Supports and Challenges for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning and

Asexual Middle School Students

Kathleen Ann Newman DiMichele

Cabrini University

W
IE
EV
PR

A dissertation submitted to the

Educational Policy & Leadership Department
in the School of Education
at Cabrini University
in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
June 30, 2020
 ProQuest Number: 28024937

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

W
IE
EV
ProQuest 28024937

Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2020 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All Rights Reserved.

PR

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled:

SUPPORTS AND CHALLENGES FOR LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER,

QUEER/QUESTIONING AND ASEXUAL MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS

prepared by

KATHLEEN DIMICHELE

is approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in
Educational Leadership at Cabrini University.

Approved by:

W
7/3/2020
Beverly Bryde, EdD, Dean for Education
IE Date

Alia Sheety______________________ 7/3/2020

Alia Sheety, PhD, Coordinator for Doctor of Education Program Date
EV

6/30/2020
Amy Gratch Hoyle, PhD, Chair of the Dissertation Committee Date
PR

6/30/2020
Thomas Conway, EdD, Committee Member Date

6/30/2020
Colleen Lelli, EdD, Committee Member Date

School of Education
Cabrini University
June 30, 2020
 W
IE
EV
PR

Copyright © 2020 Kathleen DiMichele

All rights reserved
 Dedication

This work is dedicated to my supportive and loving family; my husband Carmen, and our

children, Christina, Melissa, Matthew, and Daniel. Your love, patience, and confidence are never

ending. In addition, this is dedicated to my mom and dad; your example in your careers as

educational leaders set the ethical and moral bar high. You have supported every adventure of

my life with joy and love. Finally, I dedicate this to LGBTQIA+ youth in middle schools, who

inspired my journey.

W
IE
EV
PR
 Acknowledgements

The successful completion of this project was in no way accomplished in isolation. Dr.

Amy Gratch Hoyle provided my first exposure to socially just policy and procedural education

decisions. As committee chair, her compassionate insights into marginalized youth, wisdom in

everything dissertation, and kind encouragement in this study will forever be valued. You are an

inspiration. Dr. Thomas Conway, my committee member who provided a greatly appreciated

sounding board, for ensuring the safety and anonymity of my participants, and professional grade

editing services. Thank you also Dr. Colleen Lelli for your time and support as a valued

committee member and advocate of diversity. Special thanks to the administration of Penn-Delco

W
School District and Northley Middle School. Without your pro-child mindset and support, the
IE
voices of the LGBTQIA+ youth would have been silent.
EV
PR

i
 Abstract

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+)-

identifying students are at increased risk for depression, suicide ideation, suicide, truancy, and

academic failure. Youth, identifying as non-binary in gender identity and/or sexual orientation

face unique challenges and need for supports, which are grossly underestimated by staff in

middle schools, manifesting in policy inadequacies, and unethical allocation of limited resources.

The publication and sharing of the recommendations made in this study may impact the lives of

the participants, middle school institutions, and this researcher through the raising of

consciousness. This study provides a voice to this at-risk population from a critical framework,

W
resting on the presupposition that informed educational leaders can be a vehicle with the goal of
IE
improved acceptance of diversity of values. A transformative approach, starting with the

assumptions that this group is marginalized, under or not supported by the current laws, and are
EV
in need of advocacy was employed. Emailed surveys and interviews were used to answer the

primary research question: What supports and barriers to academic, social, and physical health

exist on middle school campuses for LGBTQIA+ youth and their allies? University students
PR

anonymously provided the participants for this phenomenological study, completing Likert scale

questions in addition to open-ended questions on SurveyMonkey. LGBTQIA+ students

participated in recorded interviews, with responses and transcripts analyzed for emergent themes.

Findings indicate that exposure to discrimination, homophobic slurs, physical and verbal

harassment were varied in frequency and intensity, and LGBTQIA+ students had little

confidence in competence of staff to competently handled these incidents. The average age of

questioning fell within the middle school years, and close friends were chosen for outing adults

in the building or parents. The impact of non-traditional identification in middle school was not

ii
perceived to be uniform in the areas of academic health, absences, and physical health, yet social

health was negative for all. Finally, access to social supports, queer literature, gender-neutral

restrooms, nonheteronormative sex education and certified guidance counselors was low.

Educational implications of the findings and recommendations for action are made.

Keywords: Middle school, LGBTQIA+, GSA, sex education, supports, challenges, queer

literature, gender-neutral restrooms

W
IE
EV
PR

iii
 Table of Contents

Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………………. i

Abstract…………………………………………………………….………………………….. ii

Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………... iv

List of Tables……………………………………………………….…………………………. ix

I. Statement of the Problem……..……………………………….…………………………......1

Introduction………………………………………………….………………………...….1

Problem Statement………………………………………….………………………….…4

Purpose of the Study……………………………………….…………………...……..….5

W
Research Questions……………………………………….………………………......…. 6
IE
Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………....….. 6

Assumptions and Limitations…………………………………………………….......…. 8

EV
Significance of the Study……………………………………………………..……..….. 11

Subjectivity Statement/Positionality…………………………………………..….……. 11

Definition of Terms…………………………………………………………..…..…….. 12
PR

Concluding Paragraph……………………………………………………...…..………. 15

II. Review of the Literature…….…………………………………………………..………… 17

Introduction to Literature Review……………………………………….………………17

Impact of Violence…………………………………………………….………….…..…18

Policies and Procedures………………………………………………………..………...21

Gay Straight Alliance Research…………………………………………….….……….. 23

Stakeholder’s Impact on Policies and Procedures……………….……….….……….….27

Queer Literature in the Classroom……………………………………………………….30

iv
 Guidance Support………………………………………………………………….…….30

III. Methodology….……………………………………………………………….……………32

Introduction………………………………………………………………….……..……32

Rationale for Research Approach………………………………………….………....…34

Research Design……...…………………………………………………….……..….… 35

Site and Sample Selection……………………………………………………….…...… 37

Data Collection Procedures……………………………………………..…….……..…..40

Ethical Considerations………..………………………………………………………… 43

Data Analysis…………....…………………………………………………….……...… 44

W
Role of the Researcher…….…………………………………………………..……..…. 46
IE
Trustworthiness – Truth Value, Consistency, Confirmability, and Applicability…….... 48

IV. Findings………………………………………………………….………………..…..…….51
EV
Introduction…………………………………………………………………..………….51

Updates to Chapter Three………………….………………………………...…...……...52

Trustworthiness of the Data………………………………………………..……….……53

PR

Methods of Data Collection and Analysis………………………………..………….…..54

Findings…………………………………………………………………………..……...57

Participant Demographics………………………………………………..….…...57

Introduction to interview participants…………………………..………..61

Aubrey………………………………………………..………..…61

Bridget………………………………………………..………..…62

Callie………………………………………………..….………...63

Daria…………………………………………..…………….……64

v
 Emma……………………………………………...……..………65

Major Theme 1: Variable exposure to discrimination, harassment and

slurs…………………………………………………….………………..66

Discrimination and/or harassment……………………………….67

Homophobic Remarks…………………………………………...69

Experiences as a victim……………………………………....…..72

Lack of confidence in school support…………………………....74

Major Theme 2: Perceptions of Safety……………….……..………...…79

Major Theme 3: Variable impact on academic, social and

physical health………………………………………………………….85

W
Academic performance……….….……………………………...86
IE
Social Health………………………………..…………………..88

Absenteeism/physical health……………………………………93
EV
Major Theme 4: Limited supports available……………….…….……..95

GSA……………………………………………………...….….96

Gender-neutral bathrooms locker rooms……....……...………..99

PR

Queer Literature Access………………………………………..102

Queer Inclusive Sex Education…………………………….…..106

Education of Staff and Students………………………..…....…106

Certified Counselors……………………………………………110

Summary of findings……………………………………………………112

Chapter V: Discussion of the Findings….………………………………...…………………114

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….114

Discussion of the findings………………………………………………...……………115

vi
 Discrimination……………………………………………………..………...………..115

Witnessing of Verbal Harassment………………………...……………………116

Homophobic slurs…………………………………………..…………………..116

Physical and verbal attacks………………………………..……………………117

Lack of confidence in school support…………………………..………………118

Major theme 2: Perceptions of safety….…………………………….…………………119

Major theme 3: Impact on academic, social and physical health……..………………..121

Academic performance……………………………………………..…………..122

Social health………………………………………………………..……...……122

W
Absenteeism/physical health……………………………………..……………..123
IE
Major theme 4: Limited availability of supports…………………..…..……………….124

GSA clubs……………………………………………………………..………..125
EV
Gender-neutral bathrooms and locker rooms…………………………...………126

Queer literature access……………………………………………....…..……...127

Queer inclusive sex education……………………………………....………….128

PR

Education of staff and students…………………………………………………128

Certified counselors…………………………………………………………….129

Limitations…………………………………………………………...…………………130

Implications…………………………………………………………..………...………131

Implications for practice……………………………………..…………………131

Recommendations for future research………………………..………………...134

Their voices get the final word…………………………………..……………………..135

References……………………...……………………………………………………………….137

vii
 Appendices

A. Original IRB Approved Application for High School Students ..………………………..148

B. Email to GSA Officers…………….…………………………………………….......…….151

C. Assent form and Risks……………………………………………….…………...……….152

D. Amended IRB Form………………………………….……………………………………155

E. Approval Email for Amended IRB………………………………………………………..158

F. Parental Consent Form………………………………..….………………………………..159

G. Survey Questions…………………………………………..……………………………...164

H. Interview Guiding Questions………………………….…….…………………………….167

W
IE
EV
PR

viii
 List of Tables

3.1 Demographics of Interview Sites……….…………………………………………38

4.2 Sexual Orientation of Participants…………………………………………………58

4.3 Gender Identity of Participants…………………………………………………….59

4.4 Sexual Orientation of Interview Participants………………………………………60

4.5 Gender Identity of Interview Participants………………………………………….60

4.6 Demographics of Interview Participants…………………………………………...66

4.7 Frequency of Exposure to Discrimination and/or Harassment (Survey)…………..67

4.8 Frequency of Exposure to Discrimination and/or Harassment (Interview)………..68

W
4.9 Survey Participants’ Exposure to Homophobic Slurs……………………………...70
IE
4.10 Frequency of Verbal and/or Physical Assault (Survey)………………….……...…73

4.11 Perception of Safety to be Self (Survey)…………………………………….……..79

EV
4.12 Approachability of Administrators, Teachers and Staff (Survey)……………….…82
PR

ix
MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 1

Chapter I: Statement of the Problem

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+)

identifying students are at increased risk for depression, suicide ideation, suicide, truancy, and

academic failure (Fisher, et al., 2012). Youth, identifying as non-binary in sexual attraction

and/or gender identity face unique challenges and need for supports, which are grossly

underestimated by staff in middle schools, manifesting in policy and procedural inadequacies

(McCabe et al., 2013b). This study leads to an increased level of consciousness for educational

leaders and has the potential to transform policy and procedural decisions at middle school

institutions. In addition, the lives of the participants in the study, through magnification of their

W
voices, may prove to be transformed. The provision of a voice to this at-risk population from a
IE
critical framework, resting on the presuppositions that informed educational leaders, can improve

acceptance of diversity. A transformative approach is employed, starting with the assumptions

EV
that this group is marginalized; under or not supported by the current laws, and are in need of

advocacy, by educational leaders. This advocacy promotes the informed, socially just allocation

of supportive resources to provide a safe and supportive campus for all students. Emailed
PR

surveys and interviews were used to answer the primary research question; What supports and

barriers to academic, social, and physical health exist on middle school campuses for

LGBTQIA+ youth and their allies? University students anonymously provided the participants

for this phenomenological study, completing Likert scale type questions and open-ended

questions on SurveyMonkey. LGBTQIA+ students participated in recorded interviews.

Transcripts of their verbatim responses were analyzed for emergent themes, and

recommendations for action are made.

MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 2

Youth identifying as LGBTQIA+ are at increased risk in the areas of academics, social

health, physical health and safety. The potential for the school environment, where students

spend up to eight hours each day, to impact student success or failure in these areas is evident in

research (Fisher et al., 2008; Robinson & Espelage, 2012). The LGBTQIA+ population of

students fight for survival in multiple areas. Craig et al. (2017), identified these as inclusive of;

(1) institutionalized homo/transphobia; (2) a culture of fear; (3) marginalization and isolation; (4)

struggle with suicide ideation and suicide; and (5) coping with resilience. The predominance of

the research is indicative of this population of students being an at-risk group (Fisher et al., 2008;

Nadal et al., 2011; Robinson & Espelage, 2012; Sue, 2010).

W
On school campuses, LGBTQIA+ students face an elevated incidence of negative messages,
IE
largely ignored or minimalized by educational leadership. Staff in educational settings

underestimate the incidence, intent and damage of student and staff use of microaggressions, or
EV
“messages that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative slights directed at marginalized

groups in society” (McCabe et al., 2013b, p. 10) on nontraditional students. LGBTQIA+ student

marginalization is frequently perpetuated by people espousing egalitarian values but fail to

PR

recognize and react to homophobic language against this population (Nadal et al., 2011; Sue,

2010). Lack of conscious acknowledgement negatively impacts these students and “is another

form of microaggression” (McCabe et al., 2013b, p. 20). Teachers and administrators dismiss the

bullying they witness as due to immaturity of the offender (Preston, 2016). In addition, some

support their inaction on the behalf of the victims, positing that the LGBTQIA+ victims flaunt

their diversity, reducing the sympathy they feel for the victims (Preston, 2016). Future social and

physical health is at risk when LGBTQIA+ students are victims of bullying.

MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 3

A significant correlation exists between LGBTQIA+ adult recollections of bullying and

current bullying; fear of negative evaluation; and shame-focused coping strategies. Devis-Devis,

et al. (2018) reported these strategies found in adults with a history of bullying include self-

attack, withdrawal, attacking others, and avoidance. The short-term and long-term influences of

ineffective bullying interventions by educational leaders is in need of additional research

support.

This qualitative, phenomenological study focuses on the unique challenges and supports

faced by middle school LGBTQIA+ youth from the perspective of university students. The

primary researcher’s experience as a teacher in a public middle school has led to a keen

W
awareness of a perception among educational leaders that the provision of supplemental
IE
supports, including but not limited to Gay Straight Alliances (GSAs); free access to gender-

neutral restrooms and lockers; and assertions that privacy rights for the LGBTQIA+ population
EV
of students at the middle school level is age inappropriate. These educational leaders tout that the

needs of students who identify as non-binary in gender and/or attraction can be fulfilled by

Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS), and that PBIS is sufficient and appropriate
PR

in isolation. PBIS is a school-wide initiative, focusing upon rewards not punishment. Jeltova and

Fish (2005) stated, “Resistance toward systemic changes is not an abstract force but resides

within people and is maintained by those in power” (p. 24). The findings of this research have

the potential to inform these educational leaders, in addition to those in the wider educational

community in policy and procedural decisions, and the ethical allocation of the limited resources

of time and money.

Educational leaders, specifically teachers and administrators possess the power to facilitate

an improved environment for this population. Policy and procedural decisions are made at the
MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 4

district and building levels. The current legislative environment leaves policy making for

LGBTQIA+ students enrolled in public school in the hands of the states, who are inclined to

defer to the individual districts and institutions (Kretz, 2013). This landscape makes extensive,

qualitative research imperative and timely for policy makers, students, and the community.

Emailed surveys and in-depth interviews were used to answer the primary research question;

What supports and barriers to academic, social, and physical health exist on middle school

campuses for LGBTQIA+ youth and their allies? The phenomenological method of qualitative

data collection is a fit, aligning with this researcher’s propensity for storytelling, the educational

policy implications, and the questions that emerged, is narrative, and interpreted through a

W
critical framework (Creswell, 2013; Maxwell, 2013). This methodological approach to inquiry,
IE
as Creswell (2013) stated, “Start with assumptions of power and identity struggles, document

them, and call for action and change” (p. 37). The aim of informing educational leaderships’
EV
policy, procedural and pedagogical efforts is a socially just endeavor, leading to an environment

that is not only safe, but one of support for all students.

Problem Statement
PR

The LGBTQIA+ population of students fight for survival in multiple areas. Craig et al.

(2017) identified these as inclusive of; (1) institutionalized homo/transphobia; (2) a culture of

fear; (3) marginalization and isolation; (4) struggle with suicide ideation and suicide; and (5)

coping with resilience. A deep, rich examination of this populations’ reflective perceptions of the

challenges they faced in middle school’s impact upon their academic, social and physical health

fills a gap in current literature. In addition, the results of this study, through the discovery of

effective supports, may serve educational leaders and staff in middle schools in the effective

allocation of resources. The aim of improvement of academic, social, and physical health
MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 5

outcomes for LGBTQIA+ - identifying middle school youth, previously underrepresented in

research, is a socially just quest for knowledge.

Purpose of the Study

This study endeavors to provide a voice to an at-risk, marginalized population of middle

school youth. The focus is upon the unique challenges and supports that exist in middle schools

for LGBTQIA+ youth from the perspective of university students. Numerous large-scale

quantitative studies examined the experiences of students in kindergarten through grade twelve,

including but not limited to the Pennsylvania Youth Survey (PAYS), the YouthTruth survey, and

the National School Climate Survey (GLSEN, 2017; Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and

W
Delinquency, 2017b). Although these longitudinal studies provide valuable information
IE
regarding school climate and the perceptions of students about their environments to educational

leaders, lacking is a rich, in-depth description and personalization of the individual middle
EV
school student’s perceptions, presenting a gap in literature. The smaller size and scope of this

study, paired with the rich, descriptive in-depth description of the phenomenological study

helped to fill this gap, providing a voice to a marginalized minority population. My experience as
PR

a public, Northeastern United States middle school teacher with LGBTQIA+-identifying youth

has brought to light a mismatch between research and educational leaderships’ practices and

policy decisions for the support of these students. This study seeks to fill the gap in literature

surrounding the personal experiences of students identifying as non-binary at the middle school

level. The dissemination of the results of this study, through communication with colleagues and

other stakeholders, benefits educational leaders through publication in scholarly journals and

presentations at conferences (Hancock & Algozinne, 2017).

MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 6

Research Question

The primary research question to be answered is:

1. What supports and barriers to academic, social, and physical health exist on middle

school campuses for LGBTQIA+ youth and their allies from the perception of

university students?

a. More specifically: What is their perception of available supports and lack

of supports, such as a GSA, upon academic success and school attendance,

social health, and physical health during their middle school years?

b. Furthermore: What additional challenges are perceived to exist for the

W
LGBTQIA+ youth from a reflective stance?

Theoretical Framework
IE
The pursuit of an answer to these research questions is supported and justified in research.
EV
Elements of Queer Theory as a focus of research are applicable, as outlined by Plummer (2011).

The openness, fluidity and non-fixed nature of the sexual categories, the decentering of identity,

and a focus of interest upon insider and outsider perspectives and transgressions, as put forth by
PR

Plummer as characteristic of Queer Theory were applicable. Other aspects of Plummer’s Queer

Theory were not applicable to the study. Specifically, what Plummer defined in this theory, by

stating, “The most frequent interests include the social world of the so-called radical sexual

fringe (e.g., drag kings and queens), and sexual playfulness” (p. 201). These elements of Queer

Theory were not included in this study. Additionally, the common objects of study including

films, novels, poetry, and visual images, were ignored, while they are a common focus in Queer

Theory.
MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 7

The four key dimensions of a life-course framework (Cohler & Hammack, 2007; Elder,

1998) asserts that lives are interdependent and influence individuals’ lives; significant

experiences have a differential impact at various stages of the life course; individuals make

choices influenced by social contexts; and that historical perspective impacts the forces and

factors that shape an individual’s experience. This theoretical framework joined with that of

Maslow’s (1943) Hierarchy of Needs and parts of Queer Theory, provided the theoretical

framework for this study.

According to Maxwell (2013), a transformative framework fills the gap left by the

interpretive frameworks of the post-positivists and the constructivists. While marginalized

W
individuals are not supported by the structural laws and theories of the post-positivists, “the
IE
constructivists do not go far enough in advocating action to help individuals” (p. 25). This study

possesses the potential to change the lives of participants, through provision of a voice; middle
EV
school institutions, in attitudes and climate and culture of the schools; and the educational

community at large, by raising consciousness.

Reliance on past observations; information gained through careful posing of questions; and
PR

the researcher’s impact on the responses is an ever-present consideration in the collection of data

and the ensuing analysis (McInroy, 2016). Through this lens, an expectation of multiple realities

was anticipated to emerge from the data, not a single perception.

Foucault (1997) spoke to this task by asserting that “One must clearly feel that everything

perceived is only evident when surrounded by a familiar and poorly known horizon, that each

certitude is only sure because of the support offered by unexplored ground” (p. 144). He posited

that mobility of reality is not obtained only at a distance, through the acquisition of new facts,

but also close-up views of the situation that are in close proximity to oneself. The rich
MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 8

descriptions of the realities of the participants in this study will improve these views and aid in

the mobility of stakeholders’ perceptions of that reality.

The questions emerged were narrative and interpreted through a critical framework

(Creswell, 2013; Maxwell, 2013). This methodological approach to inquiry, as Creswell (2013)

stated, “Start with assumptions of power and identify struggles, document them, and call for

action and change” (p. 37). These power and identity struggles are the basis of reality, with

oppression, race or ethnicity, gender, mental abilities and sexual preference impacting privilege

or oppression. This interpretive framework, as defined by Creswell (2013), emphasized that

reality is known through the “study of social structures, freedom and oppression, power, and

W
control” (p. 37). Although diversity of values plays a major role within this framework,
IE
education can provide deep and rich information to enlighten stakeholders. This study sought to

impact the knowledge of educational leaders as a vehicle to a more informed acceptance of

EV
diversity of values, in alignment with interpretation through a framework of Critical Theory.

The study of the current and future academic, social and physical health of middle school

LGBTQIA+ students is a socially just endeavor, focused on a specific societal issue, namely the
PR

marginalization of LGBTQIA+ middle school youth. A prioritization existed in this study, in

accordance with Creswell’s (2013) delineation of procedural practices, to ensure that no further

marginalization was imposed upon the participants. Respect for the individual differences of the

participants was maintained throughout the research study, and a specific call for action was

outlined.

Assumptions and Limitations

The age and marginalized status of the sample population of the study were limiting factors

to the validity and reliability of the study. Youth must be protected from the possibilities of
MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 9

unintentional outing, and measures towards that end limited access to the human subjects being

surveyed. For example, a population of university students does not require express consent of

their legal guardians, but their informed assent is needed. This placed a barrier to participation

for students who are unwilling or unable to follow the assent procedures. Gelinas, et al. (2017)

made recommendations of the norms for the ethical recruitment, data analysis and ethical

implications of online communications from and between participants. These two key norms

governing social media included “respect for privacy and investigator transparency in

recruitment” (p.8).

The return rate of online surveys may have presented a sample that is not representative of

W
the target population. Honesty of respondents is also a limitation. Maxwell (2013) asserted,
IE
“Internal generalizability is clearly a key issue for qualitative case studies; the validity of the

conclusions of a case study depend on their internal generalizability to the case as a whole” (p.
EV
137). A phenomenological study has similar issues. Internal generalizability may also have been

compromised “either by inadequate sampling, by overemphasizing common features or themes

and ignoring of minimizing differences, or by imposing uniform theories that don’t fit all of the
PR

data” (pp. 64-65). The projection of my own views in interview settings may skew the

authenticity of the discourse and the themes that emerge.

Access to the participants required rigorous Institutional Review Board (IRB) scrutiny and

possibly limited access to the population. The participants in this study were my primary

gatekeeping focus, requiring a negotiated, renegotiated, complex and ongoing relationship

(Maxwell, 2013). The researcher’s relationship with some of the youth participants, as the

interviewer, has the potential to influence their candor or transparency, seeking to please by

responding in a manner that supports the perception of their role in the study. Failure to gain
 MIDDLE SCHOOL LGBTQIA+ CHALLENGES AND SUPPORTS 10

approval from the IRB or any of the local gatekeepers may have resulted in not having access to

the population.

The decision to use a university student population was sound. Consideration was given to

studying the current experiences of middle school LGBTQIA+ identifying youth and was

rejected for three main reasons. The first of these was the increased risk of unintentional outing

of a student. A desire to maintain the safety of the participants was of primary concern. Second,

the access to this population is restricted at an increased level. Finally, the desire for

communication of the impact of the experiences in middle school from a reflective perspective,

required students to have moved onto another educational setting.

W
Covid –19 stay-at-home mandates closed all schools and posed a major potential barrier to
IE
data collection. The originally proposed study (Appendix A) was a phenomenologically-

informed case study, with participants from one high school GSA and aged 14 to 18. Approval
EV
for this study from multiple gatekeepers delayed access to the students for nine months. Data

collection was starting when schools were closed, cutting off my ability to collect paper parental

consent forms (Appendix F) and to conduct face-to-face interviews. An amended IRB

PR

application (Appendix D) was submitted, changing to university students as the participants. The

new group, all over 18 were able to provide assent virtually.

The value of this case study “may depend on its lack of external generalizability in the sense

of being representative of a larger population” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 137). The lived middle school

experiences of the participants may not be representative of the larger population of LGBTQIA+

middle schoolers, but rather unique or extreme cases, which contributes to the body of literature.

Each middle school student has individualized needs for support, with internal and external

influences falling on a spectrum of intensity.

Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.