Strategies for Queering the English Classroom:
- Disrupt and address anti-queer speech every time it comes up in the classroom.
- Introduce and openly discuss LGBTQ-inclusive materials into the classroom.
- Encourage appropriate intellectual risk-taking in students through modeling and scaffolding.
There are three methods by which I attempted to queer my English classroom. The first of which was to disrupt and address anti-queer speech every time it came up in the classroom. Pratt argues that the classroom is a contact zone where different perspectives and ideologies necessarily clash in the process of collaborative meaning making (as cited by R. Miller, 1994, p. 390). R. Miller asserts that students often avoid expressing opinions in the classroom that an educator opposes, thus sidestepping what could be productive discourse (p. 396). In order to avoid this type of suppression of ideas that does not provide opportunities for co-constructed learning, I tried to call in students for use of anti-queer speech, rather than only calling them out and shutting them down. In many cases, it feels like an easier and simpler redirection to label a behavior as unacceptable and immediately move on; however, that doesn’t give the student an opportunity to understand why what they’ve said or done might be problematic. With this in mind, any time I redirected a student for their use of anti-queer speech, I tried to follow it up with a short conversation about how the word they used, and/or the specific context in which they used it, could be considered hateful.
A second strategy I employed was to introduce LGBTQ-inclusive materials into the classroom and openly discuss them. In their study of the ways queer-themed literature is introduced in the English classroom, Clark and Blackburn (2009) warn educators to be conscious of how they position their students as well as the literature being read; one should not assume that students are heterosexual and/or homophobic, nor should the work be included in a way that explicitly frames it as other (p. 27). One of my hopes in normalizing queerness in the classroom was not to create a “heroes and holidays” style unit that would segregate queer material and discussions to a particular moment in the school year. Rather, I tried to bring these materials and ideas to the everyday learning as a way to engage students in considering these diverse identities. The goal of normalization is not to erase the differences in experience and struggle that queer people may experience. Instead, it is a way to provide a space in the classroom where students can develop a language or a strategy for identity exploration in a way that frames traditionally othered identities as part of a well-balanced worldview.
Another method that emerged in practice, at times linked to the previous two strategies, was to encourage appropriate intellectual risk-taking in students through modeling and scaffolding. In a typical day, this means I would push students to connect to their own experiences with prescriptive gender and sexual identity norms through sharing some of my own opinions and experiences. In other situations, it meant setting the planned curriculum aside to allow students to ask questions about queer themes that may or may not have fit directly with what was on the agenda that day. Since many students, even the ones who sometimes seemed to demonstrate homophobic beliefs, showed genuine curiosity about queerness, I hoped that engaging with their existing opinions and understandings could encourage them to take part in honest self-exploration.
A second strategy I employed was to introduce LGBTQ-inclusive materials into the classroom and openly discuss them. In their study of the ways queer-themed literature is introduced in the English classroom, Clark and Blackburn (2009) warn educators to be conscious of how they position their students as well as the literature being read; one should not assume that students are heterosexual and/or homophobic, nor should the work be included in a way that explicitly frames it as other (p. 27). One of my hopes in normalizing queerness in the classroom was not to create a “heroes and holidays” style unit that would segregate queer material and discussions to a particular moment in the school year. Rather, I tried to bring these materials and ideas to the everyday learning as a way to engage students in considering these diverse identities. The goal of normalization is not to erase the differences in experience and struggle that queer people may experience. Instead, it is a way to provide a space in the classroom where students can develop a language or a strategy for identity exploration in a way that frames traditionally othered identities as part of a well-balanced worldview.
Another method that emerged in practice, at times linked to the previous two strategies, was to encourage appropriate intellectual risk-taking in students through modeling and scaffolding. In a typical day, this means I would push students to connect to their own experiences with prescriptive gender and sexual identity norms through sharing some of my own opinions and experiences. In other situations, it meant setting the planned curriculum aside to allow students to ask questions about queer themes that may or may not have fit directly with what was on the agenda that day. Since many students, even the ones who sometimes seemed to demonstrate homophobic beliefs, showed genuine curiosity about queerness, I hoped that engaging with their existing opinions and understandings could encourage them to take part in honest self-exploration.