The Promise of Anonymity: An Investigation of the Practices of ELA Teachers Facilitating Discourse about LGBTq Topics

Abstract

Background/Context

As states and districts have begun adopting texts inclusive of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people, debates about how LGBTQ issues should be represented in the curricular canon have emerged. While existing research investigates curricular questions that are arising as a result of LGBTQ curricular inclusion, scholarship has been slow to address the instructional questions presented by the introduction of inclusive curricula.

Purpose

This study explored how seven secondary English Language Arts teachers facilitated student engagement with LGBTQ-related topics. Analysis of data on teachers’ instructional practice and related decision-making sought to (a) determine what instructional dilemmas arose for teachers as they taught LGBTQ-inclusive content and (b) analyze the instructional decisions that teachers made to address these dilemmas.

Participants

Participants in this study were seven secondary English Language Arts teachers who (a) held strong reputations in their professional communities for supporting LGBTQ students and (b) had strong intentions to support LGBTQ students through LGBTQ curricular inclusion, reducing student prejudice, and advocating for and with LGBTQ students.

Research Design

This comparative case study was embedded in a larger qualitative study that investigated the instructional practice of LGBTQ-supportive teachers. This article reports on findings from an analysis of all data from this project that pertained to how teachers engaged students when teaching LGBTQ content. Data was collected over a six-month period and includes 22 teacher interviews, 28 observations of classroom instruction, 70 teacher log entries, and 25 teacher questionnaires.

Findings/Results

Analysis showed that participants felt a tension between a desire to make LGBTQ identity visible and a desire to offer LGBTQ students privacy. Participants employed two different approaches to navigating the visibility–privacy tension. Some created parallel engagement strategies for students, some public and some private, while others simultaneously allowed for privacy and visibility through the use of anonymity.

Conclusions/Recommendations

As conceptions of diversity expand to include sexual diversity, this study has implications for teacher preparation and professional development aimed at supporting teachers to attend to the unique needs of LGBTQ students within instructional practice.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Artiles

A. J.

, Harry

, Reschly

D. J.

, & Chinn

P. C.

(2002). Over-identification of students of color in special education: A critical overview. Multicultural Perspectives, 4(1), 3—10.

Banks

J. A.

(2004). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and practice. In Banks

J. A.

, & Banks

C. A. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 3—29). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Banks

J. A.

(2008). Diversity, group identity, and citizenship education in a global age. Educational Researcher, 37(3), 129—139.

Berlant

, & Freeman

(1992). queer nationality. Boundary, 19(1), 149—180.

Blackburn

M. V.

, Clark

C. T.

, Kenney

L. M.

, & Smith

J. M.

(2010). Acting out: Combating homophobia through teacher activism. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Boler

(2004). All speech is not free: The ethics of “affirmative action pedagogy.” In Boler

(Ed.), Democratic dialogue in education: Troubling speech, disturbing silence (pp. 3—13). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).

Bowman

, & Gottesman

(2013). Why practice-centered teacher education programs need social foundations. Teachers College Record. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org, ID Number: 17066.

Bridges

(1979). Education, democracy and discussion. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.

10.

Brown

M. E.

(2004). Erasures: “Chalking” at Wesleyan University, 1992–2003 (Unpublished thesis). Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT.

11.

Butler

(1997). Excitable speech. New York, NY: Routledge.

12.

Cazden

C. B.

(2001). Classroom discourse (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

13.

Ellsworth

(1997). Teaching positions: Difference, pedagogy, and the power of address. New York, NY: Teachers College Press

14.

Gay

(2004a). Curriculum theory and multicultural education. In Banks

J. A.

, & Banks

C. A. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 3—29). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

15.

Gay

(2004b). New needs, new curriculum—The importance of multicultural education—why we must weave real and relevant examples of minority contributions throughout the curriculum. Educational Leadership, 61(4), 30.

16.

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).

17.

Grossman

, Hammerness

, & McDonald

(2009). Redefining teaching, reimagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 273—289.

18.

Hammerness

, & Kennedy

(April, 2015). Context-specific high-leverage practices: Findings from two urban-focused foundations courses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

19.

Hess

(2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. New York, NY: Routledge.

20.

Hess

, & Avery

(2008). Discussion of controversial issues as a form and goal of democratic education. In Arthur

, Davies

, & Hahn

(Eds.), International handbook on education for citizenship and democracy (pp. 506—518). London, England: Sage.

21.

Houston

(2004). Democratic dialogue: Who takes responsibility? In Boler

(Ed.), Democratic dialogue in education: Troubling speech, disturbing silence (pp. 105—120). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

22.

Jones

(2004). Talking cure. In Boler

(Ed.), Democratic dialogue in education: Troubling speech, disturbing silence. (pp. 56—67). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

23.

Kenney

L. M.

(2010). Being out and reading queer inclusive texts in a high school English classroom. In Blackburn

M. V.

, Clark

C. T.

, Kenney

L. M.

, & Smith

J. M.

(Eds.), Acting out! Combating homophobia through teacher activism (pp. 56—73). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

24.

Khasnabis

, Goldin

, & McMahon

(April, 2015). Using performance-based assessments of equitable teaching practice to assess actual teaching practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

25.

Koschoreck

J. W.

, & Tooms

A. K.

(2009). Sexuality matters: Paradigms and policies for educational leaders. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.

26.

Kosciw

J. G.

, Greytak

E. A.

, Diaz

E. M.

, & Bartkiewicz

M. J.

(2013). National school climate survey. New York, NY: Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network.

27.

Lampert

, Franke

, Kazemi

, Ghousseini

, Turrou

A. C.

, Beasley

, Cunard

, & Crowe

(2013). Keeping it complex: Using rehearsals to support novice teacher learning of ambitious teaching in elementary mathematics. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 226—243.

28.

Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).

29.

Lipkin

(2004). Beyond diversity day: A Q&A on gay and lesbian issues in schools. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

30.

Loutzenheiser

L. W.

(2001). “If I teach about these issues they will burn down my house”: The possibilities and tensions of a queered, antiracist pedagogy. In Kumashiro

K. K.

(Ed.), Troubling intersections of race and sexuality: Queer students of color and anti-oppressive education. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

31.

Mansbridge

(1991). Democracy, deliberation, and the experience of women. In Murchland

(Ed.), Higher education and the practice of democratic politics (pp. 122—135). Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation.

32.

Maxwell

K. E.

, Nagda

B. A.

, Thompson

M. C.

, & Gurin

(2011). Facilitating intergroup dialogues: Bridging differences, catalyzing change. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

33.

Mayo

, (2007). queering foundations: queer and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender education research. Review of Research in Education, 31, 78—94.

34.

McDonald

(2010). Social justice teacher education and the case for enacting high-leverage practices. Teacher Education and Practice, 23(4), 452—455.

35.

Meiners

E. R.

(2007). Right to be hostile: Schools, prisons, and the making of public enemies. New York, NY: Routledge.

36.

Merriam

S. B.

(2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

37.

Miles

, & Huberman

M. A.

(1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd edition). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

38.

Murray

O. J.

(2015). Queer inclusion in teacher education: Bridging theory, research, and practice. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor & Francis.

39.

National Council of Teachers of English. (2009). Resolution on strengthening teacher knowledge of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues. English Journal, 98(4), 14.

40.

Parker

W. C.

(2003). Teaching democracy: Unity and diversity in public life. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

41.

Parker

W. C.

(2006). Public discourses in schools: Purposes, problems, possibilities. Educational Researcher, 35(8), 11—18.

42.

Pew Research Center (2013). The global divide on homosexuality: Greater acceptance in more secular and affluent countries. Washington, DC: Author.

43.

Pollack

(2008). Everyday antiracism: Getting real about race in school. New York, NY: The New Press.

44.

Sedgwick

E. K.

(1990). Epistemology of the closet. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

45.

Singleton

, & Linton

(2005). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for achieving equity in schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

46.

Sleeter

C. E.

(2005). Un-standardizing the curriculum: Multicultural teaching in the standards-based classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

47.

Talburt

(2000). Subject to identity: Knowledge, sexuality, and academic practices in higher education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

48.

Thornton

S. J.

(2003). Silence on gays and lesbians in social studies curriculum. Social Education, 67(4), 226.

49.

Tierney

W. G.

(1992). Building academic communities of difference: Gays, lesbians, and bisexuals on campus. Change, 24(2), 40—46.

50.

Tintocalis

(2011, July 22). California brings gay history into the classroom. National Public Radio. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2011/07/22/138504488/california-brings-gay-history-into-the-classroom

51.

Wilson

(2002). Strangers to ourselves: Discovering the adaptive unconscious. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

52.

Windschitl

, Thompson

, Braaten

, & Stroupe

(2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96, 878—903.

53.

Yin

R. K.

(2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

54.

Zeichner

(2012). The turn once again toward practice-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(5), 376—382.

55.

Zuniga

, Nagda

B. A.

, Chesler

, & Cytron-Walker

(2007). Intergroup dialogue in higher education: Meaningful learning about social justice. ASHE higher education report, 32(4), 1—128.