scholarly journals Parents’ perspectives on the inclusion of gender and sexuality diversity in K-12 schooling: results from an Australian national study

Sex Education ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Ullman ◽  
Tania Ferfolja ◽  
Lucy Hobby
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kari J. Dockendorff ◽  
Claudia Geist

Early in 2017, all Obama era guidance on trans* and non-binary students in K-12 and higher education settings was removed from the Department of Education, which gave the authority back to individual school districts and institutions to decide if and how they want to accommodate their trans* and non-binary students (Department of Education, 2016). In conjunction with amicus briefs filed by the Department of Justice seemingly supporting LGBT+ discrimination by employers or businesses, LGBTQ+ students may feel even more vulnerable in the college environment. But, to assume that homophobia or transphobia is felt only by those who identify under the LGBTQ+ umbrella, is to misunderstand the fluidity and complexity of gender and sexuality. Because gender is a material aspect of their college experience for all students. College admissions forms typically only ask for the students' sex assigned at birth, and sexuality is typically not asked on admissions' forms. Facilities on campus including bathrooms, changing facilities, campus housing, and athletics are commonly segregated by sex (Beemyn, 2005). Rules that police what genders are allowed in certain spaces do not just impact trans* and non-binary people; however, the extent to which anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment has had negative repercussions for heterosexual and cisgender students, is unknown and understudied.Our goal for this study is twofold. First, we want to explore levels of gender marginalization on college campuses and then, we want to better understand who is at risk of feeling marginalized. In addition to conventional measures of sex, gender and sexual identities we explore novel, scaled measures of how students see themselves, and how they think others see them, with respect to masculinity, femininity, and androgyny.


2018 ◽  
Vol 100 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-26
Author(s):  
Laura Moorhead

Increasingly, policy makers, educators, and school systems are embracing LGBTQ+ individuals and issues in the classroom. This fall, California’s K-12 classrooms began using LGBTQ-inclusive textbooks, and, for the last three years, a San Francisco high school has offered an LGBTQ Studies course, likely the first in the country and a pilot for others in the district. Though far from typical, these efforts — and the LGBTQ Studies course in particular — present an opportunity to see how inclusive LGBTQ+ curriculum is playing out in schools, offering guidance on how best to encourage understanding and acceptance of gender and sexuality among students.


Author(s):  
Leanna Lucero

Heteronormativity, gender bias, and whitewashed notions of education threaten queer identities in K–12 educational spaces, specifically queer women educators of color seeking leadership roles within the public school system. The understanding of race, gender, and sexuality in K–12 education spaces are each worthwhile as focal points of educational research. However, the intersection between race, gender, and sexuality requires consideration. Prior scholarly research focuses on educators of color, female educators, and LGBTQ+ educators, not on the intersection of these identities. The lived experiences of educators who identify as queer women of color lack attention. Hence, this autoethnography focuses on the maze of challenges and opportunities I experienced while navigating elementary educational spaces in a US Texas/Mexico borderland city as a queer Latinx woman of color. I accomplish this by reflecting upon, and analyzing, my (re)memberings and previous experiences in my journey from K–8 teacher to K–8 administrator. Finally, I provide recommendations to inform both scholars and practitioners.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jazmin Lati Brown-Iannuzzi ◽  
Sierra Bainter

Given the importance of education and the role educators play on the outcomes of their students, the current research investigates implicit attitudes among a sample of mathematics educators. Implicit attitude measures are ones which investigate automatic associations between a target social group and a positive or negative feeling. These attitudes are important because they predict behaviors toward members of the target social group (e.g., Cameron, Brown- Iannuzzi, & Payne, 2012; Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann, & Banaji, 2009). The current research also extends beyond previous research by investigating the association between educators’ implicit racial attitudes toward black and white people and students’ trust and respect for their educator. If educators’ implicit attitudes are associated with how they interact with their students, it may be that we can uncover this relationship by asking students about their attitudes toward their educators. To analyze these questions, this study leverages data from the National Study of Learning Mindsets (NSLM), the largest-ever randomized controlled trial of a growth mindset program in the U.S. in K-12 settings, in which a brief online growth mindset program was administered to 9th grade students during the 2015-2016 academic year. The results suggest that educators have a more implicit positive reaction to women than men, and slightly more implicit positivity toward black men than white men. These implicit associations, however, are unrelated to students’ trust and respect for their educator. The findings and implications are discussed.


1994 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 598-599
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Zagumny
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document