LGBT-Inclusive Curricula in STEM Subjects: Changes Over Time and Associated Academic Benefits

• In Event: LGBT Inclusion in STEM: Transformative Possibilities for Teaching and Learning Research

Abstract

Educators and policy makers have identified STEM subjects as key areas of focus in education reform and innovation in recent years, including in the designation of Race to the Top funding (Duncan, 2010) and the recent emphasis on competence and testing in these areas (e.g., reauthorization attempts of NCLB; e.g., Judson, 2010). Yet, traditional pedagogies and curricula in these subjects have been slow to reform (Nelson, 1996; Lynch, 2001), even as multicultural education proponents illustrate the possibility of and need for more culturally relevant approaches (Bang & Medin, 2010; Kumashiro, 2001). Subsequently, many students may feel less disinterested in school and discouraged from pursuing these disciplines (Banks, 1993; Style, 1996; National Association for Multicultural Education, 2003). Such factors may partially explain why some demographic groups, including racial/ethnic minorities, females, and those with lower incomes, remain underrepresented in the STEM disciplines in college and beyond (Jordan & Levin, 2009; Riegle-Crumb & King, 2010; Zarrett & Malanchuk, 2005).

This paper examines inclusion of LGBT issues in U.S. secondary school STEM curricula. Research suggests that positive representations of LGBT people and issues are infrequently included in school curricula in general (Kosciw et al., 2012). LGBT students may be further discouraged from these disciplines, and the school environment in general, due to peer victimization and the lower educational aspirations that sometimes accompany these experiences (Kosciw et al., 2012). This paper explores three research questions:
1. What is the current prevalence of LGBT-inclusive STEM curricula in U.S. secondary schools?
2. Has the prevalence of LGBT-inclusive curricula in STEM subjects changed over the past several years?
3. Are inclusive curricula, including in STEM subjects, associated with better academic outcomes?

Combined survey samples of LGBT middle and high school students from 2007 (N=6,209), 2009 (N=7,261), and 2011 (N=8,584) are used in quantitative analysis. Findings show that inclusive curricula are rare across academic disciplines, but particularly so in science and math; only 2% of LGBT students reported having inclusive curricula in these subjects. Nonetheless, although results from a one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) indicate that the prevalence of inclusive curricula increased from 10.5% in 2007 to 11.5% in 2009 and 16.8% in 2011 after controlling for differences in sample composition over time, most of these changes were attributable to increases in inclusive curricula in English and history. Inclusive science and math curricula remained consistently low between 2007 and 2011. Of note, logistic and OLS regression indicate differential benefits of inclusive curricula by discipline: non-STEM core subjects (e.g., English, history) contributed to reduced absenteeism, higher educational aspirations, and greater school belonging. Inclusive math and science curricula specifically contributed only to greater school belonging, as did inclusive health/gym and art/music curricula. Academic achievement was not directly associated with inclusive curricula in any discipline after controlling for gender and age. Implications for researchers and educators are discussed, including strategies for making curricula more inclusive. Future research should examine more specific post-secondary plans, including intended field of study and occupation, to further explore effects of inclusive STEM curricula.

Author

• Neal A. Palmer, GLSEN:Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network