The Educator's Guide to LGBT+ Inclusion. Kryss Shane
Читать онлайн книгу.
to use a word or phrase, it is asked why the person chose to use that word or phrase. The focus is not on shutting down the communication; it is on nurturing the communication so as to better understand the perspective of that person, and to encourage them to think through where their thoughts and ideas originate. Whether these are biased or bigoted, and no matter how overarching these ideas and ideals are, starting the conversation where that person is at allows the speaker an opportunity to recognize the impact of their words, to consider where their assumptions began, and to make sure that what they have said is what they genuinely feel and intend when they are using this type of language.
In a school setting this may be somewhat tricky, because it is not always possible for an educator to stop an entire class to talk through this process with one student. It makes sense then that a safe-space protocol is used, as it is much more efficient to tell a student to be quiet than it would be to sit with them and talk through why they said what they did. However, these types of conversations can occur during a recess, in a study period before or after school, or you can assign them to write a paper that clarifies their words or requires them to research their incorrect assumptions about the person or group of people they spoke poorly about. In some classrooms, it may be best to establish a planned protocol at the beginning of the school term when all rules and expectations are being provided to and with the students. In elementary classes, it may be most appropriate to have the student draw or write about a time when their own feelings were hurt to help them recognize that what they say and do can help or hurt others. As students get older and become better writers, essays can be required that consider why the person said what they did, where the language came from, and the impact it may have on those who heard what was said. If a specific number of requirements, word count, or page length are provided in an age- and grade-appropriate manner, this can make it very quick for an educator to mandate this assignment without pausing classroom learning during class time.
When we look at the idea of safety, we must consider who is being kept safe. Politically, this can be a topic of significant debate. Often, this debate boils down to the difference between those who believe that people should not be forced to hear, see, or experience bigotry, and those who believe that shielding students from this experience makes them ill-prepared to deal with the real world and the things that people may say in public spaces or during their careers. It can be easy for a conversation about safety to become a conversation and debate over one side or the other. However, this is not necessary, nor is it helpful to students or educators.
This can lead to discussions about what safety measures are realistic. While some may feel that there should be significant opportunities for LGBT+ students or students of other minority groups to lead these conversations, this is not often possible. It is necessary as an educator to recognize that those in a position to make decisions about budgets may not be able to allocate programming or funds to one specific minority group within the school. However, it cannot be that nothing is done because action is said to be unaffordable. Instead, it is necessary to consider what changes and improvements can be made with little to no cost and with little to no change in the daily interactions of students and staff. These recommendations are much more likely to be approved by those in positions of power because they cause very little, if any, upset to predetermined budgets or to how educators and students typically behave.
Instead, educators can refer to existing school rules and policies. If there is already something in place regarding bullying, verbal assault, or physical assault, creating inclusion for LGBT+ people by making small changes becomes very simple. In some schools, support for LGBT+ people would be listed as a separate item within the school rules and guidelines. In other schools, they simply add the language “sexual orientation and gender identity” to rules that already list the types of bigotry or harassment that may exist, and which are not permitted. In today’s society, most schools already have policies in place regarding sexually explicit words and actions, as well as gender biases, so including “sexual orientation and gender identity” or replacing previous words with these can make this policy much more inclusive, with very little change. This can result in a reasonably quick alteration without significant discussion or concern by the community or the school board.
In addition to this set of rules being a requirement of students to understand and follow, schools typically mandate educators be mindful of the rules and be held accountable for following them. Usually, this is because schools believe that educators are automatic role models and that following these rules is simply modeling appropriate adult behavior and interaction, which betters the school experience for everyone. It may be necessary to alert all staff in the district when a policy change is made or when additional words are added to existing policies. This allows everyone to recognize the change, and this will also enable educators and staff to be held accountable if they break these rules. These not only protect all LGBT+ students, but they also protect LGBT+ staff members, LGBT+ parents, and LGBT+ members of the community who may interact with the school through volunteer work, attending school assemblies or plays, and/or those who advertise with the school in academic award programs, athletic sponsorship, or when donating for school events. This protection keeps everyone physically and psychologically safe from discrimination and bigotry in school settings and at school events.
2
How to Be an LGBT+ Ally
Several educators may question whether there is a need for reading this book. These are typically either those who have personal feelings and beliefs about the LGBT+ community or those who already identify themselves as LGBT+ supporters. Those who have personal opinions and beliefs must recognize that it is against codes of conduct and professional codes of ethics to do less for one group of students than another or to allow one’s personal beliefs or opinions to negatively influence the educational experience that students receive. It is also likely in the contract signed to become an educator that there is something in the policy that prevents educators from adversely interacting with students, staff, parents, and community members based on their minority status(es). This means that even if a reader of this book has powerful beliefs against the LGBT+ community or against students who self-identify as LGBT+, it is not permissible to avoid this topic. Instead, the information within this book can help both those with negative beliefs with opposition and those who already identify as LGBT+ supporters to best understand how to use their platform as educators to provide the best possible environment and experience for all, including the LGBT+ community.
The idea of identifying as an ally of any marginalized group of people is not new. While many may consider themselves to be an “LGBT+ ally,” there is significant difference across the spectrum of ally identities. For others, this book may require more introspection to identify how and why their personal beliefs, opinions, and actions may influence their treatment of LGBT+ students, school staff, and school community leaders. Regardless of what identity a reader of this book wears, being mindful of that identity is not enough. Instead, we must examine what it means to be someone who supports the LGBT+ community, whether this is due to a personal conviction or mandates by the profession, the school district, and/or policies and laws.
This leads to questioning who qualifies as an ally. What makes a person qualified to identify as someone supportive of this community? This is something that may be debatable. In some cases, a person may identify themselves as an ally by simply not going out of their way to harm an LGBT+ person. Others may think that their ally status applies because they vote in each election in favor of inclusive policies. While neither of these is incorrect, and both benefit the LGBT+ community, this is not enough. Some debate whether the word “ally” is the best descriptor of a person regarding the LGBT+ community and their impact on it. While “ally” is the most commonly used word, some use the word “advocate,” which implies much more of an active experience. To be an ally simply means to not go against this group of people. To be an advocate would acknowledge speaking up with or for LGBT+ people in situations where there may not be an LGBT+ person present, or where it may not be safe for an LGBT+ person to be out. Those who do more may be considered an “activist.” Typically, this is a person who participates in different layers and levels of supporting the LGBT+ community. This may mean that the person talks with school boards or local, state, or federal politicians regarding better protections for LGBT+ people. In organizations that actively work to prevent equality for LGBT+ people, allies,