University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Gender-inclusive housing in northeastern boarding schools: a comparative case study of how housing policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of belonging

(USC Thesis Other)

Gender-inclusive housing in northeastern boarding schools: a comparative case study of how housing policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of belonging

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Gender-Inclusive Housing in Northeastern Boarding Schools: A Comparative Case Study
of How Housing Policies Impact Gender Expansive Students’ Sense of Belonging

Rebecca Melvoin

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 2023

© Copyright by Rebecca Melvoin 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Rebecca Melvoin certifies the approval of the Dissertation

David Cash
Alison Muraszewski
Christina Kishimoto, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This study explores six boarding schools in the Northeastern part of the United States to
understand how they support their gender expansive students, especially as it relates to their
residential housing models. More specifically, through interviews with deans of students and
surveys from students at four of these schools, I explore the ways in which policies enhance, or
detract from, gender expansive students’ sense of belonging. I offer recommendations for steps
boarding schools can take to create a more welcoming environment for gender expansive
students, especially as it relates to their residential experience.
Keywords: Gender expansive students, belonging, residential

v
Dedication
To my family, thank you so much for your love and support over the years.

To Mom and Dad, you offered so much encouragement along the journey. I know you’re excited
that this is done so that I can slow down. Thank you for also reading through the draft and
offering suggestions.

To Sarah, thank you for reading multiple drafts and being my editor.

To Ryan and Melissa, thanks for coming to get the boys early on Sundays so that I could get my
work done. I could not be luckier than to have two close friends with whom I co-parent.

To Mark, thank you for your patience and support throughout these 3 years. You took over
bedtime time and again so I could make it to class. You read ample papers and always did so
with a smile. Thank you for letting me bounce ideas off you and for giving me Sundays.

To Hunter and Kieran, thanks for letting me be a student again. You are my biggest cheerleaders,
and I am yours. Love you two to the moon and beyond times infinity; I got you.

vi
Acknowledgements
I am so grateful to so many people who helped me along this journey to make this paper
possible. To start, I want to thank my classmates who, for three years, challenged me, supported
me, and who became close friends. A special thanks to Kelly, Matt, Karen, and Mike; thanks for
being my wolfpack. A big thanks to Diana for our Sunday calls and pushing each other to get the
work done and to do it well. I would not be able to finish this project without the help of Dr.
Cash and Dr. M. Thank you both for being on my committee. Dr. Kishimoto, thank you for the
encouragement, reading drafts, and seeing this through to the end.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 4
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 5
Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 5
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 6
Limitations and Delimitations of the Study ........................................................................ 6
Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 7
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 12
Housing for Gender Expansive Students in Colleges/Universities ................................... 14
Supporting High School Gender Expansive Students ...................................................... 21
(Independent) School Policies .......................................................................................... 30
Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................... 33
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 37
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 37
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 38
Positionality ...................................................................................................................... 38
Selection of the Population ............................................................................................... 39
Design Summary ............................................................................................................... 40

viii
Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 41
Instrumentation and Protocols .......................................................................................... 43
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 44
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 46
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 47
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 47
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 49
Overview and Organization .............................................................................................. 50
Demographics of Participants ........................................................................................... 53
Coding of Data .................................................................................................................. 57
Presentation of Findings ................................................................................................... 58
Research Question 1: Findings ......................................................................................... 58
Research Question 2: Findings ......................................................................................... 76
Research Question 3: Findings ......................................................................................... 92
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 111
Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................ 114
Findings ........................................................................................................................... 115
Limitations ...................................................................................................................... 121
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................. 122
Future Research .............................................................................................................. 125
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 125
References ................................................................................................................................... 127
Appendix A: Interview Cover Sheet: Gender Inclusive Housing ............................................... 140
Cover Letter .................................................................................................................... 140
Questions (With Transitions) .......................................................................................... 141

ix
Closing ............................................................................................................................ 144
Appendix B: Student Survey for Sense of Belonging ................................................................ 145
Survey Contents .............................................................................................................. 145
Appendix C: Consent to Participate in Research ........................................................................ 152
Description of the Research ............................................................................................ 152
Risks and Benefits ........................................................................................................... 152
Payments ......................................................................................................................... 153
Data Storage to Protect Confidentiality .......................................................................... 153
Time Involvement ........................................................................................................... 153
How Will Results Be Used ............................................................................................. 153
Assent to Participate in Research .................................................................................... 155
Consent to Participate in Research ................................................................................. 158

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Interview Participants 54
Table 2: Student Survey Participants 55
Table 3: Demographics of the Schools 57
Table 4: School Policies Related to Gender Inclusive Housing 58
Table 5: Deans of Students’ Perceived Impact of Gender Inclusive Housing on Students 77
Table 6: Gender Inclusive Policies and Sense of Belonging 93

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Envision yourself as a 14-year-old who does not know which bathroom to enter while at
school because their gender identity is neither male nor female. Then imagine that the same
student, only months earlier, had to decide if they wanted to live in a dorm with girls or boys.
Every day, that student is walking into their “home,” but it is not a home that necessarily aligns
fully with the way in which they identify themselves. Gender expansive students who attend
boarding school are confronted daily with an identity reflected as that of “other.”
Across the nation, more and more young people are identifying as gender expansive
(Human Rights Campaign & Gender Spectrum, 2021) creating a need for responsive and
inclusive policies. In response, public schools are reacting to their students’ gender identities
with ad hoc policies to address the needs of their gender non-conforming students (Szalacha,
2003). As many cities and states are taking steps to create policies, some boarding schools are
doing the same.
An added layer of complexity for boarding schools, which goes beyond a question of
which bathrooms and locker rooms students can use, includes residential options. Like all
boarding students, gender expansive boarding students live at their schools, yet not all schools
have specific dormitories for them. This potential discomfort for gender expansive students may
then lead students to question their identity as well as their sense of belonging within the larger
school community.
It is well documented that lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, questioning, intersex and asexual
(LGBTQIA+) young people face greater challenges and mental health issues than their gender
conforming peers (Almeida et al., 2009; Mustanski et al., 2010). LGBTQIA students are
victimized at higher rates than their heterosexual peers (Almeida et al., 2009; Collier et al., 2013)
2

due to their identities, which can make going to school a daily challenge. For gender expansive
students, many of these issues also exist (Wylie et al., 2010) and this becomes especially
pronounced at boarding schools when the place where students receive an education is also
where they live. Thus, it is important to consider and explore how boarding schools intentionally
support gender expansive students in all facets of school life, including intentional student
services and housing policy design.
Background of the Problem
While schools ideally are places where “all students feel safe and supported” (Boyland et
al., 2018), students who do not fit within the male/female gender binary norm can feel excluded
(Porta et al., 2017). For these non-binary students, schools can feel like places where they are not
affirmed for their identity or feel like they belong. Often, gender non-conforming students are
victims of psychological despair and suffer from depression and anxiety (Wylie et al., 2010).
This is true for students who identify within the LGBTQIA community as well (Porta et al.,
2017). State education systems have grappled with various issues related to gender identity, such
as which bathrooms gender expansive students can use, but at this time there is no universal
mandate. Additionally, some states, such as Massachusetts, have created programs for
LGBTQIA students to support their emotional needs and physical safety (Szalacha, 2003), but
these policies are not universal, nor do they necessarily extend to independent schools. While
public schools are held to state and federal mandates, independent schools are not necessarily
bound by the same laws. Each state has its own set of laws and guidelines for how independent
schools are held accountable (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). More often, independent
schools work with their individual boards of trustees to set school policies. Thus, independent
3

and boarding schools can create their own policies and practices for how to best support gender
expansive students.
Of the two hundred plus boarding schools in the United States, many of the elite
boarding schools reside in the Northeast. In fact, according to a Business Insider article from
2015, 58% of elite boarding schools are in New England, with Massachusetts having the most
elite boarding schools out of the six states (Martin & Browning, 2015). (SAT scores,
endowment, and acceptance rates were the factors that led to the status of “elite” (Martin &
Browning, 2015).) Many of these schools are looked at as exemplars or models for others to
follow; thus, I have chosen to focus mainly on schools from this region. The schools from
outside of New England are in the Northeast and compete to enroll similar students.
What is happening at colleges and universities provides one resource for independent
secondary schools to consider in creating housing policies. Currently, many colleges and
universities are exploring how to house gender expansive or trans students. These studies (Amos
et al., 2021; Anderson-Long & Jeffries, 2019; Krum et al., 2013) indicate that having a housing
option for gender expansive and trans students has led to greater feelings of acceptance and
safety among the gender expansive and trans students. There are no studies to this point,
however, about how high school gender expansive students who attend boarding schools
experience their housing options. Therefore, it is not clear if the needs of gender expansive or
trans students are being met at boarding schools.
Although there are numerous studies about how to support LGBTQIA+ students in high
schools, these studies do not address the complicated nature of boarding schools and housing
students. Some researchers have explored how creating a curriculum that includes LGBTQIA
topics matters for affirming the identities of LGBTQIA students (Camicia & Zhu, 2019;
4

Lapointe, 2016). Other studies examine best practices for high school students in supporting their
LGBTQIA students (Mayberry, 2013; Swanson & Gettinger, 2016). While these studies focus on
LGBTQIA issues, this is not the same as issues related solely to gender identity. LGBTQIA
often focuses on issues surrounding sexual orientation, which is different from gender identity.
Thus, the goal of this study is to explore what is currently being done at boarding schools in the
Northeast to specifically address issues related to gender expansive students, and in particular, as
they relate to residential options.
The most effective way to know whether boarding schools are affirming their gender
expansive students is to explore individual boarding schools’ practices more fully. Through this
study, an examination of six boarding schools explores if and how those schools’ policies are
supporting students’ identity and sense of belonging.
Statement of the Problem
There is limited research that explores if and how boarding schools support their gender
expansive students. Additionally, no studies have been conducted about how boarding schools
affirm gender expansive students’ identity and sense of belonging. The National Association of
Independent Schools (NAIS) has begun publishing guidelines for best practices for all schools in
supporting their gender expansive students (NAIS, 2022), but more studies need to be conducted.
What is known is that boarding schools, like all schools, in recent years have been enrolling
more students who identify outside of the gender binary (Johnson, 2014). The question is
whether these schools have created policies and the structure to support those students. While a
small number of boarding schools have started to offer gender inclusive housing options for
these students, such as Northfield Mount Hermon, Phillips Academy Exeter, and Loomis-
Chaffee, it is not a common practice. For the schools that have implemented this housing option,
5

studies have not been systematically conducted to find out about the efficacy of these models.
For the boarding schools that continue to offer only a binary housing model, there is to this point
no literature that examines whether and to what extent the gender expansive students’ feel seen
and affirmed.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore both boarding school policies and policy
implementation experiences of administrators and students to better understand how gender
inclusive housing options impact gender expansive students. For schools that do not have gender
inclusive dorms, the study will examine if their policies support gender expansive students in the
absence of these housing options. For schools that have gender inclusive housing options, it will
examine the impact of these policies on supporting and affirming gender expansive students’
sense of belonging. The exploration will conclude in recommendations for best practices for
supporting gender expansive students in multiple areas, including the creation of gender
inclusive housing options or other housing policies, at boarding schools in the Northeast.
Research Questions
The following research questions were used to guide this study:
1. How do school policies related to gender inclusive housing options impact gender
expansive students?
2. What do deans of students perceive to be the impact of gender inclusive housing on
gender expansive students?
3. How do gender inclusive policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of
belonging?
6

This study explores the policies and practices of six boarding schools. For the schools that offer
gender inclusive housing options, it seeks to understand the perceptions that the deans of
students have about the efficacy of the gender inclusive housing option. Additionally, it will
include how students perceive and experience these, and other, policies related to gender
expansive students. It will focus on whether the gender expansive students’ sense of identity and
belonging are affected by the school policies.
For the schools that offer a gender binary housing model, the study will offer insight from
their deans of students about their policies and their decision to continue to have only a binary
housing model. It will also seek to examine the experiences of gender expansive students and
learn about their identity affirmation and sense of belonging within the school community.
Finally, the study will utilize sense of belonging theory (Baumeister, 2012; Gaetner & Dovidio,
2012) to understand how students experience belonging in their schools. It will not, however,
look at identity development, but rather how part of a gender expansive student’s identity is
impacted by their sense of belonging. When exploring students’ sense of belonging, I will also
engage in a discussion of identity theory (Owens et al., 2010; Stryker & Burke, 2000) to
understand the roles that students embody when understanding their own identity.
Significance of the Study
This research study will provide insight into how and to what extent six boarding schools
in the Northeast support and affirm gender expansive students’ identity and sense of belonging
through their policies in general, but more specifically as they relate to gender inclusive housing
options. Recommendations from this study are directed to school policy makers, administrators
enacting those policies, and students themselves.
Limitations and Delimitations of the Study
7

Although this study incorporates survey results from students at four of the six schools,
one key limitation of this study was the restriction on being able to interview students directly.
Only one school allowed me to talk with some of their students. Related to that, a further
limitation was school-based restricted access to many students who could offer their perspectives
on this topic. Because only 18 year-old students were allowed to take the written survey, it
limited the number of participants. Thus, more research needs to be conducted on this topic. As
the first study of its kind, it is not possible to make sweeping generalizations; however, it
provides critical insight into the current climate at boarding schools in the Northeast. A future
study ought to include a greater number of schools and could be a longitudinal study to
understand student experiences throughout their time at their schools as well as retrospective
looks from students sometime after they have left their boarding schools.
The delimitations of this study were confined to the number of boarding schools in the
Northeast willing to participate. Thus, this study is limited in the number of schools it is
exploring. It is also limited geographically. The study is further limited due to the conflation of
LGBTQIA+ studies often being confused with issues related to gender expansive or gender
nonconforming students.
Definition of Terms
• An all gender dorm refers to a residence hall that is open to students of all genders
(Northwestern University, 2023); it is synonymous to a gender inclusive dorm.
• A boarding school is a school where students are educated and reside (The
Association of Boarding Schools, 2023). Boarding schools can offer housing for
students in elementary school through a post graduate year. Some schools have 100%
8

boarding students, which means all students reside in school provided dormitories.
Other schools have dorms for a certain percentage of the student population.
• Cis, which is short of cisgender, refers to when a person’s biological sex, as in their
physical anatomy, aligns with their gender identity (Brydum, 2015).
• Comparative case studies are studies that look at the similarities and differences
across two or more cases. The cases are analyzed and compared to see if patterns can
be deciphered, which can then potentially lead to generalizability (Goodrick, 2014).
• Deadnaming occurs when a gender expansive or trans individual is referred to by
their legal, but not preferred name (Zambon, 2021). This often occurs because a
school cannot change a student’s legal name on forms and documents and so teachers
call them by names that no longer align with their identity.
• Demiboy is when a person describes their gender identity as closer to male along a
gender spectrum, but who doesn’t see themselves as part of the gender binary (Trans
Youth Equality Foundation, 2021).
• Federal mandates refer to a statute or court ruling that demands specific action from a
state government or local governments. It supersedes state and local laws (Cornell
Law School, 1995).
• Gender binary is the idea that there are only two genders: male and female (Trans
Youth Equality Foundation, 2021). This binary exists within culture, and it is not tied
to the sex of the person. Rather, it resides in agreed upon cultural norms surrounding
male and female identities (Human Rights Campaign & Gender Spectrum, 2021).
• Gender expansive is an understanding of gender that goes beyond the confines of the
gender binary of male and female. Instead, this includes an understanding of gender
9

that allows for people to not identify clearly as male or female. Rather, it allows
people to identify themselves along the spectrum of the gender binary (Human Rights
Campaign & Gender Spectrum, 2021).
• Gender inclusive is this idea supports the inclusion of people of all genders in
practices and policies. It suggests that people of all genders are welcome to partake in
an activity, or in this case, a housing model.
• Gender nonconforming is like the term gender expansive, this suggests that someone
does not “fit” in the male/female binary (Trans Youth Equality Foundation, 2021).
Instead, it means that a person’s identity does not align with the stereotypically held
cultural understanding of what it means to be a man or a woman.
• Gender and sexuality alliance is a group of students who form a group or alliance
who want to engage in conversations about gender and sexuality (Ioverno et al.,
2016). At some schools, this is known as a Gay Straight Alliance. Again, the idea is
that students who are LGBTQIA+ or gender expansive, or both, and their allies, have
a safe space to talk about matters of importance to their lives.
• Independent school is a type of school that is a private, non-profit institution that
operates under the direction of a board of trustees. The school is tuition driven but is
also funded by donations and draws from its endowment (AISNE, 2021).
• LGBTQIA+ is an umbrella term encompasses the lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transsexual/transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual community (Human Rights
Campaign & Gender Spectrum, 2021). The plus acknowledges that there are likely
more similarly aligned identities that have yet to be identified in this acronym.
10

• Public policy is a series of laws or actions on a specific topic that derives from a
government (Kilpatrick, 2000).
• Sex is the biological designation of male or female based on one’s anatomy or
genitalia. This is generally assigned at birth (Human Rights Campaign & Gender
Spectrum, 2021).
• Sexual orientation describes the ways in which a person is physically, emotionally, or
romantically attracted to a different person. Typically, a person’s sexual orientation is
heterosexual or homosexual, however, there are currently expanding terms to describe
ways in which humans are attracted to other humans (Human Rights Campaign &
Gender Spectrum, 2021).
• Transgender or trans* is a term for individuals whose gender identity does not align
with their biological sex. This is based on the idea that their gender expression does
not align with the sex with which they were born (Human Rights Campaign &
Gender Spectrum, 2021). The asterisk is included to recognize the layers of
complexity that come with gender identity and that some individuals could also be
asexual, bi-gender, etc. (Steinmetz, 2018).
• Visitation policies refer to school rules about students visiting other students who do
not live in the same dorm. They were often known as parietals, when a student of the
opposite gender would receive permission to visit the dorm of a student from the
opposite gender.
Organization of the Study
Gender-Inclusive Housing in Northeastern Boarding Schools: A Comparative Case
Study of How Housing Policies Impact Gender Expansive Students’ Sense of Belonging is
11

organized into five chapters. The first chapter provides an overview of the study and introduces
key ideas and rationale for undertaking the study. It also presents key terminology as it relates to
issues of gender and theory. Chapter 2 provides a literature review that explores the following
two themes: gender expansive or trans housing in colleges and universities and how high schools
support gender expansive students including efforts related to curriculum, athletics, LBGTQIA
clubs, and other related organizations. Chapter 3 reviews the methodology used for this research
study and includes the sample population and how it was chosen, interview questions, survey
information, data collection, and analysis of the data. Chapter 4 explores the research findings.
Chapter 5 provides a summary of findings and then examines implications for boarding schools,
conclusions, and recommendations. References and appendices are included in the conclusion of
this research study.

12

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Boarding schools exist in a niche part of the educational system. In the United States,
there are between 250 and 350 boarding schools (Association of Boarding Schools, 2022) and
each of them has its own characteristics and vision. Despite the similarities and differences
between them, many, if not all, of these schools are tasked with meeting the needs of their
increasingly diverse student body. And with these diverse student bodies, each school is
responsible for its students’ wellbeing, which includes a sense of belonging.
Belonging is never easy for teenagers, and that is especially true for students who deviate
from “the norm.” More specifically, students who belong to the LGBTQIA+ community or are
gender expansive can have a harder time fitting in during high school. Students in the
LGBTQIA+ community often have more mental health issues (Almeida et al., 2009; Collier et
al., 2013; D’Augelli et al., 2006; Dragowski et al., 2011) because of the discrimination they
encounter. While most boarding schools do their best to address these issues, it is likely that their
students still have feelings of “otherness” based on their gender and/or sexual identity.
As students are wrestling with their identities in high school, most boarding school
administrators are doing their best to support LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students. But
providing support can be particularly challenging when it comes to creating the best possible
model for residential housing. Traditionally, boarding schools have separate dorms for boys and
for girls. Because the number of students who are identifying outside of the gender binary has
increased significantly in recent years (Johnson, 2014; Orr & Baum, 2022), many boarding
schools have been pressed to reconsider their housing models. In the past decade, a small number
of boarding schools have created residential models that include all gender or gender inclusive
housing; however, the majority of schools continue to have a binary housing model. Because
13

gender expansive students have more readily identified themselves publicly only in recent years,
literature on this topic¾how boarding schools support their LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive
students¾does not yet exist.
In the absence of this literature, in this chapter I will explore what is known about how
colleges and universities are supporting their LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive student
communities. By looking at and exploring the college and university models, I hope to illustrate
patterns and trends for how higher education is meeting the various needs of its gender expansive
student body.
I will then turn my attention to looking at what non-residential support structures are in
place at the secondary level to support LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students. Before
looking at the support structures, I will identify why there is a need to pay attention to this
specific student population and the threats and complexities that the LGBTQIA+ and gender
expansive student community face. By discussing the negative experiences these students
encounter, and how it often leads to mental health struggles, I will review the literature that
articulates why there is a need for systems to support LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive
students.
The first support system I will discuss is in the athletic realm. Here I identify some best
practices that are used to affirm and support LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students. From
there, I will then spend time examining the academic performance of LGBTQIA+ and gender
expansive students and why support structures are critical to their academic success. I will then
look at the creation and importance of Gay-Straight or Gender and Sexuality Alliances (GSAs).
Students, regardless of their identity, are more successful when they have adults and others in the
community creating a safe space for them to learn. These student-led groups have helped to
14

create a sense of belonging for LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students on campus; their roles
on campus are critical for this student population.
After discussing support strategies for LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students at the
secondary level, I will look more specifically at school policies, especially as they apply to
independent schools. Independent schools are unique in that they are privately funded and
generally do not receive money from the federal government. Because of their unique positions,
not all of the federal policies relate to how they are governed. Often independent schools do,
however, have to adhere to or be mindful of state and local laws which vary from state to state.
Thus, independent schools are largely free to create their own policies, which in this case, can
have various impacts on their LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students.
Finally, I will discuss my theoretical basis, starting with belonging theory. I am using this
theory to understand the significance of affirming LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students so
that they, like their gender conforming, cis peers, can have just as meaningful an experience in
high school.
As a complement to belonging theory, I will look at identity theory. In this study, I will
not be focusing on identity formation, but instead acknowledging the gender aspects of identity
of the LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students. Therefore, I will use the literature to
underscore the importance of affirming their identities.
Housing for Gender Expansive Students in Colleges/Universities
For several years, colleges and universities have wrestled with the question of how to
best support gender expansive and trans* students within their housing models. There is
currently a movement in some parts of the country for creating gender inclusive housing options
at colleges and universities because in doing so, educational institutions are better supporting
15

their gender expansive students. By moving beyond the residential gender binary, they have
increased a sense of belonging for gender expansive students in their communities.
There is no single approach to supporting gender expansive and trans* university
students. Some schools focus on the residential piece; others are looking at social or admissions
policy changes; and others are examining their administrative systems to better understand what
is currently being done and what might need adapting. At some higher education institutions,
students are often leading the way and at other places the administration is taking the lead. No
matter who is pushing for change, the issue of how to best support gender expansive and trans*
students is happening more often.
Housing and Policy Designs for Gender Inclusive Housing (GIH)
At some four-year colleges, universities, and community colleges, administrators are
discussing how to modify their housing models to accommodate gender expansive students. In
this section, I will explore the policy recommendations for higher educational institutions as they
relate to modifying their current residential, as well as larger campus, structures.
According to Hobson (2014), “Gender-neutral housing (GNH) communities offer
students a safe, inclusive, and comfortable environment in which gender nonconforming
individuals can find a home” (p. 33). Finding a home on their campuses and a place where they
can be comfortable would likely increase gender expansive and trans* students’ sense of
belonging. Higher education institutions need to create a space where all their students feel
comfortable and safe which is why the discussion of housing for gender expansive students is
now more prevalent, especially at colleges and universities in the Northeast (Laidlaw, 2020;
Tilsley, 2010). Many colleges and universities are in the process of adapting their policies to
16

better accommodate their gender expansive students, although they have undergone different
approaches.
An initial step some colleges and universities have taken is the creation of
nondiscrimination policies (Amos et al., 2021; Hobson, 2014; Tilsley, 2010) and the
implementation of specific policies to support gender expansive students. For example, the
University of Vermont has changed its software so that the language surrounding gender on
official forms goes beyond the binary options (Tilsley, 2010). Other schools have followed a
similar model and have gender neutral language on their forms (Laidlaw, 2020). Colleges and
universities are also updating their policies as they relate to bathrooms and locker rooms to be
more gender inclusive (Laidlaw, 2020). Overall, colleges and universities are examining the
physical structure of their campuses, as well as the software and systems used, to determine to
what extent they support gender expansive students.
Part of studying the campuses includes the examination of the residential models and
policies. Because “acceptance, safety, inclusivity, and a sense of home were the central tenets of
the beginnings of the community” (Hobson, 2014, p. 37), creating residential spaces and policies
that allow for gender expansive students to feel at home is critical. To create healthy models,
some colleges and universities have invited gender expansive students to the conversation to hear
from them about what policy changes ought to be made. By creating a task force that includes
gender expansive students, colleges and universities are moving away from a cis-narrative and
allowing key voices into the conversation (Nicolazzo et al., 2018). Support from student
government and the creation of pilot residential programs have been successful at various
institutions, including the University of Ohio (Hobson, 2014). Policy recommendations from
students include adding more open gender categories on the housing forms, making more spaces
17

on campus accommodating to gender expansive students, updating building codes, especially as
they relate to bathrooms, and allowing roommate assignments based on gender rather than sex
(Hobson, 2014; Laidlaw, 2020; Nicolazzo et al., 2018).
The inclusion of gender expansive students into the process of residential housing models
will enable colleges and universities to better serve their student population. Higher educational
institutions are realizing the benefits of making changes to their policies. Even small adjustments
like open gender options on official forms (Hobson, 2014), help gender nonconforming students
have similar experiences to their cis-normative peers.
Student Experience With Gender-Neutral Housing: Inclusivity and Safety
Students of all genders should feel safe in their places of school related residence. Here I
will examine the research on the lived experiences of gender expansive students in colleges and
universities. I will discuss the systems that have led some gender expansive students to
experience discomfort at college, but I will also examine which systems have helped them feel
affirmed in their identities and in their residence halls.
As noted above, many of the policy changes concerning residential housing models
occurring in higher education are done so out of concern for the safety and well-being of gender
expansive and trans* students. For the colleges and universities that have made policy changes
and adopted gender inclusive housing, Krum et al. (2013) noted, “One of the primary reasons for
the introduction of GIH [gender inclusive housing] is to better accommodate transgender and
gender-nonconforming students, who may feel uncomfortable or be unsafe rooming with
students of their legal sex” (p. 65). Indeed, higher education is becoming more mindful of what
these specific students need because too often gender expansive students experience isolation
and harm (Goodrich, 2012; Pryor et al., 2016; Rankin & Beemyn, 2012).
18

When colleges and universities only have a binary housing model, gender expansive
students tend to feel excluded and isolated (Pryor et al., 2016; Rankin & Beemyn, 2012).
Additionally, when colleges and universities have housing policies that isolate gender expansive
or trans* students, rather than house them amongst their peers, feelings of “otherness” and not
belonging (Pryor et al., 2016) can result. When gender expansive students feel isolated, their
academic performance can suffer, and the isolation may also lead students to feel like they need
to hide parts of their identity (Goodrich, 2012; Pryor et al., 2016).
To help gender expansive students, many colleges and universities have adjusted their
housing models and allow gender expansive students to have more of a voice in the housing
process. When higher education institutions have housing options like apartment style housing,
self-contained single rooms, or “same room with different sex” housing, gender expansive
students have more choices for the housing option that feels most comfortable (Krum et al.,
2013). When gender expansive and trans* students have a role in selecting their housing option
and are not being forced into an uncomfortable living arrangement, they have a greater chance
for success in college or university (Pryor et al., 2016). Lastly, colleges and universities who do
not have housing that is mindful of the needs of gender expansive and trans* students are not
matriculating these students, which underscores the need for colleges and universities to adjust
their policies (Krum et al., 2013).
Through the lived experiences of gender expansive students at colleges and universities,
it is clear that they need to feel safe and affirmed, and that when colleges provide greater and
more inclusive housing options, it leads to greater feelings of belonging. Additionally, by
offering various housing models, colleges and universities are probably more likely to enroll
gender expansive students.
19

Gender Neutral Housing and Community Policies
Colleges and universities have, over the last decade or so, begun to implement gender
inclusive housing on their campuses. The literature on expanding the housing models beyond the
binary are examined in this section. Ultimately, higher education has found that there is a need to
provide housing beyond the binary model in order to affirm gender expansive students’ sense of
belonging. Additionally, the research indicates that having more support systems for gender
expansive students in addition to a more open residential model is good for the entire
community.
Electing to change their residential models to include housing for gender expansive
students, colleges and universities communicates to all students that there is a commitment to
people of all genders (Willoughby et al., 2012). Still, the entire community needs to adapt to best
support and affirm gender expansive students.
To start, college and university administrators need to be well versed in the particular
needs of their gender expansive students so that they can best support them (Beemyn, 2003,
2005; Marine et al., 2019). When administrators and mental health professionals on campus are
trained specifically to address the needs of their gender expansive and trans* students, they
create a more welcoming and safer environment for students (Beemyn, 2003, 2005; Marine et al.,
2019; Taylor, 2015). By being better prepared to help gender expansive students navigate
various challenges that may exist on the campus, higher education institutions can work
proactively to alter policies to better serve their student population.
Besides modifying the housing model, many higher education administrators have looked
at their policies related to bathrooms and locker rooms (Beemyn, 2003, 2005). These
traditionally gendered spaces often present challenges for gender expansive and trans* students.
20

In order to create a greater sense of belonging for this student population, administrators need to
update their policies regarding these two spaces (Amos et al., 2021; Beemyn, 2003, 2005;
Thorpe, 2017). Because bathrooms and locker rooms still largely exist in a binary model, in
addition to housing reforms, colleges and universities ought to make changes to these two spaces
to be more affirming (Amos et al., 2021; Beemyn, 2003, 2005; Thorpe, 2017).
Another way for colleges and universities to demonstrate their commitment to gender
expansive students is to change the language on their forms so that students can be addressed by
their preferred names and gender (Beemyn, 2003; Willoughby et al., 2012). When students are
free from having to navigate the challenges of their legal names versus their preferred names,
their identities are more readily confirmed, and the colleges and universities can demonstrate
their commitment to honoring students as individuals.
By moving beyond the gender binary, college campuses can create a stronger sense of
belonging for their students, and the community benefits greatly (Willoughby et al., 2012).
Higher education communities with demonstrated commitment to issues of social justice, which
include providing housing beyond a binary model, have a better chance of creating a place that
affirms all of their students (Willoughby et al., 2012). As colleges and universities in various
parts of the United States continue to modify their residential models to move beyond the binary,
they will allow their students the space to fully embrace and understand their own identities
(Amos et al., 2021).
Colleges and universities have a unique opportunity to model for boarding schools what
works well on their campuses to affirm gender expansive and trans* students’ identity and sense
of belonging. Changing the residential model to move beyond the binary is one important
component, but there are other transformative actions needed including training for the
21

administration and staff, programming aimed towards social justice, and intentional
nondiscrimination policies. These actions will help to create learning and living environments
where gender expansive students feel safe and affirmed for who they are.
Supporting High School Gender Expansive Students
Secondary schools have found many ways to support gender expansive students,
including policies on athletics, enhanced systems of mental health support, and the creation of
LGBTQIA+ alliance spaces (GSAs). The literature suggests that because LGBTQIA+ and
gender expansive students face victimization and bullying at a higher rate than their cis-
heterosexual peers (Orr & Baum, 2022; Walls et al., 2010), schools need to make
accommodations to support non-cis students in specific ways. Gender inclusive housing is one
programmatic approach to support gender expansive students at boarding schools. Whether in
addition to, or in lieu of, gender inclusive housing, these other programs are essential to ensuring
a sense of belonging for gender expansive students. In the absence of literature on gender
inclusive housing at the secondary school level, I will review other programmatic approaches
that aim to affirm gender expansive students’ identity and sense of belonging.
Inclusivity and Athletics
The literature on athletics and gender expansive and/or trans* athletes indicates that
secondary schools ought to create policies that allow transgender athletes to play on the team that
aligns with their gender identity. In this section on gender expansive students and athletics, much
of the literature addresses trans* and gender nonconforming students together. Though these two
groups of people have different needs, they often face many of the same struggles due to the way
in which they challenge the traditional gender binary in athletics.
22

There is a changing landscape when it comes to gender expansive and transgender
student athletes, though many activist groups advocate that gender expansive and transgender
youth should participate on the teams that best align with their gender identity (Griffin & Carroll,
2010; Transgender Law & Policy Institute, 2009). Some states have adopted policies that will
allow a transgender or gender nonconforming athlete to play on a team that best aligns with their
gender (Women’s Sports Foundation, 2022), yet there is no federal mandate and so schools are
creating their own policies.
At the collegiate level, transgender athletes are only allowed to compete depending on the
level of testosterone in their bodies (Morris & van Raalte, 2016) and even this regulation is still
in flux. In fact, in the past year, FINA, swimming’s worldwide regulatory body, changed its
policies so that transgender athletes will swim in an open category (ESPN News Source, 2022).
As this indicates, higher education is still wrestling with the best way to allow transgender and
gender expansive athletes to compete, which also suggests why there is not a single policy at the
secondary level.
As an issue of equity, educational institutions at the secondary level need to provide ways
for all students to participate in athletics. As Griffin and Carroll (2010) noted:
When schools fail to adopt inclusive participation policies, they are not living up to the
educational ideals of equality and inclusion and may reinforce the image of athletics as a
privileged activity not accountable to broad institutional and societal ideals of inclusion
and respect for difference. (p. 18)
The challenge for secondary schools is to find ways to include transgender and gender
nonconforming athletes that are fair and reasonable to all participants.
23

Coaches can play a critical role for transgender and gender nonconforming students in the
realm of athletics. When coaches create a welcoming environment, such as using the preferred
names of their athletes, their transgender and gender expansive athletes can thrive (Anders &
DeVita, 2020; Morris & van Raalte, 2016). When coaches allow transgender and gender
expansive athletes to participate, it can also increase athletes sense of belonging (Anders &
DeVita, 2020; Morris & van Raalte, 2016; Transgender Law & Policy Institute, 2009). Thus,
while schools are in the midst of creating policies and determining which teams transgender
youth can play on, the literature strongly suggests that gender expansive student athletes ought to
pick the team that best aligns with their gender expression.
Inclusivity and Academic Performance
Being victimized in school impacts students’ mental health as well as their academic
performance (Aragon et al., 2014; Kosciw et al., 2013). The articles explored in this section
argue that when gender expansive and LGBTQIA+ students attend schools where there is less
victimization based on their gender identity, they are more successful in the classroom.
LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive youth tend to face greater challenges and higher rates
of discrimination in high school than their cis-gender peers (Poteat et al., 2014; Price et al.,
2019). These experiences with victimization often lead to higher rates of truancy and less
academic success (Lopez & De Bois, 2005; Poteat et al., 2019; Schwartz et al., 2005). On this,
Aragon et al. (2014), while quoting Kosciw (2010), found that “When looking at LGBT
secondary students … these individuals were nearly three times as likely to have missed school
during the past month if they had experienced high levels of victimization based on sexual
orientation (57.7% versus 18%)” (p. 4). Thus “in-school victimization predicted decreased self-
esteem and worse educational outcomes (lower GPA and more missed days of school)” (Kosciw
24

et al., 2013, p. 54). To help trans* and gender expansive students have a better academic career,
schools need to create healthy and safe environments in which they can learn.
To mitigate lower academic performances and to have a healthier and more successful
experience in high school, school leaders can offer specific support to their LGBTQIA+ and
gender expansive students. To start, schools can offer curricula that include LGBTQIA+ and
gender expansive issues and authors (Aragon et al., 2014; Camicia & Zhu, 2019). Schools can
also bring gender expansive speakers. Including LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive materials can
affirm the identity of these students which can often lead to greater feelings of acceptance and
belonging. When one can see themselves reflected in their academic work, the sense of being
“other” can be lessened (Camicia & Zhu, 2019).
In addition to curriculum that reflects who students are, schools can also provide space
for a GSA. Having a club or affinity group on campus signals to the school community
acceptance of LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students (Aragon et al., 2014; Kosciw et al.,
2013). I address this further in the next section. When schools are intentional about seeing and
affirming LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students, the rate of victimization decreases and
their sense of belonging increases (Lopez & Du Bois, 2005).
Higher rates of truancy, which often lead to weaker academic performances, do not have
to be a forgone conclusion for LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students in high school.
Instead, schools can take an active approach to affirming LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive
students. Kosciw et al. (2013) note that, “Our findings indicate that all four types of LGBT-
related support examined—GSAs, supportive school staff, inclusive curricula, and
comprehensive anti-bullying/harassment policies—make unique positive contributions to the
lives of LGBT students” (p. 58). Thus, through intentional actions, LGBTQIA+ and gender
25

expansive students can have healthy and positive high school experiences, similar to their
heterosexual and cis-gender peers.
Inclusivity and Mental Health
For gender expansive students, too often they will not find supportive peers who affirm
their identity. In fact, according to the Human Rights Campaign and Gender Spectrum (2022),
“Gender expansive youth take the brunt of exclusion and verbal harassment both inside and
outside of school compared to their peers” (p.10). Additionally, the Human Rights Campaign and
Gender Spectrum (2022) noted, “Only 5 percent of gender-expansive youth reported ‘definitely
fitting in’ while 30 percent reported ‘definitely not fitting in’” (p. 8). While adults cannot “fix”
this problem, they have an important role to play in affirming gender expansive students’
identity.
Students have more successful high school careers when they are supported by caring
adults (Gonzalez & McNulty, 2010). Sometimes that support comes at home, while at other
times it comes from teachers and staff at schools. Ideally, students will find support structures in
all facets of their lives, but this is not always the case.
Pyne (2014) suggests that a paradigm shift by adults¾parents and school
personnel¾who no longer make gender nonconforming students an “other” goes a long way in
affirming gender expansive students’ sense of self. When adults reframe what the norm is, it
allows gender nonconforming students the opportunity to be part of the group and no longer
highlights their gender as something that makes them different (Pyne, 2014). Because
supportive, understanding adults in gender expansive students’ lives is critical for their success in
school, counselors need to be well-trained in how to support gender expansive students. The
literature suggests that counselors are now catching up with the needs of gender expansive
26

students and need for school policies to align with mental health best practices (Gonzalez &
McNulty, 2010).
Mental health professionals also play a critical role in supporting gender expansive
students. In fact, in their roles there is much that they can do to advocate for gender expansive
youth (Gonzalez & McNulty, 2010). They can work to make sure that gender expansive students
have families who know how to use affirming language, and they can put these same steps in
place at their schools (Chen-Hayes, 2001; Gonzalez & McNulty, 2010). School counselors can
also work with the faculty and staff to train them about issues related to gender expansive
students and how to best support them whether that is using preferred pronouns or avoiding
deadnaming students.
Working directly with gender expansive students and creating opportunities to empower
them is another action that school counselors can take to support students (Gonzalez & McNulty,
2010). When a gender expansive student knows that there is an adult in their school community
to whom they can turn, and they can see that person advocating on their behalf, it can increase
their sense of belonging (Human Rights Campaign & Gender Spectrum, 2022).
Gay-Straight Alliances
GSAs provide spaces and opportunities for LGBTQIA+, as well as gender expansive
students, to find a place of belonging in schools. Schools that have GSAs have lower rates of
victimization among their LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students. Additionally, the presence
of GSAs often leads to higher student achievement and a healthier and more inclusive school
culture.
High schools, and schools in general, need to be spaces where students feel safe and can
learn without fear of harassment (Boyland et al., 2018). Often, LGBTQIA+ and gender
27

expansive students attend school with trepidation due to their identities; however, in schools that
have a GSA, there is less victimization and mistreatment (Fetner & Elafros, 2015; Heck et al.,
2013; Ioverno et al., 2016; Toomey et al., 2011). LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students can
feel safer and more affirmed by their peers and adults with the presence of GSAs. As Heck et al.
(2013) note, “by having a GSA in a school, the school may be viewed as a place where LGBT
youth feel they belong and are supported” (p. 82). Thus, it is important for the well-being of
LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students to attend a school with a GSA.
Not only do schools with GSAs have less violence towards LGBTQIA+ and gender
expansive students, they promote a culture of belonging (Toomey & Russell, 2013; Walls et al.,
2010). Heck et al. (2013) noted, “As predicted, GSA+ youth reported significantly higher ratings
of school belonging compared to non-GSA-youth” (p. 85). Without a sense of belonging,
students are prone to feel more isolated which can lead to mental health concerns (Fetner &
Elafros, 2015; Mayberry et al., 2011). The presence of a GSA can increase a sense of belonging
which can ward off feelings of isolation and potential mental health concerns.
Schools with GSAs also find that their LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive youth are less
prone to substance issues (Heck et al., 2013, 2014). Campuses with active GSAs are shown to
create a safer, more inclusive environment for LGBT students which is why they use/misuse
drugs at lower rates than their peers who do not have a GSA at their school (Heck et al., 2014).
In fact, Heck et al. (2014) report:
Relative to participants with a GSA, those without a GSA reported more lifetime
use/misuse of illicit substances overall, and specifically were at increased odds of
reporting lifetime use of cocaine, hallucinogens, marijuana, and recreational or non-
medical use of ADHD medication and prescription pain medication. (p. 6)
28

Thus, the presence of GSAs helps keep LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students healthy and
free from substance abuse at higher rates than those students who do not have a GSA in their
school.
Schools with a GSA can also promote a sense of activism among their LGBTQIA+ and
gender expansive students (Fetner & Elafros, 2015). GSAs can be seen as a way of promoting
social justice in a school setting (Russell et al., 2009). The ability to be seen and heard can be a
powerful tool for LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students. Through their actions as a group,
GSA members are empowered and can share their knowledge and identities with the school
community (Russell et al., 2009). GSAs can also connect nationally, which again allows for
LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students to see themselves as part of something that is bigger
than their own organization (Schindel, 2008). Instead, it allows them to realize that there is a
bigger community that embraces them for who they are and a way for LGBTQIA+ and gender
expansive students to support one another (Schindel, 2008). Thus, by working both with local
GSA organizations as well as with those outside of their towns and states, LGBTQIA+ and
gender expansive students are active in their own positive development.
The presence of GSAs in schools is also linked to more adult support within school
communities (Fetner & Elafros, 2015). In schools with GSAs, the staff are more likely to create
safe spaces for LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students because they affirm these students’
identities (Fetner & Elafros, 2015). This, in turn, often leads to a healthier school environment.
In addition to adult support, the presence of GSAs leads to greater academic achievement
for LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students (Toomey & Russell, 2011; Walls et al., 2010).
When students feel like they belong in school, they are less likely to be truant, which then allows
for greater academic success. As Walls et al. (2010) note, “Experiencing school as a hostile
29

environment can substantially interfere with students’ learning processes and is associated with
increased likelihood of skipping individual classes and missing entire days of school because of
feeling unsafe” (p. 310); however, when schools have a GSA, LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive
students feel a greater sense of belonging which means they will miss less school and have
greater chances of succeeding academically. Lastly, the presence of GSAs lead to more
LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students attending college (Toomey et al., 2011). Thus, it is
critical for the academic potential of LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students to attend a
school with a GSA.
Gender and sexuality alliances provide many benefits for LGBTQIA+ and gender
expansive students. As Ioverno et al. (2016) reported:
GSAs help lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) youth find
‘safety in numbers,’ feel more connected and empowered, normalize their thoughts and
feelings, reclaim ‘a sense of hope,’ negotiate peer and romantic relationships, navigate
the coming out process, and play a role in the development of self-identity and self-
esteem. (p. 398)
Making connections with others is critical for all students, but especially students who deviate at
all from the accepted “norm.” The presence of a GSA in a school indicates to the community that
all students are welcomed and will be affirmed for their identities. It provides LGBTQIA+ and
gender expansive students with a sense of hope and belonging. Those two elements¾hope and
belonging¾can make an enormous difference in the lives of LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive
students and make school a safe and affirming place and not a place to fear. Thus, the ability for
schools to have a GSA can be life saving for LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive students.
All Gender Housing
30

Aside from what boarding schools publish on their websites about their gender inclusive
housing model, there is limited research about all gender housing in high schools. One article
from National Public Radio explores why Phillips Academy Exeter (Exeter) and Phillips
Academy Andover (Andover) changed their housing model. Aside from this popular article, the
research is non-existent about how gender inclusive housing operates as a support system at
boarding schools.
In 2017, Exeter and Andover made changes to their residential housing model. Exeter
alums and school personnel drove this change, saying that the school needed to modify its
residential policies to better meet the needs of their students (Emanuel, 2017). More specifically,
an Exeter faculty member, Alex Myers, said, “Consistently, what came up as ‘what needs work’
was housing. … If you don’t understand yourself to be a girl or a boy, living in a space that’s
designated just for boys or just for girls feels really uncomfortable” (Emanuel, 2017, p. 2).
Realizing that there was a desire to modify the housing model, Myers and others pushed for
change. While he was pushing for change at Exeter, Andover personnel were considering similar
changes.
Andover and Exeter have just completed their fifth years with all gender dorms. There
have not been additional articles on this topic to know how the model is working. In 2017, Myers
reported that 90% of the student body who was surveyed on the topic had a positive outlook on it
(Emanuel, 2017). Similarly, at Andover their former head of school noted that their results were
positive (Emanuel, 2017).
(Independent) School Policies
Never before have schools had to wrestle with so many questions about how to support
gender expansive students. Many schools find themselves having to react to situations rather than
31

being proactive (Szalacha, 2003). Thus, schools are now creating policies for how to support
gender expansive youth. Independent schools are largely able to create their own policies free
from federal influence, though some must adhere to state laws (Johnson, 2014). The articles in
this section discuss some of the legal issues as well as best practices for independent schools.
Currently, there is limited, if any, research or reviews on gender inclusive housing at the
secondary school level. Some schools have their own gender inclusive housing policies, but there
are no current studies on this topic.
Independent schools, which include boarding schools, are largely non-profit institutions,
are tuition driven, and rarely, receive funding from the federal government (NAIS, 2022).
Because they do not receive federal funding, they do not have to adhere to various federal
policies, including Title IX. Thus, when it comes to spending money on issues related to gender,
whether it is for athletics or clubs or even bathrooms, independent schools have considerable
latitude to create their policies (Fay & Littlefield, 2017).
Although independent schools are generally free from following federal education
regulations, they do need to pay attention to state and local laws (Fay & Littlefield, 2017;
Johnson, 2014). For example, in Massachusetts, there is a strict no bullying law, known as
Phoebe’s law, and while it is mandatory for public schools to follow the law, it is also required
for independent schools as well. Although this law is not related to gender expression, it serves
as an example of a law to which independent schools must adhere.
When it comes to protecting students from discrimination based on their gender
expression, not all states have specific laws or policies for schools to follow. In Connecticut, the
gender identity of a student should not matter in school policies, for there is a law that protects
gender expansive students from discrimination that all public schools must abide by (Fay &
32

Littlefield, 2017). Similarly, in Massachusetts, former Governor Baker signed a law that protects
students from discrimination based on their gender identity (Fay & Littlefield, 2017;
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2021). Neither of these laws
include independent schools, though. While not required, state officials encourage independent
schools to either follow these policies or create similar ones (Johnson, 2014). Maine, Nevada,
Minnesota, and a few other states have laws that apply to independent schools, but again, there is
no federal law that applies to independent schools’ (Johnson, 2014; Troshynski & Bejinariu,
2021).
When it comes to gender expansive students and the law, matters are still evolving, and
few states have specific policies that protect the rights of gender expansive students. Thus,
localities or individual schools must create their own policies. This is certainly true for
independent schools. As Johnson (2014) wrote, “Unless it is required by a state specific law, for
most independent schools, there is no legal requirement to adopt a policy of anti-discrimination
based on gender identity or gender expression” (p. 23). The lack of an official policy then leads
independent schools to create their own, individual policies. Fortunately, guides exist for best
practices.
The National Association for Independent Schools (NAIS) has offered guidance for how
schools can create policies that support gender expansive and trans* students. Among the
recommendations are to create gender neutral bathrooms (McGuire et al., 2010; NAIS, 2022) and
a gender support plan (NAIS, 2022; Orr & Baum, 2022), advocate that the school community use
correct pronouns for gender expansive students (GLSEN, 2018; McGuire et al., 2010), train
faculty and staff on gender expansive and trans* issues (McGuire et al., 2010; NAIS, 2022), and
33

allow gender expansive students to follow the dress code that best aligns with their gender
identity (Orr & Baum, 2022). McGuire et al. (2010) add,
Potential strategies include intervention by school personnel when harassment occurs,
presence of policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment on the basis of sexual
orientation or gender identity or presentation, presence of a Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA)
or other LGBT student groups, availability of information regarding LGBT issues at
school, and inclusion of LGBT issues in the school curricula. (p. 1177)
Clearly, guidance for how independent schools should offer support is available even if specific
policies and laws are not mandatory.
NAIS (2022) has said that independent schools “must be aware of state and local laws
and cases related to [gender expansive student support]” (p. 8), but the creation of specific
policies is at the discretion of the school. Independent schools can consult with one another to
have a shared understanding of how to successfully create policies that allow gender expansive
students to feel a sense of belonging in their communities.
Theoretical Framework
Belonging Theory
Individuals want to feel that they belong to a group and that they have social connections.
The inability to make social connections can lead to negative consequences. Using belonging
theory, I am able to examine why it is so important for gender expansive students to feel like
they belong on their campuses.
People have an inherent need to feel like they belong (Baumeister, 2012). Additionally,
they want to feel social connections with others (Baumeister, 2012). Put simply, “The core idea
of the need to belong is that people have a fundamental, strong, and pervasive motivation to form
34

and maintain at least a certain minimum number of social relationships” (Baumeister, 2012, p.
123). Positive reactions in relation to others that occur with frequency are a signal of belonging
(Baumeister, 2012), and these are frequently sought out by individuals. Additionally, the feeling
of not belonging can have negative consequences and lead to feelings of isolation (Baumeister,
2012).
One way for a person to find connections and belonging with a group is to look for
shared experiences and to create a sense of “we” (Gaetner & Dovidio, 2012). In this sense,
belonging is an aside to the ability to create a shared identity and common experiences (Gaetner
& Dovidio, 2012). Still, as Gaetner and Dovidio (2012) point out:
The benefits awarded heuristically to these new ingroup members include: decreased
threat, increased empathy, trust, forgiveness, similarity to the self, increased inclusion of
the other in the self, increased willingness to take the other’s perspective, and more
generous attributional interpretations for the other’s positive and negative behavior. (p.
444)
Thus, the ability to have a shared sense of experiences, while slightly different from the feeling
of belonging, is still critical to one’s sense of being part of something larger than themselves.
Finally, a sense of belonging is important for an individual’s emotional safety and well-
being (McMillan, 1986). Being part of a community can bring a sense of security and social
capital. It also helps one to better create boundaries, which reinforce emotional safety
(McMillan, 1986). Additionally, “When one is more accepted by the community one is more
strongly attracted to that community” (McMillan, 1986, p. 317). Thus, since people are largely
looking for acceptance and to feel like they belong to a group, once that acceptance is confirmed,
the community is in turn enhanced.
35

Identity Theory
Individuals take on many roles and define themselves often in the context in which they
live. Gender expansive students, like everyone else, have roles they play; however, their
identities might be more in flux than others and may have to be flexible depending on the
environment (Human Rights Campaign & Gender Spectrum, 2022). By examining the literature
on identity theory, I can apply this framework to gender expansive students’ roles on their
campuses as it relates to their sense of belonging.
All individuals have multiple dimensions of identity and often they are contextual
(Burke, 2004; Stryker & Burke, 2000). For example, in one minute I am a mom and that is my
primary role, but not even 10 minutes later, I am a high school teacher and occupy that role.
High school students also have various identities and roles, and often they are defined vis-a-vis
the people with whom they interact (Owens et al., 2010). Because much of high school includes
socialization with various people, it is not surprising that students, like others, take on many roles
for themselves (Carter, 2014; Ellemers & Haslam, 2012). As Burke (2004) said, “Identities are
the sets of meanings people hold for themselves that define ‘what it means’ to be who they are as
persons, as role occupants, and as group members” (p. 5). It is this idea of group membership
that can be particularly important for high school students.
In high school, students are looking for peers with whom they can relate and seek a peer
group. Applying this to a student’s identity, Ellemers and Haslam (2012) noted, “The concept of
social identity is defined as ‘that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his
knowledge of his membership of a social group (or groups) together with the emotional
significance attached to that membership’” (p. 380). Clearly group membership as part of one’s
36

identity is important. People’s identities are affirmed when they can claim membership to a
group (Ellemers & Haslam, 2012; Owens et al., 2010).
Gender offers one dimension of a person’s identity (Carter, 2014). Like other identities,
gender is often formed in relation to others and only understood in social contexts (Carter, 2014).
But once one establishes a gender identity, they are then looking for confirmation of it from
others. As Stryker and Burke (2000) said, “Again, if the identity confirmation process is
successful, the salience of the identity will be reinforced; if the process is unsuccessful, the
salience of the identity is likely to diminish, perhaps considerably” (p. 289). What this indicates
is that people are looking to have their identities confirmed and once that happens, they can be
more confident with that part of themselves (Stryker & Burke, 2000).
In summation, people have various identities and roles that they play, and many of them
are formed in relation to others (Ellemers & Haslam, 2012; Owens et al., 2010; Stets & Burke,
2000). It is possible for people to hold multiple identities and look for relationships with others
depending on which role they are occupying (Burke & Stets, 2000; Stryker & Burke, 2000).
Finally, people look to have their identities affirmed through group membership and the
relationships they form with others (Carter, 2014; Ellemers & Haslam, 2012).

37

Chapter Three: Methodology
There is limited, if any, published research that explores if, and how, boarding schools
support their gender expansive students. Additionally, no studies have been conducted on how
boarding schools affirm gender expansive students’ identity and sense of belonging. In the
absence of these studies, boarding schools are left to figure out whether to create gender
inclusive dorms. Administrators at these schools must take into account the various stakeholders,
as well as the culture of their institutions, to determine if and what changes may need to be taken
in order to support gender expansive students. Currently, a small number of boarding schools in
the Northeast have adopted a new residential model which includes an all gender dorm. It is
unclear what that impact of such dorms is on gender expansive students in general, and
specifically on their sense of belonging. This study aims to explore the sense of belonging for
gender expansive students at six boarding schools, four with gender expansive housing options
and two without, to better understand how residential models, and the schools more generally,
support gender expansive students’ sense of belonging.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore boarding school policies and how administrators
and students experience policy implementation to understand better how gender inclusive
housing options impact gender expansive students at boarding schools. For boarding schools that
do not have gender inclusive dorms, the study will examine how their policies support gender
expansive students in the absence of these housing options. For boarding schools who have
gender inclusive housing options, I will examine the impact of these policies on supporting and
affirming gender expansive students’ sense of belonging. Based on my research, I will use my
findings to recommend best practices for supporting gender expansive students through various
38

methods, including the possible creation of gender inclusive housing options at boarding schools
in the Northeast.
Research Questions
The following research questions were used to guide this study:
1. How do school policies related to gender inclusive housing options impact gender
expansive students?
2. What do deans of students perceive to be the impact of gender inclusive housing on
gender expansive students?
3. How do gender inclusive policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of
belonging?
Positionality
I am a White, cis, straight woman from Massachusetts. As the child of two faculty
members, I spent the first 8 years of my life living at a boarding school in Massachusetts. I am
currently the dean of residential life and the senior class dean at an elite boarding school. As a
member of the student life office team, I work in tandem with the dean of students and associate
head of school for student life. My own school has just undergone a discussion of whether to
create a gender inclusive hall or dorm, so this topic is particularly relevant to my work,
especially since a key part of my job is to oversee student housing and to ensure that all students
have positive experiences in their dorms.
As a straight, cis woman, I have not had experiences that had me questioning my gender
identity. I am not part of the gender expansive community, so I am approaching this work as an
outsider. It is critical that I not conduct damage-centered research (Tuck & Yang, 2014), which
focuses on collecting information from a marginalized group and using their experiences for my
39

benefit and leaving that group in pain. Instead, my approach to surveying members of a gender
expansive community was to provide opportunities for them to share their experience and use
what I learned to help their schools create more inclusive communities. By taking this approach,
my goal was to do research that not only avoids causing harm but also does good (Hostetler,
2005).
When I spoke with deans of students, my interactions were different than they would be
with other administrators since they are peers. I have worked in the student life office at my
school for 7 years and have been a grade dean for all four grades as well as serving as the
associate dean of students. While holding these positions, I have gotten to know colleagues in
similar positions at peer schools. Because of this, I had to make sure to approach the interviews
not as a chance to connect with friends, but as a formal research opportunity. In short, I need to
acknowledge my relationship with my participants to ensure validity of the research (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
Lastly, I needed to monitor my own bias and assumptions (Maxwell, 2013). I needed to
be dispassionate during the interviews and when reading the survey results. I could not go into
this study with an assumption that I know the best practices for schools before conducting
authentic and valid research. I could not let the ongoing discussions at my school influence the
research.
Selection of the Population
I interviewed six deans of students from Northeastern boarding schools to better
understand their schools’ policies surrounding gender expansive students and to understand how
they work with their students who self-identify as gender expansive. I also surveyed a selection
of 18-year-old students from these boarding schools to hear how they experience the culture at
40

the school and to understand their feelings of belonging within their schools. More specifically,
in the survey I posed questions about students’ residential experiences as they relate to a sense of
belonging. Through these interviews and the survey results, I hoped to understand how to best
support gender expansive students at boarding schools holistically, and then be able make
recommendations about best practices both as they relate to school climates generally and
specifically as they relate to housing models.
To conduct this study, I used purposeful sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Purposeful
sampling also supports the selection of students to survey based on their self-selection to live in
gender inclusive housing and/or being a member of the school’s Gay-Straight Alliance (or
Gender and Sexuality Alliance). Purposeful sampling was the most appropriate method because I
wanted to explore and understand more about the experiences of gender expansive students.
Thus, I sampled that specific population (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
All students who were surveyed had been enrolled at their respective schools for at least
one year. All the students who live in a gender inclusive dorm had family support and permission
to live in that dorm. Therefore, their participation in this study will not disclose new information
to their families related to their housing or gender identity.
The deans of students also represent a purposeful sample. Participants self-selected to
join the study after learning about it at the Deans of Eleven Schools (DOES) Conference in April
2022. The interview participants are both male and female and serve at schools as small as 525
students to as large as 1150 students.
Design Summary
For this study, I used a mixed methods comparative case studies approach that included
interviews with deans of students and the administration of student surveys. Administrators at
41

five out of the six schools were reluctant for me to talk with their students directly but were
comfortable with me working with their deans of students to administer a survey. (At one school,
I spoke with the students in the GSA in addition to distributing the survey.) Using a mixed
methods approach enabled me to triangulate the data (Maxwell, 2013) through the data collection
from the interviews and the surveys as well as a review of the schools’ housing policies. This
approach also enabled me to gain insight from both the adult and student perspectives, which
helped me to examine if the intention of the practices, created by the adults, are reflected in the
lived experiences of the students.
I chose a multisite or comparative case study for this research. Though case studies do
not always allow for generalizability (Creswell, 2007), it is still possible to create transferable
findings. The case study method looks at a “bounded system” to better understand a system
(McCaslin & Scott, 2003). This study not only looked at one system at one site, but instead
examined at the same system from multiple sites to better understand the ways in which schools
support or do not support gender expansive students. Additionally, because the schools that
participated are similar in nature, it is possible to look for patterns and similarities to potentially
allow for generalizability.
Methodology
The mixed methods approach included qualitative data from a semi-structured interview
design, with open-ended interview questions in the protocol used with the deans of students. It
also included both qualitative and quantitative data from the mixed methods student surveys. The
interview protocol used a semi-structured format, which allowed for a combination of structured
and unstructured questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This flexibility allowed me to ask
42

probing questions when needed to ensure greater depth of responses. This is the reason I selected
a semi-structured format.
The surveys gave me access to student voices since talking with most of them was not an
option, due to students’ ages or schools’ reluctance to permit interviews. The survey was created
with a respondent-centered design approach (Robinson & Leonard, 2019). The goal was to hear
from 18- and 19-year-old students about their lived experiences at their school as they relate to
gender identity and sense of belonging. The survey also meant to provide an opportunity to
gather information about the campus climate and how a gender expansive student moves through
it.
The students who were purposefully selected to be surveyed are those who live in gender
inclusive dorms or are members of the Gay-Straight Alliance (or Gender and Sexuality Alliance)
at their school. The deans at four of the participating schools shared my invitation to participate
with the students and they helped administer the survey. At some of the schools, only 10 students
live in the gender inclusive dorm; however, at other schools, upwards of 40 students live in the
gender inclusive dorm. The deans and I only invited students who are 18 years or older to
participate in the survey since they needed to be old enough to consent to participate.
Membership in the GSAs can vary widely, but the goal was to hear from at least five
students at each school who were 18 years old or older. By understanding more about the day-to-
day experiences of gender expansive students, I was able to make best practice policy
recommendations based on student voice, centered on the value of belonging.
Mixed method was the chosen approach because it combined my ability to both talk with
deans of students and survey students. By taking this approach, I hoped to align the accounts
from the deans of students and the students themselves. On the topic of validity in qualitative
43

research, Lochmiller and Lester (2017) noted that it relates to “the degree to which a practitioner-
scholar’s account aligns with or matches the participants’ reality” (p. 180). Through interviews, I
learned how the deans of students at each school perceive their gender expansive students’
experiences on campus. Through the survey, I now have an understanding about if and how the
adults’ understandings match the lived experiences of their gender expansive students. In other
words, the survey results helped to triangulate information gained from the interviews
themselves and to assess how school policies are implemented and whether they are impactful.
Sense of belonging theory was then used as a method of connecting the findings among and
between the various stakeholders.
Instrumentation and Protocols
Qualitative Instrument
The qualitative data was gathered through interviews. I wrote the interview questions
with the theoretical framework of belonging theory with a component that impacts identity.
Additionally, I focused the questions on school policies, school culture, and the residential
housing models. The interview protocol consisted of 19 questions (see Appendix A). Within the
interview were additional probing questions; these probing questions are useful to help clarify
various responses and were an aid to the interview questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I
interviewed some deans of students in person on their campuses by traveling to their schools and
talking with them for 60 minutes or more. Other deans of students I Zoomed with on an agreed
upon the date. The interview questions were open ended, and I conducted a semi-structured
interview. With permission from each interviewee, the interviews were recorded, and notes were
taken.
Quantitative Instrument
44

I used a survey to capture the quantitative data. The survey had four parts with a total of
24 questions (see Appendix B). The questions in the survey centered on two of the three research
questions. Part I of the survey included three demographic questions including the participant’s
gender identity. Part II of the survey focused on the school climate, specifically as it relates to
creating an inclusive environment. Part III explored gender identity at the school, and Part IV
centered on the residential experiences of the students at their school. Most of the questions were
close-ended questions; however, there were several open-ended questions as well. I worked to
ensure that the language was accessible and clear, that the questions were focused on the best
interest of the respondents, and that the language was free from bias (Robinson & Leonard,
2019). Additionally, for the close-ended questions, I used a four-point Likert-type scale with the
options of strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree. I started with strongly disagree in
order to avoid a potential positive bias (Robinson & Leonard, 2019). My survey was distributed
via Google Forms. I then coded the data from the open-ended questions and look for patterns in
the responses.
Prior to distributing the survey to student participants at other schools, I pilot tested the
survey with some of my own students. With their permission, I asked them to take the survey so
they could help me determine any issues that may arise, which is a practice that Robinson and
Leonard (2019) encourage. The ability to pilot test also contributed to improving issues with the
order of the questions, recognizing problematic questions, and identifying areas to be modified
(Robinson & Leonard, 2019).
Data Collection
Pazzaglia et al. (2016) and Robinson and Leonard’s (2019) data collection steps were
utilized when conducting the research for this study. To start, I contacted the deans of students
45

from six schools. They gave me access to their campuses for the in-person interviews, though I
ultimately used the Zoom platform for some of them. I also provided them with a formal
invitation to participate in the study. Thus, I created a purposeful sample. After that, I needed to
collect the data, which included recording interviews and sending out surveys to students. I then
analyzed the data and worked through any issues that may have arisen. Lastly, I stored the data
safely and kept it confidential.
I invited 10 participants from the Deans of Eleven Schools Conference in April 2022 to
partake in my study, but I did not include the dean of students from my own school to protect
against bias, real or perceived. Ultimately, I interviewed six deans of students. Two of the deans
were not in attendance and two never responded to my invitation; the other six deans each agreed
to participate. I gained consent from each of the deans of students to participate, which was a
critical ethical consideration. I provided a written consent, which I reviewed with them, before
conducting the interview. I did everything in my power to do ethical research including keeping
the information confidential, storing the data in a safe place, and letting the individuals know that
they can drop out of the study at any time (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
My plan was to interview each of the deans of students over the summer; however, some
of the interviews took place in September. Once I had IRB approval, I reached out to each dean
of students and provided a formal consent letter (Appendix C). I worked around their schedule to
ensure that we met at a time that was convenient for each of them, which is why some of the
interviews took place during the Fall of 2022. I went to some of their schools to conduct the
interviews and made sure that they were comfortable with the interview process. When I
interviewed the deans of students, I asked for their permission to record the interview as such is
the ethically sound practice (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). I also took notes during the interview
46

with each interview, with most interviews taking approximately an hour. The interviews were
transcribed and then coded.
The second part of the data collection happened via surveys (Appendix B) that were be
distributed via deans of students in the Fall of 2022. I worked with each dean of students to
select the appropriate group of 18- and 19-year-old students to take the survey at their respective
school. The dean of students gathered them in one place to take the survey. (This happened at
four of the six schools. There were no surveys distributed at two of the schools. This is discussed
in Chapter 4.) Given that I had to rely on the deans of students to invite student participants, it is
possible that there was bias in the selection sample. I hoped to mitigate that bias by asking the
deans of students to include all the 18- and 19-year-old students who either live in a gender
inclusive dorm or participate in the GSA. Although I was not present to distribute the surveys,
the deans of students provided my contact information so that if students wanted to reach out
with questions, they had the ability to do so. Each survey should have taken between 10 and 15
minutes to complete. As mentioned above, I utilized Google Forms to distribute the surveys.
Data Analysis
The study’s three research questions guided this mixed methods approach. The
qualitative data gathered from the interviews focused on the second research question. Some of
the questions in the interview also looked to answer the research question about policy. The
quantitative and qualitative data from the surveys were directly aligned to the first and third
research question. All the information gathered from the qualitative data from interviews, and the
quantitative data from the surveys, worked in tandem to answer the research questions. I then
analyzed the data in order to make recommendations for how to best support gender expansive
students.
47

The data was collected from the interviews and the surveys and then it was transcribed
and then coded. The first level of coding was open coding (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016); the second
level of coding was by category then followed by analytic coding (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
From there, I triangulated the data and compared it to the literature review to determine where
there is convergence or divergence, or both (Maxwell, 2013). I also reviewed school policies
which was an additional way in which I triangulated the data. While it will not be possible for a
direct comparison between high school and university findings as they relate to housing models,
I looked to see if there were common themes. Using sense of belonging theory, I analyzed the
impact of policies and practices at boarding schools and how they affect their gender expansive
students. Throughout the entire process, I ensured the confidentiality of each of the
participants¾both adults and students.
Validity and Reliability
Throughout the study, I made every effort to ensure that there was validity and reliability.
I ensured that the study included concrete descriptions to demonstrate why my recommendations
are warranted (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I also took various steps to enhance the validity and
reliability of the study through techniques that included triangulation of the data, respondent
validation, ample time collecting the data, an exploration of my personal bias, understanding my
positionality, pilot testing the survey, and looking for alternative explanations (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). As Patton noted, “credibility hinges partially on the integrity of the researcher”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 248), and so it was critical that I acted with integrity throughout the
research process.
Summary
48

This study used a mixed-method case study approach which included qualitative data
from interviews and mixed method data from surveys. The data collected from deans of students
from six boarding schools in the Northeast helped answer my research questions about their
perceptions and the practices of the schools surrounding gender inclusive housing on their
campuses. The data collected from the surveys from students at six boarding schools in the
Northeast focused on their experiences as residents in on-campus housing. Their responses
helped me evaluate the significance of gender inclusive residential models and policies for
gender expansive students, which enabled me to answer my research questions. The findings
from these interviews and surveys are explored in Chapter 4 and a discussion of the findings
follows in Chapter 5.

49

Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter presents the findings related to how six boarding schools in the Northeast
support their gender expansive students. The data were gathered from interviews with six deans
of students and survey responses from students at four of the six schools. At one school, the dean
of students provided their “Gender Inclusivity Proposal” that their students had created rather
than survey results from students because the school had recently conducted a campus climate
audit. The intent of this study is to understand why some schools opted to create all gender
housing options, why others chose to keep a binary housing model, and how these choices
impacted gender expansive students, most specifically in their residential model and as they
relate to gender expansive students’ sense of belonging. I intentionally focused on the
experiences of gender expansive students outside of the classroom and within the culture of their
communities and specifically in their residential experiences.
The following findings and data are intended to provide insight related to how schools
might approach creating a more supportive environment for gender expansive students. It will
offer thoughts and reflections from deans of students about what stakeholders were involved in
their decision to create, or not create, gender inclusive dorms and why schools have made the
choices they did. It will also shed light on how students experience the policies that the schools
created. This study represents the first known attempt to look at such policies and to offer
recommendations for boarding schools as they consider their residential policies around gender
inclusive dorms as well as their policies writ large on support for their gender expansive
students.

50

Overview and Organization
Multiple sources note that being an adolescent in the 21st century is challenging
(Twenge, 2017; Richtel, 2022). It is often a time when young people start to question their
identity: who they have been, who they are, and who they want to be. What can make this an
even more challenging time for some young people is if part of their identity does not align with
the “norm.” More specifically, for young people who are questioning their gender identity, or
their sexuality, high school can be fraught with additional challenges and self-doubt (Kosciw et
al., 2013; Lopez & Du Bois, 2013). Adding a further layer of complexity, for young people who
attend a boarding school, a place where they are living away from home, they are navigating
their identity often, but not always, within a binary system where privacy can be limited and
there is not always the same support system as would exist at home.
Boarding schools have traditionally been schools that had separate boys’ and girls’
dorms. Boys play on one set of teams and girls play on another. Boys and girls have separate
locker rooms. Today, however, this binary system no longer works for all students. In fact, the
Williams Institute at UCLA estimated that there are 1.6 million students who are currently
identifying as transgender (Herman et al., 2017). Additionally, the Human Rights Campaign and
Gender Spectrum report that of the 10,000 young people who participated in their study, 10
percent identify outside of the boy/girl binary (Human Rights Campaign & Gender Spectrum,
2022). Boarding schools thus now face this question: do they change their systems and
structures, including their residential model, to accommodate students who are gender
expansive? Answering that question and related others is the goal of this study.
Further, the purpose of this study is to understand more about how different boarding
schools are approaching supporting gender expansive students in general, and how they support
51

them as it relates to their residential policies specifically. Because studies have not been
conducted to understand the impact of residential models at the secondary school level, this
study will bring to light some of the current trends. It will additionally seek to address the sense
of belonging that gender expansive students feel at six boarding schools in the Northeast.
As previously mentioned, studies have consistently illustrated that gender expansive
students have a more challenging time in high school (Aragon et al., 2014; Poteat et al., 2014;
Price et al., 2019) than their cisgender peers. Students who identify as LGBTQIA+ are more
likely to be harassed at school and have higher rates of mental health issues (Chen-Hayes, 2001;
Price et al., 2019). There is encouraging news, however, in that schools that have GSAs do offer
support to LGBTQIA+ students in positive ways that lessen mental health concerns and that
provide a safe environment for students to learn (Fetner & Elafros, 2015). Affirming
LGBTQIA+ students can lead to higher academic achievement (Walls et al., 2010) as well as a
better sense of belonging (Heck et al., 2013; Toomey & Russell, 2011) for said students.
Because schools are places where students should feel safe and affirmed (Boyland et al.,
2018), it is important for schools to have policies that specifically support LGBTQIA+ as well as
gender expansive students. Public schools in some states, for example in Massachusetts, have
specific policies to ensure that LGBTQIA+ students are protected from discrimination.
Independent schools, including boarding schools, however, often do not have to abide by all the
state laws. Still, independent schools are discussing how to best support students from
marginalized backgrounds, which includes gender expansive students (NAIS, 2022).
Colleges and universities can offer some guidance to independent boarding schools
related to various housing models, for these institutions are also navigating the gender inclusive
housing landscape. Yet, there is more flexibility at the college and university level because
52

generally these institutions have greater options in the number of room configurations they can
offer (Krum et al., 2013; Pryor et al., 2016). Additionally, their student populations are generally
over 18-years-old, so there are different factors that they need to consider versus a boarding
school which has students as young as age 13.
Regardless of age, people want to feel connected and to know that they belong within
their community. As Baumeister (2012) concisely stated, “people have a basic need to belong”
(p. 121). This has been a challenge for some gender expansive students at the secondary level.
This study hopes to offer explanations as to why, and also how, schools can take steps to ensure
that each student feels like they belong within their community.
The study is intended to serve as a resource for boarding schools uncertain about how to
best support their gender expansive students. It should be used to understand what steps are
necessary so that gender expansive students feel like they belong in their schools. It will offer
ideas about the potential value of gender inclusive housing and why some students and deans of
students see it as a helpful tool in supporting gender expansive students. The study will also offer
commentary about other steps that schools can take to ensure that their gender expansive
students feel included, visible, and that they belong. The study will offer heads of school and
boards of trustees findings that are supported by the literature for what belonging and support
look like for gender expansive students.
The chapter begins with an overview of the demographics of the participants and the
schools that were involved in the study. It briefly describes the coding process and explains how
the findings are presented. The bulk of the chapter is an exploration of the findings as delineated
by the guiding three research questions. Within each research question, the study explores and
provides an analysis of themes and sub-themes.
53

Demographics of Participants
This study required a qualitative approach, so that I could capture responses gleaned from
hearing directly from students about their experiences. A qualitative approach allowed for
purposeful sampling and a descriptive approach to collecting and analyzing the findings
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Six deans of students (DoS) met the criteria necessary to participate.
Each dean is currently serving in their role for this academic year and has been in the student life
office (SLO) for more than three years. Each dean participated in a semi-structured interview.
Some of the interviews took place on the dean’s campus, and other interviews were conducted
over the Zoom platform. After each participant consented to be recorded, I captured what they
shared via handwritten notes and through the audio recording and/or Zoom recording. I initially
asked the participants background questions about themselves before moving on to talk about the
culture of their school and their support for gender expansive students.
Each dean who agreed to participate in the interview was promised confidentiality.
Additionally, all student names and dorm names were changed so that they remain anonymous,
which aligns with ethical practices (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). For those reasons, I will refer to
each dean by a Greek letter¾for example, Dean Alpha, Dean Beta. I also refer to their school by
the corresponding letter: Alpha Academy, Beta Academy. So as not to disclose the gender of the
interviewee, I will use they/them pronouns. When a dean refers to their school, I will identify it
by its Greek letter. See Table 1.

54

Table 1
Interview Participants
Name Northeast boarding school Years as DoS Years in SLO
Dean Alpha Alpha Academy 1 7
Dean Beta Beta Academy 4 5
Dean Gamma Gamma Academy 4 8
Dean Delta Delta Academy 3 10
Dean Epsilon Epsilon Academy 2 7
Dean Zeta Zeta Academy 2 5

The students who participated in the surveys all met the criteria of being 18 years old and
consented to participate in the survey. Also promised confidentiality, they will be referred to
numerically but associated with their school. For example, I will refer to students from Alpha
Academy as Alpha 1 or Alpha 2. I will use their preferred pronouns because in some cases it is
important since it speaks to their experiences at their school. See Table 2.

55

Table 2
Student Survey Participants
Name Northeastern boarding school Age Gender
Beta 1 Beta Academy 18 Man
Gamma 1 Gamma Academy 18 Demiboy
Gamma 2 Gamma Academy 18 Man
Delta 1 Delta Academy 18 Gender-
questioning
Delta 2 Delta Academy 18 Woman
Delta 3 Delta Academy 18 Man
Delta 4 Delta Academy 18 Woman
Delta 5 Delta Academy 18 Woman
Zeta 1 Zeta Academy 18 Woman
Zeta 2 Zeta Academy 18 Woman
Zeta 3 Zeta Academy 18 Man
Zeta 4 Zeta Academy 18 Preferred
not to say
Zeta 5 Zeta Academy 18 Woman
Zeta 6 Zeta Academy 18 Woman
Zeta 7 Zeta Academy 18 Man

The student participants were selected because they either live in an all gender dorm or
they are a member of their school’s Gender and Sexuality Alliance. Some of the students who
56

live in the all gender dorms are also members of their school’s GSA. No students from Alpha
Academy participated in the survey; their school’s general council did not allow them to engage
in this study. Students from Epsilon Academy were also denied the ability to participate in the
survey. Instead, the dean of students at Epsilon Academy provided a “Gender Inclusivity
Proposal” that 22 students from the Class of 2020 wrote and delivered to the head of school in
2018. In this proposal, they provided recommendations for the Academy to better support their
gender expansive students. This “Gender Inclusivity Proposal” thus represents the ideas and
perspectives from students at Epsilon Academy, though no specific student can be cited.
Students from Zeta Academy requested a Zoom conversation in addition to taking the
survey, so that they could elaborate on the culture of their school. Each student who participated
in the discussion consented to participate and agreed to have the conversation recorded. I took
notes during the meeting; their comments were included in the analysis of the findings. See
Table 3.

57

Table 3
Demographics of the Schools
Name Student enrollment Location Housing model
Alpha Academy 1150 Suburban Non-binary
Beta Academy 525 Rural Non-binary
Gamma Academy 850 Suburban Non-binary
Delta Academy 650 Rural Non- binary
Epsilon Academy 545 Suburban Binary
Zeta Academy 800 Suburban Binary

Schools that consented to participate come from both rural and suburban locations and
vary in size. Three of the schools that participated have non-binary dorms and two schools have
binary housing models. Beta Academy has an all gender hall within a girls’ dormitory. Thus, the
variety in the participants allows for the comparative nature of this study.
Coding of Data
Each question in the interview was intended to either provide background information on
the school or in direct response to one or more of the study’s research questions. After each
interview was transcribed, I listened to the interviews and edited for clarity and accuracy. Next, I
used the coding software NVivo and coded each interview based on my three research questions.
Following that process, I used an analytical coding method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), to
analyze various themes and sub-themes within each research question. I looked for patterns that
emerged from themes. I then auto-coded to minimize bias in the coding process.
58

Each survey question was designed to answer one of the study’s research questions. For
the open-ended questions, I coded them based on the three research questions. Again, I used an
analytical coding method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) to analyze the data for themes and sub-
themes. Here patterns emerged that coincide with the interviews as well as the literature.
Presentation of Findings
The presentation of findings is organized around the three research questions. Within
each question, themes are examined more specifically. Relevant comments from the participants,
both via the interviews and surveys, are included. Specific tables are also be presented. The
chapter concludes with a summary of the findings.
Research Question 1: Findings
The study’s first research question sought to uncover how school’s policies related to
gender inclusive housing impacted gender inclusive students. Embedded in this question was
whether schools have all gender or gender inclusive dorms and what the process of creating
those spaces, or not, entailed. From there, themes emerged around the school’s values
statements, infrastructure, and adult support. See Table 4.

Table 4
School Policies Related to Gender Inclusive Housing
Theme Participant alignment
Values statements

4/6
Infrastructure 6/6
Adult support 4/6

59

Dean Alpha noted:
We were fortunate on a number of fronts. I would say the stars aligned for us. … It
started with a senior who wrote a proposal, a really respected, wonderful student leader
who was really comfortable being their authentic self, who said it was shocking that
Alpha Academy doesn’t have all gender dorms. And so “Clara” started it and presented it
to the faculty and got faculty support, and that got the ball rolling with our head of
school.
Values Statement
A school’s mission statement and values statement often indicate the purpose and climate
of that institution (Bamford, 2020), and that is certainly the case at boarding schools as well. The
mission statement indicates what the school is and what it aspires to be. The values statement lets
current and prospective students understand the ethos and core tenets of the school so that they
know how the school intends to operate. When it comes to gender inclusivity, some schools are
more intentional than others in how they address the topic. What the school includes, or does not
include, says a lot to the students about how and to what extent the institution supports them.
According to Dean Alpha, inclusivity is a core part of their mission of the school. They
cite their Alpha Academy’s Statement of Purpose which includes “Alpha Academy is committed
to nurturing an intentionally diverse, inclusive community that encourages students and adults to
respect, inspire, and learn from one another” (Alpha Academy, 2022). They added that the
school’s gender center is another way that they have demonstrated how they value people who
identify on the gender spectrum. By having the Alpha Academy Center for Gender Studies,
which includes education and outreach, Dean Alpha believes that their school has made gender
inclusion a priority and core value of the institution.
60

The values at Beta Academy are tied to the Episcopal Church, which Dean Beta says,
“really focus on the acceptance and inclusion side” of the identity piece, which then plays into
the mission and values of that school. The practice of acceptance as a core value suggests that
students at Beta Academy are open to their school’s all gender dorm. It also means that the
institution itself values acceptance, which then extends to gender expansive students.
Gamma Academy has an institutional statement which is designed to protect
marginalized students. As Dean Gamma notes, “We now have an institutional statement that’s
been added to our mission and other core documents. … I mean, it’s more like an expectation of
community members. … We have an identity based honor code that covers identity matters.” At
Gamma Academy, the basic expectation is that all students are protected regardless of their
identity. Thus, supporting gender expansive students is core to the school’s mission.
Delta Academy’s residential model is “safe, seen, and supported.” Thus, on a
foundational level, the school has committed itself to creating comfortable environments for all
its students, including gender expansive students. Delta Academy’s faculty has also gone through
extensive professional development to ensure that the adults are prepared to engage in
conversations with students on the topic of gender identity.
Policies of acceptance or inclusivity woven into the fabric of the school’s mission seem
to have influenced the school’s decision to have all gender housing. In fact, for the schools listed
above, each of them has a housing option for gender expansive students that is not available at
the other schools. Thus, the mission of a school and its values statement play out in the day-to-
day institutional structure of their residential models.
Infrastructure
61

Boarding schools have target enrollment goals they need to meet. At times this can be a
complicated process and often involves student life offices working with their colleagues in the
admissions offices to make sure that the school does not enroll more students than there are beds
in the dorms and also that it gets the number of enrolling boys and girls “right” to fill the
appropriate dorms. Getting the numbers correct is important given that boarding schools are
tuition driven and an empty bed means a loss of revenue. Thus, when deciding whether to create
all gender dorms, schools need to look closely at the models to determine if their school could
physically accommodate these students. As Dean Alpha noted, “It’s really hard when strategic
enrollment has X number of students, and we have X number of beds to [figure out] how many
beds are going to be all gender.” Once schools decide to have an all gender dorm, there then
needs to be another process to determine who can live in that space. Schools also have to
consider infrastructure outside of the dorms, such as are their gender inclusive bathrooms and
locker rooms in other buildings throughout campus.
The creation of an all gender dorm at Alpha Academy was student-led, with input from
the faculty and then the head of school before finally gaining the approval of the board of
trustees. As Dean Alpha said, “the stars aligned for us” in the sense that the school had both
student and adult support. Additionally, as a competitive issue, a peer school was proposing an
all gender dorm at the same time. Alpha Academy stakeholders leveraged the opportunity to
create and implement an all gender dorm.
Once the board of trustees approved the creation of a gender inclusive dorm, Alpha
Academy needed to determine which building would be used for this purpose. The degree of
student interest would inform this decision. Alpha Academy has some dorms with five to seven
students, and other dorms with more than 30 students. According to Dean Alpha, “we had 13
62

[interested students] last year and we’ll have 15 this year.” When Dean Alpha and I sat down
together in July 2022, they were wrestling with the question of what building to use for their all
gender dorm including whether they would offer single or double rooms to the student residents.
Alpha Academy has the benefit of having a large range of dorm sizes, giving them the flexibility
to change the location of the all gender dorm as needed; however, that could cause issues with
the faculty residents who live in those spaces.
Boarding schools provide housing for their faculty because being available to students in
a residential community represents a core component of the job. Most of the faculty do dorm
duty and run residential co-curricular programs in those spaces. Faculty residents tend to be
assigned to a dorm of one gender or another, and that allocation generally is consistent for
several years. What can be complicated, according to Alpha Dean, is when a dorm “flips,” and
goes from being the faculty resident for ninth grade boys to being the faculty resident for an all
gender dorm. As Alpha Dean noted, “The adults who live in the dorms have a certain concept of
what their dorm is, and when you flip it on them, that can be like a negotiation.” There is training
associated with any dormitory space, but the process of changing dorm composition could
become more complicated in this case.
Another process that boarding schools must carefully consider is student housing
placement. When the housing process begins in the spring, Alpha Academy sends an application
to those in the student body who express interest in living in an all gender dorm. Students are
then able to apply to live in an all gender space as an ally or as a student who identifies along the
gender spectrum. Families are notified of students’ interest to live in the all gender dorm. With
parental consent, the student life office then can support a student’s desire to live in an all gender
dorm.
63

Bathrooms and locker rooms also involve important infrastructure decisions that impact
gender expansive students. At Alpha Academy, they have an all gender locker room. This
includes individual changing spaces and separate shower enclosure. They are also converting
bathrooms in the older academic building so that there are more all gender bathrooms.
Additionally, they are taking further, smaller but important symbolic steps. like putting
menstrual products in boys’ bathrooms. This resource was made available in response to a
student who pointed out the need for them in that space. In short, Alpha Academy, has taken
many steps to be more gender inclusive.
At Beta Academy, which has had some form of all gender housing for 4 years, the
residential space that they have designated for gender expansive students has shifted over time.
Initially, students approached the administration only to address the gendered dress code. What
came out of that request, according to Dean Beta, was “a gender task force that was given the
task of looking at gender policies and then what it would look like to have a gender inclusive
space.” When this idea was approved, the school surveyed the student body to get a general idea
of how many students wanted to live in this space. Dean Beta recalled, “You had a dozen or so
say, ‘I’m interested,’ and then between our need for parent permission, which we required, and
just conversations about what the space would look like, it came down to four.” Although having
a four person dorm is not always possible at boarding schools, Beta Academy made the decision
to have an all gender dorm.
In the 2021–2022 school year, the school made a twenty person dorm available as the all
gender dorm; however, it only had eleven students living in that space. As Dean Beta explained:
We need to be able to do this. … We need to fill a space in a way that makes
sense. And I think part of that was driven from our policy making from the
64

reflection on having four [students] from the bed and resource usage. Long story
short, they kind of skirted the line of having just enough people to make it work,
but not really enough to fill a dorm. So, the 20 person dorm had 11 students in it
that were living there, which in our fully residential model took a boys’ dorm of
20 offline. Plus, there were nine beds that were empty.
To avoid the loss of revenue due to the unused beds or having forced doubles in other buildings,
Beta Academy switched its all gender space again. Currently, instead of having an all gender
dorm, there is a seven-person all gender hall in the basement of a girls’ dorm. Dean Beta thinks
that this current model is sustainable though it came at a cost from the student perspective.
According to Student Beta 1, Beta Academy has some work to do when it comes to its all
gender dorm. As he noted:
The gender-inclusive dormitory at my school has changed format every single
year. Last year, we were given a space and we thought that would be permanent.
But in the spring, we were told that this gender-inclusive dorm would be
dissolved, and that we would be reassigned to gender-inclusive pods, small
sections of other dorms, without anyone asking for our opinion. We had to engage
in discussions with the administration to voice our opinions of keeping a gender-
inclusive space. I feel that the administration was shortsighted and did not take
into account the feelings of its students by making decisions that greatly impact
gender expansive students without considering their thoughts.
As this indicates, the frequency at which Beta Academy has changed the space for its all gender
dorm has come at a cost in meeting its goal of inclusivity. It also disregarded the student voice in
65

the process, thereby missing an opportunity to be inclusive and create a stronger sense of
belonging and affirmation for the gender expansive students.
Who is eligible to live in the all gender dorm varies at Beta Academy, as well. The Beta
Academy Student Life Office discourages new students from living on the hall. As Dean Beta
said:
If it was just one kid, it could feel really isolating to be in that space. And kids don’t want
to hear this, but it could really prevent them from making connections with people in
their grades and that sort of thing.
While there are no specific policies that prohibit a new student from living there, it would be
unlikely that they would be allowed to, and while the students at Beta Academy may disagree
with this practice, Dean Beta believes that there are other ways to affirm the new students
outside of the gender inclusive hall.
When considering whether to create a gender inclusive dorm, Gamma Academy
conducted a gender audit to determine whether it should have a gender inclusive housing option
for its students. When reflecting on the 2016 process, Dean Gamma said:
It was really a way to look at ways in which we were supporting our students who were
not identifying on the gender binary. … We took a comprehensive look. I looked at res
life, athletics, and there was an academic component. We partnered with GLSEN and the
Mazzoni Center. … And out of that came a pretty robust report about areas of campus
life and there was a conversation with students as well. And out of that came a series of
recommendations for how our school can better support our students.
One of the recommendations was the creation of a gender inclusive dorm, which the head of
school and board of trustees approved. Thus, Gamma Academy created an all gender dorm.
66

In its first year, the all gender dorm had eight students. As Dean Gamma recalls about the
evolution of the gender inclusive dorm:
So, we went from eight to nine. We actually thought there would have been a spike after
year one, but in year one we had, of that eight, we had the two senior prefects graduate
and then the other six students, all six of them were chosen to be prefects. And so, two of
them returned, the other four went to different houses on campus. So, we stayed
relatively flat. We went from eight to nine eight to nine. And then this past year, year
three was in the mid-twenties. And next year, we’ll be at 26.
Clearly, there is an appetite for an all gender dorm from students at Gamma Academy. What this
quote also indicates is that the school climate is such that six students from the gender inclusive
dorm were selected as leaders. Their identities outside of the gender binary were accepted within
Gamma Academy, which is evident in their leadership positions.
Additionally, Dean Gamma notes that
several of our students who are gender expansive live in a kind of binary. … We’ve also
added what we’re calling coed dorms, which are basically dorms that have shared
common space, but then are more of a binary model. And I think that at the same time,
we have allies throughout the campus as well. And, you know, you don’t just want allies
in the all gender house. We want them spread throughout campus.
Because Gamma Academy is intentional in having allies throughout the campus, it is doing its
best to create spaces where its gender expansive students feel like they belong throughout the
campus.
When it comes to bathrooms and locker rooms, Gamma Academy has ongoing efforts to
make the community more accessible to gender expansive students. Dean Gamma said:
67

There have been more and more single user bathrooms put up around campus, [and]
privacy stalls installed in some of the binary bathrooms. And, one of the summer projects
we’re doing this year is to figure [out] how we can basically create all gender bathrooms.
Spending time and resources to convert bathrooms demonstrates one of the ways that Gamma
Academy is committed to its gender expansive students.
Adults and students at Delta Academy are similar to the previously discussed three
schools in that they too conducted a gender audit, and, like Gamma Academy, employed
consultants at the Mazzoni Center to offer guidance. Additionally, according to Dean Delta:
We had several really strong advocates in the community who were helping the process
[of approving an all gender dorm] move along, and that was incredibly important to have
those folks who are dedicated to it to really keep pushing. And we had students who
needed it. And I think that was what made a big difference for us is that we could see
these students right in front of us who needed that option.
At Delta Academy, the adults could see that their gender expansive students needed a place on
campus for themselves. And with the support of the board of trustees, Delta Academy created an
all gender dorm.
An ongoing issue for Delta Academy is that their current dorm is too small. In the 2022–
2023 academy year, there are 30 students in the all gender dorm, but that has led to some
students who want to live there being turned away. As Dean Delta explained:
Every student, when they’re filling out their housing preference, has these
categories to choose from: I only want to live in a boys’ dorm. I only want to live
in a girls’ dorm. I need to live in all gender. I want to live in in all gender. And I
am open to living in all gender. So, the first two categories are like the vast
68

majority of kids. … So, take all those off. And then of the I need, I want, and I am
open, the needs always get placed right there. … So, what's changed over time is
the first few years, we filled the dorm with a bunch of needs, with all the I wants
and a bunch of I’m open to. ‘I’m open to’ no longer get into [Williams]. There’s
no space. So even though we still have that category, none of those people got
into [Williams] because we filled it with the needs and the wants. And this year, I
think last year and this year, we did not actually even give all the wants. So,
what’s changed for us is that instead of having these three categories and going
deep into the third category, the third category is long gone. And the two
categories we’re not even housing all the kids who say they want.
Because “Williams” dorm is unable to house all the students who indicate their desire to live
there, the school is trying to find another, bigger dorm to house them.
The surveyed students at Delta Academy have indicated that their school values them and
has created policies that affirm their identity. All five survey participants indicated that they feel
safe on campus and that others know their authentic selves. Additionally, Delta 3 said, “The all
gender dorm does a good job of affirming the gender identities of gender expansive students,
([for example,] preferred pronouns are used), and people are encouraged to discuss it.” Delta 4
adds, “Our school demonstrates its commitment to gender-expansive students by having an all
gender dorm and a sports program that supports students’ gender identities.” Thus, the all gender
dorm at Delta Academy appears to have positive impacts on their students’ experiences.
Unlike at the previously discussed four schools, Epsilon Academy and Zeta Academy do
not have all gender housing, and part of the rationale lies in the structure of the school and their
physical space. Importantly, schools that do not have gender inclusive housing continue to have
69

affirming gender binary policies. These policies are firmly entrenched into each school’s ethos
and identity.
At Epsilon Academy, a binary structure continues to exist when it comes to their
residential model as well as their school policies. On this, Dean Epsilon stated:
[It’s] like we’re stuck in just a very binary world. We have boys’ dorms, and we have
girls’ dorms. If you’re a non-binary, you are wrapped up into that and you kind of select
based on who you would feel most comfortable living with. It’s just very, very gendered.
And I don’t, I don’t know the answer. I don’t know what building an all gendered space
or house is going to do for us. Is that going to push our community forward? Is it going to
isolate students? I don’t know.
This sense of uncertainty speaks to how much, or in this case little, time Epsilon
Academy has spent educating themselves on issues of gender. Additionally, Dean Epsilon noted,
changing their system would have implications that they are uncertain about. Would it help
gender expansive students to have a space for them to live outside of the binary model? Would it
be better to have a more individualized approach to supporting gender expansive students within
the current model? What is clear is that the adults at Epsilon Academy do not know what
direction it should take, even though students at Epsilon Academy have made it clear that they
want the policies amended, as discussed later in this section.
One of the reasons Dean Epsilon says that creating an all gender dorm would be
complicated is that the majority of students currently live in doubles. They also note that they
feel limited by the school’s physical structures. Thus, there are significant logistical and financial
challenges to making a shift. As Dean Epsilon noted, if they could create a new dorm, they
“would want the people to match up with the physical spaces.” Also, they have brainstormed
70

which smaller dorms could possibly be used for an all gender space, such as a six-person dorm.
They do not believe, however, that the family who gave the money for the dorm would allow it
to be used as a gender inclusive space.
Epsilon Academy also does not have all gender bathrooms on campus. As Dean Epsilon
acknowledged, “We don’t have any gender inclusive bathrooms on campus.” They cite this as a
huge problem for their gender expansive students. Every day the gender expansive students have
to choose a bathroom that is a reminder that they do not fit neatly into a gender box.
At the root of these issues for Epsilon Academy is the unwillingness of the administration
to examine its gender policies. Epsilon Academy is known as “The Family School” and to
deviate from this model would mean questioning or rethinking what a family looks like. Dean
Epsilon acknowledged that the school tends to enroll students from conservative families and so
it is unwilling to push stakeholders to think about issues for gender expansive students. Instead,
the students are pushing the administration to think more about their needs and being inclusive of
them as part of the fabric of the community. Until the administration is willing to educate itself,
examine how its policies impact gender expansive students, and then ask stakeholders to think
from the lends of inclusion, it is unlikely that Epsilon Academy will make significant progress.
In 2018, 22 students from the Class of 2020 at Epsilon Academy created the “Gender
Inclusivity Proposal.” In this document, they provided a mission statement, needs assessment,
proposal, and constraints. Within their proposal, the students wanted Epsilon Academy to adopt
gender neutral bathrooms, dormitories, and locker rooms. As is stated in the “Gender Inclusivity
Proposal,” “Gender variant members need inclusive facilities to enter our community without
their gender identity hindering the day-to-day activities. Everyone should be able to access a
71

public restroom when needed – it is not a privilege to be earned but a tacit right” (Epsilon
Academy). The students then offered specific places on campus and ways to address this.
When it came to their proposal for dormitories, the Epsilon students offered various paths
for the school including: “build a gender neutral dorm, make one of the Dawn dormitories gender
neutral, [and have] roommate application to include ‘ally’ option for student willing to be
roommates with a gender variant student” (“Gender Inclusivity Proposal”, Epsilon Academy).
Clearly, the students at Epsilon Academy were asking their administrators to find ways to make
them feel more comfortable at their school.
From what Dean Epsilon knows, their “Gender Inclusivity Proposal” was given to the
head of school, but he took it no further. The proposal was not discussed with the faculty or with
the board of trustees. It was never addressed and eventually all the students graduated. Though it
is not clear how current students are feeling on this issue, Dean Epsilon believes that the school
is behind the curve and has work to do to catch up to its peer schools.
Zeta Academy differs from Epsilon Academy in many ways, but the binary nature of its
infrastructure aligns with Epsilon Academy. At Zeta Academy, students live in “houses,” as
opposed to dorms, and there are year-long competitions that take place between the houses. In
fact, a student’s identity is often tied up with their house identity. As Dean Zeta said, “So much
of the Zeta Academy experience is built on house identity.” On this topic, a senior at Zeta
Academy stated, “We try to make it so that each house has a semblance of a culture or cultural
identity. It’s a piece of information that you normally give when you’re introducing yourself in a
Zeta Academy space” (conversation with Zeta Academy GSA students). Additionally, Dean Zeta
noted, “The gender issues are so endemic to how we’ve designed campus and the history of this
place that the vast majority of people don’t even see it as a problem.” When considering how
72

they would make a gender inclusive dorm, Dean Zeta said that much of the issues with gender
would have to be addressed prior to that time. An example of this is that the female students
generally must have a roommate each year they attend Zeta Academy, yet male students rarely,
if ever, have a roommate. Structures like this have reproduced gender dynamics that are binary in
nature and entrenched in the fabric of the school.
Students at Zeta Academy also want their school administrators to make changes so that
they feel more comfortable on campus. In fact, of the seven Zeta students who responded to the
survey, five of the students identified having a gender inclusive dorm as a way that their school
can improve aspects of its residential life. Additionally, six out of seven Zeta Academy students
said that the school needs to make efforts to discuss gender in various forms¾specifically toxic
masculinity and heteronormativity, among others¾so that the school can better support them.
Four of the Zeta Academy students also noted that they did not feel safe being themselves on
campus. Given that this study looks to explore how policies impact a gender expansive student’s
sense of belonging, it seems clear that at Zeta Academy there is work to be done so that their
gender expansive/LGBTQIA+ students feel more accepted and affirmed on the campus.
Zeta Academy’s dean of students, as well as many of the students from the school’s
GSA, understand that the traditional heteronormative culture creates challenges to creating an all
gender dorm. When asked about the housing, Dean Zeta said they are willing to create an all
gender dorm, but first the issues of gender need to be addressed. They said:
If we can just agree to blowing up the gendered spaces on campus and set that plan in
motion and be public about that, I would consider this year as a success because I think
for me that’s going to solve a lot of the equity issues that I feel very aware of.
73

Because the physical space at Zeta Academy separates the boys and girls and, according to Dean
Zeta, gives preference to the boys, the school needs to be prepared to look more deeply into
ingrained gender issues and address them. As noted earlier, female students have roommates and
male students do not and if the school changes their model, it could mean more boys having
roommates because the houses are no longer the same. Thus, in terms of the infrastructure, while
the school has the spaces on campus to add an all gender dorm, it currently does not have a
culture that may be ready to accept the dorm.
Students interviewed at Zeta Academy have also noted their concern for the culture
surrounding gender at their school. As Zeta 4 said, “I think we could enforce more policies
protecting gender identities because heteronormative and toxic masculinity standards are very
much in place.” On this topic, Zeta 3 noted:
My house culture emphasizes the idea of all of us being ‘men.’ There is no nuance and
gray area allowed. Also, I’ve separated myself intentionally from most of the male
population because the male culture propagates so much toxic masculinity that it ends up
worsening my internalized homophobia. I’ve thrived when allowed to exist apart from
the men here.
Zeta 2 adds, “Our school has been hesitant to implement things to help gender expansive
students.” According to Zeta 7, “The school is incredibly binary (through the house system) and
is not addressing it.” What is clear from these comments, and others from Zeta Academy
students, is that the culture on campus is not one that is particularly open to gender expansive
students and is instead deeply rooted in a binary system. This has led to Zeta Academy’s GSA
students to at times feel a lack of support and inability to be their authentic selves everywhere on
campus.
74

Adult Support
Regardless of whether a school has gender inclusive housing or not, many of the schools
are intentional about how they train the adults on campus to best support the students under their
care. Recently, four of these schools have paid closer attention to their gender expansive students
by providing professional development opportunities to ensure that the adults know how to
effectively enhance the experience of their gender expansive students. Students have said that
having supportive adults is incredibly important to their identity and sense of belonging. When
adults deadname them or use the wrong pronouns, they find that school becomes a more
challenging place. However, when gender expansive students have adults in their community
who are supportive, who help plan and attend pride prom, for example, it affirms their identity
and sense of belonging. Thus, it is critical that the adults in boarding schools, who at times act in
loco parentis, are available to students and affirming of their identities.
Alpha Academy is intentional about the faculty they house in the all gender dorms and
offer specific training for them so that they can best understand the needs of their gender
expansive student residents. Dean Alpha said,
We have, since [the implementation of the all gender dorms], done a lot of education with
everybody. But I will say, it’s only in the last six years that I’ve been here, and there’s
been turnover in the different offices, but there’s been more focus on having a more
aware and open community like [among] all campus adults.
When Dean Alpha refers to the open community of adults, they include not just teachers and
administrators, but employees who work in such places as the dining hall and campus security.
For Dean Alpha, educating only the faculty does not go far enough. Instead, the entire adult
75

community ought to be trained so that in whatever roles they play at the Academy, they can be a
resource.
Like Alpha Academy, Gamma Academy has ongoing efforts to teach the community
about issues related to gender expansive students. Dean Gamma noted:
I think during advisory group meetings, it’s often a topic that is brought up at least once a
year about how we are supporting community members who might identify with a
particular group that’s been on the margins historically. We also have, through our office,
a series of what are called community conversations. So, I’d say every other year, gender
identity is one.
At Gamma Academy, the entire student body and faculty collectively spend time together talking
about gender identities, demonstrating that they are aware of and care about students’ gender
identities. Prior to those conversations with students, adults in the community take time to review
their policies and support structures so that they can then discuss the matter with a baseline
knowledge and familiarity. Additionally, because Gamma Academy’s institutional statement
includes a clause about not discriminating based on gender identity, part of the school’s ethos
includes supporting gender expansive students.
Delta Academy has focused on training both the adults in the gender inclusive dorm as
well as the entire faculty. On this topic Dean Delta said:
We did a lot of training of adults to get the dorm up and running and also this is a
challenge of moving the population from one building to another. Like those adults are
carefully chosen and carefully trained to be in the dorm. … We sort of toggle back and
forth like one year we’ll do more gender training, another year we’ll do more of other
76

DEI training … We try to touch those bases either at different years or different times in
the year or something like that. And we also did a lot of training with the adults.
When thinking about the composition of the dorm faculty in the all gender dorm, they added,
“And we’ve also tried to have different faces to be in that building. I think it’s important for us to
have had people who represent different gender identities, who represent different sexual
expressions, who are known; that’s just been really important for us.” Thus, at Delta Academy,
the administration has made it a priority to train the faculty on how to be supportive to its gender
expansive students not as a one-off training, but something that is ongoing, and with increasing
awareness (from understanding policy, conversations, and professional development) comes the
increased opportunity for developing a culture of belonging.
Although Zeta Academy does not have gender inclusive housing, the students feel like
there are many adults in the community who support them. When asked whether they felt
respected by their classroom teachers, all seven Zeta students either agreed or strongly agreed
with this statement. Six out of seven Zeta students either agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement “There are adults at this school that make me feel like I belong.” Although many
students at Zeta Academy would argue that the school could do more to talk about and meet the
needs of gender expansive students, the survey results indicate that there is a strong support
system via individual teachers.
Research Question 2: Findings
The second research question of this study focused on how deans of students perceived
the impact that gender inclusive housing has, or would have, on their gender inclusive students.
Three themes emerged from this question which align with the sense of belonging theory, the
underpinning framework for the study. Those themes include safe spaces, visitation policies, and
77

specific policies for the gender inclusive dorms. A sub-theme is the feelings of rejection or not
belonging that emerge regardless of whether a school has gender inclusive housing or not. See
Table 5.

Table 5
Deans of Students’ Perceived Impact of Gender Inclusive Housing on Students
Theme Participant alignment
Safe spaces 5/6
Visitation policies 5/6
Policies for gender inclusive dorms 3/6
Unwelcomed places 5/6

78

Safe Spaces
When considering the impact of gender inclusive housing on gender expansive students,
deans of students identified the creation of safe spaces as something they believe benefits their
gender expansive community. They see these spaces as places where gender expansive students
are affirmed and allowed to be their authentic selves. This sentiment was reflected in the student
surveys as well. I will now look more closely at responses from the deans at five of the six
schools to get a better sense of the impact of these safe spaces.
Dean Alpha believes that their all gender dorms have a significant impact on Alpha
Academy’s gender expansive students. They said:
I think that makes a big difference. I think what people feared was [that] with the dorms
[students] would be sort of marginalized. But because our campus is probably, I would
say people would characterize us as really liberal, really erring on the right side of the
youth from every quarter, like valuing diversity, that we actually have a really wide range
of genders represented all the time.
Dean Alpha then added, “I think they [gender expansive students] would say we are making
progress and that it’s probably better than most high schools because high school is just a hard
time, right?” Thus, Dean Alpha believes that at Alpha Academy they have come a long way in
making the campus welcoming and that it makes a difference for their students.
Having two all gender dorms for their students allows students to have a place that is
dedicated to them and their needs. In the application to live in all gender housing, Alpha
Academy included the following:
All gender housing at Alpha Academy is open to all students, regardless of
gender. It was designed with the specific intent of making our residential program
79

more inclusive to trans identifying students. Boarding at the academy, including
nonbinary, gender nonconforming and transgender students, is also living space
that relies on allies or trusted advocates. Community guidelines for all gender
housing residents will work together to create a trusting, respectful and inclusive
environment in the dorm. Residents will respect the confidentiality of their peers,
gender identities and other personal information. Residents will respect each
other’s space and physical privacy (Dean Alpha; Alpha Academy).
Built into the all gender dorm contract is the idea that these dorms will provide safe spaces for
the students. As Dean Alpha noted,
And so that’s why they’ll say I’m requesting this [the all gender dorm] because I get
misgendered all the time. People don’t use the right pronouns. And I believe that because
that’s the world we live in and in an all gender community, that won’t happen. Yeah, it’s
a small community, but it will not happen in that community.
Thus, it is Dean Alpha’s understanding, based on the applications for all gender housing that
they have read, that some students apply to live in one of the all gender dorms because it will be
a safe, affirming place. Although there was no student voice made available for this study to
determine whether Alpha Academy succeeds in its mission to create these safe spaces, Dean
Alpha believes that the school is meeting its mark.
Like Dean Alpha, Dean Beta also believes that at their school, the gender inclusive house
has a positive impact on the gender expansive community and that the residential space for this
community is considered a safe space. Beta Academy went from having a gender inclusive dorm
to having a specific hall set aside for gender expansive students. As Dean Beta said about this
process,
80

In fact, when we went from a dorm to not a dorm, there were a number of students that
reached out to sign up to live in the dorm because a lot of it was a numbers thing. And
when I kind of pushed back, or not pushed back, but I just asked why, they were like, oh,
I’m simply doing this because I want there to be a space, like I’d be willing to live there
to ensure that there is a space.
From this comment, one can infer that many in the student body, writ large, believes in the value
of the gender inclusive dorm. It is striking that students who did not necessarily need the space
were willing to live there so that their peers who need it would have access to it.
Moreover, Dean Beta believes that the gender expansive students feel good about their
residential space. They said,
But I would say now I think the kids that live in, we call it the GI, the gender inclusive
house, I think they’re really happy with the space and with how it all kind of shaped out.
And then just as a group there feels like, it’s sort of a regular part of our community.
This normalization of the space indicates that Beta Academy’s community understands the value
in gender inclusive housing and sees that space as important and safe for the gender expansive
community.
While Dean Gamma did not specifically discuss the gender expansive dorm as a place
where students feel safer than in other spaces, they instead talked about the community efforts to
make the campus in its entirety a welcoming and safe space. The faculty at Gamma Academy
have been intentional about how they discuss gender. As Dean Gamma said, “I think, you know,
over the last five to seven years, the dialogue has been very open. It’s been very transparent.”
Because of that programming, they noted:
81

It’s put students in safe spaces where they feel like they can express themselves in honest
and genuine ways. And not just students who identify as LGBTQ+ or not on kind of a
traditional binary because I think it’s also given a platform for allies or for students who
have a connection with somebody who may identify in a particular way, giving them a
platform to share their experience in, you know, supporting, living with, etc. So, it’s been
good. There’s still work to do, but it’s been healthy.
This approach of educating the entire community lends itself to students feeling safe anywhere
on campus, not just in the all gender dorms.
Dean Delta feels similarly positive about their school’s efforts to create safe spaces on
their campus. As Dean Delta observed,
I think that they are included, certainly in our residential life. Not everyone who is gender
expansive lives in our gender expansive housing. They are welcome to do so, but they’re
also welcome to live elsewhere. And I think that that’s really important, that not all these
people live only in this one place.
The idea that some gender expansive students choose to live in the binary dorms suggests that
the campus is open and affirming. It means that for these students, the dorms, all of them,
represent a safe space for them. Dean Delta added, “They’re feeling that there was a place
[Williams dorm] that they could sort of let their hair down. There is a space on campus that is
formally dedicated to their safety and expression and full expression.” Dean Delta also reasoned
that a student might choose to come to the school, or not, because of their gender inclusive dorm.
For Dean Delta, the gender expansive housing is a statement about the values of the school.
Unlike the four previous schools discussed, all of which have gender inclusive housing,
Zeta Academy does not have it, yet Dean Zeta noted that for some of their students, it is still
82

possible for them to find safe spaces on the campus. Dean Zeta said that the GSA is a place
where the gender expansive students often feel safe and supported. They also acknowledged that
the experience differs depending on the gender identity of the student. They said, “There’s a
huge dichotomy in that experience and that our female students who identify as queer are like,
‘Yes, there are problems, but it’s manageable.’” From this it is possible to surmise that the
experience of gender expansive students who were born female can be more affirming than for
male students. Based on this, Dean Zeta suggests that female students can more easily navigate
the culture and community being gender variant than their male students.
Visitation Policies
At boarding schools, policies exist that dictate when male and female students can visit
one another in each other’s dorms. These heteronormative policies were created for the safety
and well-being of the students. With the introduction of gender inclusive dorms, visitation
policies have been reexamined. When male, female, gender fluid and gender questioning
students live in the same building, which is permitted in an all gender dorm, what does that mean
for visitation policies in that dorm, let alone throughout the rest of campus? In response to the
implementation of all gender dorms, many schools have created new policies, though this
continues to be an issue with which deans are wrestling.
As Dean Delta said, they made changes to their visitation policies directly because of the
creation of a gender inclusive dorm. Yet, the administration there, and at other boarding schools,
will not use the gender inclusive dorms as the rationale behind the change. Instead, they
developed other reasons and different language to explain why they are making these
modifications. Still, at the end of the day, visitation policies are changing to accommodate
83

gender inclusive housing. At the same time, the emphasis from the adults is that the change
benefits the entire community, to protect gender expansive students.
Coeducational boarding schools typically have visitation policies detailing who can visit
one another in the dorms, when they can take place, and what specific rules apply during the
visits. These policies vary from school to school, and schools that have all gender housing have
had to think through their visitation policies and what makes the most sense for this population
as well as the community in general. At all the schools with gender inclusive housing, they have
made modifications to their visitation policies to accommodate for their expanded residential
options outside of just the binary.
When discussing their visitation policies, Dean Alpha said that they have made
alterations that have impacted the entire student body. Rather than attribute the changes in
gender inclusive dorms, Dean Alpha and their team are using the Covid pandemic as a way of
resetting and modifying their policies. As Dean Alpha noted,
Yeah, we have limited room visits and visiting as a policy, and I don’t know where we’re
going to go with that, I’ll be honest. Partially, not just because of an all gender dorm, but
in general, for boundaries sake, we have changed our visiting policy to be like you just
need to check in with an adult. And that is stricter than it used to be. And students hate it,
and we really don’t want it to be a backlash on our all gender community or our
LGBTQ+ community, because that actually isn’t that isn’t the only reason. It’s just a
general safety guideline.
In their statement, Dean Alpha acknowledged that they are protecting their gender expansive
students and are intentional about the new policy despite its unpopularity. The school uses
84

language about health and safety for the entire community to shift the focus from gender
expansive students.
Like Alpha Academy, Beta Academy made modifications to their visitation policy and
restricted access between dorms. On this topic Dean Beta said, “It used to be that if you live in a
boys’ house, you could just go to another boys’ house, hang out during the day, things like that.
We’ve pulled all that back.” Now Beta Academy’s new policy
pull[s] the language away from the students, put[s] it on the dorms, which is in some
ways a kind of a fake way. But we said, if you live in a boys’ dorm, you can visit other
boys’ dorms, and the girls’ dorm, you can visit other girls’ dorms during this 3-hour
window.
In explaining why they made this shift, Dean Beta said, “The idea that you just can’t go
to a dorm unless there is a specific person that you’re trying to see with a plan.” Beta Academy is
intentional about who visits who, at what time of day, and that time is when there is an adult
presence. This new policy is inclusive and does not call into question the gender of the students
for the visitations but is instead a blanket policy so that there is no undue focus on the gender
expansive hall. This decision to change the policy, as Dean Beta notes, is kind of “fake” in the
sense that it was not created in response to the gender inclusive hall but implies that the school is
ensuring that it protects the students in the gender inclusive hall so that it minimizes the impact
on them. Thus, if any student wants to visit another who lives outside of their dorm, the policies
are the same across dorms regardless of the gender of the student.
Like Alpha and Beta Academies, Gamma Academy has limited their visitation policies so
that students must check in with an adult between certain hours and obtain permission for the
visit. When asked about this change, Dean Gamma said that in part it was because of day
85

students who used to be in their boarding friend’s room without permission, but they also said
that this was simply one of the reasons they gave to the student body to deflect attention away
from the all gender dorm. As Dean Gamma said,
By eliminating the daytime visits by going into other dorms, you kind of remove that [the
question of students from various genders visiting the all gender dorm] from the equation
in that regard. When it comes to students coming into the house … we’re not going to ask
[the gender identity].
Gamma Academy’s new policy simplified their previous one and made it universal across
campus. Thus, there are no specific visitation rules for the all gender space that others do not
have. This universal policy protects gender expansive students, which was the rationale behind
the change.
Dean Delta, as quoted above, is aware of the potential impact that the revised visitation
policies would have on their gender expansive students, so they have made sure to use language
and create a policy that shields the gender expansive students from any backlash. Prior to the
creation of an all gender dorm, Dean Delta recalls that the visitation policy was less complicated
and was heteronormative. They said:
So, prior to the all gender housing, we had a binary system. If you lived in a girls’ space,
you would visit other girls’ dorms during the day. And if you lived in a boys’ space,
you’d visit other boys’ dorms in the day. And then if you wanted to visit a dorm that was
not the designation of yours, that was restricted. And it was restricted to certain days and
times.
Once Delta Academy created an all gender dorm, they updated their policies. When asked more
about the shift, Dean Delta said,
86

We’re not allowed to say that we’ve made this change because of [Williams]. You can’t
say, ‘Oh, it’s because of [Williams] that we’re doing this.’ But actually, it is. It is because
of [Williams]. But I can’t say that because that makes it feel like it’s because of you that
we can't have nice things. And I totally get that. I understand that that might cast
aspersions or put pressure on or something like that on these kids. But I don’t know how
to get around it.
Clearly, Dean Delta is wrestling with how to create a policy that is universal and not have the
new policy land on gender expansive students. Because they are shielding gender expansive
students, Dean Delta believes that it minimizes stigma around them and allows them to be fully a
part of the community.
Epsilon Academy is similar to the aforementioned schools in the sense of having a
universal policy, however, their policy is that there is no room-to-room visitation allowed
between boys and girls. As Dean Epsilon said:
Our Student Handbook really just talks about [how] the gender you identify with is how
you essentially will be expected to express yourself across campus. So, if you are
presenting as a girl, living in a girls’ dorm, you can only visit girls’ dorms. … You will
not have access to boys’ dorms.
Dean Epsilon questions this policy, though. They pondered,
Why do we not let girls visit boys and boys visit girls? And I think people would say
‘because of relationships.’ I think my issue with it, it’s just such a heteronormative frame
of view that you’re like, do you think boys and boys are not having sex and girls and girls
are not having sex … because they are.
87

As is evident in the comments above, Dean Epsilon is aware that their policies are
heteronormative and not necessarily aligned with the student experience.
Because Epsilon Academy does not have an all gender house, or even really
acknowledgement about there being more than two genders, their gender expansive students are
not impacted by these policies in certain ways, yet the lack of recognition beyond the gender
binary no doubt influences their experiences at school. Dean Epsilon imagines it is really
challenging to be gender divergent at the school because Epsilon Academy’s Student Handbook
does not acknowledge them, nor are their designated spaces for them to live. However, when it
comes to visitation policies specifically, Dean Epsilon does not believe that gender expansive
students are impacted more than other students.
As for Zeta Academy, even without a gender inclusive dorm, they shifted their policies so
that, should the time come for them to create a gender inclusive house, the visitation policies do
not need to be amended which would make it easier on the school’s gender expansive students.
When asked about the visitation policies, Dean Zeta said,
We just quietly went back to gender nonspecific visitation policies. Having us actually
enforce those because that’s been the sticking point for our faculty [who] are not used to
seeing girls who are not in the house and doing anything about it.
What they mean is that prior to the policy change, girls from one house could visit girls in other
houses throughout the day, and the same is true for their male students. Now, no one from
outside of one’s house can visit during the day unless in a designated period of time and with the
approval of a faculty member. Thus, Zeta Academy’s policies align with four of the other
schools, all of which have gender inclusive housing.
88

None of the deans of students believes that they have the “right” visitation policy, and
this is a topic that they say is frequently discussed among their faculty as well as one that they
consult on with each other. The deans want visitation policies that focus on the well-being and
safety of their students and that do not draw attention to their gender expansive student
population. Many acknowledge that they do not know how to create a policy that best meets the
needs, or rather desires, of the students; however, those who have a gender inclusive dorm feel
good that they have protected gender expansive students from fallout because of their updated
policies.
Gender Inclusive Dorm Policies
Of the four schools with gender inclusive housing that participated in this study, three out
of the four had slightly different policies in their gender inclusive dorms that are not applicable
to the rest of campus. Though the policy changes are small modifications, they do distinguish the
gender expansive housing policies from those for the other dorms on campus. The deans of
students did not believe that these policies had a negative impact on the students who live in the
gender inclusive dorms, but they did note that the students may feel otherwise.
At Alpha Academy, students interested in the gender expansive housing option complete
an application to live in these dorms. Once selected, there is one modification for the students
who live in that dorm: “Please refrain from nudity, partial or full in halls, bathrooms and all other
public spaces” (Dean Alpha). When asked to elaborate on this, Dean Alpha said that they do not
know why only the gender inclusive dorms have this as part of their dorm contract. They think it
should be applicable to all dorms but acknowledge that currently only students in the gender
inclusive dorms are asked to abide by this rule. Dean Alpha surmises that this rule was created in
part to assuage families of students who live in the all gender dorms. For that reason, Dean
89

Alpha feels comfortable with it, despite recognizing the inconsistency, and sees it as a
worthwhile tradeoff for the students who elect to live in that space.
At Gamma Academy, while they do not have a rule about the attire for students within
the gender inclusive dorm, they do ask the students to be more forthcoming about the nature of
their relationships with one another. According to Dean Gamma, their Student Handbook
includes the following: “In an effort to build trust and open the door to conversations on healthy
relationships, students are encouraged to let an adviser know about romantic/physical
relationships that form within the dorm.” This rule does not apply to students living in binary
dorms, though, but instead exists so that the faculty who live with the gender expansive students
have a better sense of the nature of the relationships in the dorm. Again, this presents a policy
inconsistency. When asked how the students might interpret this, he said they do not always like
it, but they get it.
Delta Academy has a policy for their gender inclusive dorm that is more aligned with
Alpha Academy; students must wear a robe going to or coming out of the shower. According to
Dean Delta,
The one other thing that is unique to our dorm is that [Williams] has all the same rules of
every dorm except for one. And the one rule they have [that] is different is [that]everyone
brings a robe. Everyone brings a robe. And when you’re going to and from the bathroom,
wear your robe.
Like Dean Alpha, Dean Delta thinks that this would be great to have in all the dorms as they
joked, “I can only wish the same were true in the dorm I live in where I got the full Monty this
year.” Again, Dean Delta feels like this rule is a small trade-off for all the benefits that come
90

with having an all gender dorm. They do not believe that this rule has a significant impact on
gender expansive students.
“Unwelcome” Spaces: Efforts That Fall Short
Despite the schools’ and dean of students’ best efforts to create welcoming and safe
communities for their gender expansive students, five out of six dean’s report that they worry
that their communities are not always places where gender expansive students feel affirmed.
They surmise that this makes it even more important that they have spaces where gender
expansive students feel safe.
When reflecting on their campus community, Dean Alpha acknowledged that it is not
always the place it aspires to be. They said, “They [gender expansive students] would say there
are pockets of people who don’t get us and there are pockets of people who get us. And we’re
still working on being a whole gender inclusive community.” This honest acknowledgement
suggests that Dean Alpha likely has an accurate pulse on the student body. With over 1100
students, it seems likely that there are some community members who are not affirming of
gender expansive students’ identities. Even though the school has demonstrated its commitment
through all gender dorms, it is reasonable to assume that not all the students are aligned behind
it.
Dean Beta echoes similar sentiments about the inclusive nature of their community and
shared that there are moments when gender expansive students are not thought of as “the norm.”
As they said, “I feel like when I talk to our kids within queer space, within the queer community,
the gender expansive students, they aren’t; they don’t feel as positively as I feel about where the
general culture is, which maybe is expected.” Here Dean Beta admits that they might see things
91

differently from the students and where they see many positives, that might not be the student
experience.
Similarly, Dean Gamma believes that in general the student body is accepting of gender
expansive students and their living space, but not everyone is fully accepting. Dean Gamma
noted, “Overall, I think the experiences remain positive and there are certain things, and some
jerks, you know, and the visitation policies don’t fully support those students.” Here Dean
Gamma can recognize that not every Gamma student will make Gamma Academy as welcoming
as it aspires to be and as the school espouses in its mission, yet they believe that it is generally a
positive experience. While Dean Gamma does not worry about “the jerks,” their actions and
words can have a detrimental effect on gender expansive students.
At Epsilon Academy, the dean of students worries that the gender expansive students
often feel that the lack of gender inclusive dorms is a detriment to their experience. Dean Epsilon
said, “But they would probably say that [where] they feel least included is probably residential
life.” The lack of a dorm or space on campus that is not gendered is something that concerns
Dean Epsilon. They believe that the community, and the lack of a gender inclusive dorm, hurts
their gender expansive students and has a negative impact on their experiences.
Dean Zeta has similar concerns about how their gender expansive students feel on the
campus and does not believe that the campus is currently a welcoming and accepting place. Dean
Zeta said, “Toxic masculinity is definitely a thing on campus, and it is a really hard space to not
be a very masculine, straight-identifying male.” They believe that the school culture has moved
backwards in ways that are damaging for gender expansive and LGBTQIA+ students. As they
noted:
92

And we’ve got a few out queer students who are very vocal about their
experiences. I feel like we had this whole thing in the early 2000s where we got
kids to stop saying ‘That’s so gay.’ And then 2016 happened and now we’re right
back to that being a thing. And I’m just like, at least you learn not to say it in front
of faculty. But that’s still really problematic because that’s your peer’s
experience. And how do you not understand that this is a problem? And so, I
would say I think it’s a really hard place.
Thus, Dean Zeta recognizes that given where the culture is, their school may not be ready to
create an all gender dorm since they have other cultural issues that need to be addressed.
When pushed further on this topic, Dean Zeta believed that not having an all gender dorm
could be thought of as a safety issue. They observed
We have yet to have a trans male student actually live in male-identified housing. And I
don’t know if that would be safe for them, to be entirely honest with you, because of the
way our houses are constructed and the culture around being a boy at Zeta Academy.
This is a powerful statement in the sense that Dean Zeta recognizes that their residential model
potentially hurts gender expansive and LGBTQIA+ students because their current house system
and culture is unwelcoming of gender divergent students. Dean Zeta would like for their school
to be a place that did not negatively impact gender expansive students, but much work needs to
take place for the school to be ready for a gender expansive dorm.
Research Question 3: Findings
The third research question for this study focuses on how gender inclusive policies
impact gender expansive students’ sense of belonging. Three themes emerged from this
exploration: culture, student experiences outside of the classroom, and residential
93

recommendations. This section starts with a brief description of how deans of students define
belonging. Much of what will be shared in this section is from the voices of the students
themselves. See Table 6.

Table 6
Gender Inclusive Policies and Sense of Belonging
Theme Participant alignment
Culture 6/6
Student experiences outside of the classroom 6/6
Residential recommendations 5/6

94

Defining Belonging
Deans of students agree that belonging is critical for young people. Many of them have
similar definitions for how they define belonging. Dean Alpha stated, “Belonging, I think, is
being seen, known, valued. Belonging is being able to be your full, authentic self, if not
everywhere, at least in places on this campus.” Dean Beta echoed that idea, “Belonging is where
a student feels like they can be or express their kind of true and authentic self.” Both Dean Delta
and Dean Epsilon said that belonging is “being able to be yourself.” Dean Delta added that
belonging is “feeling as though you can make genuine friendships and relationships while you
are being yourself. Those relationships are not hinged on assuming some other identity.” Thus,
for all the deans, belonging is about acceptance for one’s true self and being seen and embraced
for it.
The Culture
At Alpha Academy, their dean of students believes that there is generally a welcoming
and inclusive environment for their gender expansive students. To demonstrate a culture of
acceptance, they pointed to two different recent graduate experiences. They talked about a male
student who
dyes his hair different colors, pink and blue and green. He wears really heavy makeup; he
wears dresses. And he’s very much a student leader and not at all fringe or marginalized.
Like that is just the way the culture is right now.
For Dean Alpha, the fact that there are students who are named leaders, and who are gender
expansive, like the one they cited, is a testament to an open culture.
95

Dean Alpha also mentioned one of their recent student body presidents who held up a
Pride flag when she gave her commencement speech to illustrate a culture of acceptance. As
Dean Alpha described,
that you could feel at a community wide event with literally the board there at graduation,
like, you can authentically be yourself. Even in a time when it feels like gender and
sexual identity can be politicized right in the news, certainly there’s all these bills against
trans students, basically, that the students here definitely feel like they can speak up.
This further validates Dean Alpha’s belief that they have a welcoming and inclusive culture of
belonging for gender expansive students.
Dean Beta also believes that their school is a place where gender expansive students feel
like they belong. They said:
In terms of the current student body, there is, I think, an overwhelming kind of
acknowledgement, acceptance and acceptance of the space [gender inclusive housing] to
them. It is a thing that we do and that they are excited about.
They also articulated that the school is supportive of students and uses the correct pronouns. In
fact, the school changed databases so that it could reflect the chosen pronouns for any given
student. They cite this as a small but important example of belonging for their gender expansive
students.
Beta 1 confirms the ideas of Dean Beta. Beta 1 said, “The school has a LGBTQ+ affinity
group that connects queer students and faculty together. In this way, I’ve felt that I feel safe with
my identity and find peers with similar experiences. Also, my school has a gender-inclusive
house.” Beta 1 added, “The gender inclusive space has really helped me feel safe as a queer
student. Though I identify as cisgender, I never liked being in boys’ dorms, and I feel much more
96

comfortable here, as we can talk about queer issues without judgment.” Beta 1 feels included
through his gender inclusive house in a way that he did not when in a boys’ dorm. His ability to
connect with peers through the LGBTQ+ affinity group also speaks to the idea that the school
has created ways that allow gender expansive students to feel like they belong on campus.
Beta 1, while generally comfortable at his school, did note that the school is not always
affirming. When asked whether he could explore his gender identity without judgment at the
school, he said he could not. Still, he said that he felt comfortable walking around campus, that
adults were supportive, that there were students on the campus that knew his authentic self, and
that he felt that he belonged among a group of students. Thus, Beta 1 speaks to a generally
healthy culture and a place where he is affirmed through his residential experience even if the
entire community may not be as welcoming.
Students at Gamma Academy also noted that it is a place where they feel safe and seen.
As Gamma 1 said,
Being around other queer and questioning people has been incredibly helpful to me. It
makes me feel like there is a safe space for me to explore my identity, and I am
surrounded by people my age who are going through the same things as me, who are
getting misgendered by the same teachers and students. The all gender dorm allows us to
explore our identities because everyone is accepting and has gone through a similar
process.
Both Gamma students also note that they feel safe in the community, comfortable
anywhere on campus, and that there are people at Gamma Academy that know their authentic
selves. Thus, Gamma Academy’s decision to have all gender dorms has made their gender
expansive students feel safe and a stronger sense of belonging while being true to their identities.
97

Gamma students also cite faculty members as reasons why they feel like they can belong.
Gamma 1 said, “Gamma Academy specifically has brought a comfortable place where I can be
my true authentic self without the fears of judgment, parents, etc.” Given that being authentic to
oneself is a key element of belonging, Gamma Academy has, for at least this one student, created
a culture where they feel seen and valued. Gamma 2 added,
The adults and faculty here at Gamma Academy specifically are really good at keeping
whatever you need to themselves and respecting your boundaries and your feelings
despite what your parents may feel. They do their best to keep you comfortable and safe,
especially at the school environment. I feel so comfortable and like school is more [of] a
home than where my parents are because I can be me or search for ways to figure out
myself with the support of the faculty, friends, and sports support.
Adult and peer support, in addition to the all gender dorm, have allowed these Gamma students
the ability to seek out their true selves and be affirmed for who they are.
Gamma 2 also believes that the gender inclusive dorm helps him feel accepted. He said,
They [Gamma Academy] have really helped me find other people who are like me or
have the same thoughts and struggles as me, which helps me feel more secure in myself
that I am not alone which is really nice especially because you don’t have to pretend to be
cis or straight especially in this dorm and you can be whoever you want to be and it can
change with zero disrespect or discrimination especially in an AGH [all gender house]
dorm.
This ability to have a space that is affirming has enabled Gamma 2 to feel connected to a
community on campus. Gamma 1 also credits the students in the all gender dorm for his
affirmation for himself. As he stated, “It has been mainly students who help me feel welcomed
98

and have supported me on my journey to discover who I am, who still support me especially
when I don’t fit the gender binary.” Thus, Gamma Academy, through its policies, but especially
its gender inclusive dorm, has created an environment where gender expansive students feel like
they belong.
Like Gamma Academy, Delta Academy is a place where both Dean Delta and the
students believe that gender expansive students are included in the culture in positive ways. At
Delta Academy, there are several events that highlight the all gender dorm. For example,
students in [Williams] House lead the school in their Halloween celebrations and the campus
comes together to celebrate. Dean Delta believes that events like this help foster a sense of
belonging for the gender expansive students.
Students at Delta Academy agree that the culture is one that is accepting of them in
general, but especially in their all gender dorm. Delta 1 said,
I have definitely felt that gender expression and exploration is encouraged at Delta
Academy amongst certain groups (my friends, GSA, Williams dorm residents, etc.),
which has given me more freedom to experiment with and consider my gender identity in
ways I have not been able to before.
The caveat Delta 1 provided, that he is comfortable with certain groups, suggests that the school
culture, while positive, is not universally accepting. On this topic, Delta 2 added, “My peers
offered me immense support in exploring my gender identity and sexual orientation.” Delta 3
and Delta 5 also suggested that the school itself does a good job of affirming their identities. As
Delta 3 said, “I find the policies at my school regarding the respect and sensitivity on this subject
does help affirm my gender identity.” Delta 5 added,
99

The all gender dorm does a good job affirming the gender identities of gender expansive
students, [for example] that preferred pronouns are used, and people are encouraged to
discuss it. The wider campus is mostly respectful, with exceptions of some older faculty
who may be less informed about the subject, but it hasn’t occurred to me that it had
impeded student-teacher relationships.
Again, through these sentiments, it is clear that Delta Academy has created an environment
throughout the campus, but especially in the all gender dorm, that allows students to be their
authentic selves.
Unlike at Academies with gender inclusive housing, Epsilon Academy does not have
specific policies for gender expansive students, nor recognition of more than two genders. Thus,
one might imagine that the sense of belonging at Epsilon Academy is lower for gender expansive
students. When asked about whether their gender expansive students likely feel like they belong
on campus, Dean Epsilon said:
I certainly think there are moments, albeit probably brief. I would say I do believe in the
work that our dorm parents do, and I think that our advisors do [create a safe space]. I
think those kids seek out an advisor that helps them feel like they belong.
Other than seeking out trusted adults, Epsilon Academy does not offer outreach to its gender
expansive students.
In the Epsilon students’ “Gender Inclusivity Proposal,” they called upon their school to
be more inclusive of their needs. As it reads in the mission statement, “Inclusion is an essential
trait we seek to cultivate. … Epsilon Academy accepts a diverse range of students, and every
member of our family, regardless of gender identity, is welcomed, included, and safe” (“Gender
Inclusivity Proposal”). In the proposal, the students are calling on Epsilon Academy to create a
100

new space, an inclusive space. They are asking to foster an informed community surrounding the
needs of gender variant students. They stated, “Having an informed community will reduce the
risk of harassment and bullying, and thereby decreasing the risk of mental health harm to gender
variant students” (“Gender Inclusivity Proposal”). These 22 Epsilon students asked their
administration to change the culture of the school so that it affirms their identity and experiences.
They wanted to educate the community and to become part of it because, as things stand, they
are forced into a binary existence through the dress code, residential model, sports teams, and
Epsilon Academy Student Handbook. These students are asking to be about to express their
gender fluidity and to be more included in the fabric of their school. Given the apparent burying
of the students’ proposal by the head of school, one wonders about the degree of acceptance and
inclusion.
Zeta Academy, like Epsilon Academy, does not have a culture of belonging for its gender
expansive students. As Dean Zeta concisely stated, “I would say in terms of inclusivity issues, I
think that Zeta Academy is the most dysfunctional place in terms of gender I have ever
experienced.” They believe the culture is so unwelcoming that they do not understand why
gender expansive students who are visiting the school would want to enroll at the Academy. As
Dean Zeta noted,
I don’t understand the students that tour here and then come here and say I’m gender
fluid. We have so many red flags in the way that we present our campus. Why are you
choosing to come here? Because I honestly could not tell you if I were interviewing you
that this would be a good fit for you. But I feel really strongly that it’s a really hard place
because in everything we do, gender is baked into where you identify and there’s no way
to escape that.
101

Clearly Dean Zeta does not shy away from the current gender problems that face their institution.
Instead, they recognize them and would like the opportunity to ensure that gender expansive
students understand the current shortcomings of the school in inclusive policies and practices.
Students at Zeta Academy share their dean’s perspective in that it can be a hard place to
attend as a student who may be gender expansive. When asked if the school demonstrates its
commitment to gender expansive students, Zeta 1 said, “Definitely not with housing. Also, with
forms they collect, most of the time with gender options, they only provide two options.”
Zeta 5 and Zeta 7 also noted the problematic binary nature of Zeta Academy. Zeta 5 said,
“I think due to the nature of ‘boundaries,’ the exploration of gender at this school, that is so
entrenched with the maintenance of binaries, is extremely limited or even non-existent; there is
no gender housing and there is an EXTREME [Zeta 5, 2022 emphasis in original] emphasis on
gender binaries and existing with those.” Zeta 7 added,
The school is incredibly binary (through the house system) and is not addressing
it. The gender divide in my school is incredibly defined, and that makes it really
hard to explore any option outside what you were assigned at birth. We have no
gender neutral housing, which means nonbinary or nonconforming students are
forced into a dorm that contradicts their identity and often triggers dysmorphia. It
would show a much greater commitment to the genderqueer student body if
gender neutral housing was available.
The binary model that is entrenched at Zeta Academy has made it hard for gender expansive
students to feel like they belong. There is no box for them to check on forms. There is no dorm
set aside for gender expansive students. Instead, they are asked to participate in the binary model,
which in turn hinders some Zeta students’ sense of belonging.
102

Zeta 3 and Zeta 4 added that even with recent school policy updates to support gender
expansive students, the rules are not meaningful due to the binary nature of their residential
model. On this Zeta 3 reflected,
I mean we just recently clarified our school mission statement and rule book to endorse
our commitment to gender expansive students. But if you’re actually a gender expansive
student, you’ll be put in either a girls’ house or a boys’ house as there is no other option.
Likewise, Zeta 4 commented:
This school has, intentionally or unintentionally, created a very heteronormative and
cisnormative society. My house even has a group chat where literally all anybody does is
take pictures of members of the house with people of another gender and wonder if
they’re a couple.
The heteronormative nature of Zeta Academy coupled with the binary housing model leads Zeta
3 and Zeta 4 to question to what extent the school is truly dedicated to supporting gender
expansive students. What is clear is that Zeta Academy has not yet created a culture that attends
to the needs of gender expansive students.
Student Experiences Outside of the Classroom (GSAs, Leadership, and Athletics)
Outside of the classroom and residence halls, all the schools in this study have found
ways to support gender expansive students to an extent. Some schools go to greater lengths in
their athletic programs, others see gender expansive students elected to leadership positions, and
at the very least, each school has an alliance or affinity group for its gender expansive students,
all of which help students to feel like they belong.
Alpha Academy has various alliances for their gender expansive students. Student
outreach and programming is often student driven. For example, students from the Gender and
103

Sexuality Alliance created programing for tenth graders on gender and sexual identity. They
delivered the content and led the discussions.
There are many gender expansive student leaders around campus at Alpha Academy, as
well. Dean Alpha noted,
Gender queer students are all over this campus, including in leadership positions where
the proctor in that dorm is trans and the prefect in that nine or ten [person] dorm is also
trans and [working] with a non-binary student who’s also a prefect in that dorm. So, it’s
not just being present, but it’s being really visible and valued.
The idea that gender expansive students are being chosen as leaders suggests a culture of
acceptance, and to an extent, belonging. As Dean Alpha summarized,
So, I would say, across campus students, whether it’s in classrooms or in student
organizations like clubs and social justice organizations out of the Community and
Multicultural Development Office or the Center for Gender Studies, students just feel like
they can authentically be themselves and speak up.
At Beta Academy, their dean believes that students can be leaders. Dean Beta said the
gender inclusive house is “A place of understanding and cooperation where we have two
students kind of step up. I think they saw themselves as being prefects in the space, which they
then became.” In this instance, the affirmation that two students received while in the gender
inclusive dorm enabled them to be the leaders, or prefects, of the dorm. Their peers recognized
them and valued them.
Beta Academy is also supportive of its athletes and allows them to play on the teams that
best align with their gender identity. They also have modified the language where possible
regarding the names of the teams. For example, Beta Academy no longer has a co-ed ski team,
104

but simply a ski team. They do not have a boys and girls wrestling team, they simply have a
wrestling team. By taking out gendered language, Beta Academy is demonstrating its
commitment to its gender expansive population.
Dean Beta also cites alliance groups as spaces on the campus where gender expansive
students are affirmed. They said,
There’s a GSA, like a classic GSA kind of club. People are welcome to come to Gender
and Sexuality Alliance. … And then they also have a LGBTQIA+ affinity group [that]
meets in a private location or a non-public location and with an adult and just kind of and
that’s meant to be an affinity space as opposed to GSA. And so, I think when I’ve been to
those before, there can be upwards of 30 kids there, which is a sizable amount.
By noting the difference between the two groups, the alliance and the affinity group, Dean Beta
acknowledges that there are places for allies to offer support, but also space for just members
who identify withing the LGBTQIA+ and gender expansive community. Dean Beta further adds,
“They have a community amongst themselves that is very strong.” This is an important
distinction to draw; within their own community they are strong, but what does that mean for
feeling like they belong to the community in general? Having survey responses from more than
one student at Beta Academy might provide greater insight.
Beta 1’s survey results suggest that he is comfortable on the campus. He feels safe
walking anywhere on campus and is treated with respect by peers and adults. His co-curricular
space is safe, and he feels like there are students and adults who make him feel like he belongs.
The only survey response that did not indicate a positive experience was whether the school let
him explore his gender identity without judgment. For this question, he did not agree that the
school supported his efforts of gender exploration. What this survey result suggests, however, is
105

that Beta 1’s three years at Beta Academy have generally been positive and that there are spaces
for this student to belong.
At Gamma Academy, students’ sense that the institution is doing its best to support their
gender expansive students. On this topic, Gamma 1 said,
Gamma Academy specifically is trying their best to be inclusive and helpful. Recently,
they are trying to make the names and pronouns available online and want to expand that
to just students and not parents. The addition to school conversations on gender and
identity help others understand gender and identity. And the AGH program is perfect
especially for students who are trans or non-binary to have others like them you can talk
and relate to about your gender and identity specifically.
Thus, this Gamma student sees the efforts the school is making to create an affirming
environment.
Both Gamma students recognized the co-curricular space as one that is affirming as well
and where they are treated with respect. Gamma 2 identifies as a demiboy yet plays goalie on the
school’s girls soccer team. He is, according to Dean Gamma, just as much a part of the team as
anyone else. Dean Gamma also noted that Gamma Academy allows its gender expansive
students to pick the team which best aligns with their gender identity, and that it does not have to
be consistent throughout the year, just the term. This freedom allows gender expansive athletes
not to be pigeonholed by their gender.
At Delta Academy, there is a Gender and Sexuality Alliance and their athletic program is
affirming for gender expansive students. As Delta 4 noted, “Our school demonstrates its
commitment to gender-expansive students by having an all gender dorm and a sports program
that supports students’ gender identities.” Dean Delta echoed those sentiments. They mentioned
106

how the school used to call their sailing team co-ed, but now they simply refer to the team as the
sailing team. Where they can, Delta Academy is taking gendered language out of their
vocabulary.
While other Academies, such as Gamma and Delta, affirm their gender expansive student
athletes, Dean Epsilon fears that this is simply another place where gender expansive students
are made to feel like the other. When asked what policies discourage a sense of belonging, Dean
Epsilon notes, “I would probably argue athletics. Like just boys’ and girls’ programs. There’s
not, anything there that would [apply] if you’re a non-binary. You have to go to a gender team,
right? Thus, at Epsilon Academy, gender expansive students must fit into a gendered box of
athletics.
Epsilon Academy does, however, have an LGBTQIA+ affinity group as a way of
supporting gender expansive students. When thinking about the LGBTQIA+ group, Dean
Epsilon said,
We have a couple spaces for a couple of clubs, a couple organizations that care that there
is. … And you know, I think they’ve done a really nice job like advocating and bringing
more light to these issues. And who they are and like for a lot of students who don’t
know or, you know, come to Epsilon Academy, and want to learn more about that.
Dean Epsilon feels good that there are these clubs, but also recognizes that there is so much more
that the school could do for its gender expansive students, such as de-gender the dress code, that
would make their gender expansive students feel a greater sense of belonging.
Similar to the previously mentioned schools, Zeta Academy also has an alliance for
gender expansive and LGBTQIA+ students which has proved generally affirming for their
students. As Dean Zeta noted,
107

Like the GSA, they had several old school announcements at assembly. And we flew the
Pride flag. … And we have a whole diversity corps of students who work hard and are
really invested in that. So again, if those are your people, you can feel like you’ve really
found your niche and to have people that you identify with and it’s a really good
experience.
Again, Dean Zeta is acknowledging the pockets of spaces that are affirming for gender expansive
students, while recognizing that it is not a community-wide initiative.
Several of Zeta Academy’s students mentioned the GSA as an affirming space for them.
Zeta 6 said, “The clubs and individual talks are really helpful, people the school brings, but not
much happens institutionally,” which echoes Dean Zeta’s remarks. Zeta 1 added, “I definitely
feel safe in the environment that the GSA creates for us at school and within my smaller circle of
friends, but nothing beyond the people I already know very well (for example, administration,
other teachers and students).” Again, the small subset of the population allows the students to
feel like they belong, but it does not expand beyond that group. Finally, Zeta 7 added, “I have
been able to explore my gender identity with the GSA, a queer affinity group, though I don’t tell
most of my peers I attend, as it is generally frowned upon.” The lack of trust that Zeta 7 has in
his community indicates that the Academy has work to do in terms of destigmatizing the gender
expansive and LGBTQIA+ community. What is additionally discouraging is that only one out of
seven Zeta students agreed that their school allows them to explore their gender identity without
judgment. Thus, to be one’s authentic self at Zeta Academy, one must be in small subsets of the
community.
Residential Recommendations
108

None of the Academies in this study claims to have the final word for how to best support
their gender expansive students. Some schools are, however, clearly further ahead than others. In
this section, I will share the recommendations from the students themselves for how to make
their schools more inclusive so that they may have a stronger sense of belonging within the entire
school community, not just within their own smaller residential experiences or from their affinity
spaces. I organized this section around recommendations from students at schools that have
gender inclusive housing and recommendations from students who have a binary housing model.
For schools that currently offer gender inclusive housing options, the students
recommended that the deans of students commit more resources to creating additional gender
inclusive spaces on campus. For example, Beta 1 would like to see his school devote a bigger
space to its gender inclusive hall. As Beta 1 said,
Currently, the gender-inclusive space at my school is only a floor of a girls’ dorm. There
is limited space (only seven students can live here), and we have to have dorm meetings
and events with the girls’ dorm that this floor is in.
Gamma 2 echoed that sentiment:
Having more all gendered dorms and trying to combat the stigma around it. It’s a bit of a
tall order, but I believe that many people want to explore their gender identity but feel
unable because of restrictions of their house.
Similarly, students at Delta Academy cited the need for additional gender expansive structures,
but in this case, more bathrooms as well as more space in the gender inclusive dorm. According
to Delta 4, “Having more all gender bathrooms and another all gender dorm, as there are more
people who want to live in [Williams] than spaces available” would make Delta Academy more
inclusive. Thus, even at schools that have an all gender dorm, they are asking for more spaces,
109

though largely residential, so that the school can offer gender inclusive housing to a larger
number of students.
Students also want their communities to be better educated on gender expansive issues.
For example, at Gamma Academy, the students feel that sometimes the school’s efforts
stigmatize them, and thus they would like the administration to take a different approach to
including them. On this, Gamma 1 said,
I feel as if they shouldn’t have AGH be a program almost. … It’s as if it’s like a target for
the LGBTQ people and only gay or transgender students live here when I feel it should
be anyone in a sense and/or more than just for the ‘outcasts’ that society may see people
who are different.
Gamma 2 added, “Another step would be decreasing gendered language in dorms that are single
gendered (or really single sex dorms).” In short, these two students would prefer their school to
make more of an effort to create an inclusive campus environment rather than isolate the gender
expansive students to specific spaces. Students at Delta Academy echo these ideas and want to
see their entire campus to become a more affirming place. As Delta 1 pointed out:
there are definitely certain safe spaces on campus ([Williams,] GSA, Roundtable) that
students can be comfortable exploring their gender identities and sexualities in. However,
I do not feel like this extends to the rest of campus, and students often feel judgment, at
least from other parts of the community. It is really important for actions to be taken to
educate the rest of the community and to make students who are gender-questioning/non-
conforming/etc. welcome to express themselves across the whole community.
Delta 3 added, “I hope that people can be allowed to explore their gender identities more freely
without preconceived notions about what different gender identities must mean, since we all
110

come from different backgrounds where the construct of gender identity can vary in meaning.”
Again, education outside of the all gender dorm is the focal point for how to make Delta
Academy an even more inclusive and welcoming space.
For schools that do not have an all gender dorm, their students have many suggestions for
what the deans of students need to do to make the campuses more inclusive, and one of the first
suggestions is to create a gender inclusive dorm and to add all gender bathrooms. Students
Epsilon Academy included the creation of an all gender dorm and all gender bathrooms in their
“Gender Inclusivity Proposal,” and five Zeta students named creating an all gender dorm as a
place to start. They believe that having that facility will protect their gender expansive students
from the unhealthy gendered culture and provide a safe space to live.
Students at both Epsilon and Zeta Academies, like their counterparts at schools with
gender inclusive dorms, also cite education as a key component to creating a more inclusive
community. In the “Gender Inclusivity Proposal,” students included educational efforts and
online training for new students on the topic of gender and sexuality. Similarly, students at Zeta
Academy said that training faculty and student leaders would create a more welcoming and
inclusive atmosphere for their gender expansive students. As Zeta 1 offered, “More opportunities
to explore and talk with other peers and representation through faculty or staff” would help the
school climate. Additionally, better training for student leaders could lead to a healthier campus
environment.
Creating a healthy, inclusive school climate are also steps that Epsilon and Zeta
Academies need to undertake, some of which will be accomplished through educations and
changes to infrastructure, but some of it needs to be a culture shift. As Zeta 6 suggested,
“Deheteronormatizing spaces and mindsets” should be a priority. Zeta 4 echoed that idea adding,
111

“I think that we could enforce more policies protecting gender identities because
heteronormative and toxic masculinity standards are very much in place.” Creating a culture that
distances itself from heteronormative practices would lead to more inclusive experiences for
gender expansive students at schools that do not have housing options outside of the binary
model.
Summary
This chapter presented the findings of this qualitative study aimed at understanding the
ways in which boarding schools in the Northeast support their gender expansive students,
especially as it relates to residential models. Using a semi-structured interview, I spoke with the
deans of students at six schools. I also surveyed 18-year-old students at four of the six schools
who either live in a gender inclusive dorm or are members of their schools’ Gender and
Sexuality Alliance. The interview data was transcribed through the Sonix application and then
coded using an analytical coding method to discover themes amongst the participants’ responses
as they related to the research questions. The survey data was also analytically coded to uncover
themes relative to the research questions.
The findings from the first research question coalesced around the school’s values
statements, infrastructure, and adult support. Four of the six schools include acceptance and
inclusion as core tenets of their mission statements. The schools seek to foster a culture where all
students, regardless of their gender identity, are welcomed and affirmed. All six schools have
infrastructures that support their culture. For the schools with gender inclusive housing, this
section included how they made decisions to create gender inclusive dorms, the structure for that
space, and other on-campus efforts to make the campus more inclusive of gender expansive
students. For schools with a binary housing model, we discussed the binary policies they have
112

and why they have not pursued creating gender inclusive dorms. Finally, four out of six deans of
students reflected on the ways in which adults can be sources of support on campus for gender
expansive students.
Results from the second research question focused on safe spaces on campuses, visitation
policies, and policies within gender inclusive dorms. A sub-theme emerged around “unwelcome”
places on campuses. Five out of six deans of students believe that they have safe spaces on
campus where gender expansive students feel comfortable being their true selves. For four of out
five of the responses, that safe space was their gender inclusive dorm; the fifth dean named their
school’s GSA as a safe space for students. Five out of six deans of students discussed their
visitation policies and the impact they have on gender expansive students. Schools with all
gender dorms made changes to visitation policies for their entire student body but did so with
language that drew attention away from their all gender dorms as the rationale for their new
policies. Additionally, of the four schools with gender inclusive housing, three of the schools
have a specific policy for the students in their all gender dorm that do not apply to the rest of the
student body. The deans did not believe that these specific rules had a harmful impact on gender
expansive students. Finally, the sub theme of unwelcome spaces emerged, and five out of six
deans of students acknowledged that they worry about whether their gender expansive students
always are welcomed and included in ways that the adults hope.
Findings from the third research question, which looked at how policies impacted gender
expansive students’ sense of belonging, aligned around the themes of culture, student
experiences outside of the classroom, and residential recommendations. At all six schools, the
results suggest that the overall school culture signals the extent to which gender expansive
students are accepted within their communities. Generally, at schools with gender inclusive
113

housing, the culture is one that is affirming and where gender expansive students feel like they
belong. Outside of the classroom, gender expansive students are affirmed as leaders, in athletics,
and through Gender and Sexuality Alliances at all the schools; at the same time, there are various
levels of acceptance and belonging at each of the six schools. Lastly, at five of the six schools,
students have been active and have made recommendations for their schools to improve. In this
way, gender expansive students have felt more accepted and that they belonged.
Chapter 5 will provide a further discussion of the findings from the research. It will also
provide recommendations and next steps for schools looking to create a gender inclusive dorm.

114

Chapter Five: Discussion
Chapter 5 summarizes findings from this comparative case study of boarding schools in
the Northeast designed to better understand how and to what extent the schools support their
gender expansive students in their residential structures. As a case study, I sought to explain and
explore the findings from each of the schools due to the richness of the data. When analyzing the
findings in this chapter, I synthesized these findings based largely on whether the schools had a
gender inclusive dorm or not and made comparisons between the schools. Key discoveries from
the research are discussed and integrated with literature with the intent of providing guidance to
boarding school administrators seeking ways to support, or enhance their support, of gender
expansive students. This chapter also includes recommendations for future studies.
This study focused on the school policies that have guided deans of students in their
support of gender expansive students both in general and more specifically as it related to their
residential experiences. It further looked to understand how school policies impacted gender
expansive students’ sense of belonging. Because gender expansive students often suffer from
higher levels of mental health issues then their cisgender peers (Aragon et al., 2014; Kosciw et
al., 2013; Lopez & Du Bois, 2005), it is important to understand how this population fares at
boarding schools, places where they both live and learn. The purpose of this study has been to
better understand the various ways that schools have approached supporting gender expansive
students and, through survey responses from students, determine if those efforts enable gender
expansive students to have the feeling of belonging within their school communities. The
following research questions guided this study:
1. How do school policies related to gender inclusive housing options impact gender
expansive students?
115

2. What do deans of students perceive to be the impact of gender inclusive housing on
gender expansive students?
3. How do gender inclusive policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of
belonging?
This qualitative study relied on semi-structured interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016),
which were conducted with six deans of students. The study also employed surveys to 18-year-
old students at four of the schools. There were no surveys administered at two of the schools. At
one of the two schools where students did not take the survey, the dean of students provided a
student-written “Gender Inclusivity Proposal” to capture the voices of students from that
institution. Both the interview responses and survey results were analyzed and then coded
looking for themes and patterns in the results.
Findings
Study findings suggest that there are various ways for schools and deans of students to
support their gender expansive students. A gender inclusive house is not a panacea; however, it
does signal to gender expansive students that the school is aware that the binary housing model
may not provide enough support for its current population. Schools that have more gender
inclusive facilities have more students who report a greater sense of belonging than students at
institutions that do not have them. Still, the presence of a GSA, supportive adults, and supportive
peers allow students at all the schools that participated to feel like they have a place on their
campuses.
Research Question 1
Research Question 1 sought to uncover how school policies related to gender inclusive
housing options impact gender expansive students. The qualitative data on this question led to
116

the emergence of three themes: schools’ values statements, infrastructure, and adult support.
These findings were consistent with the Human Rights Campaign and Gender Spectrum (2022),
as well as Fay and Littlefield’s (2017) findings that indicate that the way a school presents itself,
how it defines its core values, and how it supports gender expansive students impacts their
experiences in school.
When four of the six schools realigned their values statements to include gender
diversity, they signaled to their gender expansive students that they are seen and that they matter.
Using inclusive language in values statements that seek to affirm gender expansive students’
identity and does not allow for them to be marginalized or treated like the “other” indicates that
these schools are safe spaces for gender expansive students to be their authentic selves.
The second finding on infrastructure provides an additional signal to gender expansive
students about the extent to which a school’s policies work to affirm their space on campus. Four
of the schools that participated had gender inclusive dorms or halls on their campuses. These
four schools also had gender inclusive bathrooms and locker rooms outside of the residence
halls. The presence of these facilities, and a school’s decision to create them, more broadly
recognizes the nonbinary nature of gender for some of their students. For the two schools who
have a binary housing model, their residential systems not only operate on a gender binary by
residence halls, but they lack many, if any, gender inclusive bathrooms. These two schools are
currently fixed in their binary models which impacts gender expansive students’ abilities to
navigate their campuses more easily. As students from Zeta Academy articulated, they live in a
binary model where the culture includes toxic masculinity and an inability for their gender
expansive students to feel totally seen and safe on campus. Thus, while gender inclusive dorms
provide one way for schools to demonstrate their commitment to the experience of gender
117

expansive students, having gender inclusive bathrooms or locker rooms are other ways that
schools can demonstrate their support of gender expansive students.
Finally, findings concerning the third theme, adult support, conform to literature (Fetner
& Elafros, 2015; Gonzalez & McNulty, 2010; Mayberry et al., 2011) that says that gender
expansive high school students have greater social, academic, and mental health success when
there are adults in the community who offer them support. When gender expansive students
know that there are adults to whom they can turn for support, they are more likely to have a
positive high school experience. When adults misgender them or deadname them, it makes
school a harder place for gender expansive students to feel valued. Thus, the adults in school
communities need to continue to enhance their own understanding of gender in order to make all
students feel welcome and supported.
Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asked what do deans of students perceive to be the impact of gender
inclusive housing on gender expansive students? The themes that emerged from this finding
centered on safe spaces, visitation policies, and policies specific to gender inclusive dorms. The
importance of safe spaces aligned with Krum et al. (2013) and Amos et al.’s (2021) findings that
institutions, in their cases in higher education, ought to create residential spaces that are safe for
gender expansive students. Colleges and universities are navigating similar questions related to
their housing policies with which boarding schools must contend as well.
Deans of students from five of the schools that participated assert that their schools have
a commitment to their gender expansive students’ safety and well-being, and at four of these
schools, the deans believe that their gender inclusive dorm provides that space. Similar to
colleges and universities (Hobson, 2014; Krum et al., 2013; Tilsley, 2010), when schools create
118

an all gender housing option, they provide safer residential spaces that affirm gender expansive
students’ identity. At the fifth school, the presence of the GSA provides a safe space for their
gender expansive students, which aligns with the literature (Fetner & Elafros, 2015; Toomey &
Russell, 2011). All five deans of students acknowledged the need for a place where gender
expansive students are affirmed for their identities.
Five of the six deans of students also aligned over visitation policies and the challenges
that arise in creating a blanket policy for their schools that will not have a negative impact on
their gender expansive students. Deans at the four schools with gender expansive housing all
modified their policies because of the creation of their all gender dorms. Though only one of the
deans acknowledged that the change was due to the creation of the all gender dorms, it was
implied through the interview responses. The new policies at all five schools suggest that the
deans are trying to create visitation policies that do not consider the gender of the students who
are involved in the visitations. Limiting all students’ abilities to visit peers in other dorms¾a
broad goal that many deans were eager to pursue¾creates a gender-neutral policy which
includes gender expansive students. The deans are all careful about the language they use
concerning the new policies so that any blame and ire from the cis-students does not fall on the
students who reside in the gender inclusive dorms.
Within all gender housing, there are specific rules that apply in three out of four of the
schools. The rules relate to the state of undress at two of the schools; the third school requests
that students are open with their faculty resident about their relationships to those visiting the
dorm. The goal behind these policies is to create a safe and welcoming space, but also one where
students of all genders can be comfortable.
119

A subtheme that emerged when deans of students discussed safe spaces was the idea that
not everywhere on campus, and not every person, provides a safe space for gender expansive
students. Instead, the deans of students acknowledged that even with well-intentioned
programming and specific designated spaces, some of their gender expansive and LGBTQIA+
students continue to struggle. This sentiment was echoed in the literature (Toomey et al., 2011;
Walls et al., 2010) that even with efforts to create welcoming places for gender expansive and
LGBTQIA+ students, discrimination and unkind behavior persists, albeit at lesser rates.
Thus, when reflecting on the efforts their schools have made and continue to make to
support gender expansive students, deans of students recognize that there is still work to be done.
As one dean acknowledged, schools need to avoid isolating their gender expansive students as
they attempt to keep them safe. This was a sentiment that a student also echoed; there cannot be
just one safe space for gender expansive students. Instead, the schools need to continue to
educate the entire community on gender issues to make the community supportive writ large.
Research Question 3
Research Question 3 asked, how do gender inclusive policies impact gender expansive
students’ sense of belonging? The qualitative findings from this question coalesced around the
themes of student culture and experiences outside of the residential space. A third theme
consisted of recommendations to deans of students about ways that a school could improve its
residential models.
Students at schools with gender inclusive dorms report a healthy culture. There are places
on campus where they feel affirmed for who they are and that they belong. Though there are
moments of discomfort, they report high levels of acceptance by peers and comfort in their
dorms. This finding aligns with the literature that suggests that when schools have supportive
120

adults, GSAs or gender inclusive dorms, students report a more positive experience (Fetner &
Elafros, 2015; Toomey & Russell, 2011; Walls et al., 2010). At schools where there are not all
gender dorms, students acknowledge that they have a harder time feeling like they belong. This
feeling of being “other” aligns with the idea that schools without a GSA or that do not focus on
LGBTQIA+ issues are more challenging spaces for gender expansive students (Toomey et al.,
2011). Fortunately, for the schools involved in this study, they all have GSAs, and therefore, they
have at least one method for supporting their gender expansive students. Thus, students’ sense of
belonging at their schools is consistent with the literature that states that a school’s commitment
to the needs of gender expansive and LGBTQIA+ students reflect their experiences at those
institutions (Fetner & Elafros, 2015; Toomey & Russell, 2011; Walls et al., 2010).
Outside of the residential spaces, schools that affirm the gender identity of gender
expansive students and afford them opportunities to play on the athletic teams that align with
their gender identity or provide leadership opportunities enable gender expansive students a
greater sense of belonging. At the schools where gender expansive students are permitted to play
on the team that aligns with their gender identity, students report a strong sense of belonging
which is consistent with Morris and Van Raalte’s (2016) findings. When gender expansive
students attain leadership positions, this too affirms their identity and sense of belonging, which
in turn provides a more positive high school experience (Schindel, 2008). At schools where
students are forced into binary constraints outside of their residential realm, they are more likely
to feel like an “other” and that they do not belong, which again is consistent with the literature
(Heck et al., 2013; Toomey et al, 2011). Thus, a school’s commitment to their gender expansive
students has a direct impact on gender expansive students’ sense of belonging at their school.
121

Finally, students provided recommendations for improving their school’s residential
models which generally aligned around creating an all gender dorm if one does not currently
exist or finding additional ways to educate their communities around gender fluidity issues. At
both academies that do not have an all gender dorm, students have recommended that their
school create that space. Colleges and universities with gender inclusive housing report higher
levels of safety and acceptance for their gender expansive students (Hobson, 2014; Tilsley,
2010), which is why some boarding schools are looking to add this housing option. At schools
where an all gender dorm exists, students recommend continuing to educate the community on
gender-related topics so that they feel more included in the campus community as a whole,
something that some colleges and universities are also undertaking (Nicolazzo et al., 2018). This
idea of continued education for students and adults aligns with the literature on acceptance for
LGBTQIA+ students, as well as belonging theory (Toomey et al., 2011). With more resources
devoted to gender expansive student needs for both physical space improvements, as well as
community educational training, schools can further demonstrate their commitment for moving
beyond a gender binary.
Limitations
Limitations to this study relate to the scope of those surveyed. Student survey results
were restricted at two of the six schools, and while there was student perspective from the school
that submitted the “Gender Inclusivity Proposal,” it was not the same as hearing from current
students through the survey. Additionally, the study was limited because I could only survey
students who were 18-years-old or older. Having a larger sample of students would enable
stronger generalizations to be drawn. Another limitation of the study was the conflation of
gender expansive students with LGBTQIA+ students. While the surveys focused on the
122

experiences on gender expansive students, when including results from students, some discussed
and/or mentioned their sexual orientation as a cis-individual, which is not necessarily the same as
a gender expansive student’s experience. Additionally, I did not consider the intersectionality of
gender expansive students with other key identity markers such as race, socio-economic status of
religion. Finally, there was a geographic limitation to the study, as well. By only focusing on the
Northeast, it is unclear how boarding schools nationally, or internationally, are managing this
topic.
Implications for Practice
Boarding schools that are exploring the creation of an all gender dorm need to first take
time to understand the culture at their own institution. Creating a gender inclusive dorm without
having a supportive culture could lead to further ostracism for gender expansive students.
Instead, schools ought to start with a gender audit to determine what the student culture is
currently, what facilities currently exist to accommodate gender expansive students, and what
level of comfort faculty and staff have with gender. From there, schools can determine whether
implementing a gender inclusive dorm is prudent and what additional supports may be needed
for educating students and/or creating a more supportive school culture if this will be built. They
may also want to consult with deans at schools that already have an all gender dorm to learn
about their process, policies, and experiences.
It is possible that some of the stakeholders—from the board of trustees, families, faculty
and staff, and students themselves—are not supportive to changes in language or culture or the
creation of gender inclusive facilities. But the reality is that there are almost certainly gender
expansive students on every boarding school campus, and if that is the case, there are still ways
that school leaders can support their gender expansive students.
123

At schools that are not ready to create an all gender dorm, there are still steps deans can
take to make gender expansive students feel welcome. Having a GSA, as mentioned above, is
essential for these schools. These affinity or alliance spaces are places where gender expansive
students report feeling seen and affirmed and is a way to formalize student voice. It is a place
where they are not made to feel like the “other,” and it is crucial for their well-being that schools
have these organizations.
Having supportive adults in the community and continuing to have community-wide
conversations about gender are other important elements that will enable gender expansive
students to feel comfortable on their campuses. For deans of students, being intentional in the
housing process and making sure that gender expansive students live in halls with adults and
students with whom they are comfortable are also key steps in offering support to gender
expansive students, even within a binary system.
For schools that want to move from the binary housing model, it would behoove them to
start by taking a few meaningful first steps, such as adding gender inclusive bathrooms and
locker rooms along with school-wide faculty and staff training. To start, schools ought to train
their adults on issues related to gender and the needs of gender expansive students. This
professional development might be able to take place with internal personnel, or schools can hire
outside groups, like GLSEN, to help run such trainings, especially if there is no systemic internal
capacity. Once adults in the community are facile with key principles and concepts and language
around gender, then they can work with student leaders to have conversations across campus.
After the community has become more educated on the issues and challenges that gender
expansive students face, adding or changing smaller facilities are signals that the school is
moving towards more inclusive gender policies outside of the binary. In short, there needs to be a
124

commitment from the school that the facilities will change and that educational endeavors will
complement these efforts.
For schools that go through a gender audit and other preliminary steps and are ready to
create a gender inclusive dorm, they need to look at their binary housing model, as well as their
facilities, to determine how to make this change. The first step is to assess the needs of the
current student body. Knowing how many students need or want a gender inclusive dorm will
help inform the decision about the size of the dorm needed. Schools will want to be flexible with
the number of beds devoted to a gender inclusive dorm or hall. Shifting the space yearly, at least
in the early years of such a change, may not facilitate feelings of belonging for gender expansive
students, but may be an inevitable part of such a significant shift.
Once a location has been determined, schools need to consider what their visitation
policies for the student body are and whether there need to be distinct rules in the gender
inclusive dorm. Many of the deans who participated in this study indicated that in their first year
with a gender expansive dorm, they did not change their visitation policies but instead made that
change a year or two after the all gender dorm was created so they could put distance between
the dorm change and the new visitation policy. This is something for schools to consider. And
whether a visitation policy adaptation is initiated or not, schools need to keep students’ safety
and well-being at the forefront when creating their housing design.
In trying to provide the best possible transition, creating a gender inclusive dorm can be a
multi-year project. By starting with a gender audit, schools create time to assess the needs of
their community and find various paths forward to best support their gender expansive students.
What was clear from these findings is that when schools have gender inclusive dorms, their
students gain a greater sense of belonging from the administration and the student body. Without
125

a gender inclusive dorm, students report that there are pockets within the community where they
feel like they belong, but that the community overall is less affirming.
Future Research
More research needs to be conducted on this topic. As the first study of its kind, it is not
possible to make sweeping generalizations about how schools are thinking through and/or
creating gender inclusive dorms. Future studies ought to include a greater number of schools so
that more generalizations can be drawn. Studying boarding schools in different regions of the
country could further deepen the study. Additionally, more student participants should be
included in future studies so that there is a greater sense of the student experience and their sense
of belonging at their institutions. Future studies should also consider the intersectionality of
gender expansive students to consider other key identity markers that might also impact their
sense of belonging. Knowing more about what type of support is available, short of creating an
all gender dorm, is helpful information for schools where the stakeholders are unwilling, or
unable, to devote the resources to creating an all gender dorm.
Conclusions
Many boarding schools in the Northeast are wrestling today with how to create a culture
that is less heteronormative and more affirming to gender expansive students. One clear solution
is found in the creation of gender inclusive dorms. For a range of reasons, some schools have
moved at slower paces in their recognition of students beyond the gender binary. No matter
where a school currently stands in terms of creating a gender inclusive dorm, it is clear based on
student feedback that students believe that having an all gender dorm is an important resource for
them so that they feel a greater sense of belonging. Still, deans of students and stakeholders
acknowledge that a gender inclusive dorm is a not a panacea. There are ample ways that deans of
126

students and other adults have created safe, welcoming, and healthy spaces for their gender
expansive students. As boarding schools throughout the country, as well as internationally,
continue to wrestle with this topic, they need to talk with their gender expansive students, to
create community conversations on the topic, and to think about how to change their facilities in
small, or big, ways so that they can enhance their gender expansive students’ experiences and
allow them to truly belong in the community.

127

References
AISNE. (2021). Welcome. AISNE. https://aisne.org/schools/
Almeida, J., Johnson, R. M., Corliss, H. L., Molnar, B. E., & Azrael, D. (2009). Emotional
distress among LGBT youth: The influence of perceived discrimination based on sexual
orientation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(7), 1001–1014.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9397-9
Amos, S. N., Latz, A. O., & Mulvihill, T. M. (2021). Implementing gender-inclusive housing: A
narrative inquiry. The College Student Affairs Journal, 39(1), 43–58.
Anders, A. D., & Devita, J. M. (2020). Coaches, gender non-conforming youth and athletics:
Examining male identity and masculine expression. International Journal of Qualitative
Studies in Education, 33(9), 954–970. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2019.1693067
Anderson‐Long, M., & Jeffries, M. (2019). Open systems theory analysis of community college
Gender‐Inclusive housing policies. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2019(188),
67–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20379
Aragon, S. R., Poteat, V.P., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. W. (2014). The influence of peer
victimization on educational outcomes for LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ high school
students. Journal of LGBT Youth, 11(1), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2014.840761
Bamford, G. (2020). Getting to the point in school mission statements. NAIS.
https://www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/spring-2020/getting-to-the-point-in-
school-mission-statements/
Baumeister, R. F. (2012). Need-to-belong theory. (pp. 121–140.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n32
128

Beemyn, B. (2003). Serving the needs of transgender college students. Journal of Gay & Lesbian
Issues in Education, 1(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1300/J367v01n01_03
Beemyn, B. G. (2005). Making campuses more inclusive of transgender students. Journal of Gay
& Lesbian Issues in Education, 3(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1300/J367v03n01_08
Boyland, L. G., Kirkeby, K., & Boyland, M. (2018). Policies and practices supporting LGBTQ
students in Indiana’s middle schools. NASSP Bulletin, 102(2), 111–140.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636518782427
Brydum, S. (2015). The true meaning of the word ‘cisgender.’ Advocate.
https://www.advocate.com/transgender/2015/07/31/true-meaning-word-cisgender
Burke, P. J. (2004). Identities and social structure: The 2003 cooley-mead award address. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 67(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250406700103
Burke, P.J., & Stets, J. E. (2009). Identity theory. Oxford University Press.
Camicia, S. & Zhu, J. (2019). LGBTQ inclusion and exclusion in state social studies standards:
Implications for critical democratic education. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 21(1–
2).
Carter, M. J. (2014). Gender socialization and identity theory. Social Sciences (Basel), 3(2), 242–
263. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci3020242
Chen-Hayes, S. (2001). Counseling and advocacy with transgendered and gender-variant persons
in schools and families. The Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and
Development, 40(1), 34 – 48. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-490X.2001.tb00100.x
Collier, K. L., Bos, H. M. W., & Sandfort, T. G. M. (2013). Homophobic name-calling among
secondary school students and its implications for mental health. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 42(3), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9823-2
129

Cornell Law School. (1995). Federal mandate defined. Legal Information Institute.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/1555#:~:text=Notwithstanding%20section%2
01502%20of%20this,or%20a%20duty%20arising%20from
Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches.
Sage.
D’Augelli, A., R., Grossman, A. H., & Starks, M. T. (2006). Childhood gender atypicality,
victimization, and PTSD among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 21(11), 1462–1482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260506293482
Dragowski, E. A., Halkitis, P. N., Grossman, A. H., & D’Augelli, A., R. (2011). Sexual
orientation victimization and posttraumatic stress symptoms among lesbian, gay, and
bisexual youth. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 23(2), 226–249.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10538720.2010.541028
Ellemers, N., & Haslam, S. A. (2012). Social identity theory. (pp. 379–398). SAGE Publications
Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n45
Emanuel, G. (2017, May 3). Elite prep schools experiment with “all-gender” dorms. NPR.
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/05/03/526769862/elite-prep-schools-experiment-
with-all-gender-dorms
ESPN News Source. (2022). FINA votes to restrict transgender women from elite swimming
competition. ESPN. https://www.espn.com/olympics/story/_/id/34116871/fina-votes-
restrict-transgender-women-elite-competition
Fay, J. C., & Littlefield A. H. (2017). Transgender students in independent schools: Developing
best practices in a confusing political landscape. Shipman & Goodwin LLP; School Law.
130

https://www.ctschoollaw.com/2017/04/transgender-students-in-independent-schools-
developing-best-practices-in-a-confusing-political-landscape/
Fetner, T., & Elafros, A. (2015). The GSA difference: LGBTQ and ally experiences in high
school with and without gay-straight alliances. Social Sciences, 4(3), 563–581.
https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci4030563
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2012). The common ingroup identity model. In P. A. M. Van
Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social
psychology (pp. 439–457). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n48
GLSEN. (2018). Educator resources. GLSEN.
Gonzalez, M., & McNulty, J. (2010). Achieving competency with transgender youth: School
counselors as collaborative advocates. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 4(3–4),
176–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/15538605.2010.524841
Goodrich, K. M. (2012). Lived experiences of college-age transsexual individuals. Journal of
College Counseling, 15(3), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1882.2012.00017.x
Goodrick, D. (2014). Comparative Case Studies: Methodological Briefs - Impact Evaluation No.
9, Methodological Briefs no. 9, https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/754-comparative-
case-studies-methodological-briefs-impact-evaluation-no-9.html
Griffin, P. & Carroll, H. (2010). On the team: Equal opportunity for transgender student athletes.
Women’s Sports Foundation. https://www.nclrights.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/07/TransgenderStudentAthleteReport.pdf
Heck, N. C., Flentje, A., & Cochran, B. N. (2013). Offsetting risks: High school gay-straight
alliances and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth. Psychology of
131

Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/2329-
0382.1.S.81
Heck, N. C., Livingston, N. A., Flentje, A., Oost, K., Stewart, B. T., & Cochran, B. N. (2014).
Reducing risk for illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse: High school gay-straight
alliances and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Addictive Behavior, 39(4),
824–828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.01.007
Herman, J., Flores, A., & O’Neill, K. (2017). Report: How many adults and youth identify as
transgender in the United States. Williams Institute of Law. UCLA.
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-adults-united-states/
Hobson, A. (2014). Designing and implementing a successful gender-neutral housing
community. Center for the Study of Values in College Student Development, Florida
State University. https://doi.org/nfo:doi/
Hostetler, K. (2005). What is “good” education research? Educational Researcher, 34(6), 16–21.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006016.
Human Rights Campaign & Gender Spectrum. (2021). Supporting and caring for our gender
expansive youth. http://www.hrc.org/youth-gender
Ioverno, S., Belser, A. B., Baiocco, R., Grossman, A.H., & Russell, S. T. (2016). The protective
role of gay-straight alliances for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and questioning students: A
prospective analysis. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 3(4), 397–
406. https://doi.org/10.1037.sgd0000193
Johnson, L. (2014). NAIS Legal Advisory: The transgender student. NAIS.
https://www.nais.org/getmedia/dc0a3291-a7b9-44f6-be3b-
703a618a4079/TheTransgenderStudent-2014.pdf
132

Kilpatrick, G. (2000). Definitions of public policy and the law. National Violence Against
Women Prevention Research Center. https://mainweb-
v.musc.edu/vawprevention/policy/definition.shtml.
Kosciw, J. G., Palmer, N.A., Kull, R. M., & Greytak, E. A. (2013). The effect of negative school
climate on academic outcomes for LGBT youth and the role of in-school supports.
Journal of School Violence, 12(1), 45–63. http://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2012.732546
Krum, T. E., Davis, K. & Galupo, M. (2013). Gender-inclusive housing preferences: A survey of
college-ages transgender students. Journal of LGBTQ Youth.
http://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2012.718523
Laidlaw, L. (2020). Trans university students’ access to facilities: The limits of accommodation.
Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 35(2), 269–291.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2020.18
Lapointe, A. (2016). Queering the social students: Lessons to be learned from Canadian
secondary school Gay-Straight Alliances. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 40,
205–215.
Lochmiller, C. & Lester, J. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage.
Lopez, C., & DuBois, D. L. Peer victimization and rejection: Investigation of an integrative
model of effects on emotional, behavioral, and academic adjustment in early adolescence.
Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34(1), 25–36.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3401_3
133

Marine, S. B., Wagner, R., & Nicolazzo, Z. (2019). Student affairs professionals’ role in
advancing gender inclusive housing: Discourses of dominance and resistance. Journal of
Diversity in Higher Education, 12(3), 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000103
Martin, E. & Browning, L. (2015, January 12). The 50 most elite boarding schools in the US.
Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/most-elite-boarding-schools-in-the-
us-2014-12?op=1
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2021). Guidance for
Massachusetts public schools crating a safe and supportive school environment:
Nondiscrimination on the basis of gender identity. safeschoolsprogram@doe.mass.edu
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design. Sage.
Mayberry, M. (2013). Gay-straight alliances: Youth empowerment and working toward reducing
stigma of LGBT youth. Humanity & Society, 37(1), 35–54.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160597612454358
McCaslin, M. L., & Scott, K. W. (2003). The five-question method for framing a qualitative
research study. The Qualitative Report, 8(3), 447–461. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-
3715/2003.1880
McGuire, J. K., Anderson, C. R., Toomey, R. B. & Russell, S. T. (2010). School climate for
transgender youth: A mixed method investigation of student experiences and school
responses. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(10), 1175–1188.
https://doi.org/10.007/s10964-010-9540-7
McMillan, D. W. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Clinical Psychology Pub
Co. https://doi.org/nfo:doi/
134

Merriam, S. & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
Jossey-Bass.
Morris, J. F. & Van Raalte, J., L. (2016). Transgender and gender nonconforming athletes:
Creating safe spaces for all. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 7(2), 121–132.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21520704.2016.1184732
Mustanski, B. S., Garofalo, R., & Emerson, E. M. (2010). Mental health disorders, psychological
distress, and suicidality in a diverse sample of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender
youths. American Journal of Public Health (1971), 100(12), 2426–2432.
https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.178319
National Association for Independent Schools. (2022). Supporting transgender students in
independent schools. https://www.nais.org/articles/pages/supporting-transgender-
students-in-independent-schools/
Nicolazzo, Z., Marine, S. B., & Wagner, R. (2018). From best to intentional practices:
Reimagining implementation of gender-inclusive housing. Journal of Student Affairs
Research and Practice, 55(2), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/19496591.2018.1399896
Northwestern University Residential Services. (2023). All gender housing. Northwestern
University. https://www.northwestern.edu/living/residential-experience/housing-
options/all-gender-housing.html
Orr & Baum. (2022). Schools in transition: A guide for supporting transgender students in K–12
schools. Human Rights Campaign. https://www.hrc.org/resources/schools-in-transition-a-
guide-for-supporting-transgender-students-in-k-12-s
Owens, T. J., Robinson, D. T., & Smith-Lovin, L. (2010). Three faces of identity. Annual Review
of Sociology, 36(1), 477–499. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134725
135

Pazzaglia, A., Stafford, E. & Rodriguez, S. (2016). Survey methods for educators: Analysis
and reporting of survey data. National Center for Educational Evaluation and
Regional Assistance.
Porta, C. M., Singer, E., Mehus, C. J., Gower, A. L., Saewyc, E., Fredkove, W., & Eisenberg, M.
E. (2017). LGBTQ youth’s views on Gay‐Straight alliances: Building community,
providing gateways, and representing safety and support. The Journal of School Health,
87(7), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12517
Poteat, V. P., Scheer, J.R., Mereish, E. H. (2014). Factors affecting academic achievement
among sexual minority and gender variant youth. Advances in Child Development and
Behavior, 47, 261–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acbd.2014.04.005
Price, M., Polk, W., Hill, N., Liang, B. & Perella, J. (2019). The intersectionality of identity-
based victimization in adolescence: A person-centered examination of mental health and
academic achievement in a U.S. high school. Journal of Adolescence, 76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.09.002
Pryor, J. T., Ta, D., & Hart, J. (2016). Searching for home: Transgender students and experiences
with residential housing. The College Student Affairs Journal, 34(2), 43–60.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csj.2016.0011
Pyne, J. (2014). Gender independent kids: A paradigm shift in approaches to gender non-
conforming children. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 23(1), 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.23.1.CO1
Rankin, S., & Beemyn, G. (2012). Beyond a binary: The lives of gender-nonconforming youth.
About Campus; about Campus, 17(4), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/abc.21086
136

Richtel, M. (2022). It’s life or death: The mental health crisis among U.S. teens. The New York
Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/23/health/mental-health-crisis-teens.html
Robinson, S. & Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. Sage.
Russell, S. T., Muraco, A., Subramaniam, A., & Laub, C. (2009). Youth empowerment and high
school gay-straight alliances. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(7), 891–903.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9382-8
Schindel, J. E. (2008). Gender 101 – beyond the binary: Gay-straight alliances and gender
activism. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 5(2), 56–70.
https://doi.org/10.1525/srsp.2008.5.2.56
Schwartz, D., Gorman, A. H., Nakamoto, J., & Toblin, R. L. (2005). Victimization in the peer
group and children’s academic functioning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3),
425–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.425
Steinmetz, K. (2018, April 3). The Oxford English Dictionary added ‘Trans*’. Here’s what the
label means. TIME. https://time.com/5211799/what-does-trans-asterisk-star-mean-
dictionary/
Stryker, S. & Burke, P. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 63(4), 284–297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2695840
Swanson, K., & Gettinger, M. (2016). Teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and supportive behaviors
toward LGBT students: Relationship to gay-straight alliances, antibullying policy, and
teacher training. Journal of LGBT Youth, 13(4), 326–351.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2016.1185765
137

Szalacha, L. A. (2003). Safer sexual diversity climates: Lessons learned from an evaluation of
Massachusetts safe schools program for gay and lesbian students. American Journal of
Education, 110(1), 58–88. https://doi.org/10.1086/377673
Taylor, J. L. (2015). Call to action: Embracing an inclusive LGBTQ culture on community
college campuses. New Directions for Community Colleges; New Directions for
Community Colleges, 2015(172), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20163
The Association of Boarding Schools. (2022). Our member schools. http://Tabs.org/tabs-
member-schools
Thorpe, A. (2017). Where do we go? Gender identity and gendered spaces in postsecondary
institutions. Antistasis, 7(1), 1.
Tilsley, A. (2010). Colleges rewrite rules to accommodate transgender students. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 56(39). https://go-gale-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/ps/i.do?p=OVIC&u=usocal_main&id=GALE|A231431601&v=2.
1&it=r
Toomey, R. B., & Russell, S. T. (2013). Gay-straight alliance, social justice involvement, and
school victimization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer youth: Implications for school
well-being and plans to vote. Youth & Society, 45(4), 500–522.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X11422546
Toomey, R. B., Ryan, C., Diaz, R. M., & Russell, S. T. (2011). High school gay-straight
alliances (GSAs) and young adult well-being: An examination of GSA presence,
participation, and perceived effectiveness. Applied Developmental Science, 15(4), 175–
185. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2011.607378
138

Transgender Law & Policy Institute. (2009). Guidelines for creating policies for transgender
children in recreational sports. Transathlete.
https://www.transathlete.com/_files/ugd/2bc3fc_6cd03b8e19147c71c0153c81e96babcb.p
df
Trans Youth Equality Foundation. (2021). Glossary. Tyef.
http://www.transyouthequality.org/glossary#:~:text=Likewise%20a%20demiboy%20is%
20a,regardless%20of%20their%20assigned%20gender.
Troshynski, E. I. & Bejinariu, A. (2021). Exploring the rhetoric: How state gender diversity laws
address rights for gender-diverse students. Critical Criminology, 29(1), 111–130.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-021-09563-3
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.
Twenge, J. (2017). iGen. Atria Books.
U.S. Department of Education. 2009. State regulations of private schools.
https://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/regprivschl/regprivschl.pdf
Walls, N. E., Kane, S. B., & Wisneski, H. (2010). Gay-Straight alliances and school experiences
of sexual minority youth. Youth & Society, 41(3), 307–332.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X09334957
Willoughby, B. J., Larsen, J. K., & Carroll, J. S. (2012). The emergence of gender-neutral
housing on American university campuses. Journal of Adolescent Research, 27(6), 732–
750. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558412447852
139

Women’s Sports Foundation. (2022). Participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports.
https://Womensportsfoundation.org
Wylie, S. A., Corliss, H. L., Boulanger, V., Prokop, L. A., & Austin, S. B. (2010). Socially
assigned gender nonconformity: A brief measure for use in surveillance and investigation
of health disparities. Sex Roles, 63(3), 264–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-
9798-y
Zambon, V. (2021). What to know about deadnaming. Medical News Today.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/deadnaming

140

Appendix A: Interview Cover Sheet: Gender Inclusive Housing
Appendix A is the series of interview questions that I used when interviewing deans of
students from six schools. It begins with a cover letter and then goes into the questions from the
interview.
Cover Letter
Hi interviewee,
My name is Rebecca Melvoin, and I am a K–12 Educational Leader doctoral student at
the University of California Rossier School of Education.
To start, I want to thank you for taking the time to talk with me about gender inclusive
housing options for your students. I’m working on my dissertation, which is a comparative case
study that will explore six boarding schools in the Northeast and their residential options,
specifically focusing on how the schools support their gender expansive students. I will be
talking with administrators at boarding schools that have a housing option for gender expansive
students and schools that have a binary housing model.
When using the term gender expansive, I’m referring to students who would not define
themselves within the male/female binary. These are students who often define themselves as
gender fluid, gender nonconforming, or agender. I’m using the broader term “gender expansive”
to capture this group of students under the umbrella term of gender expansive.
Also, I want to remind you that this conversation is confidential. I will use pseudonyms
for all of the people with whom I speak and I will also change the name of the school itself. If
you are comfortable with me recording the conversation that would be great, but if not, I can
simply take notes. Are you comfortable with this being recorded? Lastly, you always have the
option of dropping out of the study. All of this information is included in the signed consent form
141

I have provided to you, but it’s important for me to articulate as well. Do you have any questions
for me before we start? And again, thank you for giving me some of your time!
Questions (With Transitions)
To start, I’m going to ask you a few questions about yourself:
1. Can you tell me how long have you been at this school?
a. And for how many years have you served as the dean of students?
b. Have you served in other roles at this school?
c. What made you decide to work here initially?
d. What’s keeping you here?
2. What are some of the challenges you face in your role?
Now that we’ve talked a little about your current position, I’d like us to talk about school
culture, especially as it relates to issues of gender.
3. Can you describe the culture of your school?
a. Are there any subgroups of students or affinity groups who have raised
concerns of inclusivity in recent years?
b. If so, what was the nature of that concern and was a resolution reached?
4. In what ways, if any, are gender expansive students part of your school culture?
5. How would your gender expansive students describe the culture of the campus?
a. Do you think they would say that they feel like they belong?
b. Can you give any examples of why you feel this way?
c. Do you have an affinity group for your gender expansive students?
6. What evidence do you have that the voice/opinions of gender expansive students is a
valued part of the school community?
142

a. In what ways is inclusivity, specifically related to gender expansive students
evident in operational matters, for example, gender inclusive bathrooms,
housing options, etc.
7. In what ways do you, as an administrator, support gender expansive students on
campus?
a. Are there specific challenges to you doing this work?
8. How do you define “belonging” in your work with students? What evidence of
belonging should parents and students look for when making a school choice?
a. Would that evidence change at all for your gender expansive students?
b. Are there ways that you support gender expansive students differently from
other students?
I appreciate hearing your ideas about the culture and students at the school. Now I’m
going to ask you some specific questions as they relate to your residential model.
9. Please describe the housing model at your school.
a. How many students do you house?
b. What are the strengths of this model?
c. What are the weaknesses of this model?
d. How many students live in your gender inclusive dorm?
10. What was the process like for your school to decide to create a gender inclusive
dorm?
a. Who first proposed the idea?
b. Who were the decision-makers?
143

c. Was there any pushback from people within or connected with the school
community? If so, how was this facilitated?
11. How involved, if at all, were your students in advocating for a gender inclusive
housing option?
12. If you could make any changes to the housing model, what would they be and why?
13. What pushback, if any, have you gotten about your gender inclusive housing policies?
From whom did you receive this pushback?
14. How have you changed policies, if you have, for your gender inclusive dorm? For
example, have you had to change visitation policies for the gender inclusive dorm
and/or binary dorms?
a. What have been students and community responses to these changes?
Thank you for all this information about your housing model. I’d like to now ask you a
few more questions about school policies.
15. Regarding student life, are you aware of any school policies that have changed or
been revised in the past year?
a. If yes, what was the nature of those changes?
b. Why was that change made? What, if anything, made it necessary?
c. Who oversaw that change?
d. Does that policy change impact your work?
i. If so, did you have an opportunity for input before the policy change
was made or adopted?
16. Do you have school policies, including housing policies, that address gender and
inclusion?
144

a. Who are the key stakeholders in creating the policy?
b. Who are other people—students, faculty, parents—who played a role in these
policy decisions?
17. When it comes to policies on gender and inclusion, who are the key stakeholders
impacted by the policy?
18. Is there any question that I didn’t ask you that you hoped I would? Or any other final
comment?
Closing
In closing, I would like to thank you again for spending this time with me. I learned so
much from talking with you! Would it be okay for me to follow up with you if additional
questions arise? Also, if you have questions for me, please reach out; my contact information is
on the information sheet provided. Thank you again!

145

Appendix B: Student Survey for Sense of Belonging
In this section, I present the survey questions that 18- and 19-year-old students received
at four boarding schools in the Northeast. This provides clarity about the questions I asked and
the students’ written responses.
Survey Contents
Dear Participant,
Thank you for taking this survey about your school’s residential housing, and specifically
how it impacts gender-expansive students.
The survey should not take more than 15 minutes and the more information you are able
to provide, the better it will help us to understand how your school supports gender-expansive
students, and ways that it can continue to improve. Your individual responses will be kept
confidential and will not be shared with your school’s administration. Your school may see final
aggregated survey results, which will include responses from multiple peer schools - none of
your answers will be connected to your identity, in any way.
By clicking begin, it means that you are comfortable beginning this survey and are ready
to take it.
Background questions:
How old are you?
a. 13
b. 14
c. 15
d. 16
e. 17
146

f. 18
g. 19
h. Other: _______
How old were you when you started attending your current school?
a. 13
b. 14
c. 15
d. 16
e. 17
f. 18
g. 19
h. Other: _______
What is your current gender identity?
a. Man
b. Woman
c. Non-binary
d. Prefer to self-describe: ______________________
e. Prefer not to say
Climate questions:
Please respond to the following statements about your experience at your current school.
1. I am comfortable walking around anywhere on campus.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
147

c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
2. I am treated with respect by my peers in the classroom.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
3. I am treated with respect by my teachers in the classroom.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
4. I am treated with respect during my co-curricular/afternoon activity (e.g., athletics,
theater, community service, etc.).
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
5. I am treated with respect in other out of class settings (e.g., dining hall, trips off
campus).
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
148

d. Strongly disagree
6. I feel safe being myself on my school’s campus.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
7. There are students at my school who know my authentic self.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
8. There are students at my school who help me feel like I belong here.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
9. There are adults at this school that help me feel like I belong here.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
Identity questions:
10. I am comfortable with my gender identity.
149

a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
11. My school allows me to explore my gender identity without judgment.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
12. There are adults at this school who support me as I’ve explored my gender identity.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
13. I have attended meetings with my school’s affinity group or alliance (s), which has
helped me with my gender identity.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
14. Please describe how adults/policies/students/experiences at your school have affected
your gender identity.
150

15. Please describe how your school does, or does not, demonstrate its commitment to
gender expansive students.
Residential questions:
16. I am comfortable living with the other students on my hall.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
17. I am comfortable using the bathroom on my hall.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
18. Students on my hall use my preferred pronouns.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
19. My dorm parent uses gender-inclusive language.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
151

20. I am comfortable getting visitations (when a student who I am interested in
romantically comes to my dorm and needs to check in with an adult) in my hall.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
21. I am comfortable when students who don’t live on my hall visit my room.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
22. My hall is a safe place.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
23. Please describe how the residential life aspects of your campus (for example, having a
gender inclusive hall or dorm, or providing room for identity exploration in alliances
or affinity groups) have helped you to explore and/or affirm your gender identity
formation.
24. Please describe ways that your school could improve aspects of residential life on
campus in order to better help students to explore their gender identities.

152

Appendix C: Consent to Participate in Research
Principal investigator: Becca Melvoin
Research title: Gender-inclusive housing in New England Boarding Schools: A
comparative case study of how housing policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of
belonging

Dear parent/ guardian:
My name is Becca Melvoin and I work at Deerfield Academy, but I am also a graduate
student at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education. It is in my role as
researcher that I am reaching out to you. I am working on my dissertation which is focused on
gender inclusive housing at boarding schools in New England. The goal of this study is to better
understand the impact of gender inclusive housing on the student experience.
Description of the Research
Students who live in a gender inclusive dorm or are members of their school’s GSA are
invited to participate in this study. The goal of this study is to better understand the impact of
gender inclusive housing at boarding schools in New England.
Risks and Benefits
There are no known risks to participating in this study. Participation, or non-participation,
will not affect the student’s status at their school. The benefits of participating in this study
include: helping to create a healthier school environment, inform future policy decisions at
boarding schools in New England, and increase school’s awareness about the impact of gender
inclusive housing at boarding schools.

153

Payments
Students will not receive payment for your participation in this study.
Data Storage to Protect Confidentiality
All surveys will be confidential and student identity will be protected. Data will be used
for professional purposes only and will be kept in a locked file in my office, as well as a
password protected storage server.
Time Involvement
Student participation will require responding to survey questions. The survey will take
15-20 minutes and be done after school.
How Will Results Be Used
The results will be wiped of any personalized, or identifying information. Data from all
students will be looked at holistically and analyzed for patterns. Overall themes and patterns will
be shared with deans of students at participating schools.

• I have read and discussed the Research Description with the researcher. I have had
the opportunity to ask questions about the purposes and procedures regarding this
study.
• My child’s participation in research is voluntary. My child may refuse to participate
or withdraw from participation at any time. My child will not be offered or receive
any special consideration if they take part in this research study.
154

• Any information derived from the research project that personally identifies my child
will not be voluntarily released or disclosed without my separate consent, except as
specifically required by law.
• If at any time me or my child have any questions regarding the research or their
participation, I can contact the investigator, who will answer my questions. The
investigator’s email address is:
• rmelvoin@usc.edu

Parent consent:
___ I agree to allow my child to participate in the survey
___ I do not agree to allow my child to participate in the survey

___ I agree to allow my child to participate in the interview
___ I do not agree to allow my child to participate in the interview

_____________________________________________________
Parent/Guardian name printed

____________________________________________________
Parent/Guardian signature Date

155

Assent to Participate in Research
Principal investigator: Becca Melvoin
Research title: Gender-inclusive housing in New England Boarding Schools: A
comparative case study of how housing policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of
belonging

Dear Student:
My name is Becca Melvoin and I work at Deerfield Academy, but I am also a graduate
student at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education. It is in my role as
researcher that I am reaching out to you. I am working on my dissertation which is focused on
gender inclusive housing at boarding schools in New England. The goal of this study is to better
understand the impact of gender inclusive housing on the student experience.

Description of the Research
Students who live in a gender inclusive dorm or are members of their school’s GSA are
invited to participate in this study. The goal of this study is to better understand the impact of
gender inclusive housing at boarding schools in New England.
Risks and Benefits
There are no known risks to participating in this study. Participation, or non-participation,
will not affect the student’s status at their school. The benefits of participating in this study
include: helping to create a healthier school environment, inform future policy decisions at
boarding schools in New England, and increase school’s awareness about the impact of gender
inclusive housing at boarding schools.
156

Payments
You will not receive payment for your participation in this study.
Data Storage to Protect Confidentiality
All interviews will be confidential and your identity will be protected. Meaning, who you
are and what you write in the survey will not be linked back to you. Data will be used for
professional purposes only and will be kept in a locked file in my office, as well as a password
protected storage server.
Time Involvement
Your participation will require responding to survey questions. The survey will take 15-
20 minutes and be done after school. You don’t have to participate if you don’t feel comfortable
doing so.
How Will Results Be Used
The results will be wiped of any personalized, or identifying information. Data from all
students will be looked at holistically and analyzed for patterns. Overall themes and patterns will
be shared with deans of students from participating schools.

• I have read and discussed the Research Description with the researcher. I have had
the opportunity to ask questions about the purposes and procedures regarding this
study.
• My participation in research is voluntary. I may refuse to participate or withdraw
from participation at any time. I will not be offered or receive any special
consideration if I take part in this research study.
157

• Any information derived from the research project that personally identifies me will
not be voluntarily released or disclosed without my separate assent, except as
specifically required by law.
• If at any time I have any questions regarding the research or my participation, I can
contact the investigator, who will answer my questions. The investigator’s email
address is:
• rmelvoin@usc.edu
Student assent:
___ I agree to participate in the survey
___ I do not agree participate in the survey

___ I agree to participate in the interview
___ I do not agree to participate in the interview

_____________________________________________________
Student’s name printed

____________________________________________________
Student’s signature Date

158

Consent to Participate in Research
Principal investigator: Becca Melvoin
Research title: Gender-inclusive housing in New England Boarding Schools: A
comparative case study of how housing policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of
belonging

Dear Dean of Students,
My name is Becca Melvoin and I work at Deerfield Academy, but I am also a graduate
student at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education. It is in my role as
researcher that I am reaching out to you. I am working on my dissertation which is focused on
gender inclusive housing at boarding schools in New England. The goal of this study is to better
understand the impact of gender inclusive housing on the student experience.

Description of the Research
Deans of students have a unique role at their schools since they implement and oversee
student housing as well as the student experience. In this realm, deans of students are well
positioned to understand their housing models, as well as their areas of strength and areas of
growth. I am interested in understanding more about how deans of students understand the
student experiences as they relate to gender inclusive housing. (Students who live in a gender
inclusive dorm or are members of their school’s GSA are invited to participate in this study to
share their experiences, as well.) The goal of this study is to better understand the impact of
gender inclusive housing at boarding schools in New England.
159

Risks and Benefits
There are no known risks to participating in this study. Participation, or non-participation,
will not impact the school. The benefits of participating in this study include: helping to create a
healthier school environment, potentially inform future policy decisions at boarding schools in
New England, and increase school’s awareness about the impact of gender inclusive housing at
boarding schools.
Payments
Deans of students will not receive payment for your participation in this study.
Data Storage to Protect Confidentiality
All surveys will be confidential and student identity will be protected. Data will be used
for professional purposes only and will be kept in a locked file in my office, as well as a
password protected storage server.
Time Involvement
Deans of Student participation will require responding to interview questions. The
interview will take between 60–75 minutes and be done at a time that is convenient for the dean
of students.
How Will Results Be Used
The results will be wiped of any personalized, or identifying information. Data from all
deans of students and student surveys will be looked at holistically and analyzed for patterns.
Overall themes and patterns will be shared with deans of students at participating schools.

160

• I have read and discussed the Research Description with the researcher. I have had
the opportunity to ask questions about the purposes and procedures regarding this
study.
• My participation in research is voluntary. I may refuse to participate or withdraw
from participation at any time.
• Any information derived from the research project that personally identifies me will
not be voluntarily released or disclosed without my separate consent, except as
specifically required by law.
• If at any time I have any questions regarding the research or their participation, I can
contact the investigator, who will answer my questions. The investigator’s email
address is:
• rmelvoin@usc.edu

Consent:
___ I agree to allow my child to participate in the survey
___ I do not agree to allow my child to participate in the survey
___ I agree to allow my child to participate in the interview
___ I do not agree to allow my child to participate in the interview

_____________________________________________________
Parent/Guardian name printed

____________________________________________________
Parent/Guardian signature Date

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study explores six boarding schools in the Northeastern part of the United States to understand how they support their gender expansive students, especially as it relates to their residential housing models. More specifically, through interviews with deans of students and surveys from students at four of these schools, I explore the ways in which policies enhance, or detract from, gender expansive students’ sense of belonging. I offer recommendations for steps boarding schools can take to create a more welcoming environment for gender expansive students, especially as it relates to their residential experience.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A phenomenological study of the impact of English language learner support services on students’ identity development

PDF

The policy of privilege: a case study on the role of policy on segregated enrollment patterns in Washington state's highly rated public magnet schools

PDF

Qualitative study of barriers that impacted school attendance for migrant farmworker students

PDF

Inclusive gender practices in high schools: a study on supports and practical solutions for California administrators

PDF

A culture of care in elementary schools to impact Black student academic achievement: a case study

PDF

An examination into leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools

PDF

A case study of how principals, teachers and parents contribute to a quality comprehensive K–12 system of support for ELL student academic success

PDF

A comparative case study on the impact of Black male teachers on implementing inclusive and antiracist practices in elementary-middle education

PDF

Promoting students' sense of belonging as a practitioner inquiry community

PDF

Understanding the perceptions of Latine undocumented students' sense of belonging in higher education

PDF

Students’ sense of belonging: college student and staff perspectives during COVID-19

PDF

Interconnectedness of cultural responsiveness, retention, and mentorship: understanding the experiences of BIPOC intern educators with BIPOC mentors

PDF

Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools

PDF

Sense of belonging among Black business students at a predominantly White institution

PDF

Integrated student supports to decrease incidences of dropout among marginalized students: a promising practice study

PDF

A case study of how principals, teachers and parents contribute to a quality comprehensive K-12 system of support for ELL student academic success

PDF

A case Study of gender gaps in the legal profession

PDF

A new lens to examine and increase sense of belonging of Latin* students from postsecondary institutions in the midwestern United States

PDF

A case study of how principals, teachers and parents contribute to a quality comprehensive K–12 system of support for ELL student academic success

PDF

How they got there: examining the advancement of women of color in K–12 leadership roles

Asset Metadata

Creator Melvoin, Rebecca Grauer (author)

Core Title Gender-inclusive housing in northeastern boarding schools: a comparative case study of how housing policies impact gender expansive students’ sense of belonging

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 03/15/2023

Defense Date 03/15/2023

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

Tag belonging,gender expansive students,OAI-PMH Harvest,Residential

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kishimoto, Christina (committee chair)

Creator Email beccamelvoin@gmail.com,rmelvoin@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112839102

Unique identifier UC112839102

Identifier etd-MelvoinReb-11503.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MelvoinReb-11503

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Melvoin, Rebecca Grauer

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230320-usctheses-batch-1010 (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. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

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