Abstract
This survey research describes English language arts teachers’ comfort levels in integrating literature with lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) themes or characters into their curricula and classroom practices. Significant relationships were found between teachers’ age, comfort, awareness of resources, and implementation levels. Although younger teachers had higher comfort levels with LGBT texts, they displayed lower resource awareness levels and static implementation rates. In addition, comfort, awareness, and implementation of LGBT curriculum materials were also correlated with teacher location and with strength of religious belief, with rural teachers and strongly religious teachers displaying lower comfort and implementation levels. Availability of supportive resources such as gay–straight alliances (GSAs) and library holdings, as well as teachers’ awareness of these resources, is also examined. Specific barriers rural teachers encounter when implementing LGBT-inclusive literature/curriculum are identified. A call for future research and professional development is extended.
Highlights
As a teacher educator, I work closely with preservice teachers and with in-service teachers working in public schools
The National School Climate Survey (NSCS) conducted by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN; Kosciw et al, 2016) reports that though progress has been made since the survey was first administered in 1999, LGBTQ students still frequently hear homophobic remarks and negative comments about gender expression, hear homophobic remarks from school staff, feel unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation, have been verbally harassed at school, have been physically harassed, and have been physically assaulted because of their sexual orientation or gender expression
“the reported grade point average (GPA) for students who had higher levels of victimization based on their sexual orientation or gender expression was significantly lower than for students who experienced less harassment and assault (2.9 vs. 3.3)” (Kosciw et al, 2016, p. 45) and LGBTQ students who were more frequently victimized based on sexual orientation or gender expression “were twice as likely to report that they did not plan to pursue postsecondary education
Summary
I work closely with preservice teachers and with in-service teachers working in public schools All of these dedicated instructors would state that they want students to feel comfortable and safe in school. Students who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) report feeling less safe, less respected, and less valued in our schools than do their heterosexual and cisgender peers, leading to lower engagement and achievement (Kosciw, Gretak, Giga, Villenas, & Danischewski, 2016; Lecesne, 2012; Robinson & Espelage, 2011). “the reported grade point average (GPA) for students who had higher levels of victimization based on their sexual orientation or gender expression was significantly lower than for students who experienced less harassment and assault (2.9 vs 3.3)” Is the victimization of one segment of the student body of concern due to the moral imperative of providing safe spaces for learning for all students, it is of concern because it directly affects the learning and educational outcomes for these students
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
