Implementing Queer Pedagogy: From Conservative Schools to Liberal Informal Settings and the Intermediate Contexts In Between

• In Event: Highlighted Session: Navigating Queer Identities in Education: Insights on SOGIE Inclusion and Community-Level Perspectives

Proposal

Overview
Over the last two decades, there has been a growing interest in issues of sexual orientation, gender identity, and expression (SOGIE) in the field of education. Unfortunately, studies conducted in the United States, Latin America, Europe, and Asia all demonstrate the existence of a hostile educational environment for LGBT+ students. These students often experience verbal violence, harassment, assaults, and discrimination in accessing resources, which negatively affect the educational climate, well-being, and academic achievement (Kosciw et al., 2020; Burdge et al., 2013). SOGIE issues have increasingly become part of the Comparative and International Education (CIE) field, particularly in the wake of UNESCO’s call for action, both in research and practice, towards inclusive and equitable education for all learners (Kosciw & Pizmony-Levy, 2016; Meadows, 2018). Accordingly, practitioners and scholars have focused on how queer pedagogy can make schools more inclusive and socially just.
Queer pedagogy challenges the central role of education systems in normalizing SOGIE and marginalizing LGBT+ students (Meyer, 2007). It has evolved alongside other critical pedagogies, such as feminist (Weiler, 1991) and anti-racist (Giroux, 1992), which address oppressive norms and power dynamics. However, unlike critical pedagogies that typically operate within existing social categories, queer pedagogy questions and deconstructs these categories themselves (Kumashiro, 2002). It operates from an epistemic standpoint that rejects absolute meanings in favor of context-dependent interpretations, complicating the formulation of a coherent queer educational practice theory due to the constant risk of essentialism. Thus, existing literature on queer pedagogy is characterized by two main poles: on one hand, there are purely theoretical discussions of idealized concepts, which often fail to offer practical insights (Britzman, 2012; Weems, 2007); on the other hand, empirical research is mostly limited to self-studies within liberal US schools, leading to a narrow and limited theoretical scope (DePalma, 2010; Whitlock, 2010). This dichotomy highlights the need for a more inclusive and adaptable framework.
Study Aims and Framework
This study aims to offer a broad and flexible analytical framework for queer pedagogy, developed inductively from practical knowledge of educators through numerous case studies. By examining queer practices in a variety of educational contexts, the study bridges the gap between queer theory and educational practical, making theory more applicable and pedagogy less rigid. The framework introduces queer orientations (Ahmed, 2006) using three main analytical axes: time, space, and affect. These axes serve as tools to understand how queer pedagogical practices can be implemented and adapted across different settings. The goal is to provide a comprehensive framework that allows educators and researchers to explore and apply queer pedagogy in diverse and evolving contexts, thus facilitating a deeper integration of queer theory into educational practice.
Methodology
The study was conducted in Israel—a society marked by nationalism, militarism, and racism (Lomsky-Feder & Ben-Ari, 2000). Despite these characteristics, Israel engages with global SOGIE discussions in education, though this engagement may be a tactic to divert attention from other human rights violations in Israel and the occupied territories (Puar, 2017). Rather than taking substantial action, the government has shifted responsibility to schools and local communities, leading to violence and hostility towards LGBT+ students within the Israeli education system. These challenges vary across locations, classes, and ethno-national groups (Pizmony-Levy et al., 2019). The study utilizes this context to explore case studies involving youth movements, conservative communities, and liberal schools.
The research includes 40 interviews with educators conducted between 2020-2021, featuring a mix of LGBT+ individuals and cisgender-heterosexuals, aged 22 to 59. Participants were primarily secular Jews, with some from traditional Jewish or Muslim-Palestinian backgrounds. The “plugging in” method (Jackson & Mazzei, 2013) was used for analysis, connecting interview findings with queer theoretical axes to generate new insights. The analysis proceeded in a cyclical, bidirectional manner, leading to new conceptualizations of analytical tools relevant to both pedagogy and queer theory.
Results
Disruptive Queer Pedagogy refers to practices that destabilize the heteronormative order, leading to limited change while exposing the potential for further alteration. It is manifested through (1) deviations from normative timelines; (2) subversive sites at the margins of sanctuary, dismantling, and resistance; and (3) affective counter-responses that reveal homophobia and violence. These spatial, temporal, and affective practices challenge normative timelines, heteronormative educational spaces, and atmospheres, focusing on disrupting sexual and gender norms in conservative schools.
Alternative Queer Pedagogy establishes an autonomous order outside the heteronormative framework, proposing significant change. It is reflected in (1) LGBT+ futurist agendas and narratives; (2) institutions for the LGBT+ community in separate spaces; and (3) experiences of gender and sexual euphoria. These practices contribute to creating alternative timelines, ‘utopian’ educational spaces, and atmospheres opposing heteronormativity, suggesting radical educational possibilities in informal and liberal settings.
Innovative Queer Pedagogy expands sexual-gender diversity within the existing order, resulting in minor but significant changes. It is seen in (1) merging times and integrating Queer events into the general agenda; (2) inclusion, blending places, and designing diverse spaces; and (3) sharing experiences of difference and fostering empathy. These practices enable the creation of renewed narratives, hybrid educational environments, and transformative experiences that navigate between dysphoria and euphoria, enhancing diversity in both schools and informal settings with mixed organizational and ideological conditions.
The framework’s potential is illustrated by a diagram (Figure 1). The vertical line represents ideological conditions—from conservative to liberal—while the horizontal line represents organizational conditions—from formal schools to informal youth movements. The diagram shows four educational contexts: (1) Traditional School, (2) Democratic School, (3) The Scouts, and (4) The Queer Youth Movement. The outer circle depicts possible bidirectional transitions among the three queer pedagogy assemblages based on their action ranges and contextual intersections. This diagram helps in examining queer pedagogy across different contexts, comparing conditions, and identifying applicable pedagogy. Ongoing re-evaluation allows for adaptation to evolving educational environments.

Author

• Avner Rogel, Teachers College Columbia University