Possibilties for and Barriers to Support: The Role of Administrators and Other School Personnel

• In Event: Teacher Researchers Learning to Advocate for Diversity in Sexual Identity and Gender Expression in Schools

Abstract

The fourth paper, presented by a single author, focuses on administrators and other personnel and the school and sometimes district-wide possibilities and limitations experienced by principals, superintendents, school counselors, school social workers, and others who work outside of classrooms, but whose decisions and commitments have significant impact on the experiences of LGBTQQ and gender-creative students and families in schools. LGBTQQ-identifying and gender creative young people continue to suffer daily hostility and limited access to educational attainment and well-being in K-12 schools. Research suggests that staff support and implementation of ennumerated bullying and harassment policies can significantly change this situation and make things better for sexual minority and gender creative students, and all students, in schools (Kosciw, Greytak, Bartkiewics, Boesen, & Palmer, 2012). To address these issues, and the persistent problems of sexual identity- and gender-based hostility, bullying, and abuse in schools, this researcher shares the results of interviews conducted with LGBTQ-identifying and straight teachers to answer the questions: What factors are interfering in adults’ willingness to provide support to LGBTQQ youth and families? Why do some educators intervene while others do not?

Purposive sampling (Patton, 1990) was used in order to identify information-rich cases that exemplify the key foci of our inquiry. Interviews were conducted with school superintendents, school administrators, counselors, and other school personnel. All of these administrators and staff professionals taught in urban, suburban, and small town schools, both public and public charter, and all were in a midwestern state, with most concentrated in or around a major midwestern city. Participants identified as gay, lesbian, trans*, queer, straight allies, or straight. Data included audiotaped and transcribed interviews. Interviews were coded and analyzed using a grounded approach and constant comparison (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) and rhetorical analysis of participants’ arguments for why they do or do not engage in this work (Thein, 2013). This analysis was conducted by the teacher inquiry group over the course of a school year. Most striking among the findings was the tendency of school administrators to focus on diversity as a larger, “catch-all” umbrella, and as a result, their unwillingness to focus on LGBTQQ-specific topics. Principals, in particular, seemed to prioritize fear of parental homophobia, that is worrying that parents won’t like their efforts to support LGBTQQ and gender creative students, above the needs of these students and their teachers desires to make schools better for them. They also expressed feeling most unprepared to deal with gender creative and transgender students. These findings call for principals to own and reflect on such priorities, but also for LGBTQQ and ally parents to commmunicate with their children’s principals to be just as assertive in demanding support for LGBTQQ and gender creative students as others might be in opposition.

Author

• Caroline T. Clark, The Ohio State University - Columbus