Opinion: Queer Pedagogy and Bullying

In 2008, Darla Linville, an associate professor at Augusta University College of Education, wrote an article in which questions were raised in the search for a more inclusive educational environment: How does queer theory help explain the narratives of high school students who identify as LGBTQ or heterosexual? How do they explain the contradictions and counternarratives they expose in practical policies and pedagogies? Do the tenets of queer theory match up with the desires of the students for their schools? Is there a better way to make schools more LGBTQ-friendly for these students?

Specialists in education, sociology, and queer theory have written various essays on how to change educational practices, curricula, pedagogies, and school structures. Despite theoretically prescribing more open and flexible life experiences that are not heteronormative, these philosophies and impulses for change that call for the integration of people outside heteronormativity collide with the most straightforward educational system and the practice of teaching.

The ideas that promote diversification and inclusion do not go well with the demands for standardization and uniformity that form part of the core value system in the majority of schools. Those seeking to bring issues related to social balance to the educational environment must work uphill to request a theoretical and practical framework that gives space to experimentation, openness, and empathy for life experiences other than the “norm.”

This is critical when we are speaking about basic education, where appropriate behaviors for students are instructed based on gender. From the first moments when we begin teaching socialization, we are already boxing students and their actions according to a binary social vision about their bodies. We teach them first about their sex and the gender that should be aligned to it and then about their character as people, which will occupy a secondary value compared to the first two attributes, perhaps for the rest of their lives. How does this affect students who do not have a heteronormative identity?

A disadvantaged minority

Queer theory and the inclusion of the LGBTQ community in public and educational spaces is a sensitive issue. The purpose of this text is not to discuss the value judgments of people with conservative values or who argue religious freedom as an inalienable right; that has been widely debated in arenas that deal with issues of a more social than educational nature. However, it is not possible to ignore the impact these social issues have on the educational and personal experiences of students who are not heteronormative.

A study conducted in 2017 by the Center for Family Research at the University of Cambridge found that 45% of LGBTQ students suffer from bullying just because they identify themselves as LGBTQ. The percentage goes up to 64% when it comes to transgender students. In the United States, homophobic and transphobic bullying ranges from 22% to 87% depending on variables such as the political leanings of the state where the students live, the policies of the schools where they study, and the personal values and professional preparation of the teachers and educational staff. In Mexico, 61 % of the LGBTQ students report homophobia-based incidents of school bullying, and 92% of these students have been victims of verbal aggression due to their sexual orientation, physical appearance, attire, or lack of compliance with social rules linked to gender stereotypes.

School is not only a place to transfer knowledge, it is also a place where people develop and grow, and independent of whether or not there is an alignment of the values and social norms that students must learn, quality training is not viable in an enclosure where the physical and emotional integrity of all students is not guaranteed.

A study published by academicians from the Universities of Ottawa and Concordia (2016), found that student school performance improves when students feel safe and welcome in the classroom. “We found that students who felt safe were more attentive in class, they were more efficient,” explains Caroline Fitzpatrick, one of the co-authors of the study. Fitzpatrick added that participating students also reported fewer indices of depression. She argued that making sure students were engaged and attentive could contribute in the long term to having a higher success rate in various intellectual abilities such as math or reading comprehension.

How to balance the educational field?

To have a balanced, healthy, and safe school environment for LGBTQ students, constant and effective measures that endure are needed in the educational experience. The problem is not resolved by a parent-teacher meeting or a seminar for students every time a harmful incident occurs for a non-heteronormative student. A significant change would begin with curriculum development and content selection for the study plan. A curriculum and content that humanizes and makes the non-heteronormative students visible is an excellent resource to promote fair treatment among students. It should be mentioned that making them visible and recognizing the right to a peaceful existence of all students does not necessarily mean agreeing on everything.

One of the most prevalent arguments against queer pedagogies and content in schools is that they go against conservative and religious values that commonly come from families who identify themselves as traditional. The idea is not to alienate this group of people; it is to get to a point where mutual respect and a constructive environment can be exercised between students who are heteronormative and those who are not. This method has proven to be effective in reducing other social imbalances such as passive sexism in the schools.

Another necessary measure is to train educational staff in inclusive pedagogies, conflict resolution, and emotional and social intelligence. Independent of their personal values, their first duty is to seek the well-being and education of students. This knowledge and training would give staff the tools they need to deal with any problems of cohabitation in the classroom, not just those related to the bullying of LGBTQ students.

Not all teachers are trained or have a personal belief system that enables them to be a help or mentor to an LGBTQ student. Just as it is necessary to recognize their skills, their character and their right to secure sustenance through teaching, it is also imperative to make them aware of their responsibility to all students, not just the ones who align with their belief system
s. It is imperative that in the case of not being the right person for the job, they facilitate the contact with another member of the educational staff who has the profile and the capabilities to offer both mentoring and accompaniment to non-heteronormative students.

To ensure a quality educational experience, educational institutions need to be aware of the existence of a diverse social landscape within the classroom and implement human policies and practices that regard the differences as a source of cultural wealth and opportunity for dialogue, rather than a mechanism for triggering situations such as bullying and other forms of school violence.

Have you had situations at your school where an approach that calls for diversity is necessary? What has been your experience? Share your impressions about this issue.

Disclaimer: This is an Op-ed article. The viewpoints expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints and official policies of Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey.

Sofía García-Bullé

Share

This article from Observatory of the Institute for the Future of Education may be shared under the terms of the license CC BY-NC-SA 4.0