with decision-making emerging as a secondary priority.
  • Northeast Parent and Teacher Samples (N = 332 combined): Re-examination of the updated FLSE-GQ-II indicated that Sexual Decision-Making and Life Skills was the singular dominant factor across both groups, accounting for 32% of total variance, highlighting an evolving consensus on the primacy of pragmatic risk reduction and adolescent agency.

Short-Form Item Selection Criteria

To construct the 20-item Short Form, Godin and Razzano applied a retention criterion requiring an item factor loading of λ ≥ .50 on its primary dimension across both the independent parent and teacher samples. The resulting allocation isolates the most psychometrically robust items:

  • Sexual Decision-Making and Life Skills (6 items): Items 8, 10, 17, 18, 21, 43
  • Teaching Physical Development (3 items): Items 32, 33, 44
  • Respect for Diversity (3 items): Items 47, 48, 49
  • Secondary Prevention (3 items): Items 39, 45, 57
  • Family Life and Personal Growth (5 items): Items 16, 20, 22, 23, 54

Instrument / Measurement Tool

  • Instrument Name: Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II (FLSE-GQ-II)
  • Alternative Versions: 60-item Long Form; 20-item Short Form
  • Assessment Type: Needs assessment scale; stakeholder attitude questionnaire
  • Target Populations: Public and private school educators, building administrators, curriculum specialists, parents/guardians of school-aged children, and community stakeholders
  • Administration Time:
    • Long Form: Approximately 30 to 40 minutes for parents; 20 to 30 minutes for educators.
    • Short Form: Approximately 8 to 15 minutes.
  • Response Format: 5-point Likert-type scale scored as follows:
    • 1 = Very Unimportant
    • 2 = Somewhat Unimportant
    • 3 = Neutral Importance
    • 4 = Somewhat Important
    • 5 = Very Important
  • Scoring and Computational Procedures:
    • Long Form (60 Items): In large normative samples, researchers are advised to conduct exploratory factor analysis/principal component analysis to derive empirical factor scores tailored to the specific demographic population without imposing a priori structural constraints. Alternatively, raw summation of items mapping to designated domains may be computed.
    • Short Form (20 Items): Subscale scores are derived by calculating the mean response value for items within each specific subscale (sum of item responses divided by the total number of items in that subscale), preserving the 1-to-5 metric for direct thematic comparison:
    • Sexual Decision-Making & Life Skills: (Item 8 + Item 10 + Item 17 + Item 18 + Item 21 + Item 43) / 6
    • Physical Development: (Item 32 + Item 33 + Item 44) / 3
    • Respect for Diversity: (Item 47 + Item 48 + Item 49) / 3
    • Secondary Prevention: (Item 39 + Item 45 + Item 57) / 3
    • Family Life & Personal Growth: (Item 16 + Item 20 + Item 22 + Item 23 + Item 54) / 5

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire series holds formal copyrights registered in 1985, 1994, and 2006 by Steven Godin and collaborators. The instrument is accessible for non-profit academic research, school district needs assessments, and doctoral dissertations upon contacting the senior author.

Electronic copies of the questionnaire, including an optional standardized demographic questionnaire assessing participant age, gender, race, educational background, and religiosity metrics, can be obtained by contacting: Dr. Steven Godin, Department of Health Studies, East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, East Stroudsburg, PA 18301 (e-mail: [email protected]). Commercial deployment, curriculum consulting reproduction, or broad institutional dissemination requires formal written permission.

References

  • Alford, S. (2003). Science and success: Sex education and other programs that work to prevent teen pregnancy, HIV & sexually transmitted infections. Advocates for Youth.
  • Alford, S. (2008). Science and success (2nd ed.). Advocates for Youth.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
  • Frank, S., Godin, S., Jacobson, S., & Sugrue, J. (1982, August). Respect for diversity: Teachers’ goals for a family life sex education program [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, United States.
  • Godin, S., Frank, S., & Jacobson, S. (1984, March). Respect for diversity: Parents’ goals for a family life sex education program [Paper presentation]. Midwestern Conference of the National Council on Family Relations, Des Moines, IA, United States.
  • Government Accountability Office. (2006). Abstinence education: Efforts to assess the accuracy and effectiveness of federally funded programs (Report No. GAO-07-8). United States Government Accountability Office. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-07-8
  • Kirby, D. (2001). Emerging answers: Research findings on programs to reduce teen pregnancy. National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
  • Kirby, D., Laris, B. A., & Rolleri, L. (2005). Impact of sex and HIV education programs on sexual behaviors of youth in developing and developed countries (Youth Research Working Paper No. 2). Family Health International.
  • McKeon, B. (2006). Effective sex education. Advocates for Youth.
  • Razzano, K., & Godin, S. (2006). A new paradigm in sexuality education in Pennsylvania: A descriptive analysis. Pennsylvania Journal of Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 76(3), 17–29.
  • Scales, P. (1983). The new opposition to sex education: A powerful threat to a democratic society. Journal of School Health, 53(5), 300–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.1983.tb03115.x
  • United States House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Minority Staff, Special Investigations Division. (2004). The content of federally funded abstinence-only education programs (Waxman Report). U.S. House of Representatives.

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)

Below are the authentic scale items in their original language as published in the standard psychometric validation studies, without modification or translation to preserve instrument validity and reliability:
Instructions / Directions: In the column to the right of the goals listed on the pages which follow, indicate the importance of each goal by using the following scale:
1

To help adolescents feel good about their physical appearance.
2

To help adolescents to appreciate their special qualities and personality as well as that of other boys and girls.
3

To reduce guilt and fear about sexuality.
4

To provide information about abnormal sexual development and behavior.
5

To help adolescents understand how sexual development affects other aspects of personal growth and development.
6

To provide complete information about male and female genitalia (sex organs) and other physical differences between men and women.
7

To involve parents in selecting instruction materials and planning the curriculum of the family life sex education program.
8

To provide information about abortion and its effects on the body.
9

To provide information about the biology of human reproduction and birth.
10

To discuss ways of coping with an unexpected pregnancy.
11

To help adolescents develop skills in getting along with members of the opposite sex.
12

To provide information about how to be good parents.
13

To help adolescents learn to understand and communicate with each other better.
14

To make youth aware of community services related to health and prenatal care.
15

To emphasize the importance of the family as the keystone of American life.
16

To help adolescents understand their responsibilities to self, family, and friends as they grow up.
17

To inform youth of community services related to birth control and sexual decision-making.
18

To counsel adolescents to make their own decisions about how far to go in their sexual activities.
19

To encourage adolescents to talk more openly with their parents about sexuality.
20

To discuss the role of the family in personal growth and development.
21

To encourage adolescents to use contraceptives if they decide to have sexual intercourse.
22

To discuss ways in which families work out conflicts and solve problems.
23

To help adolescents understand people’s feelings and points of view.
24

To educate adolescents about peer pressure and how to deal with it.
25

To provide information about sexually transmitted infections including HIV and AIDS.
26

To teach about abstention as a form of contraception.
27

To encourage discussion of personal family experiences in the classroom.
28

To provide special courses about family life and sexuality for disabled students.
29

To encourage adolescents to think about alternatives to abortion.
30

To bring in outside speakers to talk to youth about sexuality.
31

To counsel boys who are expectant fathers.
32

To correct myths and misinformation about the body.
33

To help adolescents to view the growth changes in their bodies as normal and healthy.
34

To discuss how the attitudes toward growth and development may be different for different ethnic groups and cultures in our society.
35

To provide information about alternative sexual behaviors and lifestyles, such as homosexuality.
36

To discuss abortion as a form of contraception.
37

To provide workshops to assist parents in talking more openly with their adolescent children about sexuality.
38

To encourage grooming and thoughtfulness about personal appearance.
39

To counsel girls who are pregnant.
40

To demonstrate how to put on a condom using a plastic teaching model or banana.
41

To refer students with special needs to social service agencies.
42

To make adolescents aware of the negative effects of sex role stereotypes.
43

To provide information about good prenatal care.
44

To provide information about contraceptives and how they work, and describe their effects on the body.
45

To teach about biological changes during puberty.
46

To provide individual counseling to students with low self-esteem or those who feel embarrassed about their bodies.
47

To meet with parents about a child who is having difficulties with sexual issues and stresses.
48

To teach about the different types of sexually transmitted infections or diseases.
49

To teach about how families may differ in how they make rules and decisions.
50

To teach students about the ways in which HIV is transmitted.
51

To provide information about how different ethnic and cultural groups differ in sexual beliefs and behaviors.
52

To work with outside community agencies to provide rap groups about sexuality and sexual decision-making.
53

To help adolescents to see that most young people are going through many of the same things as they grow toward maturity.
54

To help adolescents plan for and start working toward future goals.
55

To provide information about the roles and challenges that go along with reaching different ages in life.‌
56

To teach students about ways to have safer sex to reduce the risk of HIV infection.
57

To discuss ways to help families talk more openly and improve family communication.
58

To listen and respond to the opinions of the outside community and local interest groups in making family life sex education goals.
59

To encourage personal hygiene.
60

To encourage pregnant girls to stay in school and to provide special classes for them in prenatal care.
★

Rate This Scale

5.0 / 5 • 1 vote

Cite This Article

memjavad (2026, October 1). Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II. PSYCHOLOGICAL DATABASE. https://en.arabpsychology.com/scales/family-life-sex-education-goal-questionnaire-ii/
memjavad. “Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II.” PSYCHOLOGICAL DATABASE, 1 October 2026, https://en.arabpsychology.com/scales/family-life-sex-education-goal-questionnaire-ii/.
memjavad. “Family Life Sex Education Goal Questionnaire II.” PSYCHOLOGICAL DATABASE. October 1, 2026. https://en.arabpsychology.com/scales/family-life-sex-education-goal-questionnaire-ii/.