I guess what's shocking the authorities is their assumption that (1) things like these didn't happen during their 'good old days' and (2) these are really young girls. Hence their view that there is a 'decreasing moral value' among the youth today. All I can say is that they're fantasising.
First, teenagers have been having sex even in the 'good old days'. Swinging 60s anyone? I doubt that the numbers would have increased significantly over the years either. From what a university professor told me, the main lake in UM used to be littered with condoms in the 'old days'. It's just that these days, people are less shy to admit it and are willing to talk openly about it. So, you've got statistics like this one.
Second, young girls have been having sex even in the 'good old days'. Girls used to be married by the time they get to that age. And please don't tell me that they never consumated the marriage until they were 18 or whatever arbitrary age. I'm sure that many of us have grandmothers who were married at 16 or some other really young age that would be quite unacceptable in today's society.
Third, we have to be wary of the statistics. They girls were asked if they had experienced 'pleasure of the flesh', which could mean a bunch of different things besides sex. Plus, some of the admissions may be bravado, as is the usual case if you ask a bunch of teenage guys the same question.
So, I don't see how any of these things are 'new' or 'shocking' in anyway. What I did find interesting in the article was (1) that they're classifying sex as a disciplinary problem (2) that they're trying to fix the girls instead of the 'problem'. This is so typical. Well, I don't think that I have to spell it all out for people to figure it out. At least they didn't blame it on the Net [I've been listening to a lot of Avenue Q lately]!!!
PS. The hot girl is back in Ramsay! From her bad English accent, I'm guessing that she's eastern european.