What's Involved in "the Work"? Understanding Administrators' Roles in Bringing Trans-Affirming Policies Into Practice

• In Event: 29.072 - Policies and Practices Affirming Transgender and Gender-Creative Students: Cases From Australia, Canada, and the United States

Abstract

Objectives
In 2015, a university-based initiative and school district launched a research-practice partnership (Coburn, Penuel, & Geil, 2013) focused on building a district culture that affirms gender and sexual diversity (GSD) (Meyer, 2010). Central were the district’s (2012) “Guidelines to Support Students who are Transgender and Gender Expansive.” That policy was to function as protocol for addressing students’ needs, but no structures were in place to support systematic implementation. During our partnership’s first year, we developed those structures, including organizing GSD-specific professional development (PD) for 100 administrators. Here, we focus on administrators and ask: How do administrators talk about the “work” of GSD-affirming policy implementation? What supports are needed? What puzzles of practice get negotiated along the way?
2. Perspectives
Principal preparation programs are remiss in their attention to GSD (Lugg, 2008). This absence has enabled dangerous neglect of LGBTQ youth (GLSEN & Harris Interactive, 2005). As leaders whose guidance is crucial to successful policy implementation, administrators must set the tone for their communities. Therefore, a first step toward building affirming cultures involved supporting administrators to make sense of the policy and their roles in creating conditions for it to land safely. Also vital was situating our focus on GSD within mutual commitments to equity and resisting “leading along a hierarchy of oppression” (O’Malley & Capper, 2014, p. 302).
3. & 4. Methods, Data Sources and Analysis
Data were collected during the 2015-16 school year. To construct a baseline of knowledge, we collected pre-PD survey data and performed descriptive analyses of Likert-scale responses and thematic analyses of open-ended responses. Post-PD survey data solicited administrators’ perceptions of district expectations and future needs. Following the PD, we invited all administrators to participate in ongoing research. 17 consented. From those 17, we collected mid-year survey data and conducted end-of-year interviews with 9 case-study participants. We developed survey and interview protocols based on preliminary findings that led us to wonder how administrators understood the complex nature of “the work” and how they navigated uncertainty.
5. Findings
Preliminary findings suggest that administrators’ understandings involved varying degrees of engagement. Some participants emphasized supporting individuals who were transitioning; others spoke to multiple layers of the work, including ongoing staff development, supporting teachers to implement GSD-inclusive practices, and educating parents. Participants also pointed to the need to be comfortable with uncertainty.
Challenges were rooted in practical issues with implementation (e.g., designating all-gender bathrooms, supporting transgender students with unsupportive parents). Puzzles of practice were also related to teachers’ fears, specific instances of pushback, and how to sustain the “energy” of district efforts. Importantly, many understood that ongoing attention to policy implementation and consistent messaging from district leaders were requisites for success. Necessary supports also included collegial collaboration and resources for staff and parents.
6. Significance
In a policy context of unprecedented focus on gender diversity, working the knowledge-action relationship to produce and study solutions-in-progress is critical to the goal of queer-affirming schools. This study’s contribution lies in its examination and support of administrators’ efforts to meet that goal.

Authors

• Bethy Leonardi, University of Colorado - Boulder

• Sara Staley, University of Colorado - Boulder