The Paradox of Queer as a Sexual Identity Classification in Education Research

• In Event: Queering Mixed Methods Research for Social Advocacy

Abstract

Objectives and Perspectives
Historically, quantitative education researchers have treated sexual minority students as a homogenous population by collapsing all respondents into a single category (Dugan & Yurman, 2011). This methodological approach assumes that all sexual minority respondents will have the same outcomes, yet there are likely unique experiences for queer-identified students (Abes & Kasch, 2007). The paradox of queer as a sexual identity creates a discord between tenets of queer theory and recognizing queer as a normalized sexual identity. The purpose of this paper is to examine the tension of queer as a sexual identity classification in education research. The following questions guide this study:
• Do significant differences exist in leadership, perceptions of campus climate, and outness for queer and LGB students?
• (How) can quantitative scholars include queer as a sexual identity classification in survey design while also maintaining key tenets of queer theory?
Method
Data for this study originate from The National LGBT Alumni Survey, an instrument examining undergraduate experiences for sexual and gender minority students. I created comparison groups of queer students (N = 511, 18.5%) and LGB students (N = 2,253, 81.5%) and conducted ANOVAs to explore the relationship between sexual identity and leadership, perceptions of campus climate, and outness (Table 1).
Results and Discussion
ANOVA results revealed that queer students (M = 2.98, SD = 1.37) were more likely than LGB students (M = 2.64, SD = 1.43) to hold a leadership position in an organization [F(1, 2,333) = 21.87]. LGB students (M = -0.06, SD = 1.01) rated perceptions of campus climate more negatively than queer students (M = 0.22, SD = 0.98) [F(1, 2,724) = 32.55]. Finally, queer students (M = 0.34, SD = 0.88) had higher levels of outness than LGB students (M = -0.09, SD = 1.01) [F(1, 2,750) = 79.11].
Significance
Results justify the necessity of including queer as a sexual identity classification in quantitative education research. The full paper will discuss specific approaches to drafting sexual identity demographic questions that include queer while also adhering to tenets of queer identity (e.g., “check all that apply,” “not listed, please describe ___,” assessing sexual behavior and attraction).

Author

• Jason C. Garvey, The University of Alabama