Bringing LGBTQ Advocacy into the Classroom: Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focuses on encouraging anti-homophobia education in schools, specifically in regards to fostering safer school environments and bringing LGBTQ advocacy and perspectives into the secondary school classroom. Particular attention was paid to current dialogue around traditional gender binaries and how concerned educators can combat these troubling stereotypes. The questions guiding this study were in what ways does working with a Gay-Straight Alliance inform the practices of four Ontario Secondary School teachers' regarding anti-homophobia education? And what efforts are being made to reach to male students regarding anti-homophobia education? Four participants were interviews for this qualitative study, all of who are dedicated and passionate teachers working in the Greater Toronto Area to combat homophobia. Data analysis as well as the relevant literature revealed that fostering safe school environments for LGBTQ youth is a complex process and the individual teacher can have a detrimental role (either positive or negative) in contributing to feelings of safety within a school. Findings also indicated that a serious disconnect exists between current anti-homophobia policies and the practices occurring in schools. This study strives to raise awareness about this divide and to educate teachers regarding the steps they can take to bridge this gap in their classrooms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".