LBGTQIA+ Children in the Classroom- Critical Article Review

Biddulph, M. (2006). Sexualitites equality in schools: Why every lesbian, gay, bisexual or
transgender (LGBT) child matters. Pastoral Care in Education, 24 (2), 15-21. Retrieved
from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.hil.unb.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=30df44
95-1716-48b0-9bf6-c2c488223b1c%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&hid=4107

Introduction
Max Biddulph is an associate professor in the department of social sciences
at the University of Nottingham. Max Biddulphs research specializes in the field
of sex and relationships education, specifically focusing on incorporating sex and
relationship education into school systems. Biddulph spent the first two decades of
his career teaching health education in the public school system. He then went on
to do his doctoral research in the department of education at the University of
Nottingham. Biddulphs doctoral research focused on the experiences of gay and
bisexual men who are educators. Since earning his doctorate Biddulph has written
many works on the LGBT experience in school.

Summary
This article is intended to show ways that school systems, educators, and
communities can become more inclusive and provide positive experiences for
LGBT youth. Biddulph (2006) examines the inclusive strategy designed by the
UK government, entitled Every Child Matters (2004), and discusses how this
strategy can be used to create an inclusive school environment for LGBT youth.
Although focusing on the UK school system the article's aim is for the
information to be utilized globally in many different cultures. Within the article, is
it argued, that nationality plays a significant role in determining attitudes towards
sexuality and gender identity. Nations will have overarching beliefs about
sexuality. Within a nation, regions, cities, and schools will also have culturally
specific discourses on sexuality. Biddulph argues that the lack of congruity within
nations with regards to sexual orientation results in the specific locale playing a
significant role in formulating attitudes towards homosexuality. In the article is it
reasoned that tensions between schooling and sexual education are further
exacerbated by the high level of taboo surrounding homosexuality.
The article goes on to explore how schools and educators directly and
indirectly create an exclusive school system for LGBT youth. Inaction, bullying,
ingrained stereotypes, and heterosexuality presented as the norm, all contribute to
the negative school environment that many LGBT youth experience. Biddulph
explains that educators and schools can start to make changes within the school
systems to make schools more accepting and inclusive for LGBT youth. Positive,
open discussions about homosexuality, role models, literature, and teacher support
are all explored within the article and presented as ways to make the education
system more inclusive for LGBT youth.

Presentation
 At the base of the research for this article is the notion that sexuality is a
spectrum. This claim is drawn from a groundbreaking study conducted by Alfred
Kinsey (1948), where it was found that 37% of males and 13% of females had at
least one homosexual experience to orgasm. Of the males in the study only 4%
described themselves as exclusively homosexual. Biddulph uses this study to
argue that sexuality is not mutually exclusive but rather is fluid and changing
throughout ones life. Furthermore he argues that conflicting attitudes towards
homosexuality create a contradictory pattern of experience. (Biddulph, 2006, p.
16) In the article he provides examples of this within the media, where positive
and negative stories will be broadcast simultaneously enforcing the conflicting
views of homosexuality.
To highlight the need of schools to address homophobic behaviours the
article relates incidents where school aged children committed violent hate crimes
against homosexuals, including murder. Biddulph uses these cases as evidence
that the school system needs to address and change these detrimental attitudes.
Multiple studies are cited with regard to the repression of sexuality in children.
Biddulph argues that the taboo surrounding homosexuality and the repression of
sexuality in children creates a lot of tension between schooling and sexuality. This
tension in turn creates the silence we find in many schools when it comes to
homosexuality and gender identity. This silence, Biddulph states, is extremely
detrimental to the experience of LGBT youth. In the article the UK legislation
Section 28 is identified as creating greater confusion and reluctance to address
homosexuality in schools. The legislation, which was revoked in 2003, was
interpreted by many teachers as stating that it is illegal to discuss homosexuality
with young people. In the UK, this legislation had detrimental effects on the
school system and educators ability to speak openly with their students about
homosexuality. The article argues that this legislation further ingrained negative
ideologies about homosexuality, homophobia in general, and encouraged silence
as the best way to deal with homosexuality in the school system. The article
references a survey of 307 secondary schools conducted in 1997, which found
that fifty-eight percent of educators thought that Section 28 gave the school
administration the right to determine whether talking to students about
homosexuality was illegal. Forty-four percent of teachers reported difficulty
meeting the needs of homosexual students. The survey also found that ninety-nine
percent of schools surveyed had anti-bullying policies but only six percent of
these policies explicitly dealt with bullying of LGBT students. In the article
Biddulph uses this survey to show that there is confusion as to how to address
homosexuality in the schools and argues that more often than not the response is
to play it safe. Biddulph maintains that playing it safe is in fact far from safe
instead he claims that schools and teachers who adopt a position of inaction are
in fact making a statement in constructing a heterosexist view of the world.
(2006, p.17)
Within the article there is extensive research into studies on the causes and
effects of vulnerability and isolation on LGBT youth. There multiple surveys and
studies cited in the article backing Biddulphs claims that the isolation, violence,
and vulnerability that LGBT youth experience lead to strong feelings of shame,
significantly reduced self-worth, and very high rates of suicide and suicide
attempts:
In the case of Ellis and High (ibid.), who replicated the research of
Trenchard and Warren conducted in the 1980s, the researchers reported a
significant increase in the reported incidence by LGBT young people of
verbal abuse, physical assault and feelings of isolation in their data
collected in 2001 (2006, p. 18)
In the article the key components of the inclusive strategy Every Child
Matters, implemented by the UK government, are dissected and explored through
the lens of creating an inclusive environment for LGBT youth. Utilizing data from
the 2004 research report on homophobia and schools conducted by Warwick,
Chase Aggleton and Sander, Biddulph contends that the whole school approach is
the best way to affect positive change in the school system and create positive,
inclusive environments for LGBT youth. The article draws heavily on this report
for changes that can be implemented on a whole school and classroom basis. The
tendency of teachers to pathologize homosexuality is also looked at and the
detrimental effects this has on the classroom environment for LGBT youth.
Biddulph cites a study by Ellis and Hill in 2004 that found that teacher values
were the key dimension identified in their data collected from LGBT young
people. (Biddulph, 2006, p. 20) This means that as educators we can make the
biggest difference in LGBT youths experience; we have the ability to make their
classroom experience a very positive or negative one. If we can take one idea of
import from this article I believe it is this. As educators we must ensure that our
classrooms are inclusive, open, and positive environments for LGBT youth. This
will not only benefit LGBT youth but all the students in the classroom. As stated
in the article diversity is beneficial for all students, an inclusive environment
helps mold students who are open, accepting individuals. I agree that it is very
important to make sure that the classroom conversations about homosexuality are
positive, too often the only exposure homosexuality gets in the school system is
negative and issue based; it is sexual health courses about the danger of aids, or
reports on the effects of bullying. Ellis and Highs study found in their research
with LGBT young people that this approach was seen as damaging in that sexual
identity appeared to be problematized (Biddulph, 2006, p. 20)

Personal Response
In my own experience schools that explicitly include LGBT bullying in
their anti-bullying agendas have reduced incidents of LGBT bullying and tend to
have more inclusive environments. My own high school had very strict anti-
bullying rules with regards to LGBT students. These were implemented in my
first year in the school. Over the years I could see a significant change in the
school's attitude towards LGBT youth; the environment became much more
welcoming, safe and inclusive. I agree that changes must happen on a micro level,
schools have the unique opportunity to create safe, inclusive environments and
positive discourses on homosexuality. These actions benefit all people within the
school system not only LGBT students. In the article, simple steps are laid out to
make these changes. Teachers are encouraged to have open, positive discussion
 about homosexuality, and to stand up for LGBT students, not simply remain
silent. I think this is very important to understand that as teachers we are role
models; if we make a stand and show that LGBT students are to be treated with
the same respect, consideration, and kindness as all other students, we set an
example for our students to follow. I also agree with having books and plays and
talks by ex-LGBT students in the classroom. As with any student, LGBT students
need to feel that they are represented in the classroom and in the curriculum, this
should be done in a positive way, and it should be done from day one in the
classroom. The article focuses a great deal on the negative effects teachers and
schools can have on LGBT students, this information is significant for
understanding the importance of not doing these things. Most importantly though
is the information in the article on what you can do as a teacher to make your
classroom a safe, positive learning environment for LGBT youth.

Conclusion
Max Biddulphs article, Sexualities Equality in Schools is a well-
researched and informative article on the dangers LGBT students face when
schools, teachers, and communities are not inclusive and accepting. Biddulph
argues that because attitudes towards homosexuality are so diverse and conflicting
and vary from region to region and group to group, locale plays the most
significant role in developing attitudes towards homosexuality. Therefore schools
have an important role to play in creating positive attitudes towards
homosexuality. Teachers individual attitudes are key to creating this positive,
accepting environment. As teachers, we must make sure that we are not explicitly
or implicitly creating an environment that excludes LGBT youth or presents
heterosexuality as the norm. Biddulphs article does a good job of explaining what
simple actions teachers can take to ensure that their LGBT students feel included
and positively represented in the classroom and school, and the serious
consequences that can occur if teachers do not create this environment for their
students.

Biddulph, M. (2016) The school of education. The University of Nottingham. Retrieved from
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/education/people/max.biddulph
Mayberry, M. (2006) School reform efforts for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered
students. Clearing House,79(6), 262-264. Retrieved from
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.hil.unb.ca/ehost/detail/detail?sid=04d90a44-e9b3-44c7
-bb9a-2e5ea045491d%40sessionmgr4007&vid=0&hid=4107&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc
3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=22337283&db=aph

Introduction
Maralee Mayberry is a professor in the department of sociology at the
University of Southern Florida. She is the undergraduate program director, and
director of pedagogy at the university. She has conducted extensive research into
LGBT students in school settings, Gay-Straight alliances, and the sociology of
education. Mayberry specialized in the area of LGBT youth activism. Mayberrys
research into LGBT experiences in schools began in 2001 when she began
researching the effects of Gay-Straight alliances on schools and their students.
Mayberry made monthly visits to Salt Lake City, Utah to observe the cities newly
formed Gay-Straight alliance club, paying particular attention to resistance from
the community. Mayberry continued this research in southern Florida where she
has observed, over the years the benefits and downfalls of Gay- Straight alliances
and their effect on the school community.

Summary
In the article School Reform Efforts for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and
Transgendered Students Mayberry (2006) acknowledges that great strides have
been taken to make the school environment more inclusive for LGBT students,
but anti-gay sentiments continue to persist in schools on the part of both students
and teachers. In the article it is argued that, based on research, antigay attitudes
are not uncommon and continue to be the norm in many schools. The article
explores reforms and practices that can be emplaced in schools to support LGBT
students and combat anti-gay sentiments. In the article Mayberry discusses ways
in which teachers can address and prevent the marginalization of LGBT youth.
In the article the danger of silence in the school system is explored.
Mayberry identifies silence as a key tool many schools use to deal with LGBT
students and issues. It is argued that this method has a host of issues that
accompany it. Along with avoidance, reactivity and denial are all common ways
homosexuality is approached in schools. Mayberry claims that these approaches
reinforce the isolation of LGBT youth. The article explores both the benefits of
safe space programs in schools, but also the othering and dividing effect these
programs can have. Mayberry suggests that systemic change to the entire school
is more productive and beneficial to LGBT youth, and has lasting positive effects
on all members of the school.

Presentation
 Recent studies are utilized to provide the most up-to-date information on
LGBT students in-school experiences. Mayberry draws on the recent National
School Climate Survey (2003) conducted by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight
Education Network for statistics on the experience of LGBT students in schools.
The survey reported staggering statistics regarding the isolation and harassment
LGBT youth face daily in schools. In the article these statistics are used to show
that violence, isolation, and bias are still the norm in schools with regards to
LGBT youth. Mayberry claims that the prevalence of antigay sentiments in
schools depicts how important it is to critically analyse and determine the worth
of the interventions in place in schools meant to benefit LGBT youth.
The article is greatly based on the model for school change proposed by
Ouelett (1996) in the article, Systemic pathways for social transformation: School
change, multicultural organization development, multicultural education, and
LGBT youth, this article identifies key reforms and strategies schools can
implement to create a positive and accepting school for LGBT students. Mayberry
uses Oueletts research and that conducted by Quinlivan and Town (1999), to
provide information on the damaging effects schools which lack services for
LGBT students have on said students. The articles information on the use of
silence as a main tool used by many schools is drawn from Quinlivan and
Towns research. In Quinlivan and Towns research LGBT youth were
interviewed, many described the avoidance and denial they faced within their
schools with regards to their sexual orientation or gender identity led to deep
feelings of isolation. In her article Mayberry argues that this silence is found in all
sectors of the school from the curriculum, to teacher-student interactions, to
school activities.
In the article it is argued that many schools also only react to LGBT youth
when antigay bullying incidents occur, the reprimands are short lived and do not
address the underlying issues. Often the reactive model found in schools takes the
form of inhibiting students sexual and gender identities, according to Quinlivan
and Town (1999), students are encouraged to adopt appropriate gender identities.
Mayberry uses the research from these studies to claim avoidance, denial, and
reactivity are key heteronormative practices that reinforce a culture within which
LGBT youth find no sites schoolwide to articulate their identity. The chilly
school climate LGBT students face is left untouched. (Mayberry, 2006, p. 263)
This conclusion, drawn from surveys of LGBT youth, is important and intuitive.
We have all had experiences where we did not fit in, the feelings of isolation that
accompany this can be very damaging, for students who face this isolation on a
daily basis the negative effects would be significant. The insidiousness of the
heteronormative model in schools creates an environment where to not be
heterosexual is to be other, to be ostracized for not conforming to strict gender
binaries.
In the article alternative practices to silence are explored. Specifically
Mayberry looks at the creation of safe spaces in schools. Mayberry describes safe
spaces as a place where LGBT youth can find shelter from the negative school
environment. Inherent in this statement is the notion that safe spaces do little to
address and change the negative environment of the school as a whole. In the
article multiple academic articles are cited indicating the benefits of safe space in
schools. Mayberry alleges that safe spaces are targeted at helping individual
LGBT students, and have been shown to have success in increasing LGBT
students feelings of self-worth, academic achievements, and reduced feelings of
isolation. Rasmussens (2004) research into the production of sexualities and
gender in school spaces is used in the article to temper the other findings about
the benefits of safe spaces in schools. Mayberry includes the argument drawn
from Rasmussen that these spaces effectively work to reinscribe categories of
deviant and normal students because they are produced in order to cater to
students who are classified as deviant, by virtue of their sexual and gender
identifications. (Mayberry, 2006, p. 263) Although safe spaces provide support
of individual LGBT students they do nothing to change the overarching climate of
marginalization of LGBT youth and homophobia in schools.
Mayberry argues that instead systemic change is needed in schools. This
model she draws from Oueletts (1996) research and found that changing the
entire ecosystem of the school and its surrounding community is the most
effective way of creating a safe, inclusive environment for LGBT youth
(Mayberry, 2006, p. 263). Mayberry uses Oueletts research to show that the
benefits of systemic change are long lasting, and affect the values of the culture as
a whole and becoming embedded in the culture. The article discusses steps
teachers and administration can take to make these systemic changes. Mayberry
draws on the research of Quinlivan and Town to highlight the importance of
addressing LGBT students needs, and dismantling the categories of normal and
deviant sexual identities.

Personal Response
Although safe spaces are a good starting point for creating a more
inclusive environment for LGBT students, I agree that problems arise when one
group of people are singled out as different to the others. Implicit in this is the
concept that one group is normal and the other is not. Therefore although safe
spaces do provide LGBT students with a space to escape the negative school
environment, they are inherently continuing the separation that LGBT students
face in the school. Instead I agree that an overall change needs to occur within the
school. The school culture as a whole needs to change and antigay sentiments
need to be unrooted and replaced with accepting and inclusive standards of
behaviour. Teachers can make a big difference in changing the attitudes of the
school. As role models to students, teachers can normalize the LGBT experience.
One way to do this is to make sure that students are exposed to curriculum that
celebrates the LGBT experience and all sexual and gender identities. I believe this
should start at a young age, for example reading children in kindergarten a book
about same-sex marriage or gender non-conformity. Children should learn early
on that there is no such thing as normal and that everyone should be accepted
and included.

Conclusion
Maralee Mayberrys article on School Reform Efforts for Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, and Transgendered Students looks into the effects school reforms have
 on LGBT students. The article reviews the negative effects of schools that have no
reforms efforts for including LGBT student, the positive and negative aspects of
schools that have safe spaces in place and finally the benefits of reforms that
systematically transform the school's culture. Mayberry argues that the latter is the
most effective and has the most long lasting positive effects.

Maralee Mayberry Professor, Undergraduate Program Director, Director of Pedagogy.

Retrieved from http://sociology.usf.edu/faculty/mmayberry/

Marinoble, R.M. (1998) Homosexuality: A blind spot in the school mirror. Professional
School Counseling, 1(3). Retrieved from
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.hil.unb.ca/ehost/detail/detail?sid=f507476f-6e12-46ae-
b1d6-484da9eef948%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&hid=4107&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3
QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=288436&db=aph

Introduction
Rita M. Marinoble is an associate professor of counselor education at
California State University, Sacramento. Before earning her doctorate Marinoble
spent fourteen years as a school counselor with the San Diego Unified School
District. Marinoble has been very active in researching and working on
homophobia reduction in school and university settings. Earning her doctorate in
Educational Leadership at the University of San Diego, Marinobles research
focused on counseling, with a specific focus on general roles and sexuality. Many
of Marinobles published works concentrate on the reduction of homophobia in
the school system.

Summary
Marinobles (1998) article Homosexuality: A Blind Spot in the School
Mirror looks at the issues challenges that arise when working homosexual
children, specifically focusing on the difficulties school counselors face.
Marinoble explores the difficulties experienced by gay and lesbian youth, and
discusses how these difficulties may be intensified in the school setting. In the
article four main areas of difficulty are studied; identity conflict, feelings of
isolation and stigmatization, peer relationship problems, and family disruptions.
Ways in which to address these difficulties are examined in the article. Marinoble
devises a plan for schools to create supportive learning environments for their
LGBT students. In the article Marinoble emphasises what areas of the school
system specifically need to be addressed, and provides strategies to be
implemented in each of these areas.
Marinoble argues that as young people develop their sense of self, for
some a blind spot develops as well. Marinoble reasons that this blind spot is
homosexuality and that it is a part of homosexual children that they do not
understand and that is often not reflected in the heteronormative world around
them. The world homosexual children grow up in often reinforces this blind spot
which can have very negative effects on the childs self-worth. The article
maintains that teacher and school counselors can work to reduce and essentially
negate the blind spot in homosexual children, by creating a supportive, open,
inclusive environment.

Presentation
Marinoble makes use of scholarly articles in her own piece, and the US
Department of Health and Human Services report on youth suicide. In addition to
this she also included suggested readings and books and resources to benefit
school teachers and counselors. Through many sections of the article Marinoble
does not cite any other research, making the origin of her findings slightly
mysterious. It seems that many of her finding are based on her extensive
knowledge in the subject area cumulated through years of research.
Marinoble cites Gonsioreks (1988) article on mental health issues in gay
and lesbian youth to support her findings on the identity conflict that homosexual
children face. In the article Marinoble argues that many homosexual children
experience identity conflict because they are not represented in the world around
them, which reinforces heterosexuality as the norm. Many homosexual children
experience a sense of being somehow different than the world expects them to
be, and this is a source of considerable identity conflict (Marinoble,1998,
para.5). This sense of identity conflict is worsened in schools where all aspects of
the school experience reinforce heteronormative norms and values.
Marinoble maintains that the most detrimental difficulty homosexual
children face is feelings of isolation and stigmatization. In the article the U.S.
federal study on youth suicide (1989) is related to underpin the veracity of this
claim. The study found that suicide is the number one cause of death among
lesbian and gay teenagers, and that suicide attempts occur two to three times more
often among homosexual teens than among heterosexual teens (Marinoble, 1998,
para. 7). Marinoble believes that the school system often serves to further isolate
homosexual students. Teachers and counselors do not stand up for homosexual
students, and often possess homophobic sentiments in their own right.
In the article the Friends of Project 10 (1989), a handbook on addressing
gay and lesbian issues in schools is cited to aid in explaining the important role
schools play in creating an environment where students learn to embrace their
sexual orientation and the sexual and gender orientation of others. Schools that
encourage an inclusive, supportive environment are more likely to meet the needs
of homosexual students. Marinoble argues that four main areas need to be
addressed when creating a positive school environment for homosexual students:
school policies, curriculum, support services, and staff development.
With regards to in school support services the article refers to resolution
C-26 which implemented in 1988, made into law that all people regardless of
sexual orientation are to receive equal opportunities within the public school
system. Marinoble maintains that most districts around the country have done
little to implement this important resolution (Marinoble, 1998, para. 17). She
then goes on to lay out strategies that schools can utilize to a positive learning
environment wherein homosexual students will receive the same opportunities as
other students. Marinoble relates testimonials she has gathered from gay and
lesbian adults on the need to address issues in the school systems, and the
difference these changes would have made in their lives.

Personal Response
Although the article relies on a smaller number of outside sources to back
the information being related, Marinobles article is still very insightful and a
good resource for teachers and schools looking for the first steps on the road to
creating an inclusive environment. The steps laid out by Marinoble are clear and
concise and provide an excellent jumping off point for educators wanting to learn
more. The article is organized into the difficulties that homosexual students face
and the areas and strategies that schools can focus on to make the learning
environment more inclusive for homosexual students. These focus areas are
clearly defined and the strategies are all relevant and would be easily undertaken
by any teacher who chose to implement them.
The article, although written in 1998, remains relevant today. The
strategies for changing the curriculum to meet the needs of homosexual students
is as pertinent today as it was nearly twenty years ago when the article was
written. Marinoble accurately argues that children form their self-identities based
on the world they see around them: Even before discovering their homosexuality,
students must form positive images if they are to eventually deal with this
difference in themselves in a positive manner. (1998) In the classroom LGBT
literature can be used from kindergarten onwards, this not only provides LGBT
youth with positive representations within the curriculum, but it also normalizes
sexual orientation and gender identities. Children learn about sexual orientation
and gender identities through texts that accurately and positively portray LGBT
culture.
To truly create inclusive environments teachers must address any deep
seated prejudices they harbour. Whether implicitly or explicitly stated these biases
have extremely harmful effects on LGBT students. One way Marinoble suggests
to address these sentiments is for the administration to ensure that PD sessions on
dealing with LGBT youth are frequent, and to provide extensive training for
specific teachers who then can serve as resources for their colleagues and provide
support to LGBT students. The strong emphasis on staff development in the
article is important and appropriate to the significant role teachers play in the
lives of their students. Teachers need to be an adult that students can turn to for
support and protection. If teachers hold biases against LGBT students based on
 their gender or sexual identities, they cannot carry out their role as a supporter and
protector of these students. When this is the case these biases need to be addressed
and overturned, otherwise the teacher is contributing to the isolation and
stigmatization that LGBT students face.

Conclusion
Rita M. Marinobles article effectively lays out the issues homosexual
children face. In the article she relates homosexuality to a blind spot that children
develop as they grow and begin to question who they are. This blind spot is the
part of themselves that they do not understand and that they do not see reflected
and represented in the predominantly heteronormative norms and values of the
school system. The article looks at how these feelings of confusion and isolation
can lead to serious difficulties for homosexual students, and how the school
system can exacerbate these feelings. Marinoble explores the areas of the school
system that are most important to address for creating an inclusive school
environment. In the article she provides strategies that schools, educators, and
counselors can utilize when addressing each of these areas. The article is an
excellent resource for teachers looking for ways to make their classroom more
inclusive for LGBT students.

Marinoble, R. (2015) Rita M. Marinoble Curriculum Vitae. Retrieved from

http://www.csus.edu/coe/accreditation/ctc/2011/documents/vitae/sch-couns/vitae-edc-
marinoble-rita.pdf

Solomon, S., and Russell, V. (2004) Addressing homophobic bullying in the elementary
classroom. Orbit, 34(2), 24-26. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.proxy.hil.unb.ca/docview/213737132?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/
sid:wcdiscovery&accountid=14611

Introduction
Steven Solomon is a professor at Ryerson University in the School of
Social Work department. He received his doctorate in social work at the
University of Toronto. Steven Solomon worked as the school social worker for the
Toronto District School Boards Human Sexuality Program. Solomon organized
anti-homophobia workshops for students K-12, and provided counseling for
LGBT students. Solomon was awarded the TDSB Excellence Award in 2012 for
his work helping students establish Gay-Straight Alliances in schools. Solomon
has authored multiple scholarly articles as well as a book titled Homophobia:
Deal with It and Turn Prejudice into Pride, which focuses on helping children
comprehend and address homophobia and bullying. Solomon co-authored the
article Addressing Homophobic Bullying in the Elementary Classroom with
Vanessa Russell. Russell completed her PhD at the University of Toronto OISE
with a focus on teacher-students relationships. Russell has worked extensively
with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students at risk as teacher/coordinator
of the Triangle Program. She was a project leader on Rainbows and Triangles: A
Curriculum Document for Challenging Homophobia and Heterosexism in the K-6
Classroom. Russell was the William Watters Teacher-in-Residence in Urban
Education at the University of Toronto.

Summary
Solomon and Russells (2004) article Addressing Homophobic Bullying in
the Elementary Classroom looks at the negative effects homophobic bullying have
in the classroom, and how this behaviour affects all students. Specifically
Solomon and Russell examine how homophobic bullying can affect the students
ability to learn and retain new information. They argue that a student on the
receiving end of harassment, exclusion and violence stops learning. The article
addresses the serious long term effects of homophobic bullying on LGBT student,
along with how the systems that oppress LGBT children reinforce each other.
Solomon and Russell argue that homophobia needs to be addressed early on in
the school system. The LGBT community needs to be included in the curriculum
from kindergarten onwards, in doing so children will learn the importance of
challenging homophobia. The National Film Board of Canadas video Apples and
Oranges is explored in depth in the article and presented as an excellent resource
for elementary teachers to deal with homophobic bullying in the classroom.

Presentation
In their article Solomon and Russell draw on surveys and studies as well
as their own in class research to draw their conclusions about homophobic
bullying at the elementary school level. In the article the story of a young boy
who experienced traumatizing bullying based on his sexual orientation is related.
Russell worked with the boy at the Triangle Program. They claim that many
children who experience trauma become math-phobic. This is a very interesting
theory but the authors do not provide any research to substantiate this assertion.
Perhaps this has been their personal finding as educators and counselors, in which
case the issues should be explored in greater detail. There is a distinct lack of a
case study or data collected to corroborate this theory.
Solomon and Russell report that the boys in classroom learning stopped at
the time when the harassment began. This information is used to correlate
homophobic bullying to the ceasing of learning for the child experiencing the
harassment. This is a logical conclusion but again the authors have only provided
us with the one example of one students experience. By only using one childs
experience on which base a whole theory the authors have undermined their own
findings. There are too many variables that could affect the results when only
using one case as the base of a whole theory. This is the theory the authors are
presenting to teachers and schools to demonstrate the serious consequences of
homophobic bullying. Using common sense one can assume that their theory is
certainly correct, but they are doing the subject a disservice by not conducting a
more thorough case study.
Solomon and Russell do make use of research from multiple countries into
the issues facing LGBT youth, including two surveys from GLSEN: the 2001
national school survey: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students and
their experiences in schools and the 1999 national school climate survey. In the
article the findings from these surveys are used to underpin the importance of
implementing curriculum that supports an anti-homophobia agenda. Solomon and
Russell use the surveys to establish that LGBT youth face a host of problems
including a lack of self-esteem, parental rejection, peer abuse, substance abuse,
dropping out of school, homelessness, unsafe sexual behaviour, prostitution,
suicide, and self-injurious behaviours. (Solomon, 2004, para. 6) They argue that
homophobic bullying both within and outside of the school greatly contributes to
these problems LGBT youth face.
In the article it is argued that homophobic bullying is pervasive, insidious
and starts early. It prevents boys and girls from fully expressing themselves and
seriously interferes with the healthy psychosocial development of all
children.(Solomon, 2004, para. 6) The authors reinforce this claim by drawing
on the research conducted by Campey (1994) which found that homophobia,
sexism, and heterosexism are pervasive societal systems of oppression that work
together and reinforce each other. Solomon and Russell use these findings to
explain how the strict, defined gender roles these systems establish inhibit
childrens growth, and result in serious repercussions for those who do not adhere
to these strict roles. The authors find that from kindergarten onward children
experience homophobic bullying whenever they step outside of the perimeters of
defined gender roles in any way. Thus it is important to address homophobic
bullying in the curriculum beginning early with young children.
Solomon and Russell use the NFB film Apples and Oranges to
demonstrate the effect incorporating anti-homophobic lessons can have on
children. In the article the authors provide a sample of the responses they
received from students after they screened the film in various anti-homophobia
workshops. They do not provide information on how many students they
surveyed, but the responses they include provide insight into the effect talking
about homophobia and LGBT issues can have on students. The most negative
student responses were found to come from schools where children had received
little to no anti-homophobia education, in contrast to this the most positive student
responses came from children in schools where there had been extensive anti-
homophobia work. The most interesting finding though was that after the anti-
homophobia workshop even in the most negative student responses there was still
hope, students acknowledged the dangers of homophobic bullying even if they
also expressed biases towards homosexuality. Solomon and Russells study shows
 the correlation between schools that provide anti-homophobia education and
students who are accepting of the LGBT community.

Personal Response
Although Solomon and Russells article at times lacks evidence to support
their findings, overall the article is a good resource for considering the importance
of incorporating anti-homophobia education in the curriculum at the beginning
grade levels onward. The more exposure children have at young ages to LGBT
related material the more likely they are to either not form biases or to overturn
any biases they had begun to develop. Anti-homophobia workshops will help
build empathy among students for LGBT people. Empathy is so important for
creating connections and breaking down stereotypes and prejudices. The more
people feel empathy for one another the more likely we are to humanize each
other, build rapport and support each other. It is important for teachers to utilize
resources like the NFB film Apples and Oranges to address the seriousness of
homophobic bullying in a way that engages students and develops their sense of
empathy.
It is also important to remember to focus on positive representation as
well. Students should see in the curriculum positive reflections of the LGBT
experience, this is important for all students, especially those who identify as
LGBT. By approaching teaching students about the LGBT community in a
positive and celebratory way students do not learn to simply associate LGBT with
problems. This is the risk when sexual and gender identities are only explored
in the classroom in an issue based light. Therefore it seems important to combine
anti-homophobia education with education that celebrates the LGBT community.
When schools and teachers remain silent on LGBT issues it creates an
environment where the heteronormative model is further entrenched, LGBT youth
are isolated and homophobic bullying thrives. The strategies provided in the
article to address homophobia in the classroom should be combined with
curriculum that includes the LGBT experience to create inclusive, positive
classrooms for LGBT youth.

Conclusion
Solomon and Russells article Addressing Homophobic Bullying in the
Elementary Classroom looks at the serious negative effects homophobic bully has
on LGBT students, including the disruption of learning. In the article Solomon
and Russell draw on their in classroom finding to demonstrate the correlation
between students level of homophobia and the amount of anti-homophobia
education provided in the school. They found that students who received
extensive anti-homophobia education from a young age displayed significantly
higher levels of acceptance of LGBT persons. Solomon and Russell discuss the
importance of implementing anti-homophobia education in the lower grades for
young children and demonstrate the positive effects this has on the classroom
environment and all children within.

Lorimer, J. (2013) Deal with it: Conflict resolution series for kids. Ontario Media Development
 Corporation. Retrieved from
http://www.lorimer.ca/dealwithit/Contributor/2432/Steven-Solomon.html

Roberts, C. The Team. (2015) OISE Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Retrieved from
http://www.cuscrrpinitiative.ca/the-team
Solomon, S. (2016) Steven Solomon: Contract lecturer Ryerson school of social work.
Linkedin. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/in/steven-solomon-422ba529

Sykes, H. (2004) Genderqueer: Transphobia and homophobia in schools. Orbit, 34(1), 21-23.
Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.proxy.hil.unb.ca/docview/213735696?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/
sid:wcdiscovery&accountid=14611

Introduction
 Heather Sykes is an Associate Professor in the Department of Curriculum,
Teaching and Learning and the Womens & Gender Studies Institute at University
of Toronto. Sykes earned her PhD at the University of British Columbia; she
completed her doctoral thesis in Educational Studies, focusing on the feminist
post-structural histories of heterosexual and lesbian physical education
teachers in Western Canada. Much of Sykes research examines gender and
sexuality in relation to sport and physical education. Specifically Sykes studies
the relationship between LGBT students and physical education, an area of the
school system typically ruled by homophobic, transphobic, and heteronormative
ideologies. Heather Sykes has published many works, including a book titled
Queer Bodies: Sexualities, Genders & Fatness in Physical Education.

Summary
In the article Sykes (2004) delves into the variations of gender and sexual
identity. Focusing mainly on gender Sykes looks into how gender identities
existing outside of the binaries of male and female should change how schools
have traditionally viewed gender equity. The article examines what is meant by
gender identity and how this varies from sexual orientation. Non-mainstream
gender identities are examined and explained. Gender identity and sexual
orientation are completely different, Sykes explains the propensity for transphobia
to be lumped in with homophobia. The need for schools to include education for
teachers and students pertaining to gender variance is proposed. Sykes argues that
school administrators and teachers must set an example of tolerance for diversity
for their students to follow. The article provides a list of reflective questions for
teachers to begin questioning how they can respect and support gender variant
students.

Presentation
Sykes draws on many other research articles to support her theories. In the
article the work of Judith Halberstam (1998) is referenced to support the fact that
masculinity and femininity are not restricted to male and female. Instead,
according to Halberstams research, there can be masculinity without men. Sykes
uses this research to demonstrate the fluidity of sex and gender and how the
binaries we find in our society do not reflect the realities of gender identity and
sexual orientation. Sykes argues that teachers need to become familiar with the
gender-queer identities that are proliferating within alternative youth
culture.(Sykes, 2004, para.4)
According to the article schools must re-educated themselves about gender
and gender equity. The violence and isolation gender variant students face needs
to be addressed at the school and classroom level. Sykes uses research from the
Gender Public Advocacy Coalition (2002) to maintain that every student should
know that transphobic and homophobic bullying and stereotyping is not
acceptable. Sykes argues that schools must at the very minimum protect students
with variant gender identities. The article includes the extensive research done by
the U.S. Center for Policy Alternatives (2003) which found that eighty percent of
parents support in school anti-discrimination policies including LGBT students.
The same percentage of parents also support teacher sensitivity training including
anti-homophobia training and thirty-three percent supported sensitivity training
including information about transgendered people. These findings are very
significant and Sykes utilizes them to strengthen her argument that the majority
agree that schools need to be doing more to support LGBT students and create
safe, inclusive environments for LGBT students. So although schools should at
the very least protect students with alternative gender identities Sykes uses the
U.S. Center for Policy Alternatives research to suggest that with the support of the
majority of parents there is much more that can be done.
The Gender and Advocacy Organization (2003) conducted research
finding that transgendered people are often assumed to be lesbian or gay because
their appearance often aligns with societys stereotypical views of gay men and
lesbians as feminine men and masculine women. Sykes uses this research to
demonstrate that due to this misjudgement many transgendered people face
homophobia, but the harassment transgendered people face, Sykes contends,
should actually be considered transphobia. Sykes relates the dangers of confusing
homophobia with transphobia; she utilizes research that found that gender variant
people face increased risk of harassment in school, unemployment,
homelessness, hate violence, lack of access to health care and loss of custody of
their children. (Sykes, 2004, para.11)
In the article Sykes finds that too often in the school system if transgender
students receive any in-school support it is through activism and initiatives
aimed at youth who identify as lesbian, bi, gay and questioning (Sykes, 2004,
para. 12) The article looks at Ontario based programs that offer support to
transgendered students, specifically the equity policy of the Toronto District
School Board, which specifically addresses gender discrimination and
transphobia. Sykes uses this policy as a model for what all school districts should
be doing. The inclusion of this positive, successful policy in the article helps
strengthen Sykes point that there is much more that all schools can do to make
schools more inclusive for transgendered students and LGBT students in general.
Sykes includes in the article the findings of Shannon Minters (2002) research
into gender variant children. Minters research examines the actions schools can
take to make the environment more inclusive for gender variant children, and the
positive effect these actions can have on children. Minter examines one
transgender boys experience in a school that made changes to make the
environment more inclusive, the results were overwhelmingly positive. This
research supports Sykes claim that schools can and should be doing more to make
their environments more inclusive for gender variant students.

Personal Response
The evidence in the article showing that eighty percent of parents support
the inclusion of LGBT anti-bullying policies and teacher sensitivity training with
regards to alternative gender and sexual identities is very important for teachers to
know. Many teachers shy away from dealing with LGBT issues or incorporating
LGBT related lessons into the curriculum for fear of parents negative reactions. If
more teachers understood that the majority of parents support school policies that
address the discrimination and harassment faced by LGBT students, perhaps more
teachers would be willing to break the silence surrounding alternative sexual and
gender identities in the school system. Incorporating and positively representing
gender variant people in the curriculum will help LGBT students feel more
included and also help non LGBT students become more accepting, socially well-
rounded people. The more diversity is celebrated in the classroom the more
children learn to appreciate and respect their differences and break down the
stereotypes and prejudices found in their societies.
At the end of the article Sykes includes a list of questions educators can
ask themselves to help understand their own gender privilege and to build up their
sense of being an ally to LGBT students. These questions are very pertinent and
an excellent first step for educators on the road to creating positive inclusive
classrooms for LGBT students. The questions serve to open educators minds to
ideas such as what constitutes gender and sexual identity, how does it affect
students lives, and how can educators support LGBT students. These are
important questions for educators for they not only get teachers thinking about
LGBT issues and experiences but they also serve to build up empathy and
understanding. This is very important for many educators have prejudices and
biases they must deal with before they can become effective allies to LGBT
students.
As mentioned in the article it is important for educators to be familiar with
gender-queer identities, it is also important for educators to keep up with the
changing language of these identities. Ten years ago we had the acronym LGB, a
few years later it became LGBT, today we use LGBTQIA+. Our societys
understanding of gender identity has started changing, varying and broadening; as
those communities become more visible the definitions that people and youth use
are changing and becoming more extensive. As educators we need to constantly
have open dialogue with our students to know what the language is and what
people are comfortable with. This is very important with transgendered students.
Gender neutral pronouns should be used in the classroom. Switching our
pronouns can be difficult at first. Since we first learned to speak we learn to
identify people as he or she, this is something we need to actively train
ourselves not to do. If in the classroom a student presents as male or female, do
not assume that they identity as the gender they are presenting. Take the time and
ask how the student identifies, ask how they prefer to be addressed. The simple
actions can make a huge difference in a transgendered childs life.

Conclusion
Sykes article Genderqueer: transphobia and homophobia in schools looks
at how drastically the meaning of gender is changing. Gender can no longer be
viewed as a strict binary of masculine males and feminine females. Rather gender
is a construct that is fluid and exists on a spectrum. The antiquated concept of
boys will be boys and girls will be girls does not represent the varied gender
identities of todays students. Therefore schools must work to create positive
environments that support and reflect the spectrum of gender identities. Schools
must reassess how they have traditionally viewed gender equity and create
 policies that include the protection of gender variant students. Protecting gender
variant students means schools must distinguish between homophobia and
transphobia. Sykes outlines the dangers that can arise when the two are lumped
together.

Sykes, H. (2016) Faculty and staff. University of Toronto: OISE. Retrieved from
http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/ctl/Faculty_Staff/Faculty_Profiles/1313/Heather_Sykes.html