Smmoooooth: How LGBTQQ Students Gain Social Capital and What Happens When They Don't

• In Event: Conducting Activist, Collaborative Research: Sustained Teacher Inquiry on Sexual Identity and Gender Expression in Schools

Abstract

This paper, presented by two teacher-researchers, examines the concept of “smooth” and how having “smooth” impacts the experiences of LGBTQQ students. There is a significant and growing body of research documenting the hostilities that LGBTQQ and gender creative youth face in U.S. and international school contexts (see, e.g., Hillier, Turner, & Mitchell, 2005; Wyss, 2004; Ryan & Rivers, 2003). In their consistent tracking of school climate for LGBTQQ youth over time (1999 to 2012), the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), through their National School Climate Survey, has identified both continuing problems faced by LGBTQQ youth in schools as well as potential solutions (Kosciw, Greytak, Bartkiewicz, Boesen, & Palmer 2012). Overwhelmingly, schools continue to be hostile environments for these young people, where they persistently experience biased remarks; victimization, harassment, and assault; pervasive absenteeism; lowered educational aspirations and academic achievement; and poor psychological well-being (Kosciw et al, 2012, pp. xiv-xv). Based in their work as part of a teacher-inquiry group committed to combating heterosexism, homophobia, and transphobia in schools, these two teacher-researchers share the results of interviews conducted with LGBTQQ-identifying and gender-creative students to answer the question: How does having or not having “smooth” impact the experiences of LGBTQQ and gender-creative youth in schools? Purposive sampling (Patton, 1990) was used to identify information-rich cases that exemplify the key foci of our inquiry. Interviews were conducted with youth ages 8 to 25 who identified as gay, lesbian, trans*, queer, questioning, or gender-creative. These students attend or had attended urban, suburban, and small town schools, both public and public charter. Students came from the midwest, with most concentrated in or around a major midwestern city within a single state. Data included audiotaped and transcribed interviews. Interviews were coded and analyzed using a grounded approach and constant comparison (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). This analysis was conducted by the teacher inquiry group over the course of a school year. Urbandictionary.com defines “smooth” as, “completing a task with such grace and fluidity that the onlooker will lose appreciation for how difficult a task it really was.” This definition works in our research because it is the ability to be seemingly at ease in their own skin that allows students to gain social capital in high school contexts. In this paper, we look at students who gained that smooth and at those who did not. We explore the conditions that lead to both outcomes and hear what students say helped them along the way. Student interviews indicate that smooth can often impact the experience of coming out at school, the ability to hold high ranking positions within the school community, and the necessity of access to resources. Lack of smooth can subject LGBTQQ students to higher incidents of harassment by other students and higher levels of indifference from teachers and administrators.

Authors

• Courtney Johnson, Columbus City Schools

• Jenell Penn, Columbus City Schools