Sunteți pe pagina 1din 12

Chose one contemporary social justice issue currently being focused upon in the media such

as: sexuality, gender, language, refugees or ethnicity and discuss how Australian schools are

meeting the challenge of equity and access for (impacted) minority groups.

The challenge of meeting equitable and accessible practices for gender diverse students within

the school environment has been a key issue highlighted by the media in recent years. Gender

diversity is an umbrella term including individuals “who identify as agender (having no

gender), bigender (both a woman and a man), non-binary (neither woman nor man)” as well as

transgender, Trans*, intersex and gender fluid (Smith et al., 2014, p. 6). Contrastingly,

cisgender is a term used to “describe when a person’s gender identity matches social

expectations given their sex assigned at birth” (Smith et al., 2014, p. 5-6). The predominant

and normalised societal discourses regarding gender is inclined toward gender essentialism and

heteronormativity, with gender diverse students often greatly impacted through policies of

which perpetuate the dominant discourse and cisgender-privilege power imbalances. Often,

students in secondary school settings often report routine exclusion and social isolation due to

both peer and teacher influence (Ullman, 2016b, p. 3). As such, there is a present need to

explicitly and critically investigate the dominant discourse and re-conceptualise the ways in

which knowledge of sexuality and gender is portrayed, discussed and communicated within

the classroom. Furthermore, it is necessary to promote positive teacher habitus to facilitate

equitable practice and inclusivity. Feminist and poststructuralist theory will be utilised to

provide a gendered analysis of the predominantly cisgendered favoured and heteronormative

structures, knowledge and processes within Australian institutions.

1 18025558
Due to cisgendered privilege within education, gender diverse students will often face

restrictive access to and participation in, achievement, fairness and opportunity in education.

The case study of Erik Ly (Cook, 2015), a seventeen-year-old transgender student from Gilson

College in Melbourne’s north-west, reflects this difficulty in attaining equity as a result of

cisgendered privilege permeating education. Ly discusses on being forced to conform to

predetermined uniform standards according to sex, “being banned from joining the boy's cross-

country team and using the male toilets” (Cook, 2015). This conceptualisation within the school

places an attempt to resist or disrupt dominant feminine discourses as deviant and abnormal.

Ly furthers to discuss the intensive reinforcement of hegemonic masculinity so far, that he “did

not feel safe telling staff he was a transgender boy”, conveying a clear gender regime being

enforced and governed by “clearly punitive and regulatory social conventions” (Cook, 2015;

Ullman, 2016a, p. 45). Within this, teachers and staff are the individuals policing gender norms,

demonstrating “teachers drawing upon their own understandings … largely from essentialist

understandings that invoke and re-affirm gendered positioning” (Rawlings, 2016, p. 54). In

turn, there is an alarming potential to obstruct school equity policies and practices. As such, a

lack of knowledge on gender diversity perpetuates intelligible masculine and feminine genders

that are reinforced by teachers in schools, subsequently impacting upon policy, resources and

equity.

Feminist perspectives provide a gendered analysis, in an attempt to dismantle inequality as well

as structural and systematic inequity, and explicitly convey social injustice inherent within

dominant gender norms. As the dominating gender discourse centralises itself on an

essentialist and reductive binary of genders, fluidity of gender expression is often restricted

and manifests a power imbalance. As Ullman (2016a) states, “failure to perform one’s gender

‘correctly’ often results in negative reinforcement”, with the system attempting to “render

2 18025558
justice and reaffirm natural order of gender appropriate behaviour” (p. 45). This attempt to

reaffirm dominant gender binaries is evident in the case study of Erik Ly (Cook, 2015), in

having to conform to the ‘girls uniform’, despite expressing his gender as transgender. This

informal learning of gender and sexuality is presented in a social reward and punishment

framework, promoting punishment for attempt to disregard ‘normalised’ gender discourses,

such as a gender-based uniform. This informal social reward and punishment framework

proves harmful, with Ullman (2016b) conveying a correlation between a positive and

supportive dispositions of teachers to a “higher academic self-concept and being more

confident and motivated learners” within gender diverse students (p. 10). Keddie (2012)

advocates for a non-hierarchical classroom culture in support of disrupting gendered ideals, as

well as creating learning experiences that are not reductive to gender stereotypes. It is therefore

paramount for teachers to “deconstruct the model of traditional gender segregation and norm

enforcement” to provide a safe and supportive environment for full participation of gender

diverse students (Jones et al., 2016, p. 168). Schools should aim to dismantle the social reward

and punishment framework inherent to gender expectations and promote inclusive policies. On

a physical level, this may appear as allowing autonomous decision within physical

representation, i.e. through uniforms, subsequently providing an increased opportunity for

equity and access within education.

Integrating post-structuralist theory to a feminist approach allows for a more nuanced

deconstruction of aforementioned gender power hierarchies that disadvantage gender diverse

students. Bakhtin (as quoted in Francis, 2010) argues language reflects and constructs power

relations, with views of dominant social groups being positioned as unitary and total (p. 479).

As such, individuals and groups maintain a power to construct meanings to allow objects to

exist, with Rawlings (2016) arguing the culture of regulation limiting potential outcomes and

3 18025558
possibilities. In an application to gender, the dominant discourse constructs a dualist

construction of femininity and masculinity offers a form of restriction to identity, and creates

a hierarchical position for certain individuals. In turn, gender diverse students fall outside of

the privileged gender roles, and are socially marginalised, isolated, and removed from power.

Explicitly critiquing the power and authority inherent within cisgender privilege may provide

the opportunity to restore power to gender diverse students. Rawlings (2016), drawing on

Judith Butler (1990), argues gender “exists as socially and culturally informed expressions

(stylised acts) that are continually produced and reproduced” (p. 41). In turn, it is important to

note the power of pedagogical practices to be a site of production, and re-production for the

dominant gender discourses. As such, further than simplistic revision of policies disallowing

transphobic language, an entire re-conceptualisation of the way gender and sexuality is

discussed within the classroom would prove pertinent in offering greater potential outcomes

for gender diverse students, of which may currently seem inaccessible. Ullman (2014)

discusses the inclusion of “material on same-sex attraction … but also content specific to the

study of gender as a social phenomenon, incorporating theories of social learning and social

construction” to provide a foundation for understanding the construction of gender assumptions

and biases, and their impact on peers (p. 441).

A case study on Jeremy Beach (Cook, 2016) a Year 12 transgender student attending the Avila

College in Melbourne, Australia, reflects the inherent difficultly of transitioning in a Catholic-

girls high school. Beach describes his schooling as “inherently, a very gendered environment”,

claiming ‘this made it more difficult’ (Cook, 2016). However, it is pertinent to note it was a

teacher who noted Beach’s struggle with gender identity, and subsequently provided a

documentary about a transgender army officer, Lieutenant-Colonel Cate McGregor. Beach

notes that it was after being exposed to this gender identity, “that’s when [he] realised [he] was

4 18025558
transgender” (Cook, 2016). This in itself suggests the dominant gender discourse of a dualist

masculinity and femininity evident within the school and negation of gender diverse identities,

as well as conveying a lack of policy and explicit awareness. Beach further discusses

restrictive, gender nullifying language, claiming “teachers and students still referred to him as

a ‘she’”, despite identifying as a male (Cook, 2016). A sensitivity and intercultural

understanding on the school’s behalf may have proved beneficial for Beach’s ability to feel

safe, and included. As such, there is an evidential exclusionary effect, and lack of structural

support and inclusion through gender policing evident within the school.

A feminist post-structuralist framework highlights the importance of deconstructing dominant

frameworks that are inherent and normalised within the schooling system. The power that is

inherent within language is evidential through Beach’s lack of knowledge of gender identity

prior to exposure by his teacher. This severe regulation of gender identity within the school

through general discussion, discourse, and policy limited potential possibilities and outcomes,

subsequently creating a difficult schooling life. Ullman (2014) argues “notable that LGBTQ

and GQ students sense of personal teacher support appears to hinge on perceived acceptance

and associated freedom of expression, as well as protection from gender and sexuality-based

harassment” (p. 441). In turn, the positive teacher habitus undeniably provided a beneficial

effect for Beach through an implied acceptance and support, however this needs to be wholly

integrated within the school as a policy. Having access to teachers, and school staff who are

“trained, knowledgeable, administratively supported … unafraid to normalise diversity of

gender expression and discuss the ways that gender performance is learned and socially

constructed” is a must in promoting inclusivity within the classroom and positive teacher

habitus (Ullman, 2016b, p. 11). This may represent itself in forms of pre-service teacher

5 18025558
training and a revision of content and curriculum in a manner that reframes gender diversity as

empowering, rather than deviant.

As the dominant discourse stands inclined toward cisgender privilege and heteronormativity,

there is an obvious lack of gender diverse inclusive policy within the education system. In

looking at ‘Bullying: Preventing and Responding to Student Bullying in Schools Policy’ (NSW

Department of Education and Communities, 2011) the reductive and simplistic view of gender

diverse students is evident. As the policy simplistically refers to bullying based on

“homosexuality” and “transgender”, there is a severely reductionist view evident of other

sexual diversity, and gender identities. There is no clear acknowledgement of gender identities

such as gender-fluid, bigender, non-gender conforming, non-binary, and agender, and sexuality

such as intersex, asexual, pansexual, and polyamorous. As such, the lack of explicit

acknowledgement of the fluidity within sexual and gender diversity, and the lack of separation

between sexuality and gender may create an archaic, reductionist viewpoint that perpetuates

the dominant discourse. Power is evidentially operating within this study to favour the

discourse of dominant social groups, operating to misgender and misrepresent minority gender

diverse groups. As such, the impact of government legislation works to further marginalise

students who don’t fit into dominant discourse. This may result in an obstruction of equitable

policies and practices within schools. Similarly, the ‘Supporting Sexual Diversity in Schools’

(Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, 2008) policy document aims to

support sexual diversity and gender diversity in schools, however refers to merely “same-sex

attracted” individuals, negating aforementioned intersex, asexual, pansexual, and

polyamorous. Whilst this policy document attempts to “discursively construct sexually diverse

people as valued members of the school community” (Ferfolja, 2016, p. 66), the document

cannot claim to support the sexually diverse, whilst only critically examining same-sex

6 18025558
attracted students. However, it is undeniable that the document “paves way for all government

schools [and pedagogical practices] to embrace this form of diversity” with the attempt to

develop and ensure “support and inclusiveness is reflected in codes of conduct, curriculum,

anti-bullying … sexual harassment policies, student wellbeing procedures, teaching and

learning practices, organisation and ethos” (Ferfolja, 2016, p. 67; Department of Education and

Early Childhood Development, 2008, p. 6). Furthermore, the policy document recognises the

enabling effect of “turning a blind eye to discrimination, homophobic abuse or sexual

harassment by students or staff … on the basis of authorising or assisting discrimination”

(Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, 2008, p. 6). This conveys an

acknowledgement of power relations, whereby dominant gender discourses are perpetuated,

and assisted by silence. With the growing amount of data suggesting the “high levels of

bullying victimization of gender-diverse learners is related to increased absenteeism, decreased

educational aspirations, and lower academic performance” (Burford, Lucassen, & Hamilton

(2017), pp. 212-3), it is necessary to improve school climate on gender identity, to promote

positive physical and psychological health outcomes of gender-diverse students.

Upon reflection, my own experience in attending an all-girls secondary institution enabled my

own personal and cultural biases, which have subsequently been challenged. Heteronormativity

and cisgender identity was presumed as the basis of my schooling, whereby ‘boys would

distract me’, and my education would prove more fruitful ‘away from distraction’. Utilising

feminist post-structuralist framework allows for a critical deconstructing of this assumption,

through an investigation into the reductive reasoning, enabled by predominant gender

discourse. As a future educator, this framework could prove advantageous in deconstructing

dominant gender discourse within the classroom. An awareness and knowledge of the diversity

of gender identity would prove hugely beneficial in decreasing social marginalisation and

7 18025558
isolation of gender diverse students, particularly when applied to my key learning areas of

English and Modern History. In English, for example, the inclusion of gender diverse authors

and materials that explicitly address gender diversity issues as a key theme may prove

inclusive. This would provide a space for critical thinking, and an awareness and knowledge

of cisgendered norms. Furthermore, in application to Modern History, a focus on gender

diversity and power in relation to gender throughout certain historical societies and cultures

may provide an analysis to the inherent power matrix within gender. In practice this may

involve reviewing prominent historical figures in relation to their gender or sexual diversity,

or analysing the power relations within certain matrilineal societies, to challenge dominant

gender discourse.

Case studies such as Jeremy Beach (Cook, 2015), and Erik Ly (Cook, 2016), provide insight

into the medias current framing of schools struggling to meet equitable and accessible practices

for gender diverse students. It is necessary to encourage positive teacher habitus to promote an

awareness and inclusivity, as well as to provide a knowledge on the diversity of gender, outside

of the dominating dualist masculine and feminine discourse and cisgender-privilege. Utilising

feminist and post-structuralist framework, allows a deconstruction of the inherent power

relations within current gender discourse, and helps breakdown cisgendered and

heteronormative privilege within schools. Further, whilst policies such as the ‘Bullying:

Preventing and Responding to Student Bullying in Schools Policy’ (NSW Department of

Education and Communities, 2011), and ‘Supporting Sexual Diversity in Schools’ (Department

of Education and Early Childhood Development, 2008) are an attempt at paving supportive

and inclusive systems and pedagogical practices, they in many ways fall short of

acknowledging the true diversity within gender and sexuality. In turn, government legislation

and educational policy must be reviewed to be entirely inclusive, and prevent marginalisation

8 18025558
of gender diverse students. As such, a holistic acknowledgement, support, and acceptance of

diversity is paramount, to provide the opportunity for full participation within the learning

environment.

9 18025558
References

Burford, J., Lucassen, M. F. G., & Hamilton, T. (2017) Evaluating a gender diversity

workshop to promote positive learning environments. Journal of LGBT Youth, 14(2),

211-227. doi: 10.1080/19361653.2016.1264910

Cook, H. (2015, September 7). Transgender Students: The Struggle to Fit in at School. The

Age. Retrieved from: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/transgender-students-the-

struggle-to-fit-in-at-school-20150916-gjojgg.html

Cook, H. (2016, May 28). Single-sex schools in transition as transgender students gain

acceptance. The Age. Retrieved from: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/singlesex-

schools-in-transition-as-transgender-students-gain-acceptance-20160527-

gp5nkw.html

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2008). Supporting sexual

diversity in schools. Melbourne: Student Wellbeing & Department of Education and

Early Childhood Development. Retrieved from:

https://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/teachlearn/student/supportsexualdiv

ersity.pdf

Ferfolja, T. (2016). Sexual diversities, policy approaches and the construction of the subject.

In Ferfolja, T., Jones-Diaz, C., & Ullman, J (Eds.), Understanding sociological

theory for educational practices. (pp. 58-74). Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge

University Press.

Francis, B. (2010). Re/theorising gender: female masculinity and male femininity in the

classroom? Gender and Education, 22(5), 477-490. doi:

10.1080/09540250903341146

10 18025558
Jones, T., Smith, E., Ward, R., Dixton, J., Hillier, L., & Mitchell, A. (2016). School

experiences of transgender and gender diverse students in Australia. Sex Education,

16(2), 156-171. doi: 10.1080/14681811.2015.1080678

NSW Department of Education and Communities. (2011). Bullying: Preventing and

Responding to Student Bullying in Schools Policy (Publication No.

PD/2010/0415/V01). Retrieved from: https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-

library/policies/bullying-preventing-and-responding-to-student-bullying-in-schools-

policy

Keddie, A. (2012). Gender, difference, and equity in education. In A. Ashman and J. Elkins

(Eds.) Education for inclusion and diversity 4th ed., 396-397.

Rawlings, V. (2016). Gender Regulation. Gender Regulation, Violence and Social

Hierarchies in Schools. (pp. 31-61). London: Palgrave Macmillian. Retrieved from

http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=4745458

Smith, E., Jones, T. Ward, R., Dixon, J., Mitchell, A., & Hillier, L. (2014). From Blues to

Rainbows: Mental health and wellbeing of gender diverse and transgender young

people in Australia. The Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society.

Retrieved from: https://www.beyondblue.org.au/docs/default-source/research-project-

files/bw0268-from-blues-to-rainbows-report-final-report.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Ullman, J. (2014). Ladylike/butch, sporty/dapper: exploring ‘gender climate’ with Australian

LGBTQ students using stage–environment fit theory. Sex Education, (14)4, 430-443.

doi: 10.1080/14681811.2014.919912

Ullman, J. (2016a). Regulating ‘gender climate’: Exploring the social construction of gender

and sexuality in regional and rural Australian schools. In Ferfolja, T., Jones-Diaz, C.,

11 18025558
& Ullman, J (Eds.), Understanding sociological theory for educational practices. (pp.

39-57). Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.

Ullman, J. (2016b). Teacher positivity towards gender diversity: exploring relationships and

school outcomes for transgender and gender-diverse students. Sex Education, 1-15.

doi: 10.1080/14681811.2016.1273104

12 18025558

S-ar putea să vă placă și