Safe Schools for LGBTQI Students: How Do Teachers View Their Role in Promoting Safe Schools?

Abstract

This literature review presents insights from existing research on how teachers view their role in creating safe schools for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, and intersex (LGBTQI) students. Analysis of the literature shows that there are concerns for LGBTQI students' safety in schools, that educational settings operate from a position of heteronormativity, and that heterosexual teachers are uniquely positioned as part of the dominant group in which they help to define what is normal and what is deviant in school culture. Research findings on the ways heterosexual teachers respond to institutional heteronormativity are summarized and compared. This review of research provides considerations for and recommendations to school administrators and teacher educators to address needs of teachers. Areas for future research also are identified.The purpose of this article is to synthesize findings from current scholarly literature concerning teachers' view of their role in promoting safe schools for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, and intersex (LGBTQI) students in K-12 settings. (See Table 1 for an expanded definition of the LGBTQI acronym and definitions for use of terminology to describe varying identifications within the LGBTQI community.) The goal is to shed light and understand how heterosexual school staff might perpetuate or counteract heteronormativity in schools. Implications for practice and future directions for research are suggested. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Individual and Contextual Factors Associated with School Staff Responses to Homophobic Bullying

“…A recent review (Vega, Crawford, & Pelt, 2012) suggests that the manner in which school 4" staff manage sexual orientation-based discriminations is due to both individual factors, such as 5" school staff's personal attitudes and beliefs, and to contextual factors, such as their perception of 6" colleagues' beliefs and reactions towards these forms of discrimination. Several qualitative studies 7"…”

Understanding teachers' responses to enactments of sexual and gender stigma at school

“…These factors included social (e.g., relationships with colleagues, community values) and institutional (e.g., workloads, school policies, administrative support) influences, as well as internal influences (e.g., personal experiences with discrimination; Meyer, 2008). Likewise, in a review of studies about how teachers perpetuate or counter heteronormativity in schools, Vega, Crawford, and Van Pelt (2012) concluded that teachers are hesitant to challenge heteronormativity due to their personal beliefs or their perceptions of others’ beliefs; their fears of disapproval from students, colleagues, and parents; and their lack of professional development on gender and sexuality related topics. Research into teachers’ responses to non-bias related peer victimization has also found that teachers’ personal beliefs and attitudes (about bullying and aggression generally, or in regard to specific situations), as well as institutional-level factors such as anti-bullying policies and training, all play a role in how they respond (see for example Bauman, Rigby, & Hoppa, 2008; Grumm & Hein, 2013; Hektner & Swenson, 2012; Kochenderfer-Ladd & Pelletier, 2008; Sairanen & Pfeffer, 2011).…”

Communicating With School Nurses About Sexual Orientation and Sexual Health

“…For many sexual minority students, including YMSM, schools can be hostile environments (Vega, Crawford, & Van Pelt, 2012). Data from a 2009 survey revealed 81.9% of students who identified as sexual minority youth reported verbal harassment at school during the past year because of their sexual orientation (Kosciw, Greytak, Bartkiewicz, Boesen, & Palmer, 2012).…”