Jess

In this article, educators Robyn Tomiko and Page Valentine Reagan reflect on their past experiences as LGBTQ+ teenagers and current experiences as LGBTQ+ educators. 

Robyn Tomiko (she/her) reflects on how there were no queer kids - at least, that's the truth her small, conservative Texas town wanted to believe. She recalls her experience with the other queer kids, kept "safe and quiet" under the protection of the theater teacher, who's "roommate" would bring her lunch. Now a teacher teaching in Texas, Tomiko is "allowed to" wear a rainbow colored lanyard and "even allowed to acknowledge the existence of LGBTQ+ people and topics" if she's careful. I think this reflects on the difficulty that so many queer educators still face today in bringing these discussions to their classrooms; even though Tomiko can't be fired for being gay, she still can't have a photo of her girlfriend or go too far into the "homosexual agenda." Rather, Tomiko chooses to "queer" her instruction: she offers her pronouns, uses gender neutral language to refer to groups of students, uses singular they/them, and challenges students to think about "the duality of human nature and questioning society’s rules for what counts as 'good' or 'bad'" in relation to Batman. 

Page Valentine Reagan (they/them) reflects on an experience when they were sixteen-year-olds in which a teacher had put Stonewall as a potential topic for a group project; while Reagan picked the topic, they commented on how it felt like "an 'issue' rather than a point of pride or awareness" of their identity. I think this speaks to how the inclusion of LGBTQ+ subjects in schools can often feel shallow when not implemented correctly. Rather than aiming for a mere "inclusion or visibility" of LGBTQ+ subjects, we should aim for students to question what's normal, for them to ask why we have certain norms in society, and for them to challenge "traditional" societal norms. As Reagan explains, teachers should "listen to students and continue to challenge the status quo" so our classrooms can bloom with possibilities. 

This article discusses how LGBTQ+ Young Adult Literature can act as a mirror, a window, and a path to identity formation for all students. Literature that acts as a mirror allows for students to see themselves within a text. This is especially important when it comes to "experiences that advocate positive feelings for students" (32). In seeing themselves in positive representations, LGBTQ+ students are more likely to feel safer in school and are more likely to be engaged in the content they are reading. Additionally, in seeing the struggles that they face reflected in a character, and seeing that character overcome those struggles, these books can act as points of inspiration and motivation for LGBTQ+ students. Secondly, LGBTQ+ YA Literature can act as a window for straight students, just as diverse literature is a window for people of all backgrounds. Reading books about people with different sexual or gender identities can make straight students more empathetic to their classmate's struggles. Additionally, it's important for teachers to recognize that many students do not have comfortable spaces at home to talk about LGBTQ+ issues with their parents; at school may be the only place they can be open about these topics. It's important to give all students comfortable places to talk and, "by allowing them to make mistakes and then recognize and talk about them" (33), we can foster an environment of understanding and community. Finally, LGBTQ+ YA Literature acts as a path to identity formation for all students; the characters in LGBTQ+ YA literature struggle with things all teenagers struggle with - acceptance, mental health, school, and, most importantly, identity. All kids in middle and high school will form some of identity, and it's our jobs as teachers to provide literature to and to be role models for our students.

This article is a guide on LGBTQIA inclusive curriculum with different strategies, particularly when a teacher feels restrained by their teaching environment. The article really focuses on "teaching in the cracks"; rather, teaching through the confines of what you're given, teaching LGBTQIA literature on a sliding scale (in the picture on the side). The picture essentially works on a sliding scale of two different axes, going from less visibility to more visibility and text/curriculum intact/static to text/curriculum fully LGBTQIA inclusive. The different strategies Page outlines in the text each fall somewhere on the scale. For example, choice reading can stretch anywhere from very inclusive to very exclusive, because it places the choice of the literature solely in the students' hands. It also depends on students actively deciding to read. Page argues that while it is very important to include in queer literature school and classroom libraries, this cannot be the only thing you do for your students to include queer literature, as it falls very well on the "less visibility" side of the scale. Another example Page gives is literature circles or book clubs, in which a teacher curates a selection of texts and students are able to pick books from that selection. Because students are reading these books in groups, they can have group discussions, causing less awkward silence around the queer issues that might be present. Page refers to this as "constrained visibility," since all of the books in the selection are not likely to have queer themes present (rather, they have a different central theme, like friendship, family, etc.). This is still a good way for teachers to facilitate discussions around queer literature, especially when they are within smaller groups of students.

Another example Page gives is similar to the book clubs, but rather using a book, poem, or short story for the entire class with queer themes present as part of a unit with a different, centralized theme. For example, including a book the entire class reads together with supporting LGBTQ+ characters but with a different universal theme that ties in with the larger unit. Page calls this "diffused focus," because it spreads the focus over a larger number of topics. This can be used to disrupt heteronormative assumptions. As Page explains, "In a unit on romance or family, for example, students can see same-sex relationships as equal to (rather than deviant from) heterosexual  relationships” (682). Another manifestation of this partial visibility is queering the classics, or a "concentrated focus." This falls on the scale of keeping the curriculum intact, as the students are still examining the classical literature many curriculums demand, but queer themes are being integrated, rather than replacing, into the regular discussion. This can be as simple as including questions about gender and sexuality to openly and actively talking about the sexualities of classic authors, such as Oscar Wilde and Walt Whitman. This focus emphasizes that LGBTQIA themes are not abnormal, but rather integrated into our everyday lives.

Finally, Page discusses briefly Queer pedagogy, which examines "how identities and realities are constructed, both socially and linguistically. These theories also challenge the deeply engrained and societally persistent male-female and gay-straight binaries" (682). Queer pedagogy falls in the upper right corner of the graph: full visibility and the curriculum fully inclusive. Queer pedagogy also takes on a “activist, critical, social justice stance” (682). Importantly, Queer pedagogy uses classroom discussions to unveil heteronormative standards that permeate texts, society, and schools, and offers a critical approach to examining all of them. However, acknowledging that this is not a possibility for every teacher, especially when they are more restricted by their school administration, Page offers the previous solutions to include LGBTQIA-inclusive literature and lessons into classrooms.