Abstract
For adult English language learners, the English language classroom provides a space for students to examine cultural as well other identities. However, discussions often center on racial, rather than sexual identities. In addition, attention to how adult English language instructors engage in classroom practices that focus on sexual identities is often limited. This article examines how adult educators in English language classrooms feel regarding the inclusion of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Queer (LGBQ) topics and materials into their curriculum and instruction. Through a web-based survey, teachers described their beliefs, practices, and challenges in creating lessons and responding to student questions in ways that broke down heteronormativity in the adult English language classroom. Findings add to the limited knowledge of how teachers in post-secondary, English language classrooms create and support a culturally responsive learning environment regarding sexual identities.
Introduction
In recent decades, educational research has strongly supported the incorporation of student cultural identities into adult learning environments (Goldstein, 2004; Phinney, 2003; Shaw, 2001; Nelson, 2006). Nowhere is this need more clearly demonstrated than among the ethnic, racial, and linguistic diverse learners in adult English language classrooms. As these learners simultaneously experience the language acquisition and acculturation processes, the salience of their cultural identities is intensified as they make sense of their new role in their adopted culture (Nelson, 2006; Phinney, 2003). The English language learning classroom can serve as a comfortable and safe site for students to explore various facets of their cultural identities. However, there is still some reticence on the part of educators to include such lessons or to allow classroom conversations related to sexual identities other than heterosexuality (Liddicoat, 2009; Nelson, 2006; Ullman, 1997). When identity is discussed, racial rather than sexual identity is the focus, inadvertently continuing the privileging of traditional sexual identity (Kappra & Vandrick, 2006). To the detriment of all learners, this lack of attention to sexual identity results in the continued normalization of heterosexual identities and can cause problems as learners look to the English language classroom to increase their cultural awareness, as well as their linguistic proficiency (Paiz, 2015).
Although there is a growing awareness of the need to include sexual identity into the adult English language classroom, there is still limited understanding of the extent of and the ways in which it is done by English language instructors in adult learning environments (Nelson, 2006). Using Nelson’s framework of queer inquiry in English language classrooms, this study endeavored to add to the growing body of research exploring the perceptions of English language teachers of adults regarding the inclusion of topics and materials with lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer (LGBQ) representation into their curriculum and instruction. The following research questions guided this study:
Theoretical Framework
Queer Theory
Queer theory served as the framework of this study. In contrast to the 1960’s gay and lesbian liberation movements that sought to affirm a stable and positive identity (Nelson, 1999; Sullivan, 2003), queer theory uses poststructuralism’s notion of unstable identities (Jagose, 1996) and “challenges the normative social ordering of identities and subjectivities along the heterosexual/homosexual binary as well as privileging of heterosexuality as its deviant and abhorrent ‘other’” (Browne & Nash, 2010, p. 5). Furthermore, queer theory examines the discursive relations that construct heterosexuality as the norm, considering identities, such as gender and acts, but not facts (Nelson, 1999).
For the purposes of this research, queer theory offers an approach that problematizes all identities as well as deconstructs the dichotomous oppositions, such as hetero/homo, that are normalized within society. Using a queer approach to our research not only offers a way of focusing on the inclusion and exclusion of LGBQ issues from teaching and curricular practices but helps acknowledge that all identities are social constructions (Burr, 2015) and therefore are shaped discursively and materially (Butler, 1995).
Review of Related Literature
There are limited studies of the strategies used to incorporate cultural identities into adult English language classrooms (Mathews-Aydinli, 2008). Research related to the incorporation of sexual identities is even more limited (Nelson, 2010). A predominant theme of these studies is the need to overcome and disrupt the heteronormativity of the adult English language classrooms (Curran, 2006; Dumas, 2008; Nelson, 2010; O’Mochain, 2006) to create environments in which all students feel free to question and affirm their own sexual identity and to understand the cultural values and norms associated with it (Dumas, 2008; Nelson, 2010).
Nelson’s (2006) landmark study of both teachers and students offers the richest description of this topic. Findings indicated that although teachers wanted to be inclusive, there were often underlying factors that prevented them from doing so. In particular, teachers grappled with knowing how to support individual students in the process of “coming out,” responding to homophobic comments in a class setting, and teaching classes about issues related to sexual identity, which they deemed outside of their expertise. Based on this study, Nelson developed various recommendations for practitioners, which include the reaffirmation of the connection between sexual identity and cultural/linguistic fluency, a call for practitioners to reflect on and discard practices that reinforce heteronormativity, and the paradigm shift of approaching classes as multisexual, rather than as heterosexual or homosexual cohorts.
One example of successful strategies used by adult English language teachers to disrupt the heteronormativity of adult English language classrooms is offered in Curran’s (2006) description of his response to an “unsuccessful” classroom teaching experience. After identifying his unsuccessful positioning as the “expert,” he developed a more student-centered approach using reframing and deconstructing student questions or comments. Both these strategies engage all learners in critical thinking and reflection on their assumptions related to their own and others’ sexual identities.
Another successful strategy described in the literature was the addition of narratives of “local, queer-identifying individuals” to the readings (O’Mochain, 2006, p. 52) in a cultural studies class at a Christian women’s college in Japan. Underlying the success of this strategy are the goals of providing positive models for LGBQ students and developing understanding and empathy among the non-LGBQ students.
Research has also described the ways teachers respond to student queries or comments in the adult English language classroom. In general, when faced with spontaneous, student-generated questions or comments, teachers have been found to offer cursory acknowledgement of the question, often changing the topic, effectively continuing to privilege heterosexual identities (Dumas, 2010; King, 2008; Nelson, 2010). Paradoxically, teachers have rooted their reticence to engage in these discussions in cultural sensitivity and respect for students’ native values. As described by LGBQ students, this maintains heterosexual privilege and can lead to their continued silence or engagement in behaviors that hide their sexual identities (Dumas, 2010; Nelson, 2010).
Method
When research seeks to understand the experiences and “underlying structures” (Merriam, 2009, p. 38) of a phenomenon, the use of phenomenological research design is appropriate. In this study, this approach was used to understand how English language instructors of adults feel about the inclusion of topics and materials with LGBQ representation. Data were collected through a web-based survey of open-ended questions. A purposive sample of English language adult educators was selected from respondents in a previous study of culturally responsive teaching practices. All had indicated a frequent use of inclusive practices and were open to additional contact with the primary researcher. All respondents were employed as teachers in adult English language classes throughout the United States. Of the 26 respondents, 19 identified as female, five as male, and two preferred not to answer. More than 73% of the sample taught in college- and university-based English for academic purposes (EAP) programs and 88% described the composition of their classes as heterogeneous, including students of various languages, cultures, and national backgrounds. The respondents were a moderately experienced group, with 50% having more than 9 years of experience teaching English to adults and 23% indicating having either between 5 and 9 years or between 1 and 5 years.
Data were collected in a web-based survey of open-ended questions that was administered through Qualtrics. The use of a web-based survey was chosen for convenience, cost, and confidentiality (Rea & Parker, 2005). The survey consisted of an opening yes/no question about the respondent’s incorporation of materials and activities with LGBQ representation into their current teaching environment, followed by eight open-ended questions. The first three open-ended questions asked participants to describe materials and activities they had used or would use, in addition to the factors that encouraged or discouraged them from incorporating LGBQ topics and materials into their classes. These were followed by one item about their experience with openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer (LGBTQ) students and their responses to three classroom scenarios involving unplanned inclusion of LGBTQ topics. Four demographic items regarding respondents’ gender, teaching environment, student ethnic and linguistic backgrounds, and teaching experience completed the survey.
Data analysis followed the basic procedure described by Creswell (2013): (a) organization of the data; (b) reading and memoing; (c) describing, classifying, and interpreting data into codes and themes; (d) interpreting the data; and (e) representing and visualizing the data. Of note in qualitative research, the researcher’s position is significant and should be examined for biases, experiences, and assumptions that may influence the study (Merriam, 2009). Christy is a White, cisgender, straight female assistant professor with over 20 years teaching experience in English language programs for adults in the United States and abroad. She engages in research and professional development about culturally inclusive teaching and considers herself an ally to the LGBTQ community. James identifies as a White, cisgender, gay male doctoral student in Language and Literacy Education. His teaching experience includes K-12 Spanish and adult English literacy classes. In his doctoral studies, James’s work analyzed the normative ways gender and sexuality are labeled and discussed in second and foreign language contexts.
Initial analysis consisted of multiple readings of the data organized by question responses and by participant respondents. Emergent themes included institutional acceptance, curricular resources, student culture and religion, and development of language and cultural proficiency. Participant responses were categorized by theme and subjected to a peer check. The responses were not subject to a member check during this process.
Findings
Analysis of the data revealed that there was general support for including topics and materials with LGBQ representation in their curriculum, but that there were many obstacles to doing so. In addition, when faced with spontaneous, student-initiated instances, there was a support for allowing discussions to continue if they followed certain classroom and institutional norms. These findings are described in more detail in the following section.
Curriculum Planning of Materials and Activities
While many participants supported the inclusion of topics and materials with LGBQ representation in their English language classes, there were few who had successfully done so. The majority of participants described the challenges they faced to incorporate activities including these topics. There were four categories of obstacles: institutional sanction, lack of materials, conservative student culture, and perceived irrelevance. Institutional sanction was described primarily as an obstacle, as no participant described being encouraged to include LGBQ representation by his or her administration. There were specific references to working in faith-based institutions and the assumption that certain topics should be avoided to comply with the religious culture of the organization. An example of this was the quote “I hesitate to include the topic if clergy members are in my class as I can count on their perspective being rather homophobic.” Another obstacle noted by the participants was the dearth of materials and lessons with LGBQ representation. Many noted the omission of these topics from their curricula and textbooks, and the need to either create new or stick to the assigned materials. Finally, the most strongly noted perceived obstacle was the teachers’ perceptions of the effects of students’ cultural backgrounds, often described as “conservative” and “religious.” Participants described their hesitation to some topics due to their belief that these students would not want to or be able to engage in these discussions. As one teacher wrote, “students from certain regions tend to be very sensitive about the topic.” Another teacher described her rationale as a need to be culturally sensitive to students from conservative religious backgrounds, as they feel pressured by American culture to accept values different from their own. She described this as, “We have many students, Muslims in particular, who would feel very uncomfortable if they felt pressured to accept what they view to be western values they do not agree with.” Finally, the last category of obstacles to incorporating topics and materials with LGBQ representation related to teachers’ beliefs that these topics or materials were either not relevant to their course objectives or students’ interests. These topics were frequently seen as appropriate for a current event or sociology class, but not an English language class. In addition, when participants did include these topics, it was frequently done as an individual writing activity without group discussion. This parallels participants’ reporting that they were influenced not to include these topics by the lack of student interest in them. As one participant described, “It just hasn’t come up. I try to gear content to interests and topics students are interested in.”
Although limited, there was variety in how those respondents included topics with LGBQ representation and activities into their classes. Many included discussion activities of same-sex marriage and adoption rights, using newspaper articles or broadcasts and student research as the foundation. Interestingly, oral activities often included debates and were used with students of advanced English language proficiency.
Although many factors that discourage or prevent incorporation were noted, these teachers offered a variety of opinions about the structure and objectives of lessons that would incorporate LGBQ representation in a successful manner. There was general agreement that these lessons would be based in class discussions, potentially introduced by relevant print and broadcast media sources. In addition, it was important that discussions be conducted in a culturally sensitive, civil, and nonjudgmental manner. One participant summarized this idea by noting the objective “to work on having an educated discussion on, for some, a controversial topic while using English accurately.” In addition to increasing language proficiency, participants described potential outcomes from these lessons which relate to the development of critical thinking, cross-cultural awareness, and the eradication of students’ anti-LGBTQ biases. One participant noted that she deemed any activity that challenged students’ assumptions of what is “normal” to be successful. She explained that “once a student is open to the idea of stereotype threat, he or she is able to extend that to other contexts and situations.” Many respondents suggested using cross-cultural comparisons between the students’ cultures and mainstream American culture. However, only a few connected these activities to teaching students the appropriate norms in mainstream American culture.
Handling Unplanned LGBQ Topics
In addition to questions related to the intentional inclusion of lessons and activities with LGBQ representation, respondents were asked how they would respond to unexpected, student-initiated classroom occurrences. The overwhelming majority of participants noted they saw these incidents as “teachable moments” and would allow students to discuss these topics to promote students’ critical thinking and socio-linguistic proficiency. With some exceptions, participants explained that they felt students would benefit from group discussions of these spontaneous topics and explained their various methods and rationale for doing so. The dominant theme that emerged was the belief in creating and maintaining a respectful environment for all students, both those in support of and those against LGBQ equality in social issues. Respondents framed these in multidimensional ways, with a focus on structuring rational and emotionally tempered discussions, emphasizing respect for others, and cultivating multicultural competence in academic and social settings.
The need for class discussions to be conducted in rational terms was frequently mentioned by participants. Whether faced with the use of a pejorative term or a strong anti-LGBQ opinion, these teachers believed that all discussions should be conducted in tempered, academic discourse. To establish or reestablish this environment in the midst of an unexpected topic, participants described the importance of interrupting strong emotional responses and using critical analysis of students’ fallacies to deconstruct opinions. Many also mentioned reiterating class and institutional norms for appropriate language to give students time to collect their thoughts before continuing the discussion. While one participant noted that “students should be able to express their opinions, but they need to do it within the guidelines set out by the university,” she also stated that “L2 students may not always know how specific words are seen, so pausing to discuss that is also valuable.” Conversely, there were some participants who disagreed with allowing emotionally charged discussions to flourish and stated that they preferred to change the topic to avoid potential hurt feelings or misunderstandings. This can be illustrated by one participant’s comment: “Honestly, I would change the subject. If my students have strong opinions on both sides of the issue, it will probably lead nowhere good.”
Respondents felt strongly that respectful environments were built on rational and controlled discussions and often described their role as one of enforcing classroom norms in strongly regulatory, rather than facilitative terms. An illustrative example of that belief can be seen in the following comment: “There are rules of engagement in the classroom, chief among them being kind, courteous, and respectful.” Although participants anticipated students’ misuse of vocabulary based on language and cultural differences, there was no allowance for misunderstandings of appropriate academic discourse due to varying cultural backgrounds. There was a tacit assumption that students knew the importance of being respectful to one another and that they were equally aware of what were appropriate and inappropriate language and behaviors.
Many respondents supported their continuing discussion of topics with LGBQ representation with a belief in the importance of preparing their students to be culturally competent communicators both in an academic and a larger, social setting. For many respondents, this involved guiding discussions using cross-cultural comparisons and understanding the role of culture and cultural differences to second language learners. They suggested using a comparison of the racial and ethnic discrimination students may be aware of or have experienced to that of the LGBQ community. An illustration of this is found in the statement,
I would talk about differences in religious and cultural backgrounds, and explain that there are heated debates within U.S. culture as well, . . . and that if they plan to remain in the U.S. for a time that they will have to adjust themselves to living peacefully in a culture different than their own.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of English language teachers of adults regarding the inclusion of topics and materials with LGBQ representation, as well as the factors influencing their incorporation. Findings indicated that although teachers are interested in incorporating these topics into their English language classes, the majority found insurmountable obstacles that prevented them from doing so. In addition, when faced with spontaneous student discussions, teachers believe that these “teachable moments” help all students develop cultural and linguistic proficiency, yet were generally unsure of how to handle the unplanned situations. These findings present several implications for adult English language teaching and professional development.
The most frequently mentioned obstacle to the inclusion of LGBQ-friendly lessons is the dearth of appropriate materials in textbooks, an assertion that is supported by research examining commonly used textbook series (Gray, 2013). Therefore, the creation and dissemination of materials needs to become a priority for adult English language education leadership and professional development. With the support and collaboration of national adult literacy coalitions and nonprofit organizations, practitioners could create a repository of materials based in second language learning theory and cultural competence development principles. Importantly, these materials would include various themes allowing for use throughout the curriculum and not solely in cultural studies or family issues units, preventing positioning LGBTQ identities as problematic.
Second, English language teachers perceive the spontaneous, student-led discussions of LGBQ-related topics as “teachable moments” (Ó’Móchain, Mitchell, & Nelson, 2003). These spontaneous moments that arise in the classroom can be a way in which to problematize students’ normative notions of gender and sexual identities. Deconstruction, a term often attributed to Jacques Derrida, is an effective strategy to facilitate the understanding of the role of language in constructing ideas, such as the hetero/homo binary. Therefore, a deconstructive analysis would seek to understand how heterosexuality has become normalized through discursive practices. In applying a queer theory approach and its tenet of deconstruction to discussions of sexual identities in the classroom, it is necessary to focus on all sexual identities, not only LGBQ identities. Deconstruction can provide teachers with the ability to foster students’ critical thinking in regards to students’ understandings of sexual norms. Furthering inquiry in which students are asked to discuss and think about how and why certain identities are privileged over others can be a way to trouble dominant discourses such as heteronormativity.
The final implication from these findings is that there exists a level of discomfort and perceived lack of expertise related to the inclusion of LGBQ-related topics in the English language classroom, which could be mitigated through professional development. Research reveals that while the LGBQ-identifying teacher may feel apprehensive about potential responses to revealing personal information to students, the non-LGBQ-identifying teacher may feel culturally incompetent and lacking in knowledge (Nelson, 2010). A professional development initiative would enhance teachers’ understanding of their biases and heteronormative practices, in addition to affirming the compelling connection between cultural competence and linguistic fluency, particularly in relation to sexual identity.
Implications
One limitation of this study is the small pool of participants and the sole use of online data collection. Future research should include a larger sample of teachers from a variety of English language programs available to adults including adult literacy, university preparation, and community-based life skills classes. In addition, including questions about respondents’ cultural identities will expand understanding of this phenomenon and perhaps yield more detailed profiles of teaching praxis. Learning what educators believe and how they act on those beliefs in these diverse environments will greatly add to the understanding of this topic. In addition, the use of an online survey allowed for ease of participation (Dillman, 2000); however, responses were somewhat brief and the online format did not allow for easy probing of respondents’ statements. Future studies would benefit from more in-depth questioning procedures possibly through face-to-face or Internet-based interviewing.
There are many facets of identity that are important to address in adult learning environments. The field of second language teaching has been successful at increasing awareness of the need to incorporate students’ ethnic and racial identities into the classroom. It is time to broaden practices to include curriculum and materials that represent the lives and concerns of a variety of sexual identities.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Author Biographies
Christy M. Rhodes, PhD, is an assistant professor at East Carolina University in the Interdisciplinary Programs Department. She has taught adult English language learners in Florida, Virginia, and the United Arab Emirates. Her research focuses on culturally inclusive teaching in diverse adult learning environments.
James Coda, MEd, is a doctoral student in the Language and Literacy Education Department at the University of Georgia. His research interests include gender and sexuality studies and second and foreign language teaching.