LGBT history is American history, LGBT history is British history: Comparing curricular narratives in the U.S. and U.K.

• In Event: Where and how do we learn about LGTBQ+ people? Insights from Colombia, India, United Kingdom, and United States

Proposal

In recent years, some governments have mandated the inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) themes in school curricula. The 2010 Equality Act in the United Kingdom mandates that schools teach about same-sex relationships as part of students’ Relationship and Sex Education curriculum. In the United States, seven states have passed LGBT-inclusive history education mandates, which require, for example, that schools “accurately portray political, economic, and social contributions” of LGBT people (New Jersey Senate Bill 1569 2019)
Like many curricular reform mandates, these have been controversial. In 2019, predominantly Muslim parents in Birmingham, England protested daily for 12 weeks in response to curriculum that taught about same-sex parent families. Also in 2019, in the U.S. state of New Jersey, more than 700 parents signed a petition protesting NJ 1659, which mandates teaching LGBT history. At a school board meeting in a diverse New Jersey city in 2020, Coptic Christians, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and Evangelicals spoke out against this curriculum.
This paper is part of a larger study examining the rollout of—and backlash to—LGBT-inclusive curriculum in the U.S. and the U.K. We focus here on part of the rollout: how curriculum writers are creating the “school version” of LGBT history, and how their efforts are similar to—and different from—efforts to make curriculum more inclusive of diverse races and ethnicities. We investigate the following research question: How does LGBT history curriculum reproduce or challenge dominant historical narratives in the U.S. and U.K.?
We situate our study in scholarly literature on how democratic nation-states use curricular reforms to “recognize” diverse populations. These efforts are often in response to demands by minority groups—often ethnic or religious groups—to be included in national narratives. Educators believe that inclusive curriculum can be beneficial to minority students, as it can help them to see themselves represented in the nation and can thereby lead to a sense of belonging and higher self-esteem. Such inclusive curriculum is also believed to benefit the overall population of countries, as it can lead mainstream populations to have greater respect for minority populations and contribute to more peaceful intergroup coexistence. Moreover, inclusive history curriculum is sometimes perceived as a form of “reparations” against a harmed minority group—as a way for governments to acknowledge past wrongs and recognize the important role of minority groups in their history. Most of these underlying assumptions about the benefits of inclusive curriculum have been studied in relation to racial and ethnic minorities. Our study, by examining the inclusion of minority sexual orientations and gender identities, will bring new insights into the challenges and opportunities of such curricular reforms.
Scholars have also demonstrated how schools—and curricula in particular—become battlegrounds in broader culture wars about who belongs in a nation, and which versions of history should be told. These debates have recently resurged in the U.S., as some states pass laws prohibiting the teaching of Critical Race Theory and other curricula addressing slavery and race. Zimmerman (2002) writes of how throughout the twentieth century, curricular battles were sometimes settled when minority histories were “folded into” the American history curriculum, as long as they supported certain overarching national narratives—such as meritocracy, individual resilience, and overall national progress. In our examination of LGBT history curriculum, we seek to understand how the underlying narratives of lesson plans reproduce or challenge these dominant historical narratives.
Comparisons between lesson plans in the U.S. and the U.K. will shed light on the similarities and differences between American and British national historical narratives—and between how both countries have addressed multicultural populations through curriculum. In the U.K., where the mandate for LGBT-inclusive curriculum is nation-wide, such curriculum is written by government agencies, and distributed throughout the country. In the U.S., where education is more decentralized—and where LGBT curriculum mandates are newer—many LGBT-related curricula are created by non-profit organizations such as History Unerased, Stonewall, the One Archive Foundation, and the Human Rights Campaign. As we examine different lesson plans, we will take these different contexts into account.
To conduct this study, we rely predominantly on textual analysis methods. We have collected 136 LGBT history lesson plans (94 from the U.S., 42 from the U.K.). These lesson plans range in intended grade level from K-12, and cover topics about LGBT heroes, historical events, families, and symbols, as well as pro-social messages related to preventing bullying and discrimination. Using the qualitative software NVIVO, we coded these lesson plans using inductive and deductive codes. For example, we drew deductive codes from scholarly literature such as “national progress,” to code lesson plan excerpts that suggested that discrimination against LGBT peoples is a thing of the past, and that the nation is moving in positive directions. We also added inductive codes that emerged from our data, such as “transnational” to code when lesson plans spoke of transnational LGBT social movements and histories.
Our analysis is ongoing, but we expect to have more developed findings to present at the CIES conference in February 2023. Our findings will make important contributions to understanding the dilemmas educators face as they aspire to create inclusive curriculum and educational spaces. As nations use education—particularly history curriculum—as a central tool in socializing citizens, we must carefully examine the ways that curriculum is reproducing or challenging dominant national narratives.
This study aligns well with the conference theme of “Improving Education for a More Equitable World.” Curriculum writers, educators, and activists in the U.S. and U.K. are seeking to improve curriculum to make it more inclusive and equitable for sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) minorities. In so doing, they are contributing to efforts to “un-erase” the histories that have been silenced and present a more accurate history that could help inspire a more equal and peaceful contemporary society. Understanding the challenges they face could help guide these critical reform processes.

New Jersey Senate Bill 1569. 2019. https://legiscan.com/NJ/bill/S1569/2018.
Zimmerman, Jonathan. 2002. Whose America?: Culture Wars in the Public Schools. Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England: Harvard University Press.

Author

• Naomi A Moland, American University