How can schools and districts implement and scale queer-inclusive curricula?

Blog Post
April 25, 2019

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) students often have dramatically different school experiences than their peers. In many cases, they face hostility from teachers and students, discriminatory school policies, and have access to very few in-school supports. To compound this, they are never taught material that reflects, represents, or validates their identity. As a consequence, LGBTQ students are less engaged in school, graduate at lower rates, and face much higher rates of mental health conditions than their non-LGBTQ counterparts. Though more and more schools are beginning to recognize this problem, there is little guidance and few resources.
Recognizing LGBTQ-inclusive curricula as a critical step in improving outcomes for all students and especially for queer students, this blog series will explore the possibilities for creating and implementing inclusive learning materials, with a focus on leveraging open educational resources (OER). It will explore how OER, which are designed to be easily updated and shared, could provide a new approach to creating more inclusive learning materials and equitable learning environments.

This is the fifth and final post in this blog series. Click here to read previous posts.

Earlier this year, this blog series explored the implications for open learning in the two states with “no promo homo” laws, or those that forbid teachers from mentioning LGBTQ identities in the classroom. Until recently, Arizona and Oklahoma had been the only two #GoOpen states with no promo homo laws, effectively committing to open learning while prohibiting inclusive learning.

That is until last week, when Arizona lawmakers on both sides of the aisle voted to repeal this law, which was encoded in ARS § 15-716 and prohibited teachers from portraying “homosexuality as a positive alternative life-style.” The repeal is a major win for advocates in the state and a crucial first step toward creating safer and more productive learning environments for LGBTQ students.

But it’s only that: a first step. The attitudes and personal beliefs that create laws such as this don’t change overnight, and this repeal doesn’t mean that schools will automatically become inclusive and supportive of queer students. It will take robust, conscious efforts by Arizona state, district, and school leaders to capitalize on the immense opportunity that is now before them: to teach a high-quality, inclusive curriculum that reflects and validates—and therefore engages and serves—all students. Indeed, Arizona is not the first state to contend with this challenge. While California and New Jersey are the only two states to pass legislation requiring this type of inclusion in content, they’re not the only places where education leaders are making an effort to do so. Barring the six remaining “no promo homo” states, school and district leaders across the country must make concerted efforts to create, implement, and scale inclusive curricula if they want to support queer students.

So what exactly will it take to do this? How can state and district leaders in Arizona and beyond support the creation and implementation of queer-inclusive curricula? What can be done to ensure teachers are willing and equipped to teach this material

I. Take intentional steps to make queer inclusive content a priority.

Not only do public attitudes not change overnight, they aren’t always represented by current laws. Just because a state doesn’t formally prohibit teachers from teaching about LGBTQ identities doesn’t mean they will suddenly make this content a priority. Mindsets start with school and district leaders, who must do the hard, ongoing work of understanding the importance of queer identities themselves, and then create time and space to engage teachers around this topic. With many educators already strapped for time, queer inclusivity must be a voluntary priority rather than an extra box to tick. Teaching Tolerance, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, explains some common roadblocks to getting school buy-in, and how to frame the conversation when personal bias are at play. For example, approaching inclusivity as learning about lived realities and identities, rather than as a promotion of those identities, may help some teachers who feel conflicted by personal or religious beliefs.

II. Prepare teachers to teach this content and deliver ongoing support when they do so.

Even when teachers are already on board with this idea, many are not prepared to teach about LGBTQ identities or histories. Particularly those who are not queer themselves, or haven’t before engaged in conversation around these topics, may feel unprepared to do so with students. Professional learning materials may help, but there are very few inclusive materials of this kind, and where they do exist, they’re often proprietary and expensive. Schools looking to better prepare teachers have two options: to create new professional learning materials, or to update current ones. Because both of these options present significant time and cost challenges that many schools don’t have the capacity to meet, many resort to using free materials or taking no action at all. While not as flexible as open resources, free materials are often better than opting out entirely. GLSEN provides some of the most comprehensive educator resources for teaching LGBTQ content, available free online.

III. Adopt OER.

Open educational resources could be a viable option for removing those time and cost barriers. OER are not only free to access, but free to retain, reuse, redistribute, and revise—meaning that teachers anywhere could not only obtain materials to help prepare them to teach LGBTQ-inclusive content, but they could download, share, and tailor those materials to the individual needs of their classroom. The ability to tailor content in particular, which is not possible with materials that are only free and not open, provides unique opportunities for exploring the immense diversity and historical breadth within the LGBTQ cannon. For example, imagine a high-quality, openly-licensed unit for a high school history course covering LGBTQ civil rights. A teacher in New York or Washington, DC could use it to teach about Bayard Rustin, famed leader of the civil rights and gay rights movements. At the same time, another teacher in southern Texas could use it to teach about Gloria Anzaldúa, queer Chicana writer and theorist who chronicled her experiences navigating intersectional identities at the borderlands in Texas. Openly licensing the structure, guidance, and knowledge needed to teach about figures and identities such as these would pave the way for teachers to not just teach inclusive content, but to teach it in an engaging and personal way for students.

The connection between openly-licensed materials and queer equity is not an obvious one. Many OER experts with the tools to help solve the biggest challenges for queer students and educators don’t have queer rights on their radars. At the same time, OER remains largely unknown to many people outside education, including those advocating for LGBTQ students. By capitalizing on every available tool and drawing meaningful connections between these two efforts, leaders in Arizona and beyond could pave the way for a more equitable future for LGBTQ students.

Enjoy what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter to receive updates on what’s new in Education Policy!

Related Topics
Open Learning Innovation in Education