Smith & Payne. 2014. Final Draft Encyclopedia Entry. School Professionals’ Responses to LGBTQ Training. SAGE.

Smith & Payne. Rough Draft Entry. School Professionals’ Responses to LGBTQ Training The SAGE Encyclopedia of LGBTQ Studies

Smith & Payne, 2014, Rough Draft Entry The SAGE Encyclopedia of LGBTQ Studies Queering Education Research Institute (QuERI) www.queeringeducation.org

School Professionals’ Responses to LGBTQ Training

School professionals who are visibly supportive of LGBTQ youth are critically important to creating inclusive schools. These are educators who intervene when they witness homophobia, express support for LGBTQ rights, and create opportunities for gender and sexual diversity to be visible in the school environment. When LGBTQ youth are able to connect with these supportive educators, they experience greater educational success. However, practicing school professionals often feel ill-prepared to meet the needs of LGBTQ students or are completely unaware that the needs exist. Research indicates that without education and professional development, teachers are unable to understand how to effectively apply school anti-harassment policies or otherwise secure a safe learning environment. For example, when asked about their intervention efforts, teachers often report that, while motivated to intervene in heterosexual sexual harassment, they felt unsure about when or how to take action on behalf of LGBTQ students. School policies rarely provide guidance on applying sexual harassment policies to gender-based bullying experienced by LGBTQ and gender non-conforming students, and without professional development, school professionals are often unable to recognize the connections between sexual harassment, gender-based bullying, and the heterosexist norms and values through which gender-based bullying operates. Educators are not formally trained to address problems of harassment and marginalization experienced by LGBTQ youth during their professional training. In the United States, university coursework addressing the experiences of LGBTQ students is rare in undergraduate and graduate professional preparation programs. State departments of education include vague and inconsistent expectations for diversity education in their educator credential requirements, and national accrediting bodies for educator preparation (Council for the Accreditation of Education Preparation/National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (CAEP/NCATE) for instance) include broad requirements for educators to understand and accommodate the needs and experiences of all students

Smith & Payne. Rough Draft Entry. School Professionals’ Responses to LGBTQ Training The SAGE Encyclopedia of LGBTQ Studies

without naming specific student differences such as race, class, religion, gender, or sexuality. Preparation programs are given flexibility to decide how to educate their students about diversity issues, and this has resulted in teacher, school counseling, and school leadership programs where LGBTQ issues are the lowest priority in the multicultural education curriculum. Professional development has, therefore, become the context where most training for school professionals on LGBTQ issues occurs. Professional Development Content For practicing school professionals, professional development workshops have become the primary way to increase competence and address gaps in their pre-service preparation. LGBTQ professional development is intended to address the problems of educators’ lack of knowledge about LGBTQ students’ experiences, lack of action when homophobic or sexist aggression occurs, homophobic attitudes, and resistance to curricular inclusion of LGBTQ topics. LGBTQ professional development for educators varies but generally includes content on: risk factors for LGBTQ youth; correlations between social stigma/victimization and these risk factors; information about the social phenomena of bullying, sexual harassment, and microaggressions; strategies for violence intervention; and strategies for creating more inclusive school and classroom cultures. In some cases, professional development also includes content on the pitfalls of reducing LGBTQ students’ school experiences to bullying and victimization. Such models frame their strategies for improving school environments in terms of addressing schools’ investments in heteronormative values, rather than focusing solely on violence prevention or increasing the level of tolerance in a school environment. Responses to Professional Development Research suggests that in-service training on LGBTQ issues can effectively increase knowledge of the LGBTQ student experience, support improved teacher attitudes towards LGBTQ students, and improve school climate. Educators who participate in one-time trainings generally report increased awareness about the pervasiveness of homophobia in schools, increased empathy toward LGBTQ students, and higher self-efficacy regarding intervention in LGBTQ harassment and implementation of recommendations for creating safer learning environments such as displaying Safe Space stickers, no-tolerance policies for homophobic language, and starting Gay Straight Alliances. On the rare occasions when educators have opportunities to engage in a long-term series of trainings, research indicates that educators attain a greater depth of knowledge about heteronormativity and heterosexism. Over time, this increased knowledge can lead to naming gender oppressive classroom practices in their own pedagogy and

Smith & Payne. Rough Draft Entry. School Professionals’ Responses to LGBTQ Training The SAGE Encyclopedia of LGBTQ Studies

beginning to develop strategies for disrupting these patterns. Significantly, this body of research indicates that teachers who come to LGBTQ professional development with some previous awareness of homophobia and heterosexism report the most learning during training and more attempts to integrate this learning into their professional practice. Regardless of the professional development program content, educators’ responses and reflections on integrating their learning into their professional practice indicate that educators are interpreting LGBTQ educational issues as “risk” issues rather than equity issues. That is, educators tend to be preoccupied with preventing bullying, suicide, or other negative psychological and health outcomes, but they do not envision changes to school culture that could lead to more equitable school experiences for all. They place responsibility on themselves and on the dominant (heterosexual) students to express kindness and empathy, but are positioning LGBTQ students as the cultural “Other.” This paradigm for school improvement is limiting because it fails to address questions of how and why the school environment limits the visibility of diverse gender and sexual identities, thus providing LGBTQ students very little opportunity to be recognized and affirmed in school. Instead their student identities are reduced to “vulnerable” or “victim,” and educators are on notice that they need to be protected, but not necessarily integrated into the social life of the school. Time Limitations on Professional Development While research makes clear the need to provide comprehensive training that addresses gender inequities and systems of marginalization, rarely is there time available for such professional development within the structure of the public K-12 school year. Most professional development on LGBTQ students occurs in short sessions from thirty minutes to three hours in length, and there is rarely opportunity for follow up with the participants. Sufficient time is key not only for comprehensive address of the material and for understanding the complexity of marginalization, but also for educator reflection and then application. Conclusion Current scholarship on LGBTQ educator training continues to explore questions on how to empower educators to take on anti-heterosexist, equity-minded professional practice within the parameters of professional development schedules in public K-12 schools. This inquiry has the potential to create new opportunities for scholars and K-12 educators to develop innovative professional development models that inform educators about the

Smith & Payne. Rough Draft Entry. School Professionals’ Responses to LGBTQ Training The SAGE Encyclopedia of LGBTQ Studies

school experiences of LGBTQ youth, open dialogues about heteronormative school cultures, and provide educators with tools to create inclusive school cultures.

Cross References: Education; School climate; Schools as heteronormative spaces Further Reading Greytak, E. A., Kosciw, J. G., & Boesen, M. J. (2013). Educating the educator: Creating supportive school personnel through professional development. Journal of School Violence, 12, 80-97. Payne, E., & Smith, M. (2010). Reduction of stigma in schools: An evaluation of the first three years. Issues in Teacher Education, 19(2), 11–36. Payne, E., & Smith, M. (2011). The reduction of stigma in schools: A new professional development model for empowering educators to support LGBTQ students. Journal of LGBTQ Youth, 8(2), 174–200. Payne, E. & Smith, M. (2012). Safety, celebration and risk: Educator responses to LGBTQ professional development. Teaching Education, 23(3), 265-285. Towery, I. D. (2007). Fostering Gender Equity in Schools through Reflective Professional Development: A Critical Analysis of Teacher Perspectives. Penn GSE Perspectives on Urban Education, 5(1), 1-25.