Margaret A. Nash and Karen L. Graves, Mad River, Marjorie Rowland, and the Quest for LGBTQ Teachers' Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This wonderfully complex book, Mad River, Marjorie Rowland, and the Quest for LGBTQ Teachers' Rights, examines the ripple effects of Marjorie Rowland's attempt to gain recognition for the discrimination she faced as a bisexual teacher in 1974.Nash and Graves wind together Rowland's personal experiences with the burgeoning legal theories that initiated LGBTQ-related employment equity claims and provide intricate analysis of the multiple ways that such claims have been refused, sidestepped, and otherwise resisted by courts and employers, even when legislative progress has been seemingly made.This apparently ever-timely examination of the challenges facing recognition of LGBTQ rights is an important reminder that progress all too often is not linear.Further, the authors remind us that anti-LGBTQ backlash is also all too often directed at education and educators (and students as well).As Nash and Graves point out, while gay rights began to make progress in the 1970s, conservatives focused their energies on removing gay and lesbian teachers from schools.Graves' And They Were Wonderful Teachers provides an excellent account of teacher purges in Florida.Rowland undertook a series of court challenges when she was fired from her school counselling job for telling another employee she was bisexual and eventually tried appealing to the Supreme Court.When Supreme Court Justice William Brennan dissented from the court's determination to not hear Rowland's case, he pointed out the historical and contemporary discriminations facing gay people and the public concern of Rowland's words, two aspects of her case that the Supreme Court and other courts had denied.His dissent had an impact well beyond her case: it helped bolster LGBTQ-related employment discrimination cases that followed, including those of other educators as well as those serving in the military.Like Rowland's unsuccessful bid to have her freedom of speech protected as a bisexual woman, Brennan's dissent, while unable to directly help Rowland, went on to open the cracks in legal unwillingness to recognize LGBTQ people.Nash and Graves carefully note the shifts in legal strategy from early cases like Rowland's that relied on freedom of speech to the more recent trend of using due process and dignity.(The latter two strategies were recently called into question by Justice Thomas's concurrent decision in Dobbs.)While showing these theoretical complications, this book also shows how LGBTQ equality has been built and the sacrifices of those LGBTQ people, like Rowland, whose livelihoods and careers were upended but who kept going.Nash and Graves caution, too, that even if legal strategies work and laws are reformed to include LGBTQ people under non-discrimination policies, school administrators and districts find ways to fire LGBTQ educators using trumped up excuses.As local practices, policies and, in too many cases, state laws continue to obstruct LGBTQ rights, the lessons in this book are important reminders of the continuity of
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".