University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Classrooms beyond the binary: elementary teachers gendered beliefs and classroom practices

(USC Thesis Other)

Classrooms beyond the binary: elementary teachers gendered beliefs and classroom practices

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Classrooms Beyond the Binary:
Elementary Teachers Gendered Beliefs and Classroom Practices
Amy Steele
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2024

© Copyright by Amy Steele 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Amy Steele certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Briana Hinga
Ekaterina Moore
Cathy Krop, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
This study is undergirded by the queer, social learning and gender schema theories to understand
teachers' gendered beliefs, the prevalence of cisnormativity in educational settings, and the
impact of those gendered beliefs on classroom practices. The purpose of this study is to explore
elementary school teachers’ beliefs about gender, student gender identity and the influence on
their classroom practice, including gender conscious practices that promote gender inclusivity.
Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, this study analyzed survey and interview data from
transitional kindergarten–fifth grade teachers in a large school district in California. Findings
from the study indicate that participating teachers define gender as a social construct while also
emphasizing the gender binary, male and female. Analysis of the data also revealed that teachers’
beliefs about gender influence their use of gender salient classroom practices of segregation,
integration, and labeling. The study concludes with recommendations based on the findings,
including professional learning, the establishment of equity policy, and policy auditing.

v
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my dissertation committee chair, Dr. Cathy Krop, for her guidance
and encouragement during the completion of this project. In addition, I would like to express my
gratitude to my EDL classmates. Their commitment to education, liberatory practice, and
educational equity is inspirational. Finally, I would like to thank my husband and children for
their unwavering, enthusiastic, and patient support of my academic and professional pursuits.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract...........................................................................................................................................iv
Acknowledgements .........................................................................................................................v
Table of Contents ...........................................................................................................................vi
List of Tables............................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures.................................................................................................................................ix
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study...........................................................................................1
Background of the Problem.................................................................................................1
Organization Context and Mission......................................................................................3
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions ....................................................................3
Importance of the Study ......................................................................................................4
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .....................................................5
Definition of Terms.............................................................................................................7
Organization of the Dissertation..........................................................................................8
Chapter Two: Literature Review.....................................................................................................9
Legislative Context of Gender Inequities in Schools..........................................................9
Gender Binarism and Cisnormativity in Education...........................................................15
Gender and Classroom Practices.......................................................................................21
Theoretical Framework......................................................................................................27
Summary............................................................................................................................30
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................31
Overview of Methodology.................................................................................................31
Data Sources......................................................................................................................32
Interview............................................................................................................................34
Validity and Reliability/Credibility and Trustworthiness .................................................36

vii
Ethics.................................................................................................................................36
The Researcher ..................................................................................................................38
Chapter Four: Results and Findings..............................................................................................39
Study Participants..............................................................................................................39
Elementary School Teachers Beliefs About Gender.........................................................45
Classroom Practices for Gender Equity.............................................................................58
Summary............................................................................................................................62
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion .........................................................................64
Discussion of Findings and Results...................................................................................64
Recommendations for Practice..........................................................................................71
Limitations and Delimitations...........................................................................................76
Recommendations for Future Research.............................................................................78
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................79
Appendix A: Survey......................................................................................................................93
Appendix B: Interview Protocol....................................................................................................96

viii
List of Tables
Table 1: Data Sources 32
Table 2: Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Current Grade Level Teaching 40
Table 3: Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Years of Experience 41
Table 4: Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Gender Identity 42
Table 5: Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Racial Identity 43
Table 6: Interview Participants (Pseudonyms), Grade Level and School 44
Table 7: Themes in the Open Responses to the Survey Question Asking, “In Your Own
Words, How Do You Define Gender?” 46
Table 8: Survey Questions About Teacher Beliefs About Gender 50
Table 9: Survey Questions About Classroom Practices 52
Table 10: Survey Questions About Teachers Understanding of State Policies and Professional
Development 52
Table 11: Describe Two of Your Classroom Practices That Are Influenced by Student
Gender, if Any? 54
Table 12: How Do You, if at All, Ensure Your Classroom is Inclusive of Gender Identities? 59
Table A1: Survey Questions 94

ix
List of Figures
Figure 1: Tracking Anti-LGBTQ Bills 14
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework 29

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
The elementary school classroom is a fluid, dynamic environment where teachers
establish and set conditions that facilitate student learning. Teachers manage classrooms by
establishing systems that encompass carefully curated classroom practices that emphasize
structure, routine and constant monitoring of student needs (Wolff et al., 2015). Embedded in
effective classroom management strategies is a supportive environment that emphasizes the
relationship between teacher and student and the actions teachers take to facilitate prosocial,
empathetic behaviors (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006). Traditional classroom management
practices have been interrogated for their potential overreliance on strategies that do not affirm
student identities (Larson et al., 2018; Martin et al., 2016), including student gender (Andrus,
2018). Teachers’ beliefs regarding perceived gender identity negatively impact school
experiences, particularly regarding teachers’ behavioral and academic assumptions (Doornkamp
et al., 2022; Mangin, 2022; Morrisette et al., 2018). Understanding the relationship of elementary
school teachers’ beliefs about gender and their classroom practices will serve as a catalyst for
enabling gender conscious classrooms that affirm a plurality of gender identities and refrain from
reinforcing gender inequities.
Background of the Problem
Legislative action has paved inroads to ameliorate barriers for underserved and
underrepresented groups, including for gender inequities in education. Forty years ago, Title IX
of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 assured equal access to education for all genders.
Title IX’s purpose was to explicitly address gender-based discrimination, aiming to establish
equal opportunities in educational institutions for males and females. Inclusion of female
students was later incentivized by The Women’s Educational Equity Act (WEEA) as an effort to

2
minimize sex role stereotyping. Additionally, the Office of Civil rights issued a Notice of
Interpretation extending protection from discrimination to include all gender identities
(Department of Education, 2020).
Despite these political mandates to protect individuals from gender-based discrimination
and ensure equal access to education, a cisnormative framework persistently undergirds school
practices, structure, and environments (Miller et al., 2018). Cisnormativity assumes that students
are of two distinct genders, and they should adhere to and behave according to society's norms
about gender (Berger et al., 2021). Teachers’ gendered beliefs regarding academic capacity
impact student performance. The body of literature evidence that teachers’ gendered beliefs
negatively impact student wellness and achievement for both girls and boys (Carlana, 2009;
Doornkamp et al., 2022; Master et al., 2016; Morissette et al., 2018).
In recent years, closing gender gaps in educational achievement has heralded success, as
female students now outnumber men in collegiate enrollment (US Census Bureau, 2021). Gender
equity is compromised in this comparison as it relies solely on gender in binary comparison.
The increase of female enrollment in universities as a meritorious achievement of the equity fight
for gender equality unfairly posits female students as winners (Davison, 2006) silencing
historical inequities and subtly ignoring a broader spectrum of gender identities. Despite gains in
female collegiate enrollment, negative outcomes for students in school settings due to gender
stereotyping and gender exclusivity is continuously evident in investigations on imbalances in
educational access to advanced courses (Riley, 2004) and academic achievement (Doornkamp et
al., 2022; Kuchynka, 2022).
The National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality (2021) aimed to reprioritize gender
equity as a fundamental legislative priority. Published at the onset of President Biden’s

3
administration, the strategy outlines myriad initiatives to advance equity across settings. Among
these initiatives is a directive to expand culturally responsive school discipline, incentives for
girls’ access to learning, and policies to ensure education as a discrimination free setting for all
gender identities. Gender on the political and educational landscape continues its relevance as a
factor influencing student outcomes. As a result, further study to understand teacher perspectives
will support schools in inclusive practices for students of all gender identities.
Organization Context and Mission
This study took place in a large suburban school district in Northern California. Total
enrollment in the school district is over 10,000 students. The school district spans multiple cities
in northern California and includes over twenty schools including elementary, middle, and
alternative campuses. The participants in the study are elementary school teachers. The teachers
interviewed and surveyed are currently employed in the school district and are currently teaching
in transitional kindergarten, kindergarten, first, second, third, fourth or fifth grade classrooms.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to explore elementary teachers’ beliefs about gender,
student gender identity and the relationship of their beliefs and classroom practices.
The research questions addressed in this study explore:
1. What beliefs do elementary school teachers have about gender?
2. How do elementary school teachers’ gendered beliefs influence classroom practices?
3. What classroom practices do elementary school teachers utilize to ensure equity for
students of all genders?

4
Importance of the Study
The classroom setting, facilitated by a teacher, is the core educational environment where
students engage socially, academically, and emotionally. Teacher beliefs regarding gender have a
salient, documented effect on student school experiences in extant literature (Alan et., al, 2018;
Brickhouse et al., 2000; Riley, 2014). At the same time, educational practitioners continue to
display reluctance to accept an inclusive definition of gender (Morgenroth et al., 2021) and rely
on identifying students only in binary terms: male and female. Binary gendering solidifies
hierarchy, historically centering males in gendered debate (Yeatman, 1994). The reliance on
gender exclusive language reinforces patriarchy (Wilchins, 1997) and perpetuates traditional
stereotyping. Moreover, recent attention to gender identity indicates that binary categories of
gender may not comprehensively reflect how individuals identify (Diamond, 2020; Morgenroth
& Ryan, 2020), including children (Gülgöz et al., 2022).
Interpretation and application of research on gender inequities is further complicated,
Glasser (2008) asserts, by a lack of “explicit clarity” on what defines the term gender (p. 343).
To avoid confusion with the common language of practice or subject research to inapplicable
interpretation, gender must be defined at the outset of research. Studies that explicitly define and
decouple gender from biological sex are limited. In this study and subsequent discussion, gender
is defined in alignment with the APA inclusive language guidelines as a socially constructed idea
about behavior, actions and roles of a particular sex. Gender identity, as referenced here, is a
person's intuition of their own gender, sexual orientation notwithstanding (APA, 2021). Critical
definitions for this study, including gender and gender identity, are included in the definitions
section of this chapter.

5
Societal tolerance to gender plurality has thus far been politicized in the educational
setting. Regardless of action by the Office of Civil rights to extend protection from
discrimination to all gender identities (Department of Education, 2020), inconsistencies in State
laws and local policies dictate the extent of teacher’s rights to engage in overtly gender affirming
practices. Teachers in Florida, for example, are subject to the Parental Rights in Education Act,
prohibiting classroom discussion about gender identity in early elementary schools. In contrast,
the School Success and Opportunity Act mandates that teachers in California are required to
facilitate access for a student's expressed gender identity. The politicization of gender plurality
catapults the classroom teacher into a pivotal role in societal conceptualization of gender and
gender norms. As a result, it is important to understand teachers’ beliefs regarding gender, and
the connections between their gendered beliefs and classroom practices. This informs the
prevalence of gender conscious classroom practices that offer a bias free learning environment
for students of all gender identities.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study is guided by gender schema theories (Bem, 1981; Liben & Bigler, 2002;
Martin & Halverson, 1981) and social learning theory (Bandura, 1977), which offer frames for
conceptualizing the development and reinforcement of gendered beliefs in classrooms. The study
also utilizes queer theory (Butler, 1990; Halperin, 2003; de Lauretis, 1991; Warner, 1991) to
understand the inequities in gender based academic outcomes for students, as well as the
cisnormative structures undergirding school settings.
Albert Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory provides an explanation about the
reproduction of behaviors associated with gender identity. According to Bandura, gender roles
are a socially learned construct. A child’s perception of how to behave results from observations

6
of others. As a result, children imitate and adopt attributes due to the reward or punishment
received after performance of gender specific behaviors. In the classroom setting, reward and
punishments are common strategies for behavior management. The limitations of social learning
theory are its characterization of children as passive recipients of gender identity solely via
replicable behaviors and their subsequent social consequences. The assumption of children as
passive recipients is a conceptual gap that is addressed by gender schema and queer theory.
Sandra Bem’s (1983) gender schema theory purports that children obtain a gender
schema that guides their perceptions. The gender schema is a cognitive structure developed by
observing their societies cultural definitions of maleness and femaleness. After they have
developed this schema, the child will organize information about gender according to their
developing gender schema. Queer theory explains, and challenges, the historical centering of
heteronormativity and a binary gender framework (Halperin, 2003; Butler, 1990). The composite
of social learning, gender schema and queer theories encapsulates both the social environment
wherein gendered behavior is learned, schema is solidified and how gendered beliefs impact
individual agency to incorporate or assimilate new behaviors.
This mixed methods study utilized a survey and semi structured interviews. Participants
were elementary school teachers in a large northern California school district. The district has 18
elementary schools, each serving students in transitional kindergarten–fifth grade. The sample
size for the survey was 310 teachers. A survey instrument was utilized to collect data from all
elementary school teachers in the school district. Semi-Structured interviews were also
conducted.

7
Definition of Terms
Classroom management practices refer to the actions teachers take to create an
environment that supports academic and social emotional learning (Brophy, 2006; Evertson &
Wenstein, 2006).
Cisgender refers to an individual whose gender identity aligns with their sex assigned at
birth (APA, 2021).
Cisnormativity refers to the presumption that people should adhere to and behave
according to their society's norms about gender (Berger et al., 2021).
Gender is a socially constructed idea about behavior, actions and roles of a particular sex
(APA, 2021).
Gender binary is the classification of gender into two discrete categories of male and
female (APA, 2018).
Gender conscious is an awareness and acknowledgement that gender is a crucial identity,
and that stereotyping exists and must be critically challenged and addressed (Andrus et al.,
2018).
Gender identity is a person's intuition of their own gender, sexual orientation
notwithstanding (APA, 2021).
Gender essentialism is the belief that distinct categories of gender, male and female,
share fundamental qualities that make them what they are (Skewes, L. et al., 2018).
Gender expansive refers to a wider, flexible range of gender identity and/or expression
than typically associated with the binary gender system. (Human Rights Campaign, 2012;
Mangin, 2018).

8
Gender salient classroom practice refers to practices using gender as a categorical
dimension, characterized by gender labeling, gender segregation, (Bigler, 1995; Farago et al.,
2022; Hilliard, & Liben, 2010).
Gender schema refers to a cognitive structure that organizes and guides perceptions based
on prior observations of society’s cultural definitions of male and female (Bem, 1983).
Organization of the Dissertation
This study will be discussed in five chapters. This chapter provided an overview of the
background, purpose, importance and theoretical framework that will be utilized to conceptualize
the research questions. Chapter Two provides a review of the literature that will examine
classroom and school environments that are influenced by teachers’ gendered beliefs. Chapter
Three describes the methodology utilized, including the sample and population selection, survey
and interview questions and data. The findings are discussed and analyzed in Chapter Four.
Finally, Chapter Five will summarize and analyze the findings, discuss implications of this study
for practice and offer recommendations.

9
Chapter Two: Literature Review
Indicators in the school environment where gender identity is regarded with assumptive
behavioral implications, such as stereotyping, impact students. An overview of the historical
context of relevant legislation to address gender equity is provided to understand the political
landscape and its impact on gender in schools. This literature review calls upon existent research
and highlights emerging forms of gender conscious classroom practices that support a plurality
of gender identities. The academic literature examined reveals the pervasiveness of gender
binarism and cisnormativity in educational settings and the influence of teacher’s gendered
beliefs on classroom practices and student outcomes. This examination also highlights the
evidence of gender conscious classroom practices as a strategy for gender equity in classrooms.
Finally, the theoretical framework reflects the centrality of cisnormativity and teachers' gender
schema as contributors to the selection of classroom practices.
Legislative Context of Gender Inequities in Schools
The U.S. Constitution offers all children living in the United States an equal educational
opportunity to public education. Embedded in a political legislative history and assured by our
constitution, education is inherently political. Schools are situated within a local context but are
subject to the legislative action of local, state, and federal government. The context of gender
inequities in education is embedded in legislative action and political discourse that persists to
the present day.
Federal Legislative History
Prior to the seminal passage of Title IX in 1972, the 14th Amendment and federal statutes
initiated the establishment and normalization of gender equality in American society. Although
the fundamental protection clause of the 14th Amendment ensures citizenship and equal

10
protection for all Americans under the law, its early interpretation and application resulted in
palpable gender equality gaps. A prominent example is the decision in Bradwell v. Illinois in
1873. In this case, the Illinois Supreme Court denied Mary Bradwell the right to practice law
because of her status as a married woman. Mary was the first woman to pass the Illinois Bar
Exam. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, wherein Bradwell’s representation argued that
her rights under the 14th amendment were violated. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed, ruling
that no constitutional violation occurred to the 14th Amendment in the decision to deny Mary
Bradwell the right to practice law because she was a woman. As a result, a precedent was
established that the 14th amendment did not provide protections based on gender.
The 1960’s and 70’s welcomed an organized assembly of activists highlighting
disparities between men and women. The landmark case of Craig v. Boren extended the equal
protection clause of the 14th Amendment because of a discriminatory retail policy in Oklahoma
that disenfranchised men. In Boren, the Supreme Court determined that laws regarding genderbased denial of retail sales are a violation of the equal protection clause (Craig v. Boren, 1976).
This ruling solidified the unconstitutionality of gender classifications as a basis to deny rights
under the law. Similarly, the political agenda toward gender equality facilitated workplace
protections. In 1963, The Equal Pay Act was established to protect against wage discrimination
based on sex, requiring employers to equalize salary between people of different genders who
perform substantially equal jobs (US Department of Labor, 2023). This was followed in 1964
with the passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act which established protections in hiring
processes and procedures for protected classes, including sex (US Department of Labor, 2023).
Employers, because of this legislation, could not discriminate in hiring practices on the basis of
an applicant’s gender.

11
Despite established statues in workplaces, education was largely exempt from legal
protections to ensure gender equality. In the 1960’s, the secondary school classroom was
frequently gender segregated, where both men and women were unable to access content areas
outside of socially acceptable disciplines. In some colleges, men were prohibited from study of
nursing and secretarial studies, whereas women were prevented from industrial arts (Busch et al.,
2018). Women were arguably most negatively impacted by gender segregation. Colleges often
utilized higher test scores and grade requirements for female admissions, and quotas to limit
female admissions (United States Department of Justice, 2012). Gender equality in educational
settings was targeted in 1964, in the presentation of Title IX. Embedded within the Educational
Amendments Act to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX was an effort to extend protections for
gender discrimination to educational environments.
In 1972, the passage of Title IX was the seminal legislative policy to address gender
inequities in education. The purpose of the legislation was to prohibit discrimination on the basis
of gender in all educational institutions receiving federal funding. The statute aimed to eliminate
preferential treatment for males or females by establishing comprehensive protections in all
aspects of educational institutions, including but not limited to admissions, course selection,
athletics, and extra-curricular programming (Busch & Thro, 2018). Title IX currently applies to
institutions in all 50 states and includes 17,600 local school districts, over 5,000 postsecondary
institutions, charter schools, for-profit schools, libraries, and museums (U.S. Department of
Education, 2023). Under this statute, all institutions receiving federal funding for education
purposes must ensure that the educational program is free of discrimination based on sex. The
statute also includes an enforcement system operated by the Office of Civil Rights. The

12
enforcement system is a proactive and public system that reviews complaints, conducts
investigations, and applies financial sanctions to noncompliant institutions.
Shortly after the passage of Title IX, the Women's Educational Equity Act (WEE)
extended the initiatives of Title IX by offering financial resources and technical assistance for the
implementation of gender-egalitarian instructional, curricular and counseling programs in
schools. Unlike the punitive nature of Title IX regulations, The Women’s Educational Equity
Act aimed to offer support and guidance for educational institutions to achieve educational
equity for women. Stromquist (1993) contends that equity gaps exist in Title IX because it did
not require sanctions for not addressing gender inequities in curriculum. Similarly, the Women’s
Educational Equity Act included incentives for gender equity in curriculum but no sanctions for
educational institutions that chose not to pursue incentives. The benefits of WEE depend upon
voluntary participation and are unlikely to strongly influence macrosocial shifts in gender equity
in schools.
Recently, a crucial ruling extended the protections under Title IX. In the case of Bostock
v. Clayton County (2020), the plaintiff was fired from his job after advertising participation in a
gay softball league. The Supreme Court held that discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation or gender identity is also discrimination “because of sex” as prohibited by Title VII
(Bostock v. Clayton County, 2020). Ultimately, the ruling solidified the extension of the
protections of Title IX to transgender and gay individuals. The inclusion of pluralistic definitions
of gender is also reflected in the White House National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality
(Biden, 2021). The National Strategy highlights education as an area of focus and specifies the
extension of gender equity and opportunity for all, as well as a resolve to strengthen the guidance
of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. It is, however, a call to action without

13
legislative authority that highlights discrepancies between rhetoric and practice, as evidenced by
variations in state and local legislation impacting gender in schools.
State and Local Legislation
Following the U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), the
Office of Civil Rights issued a notice of interpretation to clarify that Title IX protections include
discrimination based on gender identity. During the arguments in Bostock, parties presented
competing definitions of sex. In the rulings and interpretations, however, neither the Court nor
Office of Civil Right adopted a definition of the term sex (Bostock v. Clayton County, 2020). As
a result, federal legislative action protects all gender identities from discriminatory practices but
offers no guidance for defining who is protected. The validity of a pluralistic definition of the
term sex and gender is insidiously debated in state and local education policy, often limiting
teacher autonomy over curriculum, discourse, or acknowledgement of gender plurality. Federal
statutes offer protection from gender-based discrimination, but States and local governments are
ultimately responsible for the implementation of education, including curriculum (U.S.
Department of Education, 2020). Parent rights in education are at the forefront of political
consciousness and reflected in proposed state and local legislation. Those in favor of parent
rights seek to legislate parents' rights to engage and consent to various aspects of their child’s
education, including instruction on gender identity and the rights of transgender students
(Schultz, 2022).
Florida’s Parental Rights in Education Act, for example, has garnered national attention
for the conservative position that gender identity discussion is inappropriate in elementary school
classrooms. At the time of this study, The Florida State Board of Education was considering
extending the ban through 12th grade (Bernstein, 2023). The ACLU is tracking 510 proposed

14
anti LGBTQ Bills across the United States (Figure 1), many of which are intended to influence
how schools respond to sexual orientation and gender identity (ACLU, 2023). Alternatively,
some states have statutes specifically to support the rights of gender fluid students. In California,
for example, it is a mandate that schools offer curriculum for the purpose of teaching about
gender identity and ensure facilities use in accordance with students' expressed gender identities.
Laws and policies in states and local districts create inconsistencies, which are barriers to gender
inclusive environments in educational settings.
Figure 1
Tracking Anti-LGBTQ Bills
Note. From ACLU (2023, December 30). Mapping Attacks on LGBTQ Rights in U.S. State
Legislatures. https://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights?impact=school

15
Gender Binarism and Cisnormativity in Education
According to social learning and gender schema theories, children learn about gender by
observing their societies cultural definitions (Bandura, 1977; Bem, 1983). Children spend the
majority of their waking hours at school, making the classroom a pivotal environment for the
observation of cultural definitions of gender and reinforcement for gendered behavior.
The research reviewed here indicates that gender binarism, an assertion that the students are
either male or female (Gilter, 2009), is evident in education.
Gender Binarism and Cisnormativity in Classrooms
An online survey of U.S. educators found that teachers hold egalitarian views (McCabe,
2020), while other research findings indicate some are not aware of their bias (Morrisette et al.,
2018). Glock and Klapproth (2017) conducted a comparison study on elementary and secondary
teachers' implicit and explicit gendered attitudes towards ethnic minority boys and girls using an
Implicit Association Test. The researchers’ findings indicated that teachers' associations held
proclivity for ethnic minority female students, as they had stronger positive associations for
females than secondary teachers. The researchers found that elementary teachers’ explicit
attitudes displayed a different pattern, as they expressed positive attitudes toward teaching male
ethnic minority students. The researchers highlight that the majority of their participants were
female identifying elementary school teachers. They postulate that the result may be influenced
by the teachers’ gender and the perceived behavioral implications of males versus female
students, specifically increased classroom management for boys. The research suggests that
teachers hold explicit and implicit bias toward teaching students based on their perceived gender
of male or female.

16
Cisnormativity, like gender binarism, assumes two distinct genders, but also presumes
that people should adhere to and behave according to their society's norms about gender (Berger
et al., 2021). In a study to evaluate teachers' gendered practices in their classrooms, Farago et al.
(2022) found that teachers frequently utilize the binary gender labels boy and girl. In a content
analysis of the most recent editions of the top-selling children’s literature textbooks, Smolkin and
Young (2011) found that classroom materials center a binary view of gender identity. In Paechter
et al.’s (2021) investigation, the authors sought to highlight the school experiences of students
who identify as non-binary. This small but in-depth investigation of students in the United
Kingdom revealed a general exclusion of policy protections and classroom discussion about a
spectrum of gender identities. These findings suggest that teachers create conditions that
reinforce gender binarism by the selection or absence of language, classroom materials, and
discourse. Similar findings in preschool settings were investigated by Granger et al (2016).
During observations in U.S. preschool classrooms, the researchers examined the frequency of
feminine (e.g., dolls, dress-up), masculine (e.g., trucks, bikes), and gender neutral (e.g., books,
music) activities. The preschool teachers were more likely to facilitate gender neutral activities
with mixed gender groups. If they were facilitating same gender groups, they tended to facilitate
stereotypical consistent activities. This research suggests that teachers may reinforce binary
structures by assuming student gender identities. Teachers’ reinforcement of the gender binary
assists in normalizing binary stereotypical gendered activities that are characteristic of
cisnormativity.
Cisnormativity in Education Research
In the research reviewed for this literature review, survey instruments utilized for data
collection categorized gender in the binary male and female (Callahan & Nicholas, 2018; Chen

17
& Roa, 2011; Farago et al., 2022). Farago et al. (2022) utilized multiple survey scales to assess
teachers gender role attitudes, the promotion of gender salience, and the promotion of gender
integration. All three of the survey instruments utilized likert scales. The items on the scales
measured the teachers' attitudes toward mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, boys or girls. None of
the survey items offered a plural definition of gender. Chen and Roa evaluated 206 classroom
scenes from 10 months of observational data in their study of gendered kindergarten routines and
perpetuation of gender stereotypes. The researchers’ observational coding only utilized the
gender labels boy and girl in their coding system. The methodology did not offer student or
teacher participants an opportunity to select their gender identity or include gender neutrality in
the coding procedures.
Studies focused on the impact of gendered practices on trans children and youth (Mcbride
& Neary, 2020; Meyer et al., 2016; Miller et al., 2018), however, utilize research instruments
that offer a pluralistic view of gender identity. Glasser & Smith (2008) argue that researchers
need to clarify their conceptualization of gender research such that concepts are effective forms
of communication between readers. Without clarity, they argue, the construct of gender is
conflated with biological sex, resulting in a vague understanding of how gender influences
student school experiences. Understanding the impact of gendered beliefs necessitates research
that explicitly defines concepts and considers new theoretical frameworks (Paechter, 2021) by
investigating teacher beliefs without presumptive definitions of the term gender.
Teachers’ Gendered Beliefs
Teachers’ gendered beliefs are well documented in regard to academic ability and
outcomes (Alan et al., 2018; Riege-Crumb & Humphries, 2012; Riley, 2014). Teachers have
gendered attributions of student capacity in specific content areas, most noticeably with

18
favorability for males in math and science (Riege-Crumb & Humphries, 2012), and girls in
reading (Retelsdorf et al., 2015). The research suggests that teachers’ gendered beliefs have a
negative impact on boys when the instructional focus centers on stereotypically female academic
pursuits (Retelsdorf, et. al, 2015). In Retelsdorf et al.’s study on reading, for example, teacher
gendered beliefs favored female proclivity and consequently, boys underperformed on
assessments.
Teachers’ gendered beliefs influence their attention and responsiveness to students. In
Brickhouse et al.’s (2000) qualitative study of African American girls’ engagement with science,
the researchers selected the participants due to their expressed and extracurricular interest in
science. The researchers interviewed students, their parents and teachers, conducted observations
in science classes, evaluated journal writing, and conducted focus groups. The findings revealed
that teachers fail to respond to female students when they display initiative taking behaviors.
Recognizing the importance of teacher beliefs on the trajectory of a student's academic course
options, Riley (2014) conducted a study to investigate how gender influenced advanced study
placement. The researchers utilized fictitious academic record cards with the same academic
history, but the names and genders differed. The researcher concluded that teachers were less
likely to recommend girls for advanced study (Riley, 2014). A variety of studies also provide
evidence that teacher interaction is more frequent with boys (Jones & Dindia, 2004), particularly
in math and science classrooms (Greenfield, 1998; Jones & Wheatley, 1990; Lockhead, 1984;
Morse & Handley, 1985). These findings suggest that gendered beliefs about girls and boys are
intimately connected to teacher attention and influence student academic performance. The
studies reviewed here suggest that teachers’ gendered beliefs affect attention given to students.

19
Two significant impacts are related to exclusionary discipline and effects on student selfperceptions.
Teacher Gendered Beliefs and Exclusionary Discipline
Students who have been assigned exclusionary discipline in the elementary years are
more likely to be suspended in middle and high school and have increased dropout rates (Arcia,
2006; Skiba et al., 2014). Research indicates that teachers’ gendered beliefs are predictors for
exclusionary discipline in later elementary school (Clark et al., 2003; Yang et al., 2018). In a
longitudinal study, Yang et al. (2018) explored predictors of elementary school suspension by
assessing teachers’ behavior ratings. The researchers found that teacher-rated aggression for boys
and lack of parental involvement for girls were significantly associated with a greater likelihood
of suspension. They also found that a teacher’s assessment of child behaviors in early elementary
school predicted suspension. Research has evidenced that teachers and administrators, even
when not associated with exclusionary discipline, articulate gendered assumptions about conflict
style, namely that girls display emotionality while boys utilize aggression (Morrisette et al.,
2018).
School disciplinary practices uniquely disadvantage Black girls who are subject to
adultification bias (Blake, 2019; Morris, 200; Epstein, 2017). Adultification bias is the attribution
of behavioral expectations typical for adults, resulting in more punitive and exclusionary
disciplinary consequences for Black female students (Annama et al., 2019; Epstein, 2017). In
alignment with Rennie’s (1998) assertion that gender cannot be considered without account for
myriad positionalities, these findings also suggest that gendered beliefs may be interconnected
with their perceptions on race (Crenshaw et al., 2015). The findings suggest that teachers’ beliefs
about student gendered behavior is a relevant predictor of exclusionary discipline and addressing

20
these predictors of suspension in the early elementary years may be an important area for
intervention.
Teachers Gendered Beliefs and Student Self Perceptions
According to Bem (1983), the development of gender schema is the result of observing
and receiving reinforcement for gendered ideas. Internalization of gendered beliefs can have
negative academic and social consequences for students (Brown, 2003; Skelton et al., 2019).
Young women who adopt cultural messages about femininity reinforce gendered beliefs through
an increase in female-on-female critique, judging one another on the female gender stereotypes
(Brown, 2003), and attempt to hide academic ability within the confines of socially acceptable
classroom behavior for females (Skelton et al., 2019). These findings suggest that female
students, regardless of academic performance, engage in behavior according to gender
stereotypes for self-preservation in social environments.
Children whose gender identities are incongruous with cisnormativity are most
vulnerable in schools (Kosciw et al., 2020; Miller et al., 2018). Mangin (2022) conducted a study
on elementary school teachers’ strategies to support gender expansive students. The findings
articulated barriers to inclusive environments, including teachers' deficit perspectives about trans
children, contributing to a classroom setting where gender expansive students are excluded. The
findings from the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network’s (GLSEN) 2019 School
Climate Survey highlight concerns for gender fluid students’ real and perceived safety in school.
The survey collected feedback from over 16,000 students to understand the experiences of
lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth. The survey results indicated that
transgender students reported more hostile school experiences than cisgender students, those
whose gender identity aligns with their sex assigned at birth and non-binary students, who do not

21
identify as solely male or female (Kosviw et al., 2020). Moreover, the survey results indicated
that transgender students experience more hostile school experiences than lesbian, gay, bisexual,
queer students (Kosviw et al., 2020). Surveyed students also reported avoidance of gendersegregated locker rooms, bathrooms, and extracurricular activities due to feeling unsafe and
uncomfortable. Of significant concern was that 50% of the surveyed students who experienced
harassment did not report to school staff because they doubted that intervention would occur or
they feared retaliation. These findings suggest that the protections afforded by policies, if they
exist, may not mitigate negative outcomes for gender fluid students if teachers do create gender
affirming classroom environments. Ultimately, teacher’s beliefs about gender can result in
classrooms that can mitigate or exacerbate the negative school experiences for gender fluid
students.
Gender and Classroom Practices
Classroom practices influence student climate, behavior, engagement and achievement
(Wang et al., 1994). Teachers utilize classroom strategies to set conditions for student learning,
referred to in practice and research as classroom management (Brophy, 2006). Current
conceptualizations of classroom management adopt an ecological perspective, with four salient
indicators of effective practices: positive teacher and student interactions; support for moral and
social values; proactive approaches to self-discipline; and adjustment of strategies based on
student characteristics (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006). Martin et al. (2023) acknowledge that
public perception of classroom management is often preoccupied by classroom discipline but
argue that the construct is far more complex than the indicators. They assert that precursors to
teacher actions influence classroom management decisions. Teachers’ assumptive beliefs about
gendered behavior will influence the strategies utilized to create a supportive environment and

22
manage behavior. Teachers, then, are likely to utilize gendered classroom practices in
accordance with their beliefs about gender, making classroom practices a crucial component of
student learning about gendered expectations.
Gender Salient Practices
Teachers employ gender salient practices when it is functional to utilize gender as a
categorical dimension, such as frequent use of gender labels (Bigler, 1995; Callahan & Nicholas,
2019; Hilliard, & Liben, 2010; Farago et al., 2022). The gender salient practices of binary
gendered labeling ar associated with increased stereotyping and decrease of student preference of
play with students of other genders (Hilliard & Liben, 2010). Bigler (1995) hypothesized that
gender as a functional category would increase gender stereotyping. The researcher’s findings
were that the functional use of gender categories increased gender stereotyping in elementary age
students when teachers utilized functional use of gendered grouping during instruction. Chen and
Rao’s (2011) study of Chinese kindergarten teachers found similar results, noting the use of
gendered labels in the kindergarten classroom as frequently 56 times within a 3-hour session.
Farago et al. (2022) sought to examine gender role attitudes and gendered classroom practices of
Pre-K, second, and fifth grade teachers in the United States. The researchers concluded that
elementary school teachers utilized gendered labeling in the establishment of same and mixed
gendered groupings. In addition, teachers in this study articulated that the use of gender as a
functional category offers efficiency for the development of groups. These findings indicate that
the use of gender salient practices is pervasive in teacher communication, reinforcing the norm
of gender as a binary construct.
Gender segregation and integration practices are utilized to categorically organize
students by genders, either by facilitating same or mixed gender interactions (Farago et al.,

23
2022). Gender segregation practices may perpetuate gender-typed activity preferences (Martin et
al., 2013). Studies suggest that teachers who engage in gender integration practices, if they limit
salient practices such as using explicit gendered labels, can encourage positive engagement
between boys and girls without specific attention to the student roles as defined by their gender
in a collaborative group (Hanish et al., 2021). Teachers’ assumptive behavioral expectations may
result in classroom practices, including intentional segregation or integration of boys and girls.
Morrissette et al.’s (2018) constructionist qualitative research sought to investigate K–12 teacher
and school administrator perceptions about gender. Their research study was conducted in a
largely rural part of a mid-western United States. The authors’ findings revealed that teachers
articulated gendered assumptions, namely that girls display emotionality while boys utilize
aggression. This may be a contributing factor to gender integrated practices, as teachers
identified minimizing disciplinary problems as a primary reason to assign students to mixed
gender integrated groups (Farago et al., 2022). It is important to understand teachers’ rationale
for gender integration and segregation practices because of their influence on student beliefs, and
the potential for perpetuation of gender stereotypes.
Gender Conscious Classroom Practices
In a gender consciousness classroom, teachers facilitate acknowledgement, without
limitation, of student gender identities (Andrus et al., 2018). The explicit recognition of student
gender may support the relational aspect of classroom management practices. Embedded in
effective classroom management strategies is a supportive environment that emphasizes the
relationship between teacher and student and the actions teachers take to facilitate prosocial,
empathetic behaviors (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006). The promotion of a gender conscious

24
classroom, Andrus (2018) asserts, gives agency to students to understand the power of gender,
their gender identity, and how it impacts their learning.
As discussed previously, research suggests that teacher gendered beliefs influence student
outcomes (Alan et al., 2018; Riege-Crumb & Humphries, 2012; Riley, 2014) and may be implicit
(Morrisette et al., 2018). As a result, a gender conscious approach to classroom practices likely
necessitates professional training focused on dismantling gender disambiguation. Professional
development on gender and gender identities is a promising tool for practicing educators to
dismantle bias (Retzelderoff, 2015; Springer et al., 2020). In Springer’s qualitative study of an
intervention to support elementary school faculty in meeting the needs of gender diverse
students. The researchers’ findings concluded that connections to professional identities, tangible
resources, and shared terminology were positively received by elementary educators. Mangin’s
(2022) qualitative analysis of teachers who support gender expansive children drew similar
conclusions regarding implications for professional learning. Mangin’s interviews revealed that
teachers who prioritize gender affirming practices also articulated essentializing and deficit
perspectives. The researcher concluded that professional learning on gender requires a more
comprehensive approach, in lieu of the single session training often provided to educators. These
findings suggest that elementary teachers are receptive to gender conscious practices but
necessitate effective and transparent professional learning experiences.
Despite the potential for reinforcement of established gender stereotypes in classrooms,
there is evidence that educators can participate in dismantling bias through conscious
instructional and managerial practices (Capobianco et al., 2014; Whitford, 2022). In a recent
study utilizing critical literacy practices in Social Studies classrooms, Whitford (2022) displayed
promise for students to critically analyze their thinking about gender. In this study, Whitford

25
employed a social studies unit with second and third grade students focused on analyzing
implicit and explicit gender stereotypes using critical literacy strategies such as text pairing and
interactive read alouds. After an analysis of student work, student interviews, and parent survey
data, the findings revealed an increase in student identification of gender stereotyping,
willingness to challenge, and evidence of application in their daily lives outside the classroom.
Capobianco, et al. (2014) had similar results in science classrooms, utilizing exposure to
engineer-design based curriculum to evaluate the self-beliefs of male and female students. The
researchers found that after exposure, girls scored higher than boys regarding the strength of
their ability to solve problems. Hartley and Sutton (2013) revealed that students who had
previously confirmed gender beliefs regarding girls’ superior academic ability were influenced
by teacher expectations. In their study, teachers who made expectations clear that boys and girls
are expected to perform similarly resulted in boys' improvement without detriment to girls’
performance. Similarly, gender-diverse students reported feeling supported in classrooms where
teachers explicitly address gender stereotypes (Ullman, 2017), and openly affirm gender
identities (Mangin, 2022). Ullman’s examination of 704 Australian teenagers sought to
investigate school gender climate as a potential stressor. Seven percent of the surveyed students
were classified by the authors as gender diverse because they selected transgender, gender,
gender neutral, gender-fluid, or genderqueer as their gender. Respondents categorized as gender
diverse indicated that teachers’ positivity toward gender diversity as a predictor of student sense
of connection to their school. In a qualitative study over the span of 18 months and six states,
Mangin (2022) examined teacher practices in schools where principals were supportive of
gender-expansive students. The purposive sample for the first phase of the study included 20
elementary principals that were referred by parents affiliated with PFLAG, a national

26
organization dedicated to uniting families and dedicated to supporting, educating, and advocating
for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people and their families. The research study
was conducted in two parts, including formal interviews with principals followed by an
expanded data collection from teacher and parent interviews, evaluation of school
documentation, and classroom observations.
Mangin’s (2022) findings include valuable information about the practices of elementary
school teachers that create welcoming classroom environments for gender expansive students.
Collectively, the data revealed that welcoming classrooms are characterized by teachers who
engage in gender discussions, reduce gendered classroom practices, and actively affirm students’
gender identity. In these classrooms, the teachers perceived these as common classroom practices
that also address gender bias and support all students’ gender identities. These findings suggest
that instructional practices, including explicit acknowledgement of gender identities and antistereotype declarations may influence the student gender schema and transform classrooms to
environments unaffected by gender presuppositions.
Research also supports intentionality in text selection as an effective strategy to challenge
gender norms (Karniol & Gal-Disegni, 2009; Kneeskern & Reeder, 2020; Treapnier-Street &
Romantowski, 1999). In Karniol and Gal-Disengi’s (2009) study of first graders, students who
read gender fair readers were more likely to rate activities as acceptable for both boys and girls.
Similar results for upper elementary grade students were confirmed by Kneeskern and Reeder
(2020) who found that students responded with counter stereotypical answers after the
completion of a book that had been augmented to purposefully place characters in non-typical
gender roles. These findings suggest that teachers’ selective use of literacy that avoids gender

27
stereotypes may influence students’ burgeoning gender schemas with less biased perceptions of
gendered activities.
The literature reviewed clarifies the importance of teachers’ gendered beliefs and
classroom practices on student outcomes. The theoretical framework will provide a guide for
conceptualizing the influence of a cisnormative school structure and gender schema on the
teacher’s classroom practices.
Theoretical Framework
As reviewed in this discussion, the salient impact of teacher gendered beliefs on students’
academic and social experiences is evident in research (Alan et al, 2018; Jones & Wheatley,
1990, Lockhead, 1984; Riley 2014). This study utilizes queer theory as a paradigm for
understanding gender inequities in education (Butler, 1990; Halperin, 2003; de Lauretis, 1991;
Warner, 1991), particularly for gender expansive students. The study is also undergirded by the
social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) and gender schema theories (Bem, 1981; Liben & Bigler,
2002; Martin & Halverson, 1981). The theoretical framework is represented in Figure 2.
Queer Theory
Queer theory encourages a critical analysis in the dynamic exchange between social
structures, sexuality, gender and power. Queer theory disrupts normalized conceptualizations
around sexuality and gender and asserts that gender is dynamic, rather than static (de Lauretis,
1991). As a framework, queer theory may assist to disrupt heteronormativity and cisnormativity
that underlies structural institutions such as schools. Gender, in queer theory, is a construct that
has been socially normed as a binary structure of male and female. Queer theory asserts,
however, that gender does not exist in a binary structure (Butler, 1990), but extends beyond
narrow notions and definitions (Halperin, 2003). This framing is useful in this study, as

28
cisgender identities have historically been centered and privileged in educational policy and
institutions.
Social Learning and Gender Schema Theories
Social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) asserts that individuals learn about gender and
gendered expectations by observing others. Teachers who have observed stereotypical gendered
behavior will hold similar expectations in their classrooms. Gender schema theories (Bem, 1981;
Liben & Bigler, 2002; Martin & Halverson, 1981) also explain that individuals develop beliefs
about gender via observation of society's expectations. In Gender schema theories, however,
individuals develop a schema, based on society's expectations for gendered behavior and roles
and reinforcement of those expectations. The gender schema is a cognitive mechanism that
organizes understanding about gender and incorporates new knowledge or observations into
existing gendered belief systems. The assumption in this study is that teachers have developed a
gender schema, embedded in a cisnormative society and school system that influences their
chosen classroom practices. As represented in Figure 2, teacher’s gendered beliefs and schema,
their classroom management practices, and students’ developing gender schemas are
interconnected.
It is the contention of this investigation that teachers hold gender schemas, learned and
reinforced in a cisnormative society, that influence the selection of classroom practices. In
accordance with Gender schema theories (Bem, 1981; Liben & Bigler, 2002; Martin &
Halverson, 1981), it is assumed that teachers will process information about students based on
their own gender role attitudes which will influence classroom practices. Teachers’ assumptive
beliefs about gendered behavior will influence the strategies utilized to create a supportive
environment and manage behavior (Farago et al., 2022).

29
Figure 2
Conceptual Framework
Students are not passive recipients. As Sandra Bem (1983) explained, individuals will
observe their societies' cultural definitions of maleness and femaleness and develop a gender
schema that will be utilized to organize future information about gender. Students receive
continuous reinforcement for gendered behaviors through classroom rewards and teacher
attention. As a result, students internalize gender stereotypes and articulate social rewards and
punishments for gender specific behaviors (Lesko, 1988). Internalization of gendered beliefs can
have unfortunate consequences for peer relationships (Brown, 2003). The dynamic relationship

30
between the teacher’s gender schema and classroom practices ultimately reiterates gender norms.
This repetition and reinforcement of cisnormativity risks internalization by students into their
burgeoning gender schema, setting up a continuous reinforcement system of gender bias and
cisnormativity.
Summary
The historical context of gender inequities conveys the necessity of legislative action to
establish protections for gender identities in the educational settings. The established statutes are
the underpinnings of the current political landscape that has politicized gender identity in
classrooms and curricula. Classrooms are situated in the political arena where local policy
agendas may aim to both support or limit teacher autonomy regarding gender discussions,
instruction, and student rights to confidentiality. This chapter also examined literature that
supported the notion that classrooms and schools are embedded in cisnormative practices which
influences teacher beliefs about gender. In addition, the chapter reviewed gendered classroom
practices, including salient, segregated, and integrated gendered practices and their influence on
perpetuation of gender stereotypes. Finally, the chapter examined the burgeoning concept of
gender conscious classrooms, and practices that offer students liberation from gendered beliefs
and practices that reinforce stereotyping. This evidence, compelling and humbling, reinforces the
necessity to understand teacher beliefs about gender and cisnormativity as a factor influencing
outcomes for all students. Chapter Three will outline the methodological approach for this
research study including: sample and population selection, interview questions, data collection,
and data analysis.

31
Chapter Three: Methodology
Chapter Three will provide information about the research design, methods, and
methodology for this study. It includes the methods utilized for data collection and the
corresponding data analysis techniques. It features a description of the participants in the study,
the research procedures, instruments, and limitations. The chapter also includes an analysis of the
position of the researcher, ethical considerations, credibility, and trustworthiness.
The purpose of this study was to explore kindergarten through fifth grade elementary
teacher beliefs about gender, student gender identity and the influence of gender on classroom
practices. The study also examined evidence of gender conscious and inclusive classroom
practices.
These are the research questions guiding this study:
1. What beliefs do elementary school teachers have about gender?
2. How do elementary school teachers’ gendered beliefs influence classroom practices?
3. What classroom practices do elementary school teachers utilize to ensure equity for
students of all genders?
Overview of Methodology
This study employed a mixed methods approach to investigate teachers’ beliefs about
gender, student gender identity and the influence of gender on classroom practices. The use of
mixed methods allowed the researcher to gain additional insight into the problem (Creswell &
Creswell, 2023). The researcher collected quantitative data via survey and qualitative data via
semi-structured interview, as shown in Table 1.

32
Table 1
Data Sources
Research questions Survey Interview
What beliefs do elementary school teachers have about gender? X X
How do elementary school teachers’ gendered beliefs influence
classroom practices?
X X
What classroom practices do elementary school teachers utilize
to ensure equity for students of all genders?
X X
Data Sources
Survey
To implement this mixed methods approach, a quantitative survey was utilized to collect
data to obtain information related to the two research questions associated with this study. As a
method for data collection, the survey standardized the information across a group of participants
(Lockmiller & Lester, 2017) to learn about select participants’ beliefs about gender and their
selected classroom practices.
Participants
The study was conducted in a large school district in northern California. The participants
in both phases of the study were elementary school teachers. This study utilized purposeful
sampling because the researcher selected participants with targeted criteria and unique
characteristics (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Participants were selected based on their current
employment as elementary school teachers who are currently teaching in a large public school
district in northern California.

33
Instrumentation
The survey instrument can be found in Appendix A. The survey was sent to 310
elementary school teachers employed in an elementary school district in northern California.
Non-probability, purposeful, population sampling was utilized in the selection of the participants.
All participants met the selection criteria of currently employed transitional kindergarten–fifth
grade elementary school teachers in order to address the research questions and support the
purpose of the study.
Data Collection Procedures
The survey included demographic, closed and open-ended items, giving the researcher
various answers to deepen understanding of the participants’ opinions and beliefs (Lochmiller &
Lester, 2017). In this study, the survey items asked participants to provide information on their
beliefs and attitudes about gender and classroom practices. The survey was anonymous because
the survey items investigated participant beliefs on sensitive subjects. The survey was developed
using Qualtrics and sent utilizing an anonymous link via email to the elementary school teachers.
The survey was accompanied by an introduction to the study (Appendix A). The introduction
provided information about the purpose of the study, the researcher, and the voluntary and
anonymous nature of the survey. The survey took 10–15 minutes to complete. Merriam & Tisdell
(2016) assert that survey instruments must use clear and familiar language that will be able to
extract desired information. The researcher was careful to ensure that the survey avoided jargon.
The survey questions focused on addressing two of the research questions regarding teacher
beliefs and are rooted in social learning, queer and gender schema theories that undergird the
theoretical framework for this research. Participant background and demographic information
about years of teaching experience, gender identity, and ethnic/racial identity was also collected.

34
The survey remained open for 3 weeks. The researcher sent participants two reminders prior to
the data collection window closing.
Data Analysis
The survey included closed and open items. Descriptive statistics were generated and
analyzed from the closed items. The intention of these statistical measures is to identify trends
and frequencies of the survey data set (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Demographic data was
collected to ensure that survey responses represented all grade levels in elementary school and a
range of years of teaching experience as well as gender and racial/ethnic identity. The open items
were coded by research questions and categories were developed to identify themes.
Interview
In addition to the survey, a 30–35 minute qualitative semi-structured interview was
utilized. Qualitative research assists in understanding how participants interpret their experiences
and how they develop a sense of meaning through their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Interviewing was an appropriate selection because the researcher cannot observe feelings or how
people interpret the world (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), as is the case with beliefs regarding
gender.
Participants
The interview sampling was a non-probability, non-random, convenience sample
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The participants were elementary school
teachers who also participated in the survey. The survey concluded with a question asking if the
individuals were interested in participating in a follow up interview. If they were interested in the
voluntary interview, the participants provided contact information in a separate link, assuring
that the survey would remain anonymous. Based upon the responses from survey participants,

35
the researcher intended to interview approximately eight to ten volunteers. In total, six
participants volunteered to be interviewed. Four interviews with teachers were conducted.
Instrumentation
The purpose of qualitative interviewing is to obtain data by gaining another’s perspective.
The research questions for this study included the constructs gender, cisnormativity, and gender
identity. The interview consisted of fourteen questions (see Appendix B). The interview
questions focused on addressing the three research questions. The questions were also rooted in
social learning, queer, and gender schema theories that undergird the theoretical framework for
this research. The interview protocol allowed for probes and follow up questions specific to
survey results, allowing for clarification or for the participant to elaborate on quantitative data
collected in the survey (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Individual interviews were conducted via the
Zoom video conferencing platform for the convenience of participants.
Data Collection Procedures
Participants who indicated on the survey instrument that they are willing to participate in
an interview were contacted via email by the researcher. The interviews occurred consecutively
to the open survey window. Participants were informed that their participation is voluntary and
provided the option to withdraw from the interview at any time or choose not to answer
questions. The use of pseudonyms for each participant and the school where the participant was
teaching were utilized for participant confidentiality. Each interview was audio recorded with
participant permission and transcribed upon completion of the interview.
Data Analysis
To gain an understanding of the data, the researcher coded the transcriptions by each
research question. In coding, categories were developed from the codes and interpreted into
patterns or themes in the participant responses (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).

36
Validity and Reliability/Credibility and Trustworthiness
Reliability and trustworthiness verify the degree to which the study ensures consistency,
while validity and credibility indicate that the study measures the concepts presented in the
framework. This study employed the use of mixed methods, a strategy to increase credibility
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher utilized data from both the quantitative survey and
the qualitative interviews to corroborate and evaluate findings.
In the quantitative portion of the study, reliability and validity were established by
standardizing instructions and attending to confounding variables. This study accounted for
confounding variables such as professional development or professional preparation in gender
equity or gender conscious instructional strategies.
In the qualitative portion of the study, the researcher sought to establish credibility and
trustworthiness. The researcher utilized the expertise of an elementary school teacher to review
the survey and give feedback on the questions to confirm that they addressed the topics of
cisnormativity, gender, and classroom practices. During the interview, the researcher engaged in
member checks. Member checks are a strategy utilized when participants express confusion
about the questions. Member checks support internal validity of the study, by checking if the
emerging findings are concurrent with participants’ intended meaning in the interview. In
addition, the researcher was cognizant of controlling external events, a strategy to support
credibility. For example, the researcher avoided surveys and interviews during the first
benchmark assessment week and report card preparation time window.
Ethics
This study adhered to the requirements of the University of Southern California
Institutional Review Board. The research instruments were reviewed by the University of

37
Southern California’s Institutional Review Board to ensure precautions against harm. Following
institutional review board approval, the researcher sought consent from the local school district.
The researcher was cognizant of local school board policy in the design of the study to protect
the confidentiality of the participants and organization. This process required the provision of
research instruments, the purpose of the study, and a review of literature. The researcher was also
interviewed by the associate superintendent of instructional services regarding the purpose and
methods of the study prior to approval.
This study adhered to the ethical principles of respecting human participants including
the ethics of confidentiality by developing procedures to offer informed consent and the
assurance of confidentiality prior to participating (Lockmiller & Lester, 2017). Participants in
this study, in both phases, were provided with statements confirming their willingness to
participate and the assurance of confidentiality. During the study, background and demographic
information was collected for the potential purpose of disaggregation. The demographic and
background information, however, lacked the specificity necessary to correlate it to individual
participants. The background and demographic information were collected to provide the
researcher with data to evaluate representativeness of the sample and to disaggregate.
Disaggregation of this data allows for closer analysis of discrepancies that may be masked by
aggregate data. Examples include identifying variations between demographic groups and
accounting for representation in the sample. This is an effort of the researcher to account for
equity while protecting participants’ identities.
Data was collected in a uniform and transparent manner. Survey data was collected
utilizing Qualtrics. The interview data was recorded using zoom and transcribed. After all
interviews were completed, the researcher de-identified transcripts and created pseudonyms for

38
interview participants and institutions. To ensure confidentiality, all electronic documentation
was destroyed after 6 months.
The Researcher
As Tuck and Yang (2014) assert, research is complicit with power. As a cisgender
female, the researcher is both within and outside of traditional gendered systems of power. The
traditional American school system was the researcher's frame for school experiences. Embedded
in traditional school experience is an implicit norming of binary structures that conceptualize
gender as only male and female, wherein males were most often in a position of academic,
athletic, and social power. As a professional, however, the researcher is in a position of power.
The researcher was employed as a Director in the Department of Educational Services in the
school district where the study will be conducted. The researcher also held power within the
confines of the research environment, particularly as the instrument of qualitative research. To
explore the topic objectively, the researcher sought to discipline subjectivity through a careful
assessment of the potential impact of her positionality on the conclusions (Maxwell, 2013).
In this study, gender is at the forefront of the research and interview questions. It is for
this reason that ethical considerations were important, specifically regarding showing respect for
the gendered experiences of the participants. It is unethical to falsely claim shared experiences
with interviewees (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). As a cisgender female, the researcher could not
understand the complexities of navigating the public education system as an individual who
identifies with a plurality of gender identities. Additionally, the researcher safeguarded against
reproducing cisnormative bias through critical reflection on findings and continual feedback of
the dissertation committee.

39
Chapter Four: Results and Findings
The purpose of this study was to explore transitional kindergarten–fifth grade elementary
school teachers’ beliefs about gender and their classroom practices. The study also sought to
examine classroom practices to promote gender inclusivity. The study focused on elementary
school teachers in a large public school district in northern California. The findings discussed in
this chapter will examine their beliefs about gender, classroom management practices in
relationship to gender and gender identity, evidence of professional development on gender
equity in educational settings, and evidence of gender conscious and inclusive practices. The
research questions guiding this study explored:
1. What beliefs do elementary school teachers have about gender?
2. How do elementary school teachers’ gendered beliefs influence classroom practices?
3. What classroom practices do elementary school teachers utilize to ensure equity for
students of all genders?
This chapter begins with an overview of the participants in the study. Then, results and
findings are presented and categorized by the research questions. Finally, emerging themes that
were connected to the research questions are discussed.
Study Participants
The study participants were selected because they are elementary school teachers who are
currently employed in a large public school district in northern California. For this mixedmethods study, the survey was distributed to participants first before initiating interviews. In the
survey, respondents were asked if they would be willing to participate in a follow up interview.
Interviews were arranged immediately upon response from participants. The interviews occurred
concurrently with survey responses.

40
Survey Participants
Names and email addresses for teachers were sourced through the public webpage for
schools in the district. In total, 310 individuals received an invitation to participate. The survey
yielded 42 responses over a 3-week period. All responses were utilized for this study.
Table 2 describes the percentage of participants currently teaching in each grade.
Participants were asked to select all grades currently teaching because the school district assigns
multigrade classes. Participants currently teaching fourth grade represent 28% of respondents,
whereas participants teaching first grade represent only 5% of participants. Overall, all grade
levels were represented.
Participants also spanned a large range of teaching experience. The largest percentage of
survey participants were teachers who had taught for 14 or more years, representing 57% of the
responses.
Table 2
Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Current Grade Level Teaching
Grade level Participants (N = 42)
n %
TK 4 10
K 4 10
1 5 5
2 7 18
3 6 15
4 11 28
5 7 18
Note. Participants selected all grades currently teaching. Participants may teach combination
classes of multiple grades.

41
Participants who have taught less than 1 year represented less than 3% of respondents.
Teachers who have been teaching less than 10 years represent less than half of the participants.
Table 3 displays the number of years of teaching of the survey respondents. Overall, the study
participants represented both teachers new to the profession and veteran teachers. The majority
of participants are veteran teachers.
The survey also asked participants about demographic information and their gender
identity. Most participants selected cisgender. Table 4 displays the responses from this item. The
item allowed for multiple selections allow participants to select all gender identities that apply
86% of the participants selected cisgender, significantly larger percentage than all other gender
identities selected. Transgender, non-binary, gender nonconforming were also selected by
participants. No participants selected genderfluid, while 5% of participants selected other.
Table 3
Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Years of Experience
Years of experience Participants (N = 42)
n %
>1 1 2.3
1–3 3 7
4–6 5 12
7–9 5 12
10–13 4 9.5
14+ 24 57

42
Table 4
Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Gender Identity
Gender identity Participants (N = 42)
n %
Cisgender 36 86
Transgender 1 2.4
Non-Binary 2 5
Gender Nonconforming 1 2.4
Genderfluid 0 0
Other 2 5
Note. Participants selected all that apply.
Survey participants were also asked about racial identity. Table 5 displays the responses
from this item. This item allowed for multiple selections to include participants who have
multiple racial identities. Most of the survey participants identify as European and Asian descent.
This is consistent with the student demographic information in the school district, where the
largest percentage of students are of Asian descent and the second largest are Caucasian students.

43
Table 5
Demographic Information of Survey Participants by Racial Identity
Racial identity Participants (N = 42)
n %
African descent 0 0
European descent 25 60
Indigenous to this land 0 0
Latin descent 0 0
Asian descent 14 33
Other 3 7
Note. Participants selected all that apply.
Interview Participants
The survey concluded with a question asking if the respondent was interested in
participating in a follow up interview. Responses from survey participants resulted in six
elementary school teachers volunteering to participate in a semi structured interview. The
researcher communicated via email with all six volunteers to arrange an interview. Interviews
were arranged via zoom with four of the six volunteers, with two of the potential interviewees
not able to be reached after several attempts. One of the interviews for a participant that was not
interviewed was confirmed and scheduled, but the participant did not show up to the interview.
The other participant did not respond to phone calls or emails. Interviews took place over the
duration of 3 weeks and each interview took approximately 30–35 minutes to complete.
Table 6 provides the interview participants’ pseudonym, current grade teaching, and their
currently assigned District School (DS). The school district where the survey took place assigns
teachers to combination grade level class, as indicated by the listing of two grade levels assigned

44
to Erin, one of the interview participants. Additional demographic information was purposely
omitted to ensure that participants could not be identified.
Table 6
Interview Participants (Pseudonyms), Grade Level and School.
Teacher name Grade level School
Sarah 5 DS1
Erin 1 and 2 DS2
Zara 3 DS3
Mira 3 DS4

45
Elementary School Teachers Beliefs About Gender
The first research question in this study sought to understand elementary school teachers’
beliefs about gender. Quantitative survey questions regarding beliefs about student gender,
comfort teaching students with ambiguous gender expressions, and knowing student gender
identity, were constructed to gather objective data.
Further, an open-response survey question asked participants to define gender and gender
identity to understand participant perceptions of gender, as reflected in Table 7. The question
asked, “How do you define gender?” Interview questions also included questions to understand
participants’ beliefs about gender including the questions “How do you define gender” and “Is it
important for you to know your students’ gender identity?” Analysis of the survey and interview
items led to three key findings about teacher beliefs about gender.
The findings include:
1. Teachers’ beliefs about gender are not embedded in cisnormativity, but they are
reflective of the gender binary.
2. Teachers’ beliefs about gender embeds gender identity.
3. Teachers’ beliefs emphasize classroom inclusivity.
Teachers’ Beliefs About Gender Reflect the Gender Binary
In the survey question asking participants to define gender, 25% of participants said that
gender is defined by biology at birth. This was also reflected in the interview when the question,
“How do you define gender?” was asked. Only one participant responded with a strongly
cisnormative perspective, stating, “I would define it as just what you’re born with. And I feel like
I have to get more specific. Just go down to the chromosome level.”

46
Table 7
Themes in the Open Responses to the Survey Question Asking, “In Your Own Words, How Do
You Define Gender?”
Theme Responses (N = 31)
n %
Defined as a social construct. 8 25.8
Defined as a biological definition (male & female). 8 25.8
Defined as a construct due to individual feelings. 12 38.7
Response did not answer question. 3 9.6
The interview participants reflected the concept that gender is a social construct or at least,
not so strictly defined. Zara shared, “Gender is how you identify within a social construct.
Within society, how you present yourself.” Mira also commented, “Growing up, it was very
black and white. You’re either a boy or a girl. As I’ve, you know, lived through the years and
listened and observed and seen, I think it’s a fluid thing.” Erin also echoed the other two
participants, indicating, “It is not related to one’s sex. It is an identity one feels within
themselves. Um, there are not just two genders in my opinion, there is a spectrum of genders.”
Mira and Erin were unique in their articulation of a fluid definition of gender, as this was
not reflected in the survey data where an overreliance on binary systems was evident.
Participant responses in the open-ended survey question, “How do you define gender?” reflect
a reliance on the gender binary, using only the terms male and female. Only two participants
responded to this question by identifying a continuum or naming a gender other than male and
female. The majority of participants, even those who view gender as a construct, articulated it
within a binary framework. For example, one participant communicated, “Gender refers to the

47
characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed through norms,
behaviors and roles society uses to state who a woman, a man, a girl or boy might be.” This
was also noted, “Gender has to do with what boys and girls are expected to do in their society,”
and “Where you feel you lie on the male to female spectrum. Your inside feeling, not
chromosomes or private parts.”
This finding shows the complexities and conflicts in the participating teachers’ beliefs
about gender. In surveys and interviews, participant perspectives on gender convey a belief that
gender is less strictly defined and is a construct that is related to societal expectations and
individual's feelings about their identity. Their statements, however, simultaneously
highlighted a gender binary framework. This is consistent with survey data wherein 70% of the
teachers indicated that they assume their students identify as cisnormative, agreeing or strongly
agreeing with this statement.
Teachers’ Beliefs About Gender Embeds Gender Identity
In accordance with APA guidelines, gender and gender identity hold related, but distinct
definitions. Gender is a socially constructed idea about behavior, actions and roles of a particular
sex (APA, 2021); whereas gender identity is a person's intuition of their own gender, sexual
orientation notwithstanding (APA, 2021).
In this study, survey and interview participants were asked to reflect on the definition of
gender, responding to a question “In your own words, how do you define gender?” In response to
the open-ended survey question, 64.5% of respondents reflected the concept of gender as a social
construct in their responses. Gender as a social construct indicates that participant responses refer
to the development of norms, expected behaviors, or societies definitions of roles assigned to a
particular sex. Of those respondents, 25.8% embedded personal identity as a characteristic of the

48
definition of gender. An example of this response was “I define gender as the expression of how
one would like to be perceived by the world” and “Generally, gender is divided [crudely] into
male and female but not everyone matches the gender they seem to be born with. For me, gender
is how you identify, not how you were born.” Three of the four interview participants also
referred to individual identity in response to the question of defining gender. Zara noted,
“Gender is how you identify within a social construct.” Erin differentiated gender from sex,
saying, “It is not related to one’s sex. It is an identity one feels within themselves. There are not
two genders in my opinion. There’s a whole spectrum of genders.”
As reflected in the prior finding, in both survey and interview responses, participants’
responses provided evidence that teacher beliefs about gender predominantly reflect social
prescriptiveness of the concept of gender and therefore are aligned with the definition of gender
as a social construct. The responses also indicate that teachers utilize the terms of gender and
gender identity interchangeably by including an individual’s feelings as a characteristic of the
definition of gender.
Teachers’ Beliefs Emphasize Classroom Inclusivity
Participant responses provide evidence for the teachers’ beliefs about inclusiveness and
student belonging. In response to the question (How does gender influence your classroom
practices?), all four interview participants spoke with enthusiasm about their strategies and hope
for students to feel welcome and comfortable in their classrooms. Participants confirmed that it is
important for them to know their students’ gender identity when it is important to the student.
Sarah commented, “I’m thinking it is good to know because they are thinking about it. It matters
what is occupying their minds.” All interviewed teachers shared the ideals of belonging and
inclusivity regardless of their articulated beliefs about the definition of gender. Mira shared, “I

49
can acknowledge them and correctly address them and acknowledge who they are as a person. I
think for me it’s important that I know a piece of who they are.” Erin emphasized belonging in
her response, “They all belong in my class. To be able to support them, give them language, give
them strategies, give them support, give them love for whoever they are to make them feel
comfortable in my room.” And Zara reiterated the theme of inclusivity, noting, “If it’s important
to them, then heck yeah. I want to support them. I want to, you know, make sure that they feel
absolutely accepted and loved and comfortable.”
Similarly to the interviews, participants had positive responses to survey questions about
their beliefs about knowing students’ gender identity and level of comfort with students whose
gender expression is not aligned with the gender binary. Most participants agreed that it is
important to know their students’ gender identity, with 38% strongly agreeing and 26% agreeing.
Table 8 reflects respondents’ level of comfort teaching students with ambiguous gender
expressions. Most participants in the survey felt comfortable teaching students of ambiguous
gender identities, with 46% responding strongly agree and 21% responding agree.

50
Table 8
Survey Questions About Teacher Beliefs About Gender
Question SA A D SD IDK
% % % % %
I assume that my students are cisgender. 20 50 18 10 3
I feel comfortable teaching students who
have ambiguous gender expressions.
46 21 31 3 –
As a teacher, I feel it is important to know
my students' gender identity to help
them succeed.
38 26 33 3 –
Note. strongly agree (SA), agree (A), disagree (D), strongly disagree (SD), I don’t know (IDK)
It is important to note that 31% of participants reflected that they do not feel comfortable
teaching students of ambiguous gender identities. While discomfort teaching students with
ambiguous identities was not articulated in the interviews, teachers did convey hesitation about
external conditions of concern if teaching students with ambiguous gender identities. Erin
articulated this regarding the use of utilizing pronouns, “It’s still awkward to me to write
sentences as an example with they/them pronouns. Switching up pronouns that’s a little bit more
tricky to me and it’s something I’m still growing on.” Zara, however, discussed the political
milieu regarding gender in classrooms, “There is a lot of gray area in many districts
interpretation of Ed Code and what we are allowed and not allowed to say. That’s popping up in
some areas of the state more than others.
The findings on these items convey a complexity of teachers’ beliefs about gender and
the influence on their practices. Participants articulated beliefs about inclusivity for their
classrooms but emphasized the importance of student initiation of conversation about gender.

51
The participants also agreed that they feel comfortable teaching students who have ambiguous
gender identities because they value a classroom environment where all students feel acceptance
and belonging. The findings suggest that teachers are conveying their comfort teaching students
on a gender spectrum, despite their articulated overreliance on the gender binary that
characterizes cisnormativity.
Elementary School Teachers’ Gendered Beliefs and Classroom Practices
The second research question sought to examine teachers’ beliefs about gender and their
influence on classroom practices. Table 9 displays participant responses to quantitative survey
items constructed to gather objective data.
Table 9
Survey Questions About Classroom Practices
Question SA A D SD
% % % %
I often refer to my class as “boys and girls.” 13 10 44 33
Student gender is a useful category to
organize classroom procedures.
3 23 49 26
It is not appropriate to discuss gender in an
elementary school classroom.
3 28 36 33
Note. strongly agree (SA), agree (A), disagree (D), strongly disagree (SD)

52
Quantitative data was also collected on professional development and awareness of state
policies. These questions were constructed to analyze factors that might provide context for
teacher responses to classroom practice questions. Table 10 displays participant responses.
Open-ended survey questions to address the research question (How do elementary school
teachers’ gendered beliefs influence classroom practices?) asked participants to list two
classroom practices that are influenced by gender. Analysis of the survey and interview items
asking about classroom practices led to key findings.
The findings in response to this research question include the following:
1. Teachers’ beliefs about gender influence their use of gender salient practices of
segregation, integration, and labeling.
2. Teachers’ have not participated in formal professional development on gender equity
in classrooms.
Teachers’ Beliefs About Gender Influence Their Use of Gender Salient Practices of
Segregation, Integration, and Labeling
Provided the forced choices, most teachers disagreed or strongly disagreed that gender is
a useful category to organize classroom procedures, nor do not utilize the terms “boys and girls”
to address their classes. Teachers’ disagreement was not unanimous.
To examine this further, an open-ended inquiry in the survey asked participants to
identify their own classroom practices that are influenced by student gender. Three themes
emerged in response to the question, “Describe two of your classroom practices influenced by
student gender.” When asked to identify their own classroom practices, most participants
identified gender salient practices. As seen in Table 11, the themes included gender segregation
and integration practices, gender labeling practices, and gender conscious practices.

53
Table 10
Survey Questions About Teachers Understanding of State Policies and Professional
Development
Question SA A D SD IDK
% % % % %
I am aware of state policies about student
rights and gender identity.
18 51 28 3 –
My school district emphasizes gender
equity in classrooms during
professional development.
8 18 28 21 26
Note. strongly agree (SA), agree (A), disagree (D), strongly disagree (SD), I don’t know (IDK)
As discussed previously and displayed in Table 9, most participants disagreed that gender
is a useful category to organize classroom procedures. Despite this majority, 26% of participants
did agree that gender is a useful category. Although participants disagreed that gender is a useful
category to organize classroom procedures, when asked to identify their own classroom practices
impacted by gender, most teachers identified gender salient practices. Teachers employ gender
salient practices when it is functional to utilize gender as a categorical dimension (Bigler, 1995;
Callahan & Nicholas, 2019; Hilliard, & Liben, 2010; Farago et al., 2022). Segregation and
integration practices are those wherein teachers intentionally utilize gender categories in the
design of classroom practices to separate or combine genders (Farago et al., 2022), whereas
gender labeling is the use of gendered terms to explicitly identify people or objects.

54
Table 11
Describe Two of Your Classroom Practices That Are Influenced by Student Gender, if Any?
Theme Responses (N = 36)
f %
Gender segregation or integration practices 12 33
Gender labeling practices 13 36
Gender conscious practices 5 13
Response did not apply 6 16
Gender Integration Practices
Gender integration practices reflect the purposeful use of gender as a structure to
combine genders. In the interviews, participants articulated gender integration strategies in
response to the questions “How have you seen gender influence classroom practices?” and “How
does gender influence your classroom practices?” Erin commented, “I am still guilty of sorting
and making sure there’s at least two girls in a group and two boys in a group, you know, just so
that they feel comfortable.” Sara’s comments reflected integration strategies in her instructional
groupings, “They are very typically grouped together by tables or if we are going to do an
activity.” Survey participants also commented, “I make groups based on gender (making sure
there’s a mix of boys and girls.) I make sure the seating chart mixes boys and girls” and “My
students sit at table groups, and I mix them so that there are boys and girls at each table. I try not
to have just one girl or boy at a table with five of the opposite gender.” These comments all
reflect the use of gender balance as a functional strategy in student grouping.
While participants do not articulate the specific reasons why integrating boys and girls in
groups is necessary. Participants confirmed that these practices occur, but the rationale is not

55
clear. As a practice, however, it reinforces binary structures. Particularly, because participants
refer only to boys and girls, rather than a continuum of gender identities.
Gender Segregation Practices
Gender segregation practices reflect the purposeful use of gender as a structure to
separate genders. In these practices, gender is utilized as a category to functionally separate
students. In the open-ended survey questions, this was reflected in participant comments,
“bathroom passes per school rules are assigned as girls and boys,” and “Lining up by being either
boy or girl.” One participant explained, “Sometimes I excuse kids to line up or do an activity by boys
first, now girls. Or girls sing or read, now boys.”
In the interviews, teachers also mentioned this practice. Sara noted, “I mean we have a
boys pass and a girls pass for the bathroom just so I can keep track of how many people are out
of the room. At the beginning of the year I try to be mindful with table seating. Like, I have one
girl that’s been at a boys’ table most of the year and she’s not cared.” Zara also noted her
observations of this practice, “Teachers are still doing boys line and girls line and split and they
split up boys and girls for PE time.” Zara, however, does not agree with the gender segregation
practices and discussed in length her confusion about these practices, saying, “I’m perplexed
why we're still doing that and not treating them as equal.” The other interview participants also
identified practices reflective of gender segregation when asked about gender’s influence on
classrooms, theirs or others. They did not articulate any concerns about the practices, nor
indicate, as Zara did, that they are an indication of inequality. The use of gender segregation
practices in this study reflects procedural aspects of the classroom and is not mentioned
regarding instructional practices. Teachers convey only the use of segregation practices for
procedural purposes, such as lining up or bathroom passes. It is unclear how the use of gender
segregation for these classroom procedures is necessary or beneficial for students, or if teachers

56
have adopted these practices for ease or if they believe that there is behavioral benefit from
gender segregation.
Gender Labeling Practices
Addressing or greeting a classroom of students with gender specific identities is an
example of the gender salient practice of gender labeling. As seen in Table 11, 36% of
participants responded to the question, “Describe two of your classroom practices that are
influenced by student gender, if any?” by naming a gender salient practice of gender labeling.
The majority of participants in this study disagreed that they utilize the terms “boys and
girls” when referring to their classes. The use of gendered terms to address the classroom was
further discounted in interviews. Zara said, “I am conscious of trying really hard to never say
boys here, girls here, unless I have to, like never making that distinction.” Mira also asserted, “I
try not to say boys and girls or guys.”
There is, however, evidence in the qualitative data of the gender salient practice of
labeling in classroom procedures. In lieu of participants addressing the class utilizing explicit
gender labels, functional aspects of the classroom procedures such as bathroom passes, boys and
girls student lines to enter the classroom, and student data cards are explicitly defined by binary
gender labels boy and girl. In the interview and in the open response items, teachers identified
the use of pink and blue cards as a gendered practice. Zara explained, “It’s very segregated. I
mean, it’s still pinks and blues. It’s male and female in your class.” After probing, the
participants explained that the pink and blue cards are articulation cards completed at the end of
each grade level to communicate to the next year's teacher about student data. The cards are a
gender salient labeling practice, they are printed on cardstock, pink for girls and blue for boys.
The articulation cards and bathroom passes are systemic, managerial systems to sort students in a

57
binary gendered framework. The participants explained the logistical use of these systems but
did not clarify the purpose or effectiveness of the practice.
Teachers’ Have Not Participated in Formal Professional Development on Gender Equity in
Classrooms
As seen in Table 10, the majority of participants, 69%, strongly agreed or agreed that
they are aware of state policies about student rights and gender identity. Participants, 49%, also
indicated, however, that gender inclusive practices in classrooms were not emphasized in district
professional learning and 26% indicated they did not know if they were or were not emphasized
during professional development. Interviews confirmed the survey results in this area, where the
majority of participants interviewed indicated that they had never had any professional learning
experiences focused on gender inclusive practices in their classroom. Further, there was not a
sense in the interviews that teachers had awareness of state laws regarding student rights in
regard to gender identity, as it was not mentioned by any participant. Erin is the only interview
participant that noted participating in a training on gender inclusive practices. She recalled the
training was organized by her principal for the school staff, not a centralized District offered
teacher learning opportunity. Erin recalled that the training coincided when an enrolled student in
another class was initiating a gender transition. She speculated that the training may have been
prompted in response to supporting that student.
We did have training a few years ago. We had a training where we met multiple times,
and it was on gender equality and inclusiveness. It felt to me, knowing the community I
have in my friend group, which is very diverse, it felt like it was just getting everybody to
have the same language.

58
Despite participants indicating that there is no district emphasis on gender inclusiveness,
responses convey an eagerness to learn. This was evident particularly in the interviews, where
participants expressed a desire to understand how practices create a more inclusive classroom
environment. Sara commented, “I don’t want to be ignorant to it, but I’m also like, I don’t have
time to study. I wonder if there is a stance where based on this data, the realm of gender identity
should or shouldn’t be taught.” Mira also shared her feelings about professional development, “I
would love it. I know one of my colleagues felt very upset passionately because it was like, it
needs to be happening and it’s not.” Erin echoed this desire, “I’m still trying to grow a little bit
on not being stuck on the idea of having girls together and boys together.”
These findings suggest that elementary school teachers believe that they may have
awareness of state laws, despite a lack of formal professional development in the school district.
At the same time, there was no clear indication of this knowledge of state laws. As mentioned
previously, the school district also lacks a formal policy on equity or the student rights regarding
gender identity. Participants did clearly articulate a desire for formal professional development
on gender equity in their classrooms.
Classroom Practices for Gender Equity
The third research question sought to explore current classroom practices utilized by
elementary school teachers to ensure equity for students of all genders. Open-ended survey and
interview questions probing participants to describe their practices that are inclusive of gender
identities, as well as those they would recommend to a new teacher, were utilized to address this
research question. Responses to the open-ended survey question, “How do you, if at all, ensure
your classroom is inclusive of gender identities?” was analyzed for themes. The themes are
represented in Table 12.

59
Table 12
How Do You, if at all, Ensure Your Classroom is Inclusive of Gender Identities
Theme Responses (N = 30)
f %
Discourse to promote inclusivity 11 37
Representation 6 20
Honor individual identity/pronouns 8 40
Unrelated response 5 16
Analysis of the open-ended survey and interview items led to key findings about
teachers’ use of practices to promote inclusivity of all genders. The findings include:
1. Teachers utilize the classroom practices of discourse and representation to promote
inclusivity of gender identities.
2. Teachers view supportive and inclusive classrooms as a classroom practice for
promoting gender inclusivity.
Teachers Utilize the Classroom Practices of Discourse and Representation to Promote
Inclusivity of Gender Identities
Teachers responded throughout the interview and an open-ended survey question about
classroom practices, noting the use of discourse in the classroom to promote inclusivity, both for
gender and all identities. This is consistent with the survey question, “It is not appropriate to
discuss gender in an elementary school classroom,” where the majority of participants disagreed
with this statement. The open-ended survey question asked, “Describe two of your classroom
practices that are influenced by student gender, if any?” Teachers in Grades 3, 4 and 5 responded
that they would often address stereotypical or biased comments with classroom discourse.

60
Examples include “offer another perspective when a student says things like pink is for girls,” or
“weekly discussion on this topic from new stories, from women being treated as secondary
citizens to legislatures othering LBGTQ+ communities.”
Classroom discourse as a strategy to promote gender inclusiveness and belonging was
reiterated in interview responses, particularly in response to the question, “Some people say
teachers should not be permitted to discuss gender identity, how do you respond?” All the
teachers interviewed disagreed with this statement when a student seeks them out for support or
shares their gender identity. Zara captured this in her response:
I am conscious of the fact that I am an employee and as an employee I need to follow the
board directives and district directives. But I think it’s harmful not to recognize it. It is an
unbelievable risk for that child who may have a gender identity different than is
stereotypical and we are actually doing more harm than good by keeping it secret and not
addressing and supporting it.
Despite Zara’s comments regarding School Board or District directives, the district in this
study does have a standard nondiscrimination policy. The district, however, does not currently
have a formalized equity policy referencing student gender or gender identity.
Participant responses reflected the use of classroom practices to create inclusivity for
gender identities by increasing representation. In an open-ended survey question asking
participants to identify practices for gender inclusivity, primary grade teachers noted the use of
classroom literature and stories that emphasized gender neutral themes or gender fluid identities.
These anonymous responses from multiple lower elementary grade teachers reflect the attention
to the use of classroom literature as a practice to promote inclusivity and representation. Teacher

61
participants highlighted that they “Read books including many gender identities” and “don’t
gender a book character unless it is explicitly stated.”
Teachers also noted the use of visuals throughout the classroom promoting inclusivity.
Participant comments noted the inclusion of people from various backgrounds in work examples,
and visuals in the classroom promoting inclusivity, not specifically for gender identities, but an
effort to convey that all students belong.
Teachers View Supportive and Inclusive Classrooms as a Classroom Practice for
Promoting Gender Inclusivity
A dominant theme throughout the open-ended survey questions and interview questions
about classroom practices was the development of inclusive and supportive classroom
environments as a strategy to ensure equity for students of all genders.
The participants conveyed a desire to honor students’ expressed identities, a few noting
that utilizing students’ expressed pronouns was a classroom practice utilized to promote
inclusivity. Survey responses convey this theme, examples included, “I do my best to make sure
that every student feels included, comfortable, and safe.” Other examples were, “I teach
tolerance and acceptance of all the things that are different/same in my classroom,” and “I create
a classroom where everyone feels accepted and has a sense of belonging.” Interview participants
reiterated sentiments of student support and acceptance in response to interview questions about
classroom practices. Zara reflects this theme in their comments after speaking about students’
families and her concern about familial expectations on students’ gender identities. She notes
that students are part of a family community outside of school wherein there may be expectations
about gender identity or gender fluid members of their family. She questions if students worry or
start to question if this is normal or if it will impact their ability to learn.

62
I know what I want and I know how I want my kids to feel in here, but there’s so many
outside influences that really should have nothing to do with it, but the reality is that they
do. How do I create barriers to be responsible and professional while at the same time
protecting my kids to create a safe, inclusive environment for them.
Zara did not clarify what specifically she meant by creating barriers, only communicating
her desire to protect students within her classroom. Participants seemed to indicate in their
responses, however, that gender does not impact classroom practices, unless prompted by
students. Erin explained, “I’d also say just let the student lead with what they feel about how and
who they are and learn to connect with that student on multiple levels.” Mira also emphasized
student initiation in her comments.
If it’s important to them, then yeah. I want to make sure they feel absolutely accepted
and loved and comfortable. If it’s something that they don’t wanna share, they want to
keep it private, then it doesn’t matter. It’s very, it is up to them.
It was clear that participants sought to prioritize inclusivity, but they did not practice it
specifically for the purpose of gender equity. Teachers communicated that they wanted their
students to feel supported and the classroom to be inclusive, but gender is not specifically
discussed or prioritized in their comments. The participants’ comments leaned on generalities,
rather than specific strategies to promote support and inclusion for gender identities. Instead,
most teachers indicated that an environment that promotes inclusivity for all will result in a
classroom environment inclusive of gender identities.
Summary
This chapter provided an overview of the findings analyzed in response to the three
research questions for this study. It shared the quantitative and qualitative data collected from

63
elementary school teachers and highlighted the specific experiences of four participants’
narratives in relation to their beliefs about gender and their classroom practices. This chapter
highlighted the continued pervasiveness of binary gender identities in teachers’ beliefs, the use of
gender salient practices, and lack of professional learning focused on gender inclusiveness.
Countering this narrative, the participants shared the targeted and intentional classroom practices
of discourse and use of classroom books as practices to promote gender inclusiveness. Finally,
participants conveyed the intention to develop inclusive classroom environments for all students.
This study generated eight key findings in response to the research questions, revealing
overarching themes relating to teacher beliefs about gender and the influence on their classroom
practices in the participating school district.

64
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion
Chapter Four provided the results and findings of this study in response to the three
research questions. This chapter provides a discussion of the results and findings in relation to
current literature and the conceptual framework guiding the study, as presented in Chapter Two.
This chapter continues with evidence-based recommendations for practice to address key
findings. The discussion and recommendations aim to inform district and school leadership and
classroom teachers on strategies to continue to build inclusive, gender conscious classroom
environments that offer bias-free learning environments for students of all gender identities.
Finally, the chapter will conclude with limitations and delimitations for the study and
considerations for future research.
Discussion of Findings and Results
This section discusses the findings from the study, embedded in the conceptual
framework that is informed by queer, gender schema and social learning theory. The discussion
also aligns the findings of this research study within the literature. The research questions
guiding this study explored:
1. What beliefs do elementary school teachers have about gender?
2. How do elementary school teachers’ gendered beliefs influence classroom practices?
3.What classroom practices do elementary school teachers utilize to ensure equity for
students of all genders?
Discussion of Findings: Research Question 1
The initial research question in this study sought to understand the beliefs elementary
school teachers have about gender. The body of research offers evidence that teacher beliefs
about gender impact procedural, managerial and instructional decisions that result in outcomes

65
for students of all genders (Alan et al., 2018; Riege-Crumb & Humphries, 2012; Riley, 2014).
Participants in the study did not align with cisnormativity. Instead, the findings suggest that
participants believed gender is a social construct. Teachers’ beliefs about gender as a social
construct is a fertile foundation for gender conscious practices.
Interestingly, participants’ beliefs about gender as a social construct were also reflective
of the gender binary. The peculiarity of this finding is a juxtaposition wherein participants seem
to believe gender is a social construct while also confirming the gender binary, a defining
characteristic of cisnormativity. Similar findings are evident in the body of research. For
example, an online survey showed that teachers hold egalitarian views (McCabe, 2020), while
other research findings indicate some are not aware of their gender biases (Morrisette et al.,
2018). The participants in this study did not conflate gender with biological sex, but often
confused terms gender and gender identity. There is limited research on teachers’ beliefs about
gender, but various studies have confirmed that classroom practices reflect the gender binary
(Farago et al., 2022; Smolkin & Young, 2011). In alignment with the theoretical framework of
this study, it is assumed that a teacher’s gender schema influences their chosen classroom
practices. Teachers in this study’s reliance on the gender binary reflects the teacher’s gender
schema. Teacher’s constriction of gender within a binary framework risk assisting in normalizing
binary stereotypical gendered activities that have negative academic (Alan et al., 2018; RiegeCrumb & Humphries, 2012; Riley, 2014), social (Brown, 2003; Skelton et al., 2019), and
disciplinary outcomes (Clark et al., 2003; Yang et al., 2018) for students of all genders.
Teachers’ beliefs in the study also revealed that participants also embed gender identity
in their definition of gender. Unlike the research reviewed for this study, where most survey

66
instruments utilized for data collection categorized gender as only the binary male and female
(Callahan & Nicholas, 2018; Chen & Roa, 2011; Farago et al., 2022), this study intentionally did
not define gender or gender identities in the instruments. The purpose of this study was to
understand teacher perspectives and beliefs about gender, and therefore leave the definitions of
these terms at the discretion of the participants. In accordance with gender schema theories
(Bem, 1981; Liben & Bigler, 2002; Martin & Halverson, 1981), teachers will process
information about students based on their own gender role attitude and their assumptive beliefs
about gendered behavior will influence the strategies utilized to create a supportive environment
(Farago et al., 2022). Glock & Klapproth (2017) postulated that their study findings showed that
teachers who perceived increased classroom management needs of male students may have been
influenced by their own gender identity. Similarly, in this study, participants’ gender identity
may be influential, as 90% of teachers surveyed identified as cisgender. It can be assumed that
participants’ gender identity has contributed to embracing gender and gender identity as
congruent constructs.
The findings also revealed teacher beliefs about inclusivity in classrooms. Participants
shared beliefs about classroom belonging and inclusivity regardless of their articulated beliefs
about the definition of gender as determined by biology or social construct. Participants
communicated the belief in inclusivity but lacked specificity regarding strategies. Participants
communicated a belief that knowing a student's gender identity is important if it is of value to the
student. Participants emphasized the importance of student initiation of conversation about
gender. As mentioned previously, most participants identified as cisgender, indicating that their
gender schema is informed by their gender identity. This may have contributed to their centering
the gender binary. Their implicit message was that only students who hold gender identities

67
incongruous with a binary system might benefit from conversation about gender identity with the
teacher. Reliance on student initiation for gender identity discourse risks reconfirming the binary
framework as a gender norm. Unfortunately, this is inconsistent with current research, which
indicates that binary categories of gender may not comprehensively reflect how individuals
identify (Diamond, 2020; Morgenroth & Ryan, 2020), including children (Gülgöz et al., 2022).
Additionally, teachers holding a belief that student initiation of gender identity discourse is
preferable may be risking a reinforcement of stereotyping or misgendering because male or
femaleness is assumed within the binary framework. Furthermore, the research confirms the
vulnerability of students who hold gender fluid identities (Kosciw et al., 2020; Miller et al.,
2018). Student initiation about gender identities places a burden on vulnerable students to
advocate for their inclusion in the classroom.
Discussion of Findings: Research Question 2
In this study, the findings indicate that teachers’ beliefs about gender influence their use
of gender salient practices of segregation, integration, and labeling. Use of similar practices is
evident in the exigent literature, specifically that teachers employ gender salient practices when it
is functional to utilize gender as a categorical dimension (Bigler, 1995; Callahan & Nicholas,
2019; Hilliard, & Liben, 2010; Farago et al., 2022). This is consistent with the findings in this
study, wherein participants confirmed the use of gender to functionally sort students into
groupings. The participants’ use of salient practices confirms that gender is utilized in classroom
managerial and instructional practices.
Encouragingly, findings suggest that teachers are thoughtful about their classroom
practices regarding student gender. The participants did not clarify the rationale of these
decisions but did communicate that they use salient practices as an effort to limit stereotyping.

68
Gender salient practices, depending on implementation, have mixed results in research. The
gender salient practices of binary gendered labeling are associated with increased stereotyping
and decrease of student preference of play with students of other genders (Hilliard & Liben,
2010), while studies also suggest that teachers who engage in gender integration practices, if they
limit salient practices such as using explicit gendered labels, can encourage positive engagement
between boys and girls (Hanish et al., 2021). The findings in this study identified the use of
salient practices but did not probe further into the specifics of how or why the practices are
implemented. Ultimately, the intentional use of gender is reflective of teacher willingness to
acknowledge student gender, which is associated with positive outcomes for gender expansive
students (Mangin, 2022).
The teachers in this study communicated a belief in inclusive classrooms and comfort
teaching students with ambiguous gender expression. At the same time, teachers may be
unintentionally utilizing gender salient practices that reinforce gender stereotypes. Additionally,
the overarching emphasis on the gender binary throughout the findings risks the development of
classroom practices that promote gender essentialism, even unintentionally. The misuse of
salient practices may negatively impact willingness to interact with students of other genders,
increased stereotyping (Hilliard & Liben, 2010), and perpetuate gender-typed activity
preferences (Martin et al., 2013). Teachers in the study, however, noted a lack of professional
development on classroom practices to promote gender equity. This suggests that teachers are
utilizing gender salient practices as a functional mechanism or as a strategy for inclusiveness in
their classrooms without specific guidance on how practices can enhance gender equity in
classrooms. The findings in this study are encouraging because participants articulate a desire for

69
formal professional development, suggesting that they desire to use practices that increase
inclusivity for students of all genders.
Discussion of Findings: Research Question 3
Research question three sought to understand classroom practices teachers utilize to
ensure equity for students of all genders. The findings suggest that teachers utilize the classroom
practices of discourse and representation to promote inclusivity of gender identities.
Additionally, teachers view supportive and inclusive classrooms as a classroom practice for
promoting gender inclusivity.
The participants’ reliance on classroom discourse as a practice for gender equity
emphasized addressing stereotypical or biased comments within their classrooms. Classroom
discourse is supported in research as a gender conscious strategy to affirm student gender
identities and dismantle bias. Gender expansive students feel supported in classrooms where
teachers explicitly address gender stereotypes (Ullman, 2017). The participants also
communicated the importance of teacher autonomy and freedom to discuss gender with students.
As a classroom practice, discussions about gender may support the relational aspect of classroom
management (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006), while also serving as a protective factor for students
by openly affirming gender identities (Mangin, 2022).
The participants in the study identified the use of text selection as a classroom strategy to
support equity for students of all genders. This strategy is supported in research, where
intentionality in text selection has been shown to be an effective strategy to challenge gender
norms (Karniol & Gal-Disegni, 2009; Kneeskern & Reeder, 2020; Treapnier-Street &
Romantowski, 1999). The participants in the study did not clarify if texts are assigned for student
reading or read aloud in a whole class setting, but emphasized the intentionality of seeking texts

70
that offer students representation of various gender identities or examples of anti-stereotypical
depictions of male and female characters.
The theoretical frameworks underpinning this study emphasize the salience of
individuals' observations and exposure to societies’ cultural definitions of gender. Social
observations are the foundation for the development of a gender schema that will be utilized to
organize future information about gender (Bandura, 1977; Bem, 1981; Liben & Bigler, 2002;
Martin & Halverson, 1981). The classroom is a critical setting for the establishment of gender
schema. The selection of classroom materials, then, is a unique opportunity for students to
observe gender diversity and anti-bias conceptualization of gender. The study findings suggest
that teachers' selective use of literacy may assist in avoiding gender stereotypes, supporting
students' burgeoning gender schemas with a broad conceptualization of gendered activities.
Teachers view supportive and inclusive classrooms as a classroom practice for promoting
gender inclusivity. The participants, however, did not specify actions that operationalized
supportive or inclusive classrooms. The research indicates the development of a supportive and
inclusive classroom is defined by teachers’ intentional, observable practices (Hanish et al., 2021;
Hilliard & Liben, 2010). In this study, only a few participants identified using student pronouns
as practice to support an inclusive classroom. While only articulated by a few participants, the
use of students’ chosen pronouns is a protective factor for gender expansive students (Mangin,
2022). It is encouraging that this practice was highlighted, even if only by a few participants.
Affirming a student’s gender by using their self-identified pronouns may positively affect their
sense of self (Pollitt et al., 2019; Russell et at., 2018), a practice that would aid in establishing
the supportive environment recommended by participants.

71
Overall, the findings suggest that participants in this study believe there is an association
between supportive and inclusive classrooms and gender identity but did not articulate specific
practices. Interview participants identified a few barriers to communication including parental
expectations, legislation, and the political climate undergirding gender in classrooms. It is
important to note that the participants are teachers within a system that lacks a formal equity
policy or emphasis on gender equity. It could be assumed that without vision or prioritization in
this area from school district level leadership, teachers rely on the generalizations of inclusivity
and support as strategies for gender equity.
Recommendations for Practice
This section offers three recommendations for supporting facilitators for the advancement
of gender equity and gender conscious practices within the classrooms. The first
recommendation is for professional learning for district leadership and teachers about state laws
regarding student gender, and gender identity and gender conscious classroom practices. The
second recommendation is the establishment of an equity policy and implementation of a policy
audit for gender bias. The final recommendation is to increase student voice.
Recommendation 1: Professional Learning on State Laws Regarding Student Gender,
Gender Identity and Gender Conscious Classroom Practices
The findings in the study indicate that while participants feel that they are knowledgeable
about state laws, they have not participated in professional learning addressing gender equity for
classroom teachers. The findings also suggest the teachers in the study embed gender identity
into their definition of gender and gender identity. Embedding these concepts conveys an
understanding and value on individual student gender identities. The school district, located in
Northern California, may pursue professional learning in the area of gender equity. It is

72
recommended that the district pursue professional learning opportunities, particularly given the
interest articulated by participants about professional development around gender inclusivity.
It is recommended that the district engage district leadership and classroom teachers in
ongoing, multi session professional learning for the purpose of understanding the definitions of
gender and gender identity, utilizing the APA (2021) definitions as a guide. The study findings
indicate that participants believe gender is a social construct but rely on gender binary. A
professional learning environment for educators that focuses on gender and gender identities is a
tool to dismantle bias (Retzelderoff, 2015; Springer et al., 2020). Professional learning on gender
and gender identity has promising results for increasing teacher understanding of gender and
their willingness to apply a gender lens to instructional planning (Smith et al., 2023). Therefore,
the recommendation is to provide educational leaders and teachers with ongoing, consistent,
engaging and targeted teacher professional development on gendered beliefs and bias, as well as
classroom practices to support gender equity.
Professional learning is a critical tool for the district to manifest transformation in teacher
beliefs and practice by designing ongoing, consistent, engaging and targeted teacher professional
development on gendered beliefs and impact on students (Retzelderoff, 2015). In sustained
professional development, teachers have the opportunity to reflect on their practice and learn
skills to address the inequities in imbalances of attention and feedback during instruction (Bailey,
1993). Teachers who can engage in gender conscious practices can participate in dismantling
gender bias in their classroom through conscious instructional and managerial practices
(Capobianco et al., 2014; Whitford, 2022). As teachers embody a gender consciousness, they
will facilitate a classroom that acknowledges, without limitation, student gender identity
(Andrus, et al., 2018). As evident in the findings, gender equity has not previously been

73
prioritized in professional learning. This recommendation is crucial to shift the classroom
practices to support teachers in effective use of gender salient practices, pre-practiced responses
to stereotypical student comments, and discussion facilitation about gender identities.
Recommendation 2: Establishment of an Equity Policy and Implementation of a Policy
Audit
The district wherein the study took place does not have an established equity policy that
articulates student’s legal rights in regard to gender identity, nor a policy statement highlighting
the district position to value gender equity. This is an oversight of the impact that local
governance and explicit position statements by leadership have on classroom practice. Research
has shown that trans youth are often in the position of educating their peers, advocating for their
identity and lending voice to challenge cisnormative school policies (Jones and Hiller, 2003;
Meyer et al., 2016; Meyer and Stader, 2009; Porta et al., 2017). The lack of adopted school
district policy places the onus on students to advocate for their legal and ethical rights to be
protected from bias and discrimination. Local governing board policies and administrative
regulations encapsulate and solidify vision and stipulate that autonomy of teachers to engage in
practices to promote gender equity in classrooms.
Recommendation 2 includes the implementation of a policy audit. The policy audit is an
active examination of policies for gender bias to disrupt gender related deficit perspectives
(Green, 2017). Policy, while being scrubbed for bias, should be simultaneously reviewed for
gender inconsistencies and gender specific language. An auditing assists school systems and
district leaders to ensure clarity in shared expectations, process and terminology prior to
development and implementation of professional development. The audit also functions as a
supportive practice for student gender identity, ensuring that regulations address educators' role

74
and responsibilities to student confidentiality, disclosure, harassment and bullying (Mangin,
2018). This examination offers transparency and discrepancy of beliefs in practice so that
education leaders may note inequities and establish replacement policies that disrupt systems that
reinforce bias and oppression in school systems.
Policy audits should include the practices of vetting, selecting, and utilization of
curricular materials. Curricular materials, both adopted and supplemental, necessitate review for
gender bias. Curriculum drives content, discourse, foundational understanding and critical
thinking. Instructional materials offer a valuable opportunity for representation within the
instruction to challenge stereotypes, as has been seen with classroom text selection (Karniol &
Gal-Disegni, 2009; Kneeskern & Reeder, 2020; Treapnier-Street & Romantowski, 1999).
Representation is a necessity for engagement and influences social norms within the learning
environment. The financial constraints of many districts prevent the adoption of the most recent
instructional materials (Bailey, 1993), leaving outdated materials utilized in many classrooms.
Schools should review all curriculum, investigating for images, text, narratives, etc. that
reinforce gender stereotypes and lack representation. As discussed previously, gender identity is
heavily defined in academic research as masculinity vs. femininity, male vs. female, instead of a
broader vision that embraces gender fluidity. A policy audit that includes curriculum practices
will reveal if classroom materials have a similar overreliance on static categorizations of gender.
Recommendation 3: Increasing Student Voice
The teachers in this study articulated that they are most comfortable discussing gender in
classrooms and most responsive to student initiation. This indicates that teachers are eager and
responsive to student voices regarding gender in the classroom and educational practices. There
is no evidence, however, that student participation or voice is currently a practice. Not including

75
students in gender equity dialogue, professional learning, or decision making excludes their
perspectives on educational practices that reinforce stereotyping. The district leadership is
recommended to intentionally select students for district level engagement and establish
practices that encourage classroom practices to increase student voice. Increasing student voice
requires engagement with students on the continuum of practices that impact gender equity in
schools, from daily classroom practices, intermittent professional learning, and the decision
making practices in the development of policy.
Increasing student voice transforms participation for gender expansive students from
marginalized self-advocacy and tokenism into a valued and deliberate inclusion of student
perspectives. This has been evident in classroom settings, where intentional efforts to amplify
student voice in classroom practices for upper elementary students results in the emergency of
civic efficacy, characterized by a social consciousness and responsibility (Mitra & Serriere,
2012). In the district of this study, inclusion of student voice may be modeled by district
leadership, by intentionally including of students who represent the plurality of gender identities
in training and decision making forums.
As discussed in the first recommendation, professional learning on gender increases
teacher understanding and application of a gender lens to instructional planning (Smith et al.,
2023). The professional learning environment is recommended to include student testimony,
panels, and narrative from those who identify as gender expansive. By including the voices of
students, the district will prompt a counter narrative to gender bias toward the binary framework
that overrides the study’s findings. Research confirms that gendered beliefs have negative
outcomes for students (Doornkamp et al., 2022; Mangin, 2022; Morrisette et al., 2018), including
cisgender males (Retelsdorf et al., 2015). More significantly, the current milieu in classrooms

76
that reinforces gender binarism has detrimental effects on gender expansive students' sense of
belonging, mental health, and safety (Human Rights Campaign Foundation, 2012). Proactively
amplifying student voices supports educators in uncovering areas of bias previously unknown,
centering students' lived experiences, and elevating marginalized voices to a platform of value
and significance.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are understood as factors outside of the control of the researcher that can
influence the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). This study has several limitations to consider
including the demographics of the participants, the number of participants, and the background
knowledge of participants.
First, the sample of participants is a non-diverse group of teachers. Despite representation
throughout the elementary levels grade span of transitional kindergarten–fifth grade, the other
demographics collected represent a homogenous group. The participating teachers
overwhelmingly identified as cisgender, of European descent and had been teaching for more
than 14 years.
The second is the size of the participants. The study sought to engage 310 teachers but
received only 42 survey responses. The researcher sought to avoid seeking survey input during
report card preparation but was unable to avoid the allocated time frame for parent teacher
conferences. Parent teacher conferencing consumes teacher time and may have impacted the
participation rate. The sample size significantly limits generalizability of study findings to the
local district where the study took place.
Finally, research on gender inequities is complicated by a lack of clarity on what defines
the term gender (Glasser, 2008). It cannot be assumed that all participants held the same

77
understanding or background knowledge of terms utilized in the study, such as gender, gender
identity, and gender equity. Variations in background knowledge may have influenced the
findings. An additional limitation is the truthfulness of the participants, which may have been
impacted because gender has been politicized in classroom settings. The study sought to mitigate
these limitations by employing a standardized interview protocol (Appendix B). The interview
protocol created a systematic guide that provided focus and delimited the topics of discussion
(Patton, 2022).
Delimitations are the factors that are within the control of the researcher through the
design of their study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). There are a few delimitations to consider in
this study. The study took place in a school district located in northern California. The findings
must be interpreted in the political context of the state where the study took place. The
participants are all teachers in the state of California, where law provides specific protections to
students to obtain access to school facilities in accordance with their gender identity and utilizes
their identified pronouns (California Education Code, 2015). Teachers may be influenced by
these requirements and not reflect the fullness of their perspectives because legal mandates may
silence or amplify some perspectives due to perceived professional safety or professional
mandate. Further, the participants were not randomly selected because the survey was sent to all
transitional kindergarten–fifth grade teachers in the school district, allowing participants to opt
in. Teachers who have interest in the research area of gender and education may have been more
likely to participate. The findings are not generalizable to the general population. The study may
provide valuable findings for school districts that are like the district of study, particularly those
subject to California state law and where gender equity policies have not been established.

78
Recommendations for Future Research
To deepen and extend the understanding of the study’s findings, three areas of research
are recommended for exploration. First, investigation of the development of teachers’ schemas
regarding gender. Second, teachers’ beliefs about gender and gender identity within a research
study and instruments that explicitly define terms. Finally, the last area of recommendation for
future research is the teacher’s rationale for the selection of gender salient practices.
The findings in this study suggest that teachers’ assumptive beliefs reinforced gender
salient practices in the classroom. It was difficult, however, to locate a study that evaluated
where or how teachers’ definitions of gendered identity formed. Gender schema theories (Bem,
1981; Liben & Bigler, 2002; Martin & Halverson, 1981) explain that individuals develop beliefs
about gender via observation of society's expectations. An area for further research is the
development of teachers’ gender schemas and what environments they had as children to observe
gendered activities, behaviors, and definitions. Understanding how and when teachers’ gender
schemas develop is necessary to proactively plan to disrupt harmful schemas that replicate bias
in the classroom.
Glasser (2008) asserts that defining gender at the outset of research avoids confusion and
inapplicable interpretation. In the research reviewed for this study, research that explicitly
defines and decouples gender from biological sex are limited. In this study, the terms gender and
gender identity are undefined as a design decision to answer the research question about teacher
beliefs. Interestingly, the findings indicated that teachers conflated the terms gender and
gender identity. To more fully understand teacher perspectives, further research could
intentionally and explicitly define terms gender and gender identity in accordance with APA
definitions (APA, 2021). Explicit terms could be presented to teacher participants for their

79
agreement or disagreement. Understanding the teacher’s agreement with these definitions will
deepen understanding about beliefs relating to student gender.
Finally, participants in this study utilized gender salient practices in their classrooms. The
purpose of this study was not to investigate the purpose or reasons teachers selected specific
practices, but to understand how gender influences the selection of classroom practices. Further
research could delve into teachers’ rationales for the utilization of salient practices and
investigate how teachers believe these practices are beneficial for managerial or instructional
outcomes. Research on teachers’ rationale for the utilization of salient practices will provide
insight into the desired outcomes of the practices and allow for alternative bias free strategies to
be introduced to achieve similar goals.
Conclusion
Understanding teacher perspectives is critical to support schools in inclusive practices for
students of all gender identities. This study sought to understand teacher beliefs about gender, the
influence of beliefs about gender on classroom practices, and classroom practices utilized to
promote gender equity. The investigation of classroom practices may serve as a catalyst for
enabling gender conscious classrooms that are gender affirming settings that eliminate bias and
reduce stereotypes.
In this study, across survey responses and interviews, elementary school teachers shared
their beliefs about gender, the influence of beliefs on their classroom practices and their practices
to promote gender equity. The participants represented elementary school teachers in a large
Northern California School District. The study findings revealed that teachers in this study did
not embody cisnormative beliefs. Instead, the teachers defined gender as a social construct. The
teachers surveyed, however, relied on a binary definition of gender. Teachers also conflated the

80
terms gender and gender identity. Despite a lack of formal policy or district emphasis on gender
equity, the participants communicated a belief in gender as a social construct and an
overwhelming emphasis on inclusive and supportive classroom environments.
Based on the survey and interview data, three recommendations were offered to support
the school district and teachers in the advancement of gender equity in classrooms. Participants
in the study indicated that despite a lack of emphasis on gender equity, they desired specific
professional development about gender and inclusive classroom practices. As a result, the
recommendations emphasize professional learning. The first recommendation is for professional
learning for teachers about state laws regarding students, gender, and gender identity and gender
conscious classroom practices. The second recommendation is the establishment of an equity
policy and implementation of a policy audit for gender bias.
This study’s findings are limited due to the non-diverse sample and small population
represented by participants. While the study focused on one district in northern California, the
findings offer insight on the broader community of elementary school teachers who are currently
at the center of national conscious and political dialogue regarding gender’s place in the
classroom. The findings suggest that gender already exists in the classroom, within people and
practices. Gender’s presence in the classroom, albeit controversial in the current political milieu,
signals the crucial importance of continued research on teacher beliefs and an emphasis on
professional learning. Ultimately, to pursue gender conscious practices that enable teachers to
provide the supportive and inclusive classrooms they hope to establish. Educational equality, as a
function of power, resides with the educators who set conditions in school settings. The steadfast
pursuit of gender equity is a vital imperative to liberate students from the negative academic,
emotional, and behavioral outcomes of gendered beliefs and practices in educational settings.

81
References
ACLU (2023, April 24). Mapping attacks on LGBTQ rights in U.S. state legislatures.
https://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights?impact=school
Alan, S., Ertac, S., & Mumcu, I. (2018). Gender stereotypes in the classroom and effects on
achievement. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 100(5), 876–890.
https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00756
American Psychological Association (2021). Inclusive language guidelines.
https://www.apa.org/about/apa/equity-diversity-inclusion/language-guidelines.pdf
American Psychological Association (2018). A glossary: defining transgender terms.
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2018/09/ce-corner-glossary
Andrus, Jacobs, C., & Kuriloff, P. (2018). Miles to go: The continuing quest for gender equity in
the classroom. Gender-conscious teaching can help all students dismantle stereotypes and
grow without the restrictions that come from bias. Phi Delta Kappan, 100(2), 46–46.
Arcia, E. (2006). Achievement and enrollment status of suspended students. Education and
Urban Society, 38, 359–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124506286947
Bailey, S. (1993) The current status of gender equity research in American schools.
Educational Psychologist, 28(4), 321–339.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
Bem, S. (1983). Gender schema theory and its implications for child development: Raising
gender-aschematic children in a gender-schematic society. Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 8(4), 598–616. https://doi.org/10.1086/493998
Berger, Israel; Ansara, Y. Gavriel (2021). Cisnormativity. In: Goldberg, A Beemyn, G (Eds.),
The SAGE Encyclopedia of Trans Studies. SAGE Publishing. p. 121–125.

82
Biden. (2021). Letter From President Biden and Vice President Kamala D. Harris on the
National Strategy on gender equity and equality. Daily Compilation of Presidential
Documents, 1–2.
Bigler, R. (1995). The role of classification skill in moderating environmental influences on
children’s gender stereotyping: A study of the functional use of gender in the classroom.
Child Development, 66, 1072–1087.
Bernstein, S. (2023). Florida move to expand teaching ban on sexual orientation, gender
identity. Reuters.
Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. (2020). http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/17-
1618_hfci.pdf
Brickhouse, N., Lowery, P. & Schult, S. (2000) What kind of girl does science? The construction
of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441–458.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200005)37:5<>1.0.CO;2-3
Bradwell v. State of Illinois, 83 U.S. 130 (1873).
Brophy J. (2006). History of research on classroom management. In Evertson C. M., Weinstein
C. S. (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and
contemporary issues (pp. 17–43). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Busch, & Thro, W. E. (2018). The Adoption of Title IX: A Ban on Sex Discrimination in
Education. In Title IX (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1–20). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315689760-1
California Education Code § 221.5. January 1, 2015.

83
Callahan, S & Nicholas, L. (2019) Dragon wings and butterfly wings: implicit gender binarism
in early childhood. Gender and Education, 31(6), 705–723.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09540253.2018.1552361
Capobianco, Yu, J. H., & French, B. F. (2015). Effects of engineering design-based science on
elementary school science students’ engineering identity development across gender
and grade. Research in Science Education (Australasian Science Education Research
Association), 45(2), 275–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9422-1
Chen, & Rao, N. (2011). Gender socialization in Chinese kindergartens: teachers’ contributions.
Sex Roles, 64(1–2), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9873-4
Clark, M. D., Petras, H., Kellam, S. G., Ialongo, N., & Poduska, J. M. (2003). Who's most at risk
for school removal and later juvenile delinquency? Women & Criminal Justice, 14, 89–
116. https://doi.org/10.1300/J012v14n02_05
Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/429/190/
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. (Sixth edition). SAGE Publications.
Davison, K & Frank, B. (2006). Masculinities and femininities and secondary schooling: the
case for a gender analysis in the postmodern condition. In The Sage Handbook of
Gender and Education.
Department of Education (2020). The department’s enforcement of Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972 with respect to discrimination based on sexual orientation and
gender identity in light of Bostock v. Clayton County. Federal Register.

84
Diamond, L. M. (2020). Gender fluidity and nonbinary gender identities among children and
adolescents. Child Development Perspectives, 14(2), 110–115.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12366
Doornkamp, L., Van der Pol, L., Groeneveld, S., Mesman, J., Endendijk, J.J. & Groeneveld, M.
(2022). Understanding gender bias in teachers’ grading: the role of gender stereotypical
beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 118, 103826.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103826
Elliott. (2018). Challenging toxic masculinity in schools and society. On the Horizon, 26(1), 17–
22. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-11-2017-0088
Evertson, C.M. & Weinstein, C. S. (2006). Classroom management as a field of inquiry. In C. M.
Everston and C. S. Weinsteins (Ed.), Handbook of Classroom Management; Research,
practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 3–15). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Farago, F., Martin, C., Granger, K., Santos, C., Miller, C. (2022). Teachers’ gender-role attitudes
and gendered classroom practices. Sex roles. 87(9–10), 471–486.
Glasser, & Smith, J. P. (2008). On the vague meaning of “gender” in education research: the
problem, its sources, and recommendations for practice. Educational Researcher, 37(6),
343–350. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08323718
Glock, & Klapproth, F. (2017). Bad boys, good girls? Implicit and explicit attitudes toward
ethnic minority students among elementary and secondary school teachers. Studies in
Educational Evaluation, 53, 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.04.002
Gilbert, M. A. (2009). Defeating bigenderism: changing gender assumptions in the
twenty-first century. Hypatia, 24(3), 93–112. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20618166
Good, J., Woodzicka, J. A., & Wingfield, L. C. (2010). The effects of gender stereotypic and

85
counter-stereotypic textbook images on science performance. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 150(2), 132–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903366552
Granger, K.L., Hanish, L.D., Kornienko, O., & Bradley, R.H. (2016). Preschool teachers’
facilitation of gender-typed and gender-neutral activities during free Play. Sex Roles,
76, 498–510.
Greenfield. (1997). Gender- and grade-level differences in science interest and participation.
Science Education, 81(3), 259–276.
Gülgöz. S., Edwards D.L, & Olson, K.R. (2022). Between a boy and a girl: Measuring gender
identity on a continuum. Social development, 31(3), 916–929.
Hanish, L., Martin, C. L., Cook, R., DeLay, D., Lecheile, B., Fabes, R. A., Goble, P., & Bryce,
C. (2021). Building integrated peer relationships in preschool classrooms: The potential
of buddies. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 73, 101257.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2021.101257
Halperin, D. M. (2003). The normalization of queer theory. Journal of Homosexuality,
45(2–4), 339–343. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v45n02_17
Hartley, & Sutton, R. M. (2013). A stereotype threat account of boys’ academic
underachievement. Child Development, 84(5), 1716–1733.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12079
Hilliard, & Liben, L. S. (2010). Differing levels of gender salience in preschool classrooms:
effects on children’s gender attitudes and intergroup gias. Child Development, 81(6),
1787–1798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01510.x
Human Rights Campaign Foundation (2012). Supporting and caring for gender expansive youth.
https://www.hrc.org/resources/resources-on-gender-expansive-children-and-youth

86
Jones, & Dindia, K. (2004). A meta-analytic perspective on sex equity in the classroom.
Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 443–471.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004443
Jones, T., & Hillier, L. (2013). Comparing trans-spectrum and same-sex-attracted youth in
Australia: increased risks, increased activisms. Journal of LGBT Youth, 10(4), 287–
307. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2013.825197
Karniol, & Gal-Disegni, M. (2009). The impact of gender-fair versus gender-stereotyped basal
readers on 1st-grade children’s gender stereotypes: A Natural Experiment. Journal of
Research in Childhood Education, 23(4), 411–420.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02568540909594670
Kneeskern, & Reeder, P. A. (2022). Examining the impact of fiction literature on children’s
gender stereotypes. Current Psychology, 41(3), 1472–1485.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00686-4
Kosciw, J. G., Clark, C. M., Truong, N. L., & Zongrone, A. D. (2020). The 2019 National
School Climate Survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer
youth in our nation’s schools. New York: GLSEN.
Kosciw, J.G., & Diaz, E. M. (2006). The 2005 national school climate survey: the experiences of
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth in our nation’s schools. New York: Gay,
Lesbian, and Straight Education Network.
Kuchynka, Eaton, A., & Rivera, L. M. (2022). Understanding and addressing gender-based
inequities in STEM: research synthesis and recommendations for U.S. K–12 Education.
Social Issues and Policy Review, 16(1), 252–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12087
Larson, K. E., Bradshaw, C. P., Rosenberg, M. S., & Day-Vines, N. L. (2018). Examining

87
how proactive management and culturally responsive teaching relate to student
behavior: implications for measurement and practice. School Psychology Review, 47(2),
153–166. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2017-0070.V47-2
Lesko, N. (1988). Symbolizing society: stories, rites and structure in a Catholic high school.
London: The Falmer Press.
Liben, L. S., & Bigler, R. S. (2002). The developmental course of gender differentiation:
conceptualizing, measuring, and evaluating constructs and pathways [Monograph].
Society for Research in Child Development, 67(2), vii–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/
1540-5834.t01-1-00187
Mangin, M. (2022). Teachers’ strategies for supporting transgender and/or gender-expansive
elementary school students. Educational Researcher, 51(5), 324–335.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X221084666
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Martin, & Halverson, C. F. (1981). A schematic processing model of sex typing and
stereotyping in children. Child Development, 52(4), 1119–1134.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1129498
Martin, Schafer, N. J., McClowry, S., Emmer, E. T., Brekelmans, M., Mainhard, T., & Wubbels,
T. (2016). Expanding the definition of classroom management: recurring themes and
new conceptualizations. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 51(1), 31–41.
McCabe. (2022). Early childhood educators’ beliefs about child behavior and adult outcomes
related to gender and play. Psychology in the Schools, 59(1), 51–75.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22502

88
McBride, & Neary, A. (2021). Trans and gender diverse youth resisting cisnormativity in school.
Gender and Education, 33(8), 1090–1107.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2021.1884201
McCormick, & O’Connor, E. E. (2015). Teacher-child relationship quality and academic
achievement in elementary school: does gender matter? Journal of Educational
Psychology, 107(2), 502–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037457
Meyer, E. J., & Stader, D. (2009). Queer youth and the culture wars: from classroom to
courtroom in Australia, Canada and the United States. Journal of LGBT Youth, 6(2–3),
135–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361650902905624
Meyer, Tilland-Stafford, A., & Airton, L. (2016). Transgender and gender-creative students in
PK–12 schools: What we can learn from their teachers. Teachers College Record (1970),
118(8), 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811611800806
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Miller, Mayo, C., & Lugg, C. A. (2018). Sex and gender in transition in US schools: ways
forward. Sex Education, 18(4), 345–359.
Mitra, D. L., & Serriere, S. C. (2012). Student voice in elementary school reform:
examining youth development in fifth graders. American Educational Research Journal,
49(4), 743–774. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212443079
Morgenroth, T., & Ryan, M. K. (2020). The effects of gender trouble: An integrative theoretical
framework of the perpetuation and disruption of the gender/sex binary. Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 16(6), 1113–1142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620902442
Morrissette, Jesme, S., & Hunter, C. (2018). Teacher and administrator perceptions of gender in

89
the classroom. Educational Studies, 44(3), 295–312.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2017.1373631
Morgenroth,T, Senden, M. G., Lindqvist, A., Renstrom, E. A., Ryan, M. K., & Morton, T. A.
(2021). Defending the sex/gender binary: the role of gender identification and need for
closure. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 12(5), 731–740.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620937188
National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality (2021). Federal Information & News Dispatch,
LLC.
Paechter, Toft, A., & Carlile, A. (2021). Non-binary young people and schools: pedagogical
insights from a small-scale interview study. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 29(5),
695–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2021.1912160
Payne, & Smith, M. (2022). Power, emotion, and privilege: “discomfort” as resistance to
transgender student affirmation. Teachers College Record (1970), 124(8), 43–65.
https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681221121521
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Pollitt A. M., Ioverno S., Russell S. T., Li G., Grossman A. H. (2019). Predictors and mental
health benefits of chosen name use among transgender youth. Youth & Society, 53(2),
320–341.
Porta, C. M., Gower, A. L., Mehus, C. J., Yu, X., Saewyc, E. M., & Eisenberg, M. E. (2017).
“Kicked out”: LGBTQ youths’ bathroom experiences and preferences. Journal of
Adolescence (London, England.), 56(1), 107–112.
Riley, T.A. (2014) The boys are like puppies, girls aim to please: how teachers’ gender
stereotypes may influence student placement decisions and classroom teaching.

90
Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 60(1), 1–21.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
SAGE Publications.
Russell S. T., Pollitt A. M., Li G., Grossman A. H. (2018). Chosen name use is linked to reduced
depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and suicidal behavior among transgender youth.
Journal of Adolescent Health, 63(4), 503–505.
Schultz, B. (2022). Explainer: The history behind ‘parents’ rights; in schools. AP News.
https://apnews.com/article/religion-education-gender-identity
0e2ca2cf0ef7d7bc6ef5b125f1ee0969
Skelton, & Read, B. (2006). Male and female teachers’ evaluative responses to gender and
the implications of these for the learning environments of primary age pupils.
International Studies in Sociology of Education, 16(2), 105–120.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09620210600849802.
Skiba, R. J., Arredondo, M. I., & Williams, N. T. (2014). More than a metaphor: The
contribution of exclusionary discipline to a school-to-prison pipeline. Equity &
Excellence in Education, 47(4), 546–564.
Shaver, A. N. (2011). The textbook as discourse: Sociocultural dimensions of American
schoolbooks. Faculty Books, 128. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/faculty_books/128
Skewes, L., Fine, C., & Haslam, N. (2018). Beyond mars and venus: The role of gender
essentialism in support for gender inequality and backlash. PloS One, 13(7),
e0200921–e0200921. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200921
Smith, K., Hurst, B., & Linden-Perlis, D. (2023). Using professional development resources

91
to support the inclusion of gender equity in early childhood teaching and curriculum
planning. Gender and Education, 35(3), 199–214.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2022.2142530
Smolkin, & Young, C. A. (2011). Missing mirrors, missing windows: children’s literature
textbooks and LGBT topics. Language Arts, 88(3), 217.
Springer, Mason, E. C. M., Moss, L. J., Pugliese, A., & Colucci, J. (2020). An intervention to
support elementary school faculty in meeting the needs of transgender and
gender non-conforming students. Journal of Child and Adolescent Counseling,
6(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/23727810.2019.1689765
Warner, M. (1991). Introduction: fear of a queer planet. Social Text, 29, 3–17.
Wilchins, R.A. (1997). Read my lips: Sexual subversion and the end of gender. Firebrand Books.
Whitford. (2022). Understanding and addressing gender stereotypes with elementary children:
the promise of an integrated approach. Theory and Research in Social Education,
(ahead-of-print), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2022.214
Wolff C.E., van den Bogert N., Jarodzka, H. & Boshuizen, H.P. (2016). Keeping an Eye
Learning: Differences Between Expert and Novice Teachers’ Representations of
Classroom Management Events. Journal of teacher education. 66(1),68–85.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114549810
Trepanier-Street, & Romatowski, J. A. (1999). The influence of children’s literature on
gender role perceptions: A reexamination. Early Childhood Education Journal, 26(3),
155–159. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022977317864
Tsao. (2020). Gender issues in young children’s literature. Reading Improvement, 57(1),
16–21.

92
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2014). R-words: refusing research. In D. Paris & M. T. Winn (Eds.),
Humanizing research: Decolonizing qualitative inquiry for youth and communities (pp.
223– 247). Sage.
Ullman. (2017). Teacher positivity towards gender diversity: exploring relationships and
school outcomes for transgender and gender-diverse students. Sex Education,
17(3), 276–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2016.1273104
US Census Bureau. (2021, October 8) More Than 76 million students enrolled in U.S. schools,
census bureau reports. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018
/school-enrollment.html
US Department of Education (2023, April 24). Title IX and Sex Discrimination. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/tix_dis.html
US Department of Labor (2023, April 24). Equal Pay for Equal Work. https://www.dol.gov/
Valentin, I. (1997). Title IX: Brief History. Holy Cross Journal of Law and Public Policy, 2,
123–138.
Vincent, R. C., Cartledge, G., Tobin, T. J., & Swain-Bradway, J. (2011). Toward a
conceptual integration of cultural responsiveness and schoolwide positive
behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13(4), 219–229.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300711399765
Yang, M., Harmeyer, E., Chen, Z., & Lofaso, B. M. (2018). Predictors of early elementary
school suspension by gender: A longitudinal multilevel analysis. Children and Youth
Services Review, 93, 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.08.008
Yeatman, A. (1994) Postmodern revisionings of the political. London: Routledge.

93
Appendix A: Survey
Hello,
My name is Amy Steele and I am currently the Director of Student Support Services for
the Cupertino Union School District. I am also a student enrolled in a Doctor of Education in
Educational Leadership program at the University of Southern California.
This voluntary survey will only take 10–15 minutes to complete. Survey responses will
contribute to my dissertation research, which seeks to understand elementary school teachers'
beliefs about gender and their classroom practices to promote gender equity. The survey is
completely confidential. All responses are recorded anonymously so feel free to provide honest
feedback. If you do not wish to participate, simply close this email.
If you are interested in participating, please review the following statement: I understand
that by taking the survey, I am affirming that I have read the above information and have had the
opportunity to ask questions regarding this study. I understand that my participation is voluntary,
and I may refuse to participate or withdraw from participation at any time. I am giving consent to
use my data for the purpose of this study.
Please complete the survey and submit your responses by x date.
Thank you for your time!

94
Table A1
Survey Questions
Questions Response choices
How long have you taught in elementary school? • Less than 1 year
• 1–3 years
• 4–6 years
• 7–9 years
• 10–13 years
• More than 14 years
What grade are you currently teaching? (Check
boxes, can choose multiple)
• TK
• K
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
How do you describe yourself? (check all that
apply) • Cisgender
• Transgender
• NonBinary
• Gender Nonconforming
• Genderfluid
• Other
How do you identify? (check all that apply) • African descent
• European descent
• Indigenous to this land
• Latin descent
• Asian descent
• Other
How do you, if at all, ensure your classroom is
inclusive of gender identities.
Open ended
In your own words, how do you define gender? Open ended
I assume that my students are cisgender (their sex
assigned at birth aligns with their gender
identity).
Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree, I don’t know

95
Questions Response choices
As a teacher, I feel it is important to know my
students' gender identity to help them succeed.
Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree
My school district emphasizes gender equity in
classrooms during professional development.
Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree
I am aware of state policies about student rights
and gender identity.
Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree
Describe two of your classroom practices that are
influenced by student gender, if any.
Open ended
I often refer to my class as “boys and girls”. Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree
Student gender is a useful category to organize
classroom procedures.
Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree
I feel comfortable teaching students who have
ambiguous gender expressions.
Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree
It is not appropriate to discuss gender in an
elementary school classroom.
Strongly disagree, disagree, agree,
strongly agree
Are you willing to participate in a 45–55 minute
interview to learn more about gender and your
classroom practices?
Yes/no
If yes, the participant will access a link to
take the participant to a separate
spreadsheet to request the following
information.

96
Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. I really appreciate you setting aside
time to answer my questions. Before we start, I want to remind you about the study, the overview
provided to you in the Study Information Sheet and answer any questions you may have. I am a
student at USC and I am conducting a study about elementary school teachers' beliefs about
gender and classroom practices. I am interviewing multiple elementary school teachers. I am also
conducting a survey to all elementary school teachers in this district. My goal is to understand
your perspective.
Do you have any questions for me before we get started? I will be recording the interview
so that I can capture what you share with me. The recording will not be shared with anyone. It is
solely for my purposes to make sure I accurately capture your perspectives. May I have your
permission to record the interview?
I’d like to start with a few background questions:
Introductory questions:
1. How did you become interested in the field of teaching?
2. Tell me about your current position?
3. Can you describe to me the start of a typical day from the time your students enter the
classroom.
4. How do you greet your students at the beginning of the school day?
I’d like to ask you a few questions about gender:
5. In your own words, how do you define “gender”.
6. What is your understanding of gender identity?
7. Describe any training you have had about gender inclusive practices, if at all?

97
8. Is it important to know your students' gender identity?
Now I’d like to ask you a few questions about your classroom practices.
9. In your experience, how have you seen gender influence classroom practices?
10. How does student gender influence your classroom practices, if at all?
11. How does your gender identity influence your classroom practices, if at all?
12. Some would say that teachers should not be permitted to discuss gender identity with
students, especially in elementary school. How would you respond to this statement?
13. If you were mentoring a new teacher, what classroom practices would you suggest
they use to ensure equity for students of all genders?
As we finish this interview, I wanted to offer you the opportunity to share any additional
comments or ask clarifying questions about the study. What else would you like to share, if
anything? If I have questions for you following the study, would it be okay if I email you? Thank
you again for your participation.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study is undergirded by the queer, social learning, and gender schema theories to understand teachers' gendered beliefs, the prevalence of cisnormativity in educational settings, and the impact of those gendered beliefs on classroom practices. The purpose of this study is to explore elementary school teachers' beliefs about gender, student gender identity and the influence on their classroom practice, including gender conscious practices that promote gender inclusivity. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, this study analyzed survey and interview data from transitional kindergarten-fifth grade teachers in a large school district in California. Findings from the study indicate that participating teachers define gender as a social construct while also emphasizing the gender binary, male and female. Analysis of the data also revealed that teachers' beliefs about gender influence their use of gender salient classroom practices of segregation, integration, and labeling. The study concludes with recommendations based on the findings, including professional learning, the establishment of equity policy, and policy auditing.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Impact of elementary grade teachers practicing radical love in Florida classrooms

PDF

Which grain will grow? Case studies of the impact of teacher beliefs on classroom climate through caring and rigor

PDF

Examining elementary school teachers’ beliefs and pedagogy with students from low socioeconomic status and historically marginalized communities

PDF

Considering queerness: examining school policies and their influence on inclusivity and safety for LGBTQ+ secondary students

PDF

The intersection of technology, pedagogical beliefs, and constructivism: a case study of teachers in 1:1 computing classrooms

PDF

Teacher perceptions of classroom management practices in public elementary schools

PDF

Digital literacy: teacher pedagogy and practices among upper elementary students with growing interest in social media

PDF

TikToking and Instagramming: following high school teacher influencers' roles in supporting and informing teacher practices

PDF

America has a problem: helping charter school teachers build a new foundation to combat racism with anti-racist teaching pedagogy

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Mentoring new teachers of color: how induction mentors characterize their preparation and practices that support new teachers of color

PDF

The beliefs and related practices of effective teacher leaders who support culturally and linguistically diverse learners

PDF

Student perceptions of teacher pedagogical practices in the elementary classroom

PDF

In-service teacher training in Pakistan’s elite private primary schools – lessons for Pakistan’s public schools

PDF

4th space teaching: incorporating teachers' funds of knowledge, students' funds of knowledge, and school knowledge in multi-centric teaching

PDF

The power of community-building circles (a restorative practice approach): fostering Black and Latino students’ sense of belonging

PDF

Supporting world language teachers to develop a culturally sustaining curriculum and reflect on its enactment

PDF

An Exploration of the Development and Enactment of Anti-Racist Teaching Practices in the Elementary Classroom

PDF

The relationships between teacher beliefs about diversity and opportunities for culturally and linguistically diverse students, reflectiveness, and teacher self-efficacy

PDF

Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Steele, Amy Elizabeth (author)

Core Title Classrooms beyond the binary: elementary teachers gendered beliefs and classroom practices

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 05/13/2024

Defense Date 02/20/2020

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag classroom practices,elementary,elementary teachers,gender,gender conscious,gendered beliefs,OAI-PMH Harvest,teachers

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Krop, Cathy (committee chair), Hinga, Briana (committee member), Moore, Ekaterina (committee member)

Creator Email aesteele@gmail.com,amysteel@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113931767

Unique identifier UC113931767

Identifier etd-SteeleAmyE-12908.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-SteeleAmyE-12908

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Steele, Amy Elizabeth

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240515-usctheses-batch-1150 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu